Just a few to start you off:
http://www.salon.com/news/feature/2009/09/16/beck_skousen/index.html
QuoteBeck has created a massive meet-up for the disaffected, paranoid Palin-ite "death panel" wing of the GOP, those ideologues most susceptible to conspiracy theories and prone to latch on to eccentric distortions of fact in the name of opposing "socialism." In that, they are true disciples of the late W. Cleon Skousen, Beck's favorite writer and the author of the bible of the 9/12 movement, "The 5,000 Year Leap." A once-famous anti-communist "historian," Skousen was too extreme even for the conservative activists of the Goldwater era, but Glenn Beck has now rescued him from the remainder pile of history, and introduced him to a receptive new audience.
I've read Skousen's nephew (http://www.joelskousen.com/) before, who is a nutter, but Unlce W. Cleon is far worse.
http://thinkprogress.org/2009/09/24/beck-white-culture/
QuoteIn July, Fox News' radical host Glenn Beck called President Obama a "racist," saying that he "has a deap-seated hatred for white people, or white culture" — a comment that sparked a successful advertising boycott of his Fox News program. This week in an interview with CBS News' Katie Couric, Beck said he was "sorry" for the way he "phrased" the claim, but still contended that it's a "serious question" as to whether Obama is a racist.
During the interview, Couric posed a question from a Twitter user who wanted to know what Beck meant by "white culture" in his attack on Obama. Beck responded by stuttering: "Ummmmm, I don't know." He then suggested that he had already answered the criticism on his website, and therefore didn't want to "make news" by responding to Couric.
"Can you explain what you mean by the white culture?" Couric insisted, "because some people say that sounds kind of racist." Beck complained that he shouldn't be the "target" for "asking" if Obama is a racist.
http://wonkette.com/411263/glenn-beck-literally-like-actually-literally-boils-a-frog-on-his-glenn-beck-show
QuoteOh... god. Apparently someone taught Glenn Beck a metaphor, and already, there has been one known death. You see, Obama, he's like throwing frogs in a pot of boiling water. This part of the metaphor stands in for Health Care. You dig? But John McCain, a completely random human who actually has had very little to do with the public health care debate, would never do something so gay, ever, as to force America to eat some pondwater consommé. John McCain HATES the French delicacy of Gay Soup. No, he would put the frog in regular water and slowly bring it to a boil. This part of the metaphor also represents Health Care. Ha, it is confusing! Let's actually boil something alive, for clarity.
Obviously this minor rhetorical point would be impossible to understand unless Beck were to throw an actual living creature in boiling water, on television. Never has anyone been more surprised than Glenn Beck upon realizing the Metaphor Frogs are far, far more reliable than whatever piece of shit sold to him by the pet store that can't even die on cue.
RAAAAAGGGGEEEEEE (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YA7-BvVDV10&NR=1&feature=fvwp)
Good stuff starts @ 3:00
yes. beck is crazy. plenty of examples... but the frog was, as he clearly says in the video, a fake frog.
i mean, c'mon, Cain.
we should be focusing on the fact that GLEN BECK RAPED AND MURDERED THE REAL FROG...
Quote from: Sir Remington III on September 26, 2009, 07:46:07 PM
RAAAAAGGGGEEEEEE (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YA7-BvVDV10&NR=1&feature=fvwp)
Good stuff starts @ 3:00
Woooooooowwwww... He really thinks that we should deny health care to illegal immigrants? Does he realize that they are actual human beings and not evil demon spawn from Hell! I'm pretty sure denying health care to them would be a breach of several human rights treaties.
Proving that Glenn Beck has zero sense of irony:
http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/localnews/2009950082_webbeckdispatches26m.html
QuoteBeck said he didn't remember politics being divisive growing up, and that if people now could just stop "tearing each other apart" there was a bright future for the country.
Beck can't explain what he means by "white culture"
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FKZ1qbDyKOM
BTW, when did Katie Couric become a serious interviewer?
When she started asking twitter questions.
This just in from the right-wing:
(http://images.huffingtonpost.com/gen/107688/original.jpg)
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/09/28/obama-facebook-poll-asks_n_301860.html (http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/09/28/obama-facebook-poll-asks_n_301860.html)
Um... What was the final tally?
Quote from: LMNO on September 29, 2009, 08:51:16 PM
Um... What was the final tally?
No idea, the poll was deleted and the partyvan was called.
:lulz:
Just keeps getting more and more funny... and then the screaming will set in.
Is he a nut? Yes. But he was right about the ACORN organization, though they may not be as corrupt as he makes out, enough offices fell for the worst con I have ever seen that they should be investigated.
Quote from: Halfbaked1 on September 30, 2009, 03:44:49 AM
Is he a nut? Yes. But he was right about the ACORN organization, though they may not be as corrupt as he makes out, enough offices fell for the worst con I have ever seen that they should be investigated.
The impression I got from the tapes of the ACORN "investigation" wasn't so much that ACORN itself is (necessarily) corrupt, just that they didn't bother to train any of their workers, who retained a very strong in-group out-group mentality where pimps and hos are Our People and the government is the Big Scary Man.
Quote from: GA on September 30, 2009, 06:24:21 AM
Quote from: Halfbaked1 on September 30, 2009, 03:44:49 AM
Is he a nut? Yes. But he was right about the ACORN organization, though they may not be as corrupt as he makes out, enough offices fell for the worst con I have ever seen that they should be investigated.
The impression I got from the tapes of the ACORN "investigation" wasn't so much that ACORN itself is (necessarily) corrupt, just that they didn't bother to train any of their workers, who retained a very strong in-group out-group mentality where pimps and hos are Our People and the government is the Big Scary Man.
The Government should be considered a big scary thing. I agree that it is a training issue, but that multiple offices were cool with underage prostitution and, in one case, even offered help in smuggling the children across the border. add to the fact that multiple states have been investigating them for voter fraud and you have alot of small issues that add up to something that could be much more. There should be an investigation of such an organization to make sure that they are on the up and up. These guys have strong ties with our current President, I want them to be cleared because America does not need that kind of issue with its first black president. I mean it's bad enough these "Birther" nutjobs running about and the "Truthers" calling for a meeting with President Obama.
i may hate the governmental system currently in place, but I don't need to invent reasons to hate them. Presidents, or their parties, pushing bills thru without sufficient oversight. Taxation on issues that the people do not agree with. I mean why do these talking heads like Beck get all the attention when we should be watching our government so that the people don't need instigators like Beck and Hannity, Olberman and Maddow.
ACORN are an irrelevance. Goldman Sachs have the government and FBI dancing to their tune, funding their continued existence and arresting enemies based purely on their say-so and you're worried about an organisation with a budget of a few million?
Priorities, people. Don't worry about how the deck chairs are arranged while the ship is sinking.
Quote from: Cain on September 30, 2009, 10:11:37 AM
ACORN are an irrelevance. Goldman Sachs have the government and FBI dancing to their tune, funding their continued existence and arresting enemies based purely on their say-so and you're worried about an organisation with a budget of a few million?
Priorities, people. Don't worry about how the deck chairs are arranged while the ship is sinking.
Eh, good point...but I like the chairs this way.
Wait... How was Glenn Beck "right" about ACORN?
From what I recall, the election furor was over so-called "voter fraud". But ACORN didn't commit voter fraud. They committed voter registration fraud. They were getting paid to register people, and submitted false forms so they could get paid for not doing their jobs. No ballot boxes were stuffed, the election itself wasn't altered.
That's not what Glenn Beck alleged.
Secondly, the video showing ACORN advising a pimp how to play the system for his teenage prostitution ring also has nothing to do with voter fraud.
So, while ACORN has a lot of 'splaining to do, they aren't actually "guilty" of what they are generally accused of. (They are guilty of many other things, however.)
(http://i209.photobucket.com/albums/bb163/wompcabal/bin/Fake-Police-Report-On-A-Supposed-Ra.jpg)
So Glenn Beck DIDN'T rape and murder a girl in the 1990 after all. He raped a girl and took her money and phone.
Quote from: Pastor-Mullah Zappathruster on September 30, 2009, 02:52:22 PM
So Glenn Beck DIDN'T rape and murder a girl in the 1990 after all. He raped a girl and took her money and phone.
:mittens:
and :lulz: LOVE IT CRAM, THANK YOU!
Quote from: LMNO on September 30, 2009, 01:02:09 PM
Wait... How was Glenn Beck "right" about ACORN?
From what I recall, the election furor was over so-called "voter fraud". But ACORN didn't commit voter fraud. They committed voter registration fraud. They were getting paid to register people, and submitted false forms so they could get paid for not doing their jobs. No ballot boxes were stuffed, the election itself wasn't altered.
That's not what Glenn Beck alleged.
Secondly, the video showing ACORN advising a pimp how to play the system for his teenage prostitution ring also has nothing to do with voter fraud.
So, while ACORN has a lot of 'splaining to do, they aren't actually "guilty" of what they are generally accused of. (They are guilty of many other things, however.)
You are correct. I should have been more specific. But he was right in that there is something wrong within that organization.
You realize that the voter registration fraud was discovered by acorn in the first place, which turned the people responsible in?
Quote from: Halfbaked1 on October 01, 2009, 03:27:35 AM
Quote from: LMNO on September 30, 2009, 01:02:09 PM
Wait... How was Glenn Beck "right" about ACORN?
From what I recall, the election furor was over so-called "voter fraud". But ACORN didn't commit voter fraud. They committed voter registration fraud. They were getting paid to register people, and submitted false forms so they could get paid for not doing their jobs. No ballot boxes were stuffed, the election itself wasn't altered.
That's not what Glenn Beck alleged.
Secondly, the video showing ACORN advising a pimp how to play the system for his teenage prostitution ring also has nothing to do with voter fraud.
So, while ACORN has a lot of 'splaining to do, they aren't actually "guilty" of what they are generally accused of. (They are guilty of many other things, however.)
You are correct. I should have been more specific. But he was right in that there is something wrong within that organization.
There is "something wrong" with
any sufficiently large organization. Remember about the imposition of order...
Glenn Beck, defender of slavery!
http://mediamatters.org/research/200909230042
Quote from: Iason Ouabache on October 01, 2009, 05:41:01 PM
Glenn Beck, defender of slavery!
http://mediamatters.org/research/200909230042
Gotta love that Beck guy. he Kwazy.
Worst part is that I do feel like some people have no clue what is in the Constitution, but seriously, Beck is of his bleedin nut.
Oooh, this is simply delightful on so many levels: http://www.discourse.net/archives/2009/10/glenn_beck_attempts_to_get_un_to_circumvent_us_constitution.html
Quote from: Requia ☣ on October 01, 2009, 04:07:42 AM
You realize that the voter registration fraud was discovered by acorn in the first place, which turned the people responsible in?
Of course he doesn't realize that. Limbaugh hasn't had a chance to tell him.
Halfbaked is a fucking Fox News drone. Has been since he arrived.
Quote from: The Good Reverend Roger on October 04, 2009, 08:09:41 PM
Quote from: Requia ☣ on October 01, 2009, 04:07:42 AM
You realize that the voter registration fraud was discovered by acorn in the first place, which turned the people responsible in?
Of course he doesn't realize that. Limbaugh hasn't had a chance to tell him.
Halfbaked is a fucking Fox News drone. Has been since he arrived.
TGRR always keeps me real. I can understand why he says that I am a drone, but i disagree with his appellation in this situation. Actually I did know that ACORN was discovered first by them, but I didn't remember seeing anything about it in the news until Fox said something. I go to CNN and MSNBC but they don't seem to want to talk about the current Admins mistakes or anyone connected with them until it gets so big that people are talking about it on their own. Fox goes to far on the stuff they cover though, always acting as if the Right never lorded it over the Left while they had the advantage. Basically I can listen to the far Left or the far Right, there are no fair and balanced media outlets to get news from so aside from the AP what else am i to do?
The liberal government is in charge now, so I have to take up some of the Conservative pov. When the Conservatives were in charge I was taking up Liberal pov. I don't care who is in charge cause they are all the same, just different approaches to the same ends.
Why must I be considered a drone of one side or another if I take up their point of view? I play Devils Advocate because while I want to see the constitution used as a legal document rather than a doormat, I find that I can see all points of view on an issue once I have the chance to observe it.
Mostly, its how incredibly bad the right has gotten. Its assumed if you haven't gotten fed up with everything about them, you must be one of them.
Quote from: Requia ☣ on October 07, 2009, 06:00:24 AM
Mostly, its how incredibly bad the right has gotten. Its assumed if you haven't gotten fed up with everything about them, you must be one of them.
I was fed up with the Left as well though. For being a supposedly open minded bunch most of the ones I see on the news are incredibly closed minded. The Right has always been close minded so that came as no surprise.
See, you think too narrow.
The teevee doesn't show you the truth, or even the interesting lies. It shows you the happy safe funtime political view that doesn't make people wake up screaming.
The right doesn't look like fox news, it looks like this guy:
http://www.mcnaughtonart.com/artwork/view_zoom/?artpiece_id=353
Quote from: Requia ☣ on October 07, 2009, 07:18:21 AM
See, you think too narrow.
The teevee doesn't show you the truth, or even the interesting lies. It shows you the happy safe funtime political view that doesn't make people wake up screaming.
The right doesn't look like fox news, it looks like this guy:
http://www.mcnaughtonart.com/artwork/view_zoom/?artpiece_id=353
Ah, I see your point. You see, living in the South I get alot of the religious right point of view and I am positively sick of it. But in all fairness they are fundamentalists, and therefore potential human catastrophes. I would welcome some other sources for information. If you want sci-fi info from the internet I can find it, but news sources are elusive to me.
Hang around, these fuckers will tell you the horrible troof eventually.
(Cain would probably be the best to ask about news sources.)
I'll throw up some when I finish my shift.
I'd also like to add that you'd need roughly the equivalent to Lenin to balance some of the right wing nutters on the news of late. Middle of the road, whiney sad-sacks like Rachel Maddow or Michael Moore hardly cut it. They'd probably get laughed at by Trotskyites in the street, before being used as target practice.
Quote from: Halfbaked1 on October 07, 2009, 07:05:18 AM
Quote from: Requia ☣ on October 07, 2009, 06:00:24 AM
Mostly, its how incredibly bad the right has gotten. Its assumed if you haven't gotten fed up with everything about them, you must be one of them.
I was fed up with the Left as well though. For being a supposedly open minded bunch most of the ones I see on the news are incredibly closed minded. The Right has always been close minded so that came as no surprise.
I keep hearing these words, "left" and "liberal". Not sure what you mean. Sounds like made up words, about people that don't exist.
Quote from: Kai on October 07, 2009, 11:28:32 AM
Quote from: Halfbaked1 on October 07, 2009, 07:05:18 AM
Quote from: Requia ☣ on October 07, 2009, 06:00:24 AM
Mostly, its how incredibly bad the right has gotten. Its assumed if you haven't gotten fed up with everything about them, you must be one of them.
I was fed up with the Left as well though. For being a supposedly open minded bunch most of the ones I see on the news are incredibly closed minded. The Right has always been close minded so that came as no surprise.
I keep hearing these words, "left" and "liberal". Not sure what you mean. Sounds like made up words, about people that don't exist.
:mittens:
Didja know I'm a leftist, at least according to some blog commentators?
Quote from: Doctor Rat Bastard on October 07, 2009, 02:04:51 PM
Quote from: Kai on October 07, 2009, 11:28:32 AM
Quote from: Halfbaked1 on October 07, 2009, 07:05:18 AM
Quote from: Requia ☣ on October 07, 2009, 06:00:24 AM
Mostly, its how incredibly bad the right has gotten. Its assumed if you haven't gotten fed up with everything about them, you must be one of them.
I was fed up with the Left as well though. For being a supposedly open minded bunch most of the ones I see on the news are incredibly closed minded. The Right has always been close minded so that came as no surprise.
I keep hearing these words, "left" and "liberal". Not sure what you mean. Sounds like made up words, about people that don't exist.
:mittens:
Didja know I'm a leftist, at least according to some blog commentators?
I'm commenting on the lack of liberals in this country, that's all.
OK, news and analysis sources Cain likes:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/
http://english.aljazeera.net/
http://www.atimes.com/
http://www.alertnet.org/
http://www.opendemocracy.net/
http://www.thewashingtonnote.com/
http://www.irr.org.uk/ (probably too UK orientated, but I still like it)
http://trueslant.com/matttaibbi/
http://www.globaldashboard.org/
http://cryptogon.com/
http://www.cato-at-liberty.org/
http://www.schneier.com/
http://wonkette.com/
http://www.juancole.com/
http://yglesias.thinkprogress.org/
http://www.stiftungleostrauss.com/bunker/
http://washingtonindependent.com/
http://www.wired.com/threatlevel/
http://www.nakedcapitalism.com/
http://www.salon.com/opinion/greenwald/
http://www.cnas.org/blogs/abumuqawama/
http://www.registan.net/
Ah, cool, I at least frequent two of those. BBC and Al-Jazeera. Those were like the only sources for information during the war for me. I will copy these links and pick my way thru them as the days go by...or nights since I do most of my blogging and forum/news running while I work 3rd shift.
No problem.
Anyhow, to re-jack, it seems Beck is a nasty piece of work.
http://www.salon.com/news/feature/2009/09/22/glenn_beck_two/index2.html
QuoteThe animosity between Beck and Kelly continued to deepen. When Beck and Hattrick produced a local version of Orson Welles' "War of the Worlds" for Halloween -- a recurring motif in Beck's life and career -- Kelly told a local reporter that the bit was a stupid rip-off of a syndicated gag. The slight outraged Beck, who got his revenge with what may rank as one of the cruelest bits in the history of morning radio. "A couple days after Kelly's wife, Terry, had a miscarriage, Beck called her live on the air and says, 'We hear you had a miscarriage,' " remembers Brad Miller, a former Y95 DJ and Clear Channel programmer. "When Terry said, 'Yes,' Beck proceeded to joke about how Bruce [Kelly] apparently can't do anything right -- about he can't even have a baby."
Now see that was bloody uncalled for. The hell was he thinking? Was he thinking? I somehow doubt it.
EDIT: Must remember to not read the comments in the news stories...it only encourages me to go on a TGRR style rant about how the sheep bleeting are driving me nuts. I can't call these people monkeys, I feel it is a disservice to the monkeys.
Always felt that Darwin was only half right. Monkeys are descended from us after they saw how fucked up we were becoming they said fuck that and went to flinging poo at us from the trees.
Wow, that's harsh. What a fuckhead. What a piece of no good filth. Fucking gangrenous dick.
Quote from: Triple Zero on October 09, 2009, 11:58:13 AM
Wow, that's harsh. What a fuckhead. What a piece of no good filth. Fucking gangrenous dick.
Word. But, am I surprised, fuck no.
Colbert calls out Beck (http://www.colbertnation.com/the-colbert-report-videos/252013/october-08-2009/bend-it-like-beck)
Quote from: Jenne on October 10, 2009, 06:28:53 AM
Colbert calls out Beck (http://www.colbertnation.com/the-colbert-report-videos/252013/october-08-2009/bend-it-like-beck)
That was perfect.
So, glen beck, troll, or for reals?
Both.
I'm actually about to touch on this, in my second Interregnum rant.
Cain, could I repost you without attribution for trolling purposes?
Just saw the cover to Beck's last book.
:lulz:
Quote from: Cramulus on October 12, 2009, 04:59:01 PM
Cain, could I repost you without attribution for trolling purposes?
What in particular by me? Interregnum?
Quote from: The Good Reverend Roger on October 12, 2009, 05:20:41 PM
Just saw the cover to Beck's last book.
:lulz:
Looks exactly like Colonel Klink, doesn't he?
BTW, he just jumped onto the anti-vaccine bandwagon. He finally agrees with Bill Maher about something.
http://mediamatters.org/print/research/200910070043
QuoteBeck: "I'd do the exact opposite of what the Homeland Security says." During the same show, Beck said: "If somebody had the swine flu right now, I would have them cough on me. I'd do the exact opposite of what the Homeland Security says." When his producer responded, "But this is what I think. You're coming from such a skeptic viewpoint there. You're saying, you'd do the exact opposite of what Homeland Security tells you to do," Beck replied, "Only because I believe in -- in -- you know, I think this thing is going to mutate. It hasn't mutated yet. So I'd rather have it now, just like in 1916. Those who got the flu in 1916 were the ones that survived 1918. So I'd rather have it now. I mean, here's my vaccination. Hey, everybody, it's a swine flu chicken pox party. Seriously." [The Glenn Beck Program, 9/30/09]
I really hope that someone starts a Glenn Beck body count website.
Quote from: Cain on October 12, 2009, 05:21:55 PM
Quote from: Cramulus on October 12, 2009, 04:59:01 PM
Cain, could I repost you without attribution for trolling purposes?
What in particular by me? Interregnum?
no, the OP ITT
Oh, yeah, sure. I mean, 95% of the words in the OP aren't even mine, anyway. Is this for TCC?
:lulz: how did you guess?
I thought to myself "which forum, aside from Godlikeproductions, is most likely to react in a batshit insane way to Glenn Beck being dissed?"
And then, for no apparent reason, I found myself thinking about TCC. Its like, making random connections or something, man.
Quote from: Cain on October 12, 2009, 07:10:27 PM
I thought to myself "which forum, aside from Godlikeproductions, is most likely to react in a batshit insane way to Glenn Beck being dissed?"
And then, for no apparent reason, I found myself thinking about TCC. Its like, making random connections or something, man.
Prison Planet.
Oh man, I haven't even looked at Prison Planet this year. I don't think I could deal with it.
Quote from: Sir Remington III on September 29, 2009, 08:49:37 PM
This just in from the right-wing:
(http://images.huffingtonpost.com/gen/107688/original.jpg)
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/09/28/obama-facebook-poll-asks_n_301860.html (http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/09/28/obama-facebook-poll-asks_n_301860.html)
I x-posted this at TCC and it got deleted!
Quote*edited to remove poll. It was pulled off FB and we won't have it posted here* -EBS
good to know TCC is taking its mod cues from facebook
:lulz:
Oh dear, I just remembered my TCC password. Check out the Deities subforum.
Quote from: Cain on October 12, 2009, 08:39:16 PM
Oh dear, I just remembered my TCC password. Check out the Deities subforum.
:lulz: I saw you posting that.
The winner of this poll should take on Jesus
"Can you be a christian AND a wiccan?" is a hot troll topic over there right now.
NEVER AGAIN THE CRUCIFIXION TIMEZ!
\
:sadbanana:
Quote from: Cramulus on October 12, 2009, 08:41:10 PM
Quote from: Cain on October 12, 2009, 08:39:16 PM
Oh dear, I just remembered my TCC password. Check out the Deities subforum.
:lulz: I saw you posting that.
The winner of this poll should take on Jesus
"Can you be a christian AND a wiccan?" is a hot troll topic over there right now.
I might check it out. I prefer hit and run on them, I know they spook easily. Too much, too fast...its better to ease in gently.
Plus I have to get back into that Black Hat Guy mindset.
What's TCC?
