The Atlas Asylum of absurd/ignorant posts IX

[Alben Barkley]

No men are attractive.

And I’m not saying that as some kind of “toxic masculinity” thing. I genuinely just don’t understand how anyone can look at a man and think “Yeah, that’s hot!”

Reminds me of this Seinfeld quote:

“The female body is a work of art. The male body is utilitarian, it’s for gettin’ around, like a Jeep.“

This is an incredibly "straight guy" thing to say.

You can think what you want, but I honest to god believe this and always have. I just don’t get it. Not complaining that like half the population finds men attractive, but I fundamentally do not understand why.

Not that bad but I still remember that drunken rant so naming it after that. Also Elliot going possibly blue is the worst prediction from this election

I guess I deserve it after that drunken rant but I’ll defend this post.

All I’m saying is I don’t personally see the appeal. I don’t even doubt some straight guys can recognize when a guy is supposed to be attractive. But I’m not one of them. It generally has to be pointed out to me when a man is supposed to be attractive. I have no natural inclination for it whatsoever. Like, I had no idea people found Josh Hawley attractive until that thread. That’s surprising to me.

Also I didn’t predict Elliot going blue again, didn’t even predict it as close as some people did. You can look at the thread asking people to predict the exact result before the election.

[Alben Barkley]

No men are attractive.

And I’m not saying that as some kind of “toxic masculinity” thing. I genuinely just don’t understand how anyone can look at a man and think “Yeah, that’s hot!”

Reminds me of this Seinfeld quote:

“The female body is a work of art. The male body is utilitarian, it’s for gettin’ around, like a Jeep.“

This is an incredibly "straight guy" thing to say.

You can think what you want, but I honest to god believe this and always have. I just don’t get it. Not complaining that like half the population finds men attractive, but I fundamentally do not understand why.

What is possibly wrong with this? I don’t like dick either. I am not attracted to men or women with dicks.

The post isn't about "dicks" it's about not understanding how someone can find something attractive that you personally don't. Do you think cats without dicks are cuter than male cats?

I don’t have to understand something to tolerate it. I don’t understand the attraction to men at all. Never will, never want to do either. But it’s cool if other people are into that, it doesn’t detract in any way.

What’s so hard about that to understand? I’m no fan of the ex-VP or his posting style, but this seems like a desperate excuse for you to look down your nose and wag your finger at someone.

Have to side with Sanchez and Alben Barkley here. He just expressed his personal opinion and didn't disregard those of others. At least I don't view it this way.

I personally don't feel attracted to men either, though I find some men better looking than others. Obviously gay men or transexuals feel differently, and that's perfectly fine.

He did disregard others when he said 'I genuinely just don’t understand how anyone can look at a man and think "Yeah, that’s hot!"' - it makes him sound ignorant of how straight women/gays have entirely different concepts of attractiveness than straight men.

That’s not true. Just because I don’t personally understand it doesn’t mean I don’t tolerate it. Hell, I’m glad for it, as I even said.

You are deliberately stretching this to read it the worst way possible when it wasn’t intended that way at all.

[Alben Barkley]

OK, I'm just gonna say it:

While I initially consented to the use of my name in the topic of this thread, that was now over 6 months ago. Shortly before then, I had (while highly intoxicated on the night of a holiday in which I got ESPECIALLY intoxicated even by my standards) made some extremely embarrassing, unwarranted, and unhinged posts attacking a fellow user (who I now like to think I'm on pretty good terms with), thus why I thought I was deserving of being named in the thread title. I could not possibly regret those posts more now. Hell, I couldn't even at the time. BUT I thought it would just be a temporary thing and the name would be replaced eventually, and that it was more than adequate punishment to be publicly humiliated in this way given that I had indeed made a massive fool of myself in front of everybody.

BUT I think the fact that I am STILL named in the title of this thread is frankly just bullying at this point. And in fact, the post that was used to justify the name change initially wasn't even related to the posts I regretted enough to sign off on the name change anyway -- they were in fact posts about sex s--t which it seemed to me most people here actually agreed with and did not think were crazy at all!

So at this point, I think it's unfair and wrong to continue to use my name in the title of this post. I owned it without saying a word in complaint for a solid 6 months plus. But as I am still very much a regular in this forum, I think it's just straight-up mean to still single me out like this in the title of such a massive thread. I'm not sure there's ANYONE else who deserves to be given the title next, actually. Even people who I have butted heads with many times and who I generally believe are "absurd" and/or "ignorant," I don't think they deserve to be put in the stockade and publicly shamed for this long.

So please, can the name finally be changed to something more generic that doesn't single me or any other user out?

