Principia Discordia

Principia Discordia => Aneristic Illusions => Topic started by: Doktor Howl on May 18, 2015, 03:41:30 am

Title: UNLIMITED 2016 Starting Early With Batshittery Thread.
Post by: Doktor Howl on May 18, 2015, 03:41:30 am
I'm actually a little LATE getting this started, come to think of it.

Jeb Bush slathered himself in the family glory some more, by which I mean nobody knows what the fuck he's saying:

Quote from: Jeb
If we want to create a right-to-rise society, where people, particularly children born in poverty, if we want to have them have a chance we should be—a core American value, we have to restore committed, loving family life with a mom and a dad loving their children with their heart and soul.

Title: Re: UNLIMITED 2016 Starting Early With Batshittery Thread.
Post by: Mesozoic Mister Nigel on May 18, 2015, 04:40:09 am
I'm actually a little LATE getting this started, come to think of it.

Jeb Bush slathered himself in the family glory some more, by which I mean nobody knows what the fuck he's saying:

Quote from: Jeb
If we want to create a right-to-rise society, where people, particularly children born in poverty, if we want to have them have a chance we should be—a core American value, we have to restore committed, loving family life with a mom and a dad loving their children with their heart and soul.

That whole family is amazing.

Whatever the fuck it is he's saying here, I know that he's not talking about any kind of policies that might help poor people have the financial security to spend more time with their kids. Probably the exact opposite.
Title: Re: UNLIMITED 2016 Starting Early With Batshittery Thread.
Post by: Dubya on May 18, 2015, 05:02:00 am
I'm actually a little LATE getting this started, come to think of it.

Jeb Bush slathered himself in the family glory some more, by which I mean nobody knows what the fuck he's saying:

Quote from: Jeb
If we want to create a right-to-rise society, where people, particularly children born in poverty, if we want to have them have a chance we should be—a core American value, we have to restore committed, loving family life with a mom and a dad loving their children with their heart and soul.

That whole family is amazing.

Whatever the fuck it is he's saying here, I know that he's not talking about any kind of policies that might help poor people have the financial security to spend more time with their kids. Probably the exact opposite.

Quote from: Jeb
If we want to create a meritocracy, we have to restore the nuclear family.

De-fnorded, it makes total sense, right? Because obviously economic opportunity arises directly from stable home life.

Gods, I hope we're not dumb enough to elect him.
Title: Re: UNLIMITED 2016 Starting Early With Batshittery Thread.
Post by: Demolition Squid on May 18, 2015, 12:31:03 pm
I haven't really been following the American election - I've been depressed enough with my own - but you guys are in the same situation as us, right? No good choices at all?
Title: Re: UNLIMITED 2016 Starting Early With Batshittery Thread.
Post by: Q. G. Pennyworth on May 18, 2015, 03:05:07 pm
The Democrats have Hillary Clinton (a relatively conservative, pro-rich people, pro-foreign-intervention former senator and secretary of state) and Bernie Sanders (a self-declared socialist and old man). The Republicans have 8 million candidates, all of whom are varying degrees of insane.
Title: Re: UNLIMITED 2016 Starting Early With Batshittery Thread.
Post by: MMIX on May 18, 2015, 03:33:18 pm
The Democrats have Hillary Clinton (a relatively conservative, pro-rich people, pro-foreign-intervention former senator and secretary of state) and Bernie Sanders (a self-declared socialist and old man). The Republicans have 8 million candidates, all of whom are varying degrees of insane.

Shit and derision! Apparently we have become the 51st state, just nobody was impolite enough to tell us yet
Title: Re: UNLIMITED 2016 Starting Early With Batshittery Thread.
Post by: Q. G. Pennyworth on May 18, 2015, 03:35:12 pm
The Democrats have Hillary Clinton (a relatively conservative, pro-rich people, pro-foreign-intervention former senator and secretary of state) and Bernie Sanders (a self-declared socialist and old man). The Republicans have 8 million candidates, all of whom are varying degrees of insane.

Shit and derision! Apparently we have become the 51st state, just nobody was impolite enough to tell us yet

Everyone's the 51st state!
Title: Re: UNLIMITED 2016 Starting Early With Batshittery Thread.
Post by: Dubya on May 18, 2015, 03:49:03 pm
What Id like to see would be a race between Hillary and Colin Powell. I think he's getting a little too old to want to do all that, though.
Title: Re: UNLIMITED 2016 Starting Early With Batshittery Thread.
Post by: Doktor Howl on May 18, 2015, 09:07:09 pm
What Id like to see would be a race between Hillary and Colin Powell. I think he's getting a little too old to want to do all that, though.

It's going to be Hillary vs Jeb Bush.  Hillary wins.

The only really sport in betting on this one is for VP picks.  If Hillary is smart, she'll retain Biden.
Title: Re: UNLIMITED 2016 Starting Early With Batshittery Thread.
Post by: Doktor Howl on May 18, 2015, 09:08:13 pm
I'm actually a little LATE getting this started, come to think of it.

Jeb Bush slathered himself in the family glory some more, by which I mean nobody knows what the fuck he's saying:

Quote from: Jeb
If we want to create a right-to-rise society, where people, particularly children born in poverty, if we want to have them have a chance we should be—a core American value, we have to restore committed, loving family life with a mom and a dad loving their children with their heart and soul.

That whole family is amazing.

Whatever the fuck it is he's saying here, I know that he's not talking about any kind of policies that might help poor people have the financial security to spend more time with their kids. Probably the exact opposite.

Quote from: Jeb
If we want to create a meritocracy, we have to restore the nuclear family.

De-fnorded, it makes total sense, right? Because obviously economic opportunity arises directly from stable home life.

Gods, I hope we're not dumb enough to elect him.

No de-fnorded enough.

He's saying that everyone is pre-rich, and would be rich except for that Gay marriage thing.
Title: Re: UNLIMITED 2016 Starting Early With Batshittery Thread.
Post by: Cain on May 18, 2015, 09:14:38 pm
Hillary - Palin 2016.

Just for the sheer rage and sexism that would result.
Title: Re: UNLIMITED 2016 Starting Early With Batshittery Thread.
Post by: Doktor Howl on May 18, 2015, 09:15:59 pm
Hillary - Palin 2016.

Just for the sheer rage and sexism that would result.

Hillary - DeGeneres, for maximum butthurt.
Title: Re: UNLIMITED 2016 Starting Early With Batshittery Thread.
Post by: Doktor Howl on May 18, 2015, 09:45:15 pm
More Jeb.

http://www.addictinginfo.org/2015/05/17/jeb-bush-christians-should-absolutely-be-able-to-discriminate-against-gay-people-video/

Yeah, the source is dodgy, but it has video.
Title: Re: UNLIMITED 2016 Starting Early With Batshittery Thread.
Post by: Mesozoic Mister Nigel on May 19, 2015, 12:17:52 am
I wonder if he thinks people should be able to refuse service to Christians, based on deeply-held beliefs?

AHAHAHAHAHA yeah never mind of course he doesn't. That would be some kind of liberal war on Jesus.
Title: Re: UNLIMITED 2016 Starting Early With Batshittery Thread.
Post by: Doktor Howl on May 19, 2015, 12:24:06 am
I wonder if he thinks people should be able to refuse service to Christians, based on deeply-held beliefs?

AHAHAHAHAHA yeah never mind of course he doesn't. That would be some kind of liberal war on Jesus.

Today, some giddy republican in West Virginia stated that rape is a "beautiful thing", so long as a baby results from the rape.

It's almost like someone's poisoning the beer at the RNC meetings.
Title: Re: UNLIMITED 2016 Starting Early With Batshittery Thread.
Post by: Mesozoic Mister Nigel on May 20, 2015, 03:08:37 am
I wonder if he thinks people should be able to refuse service to Christians, based on deeply-held beliefs?

AHAHAHAHAHA yeah never mind of course he doesn't. That would be some kind of liberal war on Jesus.

Today, some giddy republican in West Virginia stated that rape is a "beautiful thing", so long as a baby results from the rape.

It's almost like someone's poisoning the beer at the RNC meetings.

Centuries from now, researchers will discover that heavy metals in their luxury chewing tobacco were making them insane.
Title: Re: UNLIMITED 2016 Starting Early With Batshittery Thread.
Post by: Doktor Howl on May 20, 2015, 03:11:02 am
I wonder if he thinks people should be able to refuse service to Christians, based on deeply-held beliefs?

AHAHAHAHAHA yeah never mind of course he doesn't. That would be some kind of liberal war on Jesus.