The Celtic Connection, a wiccan forum that PD has been trolling for over two years now.
Cain just asked "who would win in a fight, zeus or odin?"
anyway,
(http://z.about.com/d/politicalhumor/1/0/9/h/2/glenn-beck-padded-room.gif)
(http://www.glenn-beck-sucks.com/images/beck-8.jpg)
(http://images.salon.com/comics/tomo/2009/04/14/tomo/story.jpg)
Tom Tomorrow always does the best cartoons.
White House advisers say Fox News is not news (http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/article/ALeqM5ha7CvIExC9yKPcBtzRHhL0AfFqGAD9BDLVC82)
While they are certainly correct, this is a battle they can never win, and honestly, is best not waged. At least, the White House should not be waging it. This is when you dispatch proxies to do the dirty work. Get Howard Dean to go around talking smack (aka the truth) about Fox News. All they are doing is giving Fox News fodder to amp up their viewer base even more.
I heard a different perspective the other day. If the White House brands Fox as representative of the Republican Party, then people will increasingly associate all republicans as screaming hate mongers, which will trigger an increasing shift away from the GOP, much in the same way that the GOP demonized the word "liberal".
So it looks like this is an extension of the battle over the independents. I just think they have to be careful about how they play it. If they overplay it, it could come off as whining and the independents just stay home, which, is okay as long as the Democrat's base remains larger than the GOP's.
almost time for the 10/31 project
I just don't think it wise for any administration to make ANY media outlet a target of their personal attention. Not that I think that the administration will actually accomplish much, but they need to at least pick a REAL subject to focus on.
That's actually a very valid point, Hb1. I got so fucking angry when on Monday the PBS news show The Lehrer Newshour spent something like 10 minutes with a 3-person panel discussing the bullshit that is Fox News vs. the Obama Administration. Fuck me running--what a waste of time, MY time, it was, and I said as much. Loudly.
We have OTHER fish to fry. Goddammit. Leave the Balloon Boy and Fux News to the asshole punditry that only want to make a buck fer chrissakes.
Quote from: Halfbaked1 on October 21, 2009, 10:23:12 AM
I just don't think it wise for any administration to make ANY media outlet a target of their personal attention.
I'm fine with it, as long as it's just shit talking and not legal action.
The president - just like you and I - does not need to lay back like a bitch when someone tells lies about them.
Quote from: RWH1N1 on October 19, 2009, 04:53:56 PM
While they are certainly correct, this is a battle they can never win, and honestly, is best not waged. At least, the White House should not be waging it. This is when you dispatch proxies to do the dirty work. Get Howard Dean to go around talking smack (aka the truth) about Fox News. All they are doing is giving Fox News fodder to amp up their viewer base even more.
You guys are a bunch of spoilsports.
I want to see a blizzard of shit. Now.
British company boycotts fox news because of Beck calling Obama a racist.
http://jackcentral.com/opinion/2009/10/glenn-beck-gets-kicked-from-britain/
Quote from: Cramulus on October 23, 2009, 02:38:11 AM
British company boycotts fox news because of Beck calling Obama a racist.
http://jackcentral.com/opinion/2009/10/glenn-beck-gets-kicked-from-britain/
The comments are hilarious, and show a quite amazing lack of reading comprehension.
Quote from: Father Kurt Christ on October 23, 2009, 04:05:56 AM
Quote from: Cramulus on October 23, 2009, 02:38:11 AM
British company boycotts fox news because of Beck calling Obama a racist.
http://jackcentral.com/opinion/2009/10/glenn-beck-gets-kicked-from-britain/
The comments are hilarious, and show a quite amazing lack of reading comprehension.
Never forget: Right wingers boycotting companies that they don't like = the Free Market at work. Left wingers boycotting companies that they don't like = trampling on free speech.
1. How did Joy Behar get her own show?
2. Ann Coulter is a horse faced nut job, which is probably why she and Beck hang out together. Case in point, NEWS FLASH: all Presidential Assassins are Liberals. http://www.cnn.com/video/#/video/bestoftv/2009/10/22/joy.behar.ann.coulter.cnn
Yeah, I couldn't listen to more than 20 seconds of that bullshit. Watching Mann Coulter's adam's apple bob up and down was turning the excellent red wine in my stomach to acid.
Was Joy Behar just filling in? I thought she was still on "The View"--which is such a shit show I don't keep up anyway.
Nonetheless, it makes me teehee that the Right has so many fucking fabrications to make up for the fact that it's their side clearly calling for, in foamy-mouth rabid fashion, Obama's blood to be spilled. IN SO MANY WORDS.
Nope, I saw an advert for the Joy Behar Show on CNN the other day. Seems she is branching out, spreading out...oozing out, whatever.
And yes, the adams apple is kinda freaky. Coulter annoyed the hell outta me from day one by claiming the widows of United 93 were playing the "victim card". Bitch please, if those women have something to say then let em say it. Not like every other group with far less cause aren't doing the same. Honestly I can't even remember what it was that bunch was advocating anymore.
I want Ann Coulter to produce an original birth certificate to prove she was not born male.
Seriously, between the brow ridges and the adam's apple, that chick looks like she was exposed to an awful lot of testosterone during her formative years.
Quote from: Nigel on October 27, 2009, 06:33:58 PM
I want Ann Coulter to produce an original birth certificate to prove she was not born male.
Seriously, between the brow ridges and the adam's apple, that chick looks like she was exposed to an awful lot of testosterone during her formative years.
and what's scary is that there's a bunch of wingnut guys that have nocturnal emissions over her.... :x
Quote from: Iptuous on October 27, 2009, 06:38:36 PM
Quote from: Nigel on October 27, 2009, 06:33:58 PM
I want Ann Coulter to produce an original birth certificate to prove she was not born male.
Seriously, between the brow ridges and the adam's apple, that chick looks like she was exposed to an awful lot of testosterone during her formative years.
and what's scary is that there's a bunch of wingnut guys that have nocturnal emissions over her.... :x
They be gay and not a-knowin' it. Which goes to show they have bad taste in trannies.
I believe ECH and I came to the conclusion, however, that a hate fuck would not be completely out of the question.
:x On THAT?
Never underestimate the blinding powers of a powerful Hate Fuck.
Hopefully 1) in the dark and 2) with the blinding powers of a controlled (or illegal?!) substance on board.
Cuz srsly. :x
Quote from: LMNO on October 27, 2009, 06:54:41 PM
I believe ECH and I came to the conclusion, however, that a hate fuck would not be completely out of the question.
Well sure, if you're gay.
...up for any program...
Quote from: LMNO on October 27, 2009, 06:54:41 PM
I believe ECH and I came to the conclusion, however, that a hate fuck would not be completely out of the question.
Not a hate fuck, and not even on LSD.
I would not do that while I was high,
I would not do that with taped eyes,
I would not do that in the dark,
I would not do that for a lark.
I do not do strange man women things,
not from the left or right wings.
But seriously, I think she is a reanimated corpse. Have you seen how sunken her eyes are? Creepy chick
Quote from: Halfbaked1 on October 28, 2009, 05:15:31 AM
Quote from: LMNO on October 27, 2009, 06:54:41 PM
I believe ECH and I came to the conclusion, however, that a hate fuck would not be completely out of the question.
Not a hate fuck, and not even on LSD.
I would not do that while I was high,
I would not do that with taped eyes,
I would not do that in the dark,
I would not do that for a lark.
I do not do strange man women things,
not from the left or right wings.
But seriously, I think she is a reanimated corpse. Have you seen how sunken her eyes are? Creepy chick
:lulz:
I'd totally hatefuck her, especially if it included tying her to a wall and beating her around a little with a copy of Atlas Shrugged.
Quote from: Doctor Rat Bastard on October 28, 2009, 07:17:54 PM
I'd totally hatefuck her, especially if it included tying her to a wall and beating her around a little with a copy of Atlas Shrugged.
The really scary part is, I think Coulter would be very up for that program.
Quote from: Requia ☣ on October 28, 2009, 07:22:39 PM
Quote from: Doctor Rat Bastard on October 28, 2009, 07:17:54 PM
I'd totally hatefuck her, especially if it included tying her to a wall and beating her around a little with a copy of Atlas Shrugged.
The really scary part is, I think Coulter would be very up for that program.
Hrmmm, I should give her a call then!
:lulz: :) :eek: :sad: :cry: :vom: :asplode:
I wouldn't fuck Ann Coulter with LMNO's dick!
On a somewhat related, but less fuckable note. One of my co-workers sent me this link and I was wondering who thise Lord Monckton dude was. I already LOL'd the name. :D
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PMe5dOgbu40
Oh yay, more New World Order shit.
Monckton sounds like the average UK Independence Party member.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lord_Monckton#Political_views
BWAHAHAHAHAH!!! This guy is a total loon! Figured as much, but I wanted to see how much weight he carries with anyone. Luckily it seems like little. The guy who sent it to me is not much of a conspiracy theorist, but he has bought this guys story hook line and sinker.
Any one with a deviant art account. Help point out Glenn Becks insanity to this guy.
http://conservatoons.deviantart.com/art/Glenn-Beck-142230444
So I was at a Wal-Mart today, and I noticed that Glenn Beck has a book out. It's called "Arguing With Idiots."
I-rony!
BREAKING NEWS!
Victim in Fatal Car Accident Tragically Not Glenn Beck (http://www.theonion.com/content/video/victim_in_fatal_car_accident)
Quote from: Sir Remington III on November 04, 2009, 01:10:17 AM
BREAKING NEWS!
Victim in Fatal Car Accident Tragically Not Glenn Beck (http://www.theonion.com/content/video/victim_in_fatal_car_accident)
:x That's terrible news!
:lulz: :lulz: :lulz: -- I love all the footage they have of beck in that video
also:
"I heard screaming, and at first I thought it was someone doing an impression of Glenn Beck talking normally..."
Quote from: Sir Remington III on November 04, 2009, 01:10:17 AM
BREAKING NEWS!
Victim in Fatal Car Accident Tragically Not Glenn Beck (http://www.theonion.com/content/video/victim_in_fatal_car_accident)
:lulz: :lulz: I am sharing this on Facebork.
Jon Stewart does a dead-on Glenn Beck impression:
http://www.thedailyshow.com/watch/thu-november-5-2009/the-11-3-project
Quote from: Iason Ouabache on November 06, 2009, 05:17:07 PM
Jon Stewart does a dead-on Glenn Beck impression:
http://www.thedailyshow.com/watch/thu-november-5-2009/the-11-3-project
That was amazing. He got all the mannerisms down pat. :lulz:
JONISWIN
:news:
Victim in Fatal Car Accident not Glenn Beck (http://www.theonion.com/content/video/victim_in_fatal_car_accident)
Quote from: Requia ☣ on October 01, 2009, 04:07:42 AM
You realize that the voter registration fraud was discovered by acorn in the first place, which turned the people responsible in?
See? Even they knew they were corrupt.
Quote from: Pope Benny on November 08, 2009, 07:01:11 AM
:news:
Victim in Fatal Car Accident not Glenn Beck (http://www.theonion.com/content/video/victim_in_fatal_car_accident)
Yeah, check the previous page.
Quote from: Nigel on November 07, 2009, 09:56:15 PM
Quote from: Doctor Rat Bastard on November 06, 2009, 07:44:01 PM
JONISWIN
He's also hot as fuck.
WORD.
(http://johngushue.typepad.com/photos/uncategorized/2007/11/29/jon_stewart_parody_from_worth_1000.jpg)
S'posed to be a parody, but it makems me wanna: :fap: :fap: :fap: :fap: :fap: :fap: :fap: :fap:
(http://i114.photobucket.com/albums/n262/telarus/LDD_JonStewart.png)
Heh
Crossposted from the Youtube Doubler thread:
http://www.youtubedoubler.com/?video1=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.youtube.com%2Fwatch%3Fv%3D0sv2J5kbOfk&video2=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.youtube.com%2Fwatch%3Fv%3DbTjRtjVi0yI
Quote from: Jenne on November 09, 2009, 10:31:36 PM
Quote from: Nigel on November 07, 2009, 09:56:15 PM
Quote from: Doctor Rat Bastard on November 06, 2009, 07:44:01 PM
JONISWIN
He's also hot as fuck.
WORD.
(http://johngushue.typepad.com/photos/uncategorized/2007/11/29/jon_stewart_parody_from_worth_1000.jpg)
S'posed to be a parody, but it makems me wanna: :fap: :fap: :fap: :fap: :fap: :fap: :fap: :fap:
I KNOW! Damn.
You know how Palin said she was considering taking Glenn Beck as a vice-pres candidate?
Well...
http://rawstory.com/2009/11/beck-yapping-palin-kitchen/ (http://rawstory.com/2009/11/beck-yapping-palin-kitchen/)
QuoteWhile joking around on his radio show Wednesday, Fox News personality Glenn Beck addressed the idea that he and Sarah Palin should run for president together in 2012.
Beck apparently likes the idea of a Beck-Palin ticket, but a Palin-Beck ticket? Not so much.
"I was just thinking, what, I'm going to take a back seat to a chick?" Beck quipped, to laughter from the studio. "Go shoot a bear, make some stew, I'm hungry in here."
In an interview with Newsmax last week, Palin "wouldn't rule out" running with the controversial talk show host in 2012.
"So while she's considering it ... I just want her to know, I'm ruling it out. A Palin-Beck ticket, I'm absolutely ruling it out," Beck said. "I'm just saying, Beck-Palin, I'll consider. But Palin-Beck -- can you imagine what an administration with the two of us would be like? She'd be yapping or something, I'd say, 'I'm sorry, why am I hearing your voice? I'm not in the kitchen.'
:eek: :lulz: :horrormirth:
Ah, this is just Beck trolling the easily scared liberals.
Holy shit are people really that sexist still? :horrormirth:
I wouldn't really count Glenn Beck as people really...the man makes a career out of being an asshole.
Quote from: Zenpeanut on November 28, 2009, 05:33:23 PM
I wouldn't really count Glenn Beck as people really...the man makes a career out of being an asshole.
Being an asshole is one thing, but I had a co-worker tell me that during Thanksgiving his father-in-law was asked a question about politics and the guy actually said he would wait and see what Beck had to say about the issue.
seriously, can we stop the world? I wanna get off here. Check please? Where the fuck is my world ending asteroid with the name wormwood tattooed on its arse?
In my opinion, one of the worst things about Glenn Beck is that he makes Lou Dobbs look rational.
Quote from: LMNO on December 01, 2009, 02:33:37 PM
In my opinion, one of the worst things about Glenn Beck is that he makes Lou Dobbs look rational.
Plus, Lou Dobbs doesn't cry on air on occasion...
Yes, but Lou Dobbs is just as much as a fuckhead. Almost.
Quote from: LMNO on December 01, 2009, 03:34:26 PM
Yes, but Lou Dobbs is just as much as a fuckhead. Almost.
seriously?
i've never really heard what lou dobbs has said except when he says something controversial and i see a blurb about it in the news, but i thought he maintained some air of dignity in his presentation (if not his message...)
that caters to an entirely different crowd than Beck who will scream at guests, use visual stunt gags, incorporates ridiculous imagery.... more of a political 'shock jock' type pundit.
did i miss the really good stuff Dobbs has put out?
what are his best gems?
Quote from: Iptuous on December 01, 2009, 03:52:06 PM
Quote from: LMNO on December 01, 2009, 03:34:26 PM
Yes, but Lou Dobbs is just as much as a fuckhead. Almost.
seriously?
i've never really heard what lou dobbs has said except when he says something controversial and i see a blurb about it in the news, but i thought he maintained some air of dignity in his presentation (if not his message...)
that caters to an entirely different crowd than Beck who will scream at guests, use visual stunt gags, incorporates ridiculous imagery.... more of a political 'shock jock' type pundit.
did i miss the really good stuff Dobbs has put out?
what are his best gems?
While he was on vacation, his assistant filled in for him. Her last day doing so, she spent debunking the birther shit.
He came back the next day and start jabbering about all the "unanswered questions" concerning Obama's place of birth.
Quote from: The Good Reverend Roger on December 01, 2009, 03:55:31 PM
Quote from: Iptuous on December 01, 2009, 03:52:06 PM
Quote from: LMNO on December 01, 2009, 03:34:26 PM
Yes, but Lou Dobbs is just as much as a fuckhead. Almost.
seriously?
i've never really heard what lou dobbs has said except when he says something controversial and i see a blurb about it in the news, but i thought he maintained some air of dignity in his presentation (if not his message...)
that caters to an entirely different crowd than Beck who will scream at guests, use visual stunt gags, incorporates ridiculous imagery.... more of a political 'shock jock' type pundit.
did i miss the really good stuff Dobbs has put out?
what are his best gems?
While he was on vacation, his assistant filled in for him. Her last day doing so, she spent debunking the birther shit.
He came back the next day and start jabbering about all the "unanswered questions" concerning Obama's place of birth.
meh... so he's a 'birther sympathizer'... that's nowhere neeeear the level of hanging-by-a-thread nuttery that Beck displays on a regular schedule.
Didn't Dobbs have some pretty outrageous racist comments at some point?
Didn't Lou Dobbs invite Jared Taylor on a fair few times to discuss immigration without disclosing the fact he is the editor of a White Supremacist magazine, which some might consider a pertinent fact?
My point being, Ip, is that Lou Dobbs doesn't act as insane as Glenn Beck, and so his unverified right-wing nuttery is taken as rational discourse.
Cain would know the right phrase for this, but it's basically the practice of shifting the "moderate" position further Right.
Quote from: LMNO on December 01, 2009, 04:03:23 PM
My point being, Ip, is that Lou Dobbs doesn't act as insane as Glenn Beck, and so his unverified right-wing nuttery is taken as rational discourse.
Cain would know the right phrase for this, but it's basically the practice of shifting the "moderate" position further Right.
I think the term is "Being a Good German" (in the 1945 perjorative sense).
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Overton_window
Quote from: Cain on December 01, 2009, 04:00:27 PM
Didn't Lou Dobbs invite Jared Taylor on a fair few times to discuss immigration without disclosing the fact he is the editor of a White Supremacist magazine, which some might consider a pertinent fact?
That definitely seems like something a serious journalist would want to disclose...
although Talyor's wiki page says,
QuoteTaylor says he is not a white supremacist, whom he defines as one who wishes to rule over others. He is, if anything, a "yellow supremacist" because he has theorized that Asian people are the most advanced humans (in evolutionary terms), followed by white people and those of African descent.
that he considers himself a 'racialist' is still very germane to the discourse.
(i looked him up because i'd not heard of the guy)
Quote from: Cain on December 01, 2009, 04:05:26 PM
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Overton_window
thanks for the link. that's a good reference to keep in your pocket.
It is my observation that the Overton window is trying to get pushed in several directions and thereby getting wider these days. (a good thing imo)
Quote from: Iptuous on December 01, 2009, 05:27:58 PM
thanks for the link. that's a good reference to keep in your pocket.
It is my observation that the Overton window is trying to get pushed in several directions and thereby getting wider these days. (a good thing imo)
Actually, I think it's getting narrower, and moving to the right.
Even the "liberals" bought into NCLB, the Iraq war, and "enhanced interrogation".
Yeah. Think about it, Obama is considered a "liberal".
Quote from: LMNO on December 01, 2009, 05:43:46 PM
Yeah. Think about it, Obama is considered a "liberal".
By who?
By these 29,500,000 hits. (http://www.google.ca/search?hl=en&source=hp&q=obama+liberal&meta=&aq=0&oq=obama+libera)
Quote from: Iptuous on December 01, 2009, 05:46:33 PM
Quote from: LMNO on December 01, 2009, 05:43:46 PM
Yeah. Think about it, Obama is considered a "liberal".
By who?
By the liberals and the conservatives.
Both are, as always, totally wrong.
Quote from: The Good Reverend Roger on December 01, 2009, 05:51:47 PM
Quote from: Iptuous on December 01, 2009, 05:46:33 PM
Quote from: LMNO on December 01, 2009, 05:43:46 PM
Yeah. Think about it, Obama is considered a "liberal".
By who?
By the liberals and the conservatives.
Both are, as always, totally wrong.
when you talk about the liberals, are you referring to the masses of people in the country that have truly liberal ideas? or are you talking about the handful of jackasses in the congress that claim that moniker? Same with the conservatives....
Ftr, I think both those labels are inadequate, anyways, but don't let them narrow the window simply by co-opting our political language....
That makes it too damned easy for them.
Quote from: Iptuous on December 01, 2009, 06:29:57 PM
when you talk about the liberals, are you referring to the masses of people in the country that have truly liberal ideas?
lol wut
Quote from: The Good Reverend Roger on December 01, 2009, 06:30:53 PM
Quote from: Iptuous on December 01, 2009, 06:29:57 PM
when you talk about the liberals, are you referring to the masses of people in the country that have truly liberal ideas?
lol wut
This
Quote from: Iptuous on December 01, 2009, 06:29:57 PM
when you talk about the liberals, are you referring to the masses of people in the country that have truly liberal ideas?
I think you're confused. There aren't any truly liberal people in this country, haven't been for a long time.
Quote from: The Good Reverend Roger on December 01, 2009, 06:30:53 PM
Quote from: Iptuous on December 01, 2009, 06:29:57 PM
when you talk about the liberals, are you referring to the masses of people in the country that have truly liberal ideas?
lol wut
seriously? you don't know any?
Quote from: Kai on December 02, 2009, 02:57:03 AM
I think you're confused. There aren't any truly liberal people in this country, haven't been for a long time.
Aren't
you a self professed liberal?
don't you have any friends that are of like mind?
I know you guys are being tongue in cheek indicating that you feel that those with a truly 'liberal' outlook are in some insignificant minority, but i think perhaps you are selling yourself short by believing this.
likewise, the 'truly conservative' people i know often sell themselves short in the same way.
of course, it's probably simply a failure on the part of the vocabulary, as those terms are not properly defined, and are inadequate, which is my beef with the whole deal...
Quote from: Iptuous on December 02, 2009, 03:50:56 AM
Quote from: The Good Reverend Roger on December 01, 2009, 06:30:53 PM
Quote from: Iptuous on December 01, 2009, 06:29:57 PM
when you talk about the liberals, are you referring to the masses of people in the country that have truly liberal ideas?
lol wut
seriously? you don't know any?
Quote from: Kai on December 02, 2009, 02:57:03 AM
I think you're confused. There aren't any truly liberal people in this country, haven't been for a long time.
Aren't you a self professed liberal?
don't you have any friends that are of like mind?
I know you guys are being tongue in cheek indicating that you feel that those with a truly 'liberal' outlook are in some insignificant minority, but i think perhaps you are selling yourself short by believing this.
likewise, the 'truly conservative' people i know often sell themselves short in the same way.
of course, it's probably simply a failure on the part of the vocabulary, as those terms are not properly defined, and are inadequate, which is my beef with the whole deal...
Heh.
I can name the people who support both amendments II
AND IV on one hand. Hell, I can name the people who support amendment VIII on one hand.
Patrick Henry and Thomas Paine represented the classic ideals of liberalism, and if they came back to life today, they'd wear their boots out kicking everyones' arses.