[Alben Barkley]

OK, I'm just gonna say it:

While I initially consented to the use of my name in the topic of this thread, that was now over 6 months ago. Shortly before then, I had (while highly intoxicated on the night of a holiday in which I got ESPECIALLY intoxicated even by my standards) made some extremely embarrassing, unwarranted, and unhinged posts attacking a fellow user (who I now like to think I'm on pretty good terms with), thus why I thought I was deserving of being named in the thread title. I could not possibly regret those posts more now. Hell, I couldn't even at the time. BUT I thought it would just be a temporary thing and the name would be replaced eventually, and that it was more than adequate punishment to be publicly humiliated in this way given that I had indeed made a massive fool of myself in front of everybody.

Yeah, as the person towards whom that rant was directed, I found it pretty funny and I don't hold any grudge at all. The thread should be renamed. We have users on this site who believe in Bigfoot and want to ban knives; the fact that this is still named for AB of all people is an insult to our collective intelligence.

Thanks man, I really appreciate the support.

Again, I cannot emphasize enough how much of an idiot I was at that time, and how much I regret going psycho on you that night. Was beyond the pale and absolutely unwarranted.

And every time I read a post of yours since then I think "My god, this man is one of the smartest people here!" which just makes me feel even dumber and dumber for ever having done it.

Again, I was not thinking at all, I sincerely and totally regret it, and I think and hope that I've demonstrated enough since then that I'm not even close to the most "absurd" or "ignorant" person here. I had an extremely unfortunate lapse in judgment that was so horribly embarrassing it still to this day makes me feel a little shame whenever I remember it logging in here. But I really do not think it should define me for all-time, and I'm glad you agree.

[Alben Barkley]

538 GCB average Republican advantage down to 0.2%. RCP to 0.9%.  I guess we will find out what matters more, the GCB or presidential job approval.

If the theory that a big part of the reason for Biden’s low approval is dissatisfied progressives holds water, then I’d guess the former. Which could mean one of the most underwhelming midterm performances by the opposition in years.

It doesn't hold water. It's pure hackery by people who refuse to accept that polling continues to overestimate democrats egregiously.

Except it didn't in 2018 or even 2014 or really any election without Trump. Sometimes even underestimated Democrats. And the crosstabs support it (terrible Biden approvals among young Democratic voters for instance). Like, some of the very same polls finding Biden deep underwater are also finding Democratic candidates comfortably ahead. Literally the exact same polls, same sample of people saying they disapprove of Biden yet will vote for Democrats. How else do you explain that? It's not "hackery" to logically analyze the numbers instead of just knee jerk dooming.

Yeah, totally did. I mean just look at all these sources from the famously Democrat-leaning RCP showing how far D-skewed the polls were for Dems in those years, and how the phenomenon you described actually worked in those years:

https://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2014/senate/mi/michigan_senate_land_vs_peters-3820.html

https://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2014/senate/mn/minnesota_senate_mcfadden_vs_franken-3902.html

https://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2018/senate/wv/west_virginia_senate_morrisey_vs_manchin-6258.html

https://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2018/senate/tx/texas_senate_cruz_vs_orourke-6310.html

Also love how you left out the rest of my post in that thread where I completely ripped you a new asshole and tore your entire argument to shreds, bit by bit.

You're a f--king hack. And/or an ignorant fool who doesn't even know what the hell he is talking about.

EDIT: Here's some more from those years, IN PENNSYLVANIA, which is where this whole feud even started!

https://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2014/governor/pa/pennsylvania_governor_corbett_vs_wolf-3535.html

https://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2018/senate/pa/pennsylvania_senate_barletta_vs_casey-6312.html

Wow, so totally far off!

Moron.

[Alben Barkley]

"Bomb, bomb, bomb Iran..."

The older I get, the more neocon I get.

I don't think this is a coincidence.

After all, there's only so long you can watch the same cycle of an evil regime harshly oppressing its people, the people try in vain to rise up, only to be brutally crushed so things just get even worse, before you start to wonder if maybe we should intervene and indeed might even have a duty to intervene as the most powerful country in the world. I know if the US ever went full Handmaid's Tale, I'd want Canada and the UK to bomb, bomb, bomb the US!

This is for bad posts, not based posts.

I don't mind it. When the children grow up, they'll realize that they are lucky to live in a country with basic freedoms, for all its faults, and that their reflexive opposition to any interventions it makes was stupid and wrong, just as reflexive support for anything the US does is also stupid and wrong. I was once like them, after all. And I hope that scares the s--t out of them lol!

[Alben Barkley]

Also the MIC is based.

Where's the lie?

Thank God for the Arsenal of Democracy! And if you actually listen to Eisenhower's full speech where he coined that term, you would know he was by no means advocating for its destruction. He outright endorsed it, just said there needs to be balance. Perfectly reasonable and I agree completely as a liberal interventionist. Ultimately, he wanted it to be so that "security and liberty may prosper together." Can't have that if we cut our defense spending drastically and pull back from the rest of the world as you advocated for.