Today, some giddy republican in West Virginia stated that rape is a "beautiful thing", so long as a baby results from the rape.

It's almost like someone's poisoning the beer at the RNC meetings.

Centuries from now, researchers will discover that heavy metals in their luxury chewing tobacco were making them insane.

Possibly.

I think it's just a consequence, though, of too many people being safe at the same time, amid people who aren't safe.

Not saying that right.  I think I need to step back and figure out how to say it.
Title: Re: UNLIMITED 2016 Starting Early With Batshittery Thread.
Post by: Mesozoic Mister Nigel on May 20, 2015, 03:13:00 am
I wonder if he thinks people should be able to refuse service to Christians, based on deeply-held beliefs?

AHAHAHAHAHA yeah never mind of course he doesn't. That would be some kind of liberal war on Jesus.

Today, some giddy republican in West Virginia stated that rape is a "beautiful thing", so long as a baby results from the rape.

It's almost like someone's poisoning the beer at the RNC meetings.

Centuries from now, researchers will discover that heavy metals in their luxury chewing tobacco were making them insane.

Possibly.

I think it's just a consequence, though, of too many people being safe at the same time, amid people who aren't safe.

Not saying that right.  I think I need to step back and figure out how to say it.

No, I think I get it.

Privilege among the less privileged has given them a sense that they are untouchable, and that this is RIGHT.
Title: Re: UNLIMITED 2016 Starting Early With Batshittery Thread.
Post by: Doktor Howl on May 20, 2015, 03:22:16 am
I wonder if he thinks people should be able to refuse service to Christians, based on deeply-held beliefs?

AHAHAHAHAHA yeah never mind of course he doesn't. That would be some kind of liberal war on Jesus.

Today, some giddy republican in West Virginia stated that rape is a "beautiful thing", so long as a baby results from the rape.

It's almost like someone's poisoning the beer at the RNC meetings.

Centuries from now, researchers will discover that heavy metals in their luxury chewing tobacco were making them insane.

Possibly.

I think it's just a consequence, though, of too many people being safe at the same time, amid people who aren't safe.

Not saying that right.  I think I need to step back and figure out how to say it.

No, I think I get it.

Privilege among the less privileged has given them a sense that they are untouchable, and that this is RIGHT.

Yeah, aristocratic sons of bitches, is what I was trying to say.

Title: Re: UNLIMITED 2016 Starting Early With Batshittery Thread.
Post by: Mesozoic Mister Nigel on May 20, 2015, 03:25:48 am
I wonder if he thinks people should be able to refuse service to Christians, based on deeply-held beliefs?

AHAHAHAHAHA yeah never mind of course he doesn't. That would be some kind of liberal war on Jesus.

Today, some giddy republican in West Virginia stated that rape is a "beautiful thing", so long as a baby results from the rape.

It's almost like someone's poisoning the beer at the RNC meetings.

Centuries from now, researchers will discover that heavy metals in their luxury chewing tobacco were making them insane.

Possibly.

I think it's just a consequence, though, of too many people being safe at the same time, amid people who aren't safe.

Not saying that right.  I think I need to step back and figure out how to say it.

No, I think I get it.

Privilege among the less privileged has given them a sense that they are untouchable, and that this is RIGHT.

Yeah, aristocratic sons of bitches, is what I was trying to say.

It's pretty much what happens when spoiled brats grow up and are handed the scepter.
Title: Re: UNLIMITED 2016 Starting Early With Batshittery Thread.
Post by: Doktor Howl on May 20, 2015, 03:26:46 am

It's pretty much what happens when spoiled brats grow up and are handed the scepter.

And when those on the bottom get used to tugging their forelocks to keep what little they have.
Title: Re: UNLIMITED 2016 Starting Early With Batshittery Thread.
Post by: Mesozoic Mister Nigel on May 20, 2015, 03:27:45 am

It's pretty much what happens when spoiled brats grow up and are handed the scepter.

And when those on the bottom get used to tugging their forelocks to keep what little they have.

So true.
Title: Re: UNLIMITED 2016 Starting Early With Batshittery Thread.
Post by: Doktor Howl on May 20, 2015, 03:30:23 am

It's pretty much what happens when spoiled brats grow up and are handed the scepter.

And when those on the bottom get used to tugging their forelocks to keep what little they have.

So true.

I have decided over the last few years to be a counter-example.

"Fuck you, Jack."

I have no idea if it is effective.
Title: Re: UNLIMITED 2016 Starting Early With Batshittery Thread.
Post by: Mesozoic Mister Nigel on May 20, 2015, 03:31:26 am

It's pretty much what happens when spoiled brats grow up and are handed the scepter.

And when those on the bottom get used to tugging their forelocks to keep what little they have.

So true.

I have decided over the last few years to be a counter-example.

"Fuck you, Jack."

I have no idea if it is effective.

All it takes is the idea that they CAN do that, and survive.
Title: Re: UNLIMITED 2016 Starting Early With Batshittery Thread.
Post by: Doktor Howl on May 20, 2015, 03:35:49 am

It's pretty much what happens when spoiled brats grow up and are handed the scepter.

And when those on the bottom get used to tugging their forelocks to keep what little they have.

So true.

I have decided over the last few years to be a counter-example.

"Fuck you, Jack."

I have no idea if it is effective.

All it takes is the idea that they CAN do that, and survive.

I think a bit of a change is happening regardless.

NOBODY can keep a straight face when they hear "job creators" or Jeb Bush's babbling about a "right to rise society".
Title: Re: UNLIMITED 2016 Starting Early With Batshittery Thread.
Post by: Mesozoic Mister Nigel on May 20, 2015, 03:50:18 am

It's pretty much what happens when spoiled brats grow up and are handed the scepter.

And when those on the bottom get used to tugging their forelocks to keep what little they have.

So true.

I have decided over the last few years to be a counter-example.

"Fuck you, Jack."

I have no idea if it is effective.

All it takes is the idea that they CAN do that, and survive.

I think a bit of a change is happening regardless.

NOBODY can keep a straight face when they hear "job creators" or Jeb Bush's babbling about a "right to rise society".

All I can do is hope.

There has been a sea change with the food stupidity, though, and that makes me glad; it's like Food Babe brought enough stupidity to push it over the edge and now people are starting to step back.
Title: Re: UNLIMITED 2016 Starting Early With Batshittery Thread.
Post by: Doktor Howl on May 20, 2015, 03:56:34 am

It's pretty much what happens when spoiled brats grow up and are handed the scepter.

And when those on the bottom get used to tugging their forelocks to keep what little they have.

So true.

I have decided over the last few years to be a counter-example.

"Fuck you, Jack."

I have no idea if it is effective.

All it takes is the idea that they CAN do that, and survive.

I think a bit of a change is happening regardless.

NOBODY can keep a straight face when they hear "job creators" or Jeb Bush's babbling about a "right to rise society".

All I can do is hope.

There has been a sea change with the food stupidity, though, and that makes me glad; it's like Food Babe brought enough stupidity to push it over the edge and now people are starting to step back.

I can even name the moment:   When she was warning people that airplane air wasn't really air, it was more than 50% nitrogen.

 :lulz:
Title: Re: UNLIMITED 2016 Starting Early With Batshittery Thread.
Post by: Mesozoic Mister Nigel on May 20, 2015, 04:04:40 am

It's pretty much what happens when spoiled brats grow up and are handed the scepter.

And when those on the bottom get used to tugging their forelocks to keep what little they have.

So true.

I have decided over the last few years to be a counter-example.

"Fuck you, Jack."

I have no idea if it is effective.

All it takes is the idea that they CAN do that, and survive.

I think a bit of a change is happening regardless.

NOBODY can keep a straight face when they hear "job creators" or Jeb Bush's babbling about a "right to rise society".

All I can do is hope.

There has been a sea change with the food stupidity, though, and that makes me glad; it's like Food Babe brought enough stupidity to push it over the edge and now people are starting to step back.

I can even name the moment:   When she was warning people that airplane air wasn't really air, it was more than 50% nitrogen.

 :lulz:

That's probably exactly it.  :lulz:
Title: Re: UNLIMITED 2016 Starting Early With Batshittery Thread.
Post by: Doktor Howl on May 22, 2015, 10:11:00 pm
Mike Huckabee is now explaining why Josh Duggar should be forgiven for diddling 8 year old girls, including 2 of his sisters.

