Jump to content

Omerta

TGP Prime+
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Content Count

    4,506

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    98

Posts posted by Omerta

  1. Posted

    Maybe it's me seeing what I want but I know CONSERVATIVES voting for Tulsi because of their absolute hatred for Clinton, destruction of the ever privileged Kamala Harris, and her moderate policies and support of a free market with only slight moderations that won't effect most.

    Moderates love her, and she still gets some decent pull in liberal circles. It's the White Knight pussy and the people who are a slave to a cunt who don't like her. Everyone else can be convinced.

    I think this is a 3 horse race. We will see though

     

  2. Posted

    Yeah maybe in Iowa, but outside there people have no idea who this guy is or why a Mayor is neglecting the town he runs, to runf for president.

    Seriously most people in Seattle know the guys as the homo mayor or the gay mayor.

    Some people really hate him and I don't know why. Some people love him, because he is gay I presume, and most have no idea who the fuck he is lol.

  3. Posted

    27 minutes ago, seanbrock said:

    There have been surprises before in the early states. I think Mayor Pete, Tulsi and Yang could all jump into contention because polls aren't always reliable. 

    I think Pete is gone. He is a shitty Mayor of a relatively small City that had regressed under him. He is done.

    I think it's a 4 person race. Tulsi, Yang, Bernie, and Warren. I think it's going to be hard to elect Bernie because of his health.

    So in effect it's 3.

  5. Posted

    On 10/29/2019 at 5:10 PM, BwareDWare94 said:

    Stone Cold Lock(s): Harrison Smith, Anthony Barr (so long as Barr maintains his level of play)

    Had potential but is slowing down: Xavier Rhodes. If he regains form and carries it for 2-3 more seasons, I think he has a chance. I don't see it happening, though. I think he's washed. 

    Young but with the potential: Dalvin Cook, Danielle Hunter, Stefon Diggs, Adam Theilen. MAYBE Eric Kendricks

    Harrison Smith is another person who should be in the Hall of very good. He is a great player, but when I think of the greatest safeties of the last 20 years he doesn't make the list, at least not in the top five.

  6. Posted

    Checkers rarely make it in. And USB stoned off your ass if you think Marshal yanda is not putting together a greater body of work than Justin Tucker at this point.

    yonder has played in the trenches for almost 14 years, most kickers don't have a career that long. Not to mention, he still doing it at a pro bowl or all pro level.

    is Justin Tucker puts together another 10 years, he'll absolutely be on this list, or at least should be.

  10. Posted

    4 minutes ago, Sarge said:

    I saw this thread yesterday, but I wanted to give it some thought before I answered. 

    1. Michael Myers. I couldn't agree more with you, Ngata. Michael Myers was the original badass. He had it all: a chilling backstory, super-human strength and invulnerability, stalking, an imposing presence and walk, and the best mask. There's one more thing that sets Michael apart: his foil characters. No other slasher villain has foil characters in Michael's level. In fact he has the two greatest foil characters in horror movies history. We all know that Laurie Strode is the baddest chick ever to grace the horror screen. How do you escape the terror of your own brother? But there's also the timeless and venerable Dr. Loomis. Loomis' monologues as he chases Michael through the streets of Haddonfield are incomparable. Halloween was a game-changer in the horror genre; it was filmed and produced on a shoe-string budget and still influences new horror films more than 40 years after its release. Every basketball player wants to Be Like Mike, and so does every slasher villain. In fact, in Wes Craven's Scream, he unashamedly pays homage to Halloween all throughout the movie: one of the killers is Billy Loomis (same last name as Dr. Loomis). But the biggest tribute was when all the kids were at Stu's house for the Massacre Party and what movie were they watching? Halloween. Wes Craven admired Halloween so much that he played an entire scene from it in his movie. What could be a better tribute than that?

    2. Freddie Kruger. Here's where I diverge from you. Although your description of Freddie Kruger as a loser ass pedo who was burned alive isn't inaccurate, it doesn't do the character justice. In my mind it is part of what makes his character even more gruesome. Whether you kill a pedophile or he goes to jail, the impact of what he did never really goes away. Unfortunately, Jerry Sandusky is a real life example of that. 50 years from now, Penn State will still be haunted by his memory. Well Wes Craven took it a step further and made that loser ass pedo a psycho killers who not only haunts your nightmares but kills you in them. Freddie was the first guy that scared the piss out of me. That's because I saw A Nightmare on Elm Street before Halloween. Nonetheless I consider Wes Craven's crown jewel a true horror icon, and finishing 2nd to Michael is nothing to be ashamed of. 