Quote from: The Good Reverend Roger on December 02, 2009, 04:05:39 AM
Heh.
I can name the people who support both amendments II AND IV on one hand. Hell, I can name the people who support amendment VIII on one hand.
really? perhaps i'm missing something here...
I know a good amount of people that support them, although they would consider themselves 'conservative'.
Is there some finer point of interpretation that makes you think i am likely wrong in this assessment?
Quote from: The Good Reverend Roger on December 02, 2009, 04:05:39 AM
Patrick Henry and Thomas Paine represented the classic ideals of liberalism, and if they came back to life today, they'd wear their boots out kicking everyones' arses.
exactly. the terms are muddied.
Quote from: Iptuous on December 02, 2009, 04:12:30 AM
exactly. the terms are muddied.
The terms are meaningless. They are fistfulls of poop that the "other side" can fling around.
I would consider Franklin, Henry, and Paine to be actual liberals.
I would consider Taft to be an actual conservative.
Neither example applies to any major segment of our population today.
GO BACK TO CANUKISTAN, TERRORIST-HUMPER.
Quote from: LMNO on December 02, 2009, 04:13:10 PM
GO BACK TO CANUKISTAN, TERRORIST-HUMPER.
Oddly enough, at most political boards, I am considered a "terrorist enabler" or a "terrorist sympathyzer".
Cain would be shot on sight.
(http://www.redmeat.com/redmeat/2009-11-10/index-1.gif)
http://mediamatters.org/mmtv/201002010022
Beck thinks Obama is more at risk from imaginary leftist radical terrorists than actual racists, despite the fact there are now two trials concerning the latter trying to kill him, and none of the former.
Obama is un-American for using his first name:
http://mediamatters.org/blog/201002040028
QuoteBECK: He chose to use his name, Barack, for a reason. To identify, not with America -- you don't take the name Barack to identify with America. You take the name Barack to identify with what? Your heritage? The heritage, maybe, of your father in Kenya, who is a radical? Really? Searching for something to give him any kind of meaning, just as he was searching later in life for religion.
Quote from: Iason Ouabache on February 07, 2010, 04:34:16 PM
Obama is un-American for using his first name:
http://mediamatters.org/blog/201002040028
QuoteBECK: He chose to use his name, Barack, for a reason. To identify, not with America -- you don't take the name Barack to identify with America. You take the name Barack to identify with what? Your heritage? The heritage, maybe, of your father in Kenya, who is a radical? Really? Searching for something to give him any kind of meaning, just as he was searching later in life for religion.
:lulz: This is hilarious!
What's an "American" name? By this logic, my friend Fiona is using her given first name to identify with her Irish parentage and mark her as a radical Protestant. What the hell does that make my first name? Maybe I should run for office, since my first name is American indian, making me a REALLY REAL AMERICAN, unlike the President of the United States.
And that George Bush, OBVIOUSLY using his first name to identify with Great Britain, indicating that he opposed US independence and wanted to see us back under the Crown.
Not even Beck's own guests believe his shit:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xIu9D9Aa3u0&feature=related (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xIu9D9Aa3u0&feature=related)
Beck was the keynote speaker at CPAC this year. I didn't watch it.
Ron Paul won the CPAC straw vote for the 2012 nomination for President. Doesn't mean thatttt much. Romney has won it for the previous three years, and we see it much it help him in 2008. Romney will probably be the party's choice in 2012, imo.
Palin came in way behind in 3rd.
Quote from: EarthBound SpIRiT on February 21, 2010, 05:27:41 PM
Ron Paul won the CPAC straw vote for the 2012 nomination for President. Doesn't mean thatttt much.
Doesn't mean anything.
Ron Paul was endorsed by Ann Coulter.
The Congressman for Porksville has officially been co-opted, at least on a rhetorical level, by Movement Conservatism,
Teddy Roosevelt: big government socialist (http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/02/20/AR2010022004046.html?nav=hcmodule)
QuoteIn an apparent reference to John McCain, Beck condemned a "guy in the Republican Party who says his favorite president is Theodore Roosevelt." He then read disapprovingly the Roosevelt quote that "we grudge no man a fortune in civil life if it is honorably obtained and well used . . . so long as the gaining represents benefit to the community."
"Is this what the Republican Party stands for?" Beck demanded. He was answered with boos and cries of "no!" "It's big government, it's a socialist utopia and we need to address it as if it is a cancer."
Now to be fair, Teddy was probably the only man to shake a fist in J. P. Morgan's face and not end up face-down in a ditch anywhere, but I remember only a few years ago some major league wingnuts were swooning over Teddy due to his macho foreign adventurism. The appeal is pretty obvious, once you read a bio of the man: he was a priggish, sheltered, fat nerd who overcame all that by a nearly Nietzschean Will to Power which made it impossible for him to stand down from any percieved threat. But anyway, TR is out. Who is next for a chop from wingnut mythology?
Quote from: Cain on February 21, 2010, 07:24:16 PM
Teddy Roosevelt: big government socialist (http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/02/20/AR2010022004046.html?nav=hcmodule)
QuoteIn an apparent reference to John McCain, Beck condemned a "guy in the Republican Party who says his favorite president is Theodore Roosevelt." He then read disapprovingly the Roosevelt quote that "we grudge no man a fortune in civil life if it is honorably obtained and well used . . . so long as the gaining represents benefit to the community."
"Is this what the Republican Party stands for?" Beck demanded. He was answered with boos and cries of "no!" "It's big government, it's a socialist utopia and we need to address it as if it is a cancer."
Now to be fair, Teddy was probably the only man to shake a fist in J. P. Morgan's face and not end up face-down in a ditch anywhere, but I remember only a few years ago some major league wingnuts were swooning over Teddy due to his macho foreign adventurism. The appeal is pretty obvious, once you read a bio of the man: he was a priggish, sheltered, fat nerd who overcame all that by a nearly Nietzschean Will to Power which made it impossible for him to stand down from any percieved threat. But anyway, TR is out. Who is next for a chop from wingnut mythology?
FUCK YOU, I'M ON A MOOSE
/
(http://imgur.com/zsiBt.jpg)
:lulz:
Quote from: Cain on February 21, 2010, 07:24:16 PM
Teddy Roosevelt: big government socialist (http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/02/20/AR2010022004046.html?nav=hcmodule)
QuoteIn an apparent reference to John McCain, Beck condemned a "guy in the Republican Party who says his favorite president is Theodore Roosevelt." He then read disapprovingly the Roosevelt quote that "we grudge no man a fortune in civil life if it is honorably obtained and well used . . . so long as the gaining represents benefit to the community."
"Is this what the Republican Party stands for?" Beck demanded. He was answered with boos and cries of "no!" "It's big government, it's a socialist utopia and we need to address it as if it is a cancer."
Now to be fair, Teddy was probably the only man to shake a fist in J. P. Morgan's face and not end up face-down in a ditch anywhere, but I remember only a few years ago some major league wingnuts were swooning over Teddy due to his macho foreign adventurism. The appeal is pretty obvious, once you read a bio of the man: he was a priggish, sheltered, fat nerd who overcame all that by a nearly Nietzschean Will to Power which made it impossible for him to stand down from any percieved threat. But anyway, TR is out. Who is next for a chop from wingnut mythology?
I can't wait until they finally figure out that Reagan wasn't a fiscal conservative. :lulz:
:lulz: at the picture.
Well I'm waiting for someone to decry Reagan as being soft on terrorism. Several constitutional lawyers have pointed out he said torture was an abomination and terrorists should be tried like common criminals (somewhat ironic, considering the Contras, but never mind).
Quote from: Cain on February 21, 2010, 09:43:08 PM
:lulz: at the picture.
Well I'm waiting for someone to decry Reagan as being soft on terrorism. Several constitutional lawyers have pointed out he said torture was an abomination and terrorists should be tried like common criminals (somewhat ironic, considering the Contras, but never mind).
Do you have a link to actual quotes for that?
I'd love to poke some people in the eye with that.
http://www.disam.dsca.mil/pubs/Vol%2010-2/Bremer.pdf that is the official Reagan policy I've linked to. An extract:
QuoteAnother important measure we have developed in our overall strategy is applying the rule of law to terrorists. Terrorists are criminals. They commit criminal actions like murder, kidnapping, and arson, and countries have laws to punish criminals. So a major element of our strategy has been to delegitimize terrorists, to get society to see them for what they are -- criminals -- and to use democracy's most potent tool, the rule of law against them.
As for torture:
QuoteIt was also Ronald Reagan who signed the Convention Against Torture in 1988 -- after many years of countless, horrific Terrorist attacks -- which not only declared that there are "no exceptional circumstances whatsoever" justifying torture, but also required all signatory countries to "ensure that all acts of torture are offences under its criminal law" and -- and Reagan put it -- "either to prosecute torturers who are found in its territory or to extradite them to other countries for prosecution."
Thanks cain. :)
Quote from: Cain on February 21, 2010, 07:24:16 PM
Teddy Roosevelt: big government socialist (http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/02/20/AR2010022004046.html?nav=hcmodule)
QuoteIn an apparent reference to John McCain, Beck condemned a "guy in the Republican Party who says his favorite president is Theodore Roosevelt." He then read disapprovingly the Roosevelt quote that "we grudge no man a fortune in civil life if it is honorably obtained and well used . . . so long as the gaining represents benefit to the community."
"Is this what the Republican Party stands for?" Beck demanded. He was answered with boos and cries of "no!" "It's big government, it's a socialist utopia and we need to address it as if it is a cancer."
Now to be fair, Teddy was probably the only man to shake a fist in J. P. Morgan's face and not end up face-down in a ditch anywhere, but I remember only a few years ago some major league wingnuts were swooning over Teddy due to his macho foreign adventurism. The appeal is pretty obvious, once you read a bio of the man: he was a priggish, sheltered, fat nerd who overcame all that by a nearly Nietzschean Will to Power which made it impossible for him to stand down from any percieved threat. But anyway, TR is out. Who is next for a chop from wingnut mythology?
Abraham Lincoln.
:lulz: This is gonna be a fun decade.
Quote from: BabylonHoruv on February 22, 2010, 02:58:44 AM
Quote from: Cain on February 21, 2010, 07:24:16 PM
Teddy Roosevelt: big government socialist (http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/02/20/AR2010022004046.html?nav=hcmodule)
QuoteIn an apparent reference to John McCain, Beck condemned a "guy in the Republican Party who says his favorite president is Theodore Roosevelt." He then read disapprovingly the Roosevelt quote that "we grudge no man a fortune in civil life if it is honorably obtained and well used . . . so long as the gaining represents benefit to the community."
"Is this what the Republican Party stands for?" Beck demanded. He was answered with boos and cries of "no!" "It's big government, it's a socialist utopia and we need to address it as if it is a cancer."
Now to be fair, Teddy was probably the only man to shake a fist in J. P. Morgan's face and not end up face-down in a ditch anywhere, but I remember only a few years ago some major league wingnuts were swooning over Teddy due to his macho foreign adventurism. The appeal is pretty obvious, once you read a bio of the man: he was a priggish, sheltered, fat nerd who overcame all that by a nearly Nietzschean Will to Power which made it impossible for him to stand down from any percieved threat. But anyway, TR is out. Who is next for a chop from wingnut mythology?
Abraham Lincoln.
I've been trying to convince them to cut Eisenhower for being soft on commies.
Quote from: Requia ☣ on February 22, 2010, 05:38:48 AM
Quote from: BabylonHoruv on February 22, 2010, 02:58:44 AM
Quote from: Cain on February 21, 2010, 07:24:16 PM
Teddy Roosevelt: big government socialist (http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/02/20/AR2010022004046.html?nav=hcmodule)
QuoteIn an apparent reference to John McCain, Beck condemned a "guy in the Republican Party who says his favorite president is Theodore Roosevelt." He then read disapprovingly the Roosevelt quote that "we grudge no man a fortune in civil life if it is honorably obtained and well used . . . so long as the gaining represents benefit to the community."
"Is this what the Republican Party stands for?" Beck demanded. He was answered with boos and cries of "no!" "It's big government, it's a socialist utopia and we need to address it as if it is a cancer."
Now to be fair, Teddy was probably the only man to shake a fist in J. P. Morgan's face and not end up face-down in a ditch anywhere, but I remember only a few years ago some major league wingnuts were swooning over Teddy due to his macho foreign adventurism. The appeal is pretty obvious, once you read a bio of the man: he was a priggish, sheltered, fat nerd who overcame all that by a nearly Nietzschean Will to Power which made it impossible for him to stand down from any percieved threat. But anyway, TR is out. Who is next for a chop from wingnut mythology?
Abraham Lincoln.
I've been trying to convince them to cut Eisenhower for being soft on commies.
Eisenhower as a tax and spend liberal, look at his social programs.
Reagan's crime against humanity was deregulation, which led to the horrific health care, human individual status of corporations, soaring interest rates and credit crash of today, so let's not imagine that his comparatively humanitarian stance on terrorism was somehow significant relative to the overall structural damage he did to our economy and social structure. Of course, Clinton did his part with globalization and "world trade". Frankly, from opposite sides of the coin, Carter and Bush Sr. were probably the least damaging Presidents in my lifetime. No comment on Ford, I don't know enough about him. I should look his ass up.
Agreed, Nigel.
Jeezus, I never thought I would look back on the Bush Sr. administration with nostalgia. :horrormirth:
I don't think Ford was a bad President. If he hadn't pardoned Nixon he quite possibly would of won reelection and we wouldn't of had to suffer through Jimmy Carter.
Given Ford had Rumsfeld and Cheney as his Chiefs of Staff, I cant see anything good coming of his administration. Ford also raised Bush Sr's stature quite a lot (liason to China, CIA director). Helsinki Accords was smart, not condemning the invasion of Cyprus was stupid, letting Kissinger conduct diplomacy between Israel and the Arab states was stupid, trying to throw money at South Vietnam was stupid and the Mayaguez incident was really stupid.
Squeaky Fromme also tried to off him though, so he can't have been all bad.
Well, pardoning Nixon makes him alright in my eyes.
I'm pretty sure the pardon was part of the "deal" when Nixon left so I shouldn't blame Ford for his failure to get reelected.
Carter was a joke and continues to be one.
Quote from: EarthBound SpIRiT on February 23, 2010, 03:25:24 AM
I'm pretty sure the pardon was part of the "deal" when Nixon left so I shouldn't blame Ford for his failure to get reelected.
Carter was a joke and continues to be one.
Maybe as a president, but as a humanitarian he's something else.
True.
Which incidentally, I think is hilarious.
Here comes this nice guy, gets elected leader of the worlds greatest economic and military power, and he does a crap job because he's not mean enough. :lulz:
I wouldn't say the "crap job" is all attributable for not being mean enough but enough of him.
Obama is going to be a worse President than Carter. :argh!:
Quote from: Jerry_Frankster on February 21, 2010, 10:51:12 PM
Thanks cain. :)
also this http://www.dailykos.com/story/2010/2/1/832706/-How-progressives-can-turn-the-Reagan-myth-on-its-head!
QuoteReagan would not have approved of drone-fired missile attacks aimed at killing terrorists; as president he several times rejected anti-terrorism operations for the sole reason that civilians would have been killed by collateral damage. In 1985, he surprised aides such as Pat Buchanan by ruling out a military response to a Beirut hijacking for fear of civilian casualties; Lou Cannon reported then in the Washington Post that Reagan said "retaliation in which innocent civilians are killed is 'itself a terrorist act.'"
so yeah. meanwhile, Obama is a communist for unleashing an army of killer robots on an americam ally.
I kinda think most people don't really know enough about Carter, beyond the popular folklore, to comment.
Kai, I think you're probably one of the few who does.
Anyone who actually reads up on the man (and his wife) and doesn't respect them needs a head check.
Jonah Goldberg is now taking his marching orders from Glenn Beck, it seems http://wonkette.com/413869/jonah-goldberg-decides-next-wingnut-target-is-teddy-roosevelt
Quote from: EarthBound SpIRiT on February 23, 2010, 03:25:24 AM
I'm pretty sure the pardon was part of the "deal" when Nixon left so I shouldn't blame Ford for his failure to get reelected.
Carter was a joke and continues to be one.
Yeah, except for having the best job creation figures of any president, ever.
Isn't talk radio brainwashing wonderful?
I don't listen to talk radio...
The only presidents I feel comfortable estimating are Andrew Jackson (asshole) and Clinton (horndog).
But if it's true that Carter put a wood stove in the oval office, he gets my stamp of approval for, if nothing else, putting his money where his mouth was.
Wait no. I'm sorry, I was wrong.
Reagan was an asshole too.
Alty,
has no political nuance but knows what he likes.
They were all assholes, the question is what kind of asshole.
WHY DO WE KEEP ELECTING ASSHOLES?!
/
:lord:
Is it because we, too, are assholes?
Quote from: Alty on February 26, 2010, 06:35:51 AM
WHY DO WE KEEP ELECTING ASSHOLES?!
/
:lord:
Is it because we, too, are assholes?
To get to the top of the heap and be elected to the highest position in the land you have to be an asshole. They can't just turn it off and stop being an asshole once they are in office.
Its assholes all the way up.
Quote from: Rev. What's-His-Name? on February 26, 2010, 12:03:37 PM
Its assholes all the way up.
AND DOWN. I keep pointing to the local politicians in this subforum, because it really TRULY starts there. They let corruption seep into your neighborhoods, your local businesses, your local taxes, and your schools. We are always quick to look at the state governments and the federal, but how often do we get to really KNOW what our council members, mayors, board of education folks and the like are DOING out there? WHAT THE FUCK ARE THEY DOING?
Quote from: Jenne on February 26, 2010, 05:52:35 PM
Quote from: Rev. What's-His-Name? on February 26, 2010, 12:03:37 PM
Its assholes all the way up.
AND DOWN. I keep pointing to the local politicians in this subforum, because it really TRULY starts there. They let corruption seep into your neighborhoods, your local businesses, your local taxes, and your schools. We are always quick to look at the state governments and the federal, but how often do we get to really KNOW what our council members, mayors, board of education folks and the like are DOING out there? WHAT THE FUCK ARE THEY DOING?
Local government is a lot easier to effect too, we should probably be focusing on them more.
Quote from: Earthbound Spirit on February 26, 2010, 04:28:08 AM
I don't listen to talk radio...
Okay.
So where do you get these weird ideas about Carter?
They are everywhere Roger. You can't escape them. Hell I believed them until I actually looked at the employment numbers.
I think we've been over this before, but new job creation numbers are just one factor in determining economic success where as the double digit inflation rates, very high interest rates, and double digit unemployment rates would imply to me that Carter was a economic failure.
Quote from: Earthbound Spirit on February 28, 2010, 02:16:37 PM
I think we've been over this before, but new job creation numbers are just one factor in determining economic success where as the double digit inflation rates, very high interest rates, and double digit unemployment rates would imply to me that Carter was a economic failure.
No links, no nothing. More Rush Limbaugh jabbering.
TRANSLATION: "NO AMOUNT OF FACTS WILL GET ME TO CHANGE MY RELIGIOUS BELIEFS CONCERNING POLITICIANS. GOOD NIGHT AND THANK YOU FOR COMING."
Quote from: Requia ☣ on February 28, 2010, 07:56:42 AM
They are everywhere Roger. You can't escape them. Hell I believed them until I actually looked at the employment numbers.
Difference is, you were able to process the data and alter your POV.
With most of these people, it's a fucking religion, and no amount of facts will get them to move their POV one iota...for the same fucking reason a non-rich person would sign on with the right wing nutjobs in the first place.
I went to get the unemployment numbers and the fact of the matter is, I'm not going to be able to produce them. It doesn't seem they were as high as I remembered. I am wrong on that point.
A libertarian basing their political views on things that are not facts?
Holy shit! Really?
Quote from: Jenne on February 26, 2010, 05:52:35 PM
Quote from: Rev. What's-His-Name? on February 26, 2010, 12:03:37 PM
Its assholes all the way up.
AND DOWN. I keep pointing to the local politicians in this subforum, because it really TRULY starts there. They let corruption seep into your neighborhoods, your local businesses, your local taxes, and your schools. We are always quick to look at the state governments and the federal, but how often do we get to really KNOW what our council members, mayors, board of education folks and the like are DOING out there? WHAT THE FUCK ARE THEY DOING?
Ask your local public affairs reporter/read your local paper. If they aren't covering it, write angry letters encouraging to do their fucking job. Encourage everyone you know to do the same. Threaten to unsubscribe.
Edit: ...even if you're not subscribed...
Benjamin Harrison was the best president we have ever had
Quote from: Earthbound Spirit on March 01, 2010, 06:04:29 AM
I went to get the unemployment numbers and the fact of the matter is, I'm not going to be able to produce them. It doesn't seem they were as high as I remembered. I am wrong on that point.
I think you got that the wrong way around.
You went to look them up. You DID find them because they weren't as high as you remembered. But because they weren't as high, you say "I'm not going to be able to produce them" instead.
There's no pwnage like self-pwnage, I guess.
I can't find anything definitive. I thought unemployment was double digit. 10% or higher. The information that I found ranged from 7 - 7.6 so I was clearly wrong but I still don't know what the high mark actually was. Sites favorable towards Carter listed his high mark at 7. I found some conservative sites that listed it as high as 7.6
Quote from: Earthbound Spirit on March 02, 2010, 02:55:32 AM
I can't find anything definitive. I thought unemployment was double digit. 10% or higher. The information that I found ranged from 7 - 7.6 so I was clearly wrong but I still don't know what the high mark actually was. Sites favorable towards Carter listed his high mark at 7. I found some conservative sites that listed it as high as 7.6
Hardly surprising. Carter got shat on, because he was the only honest president since Calvin Coolidge. Everyone has a reason to bitch about him, and those reasons are usually based on complete fabrications.
For example: The hostages. Carter wouldn't deal with the kidnappers, and Reagan bribed them with weapons, then spun it as the Ayatollah freeing them because he was afraid of Reagan.
Another example: Inflation. This would have happened to anyone, as the bar tab for Vietnam was coming due. The next US president will feel the same effects from Iraq & Afghanistan, but someone will be dumb enough to take the job anyway.
Another example: Employment. As you say, he had ~ 7% unemployment, but also the highest job creation figures anywhere.
99% of the bad rap Carter got was campaign smears by Reagan's crew, which were then accepted as "fact".
He also had a bad habit of telling the truth, like his "this country is in a malaise" comment.
It was, but no one wanted to actually admit it.
Quote from: LMNO on March 02, 2010, 04:47:16 PM
He also had a bad habit of telling the truth, like his "this country is in a malaise" comment.
It was, but no one wanted to actually admit it.
The Truth will not make you popular at parties.
Or get you reelected.
Then we bitch that our politicians are liars. :lulz:
another beef with him is giving back the Panama Canal, which i am undecided upon as far as the wisdom of that... i need to read more about it.
Quote from: Iptuous on March 02, 2010, 04:57:12 PM
another beef with him is giving back the Panama Canal, which i am undecided upon as far as the wisdom of that... i need to read more about it.