I swear to God, this election cycle is freakish.  It's like if McGovern had suddenly started humping Eagleton's leg on live TV.  I can't stand it.
Title: Re: UNLIMITED 2016 Starting Early With Batshittery Thread.
Post by: LMNO on May 22, 2015, 10:18:52 pm
You love it.  You know you love it.
Title: Re: UNLIMITED 2016 Starting Early With Batshittery Thread.
Post by: Doktor Howl on May 22, 2015, 10:22:54 pm
You love it.  You know you love it.

I don't love what that squirrelly fucker did.

But I do love watching 19 people run into the ring 9 months before the fight is even announced, to beat the mortal shit out of themselves.

 
Title: Re: UNLIMITED 2016 Starting Early With Batshittery Thread.
Post by: Cain on May 23, 2015, 11:57:39 pm
So far it looks like Hillary has this in the bag.
Title: Re: UNLIMITED 2016 Starting Early With Batshittery Thread.
Post by: Mesozoic Mister Nigel on May 24, 2015, 03:07:31 am
The whole Duggar thing is fucked up beyond ALL belief, on so many levels. I won't even address it anywhere but this forum, because I've seen what happens if people get whiff that you might be taking anything other than the prescribed line on the subject; they go chicken on you, they think they see a red spot, and the next thing you know there's eighteen of them climbing over each other to try to pick all the meat off your facebones.

But I will say something here. I have actually tried really hard to avoid reading about it, because the last thing I need at the moment is to be horrified by nightmares that call up my own childhood. However, I did end up reading about it, because if I'm going to have to have this shit in my head, I want to know what actually happened because believe me, it's better than whatever my mind will invent in the absence of knowledge.

So basically, this kid who is perhaps 13-14 at the time when this started, is largely unsupervised in a family too big for parents to even start to spend adequate time with each child, in a repressive religion where sexuality isn't discussed other than as a shameful thing you don't do outside of marriage and procreation. So the little fuck starts groping the breasts of sleeping girls in his family, and also sometimes their crotches. He gets told on, and the dad tells their pastor, and instead of sending the kid to, say, a COUNSELOR or getting him any kind of actual help, they made him say he was sorry and send him to go spend the summer working on a deck with some asshole who is currently serving 56 years on a child porn possession conviction.

14-15 years later, it all comes to light, and everyone is supposed to hate the kid for being a pedophile. Because that's the right thing to do, right?

I would put money on him having been groped by someone higher up the chain. That doesn't excuse pedophilia, but I'm not at all convinced that a repressed 14-year-old is a pedophile.

Who's the villain, here? I would say that dad and pastor are the villains. Not to mention the creep they sent him to stay the summer with.
Title: Re: UNLIMITED 2016 Starting Early With Batshittery Thread.n t
Post by: LMNO on May 24, 2015, 04:15:16 am
Yeah, with that timeframe, the responsibilty seems to lay with the parents and other "authority" figures.

That kid needed ounseling then, and needs a SHITLOAD of counseling now.  They all do, really.

My anger, as before, is with the parents who decided to go down this stupid, stupid path.
Title: Re: UNLIMITED 2016 Starting Early With Batshittery Thread.
Post by: Cain on May 24, 2015, 11:32:57 am
Yeah, there is definitely more going on here.  14 year olds don't sexually abuse younger kids without some pretty fucked up things having happened to them, too.
Title: Re: UNLIMITED 2016 Starting Early With Batshittery Thread.
Post by: Cain on May 24, 2015, 05:18:38 pm
More interestingly, the initial police investigation into Duggan was ordered to be destroyed by a judge with political connections to Huckabee.  District Court Judge Stacey Zimmerman has a long history of making...questionable rulings which are later overturned.  She also was appointed by Huckabee to a couple of state level committees in the late 90s.

We know the Duggans have some juice in local politics, and are helping Huckabee's 2008 Presidential run.

And now we have a judge friend for Huckabee ordering investigation papers to be destroyed.

This stinks.
Title: Re: UNLIMITED 2016 Starting Early With Batshittery Thread.
Post by: Bu☆ns on May 24, 2015, 09:13:54 pm
Quote from: http://talkingpointsmemo.com/news/josh-duggar-s-police-records-destroyed
"Those who have enjoyed revealing this long ago sins in order to discredit the Duggar family have actually revealed their own insensitive bloodthirst, for there was no consideration of the fact that the victims wanted this to be left in the past and ultimately a judge had the information on file destroyed_not to protect Josh, but the innocent victims," Huckabee wrote.

well he went right for the heart of the matter didn't he.
Title: Re: UNLIMITED 2016 Starting Early With Batshittery Thread.
Post by: Doktor Howl on May 25, 2015, 08:15:05 am
In somewhat related news, Dolly Parton has been kicked out of America™ for not hating on Gays.
Title: Re: UNLIMITED 2016 Starting Early With Batshittery Thread.
Post by: Cain on May 25, 2015, 10:21:56 am
"Christians who judge LBGT people are sinners".  Damn.  I mean, she aint wrong, and it's always nice to see someone who focuses on the "love thy neighbour" parts of the Bible, but that's a significant lack of word mincing, right there.

And, according to Wikipedia, she is also the godmother of Miley Cyrus.
Title: Re: UNLIMITED 2016 Starting Early With Batshittery Thread.
Post by: Q. G. Pennyworth on May 25, 2015, 01:24:02 pm
The whole Duggar thing is fucked up beyond ALL belief, on so many levels. I won't even address it anywhere but this forum, because I've seen what happens if people get whiff that you might be taking anything other than the prescribed line on the subject; they go chicken on you, they think they see a red spot, and the next thing you know there's eighteen of them climbing over each other to try to pick all the meat off your facebones.

But I will say something here. I have actually tried really hard to avoid reading about it, because the last thing I need at the moment is to be horrified by nightmares that call up my own childhood. However, I did end up reading about it, because if I'm going to have to have this shit in my head, I want to know what actually happened because believe me, it's better than whatever my mind will invent in the absence of knowledge.

So basically, this kid who is perhaps 13-14 at the time when this started, is largely unsupervised in a family too big for parents to even start to spend adequate time with each child, in a repressive religion where sexuality isn't discussed other than as a shameful thing you don't do outside of marriage and procreation. So the little fuck starts groping the breasts of sleeping girls in his family, and also sometimes their crotches. He gets told on, and the dad tells their pastor, and instead of sending the kid to, say, a COUNSELOR or getting him any kind of actual help, they made him say he was sorry and send him to go spend the summer working on a deck with some asshole who is currently serving 56 years on a child porn possession conviction.

14-15 years later, it all comes to light, and everyone is supposed to hate the kid for being a pedophile. Because that's the right thing to do, right?

I would put money on him having been groped by someone higher up the chain. That doesn't excuse pedophilia, but I'm not at all convinced that a repressed 14-year-old is a pedophile.

Who's the villain, here? I would say that dad and pastor are the villains. Not to mention the creep they sent him to stay the summer with.

Thank you for this.
Title: Re: UNLIMITED 2016 Starting Early With Batshittery Thread.
Post by: Mesozoic Mister Nigel on May 25, 2015, 08:06:37 pm
"Christians who judge LBGT people are sinners".  Damn.  I mean, she aint wrong, and it's always nice to see someone who focuses on the "love thy neighbour" parts of the Bible, but that's a significant lack of word mincing, right there.

And, according to Wikipedia, she is also the godmother of Miley Cyrus.

Dolly Parton has never fucked around when expressing her opinions.

Also, apparently she and Miley are close.
Title: Re: UNLIMITED 2016 Starting Early With Batshittery Thread.
Post by: Hoopla! on May 25, 2015, 09:30:24 pm
"Christians who judge LBGT people are sinners".  Damn.  I mean, she aint wrong, and it's always nice to see someone who focuses on the "love thy neighbour" parts of the Bible, but that's a significant lack of word mincing, right there.

And, according to Wikipedia, she is also the godmother of Miley Cyrus.

Dolly Parton has never fucked around when expressing her opinions.

Also, apparently she and Miley are close.

Dolly is all kinds of amazing.
Title: Re: UNLIMITED 2016 Starting Early With Batshittery Thread.
Post by: Mesozoic Mister Nigel on May 25, 2015, 10:09:20 pm
"Christians who judge LBGT people are sinners".  Damn.  I mean, she aint wrong, and it's always nice to see someone who focuses on the "love thy neighbour" parts of the Bible, but that's a significant lack of word mincing, right there.

And, according to Wikipedia, she is also the godmother of Miley Cyrus.

Dolly Parton has never fucked around when expressing her opinions.

Also, apparently she and Miley are close.