    3. Jason Voorhees. The Sultan of Slash, His Hockey-Masked Highness, The God of Gore. Jason could be given a lot of nicknames, and he probably has earned them all. Jason made hockey masks more popular than hockey players did. That says a lot. Of the Holy Trinity of slasher villains, Jason is the toughest and most physically imposing. In Freddy vs. Jason, Freddy couldn't kill Jason even while Jason was asleep. But when the Big Dog woke up, it was lights out for Pedo Boy. The signature "ki-ki-ki, ma-ma-ma"  (Jason's way of saying kill them, mommy!) that we hear when Jason stalks his victims is a legendary sound-effect in horror. It seems that I'm a huge fan of Jason, and I am. So why is he only 3rd on my list? The first reason is that Jason isn't even the original killer in his franchise; Mrs. Voorhees was the killer in the very beginning. Does that really matter? Well if we're choosing the greatest of all time, then yes, yes it does. The other reason is that Jason never had a foil character follow him around throughout the series. Michael Myers had 2, and they were the best to ever do it. All that said, Jason definitely deserves this spot, and I understand completely if someone puts him higher. 

    4. Ghostface. After the highly-successful runs of Jason and Freddie in the 1980's, horror was ready for a new face. Those 2 had established themselves as legends, but horror fans needed a fresh face to fear. Wes Craven once again was up to the task. 1996's Scream introduced us to Ghostface. Ghostface borrowed many ideas and tactics from his (or her) horror ancestors, but added his own twist: calling the victims from inside their houses while stalking them. Ghostface was equal parts a homage to the great films of the past and a parody of how corny they could be. Nonetheless, Scream became the most popular slasher film from the mid 1990s onward. And the franchise introduced us to another great Fearsome Female: Sidney Prescott. Sidney became to the 90s and 00s what Laurie Strode was to the 70s and 80s--a kick-ass foil character who refused to die and would kick the killer's ass in the process. So Ghostface had many things in his favor: originality, a modern twist, and a great foil character to boot. Why is he only #4 then? Two reasons: one, it wasn't the same character in every movie. If you want to be a legend, you have to earn it every movie for a while. Some people could argue this gives Ghostface a cool advantage that the others don't have: anyone can dawn the mask and cause a town to cowar in fear. I get it. I just believe there's something to be said for continuity when we're talking the greatest of all time. The other reason is that Ghostface has become the most parodied killer of all time. It is difficult to take him as seriously as the others thanks to Scary Movie. But perhaps that means he is only a victim of his own success. Either way, I can't put him on the same level as the Horrible Trinity. They did it better and longer. 

    5. I'm leaving this blank. Nobody else is worth mentioning. 

     

    I knew we would agree on Halloween, Michael is the GOAT. I do enjoy the foil characters that you brought up because that is an underrated part of the horror genre that people often forget. If there is just an unstoppable character there is no point to a movie because there is no drama. And if you think about how groundbreaking it was that a woman was the foil character, and a high school one at that. I think that had a lot to do with the fact that one of the writers was a woman (Debra Hill) and that she understood the high school dynamic. Loomis was one of the great character actors of his time,  and I think Halloween was some of his best performances. When they did the voice-over for his characters for Haloween H20 (It wasn't him, but a voice actor), you can tell how much his voice was kind of a character of its own. 

    When it comes to Freddy, I'll be honest I never saw the angle of how something like being a victim of being a pedophilia would haunt you years later, I never made the connection of that is why he does it in their dreams, and the haunting's are his playground. He is still a loser ass pedo, but I guess the villain of the movie is supposed to bring angst in some form, Freddy isn't really scary, but he is hate-able so you root for the kids. I would disagree that Freddy is his crown jewel, I would say it is probably Scream, but I could see how you would make that argument. 

    Jason's lack of a foil character was both a strength and a weakness for me. He did have somewhat of a foil character though in Tommy Jarvis. The lack of a real foil character was kind of cool though because every movie you got to guess who was going to be the survivor girl. Although you could always tell in the first 5 minutes. It was always the sexually repressed nerd who didnt drink, thus enforcing the rules of horror.

    I thought Candyman was a strong Villain, although given the importance that you place on a foil character it probably isn't as great for you.

    As a side not, have you seen the Scream TV series ?

  11. Posted

    58 minutes ago, Thanatos said:

    Have you flipped on Snowden? Thought at one point you thought he was a traitor.

    I didn't know if he was a traitor. I did say, and still maintain the fact that I think some part of him is an idiot. What he did was not nearly as bad as it was first reported to be, however, a couple of years ago when he was acting as surprised as you was at the backlash oh, I couldn't believe it. You expose government corruption on a mass scale, you don't think they're going to come after you? Or you try to be the anti-hero of the population and you don't think the government is going to bite back hard? He just comes off as a whiny prick.