Giving back something we stole?
Heavens.
So...how much US shipping, military or civilian, has been turned back from the canal?
Quote from: Doktor Howl on March 02, 2010, 04:59:24 PM
Quote from: Iptuous on March 02, 2010, 04:57:12 PM
another beef with him is giving back the Panama Canal, which i am undecided upon as far as the wisdom of that... i need to read more about it.
Giving back something we stole?
Heavens.
So...how much US shipping, military or civilian, has been turned back from the canal?
Right... the matter seems obfuscated from the little that i remember from reading about it...
we built it right?
we supported the Panamanian separatists and got them to sign off on perpetual lease in exchange for that support if i remember correctly.
of course there's shady shit in anything like this, but i don't know how it turns out in the wash...
(http://data.bls.gov/PDQ/graphics/LNU02300061Q_72493_1267549212576.gif)
BLS employment figures (specifically, the percentage of men 25-54 with jobs, I find this one of the best economic indicators) for Carter/Reagan.
Quote from: Iptuous on March 02, 2010, 05:02:52 PM
Quote from: Doktor Howl on March 02, 2010, 04:59:24 PM
Quote from: Iptuous on March 02, 2010, 04:57:12 PM
another beef with him is giving back the Panama Canal, which i am undecided upon as far as the wisdom of that... i need to read more about it.
Giving back something we stole?
Heavens.
So...how much US shipping, military or civilian, has been turned back from the canal?
Right... the matter seems obfuscated from the little that i remember from reading about it...
we built it right?
we supported the Panamanian separatists and got them to sign off on perpetual lease in exchange for that support if i remember correctly.
of course there's shady shit in anything like this, but i don't know how it turns out in the wash...
Kinda, yeah:
QuoteIn the first eighty years following independence from Spain, Panama was a department of Colombia. The people of the isthmus made several attempts to secede and came close to success in 1831, and again during the Thousand Days War of 1899–1902. When the Senate of Colombia rejected the Hay-Herran Treaty, the United States decided to support the Panamanian independence movement. In November 1903, Panama proclaimed its independence and concluded the Hay/Bunau-Varilla Treaty with the United States.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Panama
Lesson: Do things as El Norte asks, or we'll send you home with a rupture. The free market at its finest.
Quote from: Requia ☣ on March 02, 2010, 05:05:28 PM
(http://data.bls.gov/PDQ/graphics/LNU02300061Q_72493_1267549212576.gif)
BLS employment figures (specifically, the percentage of men 25-54 with jobs, I find this one of the best economic indicators) for Carter/Reagan.
Looking at debt is fun, too.
For all his talk about "small government", old Ronnie added 200,000 federal jobs (hence the bumps), and spent money like there was no tomorrow.
Quote from: Doktor Howl on March 02, 2010, 05:13:43 PM
Lesson: Do things as El Norte asks, or we'll send you home with a rupture. The free market at its finest.
So, for great justice, we should have given the canal back to Columbia?
(im being flip, that obviously would not be a good thing)
but. ok. so Spain lost the war against Gran Colombia seeking independence. after Gran Colombia won the various groups that were cohesive in order to fight well started to argue, and many wanted to break up. so upon separating Columbia had the Isthmus of Panama as part of their territory, although many in Panama wanted to be separate. So the US comes along and points its hamfist at the isthmus and says, "hey we think we can build that canal that the others failed at, let us give it a shot and we'll lease the canal from you". Their congress turns down the offer considering it a bad deal. The separatists on the isthmus say, "hey we want that canal, and we want the money that the US will pay us for leasing it. We also want you(Colombia) to gtfo." So we say, "sure, we can make yer dreams come true."
So, apart from interventionism and liberating the fuck out of some people, was it really 'theft'?
and once the deed is done, what is the proper way that a successor govt. should make amends? There just seems something unsatisfying in just giving the canal back since we invested money and lives in the construction of it, so that we could have access to a strategic asset... why not just renegotiate more generous terms that would help out the Panamanians so that there's not a wire fence that separates shit hole panama slums from eden like canal zone?
I dunno.
shit like that is the reason that non-interventionism seems the best policy to me in the first place....
but then you suggest that, and your slapped with the 'isolationist' label.
Quote from: Iptuous on March 02, 2010, 05:57:17 PM
So, apart from interventionism and liberating the fuck out of some people, was it really 'theft'?
"Apart from forced anal intrusion and the whole toilet plunger thing, was it really 'rape'?" :lulz:
And what's wrong with being an isolationist?
Quote from: Doktor Howl on March 02, 2010, 06:00:40 PM
And what's wrong with being an isolationist?
It runs contrary to globalization and imperialism, would be my guess.
Quote from: Doktor Howl on March 02, 2010, 06:00:05 PM
Quote from: Iptuous on March 02, 2010, 05:57:17 PM
So, apart from interventionism and liberating the fuck out of some people, was it really 'theft'?
"Apart from forced anal intrusion and the whole toilet plunger thing, was it really 'rape'?" :lulz:
well, we followed the contract with the people that *then* owned it... so we didn't steal the canal. we just took the Necessary Action™ to ensure that the people willing to sell it to us came into possession of it....
:lulz:
Quote from: Doktor Howl on March 02, 2010, 06:00:40 PM
And what's wrong with being an isolationist?
isolationism means that you don't engage in trade with other nations, either. which is bad.
the whole "borders across which goods do not travel, armies will" thing. (or something to that effect)
Quote from: Iptuous on March 02, 2010, 06:19:03 PM
isolationism means that you don't engage in trade with other nations, either.
Naw. Military and economic isolationism are two very different things.
Quote from: Doktor Howl on March 02, 2010, 06:22:25 PM
Quote from: Iptuous on March 02, 2010, 06:19:03 PM
isolationism means that you don't engage in trade with other nations, either.
Naw. Military and economic isolationism are two very different things.
yeah, but they get lumped together at the convenience of the hawks and mercantilists.
that's what i observed when they bagged on Dr. Paul when he suggested that we bring home the empire....
Quote from: Iptuous on March 02, 2010, 06:26:33 PM
Quote from: Doktor Howl on March 02, 2010, 06:22:25 PM
Quote from: Iptuous on March 02, 2010, 06:19:03 PM
isolationism means that you don't engage in trade with other nations, either.
Naw. Military and economic isolationism are two very different things.
yeah, but they get lumped together at the convenience of the hawks and mercantilists.
that's what i observed when they bagged on Dr. Paul when he suggested that we bring home the empire....
Why should we let them change our language to suit their aims?
Quote from: Doktor Howl on March 02, 2010, 06:27:16 PM
Quote from: Iptuous on March 02, 2010, 06:26:33 PM
Quote from: Doktor Howl on March 02, 2010, 06:22:25 PM
Quote from: Iptuous on March 02, 2010, 06:19:03 PM
isolationism means that you don't engage in trade with other nations, either.
Naw. Military and economic isolationism are two very different things.
yeah, but they get lumped together at the convenience of the hawks and mercantilists.
that's what i observed when they bagged on Dr. Paul when he suggested that we bring home the empire....
Why should we let them change our language to suit their aims?
Well, control of language is a shouting match. I guess you can use linguistic jiujitsu, and further change the words in ways that they don't anticipate. but even that requires that people hear the language you put out....
so trying to resist being called an 'isolationist' because you think policies like determining whether some separatists succeed or not in order to achieve some short term goal (damn the blowback), is probably futile....
they have the
conch TV and so they choose the words and their meanings. perhaps humpty dumpty will fall someday and the words will mean precisely what
we want them to mean, but until then....
Quote from: Iptuous on March 02, 2010, 07:00:27 PM
Quote from: Doktor Howl on March 02, 2010, 06:27:16 PM
Quote from: Iptuous on March 02, 2010, 06:26:33 PM
Quote from: Doktor Howl on March 02, 2010, 06:22:25 PM
Quote from: Iptuous on March 02, 2010, 06:19:03 PM
isolationism means that you don't engage in trade with other nations, either.
Naw. Military and economic isolationism are two very different things.
yeah, but they get lumped together at the convenience of the hawks and mercantilists.
that's what i observed when they bagged on Dr. Paul when he suggested that we bring home the empire....
Why should we let them change our language to suit their aims?
Well, control of language is a shouting match. I guess you can use linguistic jiujitsu, and further change the words in ways that they don't anticipate. but even that requires that people hear the language you put out....
so trying to resist being called an 'isolationist' because you think policies like determining whether some separatists succeed or not in order to achieve some short term goal (damn the blowback), is probably futile....
they have the conch TV and so they choose the words and their meanings. perhaps humpty dumpty will fall someday and the words will mean precisely what we want them to mean, but until then....
Well, fuck it, then. Communication is a dead art, and we let them kill it.
Quote from: Doktor Howl on March 02, 2010, 07:06:09 PM
Quote from: Iptuous on March 02, 2010, 07:00:27 PM
Quote from: Doktor Howl on March 02, 2010, 06:27:16 PM
Why should we let them change our language to suit their aims?
Well, control of language is a shouting match. I guess you can use linguistic jiujitsu, and further change the words in ways that they don't anticipate. but even that requires that people hear the language you put out....
so trying to resist being called an 'isolationist' because you think policies like determining whether some separatists succeed or not in order to achieve some short term goal (damn the blowback), is probably futile....
they have the conch TV and so they choose the words and their meanings. perhaps humpty dumpty will fall someday and the words will mean precisely what we want them to mean, but until then....
Well, fuck it, then. Communication is a dead art, and we let them kill it.
well, we certainly let them control it. :sad:
the only solution is a campaign to destroy mass media... Mad Science to the rescue! :evil:
http://www.newshounds.us/2010/03/07/glenn_beck_wants_you_to_sacrifice_your_car_to_fight_his_war_on_education.php
QuoteGlenn Beck, the multi-millionaire who loves his country so much he'd cry for it, has a new sacrifice he wants viewers to make on behalf of his latest war. You may recall he recently suggested his audience should sacrifice their fortunes and maybe their lives (but God, he hopes it doesn't come to that) to fight the threats from progressives. More recently, Beck thought y'all should give up your Social Security and Medicare because it would be good for us – and it would help him fight his war on entitlements. On Friday (3/5/10), Beck asked his viewers to sell their cars so that they could pull their kids out of public schools in order to help him fight his war on public education. "Or our republic will be lost." With video.
The whole show was a "special" (read: Beck took the day off) devoted to "indoctrination in America." But other than attacking the recent student protests against tuition hikes and education cuts – and the call for viewers to give up their cars – the rest was pretty much a rehash of past talking points: mocking Meghan McCain, attacking public education as socialism (another thing we should give up, to help fight the commies), etc. He probably brought up Van Jones somewhere but I've forgotten.
Beck spent a good deal of time ridiculing and smearing the student protesters. Their protest signs, he said, were "eerily reminiscent of communist propaganda" and "almost like it's appealing to people who speak Spanish." The students, themselves, were so un-American as to consider education as a right.
"Education is not a right. It's a privilege," Beck shrieked, ignoring the fact that our laws indicate otherwise. According to Beck, it's all a gimmick to enslave the poor, "keeping them down for your own political purposes. This is really why the President has such a problem with the Constitution." Maybe you can understand what he meant. I couldn't.
One thing I did understand. All those sacrifices that Beck wants other people to make would benefit his pocketbook by reducing his high-bracket tax bill.
Beck ranted on, "Our children are being taught to be slaves to government." He said it with such emotional melodrama, I thought he might bust a sob right then and there. His effort for the cause.
In the next segment, the second video below, Beck made his impassioned plea at about 50 seconds in. "Sell a car if you have to. Get your kids out of this indoctrination. Or our republic will be lost."
Once again, Beck never did say what sacrifices he'd be making.
Bold part really really pisses me off. Article 26 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights clearly says:
Quote#(1) Everyone has the right to education. Education shall be free, at least in the elementary and fundamental stages. Elementary education shall be compulsory. Technical and professional education shall be made generally available and higher education shall be equally accessible to all on the basis of merit.
# (2) Education shall be directed to the full development of the human personality and to the strengthening of respect for human rights and fundamental freedoms. It shall promote understanding, tolerance and friendship among all nations, racial or religious groups, and shall further the activities of the United Nations for the maintenance of peace.
# (3) Parents have a prior right to choose the kind of education that shall be given to their children.
I've also noticed that Beck has started a War on Social Justice lately. He's even calling out churches that mention Social Justice on their websites. So, I take this to mean that Beck is now in favor of Social Injustice.
It is a favored bailiwick of the Right to ridicule education in general, specifically pulic schooling and higher education (unless it's parochial). Which is why home-schooling and charter schools are deemed the "saviors" of the "broken system"...forgetting of course that there's a federal mandate to educate the WHOLE populace. It's a convenient "moral" argument they like to trot out way to often for my tastes. Smacks of the same elitism (how many Republican and right-wingist families send their kids to private school again?) that they accuse the Left of.
Quote from: Iptuous on March 02, 2010, 07:00:27 PM
Quote from: Doktor Howl on March 02, 2010, 06:27:16 PM
Quote from: Iptuous on March 02, 2010, 06:26:33 PM
Quote from: Doktor Howl on March 02, 2010, 06:22:25 PM
Quote from: Iptuous on March 02, 2010, 06:19:03 PM
isolationism means that you don't engage in trade with other nations, either.
Naw. Military and economic isolationism are two very different things.
yeah, but they get lumped together at the convenience of the hawks and mercantilists.
that's what i observed when they bagged on Dr. Paul when he suggested that we bring home the empire....
Why should we let them change our language to suit their aims?
Well, control of language is a shouting match. I guess you can use linguistic jiujitsu, and further change the words in ways that they don't anticipate. but even that requires that people hear the language you put out....
so trying to resist being called an 'isolationist' because you think policies like determining whether some separatists succeed or not in order to achieve some short term goal (damn the blowback), is probably futile....
they have the conch TV and so they choose the words and their meanings. perhaps humpty dumpty will fall someday and the words will mean precisely what we want them to mean, but until then....
I disagree. I think the distinction can still be made, no matter how loudly the rabble are yelling that are trying to change the definitions to suit their purposes.
Quote from: Jenne on March 09, 2010, 01:37:37 PM
It is a favored bailiwick of the Right to ridicule education in general, specifically pulic schooling and higher education (unless it's parochial). Which is why home-schooling and charter schools are deemed the "saviors" of the "broken system"...forgetting of course that there's a federal mandate to educate the WHOLE populace. It's a convenient "moral" argument they like to trot out way to often for my tastes. Smacks of the same elitism (how many Republican and right-wingist families send their kids to private school again?) that they accuse the Left of.
Well... What's wrong if you want to homeschool?
Quote from: Mistress Freeky on March 09, 2010, 03:02:54 PM
Quote from: Jenne on March 09, 2010, 01:37:37 PM
It is a favored bailiwick of the Right to ridicule education in general, specifically pulic schooling and higher education (unless it's parochial). Which is why home-schooling and charter schools are deemed the "saviors" of the "broken system"...forgetting of course that there's a federal mandate to educate the WHOLE populace. It's a convenient "moral" argument they like to trot out way to often for my tastes. Smacks of the same elitism (how many Republican and right-wingist families send their kids to private school again?) that they accuse the Left of.
Well... What's wrong if you want to homeschool?
Nothing. Unless you get your kids some other kind of socialization. The problem with Home School children is that they are isolated from the community they live in. Then they are usually thrown, willy-nilly, into high school, the most inbred of social hierarchies there is. Not a lot of skill-building for socialization can be had in high school, it's literally sink-or-swim. And h.s. is your last step until you're a functioning adult. By our society's standards, anyway.
Also, Home Schooling as a movement has been politicized much like the militias now. So, it's a sort of "hermitizing" mentality, that society corrupts the child's mind. So the parents protect it, through God and home. Personally, scares the shit outta me. Creates an us-vs-them mindset that is later tough to break through.
Quote from: Mistress Freeky on March 09, 2010, 03:02:54 PM
Quote from: Jenne on March 09, 2010, 01:37:37 PM
It is a favored bailiwick of the Right to ridicule education in general, specifically pulic schooling and higher education (unless it's parochial). Which is why home-schooling and charter schools are deemed the "saviors" of the "broken system"...forgetting of course that there's a federal mandate to educate the WHOLE populace. It's a convenient "moral" argument they like to trot out way to often for my tastes. Smacks of the same elitism (how many Republican and right-wingist families send their kids to private school again?) that they accuse the Left of.
Well... What's wrong if you want to homeschool?
That depends if on the type of learning plan you choose.
You can have the "Only a Little Jesus" plan, the "Whole Lotta Jesus" plan, or the "MEGA FUCKTONS OF JESUS" plan.
When you teach to the test in homeschooling, you can fill in the gaps with scads of horrible shit.
BTW, I don't mean that kids that need extra help that their public schools can't provide and their parents can't afford are losing out either. Again, it's all in the socialization. If you home school your kids so they get the benefit of one-on-one instruction, well, that's another thing altogether.
Home schooling is a great way to make sure your kids are eaten by sharks.
Quote from: LMNO on March 09, 2010, 03:10:24 PM
That depends if on the type of learning plan you choose.
You can have the "Only a Little Jesus" plan, the "Whole Lotta Jesus" plan, or the "MEGA FUCKTONS OF JESUS" plan.
When you teach to the test in homeschooling, you can fill in the gaps with scads of horrible shit.
That's kind of what I was planning...
@Jenne: Yeah, I know socializing is the biggest problem with homeschooling. My cousin homeschools her kids, though (she subscribes to the MEGA FUCKTONS OF JESUS plan, :x ), but she gets around that by putting all her kids in all sorts of group activities, and church.
I really don't get home schooling until high school. Except perhaps that the parents doing that can't handle Algebra themselves and finally admit they need help.
Quote from: Mistress Freeky on March 09, 2010, 03:16:38 PM
Quote from: LMNO on March 09, 2010, 03:10:24 PM
That depends if on the type of learning plan you choose.
You can have the "Only a Little Jesus" plan, the "Whole Lotta Jesus" plan, or the "MEGA FUCKTONS OF JESUS" plan.
When you teach to the test in homeschooling, you can fill in the gaps with scads of horrible shit.
That's kind of what I was planning...
@Jenne: Yeah, I know socializing is the biggest problem with homeschooling. My cousin homeschools her kids, though (she subscribes to the MEGA FUCKTONS OF JESUS plan, :x ), but she gets around that by putting all her kids in all sorts of group activities, and church.
Yeah, unfortunately, most "interaction" the Home Schooled get is more Jesercizing, as my husband calls it. So the worldview is shrunken, but not as badly as those kids who get none, I guess.
Freeky, I suggest public school with assistance at home, truly.
Quote from: Requia ☣ on March 09, 2010, 03:20:15 PM
I really don't get home schooling until high school. Except perhaps that the parents doing that can't handle Algebra themselves and finally admit they need help.
Has to do with graduation standards as well as those for entrance to college.
Quote from: Doktor Howl on March 09, 2010, 03:15:19 PM
Home schooling is a great way to make sure your kids are eaten by sharks.
Yup.
Quote from: Jenne on March 09, 2010, 03:23:52 PM
Yeah, unfortunately, most "interaction" the Home Schooled get is more Jesercizing, as my husband calls it. So the worldview is shrunken, but not as badly as those kids who get none, I guess.
Freeky, I suggest public school with assistance at home, truly.
Yes. It's a few years out, in any case.
Quote from: Jenne on March 09, 2010, 03:24:34 PM
Quote from: Doktor Howl on March 09, 2010, 03:15:19 PM
Home schooling is a great way to make sure your kids are eaten by sharks.
Yup.
Step one: Raise and school kid in a loving home environment.
Step two: Toss newly minted adult into the real world, with above (step 1) as his/her set of major life experiences.
Step three: Kid moves back home forever, or goes crazy.
Quote from: Doktor Howl on March 09, 2010, 03:49:15 PM
Step one: Raise and school kid in a loving home environment.
Step two: Toss newly minted adult into the real world, with above (step 1) as his/her set of major life experiences.
Step three: Kid moves back home forever, or goes crazy.
:asplode:
Forgot alternate #3: Kid gets treated like a farm girl at a bike rally.
I was home schooled. Left as soon as I turned 18 (literally within a few weeks) moved to another city, got a job, started college, never looked back.
Quote from: Calamity Nigel on March 09, 2010, 04:07:16 PM
I was home schooled. Left as soon as I turned 18 (literally within a few weeks) moved to another city, got a job, started college, never looked back.
You're the first one I've met that didn't train wreck at 18-20. So it's obviously possible, but that's not the way I'd bet.
Nigel never stated what KIND of home schooling she had. There's all sorts. But notice she left and never came back.
Don't know, there are just better alternatives, imho, to homeschooling unless you need that one-on-one with your kid to get the instruction through to them.
I had the kind where my mom gave me a library card and a bus pass.
I left and never came back because I was 18. It was time to go. I never did understand that whole "moving back in with the parents" thing.
Me either, though I did it to save on rent before I got married in between backpacking round Yurp and the wedding. (it was 5 mos)
Quote from: Calamity Nigel on March 09, 2010, 04:37:36 PM
I had the kind where my mom gave me a library card and a bus pass.
I left and never came back because I was 18. It was time to go. I never did understand that whole "moving back in with the parents" thing.
I' doing it because I haven't had a full time job in um... 20 months now?
http://www.politicsdaily.com/2010/03/08/glenn-beck-urges-listeners-to-leave-churches-that-preach-social/ (http://www.politicsdaily.com/2010/03/08/glenn-beck-urges-listeners-to-leave-churches-that-preach-social/)
Blaarrrgghhhh
Quote from: Remington on March 09, 2010, 06:38:54 PM
http://www.politicsdaily.com/2010/03/08/glenn-beck-urges-listeners-to-leave-churches-that-preach-social/ (http://www.politicsdaily.com/2010/03/08/glenn-beck-urges-listeners-to-leave-churches-that-preach-social/)
Blaarrrgghhhh
JESUS WAS A COMMIE NAZI BASTARD!!!!!!!
Quote from: Remington on March 09, 2010, 06:38:54 PM
http://www.politicsdaily.com/2010/03/08/glenn-beck-urges-listeners-to-leave-churches-that-preach-social/ (http://www.politicsdaily.com/2010/03/08/glenn-beck-urges-listeners-to-leave-churches-that-preach-social/)
Blaarrrgghhhh
SOCIAL INJUSTICE FOR EVERYONE!!!
I think Glen Beck's job is simply to confuse people, and make the confusion seem rational.
Watching Glenn Beck purposefully miss the point or misunderstand the theories he purports to subscribe to is constantly fascinating.
For instance, he has a real gripe with equality of any sort. Now, most advocates of capitalism, for example, advocate it because they think it is the most equitable and moral economic system, all things considered. Yes there will be measures of difference, but by and large, capitalism will make everyone wealthier (via trickle-down, philantrophy, whatever) and improve everyone's lives.
Glenn Beck, on the other hand, is the sort of person who would agree with critics of capitalism that it isn't equitable or moral, but then go on to endorse it anyway, since inequality is the goal. Anything that even aims at some sort of fairness or balance is suspect and must be destroyed.