Dolly is all kinds of amazing.

She really is.
Title: Re: UNLIMITED 2016 Starting Early With Batshittery Thread.
Post by: xXRon_Paul_42016Xxx(weed) on May 26, 2015, 04:20:36 pm
http://www.nationalreview.com/corner/418674/majority-democrats-37-percent-republicans-want-repeal-first-amendment-charles-c-w

Quote
YouGov’s latest research shows that many Americans support making it a criminal offense to make public statements which would stir up hatred against particular groups of people. Americans narrowly support (41%) rather than oppose (37%) criminalizing hate speech, but this conceals a partisan divide. Most Democrats (51%) support criminalizing hate speech, with only 26% opposed. Independents (41% to 35%) and Republicans (47% to 37%) tend to oppose making it illegal to stir up hatred against particular groups. Support for banning hate speech is also particularly strong among racial minorities. 62% of black Americans, and 50% of Hispanics support criminalizing comments which would stir up hatred. White Americans oppose a ban on hate speech 43% to 36%.

 :teabagger1:

Hate speech laws within a generation. Calling it. Fourth Amendment is dead, First is soon to follow.
Title: Re: UNLIMITED 2016 Starting Early With Batshittery Thread.
Post by: Doktor Howl on May 26, 2015, 04:48:30 pm
Yeah, you kind of have to choose, when it comes to speech.  It's either protected or it's not.  I agree with Thurgood Marshall's ruling on free speech vs an overt act, but that's as far as I go.
Title: Re: UNLIMITED 2016 Starting Early With Batshittery Thread.
Post by: Hoopla! on May 26, 2015, 06:18:13 pm
I'm pretty 100% behind free speech, but those stats made it clear that there is a lot of privilege on my part behind that. I'll have to give it some thought.
Title: Re: UNLIMITED 2016 Starting Early With Batshittery Thread.
Post by: Doktor Howl on May 26, 2015, 06:22:57 pm
I'm pretty 100% behind free speech, but those stats made it clear that there is a lot of privilege on my part behind that. I'll have to give it some thought.

I am not prepared to abrogate the right of free speech over an issue of privilege for reasons that should be blatantly obvious.
Title: Re: UNLIMITED 2016 Starting Early With Batshittery Thread.
Post by: Hoopla! on May 26, 2015, 06:44:11 pm
I'm pretty 100% behind free speech, but those stats made it clear that there is a lot of privilege on my part behind that. I'll have to give it some thought.

I am not prepared to abrogate the right of free speech over an issue of privilege for reasons that should be blatantly obvious.

I would have agreed wholeheartedly half an hour ago. But seeing that it's mostly white people who think it's no a problem has made me pause. I'm not decided yet.
Title: Re: UNLIMITED 2016 Starting Early With Batshittery Thread.
Post by: Doktor Howl on May 26, 2015, 06:46:39 pm
I'm pretty 100% behind free speech, but those stats made it clear that there is a lot of privilege on my part behind that. I'll have to give it some thought.

I am not prepared to abrogate the right of free speech over an issue of privilege for reasons that should be blatantly obvious.

I would have agreed wholeheartedly half an hour ago. But seeing that it's mostly white people who think it's no a problem has made me pause. I'm not decided yet.

The rules are established by those, mostly, who have privilege.

So let's let them decide who gets to say what.

:banana:
Title: Re: UNLIMITED 2016 Starting Early With Batshittery Thread.
Post by: xXRon_Paul_42016Xxx(weed) on May 27, 2015, 01:33:32 am
I'm pretty 100% behind free speech, but those stats made it clear that there is a lot of privilege on my part behind that. I'll have to give it some thought.

I am not prepared to abrogate the right of free speech over an issue of privilege for reasons that should be blatantly obvious.

I would have agreed wholeheartedly half an hour ago. But seeing that it's mostly white people who think it's no a problem has made me pause. I'm not decided yet.

So is that how things work now? The second the percentage of black opinions on X goes .0005% over the white opinions on X you need to think about it? I realize Im literally oppressing 13.2% of America by even thinking these doublewrong thoughts but it is entirely possible for a black person to be wrong about something. More importantly I dont see what bearing the official black person stamp of approval(Ignore the 38% of blacks who disagree) has on if we should arbitrarily restrict free speech.

Im interested in how far this goes. Like, if it was 70% of whites support hate speech laws and 60% of blacks support hate speech laws would you still have to think about if you really support free speech? What if it was still more white people than blacks who think it isnt a problem but the black number was more around 30-ish?
Title: Re: UNLIMITED 2016 Starting Early With Batshittery Thread.
Post by: Mesozoic Mister Nigel on May 27, 2015, 03:56:37 pm
I'm pretty 100% behind free speech, but those stats made it clear that there is a lot of privilege on my part behind that. I'll have to give it some thought.

I am not prepared to abrogate the right of free speech over an issue of privilege for reasons that should be blatantly obvious.

I would have agreed wholeheartedly half an hour ago. But seeing that it's mostly white people who think it's no a problem has made me pause. I'm not decided yet.

The rules are established by those, mostly, who have privilege.

So let's let them decide who gets to say what.


:banana:

YEP. THIS.

If hate speech is made illegal, I will guarantee you that the people getting prosecuted for hate speech crime will be overwhelmingly the disempowered.
Title: Re: UNLIMITED 2016 Starting Early With Batshittery Thread.
Post by: Cain on May 27, 2015, 04:12:13 pm
Yup.  I'm sure there are good intentions behind at least some hate speech legislation...but the realities of power politics is that the New Black Panthers will be charged under hate speech legislation before, say a Republican Presidential candidate.
Title: Re: UNLIMITED 2016 Starting Early With Batshittery Thread.
Post by: Mesozoic Mister Nigel on May 27, 2015, 04:14:17 pm
It sure as hell won't be the people spouting off about gays being sinners, or about how Those People need to stop destroying their own neighborhoods.
Title: Re: UNLIMITED 2016 Starting Early With Batshittery Thread.
Post by: Hoopla! on May 27, 2015, 04:33:55 pm
I'll have to give it some thought.

What I really meant was "wait to see what Nigel says, because she's always right".
Title: Re: UNLIMITED 2016 Starting Early With Batshittery Thread.
Post by: Mesozoic Mister Nigel on May 27, 2015, 04:39:30 pm
I'll have to give it some thought.

What I really meant was "wait to see what Nigel says, because she's always right".

 :lulz: Only because I can't touch the good stuff anymore.
Title: Re: UNLIMITED 2016 Starting Early With Batshittery Thread.
Post by: Junkenstein on May 27, 2015, 05:16:16 pm
Yup.  I'm sure there are good intentions behind at least some hate speech legislation...but the realities of power politics is that the New Black Panthers will be charged under hate speech legislation before, say a Republican Presidential candidate.

Perfect demonstration of this on a daily basis with Fox news. Old crazy white people get to "ask questions" and "be pundits" about all kinds of crap that generally amounts to an onslaught of racist bullshit.

It really would be nice to see someone like Boko Haram or ISIS sue Murdoch on these grounds. Or the civilian non-militant equivalents. By all accounts ISIS is doing quite well on the hearts and minds front and Murdoch isn't half the shadowy figure he was 20/30 years ago.

Thinking that, Surely the Daily hate* should be wide open under UK legislation? Kids and cretins have had all kinds of punishments for social media statements that are probably around half as offensive as any given page of it.


*For filthy immigrant foreign readers, I am reffering to the Daily Mail. The only UK paper that can mention evil Asians and house prices being up and/or down in a 5 line sidebar about horseracing results. 
Title: Re: UNLIMITED 2016 Starting Early With Batshittery Thread.
Post by: Reginald Ret on May 27, 2015, 05:37:24 pm
Yup.  I'm sure there are good intentions behind at least some hate speech legislation...but the realities of power politics is that the New Black Panthers will be charged under hate speech legislation before, say a Republican Presidential candidate.

Perfect demonstration of this on a daily basis with Fox news. Old crazy white people get to "ask questions" and "be pundits" about all kinds of crap that generally amounts to an onslaught of racist bullshit.

It really would be nice to see someone like Boko Haram or ISIS sue Murdoch on these grounds. Or the civilian non-militant equivalents. By all accounts ISIS is doing quite well on the hearts and minds front and Murdoch isn't half the shadowy figure he was 20/30 years ago.

Thinking that, Surely the Daily hate* should be wide open under UK legislation? Kids and cretins have had all kinds of punishments for social media statements that are probably around half as offensive as any given page of it.