  12. Posted

    So it is my favorite time of year and the office talk always revolves around the best horror franchise, and most of, although not all, horror credibility is the main antagonist for the franchise. So who do you have and why? Lets get a rank choice here. Top 5. 5th will get 1 point, and 1st will get 5 points. The other ones are irrelevant lol.

     

    1.) Michael Myers (Halloween) Honestly this isnt even close to me. He was easily the best because of his presence. He did not have as much gore but the stalking and foreshadowing was intense. He had it all, the look, the unstoppable nature, the back story, the walk, just the best.

    2.) Ghost Face. There was something about the perpetual nature of the mask. It wasnt so much the killers as what the mask represented to me. It was the mystery of it all, this was a whodunnit that could stay interesting even though it did not need a complete cast remake and the star heroine and her nemesis made this awesome. 

    3.)  Jason Voorhees. He is pretty much a watered down Michael Myers, but a force to be reckoned with all the same. The backstory was good, but it all went to shit after the 3rd one, although Jason takes Manhattan had some redeeming qualities. 

    4.) Jigsaw. An actual flesh and blood human who used his wits to get people to appreciate their lives or exact revenge. IT was creative and brutal but completely plausible given the right circumstances. He could be killed and he was at one point, but he still found a way to test and inspire proteges. 

    5.) Candyman. I absolutely loved the premise of the original, I though it was an awesome way to introduce a movie antagonist. It was original and it capitalized on a visceral fear of the 90's kids who did this shit. He was a scary enough guy and the character was written well.

    The other 2 are shit in my opinion. Hellraiser was never scary to me and Freddie was just a loser ass pedo who was burned alive, but somehow attacked people while dreaming. 

     

    I wouldnt mind doing more of these like best franchise, best one off horror movies, and so on. Come up with ideas you fucks.

  13. Posted

    That is touchy for me. It depends on what they blow the whistle on. If they are spoiling black ops missions, they should definitely prosecute. If it is some Edward Snowden shit where it is the government infringing on the constitutional rights of the American everyman, yeah they did a public service.

    • Upvote 1

  14. Posted

    5 hours ago, Thanatos said:

    Did I say that anywhere? No. The dude is misleading with his post.

    It is entirely *possible* she is telling the truth. This guy is acting like he proved she is lying, when he did not do that at all. If your argument is "hillary is pandering so she's probably lying" that's an entirely different argument from "here is proof she is lying."

    Just funny that people get upset at her sending a positive message to girls by trying to nitpick exactly what she means by a little girl, lol.

    "There is no fact she sent a letter. She doesn't have it NASA doesn't either." Are you serious bro? It was written in 1960. Yall talk about Trump derangement syndrome, this is Hillary derangement syndrome, lol. TIL that not holding onto a letter you got 60 years ago clearly means that is proof you are lying.

    I didn't say that. You claim it's possible based on your grandma saying she was a little girl at 18. My great great grandmother has letters from family going back to the great potato famine in Ireland. Using your logic of your grandma using little girl.tonreference someone in their late teens.meams Hillary did, means my grandma keeping letters means Hillary should have.

    There is no positive message if it's sent by a liar, especially if it's bullshit.the message is pander, pander, pander, to suit the crowd you're in. Also the message would mean nothing because of who said it. If Trump tells boys about overcoming adversity its a bunk message because it comes from someone who is morally bankrupt and has never overcome adversity.

    There is no derangement syndrome. Everyone seems to think their is a higher probability of her lying than telling the truth except you, which is all well and good. But pretending anyone has facts here is dumb.

  17. Posted

    15 minutes ago, DalaiLama4Ever said:

    I hope so. 

    Tulsi was very... wordy and... "harsh" in her response. She might pull some (more) moderates... but there is a serious and hardcore Hillary cult (still) on the left. I can't imagine they are taking too kindly to the Hilldog attack. And I say "harsh" in quotes because I literally give no fucks with what she said. She is 100% right and I 100% support her in standing up for herself and against the evil and corrupt cunt known as Hillary, but I genuinely feel a lot of people won't see it that way lol.

    Oh for sure you have people who think she hung the moon. That said the party as a whole is leaving her. Bernie was the real leader, not Biden for the nomination. I personally think he is out now. If he is, he is going to endorse one of two people. Watered or Gabbard. 

    Gabbard or Yang is their best shot at pulling moderates. I would say Gabbard because the military service go a long way with the right. If Bernie endorses Gabbard she becomes a powerhouse. As we speak Bernie peeps are looking at her. And policy for policy I think she is the best.

  18. Posted

    53 minutes ago, DalaiLama4Ever said:

    Ya ya, I know it's The Hill. But this guy is fucking loopy. He says if he doesn't win the nomination, he is leaving politics... I think that would be best for all parties involved.