That's what marks him out to me as a purposeful tool, rather than an idiot who drank too much kool aid. I've noticed this with a few others, like Limbaugh as well. In fact, I think I might be basing the above example on something I heard Limbaugh say. It seems utterly bizarre to me that you can get people to go along with such a premise, but I suppose if you put them in a position of relative power in this future schema (ie give them someone to pound on), then you can get people to go along with just about anything.
well that's a chilling thought
Well, you have to say *something* in order to get people to tune in and see your advertisements. :horrormirth:
Damn, Cain. Welcome back. Missed that. Hope you're feeling better.
Um, thanks, but I've been well for over a week now.
I was staying away from this place because of all the shitting blog threads that were pissing me off, and making it more likely I was going to go into troll mode.
welcome back I just bought new shoes and there is a coffee mug on my desk and when I woke up this morning my shoulder kind of hurt
/troll mode
Some Christians are fighting back on Beck's insistence that his listeners leave churches that promote "social justice"
http://www.nytimes.com/2010/03/12/us/12justice.html
QuoteLast week, the conservative broadcaster Glenn Beck called on Christians to leave their churches if they hear preaching about social or economic justice, saying they were code words for Communism and Nazism.
This week the remarks prompted outrage from several Christian bloggers. The Rev. Jim Wallis, who leads the liberal Christian antipoverty group Sojourners, in Washington, called on Christians to leave Glenn Beck.
"What he has said attacks the very heart of our Christian faith, and Christians should no longer watch his show," Mr. Wallis wrote on his blog, God's Politics. "His show should now be in the same category as Howard Stern."
In attacking churches that espouse social justice, Mr. Beck is taking on most mainline Protestant, Roman Catholic, black and Hispanic congregations in the country — not to mention plenty of evangelical churches and even his own, the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints.
Mr. Beck said on his radio show on March 2, "I beg you, look for the words 'social justice' or 'economic justice' on your church Web site. If you find it, run as fast as you can. Social justice and economic justice, they are code words."
"Am I advising people to leave their church? Yes! If I am going to Jeremiah Wright's church," he said, referring to President Obama's former pastor in Chicago. "If you have a priest that is pushing social justice, go find another parish. Go alert your bishop."
Religion scholars say the term "social justice" was probably coined in the 1800s, codified in encyclicals by successive popes and adopted widely by Protestant churches in the 1900s. The concept is that Christians should not merely give to the poor, but also work to correct unjust conditions that keep people poor. Many Christians consider it a recurring theme in Scripture.
I keep thinking that maybe he'll finally say something so outrageous that his followers will abandon him. Maybe this time..........
Nazis were well known for their fortright defence of social justice. No, really. Always harping on about human rights and how bad racial discrimination was.
Whoa, whoa, whoa-- Beck is LDS?
You didn't know? Yeah he is. I've been meaning to try and stir up trouple with evangelicals about that, they keep kicking me out before I get the chance though.
Quote from: LMNO on March 13, 2010, 03:30:35 AM
Whoa, whoa, whoa-- Beck is LDS?
I second this 'whoa'.
glennbeckmormon.com :?
www.glennbeckwearsmagicunderpants.com
John Stewart rips the hell out of Glenn... as Glenn.
http://tv.gawker.com/5497006/the-jon-stewart-clip-that-will-make-glenn-beck-cry-real-tears (http://tv.gawker.com/5497006/the-jon-stewart-clip-that-will-make-glenn-beck-cry-real-tears)
Canadian mirror:
http://www.thecomedynetwork.ca/Displayblog.aspx?bpid=4843e0b6-7dbc-44d7-be1b-615a35ac155f (http://www.thecomedynetwork.ca/Displayblog.aspx?bpid=4843e0b6-7dbc-44d7-be1b-615a35ac155f)
Apparently Glenn Beck is now against the census.
http://theweek.com/article/index/201024/Glenn_Beck_vs_the_Census
(http://theweek.com/article/index/201024/Glenn_Beck_vs_the_Census)
Well naturally. It's going to put people into Japanese internment camps, even if they're not Japanese.
Quote from: Lord Quantum on March 22, 2010, 02:28:37 PM
Apparently Glenn Beck is now against the census.
http://theweek.com/article/index/201024/Glenn_Beck_vs_the_Census
(http://theweek.com/article/index/201024/Glenn_Beck_vs_the_Census)
So, Glenn Beck now hates the US Constitution, Jesus Christ, and old people. He should get in on the racist thing, while it's still relatively near the ground floor.
Actually, he IS the ground floor (that's why you didn't notice). I mean come on, saying that Obama has a "deep-seated hatred of white people" is cutting edge racism. He deflects any suspicion of him by accusing everyone else. Genius.
Quote from: Lord Quantum on March 22, 2010, 02:28:37 PM
Apparently Glenn Beck is now against the census.
http://theweek.com/article/index/201024/Glenn_Beck_vs_the_Census
(http://theweek.com/article/index/201024/Glenn_Beck_vs_the_Census)
Shh.. no one explain to Beck's listeners that not filling out the census form means that they'll end up with less representation in the government. I want to wait until the re-districting is done before we break it to them.
Did you watch the Colbert video underneath the article? There's a representative who's against the census too and Colbert pointed out that in her state, she'd be the first to lose her seat if fewer people sent in the census. She apparently has the district with the lowest population.
I don't get it. They do it every 10 years. They do it for a reason, damnit...
I just...I...er...*splodes*
I really wonder what the republicans have to gain by fighting the census.
Quote from: Z³ on March 23, 2010, 02:15:52 AM
I really wonder what the republicans have to gain by fighting the census.
It's an easy target to vent their rage on.
Quote from: Z³ on March 23, 2010, 02:15:52 AM
I really wonder what the republicans have to gain by fighting the census.
I don't think that the average republican is against the census....
Quote from: Iptuous on March 23, 2010, 03:11:46 AM
Quote from: Z³ on March 23, 2010, 02:15:52 AM
I really wonder what the republicans have to gain by fighting the census.
I don't think that the average republican is against the census....
I agree.
It would happen even if a Republican was in office...IT HAPPENS EVERY FUCKING 10 YEARS.
Quote from: Suu on March 23, 2010, 03:30:22 AM
It would happen even if a Republican was in office...IT HAPPENS EVERY FUCKING 10 YEARS.
Yeah, it's kinda mandated by the US constitution.
Quote from: Earthbound Spirit on March 23, 2010, 03:27:29 AM
Quote from: Iptuous on March 23, 2010, 03:11:46 AM
Quote from: Z³ on March 23, 2010, 02:15:52 AM
I really wonder what the republicans have to gain by fighting the census.
I don't think that the average republican is against the census....
I agree.
I don't. I have faith that the sheer stupidity of republicans approaches an infinite value.
Quote from: Doktor Howl on March 23, 2010, 03:46:38 AM
Quote from: Suu on March 23, 2010, 03:30:22 AM
It would happen even if a Republican was in office...IT HAPPENS EVERY FUCKING 10 YEARS.
Yeah, it's kinda mandated by the US constitution.
But the Constitution is totally unAmerican!
Quote from: Professor Freeky on March 23, 2010, 03:48:20 AM
Quote from: Doktor Howl on March 23, 2010, 03:46:38 AM
Quote from: Suu on March 23, 2010, 03:30:22 AM
It would happen even if a Republican was in office...IT HAPPENS EVERY FUCKING 10 YEARS.
Yeah, it's kinda mandated by the US constitution.
But the Constitution is totally unAmerican!
Don't laugh. I just had some spag on GLP tell me that the general welfare clause is unconstitutional (it's the 1st clause of the 8th section of article I of the US constitution).
Unfortunately, SHR and Evil Twin, two of the mods, noticed the republicans were losing, and deleted the thread.
Quote from: Doktor Howl on March 23, 2010, 03:47:35 AM
Quote from: Earthbound Spirit on March 23, 2010, 03:27:29 AM
Quote from: Iptuous on March 23, 2010, 03:11:46 AM
Quote from: Z³ on March 23, 2010, 02:15:52 AM
I really wonder what the republicans have to gain by fighting the census.
I don't think that the average republican is against the census....
I agree.
I don't. I have faith that the sheer stupidity of republicans approaches an infinite value.
This. They've already kicked the intelligence boulder down the cliff,
Right now they are watching it roll, hoping it gains sufficient momentum
What do they hope to gain?
(edit. maybe It should be the stupidity boulder)
Quote from: Lord Quantum on March 22, 2010, 10:47:16 PM
Actually, he IS the ground floor (that's why you didn't notice). I mean come on, saying that Obama has a "deep-seated hatred of white people" is cutting edge racism. He deflects any suspicion of him by accusing everyone else. Genius.
I'm not sure I understand this argument. Because what you, and others, seem to be saying is that accusing someone of racism when they are clearly not is a form of racism. Stupid and slanderous for sure, not to mention a little suspect, but not in any way proof of racist sentiment.
Now, I wouldn't be surprised to find out that Beck has some race issues. He is, after all, a Mormon conspiracy theorist. On the other hand, he's equally likely to be cynical enough not to care about race, while blowing various dogwhistles in order to appeal to that sort of viewer.
As it is, I went Googling yesterday, and the closest I could find to racism was that bizarre accusation against Obama, and his hectoring of a Muslim member of Congress to prove "he is not working with our enemies". The Congressman in question is black, but most black Americans aren't Muslims anyway (if he had been Arab or Iranian, the suspicion of racism might be on better ground....barely). So he's clearly a sectarian bigot, but we already knew that.
Quote from: Doktor Howl on March 23, 2010, 03:47:35 AM
Quote from: Earthbound Spirit on March 23, 2010, 03:27:29 AM
Quote from: Iptuous on March 23, 2010, 03:11:46 AM
Quote from: Z³ on March 23, 2010, 02:15:52 AM
I really wonder what the republicans have to gain by fighting the census.
I don't think that the average republican is against the census....
I agree.
I don't. I have faith that the sheer stupidity of republicans approaches an infinite value.
Perhaps it's a regional thing... :?
do all the republicans in your friends and family believe this where you live?
very few of them in my corner of the world do.
only one person that i've talked to has said anything like that. he mentioned hearing something about 'i heard blah blah blah Acorn blah blah blah'.... after i gave him a blank look and pointed out that he had a little of stupid on his face, he brushed it off, embarrassed, and got back to work.
Quote from: Cain on March 23, 2010, 10:25:18 AM
Quote from: Lord Quantum on March 22, 2010, 10:47:16 PM
Actually, he IS the ground floor (that's why you didn't notice). I mean come on, saying that Obama has a "deep-seated hatred of white people" is cutting edge racism. He deflects any suspicion of him by accusing everyone else. Genius.
I'm not sure I understand this argument. Because what you, and others, seem to be saying is that accusing someone of racism when they are clearly not is a form of racism. Stupid and slanderous for sure, not to mention a little suspect, but not in any way proof of racist sentiment.
Now, I wouldn't be surprised to find out that Beck has some race issues. He is, after all, a Mormon conspiracy theorist. On the other hand, he's equally likely to be cynical enough not to care about race, while blowing various dogwhistles in order to appeal to that sort of viewer.
As it is, I went Googling yesterday, and the closest I could find to racism was that bizarre accusation against Obama, and his hectoring of a Muslim member of Congress to prove "he is not working with our enemies". The Congressman in question is black, but most black Americans aren't Muslims anyway (if he had been Arab or Iranian, the suspicion of racism might be on better ground....barely). So he's clearly a sectarian bigot, but we already knew that.
My argument is not that Beck
must be racist just because he said that, but that it makes more sense for him to be making comments like that out of racism. Especially since things like the Birther movement are clearly rooted in race. Even the healthcare debate has been tainted now that the entire crowd outside of the Capitol was heard shouting "nigger" at a Black democrat on Sunday. So now people are wondering if the crowd was there to protest the bill or the niggers. Granted, none of this really says much about Glenn Beck, but there doesn't seem to be much of a reason to assume that he's vastly different from the other conservative wackos. But then again, I don't watch TV at all, so I've never actually seen Glenn Beck. I get my all news from news magazines, so perhaps someone who's actually seen him action should be making this argument.
GS made a valid observation a few weeks ago when we were watching a program on History Channel about Andrew Jackson, and that is what Republicans USED to be is what most Democrats are now, and the psycho rights were the Whigs. However, Democrats 200 years ago were as socialist as they could be in a time when there wasn't any idea on how that kind of a system would work, so it was really feared and they were often looked down upon. Even Martha Washington is quoted to have said after finding a grease spot on the wall after a dinner party at the presidential house in Philadelphia that it was put there by "a filthy Democrat".
We marveled over the political shift and tried to think of all the crazy shit that that made the changes.
Quote from: Suu on March 23, 2010, 02:00:01 PM
GS made a valid observation a few weeks ago when we were watching a program on History Channel about Andrew Jackson, and that is what Republicans USED to be is what most Democrats are now, and the psycho rights were the Whigs. However, Democrats 200 years ago were as socialist as they could be in a time when there wasn't any idea on how that kind of a system would work, so it was really feared and they were often looked down upon. Even Martha Washington is quoted to have said after finding a grease spot on the wall after a dinner party at the presidential house in Philadelphia that it was put there by "a filthy Democrat".
We marveled over the political shift and tried to think of all the crazy shit that that made the changes.
That was one of the most interesting discoveries I made in university--was the shift in alignments of the two parties vis a vis their original and their modernday platforms.
Quote from: Lord Quantum on March 23, 2010, 01:57:56 PM
Quote from: Cain on March 23, 2010, 10:25:18 AM
Quote from: Lord Quantum on March 22, 2010, 10:47:16 PM
Actually, he IS the ground floor (that's why you didn't notice). I mean come on, saying that Obama has a "deep-seated hatred of white people" is cutting edge racism. He deflects any suspicion of him by accusing everyone else. Genius.
I'm not sure I understand this argument. Because what you, and others, seem to be saying is that accusing someone of racism when they are clearly not is a form of racism. Stupid and slanderous for sure, not to mention a little suspect, but not in any way proof of racist sentiment.
Now, I wouldn't be surprised to find out that Beck has some race issues. He is, after all, a Mormon conspiracy theorist. On the other hand, he's equally likely to be cynical enough not to care about race, while blowing various dogwhistles in order to appeal to that sort of viewer.
As it is, I went Googling yesterday, and the closest I could find to racism was that bizarre accusation against Obama, and his hectoring of a Muslim member of Congress to prove "he is not working with our enemies". The Congressman in question is black, but most black Americans aren't Muslims anyway (if he had been Arab or Iranian, the suspicion of racism might be on better ground....barely). So he's clearly a sectarian bigot, but we already knew that.
My argument is not that Beck must be racist just because he said that, but that it makes more sense for him to be making comments like that out of racism. Especially since things like the Birther movement are clearly rooted in race. Even the healthcare debate has been tainted now that the entire crowd outside of the Capitol was heard shouting "nigger" at a Black democrat on Sunday. So now people are wondering if the crowd was there to protest the bill or the niggers. Granted, none of this really says much about Glenn Beck, but there doesn't seem to be much of a reason to assume that he's vastly different from the other conservative wackos. But then again, I don't watch TV at all, so I've never actually seen Glenn Beck. I get my all news from news magazines, so perhaps someone who's actually seen him action should be making this argument.
There's no doubt in my mind that Glenn Beck and Rush Limbaugh have a very racist leitmotif in their rhetoric.
Quote from: Jenne on March 23, 2010, 03:29:32 PM
Quote from: Suu on March 23, 2010, 02:00:01 PM
GS made a valid observation a few weeks ago when we were watching a program on History Channel about Andrew Jackson, and that is what Republicans USED to be is what most Democrats are now, and the psycho rights were the Whigs. However, Democrats 200 years ago were as socialist as they could be in a time when there wasn't any idea on how that kind of a system would work, so it was really feared and they were often looked down upon. Even Martha Washington is quoted to have said after finding a grease spot on the wall after a dinner party at the presidential house in Philadelphia that it was put there by "a filthy Democrat".
We marveled over the political shift and tried to think of all the crazy shit that that made the changes.
That was one of the most interesting discoveries I made in university--was the shift in alignments of the two parties vis a vis their original and their modernday platforms.
It's actually quite an interesting topic. Modern Dems are original Republicans, and Modern Republicans would have been Whig if not outright loyalists. Original Dems would have been Lenin's best friends.
Also, the terms Republican and Democrat themselves are outdated. The USA is a federal republic, not a democracy. Although our legislative system can be described as representative democratic, the overall snapshot of the country is not one.
Quote from: Jenne on March 23, 2010, 03:29:32 PM
Quote from: Suu on March 23, 2010, 02:00:01 PM
GS made a valid observation a few weeks ago when we were watching a program on History Channel about Andrew Jackson, and that is what Republicans USED to be is what most Democrats are now, and the psycho rights were the Whigs. However, Democrats 200 years ago were as socialist as they could be in a time when there wasn't any idea on how that kind of a system would work, so it was really feared and they were often looked down upon. Even Martha Washington is quoted to have said after finding a grease spot on the wall after a dinner party at the presidential house in Philadelphia that it was put there by "a filthy Democrat".
We marveled over the political shift and tried to think of all the crazy shit that that made the changes.
That was one of the most interesting discoveries I made in university--was the shift in alignments of the two parties vis a vis their original and their modernday platforms.
Just look up Lyndon Johnson's civil rights bill. Pretty much tells you all you need to know.
Quote from: Suu on March 23, 2010, 03:59:41 PM
Quote from: Jenne on March 23, 2010, 03:29:32 PM
Quote from: Suu on March 23, 2010, 02:00:01 PM
GS made a valid observation a few weeks ago when we were watching a program on History Channel about Andrew Jackson, and that is what Republicans USED to be is what most Democrats are now, and the psycho rights were the Whigs. However, Democrats 200 years ago were as socialist as they could be in a time when there wasn't any idea on how that kind of a system would work, so it was really feared and they were often looked down upon. Even Martha Washington is quoted to have said after finding a grease spot on the wall after a dinner party at the presidential house in Philadelphia that it was put there by "a filthy Democrat".
We marveled over the political shift and tried to think of all the crazy shit that that made the changes.
That was one of the most interesting discoveries I made in university--was the shift in alignments of the two parties vis a vis their original and their modernday platforms.
It's actually quite an interesting topic. Modern Dems are original Republicans, and Modern Republicans would have been Whig if not outright loyalists. Original Dems would have been Lenin's best friends.
Also, the terms Republican and Democrat themselves are outdated. The USA is a federal republic, not a democracy. Although our legislative system can be described as representative democratic, the overall snapshot of the country is not one.
The fact that we no longer teach this in public schools is downright humiliating. Civics is a luxury subject now, like art and phys ed. Makes me want to smash things.
Quote from: Doktor Howl on March 23, 2010, 04:01:22 PM
Quote from: Jenne on March 23, 2010, 03:29:32 PM
Quote from: Suu on March 23, 2010, 02:00:01 PM
GS made a valid observation a few weeks ago when we were watching a program on History Channel about Andrew Jackson, and that is what Republicans USED to be is what most Democrats are now, and the psycho rights were the Whigs. However, Democrats 200 years ago were as socialist as they could be in a time when there wasn't any idea on how that kind of a system would work, so it was really feared and they were often looked down upon. Even Martha Washington is quoted to have said after finding a grease spot on the wall after a dinner party at the presidential house in Philadelphia that it was put there by "a filthy Democrat".
We marveled over the political shift and tried to think of all the crazy shit that that made the changes.
That was one of the most interesting discoveries I made in university--was the shift in alignments of the two parties vis a vis their original and their modernday platforms.
Just look up Lyndon Johnson's civil rights bill. Pretty much tells you all you need to know.
If I'm thinking of the same one as Dok, the only thing the black community got out of that was the right to sit on a jury, and nothing else.
Quote from: Hover Cat on March 23, 2010, 04:08:18 PM
Quote from: Doktor Howl on March 23, 2010, 04:01:22 PM
Quote from: Jenne on March 23, 2010, 03:29:32 PM
Quote from: Suu on March 23, 2010, 02:00:01 PM
GS made a valid observation a few weeks ago when we were watching a program on History Channel about Andrew Jackson, and that is what Republicans USED to be is what most Democrats are now, and the psycho rights were the Whigs. However, Democrats 200 years ago were as socialist as they could be in a time when there wasn't any idea on how that kind of a system would work, so it was really feared and they were often looked down upon. Even Martha Washington is quoted to have said after finding a grease spot on the wall after a dinner party at the presidential house in Philadelphia that it was put there by "a filthy Democrat".
We marveled over the political shift and tried to think of all the crazy shit that that made the changes.
That was one of the most interesting discoveries I made in university--was the shift in alignments of the two parties vis a vis their original and their modernday platforms.
Just look up Lyndon Johnson's civil rights bill. Pretty much tells you all you need to know.
If I'm thinking of the same one as Dok, the only thing the black community got out of that was the right to sit on a jury, and nothing else.
wut
It ensured voting rights, among about a million other things.
It also ensured that the South would go solidly republican for 40 years.
Quote from: Jenne on March 23, 2010, 04:07:20 PM
The fact that we no longer teach this in public schools is downright humiliating. Civics is a luxury subject now, like art and phys ed. Makes me want to smash things.
I KNOW CIVICS. I SAY PLEASE.
\
:nigel:
Quote"No, the California hippie, Marxist, communist, socialist progressives with flowers in the barrels of guns, sitting around smoking dope and talking about how they can destroy the evil American empire — they are the ones who have declared themselves king. So, I'm thankful because there is a long war ahead and America can now clearly see what they are up against."
- Glenn Beck, blubbering after the healthcare bill was passed.
Quote from: Doktor Howl on March 23, 2010, 04:11:29 PM
Quote from: Jenne on March 23, 2010, 04:07:20 PM
The fact that we no longer teach this in public schools is downright humiliating. Civics is a luxury subject now, like art and phys ed. Makes me want to smash things.
I KNOW CIVICS. I SAY PLEASE.
\
:nigel:
I LOVED civics! I think it's really fucking important to know this stuff and to better understand the differences in governments, because when I make the point of Canada being a democracy and the US being a republic, I get a lot of odd looks.
"Wha choo talkin' bout? All dem Democrats should just move back to Canada!"
\
:mullet:
Quote from: Cain on March 23, 2010, 04:14:07 PM
Quote"No, the California hippie, Marxist, communist, socialist progressives with flowers in the barrels of guns, sitting around smoking dope and talking about how they can destroy the evil American empire — they are the ones who have declared themselves king. So, I'm thankful because there is a long war ahead and America can now clearly see what they are up against."
- Glenn Beck, blubbering after the healthcare bill was passed.
Does this make sense to ANYONE?!