*For filthy immigrant foreign readers, I am reffering to the Daily Mail. The only UK paper that can mention evil Asians and house prices being up and/or down in a 5 line sidebar about horseracing results. 
Do you mean wide open to being charged under hate speech legislation?
Because the Daily Mail is not a likely target, their targets are likely targets for hate speech legislation.
Title: Re: UNLIMITED 2016 Starting Early With Batshittery Thread.
Post by: Junkenstein on May 27, 2015, 05:50:03 pm

Do you mean wide open to being charged under hate speech legislation?-

Yes, If not the entity, then the individual contributors/editor. In a similar way to how Private Eye dealt with/ deals with(?) libel cases and the like.

Because the Daily Mail is not a likely target, their targets are likely targets for hate speech legislation.

Somewhat. The UK press/media are not likely targets due to the proven inability of the UK population to have any real influence over them. See the clusterfuck that is Leveson, The Sun, "Sun on Sunday" and Brooks back in the mix for reference there. It was more just the idea of one of their hates suing them on completely justified grounds that amused me.
Title: Re: UNLIMITED 2016 Starting Early With Batshittery Thread.
Post by: xXRon_Paul_42016Xxx(weed) on May 27, 2015, 07:44:14 pm
I'm pretty 100% behind free speech, but those stats made it clear that there is a lot of privilege on my part behind that. I'll have to give it some thought.

I am not prepared to abrogate the right of free speech over an issue of privilege for reasons that should be blatantly obvious.

I would have agreed wholeheartedly half an hour ago. But seeing that it's mostly white people who think it's no a problem has made me pause. I'm not decided yet.

The rules are established by those, mostly, who have privilege.

So let's let them decide who gets to say what.


:banana:

YEP. THIS.

If hate speech is made illegal, I will guarantee you that the people getting prosecuted for hate speech crime will be overwhelmingly the disempowered.

Even if hate speech laws prosecuted no one but the privileged and didnt put minorities at any disadvantage at all they would still be wrong. 
Title: Re: UNLIMITED 2016 Starting Early With Batshittery Thread.
Post by: Doktor Howl on May 27, 2015, 07:50:14 pm
I'll have to give it some thought.

What I really meant was "wait to see what Nigel says, because she's always right".

There's not actually a monopoly on that, despite appearances.

Nor is there anything wrong with having a friend who is usually right, when you think about it.  You have this person that you can destructively test your ideas against.

Title: Re: UNLIMITED 2016 Starting Early With Batshittery Thread.
Post by: Doktor Howl on May 27, 2015, 07:50:47 pm
I'm pretty 100% behind free speech, but those stats made it clear that there is a lot of privilege on my part behind that. I'll have to give it some thought.

I am not prepared to abrogate the right of free speech over an issue of privilege for reasons that should be blatantly obvious.

I would have agreed wholeheartedly half an hour ago. But seeing that it's mostly white people who think it's no a problem has made me pause. I'm not decided yet.

The rules are established by those, mostly, who have privilege.

So let's let them decide who gets to say what.


:banana:

YEP. THIS.

If hate speech is made illegal, I will guarantee you that the people getting prosecuted for hate speech crime will be overwhelmingly the disempowered.

Even if hate speech laws prosecuted no one but the privileged and didnt put minorities at any disadvantage at all they would still be wrong.

Well, of course.  But sometimes you have to approach this from practicality.
Title: Re: UNLIMITED 2016 Starting Early With Batshittery Thread.
Post by: xXRon_Paul_42016Xxx(weed) on May 27, 2015, 08:18:56 pm
I'm pretty 100% behind free speech, but those stats made it clear that there is a lot of privilege on my part behind that. I'll have to give it some thought.

I am not prepared to abrogate the right of free speech over an issue of privilege for reasons that should be blatantly obvious.

I would have agreed wholeheartedly half an hour ago. But seeing that it's mostly white people who think it's no a problem has made me pause. I'm not decided yet.

The rules are established by those, mostly, who have privilege.

So let's let them decide who gets to say what.


:banana:

YEP. THIS.

If hate speech is made illegal, I will guarantee you that the people getting prosecuted for hate speech crime will be overwhelmingly the disempowered.

Even if hate speech laws prosecuted no one but the privileged and didnt put minorities at any disadvantage at all they would still be wrong.

Well, of course.  But sometimes you have to approach this from practicality.

True, but what bugs me is how Hoopla stated that they agreed wholeheartedly with free speech, until they found out, on noez, more white people support free speech than black people by a margin of about 20%. Without any other new information, no argumentation, nothing at all they were willing to drop their supposed principles because of a complete robotic emotional reaction to being on the "white(ignore the 43% of white people who want hate speech laws)" and therefore wrong side of an issue.

I still want to know. Where exactly is the line? What other things would he be unsure of just because 51% of black people didnt like it?
Title: Re: UNLIMITED 2016 Starting Early With Batshittery Thread.
Post by: LMNO on May 27, 2015, 08:28:29 pm
I think his reaction was fairly normal for someone who has become aware that their ideological point of view has the potential of being biased due to racial contexts.
Title: Re: UNLIMITED 2016 Starting Early With Batshittery Thread.
Post by: xXRon_Paul_42016Xxx(weed) on May 27, 2015, 08:46:07 pm
I think his reaction was fairly normal for someone who has become aware that their ideological point of view has the potential of being biased due to racial contexts.

But what evidence did he receive that the principle of free speech was wrong? There have been countless (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_United_States_Supreme_Court_cases_involving_the_First_Amendment) arguments made against free speech, I assume he was at least marginally familiar with them. When it came to all of that his principles were unshakable, but somehow black people supporting hate speech laws by certain percentage more than white people made him unsure.

Im just saying, if your so called wholehearted principles cant withstand the crushing moral ambivalence of disagreeing with a black person, maybe they arent so ironclad after all. In fact maybe you dont have any principles at all.
Title: Re: UNLIMITED 2016 Starting Early With Batshittery Thread.
Post by: LMNO on May 27, 2015, 08:51:15 pm
Since when is
I'll have to give it some thought.

some abandonment of principle? 

I, for one, believe people should be thinking about their principles ALL THE FUCKING TIME.
Title: Re: UNLIMITED 2016 Starting Early With Batshittery Thread.
Post by: xXRon_Paul_42016Xxx(weed) on May 27, 2015, 09:20:09 pm
Since when is
I'll have to give it some thought.

some abandonment of principle? 

I, for one, believe people should be thinking about their principles ALL THE FUCKING TIME.

They should. This is not thinking about your principles. This is the opposite.

I would have agreed wholeheartedly half an hour ago. But seeing that it's mostly white people who think it's no a problem has made me pause. I'm not decided yet.

Was completely decided on the issue, come hell or high water. Then finds out that its mostly white people who agree with him. THAT, of all things makes him unsure. So again, how far does this go? Blacks support gay marriage less than whites too. Does knowing that make you reexamine the influence of racial conflicts on your ideological point of view about gay marriage? Are you suddenly undecided on gay marriage?

What is he even thinking about? How do you go from "X% of black people disagree with me" to some kind of critique of your worldview? Its not an argument, its not a challenge to what he thinks at all. It makes him uncomfortable, so he immediately buckles.
Title: Re: UNLIMITED 2016 Starting Early With Batshittery Thread.
Post by: Hoopla! on May 27, 2015, 11:13:30 pm
Since when is
I'll have to give it some thought.

some abandonment of principle? 

I, for one, believe people should be thinking about their principles ALL THE FUCKING TIME.

They should. This is not thinking about your principles. This is the opposite.

I would have agreed wholeheartedly half an hour ago. But seeing that it's mostly white people who think it's no a problem has made me pause. I'm not decided yet.

Was completely decided on the issue, come hell or high water. Then finds out that its mostly white people who agree with him. THAT, of all things makes him unsure. So again, how far does this go? Blacks support gay marriage less than whites too. Does knowing that make you reexamine the influence of racial conflicts on your ideological point of view about gay marriage? Are you suddenly undecided on gay marriage?

What is he even thinking about? How do you go from "X% of black people disagree with me" to some kind of critique of your worldview? Its not an argument, its not a challenge to what he thinks at all. It makes him uncomfortable, so he immediately buckles.

You seem to equate "think about it" with buckling, which I think says more about you than it does about me. 

I saw something which made me pause and look at it from a different angle, which isn't something that occurs all that regularly.  Thankfully, since it's not pleasant to suddenly wonder if part of your worldview is based on a bad premise.  I've been wrong before (many times, in fact) and thought it was probably a good sign to step aside and give it some time to mull it over.  I also wanted to hear opinions from others who I respect (not just Nigel, Roger, that was just for lols. She and you and others) before I made up my mind.  I do this fairly regularly, on a number of subjects.

