WAR ROOM LOUNGE V17: The Stuff Under Your You-Know-What

[Darkballs]

Have at it.

I apologize profusely for typing the word "irregardless" while 4 bourbons deep and trying to keep an eye on dinner. I officially withdraw that word and replace it with "regardless."

Additionally, I would further like to replace the remainder of that post with "suck my cock."

 

[Cubo de Sangre]

I apologize profusely for typing the word "irregardless" while 4 bourbons deep and trying to keep an eye on dinner. I officially withdraw that word and replace it with "regardless."

Additionally, I would further like to replace the remainder of that post with "suck my cock."

Unless it's four bottles you've just admitted to being a lightweight or employing a sad excuse.

On that unpalatable note, your AV and screen name are seemingly at odds.

 

[Trotsky]

Did anyone even notice that a porn star leaked to The Guardian that the President of the United States has a tiny, mushroom-esque penis and "yetti pubes," and it isn't even newsworthy enough to be talked about, let alone have a thread made?

This is 2018.

Fuck, imagine if that happened under/about Obama. Surreal.

 

[Lord Commander Palis]

Did anyone even notice that a porn star leaked to The Guardian that the President of the United States has a tiny, mushroom-esque penis and "yetti pubes," and it isn't even newsworthy enough to be talked about, let alone have a thread made?

This is 2018.

Fuck, imagine if that happened under/about Obama. Surreal.

Ya you're an idiot... open your eyes.

Also, @Quequeg banned.

 

[brothir]

Anybody need 50 cases of natty delivered on a Wednesday night?

Spoiler

If I buy the 50 thirty packs, do I get the guy in the fish costume too?

 

[brothir]

Brought this here because it was a non-sequitur to the thread it was in but I just wanted to say how much I appreciate your proper use of "fewer" instead of the much more common misuse of "less".

I guess language is an evolving thing but I see otherwise intelligent people making this mistake so often it's become accepted. Right up there with "irregardless" .

Just a pet peeve, carry on folks.

I could care fewer.

 

[Limbo Pete]

what do you guys think of the Jon Jones verdict? 15 months retroactive???? While Machida got 18??

It's a really terrible look for everyone involved.
It pretty much cements the notion that some fighters can simply afford to cheat while others cannot.
Unequally enforced testing is terrible in that it means certain people can use the process itself to create an advantage.
Just a massive black eye. It's so fucking transparent. I know the trolls love gloating over it, but it shouldn't matter that it involved Jones. ANYONE benefiting from such blatantly biased testing enforcement should be called out.

 

[RockstarChris]

the mod notes are the funniest thing. the first image that came to mind was Ricky Bobby not sure what to do with his hands

 

[HereticBD]

Also, @Quequeg banned.

 

[JudoThrowFiasco]

How the hell did I miss that amazing OT thread????

 

[Jack V Savage]

How the hell did I miss that amazing OT thread????

What are you talking about?

 

[JudoThrowFiasco]

What are you talking about?

The one roasting homer

 

[Gregolian]

It's a really terrible look for everyone involved.
It pretty much cements the notion that some fighters can simply afford to cheat while others cannot.
Unequally enforced testing is terrible in that it means certain people can use the process itself to create an advantage.
Just a massive black eye. It's so fucking transparent. I know the trolls love gloating over it, but it shouldn't matter that it involved Jones. ANYONE benefiting from such blatantly biased testing enforcement should be called out.

It also proves, again, if you’re a cash cow for Dana you can literally do anything without fear of reprecussion.

 

[nac386]

You're joking right?

Court ordered psych exams aren't some unreasonable extension of government power. Western nations have been using them for decades in relation to criminal and civil court proceedings.

Basically, this chick is just trying to disregard normal court proceedings because she feels she's above the law. Please don't teach your hypothetical daughter to emulate anti-social behavior and a disregard for the rule of law.

AlanB also went on a rant one time about how the judge should have been lenient when War Machine beat that woman half to death. Why? Because we used to understand when a man lost his temper over a female, and War machine is not a criminal, he's a victim. Victim of what? Radical feminism. Lol. Oh, the good ole days.

Keep in mind, he claims to be a lawyer.

Here's the post, before anyone pretends he didn't actually say that.

I am or at least was pretty good friends with War Machine. We were training partners for years up until the night he left San Diego for Vegas and had his encounter with Mack . As that as a caveat, his sentence is bullshit. I've been a lawyer for awhile now and I've seen people get far less for actual unlawful killings. He is a victim of a society that has been eaten up by radical femnism. He walked in on his girl with another man. What he did our Common Law used to understand was a normal reaction to being cuckold. Yet the court did not take that into consideration and actually let Christie Mack decide whether a deal offered to War by the DA of 12 years would be allowed. She said no and the judge rejected the plea deal. War Machine is a victim not a criminal.

This is me with jon and the gang

 

[MayhemMonkey]

AlanB also went on a rant one time about how the judge should have been lenient when War Machine beat that woman half to death. Why? Because we used to understand when a man lost his temper over a female, and War machine is not a criminal, he's a victim. Victim of what? Radical feminism. Lol. Oh, the good ole days.

Keep in mind, he claims to be a lawyer.

Here's the post, before anyone pretends he didn't actually say that.

lol holy shit.... I was a fan of WM but thats retarded.

 

[Kindacrazy]

AlanB also went on a rant one time about how the judge should have been lenient when War Machine beat that woman half to death. Why? Because we used to understand when a man lost his temper over a female, and War machine is not a criminal, he's a victim. Victim of what? Radical feminism. Lol. Oh, the good ole days.

Keep in mind, he claims to be a lawyer.

Here's the post, before anyone pretends he didn't actually say that.

Is that supposed to make AlanB look bad? I don't defend anyone getting violent over pretty much anything other then in self defense but to pretend that walking in on your spouse getting plowed is somehow not a mitigating issue is a little bit absurd.

 

[nac386]

Is that supposed to make AlanB look bad? I don't defend anyone getting violent over pretty much anything other then in self defense but to pretend that walking in on your spouse getting plowed is somehow not a mitigating issue is a little bit absurd.

It wasn't his spouse, it was his ex girlfriend who had a new boyfriend. Also, it's not at all a "normal reaction" to beat a woman almost to death in any circumstance. Also, it's not "radical feminism" that makes beating a woman almost to death a bad thing. You are sounding just as insane as him.

 

[nac386]

Goddammit, Alan.

He is a lawyer, though. And, as pan said, a seemingly competent one.

Seemingly competent lawyer/psycho, apparently.

Don't forget, War Machine is a victim of feminism, not a criminal. He just did the normal thing that people do when their ex girlfriend moves on. Lol.

 

[HereticBD]

The one roasting homer

First ballot HOF thread for sure.

 

[nac386]

Ahh, I missed that it was his ex. Then yes, that is obviously considerably worse. I never said it was justifiable, I said that it was understandable as a mitigating circumstance.

You are attempting to apply a pretty massive double standard based on his capacity for violence. As a semi professional athlete he was capable of killing her very easily and very quickly. If you reversed the situation, the issue doesn't even make the news. He lost his temper when he shouldn't have. He should have been punished for his relative actions not his relative capacity. That is wholly consistent with the principles of justice and fairness even if it departs from some modern legal concepts.

Wait, are you actually claiming that we should be more lenient on him because he could easily kill people and chose not to?

What are you trying to say here?