Quote from: Doktor Howl on March 23, 2010, 04:10:49 PM
Quote from: Hover Cat on March 23, 2010, 04:08:18 PM
Quote from: Doktor Howl on March 23, 2010, 04:01:22 PM
Quote from: Jenne on March 23, 2010, 03:29:32 PM
Quote from: Suu on March 23, 2010, 02:00:01 PM
GS made a valid observation a few weeks ago when we were watching a program on History Channel about Andrew Jackson, and that is what Republicans USED to be is what most Democrats are now, and the psycho rights were the Whigs. However, Democrats 200 years ago were as socialist as they could be in a time when there wasn't any idea on how that kind of a system would work, so it was really feared and they were often looked down upon. Even Martha Washington is quoted to have said after finding a grease spot on the wall after a dinner party at the presidential house in Philadelphia that it was put there by "a filthy Democrat".
We marveled over the political shift and tried to think of all the crazy shit that that made the changes.
That was one of the most interesting discoveries I made in university--was the shift in alignments of the two parties vis a vis their original and their modernday platforms.
Just look up Lyndon Johnson's civil rights bill. Pretty much tells you all you need to know.
If I'm thinking of the same one as Dok, the only thing the black community got out of that was the right to sit on a jury, and nothing else.
wut
It ensured voting rights, among about a million other things.
It also ensured that the South would go solidly republican for 40 years.
Then we're thinking about different ones. The one he got passed while he was still in the Senate was the one I was talking about.
The cries for INSURRECTION! TAKE BACK OUR CUNCHREEE! make me larf. Where were these fuckers when Bush was tankin' their CUNCHREE right and left?
Oh. That's right. He believes in right-to-life and Jebus. He's exempt. :|
Quote from: Hover Cat on March 23, 2010, 04:15:34 PM
Quote from: Doktor Howl on March 23, 2010, 04:10:49 PM
Quote from: Hover Cat on March 23, 2010, 04:08:18 PM
Quote from: Doktor Howl on March 23, 2010, 04:01:22 PM
Quote from: Jenne on March 23, 2010, 03:29:32 PM
Quote from: Suu on March 23, 2010, 02:00:01 PM
GS made a valid observation a few weeks ago when we were watching a program on History Channel about Andrew Jackson, and that is what Republicans USED to be is what most Democrats are now, and the psycho rights were the Whigs. However, Democrats 200 years ago were as socialist as they could be in a time when there wasn't any idea on how that kind of a system would work, so it was really feared and they were often looked down upon. Even Martha Washington is quoted to have said after finding a grease spot on the wall after a dinner party at the presidential house in Philadelphia that it was put there by "a filthy Democrat".
We marveled over the political shift and tried to think of all the crazy shit that that made the changes.
That was one of the most interesting discoveries I made in university--was the shift in alignments of the two parties vis a vis their original and their modernday platforms.
Just look up Lyndon Johnson's civil rights bill. Pretty much tells you all you need to know.
If I'm thinking of the same one as Dok, the only thing the black community got out of that was the right to sit on a jury, and nothing else.
wut
It ensured voting rights, among about a million other things.
It also ensured that the South would go solidly republican for 40 years.
Then we're thinking about different ones. The one he got passed while he was still in the Senate was the one I was talking about.
Talking about the one he signed as president.
Quote from: Jenne on March 23, 2010, 04:22:41 PM
The cries for INSURRECTION! TAKE BACK OUR CUNCHREEE! make me larf. Where were these fuckers when Bush was tankin' their CUNCHREE right and left?
Oh. That's right. He believes in right-to-life and Jebus. He's exempt. :|
It turns out they don't mind tyranny, as long as their side is doing the tyrannizing.
Quote from: Doktor Howl on March 23, 2010, 04:24:26 PM
Quote from: Jenne on March 23, 2010, 04:22:41 PM
The cries for INSURRECTION! TAKE BACK OUR CUNCHREEE! make me larf. Where were these fuckers when Bush was tankin' their CUNCHREE right and left?
Oh. That's right. He believes in right-to-life and Jebus. He's exempt. :|
It turns out they don't mind tyranny, as long as their side a white man is doing the tyrannizing.
Fixed...only because I felt I left something out in my original thought up there.
You forgot the Arab part.
I've decided I'm going to, for the first time ever, watch a full episode of Glenn Beck's tv show (and not just clips of his hilarious freakouts on Youtube).
Stay tuned.
Quote from: Cain on March 23, 2010, 04:39:46 PM
I've decided I'm going to, for the first time ever, watch a full episode of Glenn Beck's tv show (and not just clips of his hilarious freakouts on Youtube).
Stay tuned.
I've watched him a few times at the gym (the Y, or course, being a fanatically conservative organization).
Quote from: Cain on March 23, 2010, 04:39:46 PM
I've decided I'm going to, for the first time ever, watch a full episode of Glenn Beck's tv show (and not just clips of his hilarious freakouts on Youtube).
Stay tuned.
I used to listen to him on the radio a lot in college. He wasn't as crazy then. Either that or I was fucking stupid. Probably a little of both. My dad used to listen to him too, and even he admitted that somewhere in the past decade he's gone completely off the deep end.
Over here, they only seem to show music videos or really shitty daytime soaps in gyms. Or cooking programs, for some reason. Must be a culture thing.
Well, so far, the program is at 8.9%...and will take another three hours to complete. I can barely take the suspense! If this entertains me enough, I might start watching every day.
Quote from: Cain on March 23, 2010, 04:58:08 PM
Over here, they only seem to show music videos or really shitty daytime soaps in gyms. Or cooking programs, for some reason. Must be a culture thing.
Well, I imagine the English can use all the cooking programs they can get.
They're only watched because of Nigella Lawson
(http://i87.photobucket.com/albums/k155/foodnetaddict/0596565600.jpg)
Quote from: Cain on March 23, 2010, 05:14:35 PM
They're only watched because of Nigella Lawson
(http://i87.photobucket.com/albums/k155/foodnetaddict/0596565600.jpg)
I see no 5 gallon buckets of lard.
She isn't English.
Nigella's not only HAWT, but she quit modelling to cook fatty, delicious foods.
FUCK THAT.
NIGELLA TOLD ME THAT IF I DON'T HAVE PICKLED JALEPENOS TO ADD TO MY GUACAMOLE, I CAN USE GHERKINS.
GHERKINS.
GHERKINS.
Quote from: LMNO on March 23, 2010, 06:19:33 PM
FUCK THAT.
NIGELLA TOLD ME THAT IF I DON'T HAVE PICKLED JALEPENOS TO ADD TO MY GUACAMOLE, I CAN USE GHERKINS.
GHERKINS.
GHERKINS.
Maybe her gherkins are spicier than your average American's?
They are pickled fucking baby cucumbers.
...doesn't dispute the notion of her hawtness...I judge her not by the size of her gherkins...
I can't believe I'm saying this, but at least Giada knows what Italian food is supposed to taste like.
:lol: To be fair, something like guacamole is much more...exotic? to the Brits than it is over here. NOT much excuse to use pickles in the dish, but perhaps it's a cultural taste issue?
And Giada better fucking know Italian, that's supposedly how she makes her way in the world...besides her smile and bearing of...what did RWHN call it?...her BREASTBONE.
I also appreciate that she appears to have multiple orgasms when tasting prosciutto.
Quote from: LMNO on March 23, 2010, 06:59:16 PM
I also appreciate that she appears to have multiple orgasms when tasting prosciutto.
You haven't seen Nigella tear into her trifle, then, have you?
Quote from: Jenne on March 23, 2010, 07:00:07 PM
Quote from: LMNO on March 23, 2010, 06:59:16 PM
I also appreciate that she appears to have multiple orgasms when tasting prosciutto.
You haven't seen Nigella tear into her trifle, then, have you?
You may not be surprised that I just got an erection reading that.
Quote from: LMNO on March 23, 2010, 07:02:02 PM
Quote from: Jenne on March 23, 2010, 07:00:07 PM
Quote from: LMNO on March 23, 2010, 06:59:16 PM
I also appreciate that she appears to have multiple orgasms when tasting prosciutto.
You haven't seen Nigella tear into her trifle, then, have you?
You may not be surprised that I just got an erection reading that.
Me? Hell no. Shit, I expected worse--I mean, more than that.
I forgot to mention that in my mind, you were involved, and the trifle, well... let's just say that we all learned a little more about human anatomy.
Quote from: Suu on March 23, 2010, 04:15:18 PM
Quote from: Cain on March 23, 2010, 04:14:07 PM
Quote"No, the California hippie, Marxist, communist, socialist progressives with flowers in the barrels of guns, sitting around smoking dope and talking about how they can destroy the evil American empire — they are the ones who have declared themselves king. So, I'm thankful because there is a long war ahead and America can now clearly see what they are up against."
- Glenn Beck, blubbering after the healthcare bill was passed.
Does this make sense to ANYONE?!
sadly yes; its a RED SCARE attempt
Muslims arent PC to make fun of anymore
so hes switching to Hippies
Quote from: Suu on March 23, 2010, 03:59:41 PM
It's actually quite an interesting topic. Modern Dems are original Republicans.
Modern Dems want to keep women from voting?
This is news to me.
Incidentally, Comedy Central replayed the Jon Stewart as Glenn Beck parody last night. I almost shat myself laughing.
Yeah, I saw that one over here a couple of days ago. The chalk board was entirely awesome.
"Why didn't they use a 'Y' to spell 'Arians'?... BECAUSE THAT'S THE ONE QUESTION THEY DON'T WANT YOU TO ASK."
So, watching Glenn Beck right now....does he normally perform his shows while high?
Quote from: Requia ☣ on March 25, 2010, 08:40:31 AM
Quote from: Suu on March 23, 2010, 03:59:41 PM
It's actually quite an interesting topic. Modern Dems are original Republicans.
Modern Dems want to keep women from voting?
This is news to me.
I'm talking 75-100 years before suffrage when the idea of women voting was out of the question for both parties.
Also: Shut up.
Quote from: Cain on March 25, 2010, 02:58:58 PM
So, watching Glenn Beck right now....does he normally perform his shows while high?
No, he's always like that.
OH GOD HE'S GOT THE CHALKBOARD OUT!
AVERT YOUR EYES!
IF IT'S SCRAWLED IN CHALK, IT MUST BE TRUE!
Saul Alinsky-ites?
Also, I like the way he makes up personal stories which no-one can verify and prove nothing. OH MY GOD HE JUST TOLD ME MICHAEL MOORE IS FAT. HA HA. YOU SEE, ITS FUNNY, BECAUSE MICHAEL MOORE IS REALLY FAT. FAT, HA HA.
I love how not 10 minutes after claiming progressive Democrats in government sit around smoking pot and plotting to destroy America, he went on a crazy rant about how people say he "makes stuff up".
Quote from: Cain on March 25, 2010, 03:15:22 PM
I love how not 10 minutes after claiming progressive Democrats in government sit around smoking pot and plotting to destroy America, he went on a crazy rant about how people say he "makes stuff up".
I call troll. He can't be serious.
He just repeated it again. Also everything is free in Europe, and we should go back to the early 19th century wagon lifestyle, because weak people should apparently just get eaten by wolves.
Quote from: Cain on March 25, 2010, 03:22:14 PM
He just repeated it again. Also everything is free in Europe, and we should go back to the early 19th century wagon lifestyle, because weak people should apparently just get eaten by wolves.
How long do you suppose he'd last?
GLENN BECK MADE HIS ENTIRE CAREER, BY HIMSELF. IN A CAVE. FROM SCRAPS!
Also parents need to hit their kids in the face with a ball sometimes and not let them know they love them.
:lulz:
I saw the Daily Show parody yesterday. Have to say that, while it was certainly amusing in places, I wasn't laughing too much. It was getting into that territory that Bill Hicks was in towards the end of his life where you know what he's saying is funny yet, at the same time, you just feel weird when you realize how serious the problem is. In this case, it's the fact that
someone, somewhere is taking Beck seriously even if he's (Beck) a troll.
There was a great clip of Beck, I think of Mar 10th where he said 'I am not a journalist'. And to me, that's a huge fucking problem - when you have a show on an <ahem, cough> NEWS CHANNEL, you'd think being a journalist would've been an entry requirement.
Beck used to be (and basically, still is) one of those wearisome radio DJs who want to convince you how freaking 'zany' they are. He's a Conservative Pinealist and if he was on this forum, there would be mammoth hate shitting threads extending over 50+ pages.
Incidentally, I donated $1 to the 'get Rush a ticket' website and suggested that if Rush won't go, then see if Glenn will move to Costa Rica instead.
Quote from: Cain on March 25, 2010, 02:58:58 PM
So, watching Glenn Beck right now....does he normally perform his shows while high?
He used to be a drug addict, so I wouldn't be surprised. :lol:
Quote from: Doktor Howl on March 25, 2010, 03:26:35 PM
Quote from: Cain on March 25, 2010, 03:22:14 PM
He just repeated it again. Also everything is free in Europe, and we should go back to the early 19th century wagon lifestyle, because weak people should apparently just get eaten by wolves.
How long do you suppose he'd last?
He's apparently an expert hunter. I don't believe it.
I actually wrote a story on this. I think I shall expand it and possibly post it in Bring and Brag.
Quote from: Suu on March 25, 2010, 02:59:27 PM
Quote from: Requia ☣ on March 25, 2010, 08:40:31 AM
Quote from: Suu on March 23, 2010, 03:59:41 PM
It's actually quite an interesting topic. Modern Dems are original Republicans.
Modern Dems want to keep women from voting?
This is news to me.
I'm talking 75-100 years before suffrage when the idea of women voting was out of the question for both parties.
Also: Shut up.
Really? I wasn't aware the republican party was around in 1769.
Just cause you east coast spags dragged your heels about it doesn't mean the rest of the country was opposed.
Quote from: Mangrove on March 25, 2010, 05:07:18 PM
Beck used to be (and basically, still is) one of those wearisome radio DJs who want to convince you how freaking 'zany' they are. He's a Conservative Pinealist and if he was on this forum, there would be mammoth hate shitting threads extending over 50+ pages.
OMG, that would be awesome. Now, how the hell do we manage to lure conservatards to our forum? Anyone? Anyone?
I've tried. The Political Crossfire forums are loaded with them. I managed to get BabylonHoruv over here, but none of the rabid conservatards. They seem quite happy wher they are under the protection of the mods.
It probably wouldn't work but you could always call 'em out Old West style and say that they just don't have the guts to come over here. Then call 'em "yella". But yeah, I think embarrassment would be the only thing that would work. They won't come here out of sheer curiosity.
Quote from: Rev. What's-His-Name? on March 26, 2010, 11:19:49 AM
I've tried. The Political Crossfire forums are loaded with them.
I was a founding member on that board. Banned for being - no shit - "dangerously liberal".
Went back about a month ago. Warned twice in one night for disagreeing with a mod's position, left in disgust. Will nuke later.
Been trying to lure my conservatard students here. So far none of them have risen to my bait. :( But I'm going to try with some others I know.
Are you a professor?
Me? No. A debate coach at a high school with a fuck ton of conservatives/glibertarians. And god, they ALL JOIN THE TEAM.
Well of course they did! What club did you expect them to join, the Chess team?
I expected them to join the Young Christian Athletes Society, among other things. Not debate and forensics, which is run by godless liberals.
you know your missing a great opportunity
who they would pick as a better president
bush or palin...
"Missing a great opportunity"? Not likely. Most of the boys have a hard on for Palin and would pick her over Bush any day, and the girls love her, too. I predict many PALIN 2012 stickers on back packs next year.
ask for a debate about really wacky right topics... ten commandments in the courtroom
even frame topics that the left answer is reasonable but the partyline or "common sense" says otherwise
object is to get a student to say something so far out there, secret service is called by the PTA
Quote from: Pēleus on March 29, 2010, 04:41:07 AM
ask for a debate about really wacky right topics... ten commandments in the courtroom
object is to get a student to say something so far out there, secret service is called by the PTA
You have a frightening amount of faith in that kind of thing. Short of a bomb threat, nothing my kids say is going to raise an eyebrow, and I mean NOTHING.
well if nothing else trying to argue the other-side of an argument that conflicts with their BIP
might provoke them to think for themselfs
also ment to say who would be a better president palin or beck..
not sure how i confused that one :D
I try, believe me, but it's a bit like trying to tear the blinkers off a blind horse. They have that smug right wing thing going on already--"if it's inconvenient, it ain't true."
Quote from: Hover Cat on March 29, 2010, 04:43:17 AM
Quote from: Pēleus on March 29, 2010, 04:41:07 AM
ask for a debate about really wacky right topics... ten commandments in the courtroom
object is to get a student to say something so far out there, secret service is called by the PTA
You have a frightening amount of faith in that kind of thing. Short of a bomb threat, nothing my kids say is going to raise an eyebrow, and I mean NOTHING.
Where the fuck do you live? Kids get expelled around here just for looking funny.
Quote from: Mangrove on March 25, 2010, 05:07:18 PM
I saw the Daily Show parody yesterday. Have to say that, while it was certainly amusing in places, I wasn't laughing too much. It was getting into that territory that Bill Hicks was in towards the end of his life where you know what he's saying is funny yet, at the same time, you just feel weird when you realize how serious the problem is. In this case, it's the fact that someone, somewhere is taking Beck seriously even if he's (Beck) a troll.
There was a great clip of Beck, I think of Mar 10th where he said 'I am not a journalist'. And to me, that's a huge fucking problem - when you have a show on an <ahem, cough> NEWS CHANNEL, you'd think being a journalist would've been an entry requirement.
Beck used to be (and basically, still is) one of those wearisome radio DJs who want to convince you how freaking 'zany' they are. He's a Conservative Pinealist and if he was on this forum, there would be mammoth hate shitting threads extending over 50+ pages.
Incidentally, I donated $1 to the 'get Rush a ticket' website and suggested that if Rush won't go, then see if Glenn will move to Costa Rica instead.
They're actually giving the money to Planned Parenthood if he won't accpet it.
Quote from: Pēleus on March 29, 2010, 04:41:07 AM
ask for a debate about really wacky right topics... ten commandments in the courtroom
even frame topics that the left answer is reasonable but the partyline or "common sense" says otherwise
object is to get a student to say something so far out there, secret service is called by the PTA
:crankey:
Quote from: Jenne on March 29, 2010, 02:37:04 PM
Quote from: Mangrove on March 25, 2010, 05:07:18 PM
I saw the Daily Show parody yesterday. Have to say that, while it was certainly amusing in places, I wasn't laughing too much. It was getting into that territory that Bill Hicks was in towards the end of his life where you know what he's saying is funny yet, at the same time, you just feel weird when you realize how serious the problem is. In this case, it's the fact that someone, somewhere is taking Beck seriously even if he's (Beck) a troll.
There was a great clip of Beck, I think of Mar 10th where he said 'I am not a journalist'. And to me, that's a huge fucking problem - when you have a show on an <ahem, cough> NEWS CHANNEL, you'd think being a journalist would've been an entry requirement.
Beck used to be (and basically, still is) one of those wearisome radio DJs who want to convince you how freaking 'zany' they are. He's a Conservative Pinealist and if he was on this forum, there would be mammoth hate shitting threads extending over 50+ pages.
Incidentally, I donated $1 to the 'get Rush a ticket' website and suggested that if Rush won't go, then see if Glenn will move to Costa Rica instead.
They're actually giving the money to Planned Parenthood if he won't accpet it.
That's brilliant! :lulz:
Quote from: Lord Quantum on March 29, 2010, 02:05:56 PM
Quote from: Hover Cat on March 29, 2010, 04:43:17 AM
Quote from: Pēleus on March 29, 2010, 04:41:07 AM
ask for a debate about really wacky right topics... ten commandments in the courtroom
object is to get a student to say something so far out there, secret service is called by the PTA
You have a frightening amount of faith in that kind of thing. Short of a bomb threat, nothing my kids say is going to raise an eyebrow, and I mean NOTHING.
Where the fuck do you live? Kids get expelled around here just for looking funny.
I live in a land of rolling suburbs, filled with SUVs, strip mall churches, soccer moms hopped on their kids' ritalin, and tea baggers. Everyone here seems to assume nothing bad will ever happen, until it does. It's a bit like being trapped in a slice of the 1950s.
I would say that I feel sorry for you but I live in Georgia. We're more paranoid but other than that, I see your strip mall churches and raise you an army of street preachers.
Quote from: Lord Quantum on March 30, 2010, 02:05:07 AM
I would say that I feel sorry for you but I live in Georgia. We're more paranoid but other than that, I see your strip mall churches and raise you an army of street preachers.
Got those, too.
But! We only have one mega-church, which most of us refer to as the Mother Ship for a variety of reasons.
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/36075836/ns/us_news-crime_and_courts?GT1=43001 So can we lay shit like this at Glenn Beck's feet, or what?
They better charge these guys with treason. I'm kind of torn between hoping it quashes this sort of thing (which it won't) and hoping it'll inflame it (which is much more likely).
Quote from: Hover Cat on March 30, 2010, 02:08:49 AM
Quote from: Lord Quantum on March 30, 2010, 02:05:07 AM
I would say that I feel sorry for you but I live in Georgia. We're more paranoid but other than that, I see your strip mall churches and raise you an army of street preachers.
Got those, too.
But! We only have one mega-church, which most of us refer to as the Mother Ship for a variety of reasons.
I see your mothership and raise you a church that believes that churches that have kitchens are all going to hell.
I am Glenn's complete lack of irony:
http://mediamatters.org/blog/201003260022
If you don't want to click: Glenn is accusing Obama of using the politics of fear.
You know what I find ironic?
(and I acknowledge that I'm beating a dead horse here)
Terrorism is "the systematic use of terror especially as a means of coercion."
When Glenn Beck motivates people through fear,
when the government justifies itself by referencing 9/11,
basically any time that you trade freedom for security,
isn't that a form of terrorism?
I'm not saying that the government's warrantless wiretapping is equivalent to flying a plane into a building
but the real effect of 9/11 wasn't based on the lives we lost, it was the cultural reaction to the attack. That was the intent of the terrorism, to shake everybody to the core and make them question their values.
Constantly evoking this image -- or any image of violence and destruction -- as a form of persuasion
seems to be tapping into the same power source. You can't get people to agree with you unless you evoke the same fear, as we experienced on 9/11
that's what's so frustrating to be about the 9/12 movement. I forget which pundit said it, but 9/12 was a scary fucking day! YES we all stood together with the flag flying overhead and our hands on our hearts.. but NO, this is what led to the patriot act!
btw, HI NSA BOTS!
:wave:
I agree. The terror about terrorism, and branding anything or anyone who disagrees as a terrorist, is in itself a form of terrorism. This whole past decade has been largely about fearmongering. And Glenn Beck is one of the worst.
Though, I will say, as much as I think Glenn Beck is a bag of douche... I'm glad he exists, and is allowed a forum.
http://www.wftv.com/news/22999143/detail.html (http://www.wftv.com/news/22999143/detail.html)
QuoteORLANDO, Fla. -- Dozens of people who parked at the University of Central Florida for an event say they were set up after their cars were towed. They said event parking signs directed them to a lot, but more than 50 cars in that lot were towed. People said those signs and their cars were gone when they got back.
A viewer contacted WFTV after his car was towed Saturday, along with 52 others. All of them were in line to recover their cars at an impound lot and all of them attended the Glenn Beck show at UCF.