And yes, I said "agreed wholeheartedly" because up until then I had no new data to disagree with my view... then I got new data.  That's how I work.

I'm not going to answer your further questions because it seems like a lot of "slippery slope" straw man stuff I'm not much interested in discussing.  Sorry if any of this damaged your view of someone you hardly know.
Title: Re: UNLIMITED 2016 Starting Early With Batshittery Thread.
Post by: Mesozoic Mister Nigel on May 28, 2015, 02:19:49 am
I'm pretty 100% behind free speech, but those stats made it clear that there is a lot of privilege on my part behind that. I'll have to give it some thought.

I am not prepared to abrogate the right of free speech over an issue of privilege for reasons that should be blatantly obvious.

I would have agreed wholeheartedly half an hour ago. But seeing that it's mostly white people who think it's no a problem has made me pause. I'm not decided yet.

The rules are established by those, mostly, who have privilege.

So let's let them decide who gets to say what.


:banana:

YEP. THIS.

If hate speech is made illegal, I will guarantee you that the people getting prosecuted for hate speech crime will be overwhelmingly the disempowered.

Even if hate speech laws prosecuted no one but the privileged and didnt put minorities at any disadvantage at all they would still be wrong.

Well, of course.  But sometimes you have to approach this from practicality.

True, but what bugs me is how Hoopla stated that they agreed wholeheartedly with free speech, until they found out, on noez, more white people support free speech than black people by a margin of about 20%. Without any other new information, no argumentation, nothing at all they were willing to drop their supposed principles because of a complete robotic emotional reaction to being on the "white(ignore the 43% of white people who want hate speech laws)" and therefore wrong side of an issue.

I still want to know. Where exactly is the line? What other things would he be unsure of just because 51% of black people didnt like it?

It's called "taking a step back and re-evaluating, because maybe those other people who have a completely different perspective from my own, and have a statistical tendency to be targeted/effected by this issue more than my own demographic does, have a valid point that I have been hitherto unable to see".
Title: Re: UNLIMITED 2016 Starting Early With Batshittery Thread.
Post by: Mesozoic Mister Nigel on May 28, 2015, 02:22:50 am
The fact that those other people with a different perspective are non-white is relevant because Hoopla is white, and therefore he decided to consider whether his opinion was primarily a byproduct of his perspective as a white person, in which case considering it from a different perspective, ie. that of a non-white person, might bring him new information that could change his mind.

It's basic fucking critical thinking, FFS.
Title: Re: UNLIMITED 2016 Starting Early With Batshittery Thread.
Post by: Mesozoic Mister Nigel on May 28, 2015, 02:34:13 am
I'm pretty 100% behind free speech, but those stats made it clear that there is a lot of privilege on my part behind that. I'll have to give it some thought.

I am not prepared to abrogate the right of free speech over an issue of privilege for reasons that should be blatantly obvious.

I would have agreed wholeheartedly half an hour ago. But seeing that it's mostly white people who think it's no a problem has made me pause. I'm not decided yet.

The rules are established by those, mostly, who have privilege.

So let's let them decide who gets to say what.


:banana:

YEP. THIS.

If hate speech is made illegal, I will guarantee you that the people getting prosecuted for hate speech crime will be overwhelmingly the disempowered.

Even if hate speech laws prosecuted no one but the privileged and didnt put minorities at any disadvantage at all they would still be wrong biased as fuck, what the fuck kind of fucked-up laws only prosecute the privileged?
Title: Re: UNLIMITED 2016 Starting Early With Batshittery Thread.
Post by: Mesozoic Mister Nigel on May 28, 2015, 02:35:12 am
Since when is
I'll have to give it some thought.

some abandonment of principle? 

I, for one, believe people should be thinking about their principles ALL THE FUCKING TIME.

They should. This is not thinking about your principles. This is the opposite.

I would have agreed wholeheartedly half an hour ago. But seeing that it's mostly white people who think it's no a problem has made me pause. I'm not decided yet.

Was completely decided on the issue, come hell or high water. Then finds out that its mostly white people who agree with him. THAT, of all things makes him unsure. So again, how far does this go? Blacks support gay marriage less than whites too. Does knowing that make you reexamine the influence of racial conflicts on your ideological point of view about gay marriage? Are you suddenly undecided on gay marriage?

What is he even thinking about? How do you go from "X% of black people disagree with me" to some kind of critique of your worldview? Its not an argument, its not a challenge to what he thinks at all. It makes him uncomfortable, so he immediately buckles.

I  think it's really weird that this is how you read that.
Title: Re: UNLIMITED 2016 Starting Early With Batshittery Thread.
Post by: xXRon_Paul_42016Xxx(weed) on May 28, 2015, 05:12:00 am
The fact that those other people with a different perspective are non-white is relevant because Hoopla is white, and therefore he decided to consider whether his opinion was primarily a byproduct of his perspective as a white person, in which case considering it from a different perspective, ie. that of a non-white person, might bring him new information that could change his mind.

Ok, I ask again. Is my support of gay marriage primarily a byproduct of my perspective as a white person? Blacks also support the NSA's domestic spying program more than whites. Is my opposition to the NSA a byproduct of my perspective as a white person?

While were on the topic of perspective let me try and explain why this bugs me so much. I personally believe in freedom of speech as a basic human right and that any limitation on it is abhorrent. So an article about how most of America thinks that we should just toss the rest of the constitution in the furnace and just get it over with irked me just a little bit. So I post it here, assuming that most people are on the same wavelength. Only someone reads the article and decides that "WELL GEE MAYBE FREE SPEECH JUST AINT ALL ITS CRACKED UP TO BE". This alone pushes my buttons, but the fact that there was no argument. There was no case made against his previous support that made him doubt. The fact that all it took to make someone here wonder if maybe, just maybe certain thoughts should be illegal is playing to identity politics, oh boy.

Then this:

I'll have to give it some thought.

What I really meant was "wait to see what Nigel says, because she's always right".

He changed his mind back, without even looking at all those mindblowing black pro-censorship perspectives you all keep talking about. No argument on the value of free speech was given, instead the issue was reframed, again using identity politics. So before he was questioning his opposition to anti-thoughtcrime laws, without even knowing why. Then, he comes full circle, not when someone refutes these arguments that have made him doubt his worldview despite not even knowing them, but when someone reframes the issue so his old view is now on the non-shitlord side. So now he doesnt even have to look into all these alternative perspectives out there, which again, are so persuasive he was moved by them before he even heard them. Because hate speech laws would actually oppress blacks, whew, crisis averted. That isnt thinking, that isnt critically evaluating your ideology, thats being a tool.

All it takes is "Check yer privs" and suddenly banning ideas is up for debate. Without the identity politics angle he would have never even considered that maybe some ideas should be illegal, and if anyone did without the identity politics angle absolutely none of you would ever defend them. Its disgusting. Limiting freedom of thought is disgusting and so is anyone who supports it. It is absolutely disgusting and my life is too short to call it anything but what it is.

Title: Re: UNLIMITED 2016 Starting Early With Batshittery Thread.
Post by: Doktor Howl on May 28, 2015, 05:38:25 am
It's basic fucking critical thinking, FFS.

Which is un-American as fuck, and Hoopla oughta be ashamed of himself.
Title: Re: UNLIMITED 2016 Starting Early With Batshittery Thread.
Post by: Hoopla! on May 28, 2015, 05:52:32 am
You can say I changed my mind back, but it was never changed in the first place, which you don't seem to be getting. Pausing to think is not necessarily a 180.

And yes, everything is up for theoretical debate.
Title: Re: UNLIMITED 2016 Starting Early With Batshittery Thread.
Post by: Hoopla! on May 28, 2015, 05:53:43 am
It's basic fucking critical thinking, FFS.

Which is un-American as fuck, and Hoopla oughta be ashamed of himself.

I'll hand in my 'Murrican card at the door. 
Title: Re: UNLIMITED 2016 Starting Early With Batshittery Thread.
Post by: xXRon_Paul_42016Xxx(weed) on May 28, 2015, 06:04:27 am
Still wondering if my position on gay marriage is the result of my ideological point of view being biased due to racial contexts. What about the NSA's domestic surveillance (http://www.people-press.org/2014/01/20/obamas-nsa-speech-has-little-impact-on-skeptical-public/) program? Do I really oppose that or is that just my privilege talking?
Title: Re: UNLIMITED 2016 Starting Early With Batshittery Thread.
Post by: Hoopla! on May 28, 2015, 06:07:23 am
Still wondering if my position on gay marriage is the result of my ideological point of view being biased due to racial contexts. What about the NSA's domestic surveillance (http://www.people-press.org/2014/01/20/obamas-nsa-speech-has-little-impact-on-skeptical-public/) program? Do I really oppose that or is that just my privilege talking?