    Haha look its that one guy with the punchable face who does more pandering to the crowd than any other candidate. He is that atypical beta cuck white guy who is talking about poke balls at a riot, sees a black guy, and starts yelling," BLACK LIVES MATTER, BLACK LIVES MATTER, BLACK LIVES MATTER, BLACK LIVES MATTER" Then as soon as the black guy leaves he runs home and thinks to himself how lucky he is he didnt have to make eye contact because he would have wet himself. 

    I love his, we are going door to door speeches. Like, Bitch you aint doing shit. The first guy would smack you out of your boots and you would talk about your oppression in your next basket weaving class with the other women. 

     

    This is Robert in his natural habitat:

    tumblr_mbd530nmXl1qmary5o1_500.gif

  19. Posted

    1 hour ago, DalaiLama4Ever said:

    A little late to the party but nice to see
     

     

    I really think that Clinton is doing Tulsi a favor. Clinton is such a vile, loathsome, lying, piece of shit, cunt that so many people hate her they are going to start saying," Hey, I hate Hillary Clinton, this Gabbard lady has rustled her jimmy, she must be doing something right, let me go check it out." I cannot reiterate enough how much I absolutely hate that woman, and I am not alone. Her own party hates her sorry ass. 

    I think this really could swing a lot of people to at least listen to Gabbard, if she does not win, then fine, but her message should be heard. 

    • Upvote 1

  20. Posted · Edited by Omerta

    1 hour ago, Thanatos said:

    No, its not. The end does not justify the means.

    And no, the media as a whole is absolutely nowhere near as bad as Project Veritas. The media has their biases, to be clear. The vast majority of them are not intentionally lying. O'Keefe and his organization are and they've been caught on it multiple times.

    I think they absolutely lie to us on purpose. I guess we will disagree. On the Joe Rogan Podcast with a dogshit, confused, sack of shit reporter Bary Weiss from the New York Times, she straight admits it. She says she will run.stories she thinks are dubious just to get out there first, and retract it later if there is backlash.

    I don't know. I agree an eye for an eye probably isn't productive. Although I would be lying to you if I said I don't get some joy watching someone do to reporters what they do to everyone else. Honestly I would abolish the first amendment at this point before the second. Freedom of the press is all great and all until their in bed with the people who make the rules.

  21. Posted

    33 minutes ago, DalaiLama4Ever said:

    We have to take down the medical cartel.

    https://www.axios.com/doctors-big-pharma-drug-medical-device-payments-6526a1e3-04a0-41f3-b3f5-a520fa1e97dc.html?utm_source=facebook&utm_medium=social&utm_campaign=organic

    You should go to prison for this. The longer my wife does this the more discouraging it is. To her patient care is numero uno. There is nothing else, and it's frustrating to me because she will come home crying some days because follow up care is so poor and nurses suck ass. Admittedly she is adorable when she gets fiesty.

    That said as a doctor people are entrusting you with their lives or the lives of their loved ones. Any shady dealings like that should get you in the clink. That is why your salary is so high, because the outcomes of your decisions are magnified.

    • Upvote 1

  22. Posted

    I can see that, but here is the philosophical question at play here. Given the degradation of the standards in media you should be suspect of all news because they all pretty much suck. 

    So if someone suspects someone is doing some shady shit, and maybe leaks a false story, like major news organizations, to get them investigated, how wrongt is it ? If it's true you did a bad thing with net good results. If you don't you retract it, and it's a way, with maybe a slight lean negative. So is it worth it? I don't know, but it's interesting.

  23. Posted

    I can get behind it in principle though. The idea to use undercover reporting to expose corruption is something I love on a lot of levels. It is brilliant strategically as well if all the corrupt people can't trust phone repairmen. They would have to circle the wagons for survival and the will have isolated themselves. 

    He is a sleaze, but again the principle I can get behind. Tulsi supporting something like that is not a bad thing necessarily. I will say if that's the only flaw she has, she is far and away the best candidate.

  24. Posted

    11 minutes ago, Thanatos said:

    The only thing I don't like about Tulsi is her promoting Project Veritas. Veritas is nothing but a bunch of liars who selectively edit their videos to make people seem bad.

    James O'Keefe has been caught in these lies over and over again, and yet the right wing people keep promoting his conspiracy theory videos.

    Other than that, she's the best candidate out there. Also the idea that a US vet is a Russian asset is fucking hilarious.

    You only say that because O'Keefe is "conservative." 

    In reality I like the idea. I love the fact that Tulsi will reach across the aisle. She could be extremely successful if elected

     

  • Chatbox

    TGP has moved to Discord (sorta) - https://discord.gg/JkWAfU3Phm

    Load More
    You don't have permission to chat.
×