The people parked in a Kappa Sigma lot. Mike Vedder thinks they were set up. He doesn't know if it was a dislike of the conservative commentator or money.
Freakin' Genius.
Quote from: Da6s on March 30, 2010, 07:44:56 PM
http://www.wftv.com/news/22999143/detail.html (http://www.wftv.com/news/22999143/detail.html)
QuoteORLANDO, Fla. -- Dozens of people who parked at the University of Central Florida for an event say they were set up after their cars were towed. They said event parking signs directed them to a lot, but more than 50 cars in that lot were towed. People said those signs and their cars were gone when they got back.
A viewer contacted WFTV after his car was towed Saturday, along with 52 others. All of them were in line to recover their cars at an impound lot and all of them attended the Glenn Beck show at UCF.
The people parked in a Kappa Sigma lot. Mike Vedder thinks they were set up. He doesn't know if it was a dislike of the conservative commentator or money.
Freakin' Genius.
:lulz: That's awesome!
Quote from: Da6s on March 30, 2010, 07:44:56 PM
http://www.wftv.com/news/22999143/detail.html (http://www.wftv.com/news/22999143/detail.html)
QuoteORLANDO, Fla. -- Dozens of people who parked at the University of Central Florida for an event say they were set up after their cars were towed. They said event parking signs directed them to a lot, but more than 50 cars in that lot were towed. People said those signs and their cars were gone when they got back.
A viewer contacted WFTV after his car was towed Saturday, along with 52 others. All of them were in line to recover their cars at an impound lot and all of them attended the Glenn Beck show at UCF.
The people parked in a Kappa Sigma lot. Mike Vedder thinks they were set up. He doesn't know if it was a dislike of the conservative commentator or money.
Freakin' Genius.
That's more win than I care to contemplate.
FUCKING GLENN BECK DITTOHEADS GOT WHAT THEY DESERVED.
PLEASE SIR, CAN I HAVE SOME MORE?
Quote from: Jenne on March 30, 2010, 07:59:47 PM
FUCKING GLENN BECK DITTOHEADS GOT WHAT THEY DESERVED.
PLEASE SIR, CAN I HAVE SOME MORE?
I <3 ragey Jenne. :)
Quote from: Doktor Howl on March 30, 2010, 08:01:22 PM
Quote from: Jenne on March 30, 2010, 07:59:47 PM
FUCKING GLENN BECK DITTOHEADS GOT WHAT THEY DESERVED.
PLEASE SIR, CAN I HAVE SOME MORE?
I <3 ragey Jenne. :)
CEPT YOU RUINED HER WITH YOUR DRIVEBY DIALWRONG. :D
EVERYTHING'S PISSING ME OFF TODAY! :crankey: IF I SEE GLENN BECK IN THE STREET IMA KICK IM IN THE JIMMY! DON'T SEE IF I WON'T!
Quote from: Jenne on March 30, 2010, 08:05:28 PM
Quote from: Doktor Howl on March 30, 2010, 08:01:22 PM
Quote from: Jenne on March 30, 2010, 07:59:47 PM
FUCKING GLENN BECK DITTOHEADS GOT WHAT THEY DESERVED.
PLEASE SIR, CAN I HAVE SOME MORE?
I <3 ragey Jenne. :)
CEPT YOU RUINED HER WITH YOUR DRIVEBY DIALWRONG. :D
EVERYTHING'S PISSING ME OFF TODAY! :crankey: IF I SEE GLENN BECK IN THE STREET IMA KICK IM IN THE JIMMY! DON'T SEE IF I WON'T!
I was trying to dial "John" on my speed dial, and dialed "Jenne", which is right below it.
I have really big fingers. :(
Quote from: Doktor Howl on March 30, 2010, 08:29:24 PM
Quote from: Jenne on March 30, 2010, 08:05:28 PM
Quote from: Doktor Howl on March 30, 2010, 08:01:22 PM
Quote from: Jenne on March 30, 2010, 07:59:47 PM
FUCKING GLENN BECK DITTOHEADS GOT WHAT THEY DESERVED.
PLEASE SIR, CAN I HAVE SOME MORE?
I <3 ragey Jenne. :)
CEPT YOU RUINED HER WITH YOUR DRIVEBY DIALWRONG. :D
EVERYTHING'S PISSING ME OFF TODAY! :crankey: IF I SEE GLENN BECK IN THE STREET IMA KICK IM IN THE JIMMY! DON'T SEE IF I WON'T!
I was trying to dial "John" on my speed dial, and dialed "Jenne", which is right below it.
I have really big fingers. :(
I do it all the time. On the iPhone, some areas of the screen are more sensitive than others, and my clumsy fingers touch "call" or whatever before I know it, and I'm going SHIT SHIT SHIT ENDCALL ENDCALL.
:D You were polite and sat while I cackled in your ear, semi-hysterically, after biting your head off for calling me while working.
You, Sir, are a god among men. :D
Ten bucks says he was getting off on it.
Quote from: LMNO on March 30, 2010, 08:35:27 PM
Ten bucks says he was getting off on it.
She charged me $4.99/minute for phone rage.
:oops:
Dok,
Thinks we might be on to something.
Quote from: LMNO on March 30, 2010, 08:35:27 PM
Ten bucks says he was getting off on it.
There was some silence on his end, I can't believe I laughed that long, but a series of thoughts like, "shit, wtf?! I sounded horrible just now!" and his "I totally just called the WRONG NUMBER" made me laugh and laugh...then I thought FUCK you should let him get off the phone and stop laughing now.
I think I've had too much coffee...
Quote from: Doktor Howl on March 30, 2010, 08:36:32 PM
Quote from: LMNO on March 30, 2010, 08:35:27 PM
Ten bucks says he was getting off on it.
She charged me $4.99/minute for phone rage.
:oops:
Dok,
Thinks we might be on to something.
More like "phone HOWL"
Quote from: Jenne on March 30, 2010, 08:38:56 PM
Quote from: Doktor Howl on March 30, 2010, 08:36:32 PM
Quote from: LMNO on March 30, 2010, 08:35:27 PM
Ten bucks says he was getting off on it.
She charged me $4.99/minute for phone rage.
:oops:
Dok,
Thinks we might be on to something.
More like "phone HOWL"
Either way. I'm up for
any program.
SAVED! :D
Quote from: Jenne on March 29, 2010, 02:38:18 PM
Quote from: Pēleus on March 29, 2010, 04:41:07 AM
ask for a debate about really wacky right topics... ten commandments in the courtroom
even frame topics that the left answer is reasonable but the partyline or "common sense" says otherwise
object is to get a student to say something so far out there, secret service is called by the PTA
:crankey:
if Bush's staff actually took the 8 year old's drawing of the president a few years back
seriously enough to interview his family.
who knows what kinda circus a right wing bastard could produce :lulz:
infact i think its only a matter of time, before it happens anyways in the wild
Quote from: Pēleus on March 31, 2010, 08:00:42 PM
Quote from: Jenne on March 29, 2010, 02:38:18 PM
Quote from: Pēleus on March 29, 2010, 04:41:07 AM
ask for a debate about really wacky right topics... ten commandments in the courtroom
even frame topics that the left answer is reasonable but the partyline or "common sense" says otherwise
object is to get a student to say something so far out there, secret service is called by the PTA
:crankey:
if Bush's staff actually took the 8 year old's drawing of the president a few years back
seriously enough to interview his family.
who knows what kinda circus a right wing bastard could produce :lulz:
Quote from: Pēleus on March 31, 2010, 08:02:44 PM
infact i think its only a matter of time, before it happens anyways in the wild
Any motherfucking PTA that does that needs stripping of its charter.
Our first mission (yes, I said
our, fuck you) is to ADVOCATE for children. First, foremost, end of story. If your PTA is not doing that, then become a PTO for chrissakes and have done with it.
Whassa PTO, Jenne?
It's a non-PTA affiliated parent-teacher-volunteer organization. Doesn't have the legislative arm that PTA does. PTA has a national rhetoric, PTOs are on their own, get their own insurance, don't have national membership.
PTA is a CHAIN, PTOs are mom-n-pops, set up to fundraise, primarily. PTA's main function is NOT to fundraise (if that's all your unit's doing, then they're doin' it WRONG!), but instead to mobilize parents in efforts to advocate for all children, everywhere.
Learning is win! :D
Also, sounds like PTAs are supposed to be a good thing, only there's a lot of potential for monkeys to fuck it up for everyone. Yes?
just like the rest of life, Freeky, hells yes.
PTA has a bad rep mostly because they are hierarchical, and we all know what happens when folks get hierarchical. But, on the other had, it has the potential to do great things, which is why I am tied to it.
Oh, I see.
http://ecopolitology.org/2010/03/22/7-things-glenn-beck-doesnt-know-about-public-lands-policy/
From the above link:
QuoteLike his boss, President Obama, Secretary Salazar has shown that he leads by consensus and collaboration, not by decree.
That doesn't sound like the Enrico I know...
Quote from: Cain on April 05, 2010, 03:00:12 PM
From the above link:
QuoteLike his boss, President Obama, Secretary Salazar has shown that he leads by consensus and collaboration, not by decree.
That doesn't sound like the Enrico I know...
That's because...
(http://i67.photobucket.com/albums/h303/usa732/its-a-trap.jpg)
I figured it out
Glen Beck is the reincarnation of Howard Beale
Quote from: Thurnez Isa on April 08, 2010, 01:16:20 AM
I figured it out
Glen Beck is the reincarnation of Howard Beale
Except Beale got IT. Beck can't even come close.
Quote from: Kai on April 08, 2010, 04:11:44 AM
Quote from: Thurnez Isa on April 08, 2010, 01:16:20 AM
I figured it out
Glen Beck is the reincarnation of Howard Beale
Except Beale got IT. Beck can't even come close.
He`ll eventually get it right.
Then he`ll get shot.
and it will be "hilarious"
Quote from: Thurnez Isa on April 12, 2010, 01:23:01 AM
Quote from: Kai on April 08, 2010, 04:11:44 AM
Quote from: Thurnez Isa on April 08, 2010, 01:16:20 AM
I figured it out
Glen Beck is the reincarnation of Howard Beale
Except Beale got IT. Beck can't even come close.
He`ll eventually get it right.
Then he`ll get shot.
and it will be "hilarious"
I think Fox News is like one of those middle eastern terrorist organizations, and the teabaggers are the cult following. If Beck (the religious authority) were to die in any way that could be construed as assisted, the teabaggers would lash out like a bunch of mujadeen.
Honestly. Change the image a bit and they look just like the precursor to Al-Qu'aida.
Personally, I think they're tools.
Al-Qai'da actually had some men of intelligence amongst its members and were very often able to turn the tables on those who attempted to use them (Sudan, Afghanistan, Pakistani Intelligence etc), because they valued their group independence over the sort of "assistance" various groups could offer.
The Teabaggers, by contrast are more like the Grey Wolves, and the neocons who got fat and rich off 8 years of unending foreign and culture wars are the Special Warfare Department. The Teabaggers are there to incite chaos, and under the cover of that chaos, allow for targeting of select individuals (these individuals may have strategic importance but, as in the case of Van Jones, may be taken care of merely to cause the administration to flinch). When that chaos gets too out of hand, ie when the Republicans return to power, they'll be co-opted or crushed. Just in the same way the same military which armed and trained the Grey Wolves were the ones who were able to suppress them, after their military coup.
The only difference is this is being played out mostly on the social-political level and not the paramilitary-terrorist level. Some of that is part of the program (Broken windows are just the start) but not all of it.
If Beck died even under easily explainable circumstances, I could see violence erupting. It'd be Vince Foster x 10,000. But ultimately, they'd get taken down, because the guys behind them are not going to let them get too out of hand, too dangerous. They'll be kept at almost boiling point at all times. Sometimes a little water will bubble over the edge, but the whole thing will never be allowed to go.
Either way, Beck is more or less just faking it
http://www.chicobrisbane.com/2010/04/forbes-says-glenn-beck-gets-audience.html
Riling up idiots and taking their money. (Same shit the religious right does) When someone takes it too far and someone get's killed cause of his idiot conspiracies he probably wont even lose a night of sleep.
Oh yeah. There are a few true believers out there, but most of the really big ones are in it for the money and the power. Which in some respects may be worse, since at least true believers are sincere idiots, who really think they are doing the right thing. Beck et al just don't give a fuck.
:lulz: George Bush was a progressive.
http://thinkprogress.org/2010/04/26/beck-obama-bush/
QuoteWhat has [Obama] done that is different? I think he's done exactly what George Bush was doing, except to the times of a thousand. I mean we're talking about a progressive. And George Bush was a progressive. It's the difference between a steam train and the space shuttle.
Quote from: Iason Ouabache on April 26, 2010, 10:06:23 PM
:lulz: George Bush was a progressive.
http://thinkprogress.org/2010/04/26/beck-obama-bush/
QuoteWhat has [Obama] done that is different? I think he's done exactly what George Bush was doing, except to the times of a thousand. I mean we're talking about a progressive. And George Bush was a progressive. It's the difference between a steam train and the space shuttle.
:crankey:
:lulz:
Quote from: Iason Ouabache on April 26, 2010, 10:06:23 PM
:lulz: George Bush was a progressive.
http://thinkprogress.org/2010/04/26/beck-obama-bush/
QuoteWhat has [Obama] done that is different? I think he's done exactly what George Bush was doing, except to the times of a thousand. I mean we're talking about a progressive. And George Bush was a progressive. It's the difference between a steam train and the space shuttle.
:lulz: I don't get the bolded part, can someone essplain?
Quote from: Iason Ouabache on April 26, 2010, 10:06:23 PM
:lulz: George Bush was a progressive.
http://thinkprogress.org/2010/04/26/beck-obama-bush/
QuoteWhat has [Obama] done that is different? I think he's done exactly what George Bush was doing, except to the times of a thousand. I mean we're talking about a progressive. And George Bush was a progressive. It's the difference between a steam train and the space shuttle.
That is hilariously retarded. Didn't he suggest that progressives should be hunted?
is technology, progressive?
Progressive = anyone in the world that isn't Glenn Beck.
Glenn Beck Loves American Nazis Sympathizers, Promotes Book by Prominent Hitler Advocate of the 1930s (http://crooksandliars.com/david-neiwert/now-glenn-beck-loves-american-nazis)
QuoteWell, Glenn Beck has long had a predilection for promoting the work of far-right extremists like Cleon Skousen, as well as promoting a variety of ideas and theories that originated with the extremist right.
But his latest endorsement is simply beyond the pale. Media Matters has the whole scoop:
QuoteOn his radio show today, Glenn Beck heralded and promoted the work of Nazi sympathizer Elizabeth Dilling, who spoke at rallies hosted by the leading American Nazi group and praised Hitler. Today, Dilling is heralded by White Supremacists and White Aryans who revere her "fearless" work against Jewish people.
As Media Matters' Simon Maloy noted, Beck had kind words for Dilling's 1934 anti-communist book, The Red Network, saying: "This is a book -- and I'm a getting a ton of these -- from people who were doing what we're doing now. We now are documenting who all of these people are. Well, there were Americans in the first 50 years of this nation that took this seriously, and they documented it." Maloy noted that Dilling has a long history of rabid anti-Semitism, such as calling President Eisenhower "Ike the Kike" and labeling President Kennedy's New Frontier program the "Jew frontier."
Professor Glen Jeansonne and writer David Luhrssen note in the encyclopedia Women and War that Dilling wasn't only anti-Semitic, but a sympathizer and supporter of the Nazis and Hitler:
QuoteWhen World War II began in 1939, Dilling was part of the national network of anti-Semitics, anti-Communists, and Nazi sympathizers such as Father Charles Coughlin, Reverend Gerald L. K. Smith, Reverend Gerald Winrod, and William Dudley Pelley. Material generated by Nazi organizations in Germany to inspire race hated and exploit dissatisfaction in the United States found its way into Dilling's publications. She spoke at rallies hosted by the leading U.S. Nazi organization, the German-American Bund, and had traveled to Germany, pronouncing the country as flourishing under Hitler.
Dilling called for appeasing Germany; she blamed the war on Jews and Communists and accused the Roosevelt administration of being controlled by Jewish Communists. ... After Pearl Harbor, Dilling resisted wartime rationing and denounced the Allies.
So Dilling "spoke at rallies hosted by the leading U.S. Nazi organization, the German-American Bund." Who's the German-American Bund? Let Glenn Beck, Elizabeth Dilling fan, tell you:
QuoteBECK: The Bund gathered socially and ran Nazi camps. The camps were advertised as summer retreats where you could escape the city, celebrate German heritage, dance, drink, at places like Camp Nordlund in New Jersey and Camp Siegfried in Long Island. The camps hidden as pro-German/pro-American were attended by adults and families.
On the outside, they looked like any other camp. But the children were indoctrinated in the ideals of Nazism, breeding young Americans to become full-fledged Nazis. They marched, performed drills in Nazi uniforms. And they were taught about their racial superiority, their potential as Aryan youth.
As media scrutiny of the Bund increase, so did anti-Nazi protests, including other Americans who hated the Nazi image and Jewish-American veterans. Instead of quieting down, Bund leader Fritz Kuhn decided to hold the largest rally in their history, Madison Square Garden. These American Nazis showed their true colors, beating a Jewish protester who rushed the stage. Kuhn and other speeches were nothing more than anti-Semitic rants wrapped in the American flag protected by the First Amendment. [Glenn Beck, March 11]
British Professors Christopher Partridge and Ron Geaves wrote that Dilling was a "pro-Nazi anti-Semite" who disseminated Protocols of the Learned Elders of Zion. The ADL describes Protocols as "a classic in paranoid, racist literature. Taken by the gullible as the confidential minutes of a Jewish conclave convened in the last years of the nineteenth century, it has been heralded by anti-Semites as proof that Jews are plotting to take over the world."
Dilling's Nazi sympathies have made her a cult hero among Aryan groups and White Nationalists/Supremacists. For instance, the group Women for Aryan Unity features Dilling in a publication whose purpose is "to honour Aryan Women past and Present."
...
But at least someone on his staff had to be aware of her background. Most likely it was pointed out to Beck and he ignored it.
...
You'd think he'd at least try for some consistency outside of his use of tears.
http://mediamatters.org/blog/201006110032
Quote
The opening lines of Glenn Beck's yet-to-be-released novel, The Overton Window, read as follows: "Most people think about age and experience in terms of years, but it's really only moments that define us."
In a quirk of convenience, this line also describes the best way to deconstruct The Overton Window, a copy of which Media Matters obtained and read -- nay, devoured -- with great relish. As we slogged through its many plot holes, ridiculous narrative devices, and long-winded limited-government sermonizing passed off as dialogue, we singled out ten moments that define The Overton Window as the truly and remarkably awful novel that it is.
First, a quick summation of the plot, such as it is. The protagonist, Noah Gardner, works for an impossibly powerful public relations firm in Manhattan that has been the driving force behind pretty much every political and cultural movement of the 20th century. Their latest and grandest scheme is the culmination of a lengthy plot to change the United States into some sort of ill-defined progressive plutocracy, and the catalyst for this change is a nuclear explosion that will occur outside the home-state office of "the current U.S. Senate majority leader," which happens to be at the same address as Harry Reid's Las Vegas offices. The nuclear attack is to be blamed on the Founders Keepers, a Tea Party-like group -- led by Noah's love interest, Molly Ross -- that is working to foil the plot.
1. Rule number one is: "Don't tease the panther"
Noah and Molly find themselves in bed together early in the book after a harrowing experience at a Founders' Keepers rally. They agree to sleep in bed together because Molly is too scared to sleep at home, but Molly insists that nothing sexual will take place. Noah agrees, on the condition that she "not do anything sexy." She presses her cold feet against his legs, and Noah responds:
"Suit yourself, lady. I'm telling you right now, you made the rules, but you're playing with fire here. I've got some rules, too, and rule number one is, don't tease the panther."
:lulz: :lulz: :lulz:
Wow. Fucking wow. :lulz:
:lulz: :lulz: :lulz: Those excerpts were pretty bad. :lulz: :lulz: :lulz:
I still can't decide if Beck is trolling or not.
OMG!! There's an ad for it too!!!
http://crooksandliars.com/david-neiwert/glenn-becks-overton-window-ad-try-no
:lulz: :lulz: :lulz: He has to be trolling us!
Okay, that poem got ganked from somewhere, I just cannot for the life of me remember where.
I think I read it here on PD.
God's of the Copybook headings. It's a Kipling.
Calling the book the Overton Window has to be a shot at how ridiculous the right has become, right? I cannot think of another reason to title it that.
No, the book is about a leftist conspiracy to move the Overton Window.
Quote from: Requia ☣ on June 11, 2010, 11:54:00 PM
God's of the Copybook headings. It's a Kipling.
Oh sweet thanks.
Quote from: Requia ☣ on June 11, 2010, 11:11:07 PM
I still can't decide if Beck is trolling or not.
:tinfoilhat: assumes Founder Keepers is referencing to 'the Finders' a pagan cabal rumored to run the government
Quote from: Requia ☣ on June 12, 2010, 01:05:47 AM
No, the book is about a leftist conspiracy to move the Overton Window.
Ironic considering how much the right used 9/11 to move the Overton Window waaaay to the right.
Thats part of what makes me think he's trolling.
http://feeds.wonkette.com/click.phdo?i=577bd862b7c0072b957b3554e6ab7e47
QuoteOMG, you guys, Glenn Beck is dying! At least we think so, as he is very cryptic about it. He got all teary and such on his radio show today, and while that's pretty much an every-second occurrence for him, this time he seemed resigned to the fact that he will die or something soon. No, sorry, we heard that wrong: "What is happening to me mentally is not a depression, is not a death, it is a transformation," he said, because Mormons don't actually die, they just transform, like in those Animorphs books. But the word "mentally" in that gives us pause, because maybe it just means Glenn Beck is finally realizing he should trust his doctors when they say he's insane. Holy Shutter Islandz!
What is this theory? Someone injured his soul? What the hell is he talking about? Did Dana Milbank get in the Magic School Bus, drive into Glenn Beck's body, and take home a piece of his soul?
"I have been drinking that poison," Glenn Beck also said, after announcing doctors were looking for toxins in his body. What?
Yeah, we're gonna say Dana Milbank is murdering Glenn Beck. But Fox News is an equal-opportunity employer, so they will still pay Ghost Beck to host a show after he dies. No big deal! Don't cry about it! Ghostbusters don't exist, Glenn!
Or if Glenn Beck is not dying, he will probably get to hang out with Margaret Thatcher at the dementia palace, transforming at will into snakes and puppies and penguins. Still fun!
http://www.theblaze.com/stories/glenn-beck-reveals-hell-undergo-medical-tests-for-combination-of-problems/
Maybe he's drinking again?
Is it a tumor?
Glenn beck just needs to eat a bunch of acai berry pills.
I hope it's nothing trivial.
Because he's a moron who plays the pity card like it's going out of style? That would be my guess, given his tendency to cry at the drop of a hat. Or maybe he's coming in drunk and remorseful and can't keep his yap shut about it.