Let's just leave it at Ron Paul doesn't like the way I think, and I am ok with that.
Title: Re: UNLIMITED 2016 Starting Early With Batshittery Thread.
Post by: Mesozoic Mister Nigel on May 28, 2015, 06:36:16 am
"Nigel is always right" is a fucking in-joke, FFS. I'm always right the way a fifteen-year-old is always rational.

And shit, yeah, sometimes people need to stop and wonder whether maybe, just MAYBE they're wrong because they're missing part of the picture. It can be a startling thought, if you open yourself up to it, to consider that something you have been taking for granted as TRUE may be seen as FALSE by people who are more affected by it than you are. It may even take a moment of pause, some reflection, and a little flexibility of intellect.

To judge someone's inner process based on a few brief outward expressions is, IMO, pure arrogance.
Title: Re: UNLIMITED 2016 Starting Early With Batshittery Thread.
Post by: Reginald Ret on May 28, 2015, 07:20:09 am
Still wondering if my position on gay marriage is the result of my ideological point of view being biased due to racial contexts.
Wondering about the possible causes for your position on ethical issues is always a good thing.


What about the NSA's domestic surveillance (http://www.people-press.org/2014/01/20/obamas-nsa-speech-has-little-impact-on-skeptical-public/) program? Do I really oppose that or is that just my privilege talking?
Wrong question, please get back to wondering if your position is caused by things.

Can you honestly not tell the difference between asking yourself why you think something and asking yourself what thought you should have?
Title: Re: UNLIMITED 2016 Starting Early With Batshittery Thread.
Post by: LMNO on May 28, 2015, 01:10:58 pm
METAPHOR TIME!


I am correct in believing that if I let go of my pencil, it will fall to the ground.

Should it matter that I believe it falls to the ground because a tiny demon grabs it and carries it there?

Should I question those beliefs if, for example, someone tries to explain the relationship of mass and gravity?

I suppose it doesn't matter though, I am correct about what will happen to the pencil when I let go of it.  Better not to question why.
Title: Re: UNLIMITED 2016 Starting Early With Batshittery Thread.
Post by: Cain on May 28, 2015, 01:13:06 pm
STOP ATTACKING TINY DEMONS - half of all Republican presidential candidates.
Title: Re: UNLIMITED 2016 Starting Early With Batshittery Thread.
Post by: Junkenstein on May 28, 2015, 07:37:24 pm
TINY DEMONS TERKING YER JERBS - The other half of Republican candidates.
Title: Re: UNLIMITED 2016 Starting Early With Batshittery Thread.
Post by: Doktor Howl on May 30, 2015, 07:22:58 am
"Nigel is always right" is a fucking in-joke, FFS.

She's right, you know.
\
:snob:
Title: Re: UNLIMITED 2016 Starting Early With Batshittery Thread.
Post by: Mesozoic Mister Nigel on May 30, 2015, 07:33:58 am
"Nigel is always right" is a fucking in-joke, FFS.

She's right, you know.
\
:snob:

 :lulz:
Title: Re: UNLIMITED 2016 Starting Early With Batshittery Thread.
Post by: Cainad (dec.) on June 02, 2015, 04:11:31 pm
Gee whiz, Ron. A witch-hunt is only fun if everyone gets in on it, and you seem to be alone in the town square, pitchfork in the air and ass in the breeze. I mean, Hoopla IS a witch and will be sent to Pervert Hell when his time comes, but that's for "Bob" to decide.

You sure seem intent on lambasting him for a lack of ideological purity.
Title: Re: UNLIMITED 2016 Starting Early With Batshittery Thread.
Post by: Hoopla! on June 02, 2015, 09:25:30 pm
Gee whiz, Ron. A witch-hunt is only fun if everyone gets in on it, and you seem to be alone in the town square, pitchfork in the air and ass in the breeze. I mean, Hoopla IS a witch and will be sent to Pervert Hell when his time comes, but that's for "Bob" to decide.

You sure seem intent on lambasting him for a lack of ideological purity.

I prefer the term "warlock".
Title: Re: UNLIMITED 2016 Starting Early With Batshittery Thread.
Post by: Cainad (dec.) on June 03, 2015, 04:48:03 am
Gee whiz, Ron. A witch-hunt is only fun if everyone gets in on it, and you seem to be alone in the town square, pitchfork in the air and ass in the breeze. I mean, Hoopla IS a witch and will be sent to Pervert Hell when his time comes, but that's for "Bob" to decide.

You sure seem intent on lambasting him for a lack of ideological purity.

I prefer the term "warlock".

But do you prefer that term as a principled choice, or did you perhaps CHANGE YOUR MIND AT SOME POINT?!?!?!

Because we have rules about that sort of thing, mister.
Title: Re: UNLIMITED 2016 Starting Early With Batshittery Thread.
Post by: Mesozoic Mister Nigel on June 03, 2015, 07:07:21 am
Gee whiz, Ron. A witch-hunt is only fun if everyone gets in on it, and you seem to be alone in the town square, pitchfork in the air and ass in the breeze. I mean, Hoopla IS a witch and will be sent to Pervert Hell when his time comes, but that's for "Bob" to decide.

You sure seem intent on lambasting him for a lack of ideological purity.

I prefer the term "warlock".

But do you prefer that term as a principled choice, or did you perhaps CHANGE YOUR MIND AT SOME POINT?!?!?!

Because we have rules about that sort of thing, mister.

Don't EVEN tell me that the reason you changed your mind was Black. Reconsidering for Black reasons is just spineless.
Title: Re: UNLIMITED 2016 Starting Early With Batshittery Thread.
Post by: Hoopla! on June 03, 2015, 07:28:33 am
I have a dartboard with differing concepts and ideologies on them. I toss a few darts everyday and Mad Lib my beliefs.
Title: Re: UNLIMITED 2016 Starting Early With Batshittery Thread.
Post by: Reginald Ret on June 03, 2015, 09:46:07 am
I have a dartboard with differing concepts and ideologies on them. I toss a few darts everyday and Mad Lib my beliefs.
That is irrelevant.
Are there Black parts on that dartboard?
Did you use Black letters?
Title: Re: UNLIMITED 2016 Starting Early With Batshittery Thread.
Post by: LMNO on June 03, 2015, 01:06:18 pm
Getting back on track for a second, I had a thought about this massive field of GOP candidates.

It started with being puzzled how the GOP, long behaving as a monolith of unified belief* and action, would fracture like this, and so enormously.  So, just to be fun, I thought of a way this could be beneficial in 2016.  So check it: You have 2-3 "mainstream" candidates, 10 or so "wingnuts", and maybe five "batshit crazies".  They're all preaching variations on a conservative message, often contradictory.  This means they can play to a niche market, and draw to them whatever conservatives are passionate to their cause.  Then, in a controled consolidation, the batshits drop out and endorse one or more of the wingnuts, who are then cultured and bolstered.  The wingnuts, in turn, drop out and endorse either another wingnut or a mainstream, bringing their supporters with them.  In short order, you've gathered a fractured and rather tenuous base together under one candidate.

It's so crazy it's not out of the realm of possibility.





















*Or at least lip service.
Title: Re: UNLIMITED 2016 Starting Early With Batshittery Thread.
Post by: Doktor Howl on June 04, 2015, 04:57:35 am
Getting back on track for a second, I had a thought about this massive field of GOP candidates.

It started with being puzzled how the GOP, long behaving as a monolith of unified belief* and action, would fracture like this, and so enormously.  So, just to be fun, I thought of a way this could be beneficial in 2016.  So check it: You have 2-3 "mainstream" candidates, 10 or so "wingnuts", and maybe five "batshit crazies".  They're all preaching variations on a conservative message, often contradictory.  This means they can play to a niche market, and draw to them whatever conservatives are passionate to their cause.  Then, in a controled consolidation, the batshits drop out and endorse one or more of the wingnuts, who are then cultured and bolstered.  The wingnuts, in turn, drop out and endorse either another wingnut or a mainstream, bringing their supporters with them.  In short order, you've gathered a fractured and rather tenuous base together under one candidate.