Quote from: Lord Glittersnatch on October 11, 2010, 11:32:21 PM
Then why would he go around broadcasting it to the world?
because he's an
emotional huckster
he has an emotional accord with his audience, that's why he does so well
Also, I think public self-humiliation and debasement is a Mormon device. Step two is turning to God, who will instruct him to don the Magick Underpance.
We should pray to the Discordian St. Magusundies for him.
http://www.newshounds.us/2010/10/22/california_gunman_admits_glenn_beck_influence_both_beck_and_the_tides_foundation_double_down.php
This made my day.
:lulz:
Yay boycott! this might also explain why some commericals are more common during Beck's timeslot
Quote from: Pēleus on October 23, 2010, 03:48:46 AM
Yay boycott! this might also explain why some commericals are more common during Beck's timeslot
What? You mean the commercials for testosterone pills?
I never thought that was much of a mystery.
Beck is not a fan of evolution because he has never seen a half man/half monkey. Maybe someone should give him a mirror and see if he throws shit at it.
http://scienceblogs.com/dispatches/2010/10/glenn_beck_on_evolution.php
Quote from: Lord Glittersnatch on October 23, 2010, 03:59:42 AM
Quote from: Pēleus on October 23, 2010, 03:48:46 AM
Yay boycott! this might also explain why some commericals are more common during Beck's timeslot
What? You mean the commercials for testosterone pills?
I never thought that was much of a mystery.
GOLD and pills :lulz:
Quote from: Iason Ouabache on October 23, 2010, 05:13:31 AM
Beck is not a fan of evolution because white mainstream Protestants arent.
http://scienceblogs.com/dispatches/2010/10/glenn_beck_on_evolution.php
Fixed for more likely truthiness. Mormonism, as a body of teachings, doesn't explicitly say anything that contradicts evolution and some Mormons, like Mitt Romney, seem to have no trouble believing in it.
However, because politically focused Mormons, including Beck, have been building alliances with the mainstream Christian right, they've to an extent adopted their teachings on certain key issues.
This is Beck signalling, yet again, "I'm one of you guys. Not one of
those guys."
Quote from: Cain on October 23, 2010, 09:21:02 PM
Quote from: Iason Ouabache on October 23, 2010, 05:13:31 AM
Beck is not a fan of evolution because white mainstream Protestants arent.
http://scienceblogs.com/dispatches/2010/10/glenn_beck_on_evolution.php
Fixed for more likely truthiness. Mormonism, as a body of teachings, doesn't explicitly say anything that contradicts evolution and some Mormons, like Mitt Romney, seem to have no trouble believing in it.
However, because politically focused Mormons, including Beck, have been building alliances with the mainstream Christian right, they've to an extent adopted their teachings on certain key issues.
This is Beck signalling, yet again, "I'm one of you guys. Not one of those guys."
Also to support this, the Vatican accepts evolution as valid. And you know how Catholics are atheistic, God-hating, communist perversions of Christians, so everything they think must be wrong, right? :lulz:
Depends on the pope, I think they been on the decline ever since they had their summer home in france
Quote from: Phox on October 23, 2010, 10:03:14 PM
Quote from: Cain on October 23, 2010, 09:21:02 PM
Quote from: Iason Ouabache on October 23, 2010, 05:13:31 AM
Beck is not a fan of evolution because white mainstream Protestants arent.
http://scienceblogs.com/dispatches/2010/10/glenn_beck_on_evolution.php
Fixed for more likely truthiness. Mormonism, as a body of teachings, doesn't explicitly say anything that contradicts evolution and some Mormons, like Mitt Romney, seem to have no trouble believing in it.
However, because politically focused Mormons, including Beck, have been building alliances with the mainstream Christian right, they've to an extent adopted their teachings on certain key issues.
This is Beck signalling, yet again, "I'm one of you guys. Not one of those guys."
Also to support this, the Vatican accepts evolution as valid. And you know how Catholics are atheistic, God-hating, communist perversions of Christians, so everything they think must be wrong, right? :lulz:
Yeah. Someone needs to point out to the American right in general that reversed stupidity is not intelligence (http://lesswrong.com/lw/lw/reversed_stupidity_is_not_intelligence/).
Of course, getting to admit evolution isn't stupid in the first case would be nice, but, you know, baby steps...
Quote from: Cain on October 24, 2010, 09:10:28 PM
Of course, getting to admit evolution isn't stupid in the first case would be nice, but, you know, baby steps...
Hit the nail on the head there, Cain. :lol:
I need to see more angst from the neocons about this anti-intellectualism that has taken hold of the far-Right. It's one of the last strings that holds the Repulicans in the realm of credibility, for the long-run.
:lulz:
Glenn Beck believes in four insane things before breakfast (http://www.boingboing.net/2010/11/26/glenn-beck-believes.html?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+boingboing%2FiBag+%28Boing+Boing%29)
QuoteMissed in the brouhaha over Sarah Palin's verbal flub about our North Korean "allies," and much more telling:
According to host Glenn Beck's own transcript, Beck's very next utterance was to proclaim that the "mystery" jet contrail recently seen in California (explained weeks ago (even by Fox News online) as almost certainly an optical illusion created by still air and a jet contrail from a known UPS delivery flight) was in fact a secret two-stage missile launch by the Chinese government to assert their power over America, "sending a signal that the world has changed."
Beck then went on to state that the Chinese "control the world."
Did Sarah Palin, would-be leader of the United States, disagree with any of this? Nope.
Palin's verbatim response: "Well, that's right."
For Beck's (and apparently Palin's*) version of reality to be accurate, of course, these four logical conditions must also be true:
(a) China can launch missiles in or near U.S. waters in broad daylight without provoking any American response; (b) the Pentagon either does not know this, and therefore cannot defend our shores, or they do know, and are now engaged in a massive coverup (either one of which must be sufficient for both Beck and Palin to question their avowed support of the Pentagon); (c) for the missile to have any meaning, China must have assumed that the Pentagon would understand the source and significance, something even Americans ourselves apparently cannot assume, according to (b); and (d) China must have also either assumed that the Pentagon would be cowed and not respond, or been eager to start a hot war with massive loss of life for no explicable reason.
Beck's assertion -- with which Palin showed no disagreement whatsoever -- requires belief in no less than four different insane things -- and that's even if the contrail hadn't already been fully explained.
And this gets virtually no comment anywhere.
Apparently we've all been numbed by stupidity for so long that while the media can still grok an obvious up-is-down screw-up, the presence of mind-blowing nests of illogic immediately adjacent to the famous gaffe... that's just dismissed as normal.
*Some may suggest that Palin was agreeing only with Beck's unique notion of Chinese global dominion. After all, Beck's assertion about a Chinese missile occurred a full eight seconds before her statement of agreement. One can defend Palin simply by insisting that eight seconds is an unreasonably long time to retain information.
The "China is taking over" trope is very popular amongst the Teabagger right. I remember Christine O'Donnell also asserting this. And I believe this was popular among certain Patriot militia groups in the 90s as well (IIRC, this was a main plot point in The Turner Diaries, though whether it was included because Patriot groups believed it, or whether its inclusion led to Patriot groups believing it is up for debate - especially since the spectre of some kind of UN-sponsored foreign troop takeoever goes back to the John Birch Society).
Quote from: Hover Cat on November 27, 2010, 03:02:02 AM
:lulz:
Glenn Beck believes in four insane things before breakfast (http://www.boingboing.net/2010/11/26/glenn-beck-believes.html?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+boingboing%2FiBag+%28Boing+Boing%29)
:lulz:
I'm not sure Beck and Palin actually believe this shit*. I thought so at one point, and maybe they did earnestly believe a lot of that crap, but now it's getting more and more obvious that they're just mouthpieces for strategists that have carefully been crunching the numbers.
*See Subetai's post above mine.
Yeah, but what about that missile they launched at 'Murrica? I mean, obviously, that's what it was. It couldn't be explained in any other way, right? :lulz:
Quote from: Hover Cat on November 27, 2010, 03:02:02 AM
:lulz:
Glenn Beck believes in four insane things before breakfast (http://www.boingboing.net/2010/11/26/glenn-beck-believes.html?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+boingboing%2FiBag+%28Boing+Boing%29)
Now a Willy Wonka joke :horrormirth:
The other irony about all this is that if people followed the news, they'd know China already has a military plan in place to intimidate or bring down America, and it's called Assassin's Mace (http://www.atimes.com/atimes/China/HJ20Ad01.html), and American strategists are well aware of it.
China doesn't need to fire a missile to try and coerce or threaten America, it just leaks another report on a particular Assassin's Mace program.
I note that in the article on the "assassin's mace" they reference the dual use of the word mace in English. Considering that the label is a translation from Chinese I wouldn't expect that dual usage to be portable across languages. Perhaps it is, but that incongruity makes me suspicious of the article.
Hmm. My stepdad speaks Chinese. I shall ask him.
Quote from: Phox on October 23, 2010, 10:03:14 PM
Fixed for more likely truthiness. Mormonism, as a body of teachings, doesn't explicitly say anything that contradicts evolution and some Mormons, like Mitt Romney, seem to have no trouble believing in it.
However, because politically focused Mormons, including Beck, have been building alliances with the mainstream Christian right, they've to an extent adopted their teachings on certain key issues.
This is Beck signalling, yet again, "I'm one of you guys. Not one of those guys."
Also to support this, the Vatican accepts evolution as valid. And you know how Catholics are atheistic, God-hating, communist perversions of Christians, so everything they think must be wrong, right? :lulz:
What happened to your teabagger friend? :sad:
Quote from: BabylonHoruv on November 28, 2010, 08:30:12 PM
I note that in the article on the "assassin's mace" they reference the dual use of the word mace in English. Considering that the label is a translation from Chinese I wouldn't expect that dual usage to be portable across languages. Perhaps it is, but that incongruity makes me suspicious of the article.
Learn 2 reading comprehension.
"They" dont, the author does, presumably to explain to people who are only aware of the modern mace what the historical one was.
Oh, and hundreds of articles have been written on the Assassin's Mace series of programs. But obviously since you cant read properly, they must be false.
UUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUNNNNNNNNNNNNNG
Quote from: Cain on November 28, 2010, 11:53:53 PM
Learn 2 reading comprehension.
"They" dont, the author does, presumably to explain to people who are only aware of the modern mace what the historical one was.
Oh, and hundreds of articles have been written on the Assassin's Mace series of programs. But obviously since you cant read properly, they must be false.
UUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUNNNNNNNNNNNNNG
I wasn't saying assassin's mace doesn't exist, I was saying I was suspicious of that particular article.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WVYK8rnYFI4
MAGIC UNDERPANTS :lulz:
Quote from: BabylonHoruv on November 29, 2010, 09:42:39 PM
Quote from: Cain on November 28, 2010, 11:53:53 PM
Learn 2 reading comprehension.
"They" dont, the author does, presumably to explain to people who are only aware of the modern mace what the historical one was.
Oh, and hundreds of articles have been written on the Assassin's Mace series of programs. But obviously since you cant read properly, they must be false.
UUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUNNNNNNNNNNNNNG
I wasn't saying assassin's mace doesn't exist, I was saying I was suspicious of that particular article.
Which just reports
what every other article does, which you would know had you
done some research instead of popping off half-cocked against me. Like every other fucker here who tries to show how oh so clever they are by trying to take me down a peg or two.
This is a bit incriminating...
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cQcvbw6ExTQ
http://www.hddownloader.com/?url=http://www.youtube.com/watch%3Fv%3DcQcvbw6ExTQ
:jihaad:
Glenn Beck thinks Google is teh evulz because one of its executives helped the revolution in Egypt.
So yeah, overthrowing brutal dictators and establishing popular democracies is reason to be scared.
http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/news/2011/02/russia-glenn-beck-agree-google-fomenting-actual-revolutions.ars
http://www.thenewamerican.com/index.php/usnews/politics/6420-google-and-us-state-depts-role-in-egyptian-revolution
:lulz:
That's because the Muslim Brotherhood and Marxist radicals are, apparently, behind the uprising.
The MB are also, somehow, behind the Wisconsin protests as well.
Never mind the MB were essentially the Egyptian "regime approved" opposition movement (with all that implies) and about as dangerously subversive as, oh, the Rotary Club*. They're secret global manipulators!
*If the Rotary Club had organised the assassination of Reagan, admittedly. But they've chilled out a lot since the 80s.
IS NEW GLOBUL WORLD ORDER!!!!one11 MOOSE-SLIM RADIKULS R00LZ DEH WORLD! FEAR FEAR FEAR!!!11
http://www.theblaze.com/stories/does-raw-video-of-npr-expose-reveal-questionable-editing-tactics/
Yes, that is Beck's site, taking a pop at O'Keefe for his latest idiotic "expose" ("guy at NPR thinks Teabaggers are racist morons" shocker!). It seems there are lines even he will not cross.
Given that O'keefe is an embarrassment with how often he gets caught, I'm not surprised.
Quote from: Cain on March 12, 2011, 01:05:30 AM
http://www.theblaze.com/stories/does-raw-video-of-npr-expose-reveal-questionable-editing-tactics/
Yes, that is Beck's site, taking a pop at O'Keefe for his latest idiotic "expose" ("guy at NPR thinks Teabaggers are racist morons" shocker!). It seems there are lines even he will not cross.
:spittake:
Quote from: Requia ☣ on March 12, 2011, 06:08:01 AM
Given that O'keefe is an embarrassment with how often he gets caught, I'm not surprised.
Yeah, but the same thing can be (and is) said of Beck as well.
QuoteOnly someone with a profoundly warped view of women could possibly make the statement Glenn Beck made this morning on his radio show. In a sickening rant, Beck actually mocked women who depend on Planned Parenthood for health services — and said they must be prostitutes.
http://littlegreenfootballs.com/article/38371_Glenn_Beck-_Who_Depends_on_Planned_Parenthood_Hookers!
How long 'til this nutbag is off the air?
Given the longevity of Rush's career....I would advise against holding your breath.
OK, so Glen Beck's latest plan is a fantasy style "Citadel of Freedom" (no pinkos allowed), a walled libertarian community which will be entirely self-sustaining, because libertarians don't believe in trade with the corrupted outside world or something. I don't know.
Anyway, it's patently bullshit, but it's also an excellent scam.
Why?
Firstly, the processing fee. Simply to apply, you have to give Beck $208 dollars. No refunds if you don't make the cut. So long to your money, suckers!
Secondly, no-one will be able to own property in the Citadel. Everyone will be renting from Glen Beck.
It's a brilliant scam, I must say.
Quote from: Cain on January 18, 2013, 12:31:18 PM
OK, so Glen Beck's latest plan is a fantasy style "Citadel of Freedom" (no pinkos allowed), a walled libertarian community which will be entirely self-sustaining, because libertarians don't believe in trade with the corrupted outside world or something. I don't know.
Anyway, it's patently bullshit, but it's also an excellent scam.
Why?
Firstly, the processing fee. Simply to apply, you have to give Beck $208 dollars. No refunds if you don't make the cut. So long to your money, suckers!
Secondly, no-one will be able to own property in the Citadel. Everyone will be renting from Glen Beck.
It's a brilliant scam, I must say.
How is it no one else has picked up on this interesting tidbit?
Because they didn't do the research
http://www.iiicitadel.com/index.html
Like the libertarian paradise of China, you will only be able to lease, not own, property.
So, the proper term would be "Free Market Serfdom"?
Which is fitting, when you consider the place has clearly been modelled on a D&D castle.
Quote from: Cain on January 18, 2013, 02:24:42 PM
Which is fitting, when you consider the place has clearly been modelled on a D&D castle.
The "aerial concept" (http://www.iiicitadel.com/images/aerialConcept_lg.jpg) map reminded me very much of this random city map generator (http://www.inkwellideas.com/roleplaying_tools/random_city/).
Also, I'm not all that much of a military guy, but how much good is a castle in an age of indirect artillery fire and, you know, aircraft?
Or UNMANNED DRONES.
Well I'm sure that's what the Firearms museum and Arms factory is there for. Because that's what a progressive society looks like.
I support this endeavour. Who wouldn't want to see Waco on crack?
Oh, THIS isn't chilling...
http://www.iiicitadel.com/patriotagreement.html
So this is basically LARPing for tea party types, right? I say we encourage this, on the condition that they live by their word and promise to lock themselves in and never, ever emerge again.
Quote from: Luna on January 19, 2013, 02:04:40 PM
Oh, THIS isn't chilling...
http://www.iiicitadel.com/patriotagreement.html
What it is, is retarded. It's a childish fantasy.
QuoteOne of the major challenges for making the Citadel a reality instead of remaining a dream is the ability to:
Help make it affordable for Patriots to move in with little money down
Keep costs competitive or cheaper than equal housing costs elsewhere across the country
Get rid of the banks' ridiculous 20% deposit rule, then,
Make sure our residents can find work!
Uhhhhh good luck with that.
OMG HAHAHAHAHAHAHA
QuoteRemember, your home requires zero down payment, zero interest, no background check and no credit check... and your Lease is for Life.
Quote from: Luna on January 19, 2013, 02:04:40 PM
Oh, THIS isn't chilling...
http://www.iiicitadel.com/patriotagreement.html
Like half of it is making sure there are enough guns. I know that's important to these people, but half of their founding document?
The whole thing reads like it was written by children. Like the part where they apparently expect the banks to do the lending, waiving the down payment, credit check, and background check, and the "lease is for life", whatever that means. Because apparently they don't think banks care about making money or securing their loans... so much for the free market. How exactly do they plan to convince the banks to do this? Government regulations?
I think they're using a bunch of words that they don't really understand, and stringing them together in a way that they hope sounds credible. Plus, um, interest-free loans with no background or credit check? Yeah. That's going to attract a very savory type to their little community.
Quote from: M. Nigel Salt on January 19, 2013, 07:53:28 PM
The whole thing reads like it was written by children. Like the part where they apparently expect the banks to do the lending, waiving the down payment, credit check, and background check, and the "lease is for life", whatever that means. Because apparently they don't think banks care about making money or securing their loans... so much for the free market. How exactly do they plan to convince the banks to do this? Government regulations?
I think they're using a bunch of words that they don't really understand, and stringing them together in a way that they hope sounds credible. Plus, um, interest-free loans with no background or credit check? Yeah. That's going to attract a very savory type to their little community.
Reminds me when New Age/Spiritualists try to pass of fake science for actual science.
I don't think there are any loans involved. Everything is rented.
It's basically just a fortified subdivision.
The really funny part is, you can't live there unless you are proficient with a gun, so no people with poor vision, or parkinsons or anything, ever, even if you've lived there for 30 years.
Worst. HOA. Ever.
The point isn't to make a viable community, or political point or whatever.
The point of this whole project is to fleece the fuckers. All of it is going to be spin, carefully crafted conservative propaganda and fantasy.
I suspect the plan is to get shut down by the government before anything is actually built, but after they've collected the "application fees", then blame the Librulz.
Quote from: Emo Howard on January 19, 2013, 10:40:30 PM
I don't think there are any loans involved. Everything is rented.
It's basically just a fortified subdivision.
The really funny part is, you can't live there unless you are proficient with a gun, so no people with poor vision, or parkinsons or anything, ever, even if you've lived there for 30 years.
Worst. HOA. Ever.
Wait... a Teabagger community without property ownership? :lulz: :lulz: :lulz: :lulz: :lulz:
This is seriously amazing.
Quote from: Cain on January 19, 2013, 10:51:03 PM
The point isn't to make a viable community, or political point or whatever.
The point of this whole project is to fleece the fuckers. All of it is going to be spin, carefully crafted conservative propaganda and fantasy.
Yeah, gotta be. Because nothing about it is feasible, or even plausible.
I am still loving that one of the hurdles they claim to think they're going to overcome is getting a bank to loan them money to buy 2 square miles without 20% down. :lulz:
ALSO ALSO ALSO
The reason the population density is so low in the area they chose is because the ground is made out of GRAVEL. There's exactly zero possibility of subsistence farming, so there's pretty much no point in people leasing 40 acres.
I realize that most people won't know that and that the point is just to convince enough suckers to part with an application fee (which is also funny, because if there's no background or credit check, why would they need an application fee?) but still.
:lulz:
Does anyone else notice item 12, which says that, essentially, if you're a bad shot you can face DISCIPLINARY MEASURES?
Quote from: LMNO, PhD (life continues) on January 20, 2013, 02:55:44 AM
Does anyone else notice item 12, which says that, essentially, if you're a bad shot you can face DISCIPLINARY MEASURES?
:lulz: :lulz: :lulz: Wow.
I assume they must plan on culling the elderly.
Quote from: LMNO, PhD (life continues) on January 20, 2013, 02:55:44 AM
Does anyone else notice item 12, which says that, essentially, if you're a bad shot you can face DISCIPLINARY MEASURES?
This reminds me of one of those recent wannabe libertarian utopias, where the asshole organizing was asked what they'd do if people wanted to reintroduce some socialism. Jackass says "They won't be allowed to talk about that sort of thing".
Scratch a utopianist, get a Nazi.
Quote from: The Good Reverend Roger on January 20, 2013, 03:37:30 AM
Quote from: LMNO, PhD (life continues) on January 20, 2013, 02:55:44 AM
Does anyone else notice item 12, which says that, essentially, if you're a bad shot you can face DISCIPLINARY MEASURES?
This reminds me of one of those recent wannabe libertarian utopias, where the asshole organizing was asked what they'd do if people wanted to reintroduce some socialism. Jackass says "They won't be allowed to talk about that sort of thing".
Scratch a utopianist, get a Nazi.
Yep. The only way to get people to BEHAVE RIGHT is to MAKE THEM. For FREEDOM! :lol:
Quote from: M. Nigel Salt on January 20, 2013, 03:40:33 AM
Quote from: The Good Reverend Roger on January 20, 2013, 03:37:30 AM
Quote from: LMNO, PhD (life continues) on January 20, 2013, 02:55:44 AM
Does anyone else notice item 12, which says that, essentially, if you're a bad shot you can face DISCIPLINARY MEASURES?
This reminds me of one of those recent wannabe libertarian utopias, where the asshole organizing was asked what they'd do if people wanted to reintroduce some socialism. Jackass says "They won't be allowed to talk about that sort of thing".
Scratch a utopianist, get a Nazi.
Yep. The only way to get people to BEHAVE RIGHT is to MAKE THEM. For FREEDOM! :lol:
Goes back to Plato..."Get rid of all the artists and other troublemakers."
Quote from: M. Nigel Salt on January 20, 2013, 12:57:46 AM
Quote from: Emo Howard on January 19, 2013, 10:40:30 PM
I don't think there are any loans involved. Everything is rented.
It's basically just a fortified subdivision.
The really funny part is, you can't live there unless you are proficient with a gun, so no people with poor vision, or parkinsons or anything, ever, even if you've lived there for 30 years.
Worst. HOA. Ever.
Wait... a Teabagger community without property ownership? :lulz: :lulz: :lulz: :lulz: :lulz:
This is seriously amazing.
THIS X10000000
What do feudal europe the soviet union and glenn beck have in common?
They're both cold as ice?
I was thinking along the lines of property but i cant say that you are incorrect.