It's so crazy it's not out of the realm of possibility.





















*Or at least lip service.

That ain't what's gonna happen, though.

70% of the GOP who will bother to vote in the general election will vote for the GOP candidate, on account of Anything But Hillary.

30% will throw a wobbler and write Rand Paul in. 

Bank on it.
Title: Re: UNLIMITED 2016 Starting Early With Batshittery Thread.
Post by: Q. G. Pennyworth on June 16, 2015, 04:40:47 pm
Trump's in the race.


It's a good thing tonight is drinking night. All these brain cells have been contaminated and need to die.
Title: Re: UNLIMITED 2016 Starting Early With Batshittery Thread.
Post by: Rev Thwack on June 16, 2015, 05:40:11 pm
Trump's in the race.


It's a good thing tonight is drinking night. All these brain cells have been contaminated and need to die.
Hey, it's fun watching a toupee think it can grow up to be the president.
Title: Re: UNLIMITED 2016 Starting Early With Batshittery Thread.
Post by: President Television on June 17, 2015, 12:16:39 am
http://www.politicususa.com/2015/06/16/neil-young-sends-big-f-u-music-thief-donald-trump-endorsing-bernie-sanders.html

This gave me a bit of a chuckle.
Title: Re: UNLIMITED 2016 Starting Early With Batshittery Thread.
Post by: Faust on June 17, 2015, 10:24:32 am
Quote
A LARGE stack of money has announced that it will make a run for the White House in 2016.

The pile of cash, estimated to be around 1.2 billion US dollars, said yesterday at a special press conference in Washington DC that it would seek the presidency next year.

“I’m running for the oval office,” the money told a packed conference room. “I will begin my campaign immediately and start touring the United States as early as next week”.

Reports claim the centre of the large pile of money’s campaign pitch will be its “simple approach” to the election process: ‘scaling back on everything but the financial element behind a regular presidential campaign’.

“Why waste time with people and merchandise that are basically just fronts for the real fuel behind a US presidential bid – money,”  said a spokesperson for the legal tender. “Scaling back to the bare essentials is the way forward. Money talks so why not let it run for office?”

It is believed the $1.2bn will also stress its attempt to become the first ever stack of cash to sit in the Oval Office.

“We expect its value to drop to seven hundred million by election time, but it will be enough to sustain a four year term as president”.

Meanwhile, former Secretary of State and first lady Hillary Clinton also announced her presidential bid yesterday evening, raising fears that Monika Lewinsky may be one step closer to annihilation by drone strike.

http://waterfordwhispersnews.com/2015/04/13/large-pile-of-cash-announces-us-presidency-bid/
Title: Re: UNLIMITED 2016 Starting Early With Batshittery Thread.
Post by: Hoopla! on June 17, 2015, 12:55:31 pm
Trump's in the race.


It's a good thing tonight is drinking night. All these brain cells have been contaminated and need to die.

People keep talking like this is a real thing, but throwing your hat in the ring is not the same as getting the election.  I can't imagine a world where the GOP actually put him forward as their candidate. Am I being naive?
Title: Re: UNLIMITED 2016 Starting Early With Batshittery Thread.
Post by: Q. G. Pennyworth on June 17, 2015, 01:03:01 pm
Trump's in the race.


It's a good thing tonight is drinking night. All these brain cells have been contaminated and need to die.

People keep talking like this is a real thing, but throwing your hat in the ring is not the same as getting the election.  I can't imagine a world where the GOP actually put him forward as their candidate. Am I being naive?

It means he's going to participate in the primaries. He's going to get interviewed, show up at debates, and probably pay for political ads. I don't want to bleach my brain because he might be our next president, but because we're going to have to listen to his bullshit for months.
Title: Re: UNLIMITED 2016 Starting Early With Batshittery Thread.
Post by: Rev Thwack on June 17, 2015, 01:55:45 pm
Trump's in the race.


It's a good thing tonight is drinking night. All these brain cells have been contaminated and need to die.

People keep talking like this is a real thing, but throwing your hat in the ring is not the same as getting the election.  I can't imagine a world where the GOP actually put him forward as their candidate. Am I being naive?

It means he's going to participate in the primaries. He's going to get interviewed, show up at debates, and probably pay for political ads. I don't want to bleach my brain because he might be our next president, but because we're going to have to listen to his bullshit for months.
Don't start the drinking now... Save it as a drinking game. Take a drink whenever he brings up a failed casino as an example of how great a business man he is.
Title: Re: UNLIMITED 2016 Starting Early With Batshittery Thread.
Post by: Mesozoic Mister Nigel on June 17, 2015, 03:19:33 pm
Trump is nothing but a running stream of hilarity, from unauthorized use of Neil Young's music to his apparent plans to "stop subsidizing China" by repaying our debt.
Title: Re: UNLIMITED 2016 Starting Early With Batshittery Thread.
Post by: Cain on June 17, 2015, 05:46:39 pm
Quote
A LARGE stack of money has announced that it will make a run for the White House in 2016.

The pile of cash, estimated to be around 1.2 billion US dollars, said yesterday at a special press conference in Washington DC that it would seek the presidency next year.

“I’m running for the oval office,” the money told a packed conference room. “I will begin my campaign immediately and start touring the United States as early as next week”.

Reports claim the centre of the large pile of money’s campaign pitch will be its “simple approach” to the election process: ‘scaling back on everything but the financial element behind a regular presidential campaign’.

“Why waste time with people and merchandise that are basically just fronts for the real fuel behind a US presidential bid – money,”  said a spokesperson for the legal tender. “Scaling back to the bare essentials is the way forward. Money talks so why not let it run for office?”

It is believed the $1.2bn will also stress its attempt to become the first ever stack of cash to sit in the Oval Office.

“We expect its value to drop to seven hundred million by election time, but it will be enough to sustain a four year term as president”.

Meanwhile, former Secretary of State and first lady Hillary Clinton also announced her presidential bid yesterday evening, raising fears that Monika Lewinsky may be one step closer to annihilation by drone strike.

http://waterfordwhispersnews.com/2015/04/13/large-pile-of-cash-announces-us-presidency-bid/

Obviously racist against Bitcoin.
Title: Re: UNLIMITED 2016 Starting Early With Batshittery Thread.
Post by: Rev Thwack on June 17, 2015, 06:04:12 pm
Bitcoin? Oh please. Bitcoin is obviously just pesos that are lying and claiming to be transmonetary.
Title: Re: UNLIMITED 2016 Starting Early With Batshittery Thread.
Post by: Cain on June 17, 2015, 06:08:13 pm
See, all of you nationally backed currencies are racist.
Title: Re: UNLIMITED 2016 Starting Early With Batshittery Thread.
Post by: Doktor Howl on June 18, 2015, 05:25:07 am
It seems that the clapping crowd around Trump when he announced were all extras being paid $50 a head.

 :lulz:
Title: Re: UNLIMITED 2016 Starting Early With Batshittery Thread.
Post by: Cain on June 18, 2015, 06:02:43 am
Cheapskates.  I'd only applaud Trump for $150 and a date with a Miss America washout.
Title: Re: UNLIMITED 2016 Starting Early With Batshittery Thread.
Post by: Rev Thwack on June 18, 2015, 11:50:27 am
But what would it take to get you to applaud "his" hair?
Title: Re: UNLIMITED 2016 Starting Early With Batshittery Thread.
Post by: Dubya on June 18, 2015, 05:46:10 pm
"He" is the hair. The rest of "him" is a poorly made prosthetic.
Title: Re: UNLIMITED 2016 Starting Early With Batshittery Thread.
Post by: Rev Thwack on June 18, 2015, 06:56:20 pm
And you don't think that a toupee deserves a chance to be president? Fucking sentientist.
Title: Re: UNLIMITED 2016 Starting Early With Batshittery Thread.
Post by: Dubya on June 18, 2015, 11:56:29 pm
Hey, some of my best friends are inanimate.  :argh!:

I was pointing this out to illustrate the difficulties that that brave hairpiece has had to overcome.
Title: Re: UNLIMITED 2016 Starting Early With Batshittery Thread.
Post by: Rev Thwack on June 19, 2015, 12:43:07 am
That "brave" hairpiece? Yea, like it's so difficult to be a 1% toupee... The shampoos, the helicopter rides, the salt spray in the hair on the yacht rides... Such a hard life.
Title: Re: UNLIMITED 2016 Starting Early With Batshittery Thread.
Post by: Dubya on June 19, 2015, 03:26:48 am
 :lulz: