Printable View
I think it's a shame that "omg global warmings" has replaced talking about straight-up pollution in political discourse, personally. There's too many lakes and rivers in this country that you can pretty much walk across the top of anymore, for the amount of crap dumped in 'em. "GW" issues are distracting attention from this. Clean air and water are fairly important.Quote:
Originally Posted by Yoshi
yeah. Its called wax paper, glass and refrigeration.Quote:
Originally Posted by FirstBlood
Do none of you know about life pre 1965?
LOL GLASS.
Also, can you vacuum seal wax paper?
yeah, people like you might drop it and cut yourself. It is understandable that you fear a world without nice soft plastics.
Are you seriously arguing against plastic?
IP continues to entertain.
I'm arguing against the idea that it can not be made without oil, the idea that we will all die without it and the idea that a lot of things don't have to be made out of it.Quote:
Originally Posted by YellerDog
I mean seriously, OMG life is going to end without plastic rap and plastic test tubes, wtfomgbbq.
How on earth do any of you think any of your grandparents got by? Really?
Quote:
Originally Posted by buttcheeks
Was anyone arguing that life would end?
Everyone just knows that a shift away from plastic would be so much more complicated than simply returning to how our grandparents did things.
also, LOL^^^
All right, keep the dumb ass plastics shit out of this thread. Someone can make a specific thread about the retarded bile buttcheeks is saying.
Back on topic.
aaaanyways.
who is watching the debate? I'm not really paying attention but enjoy much of what Ron Paul has to say.
cow kind of implied that a lot of industry fields would just flat out no longer exist.Quote:
Originally Posted by FirstBlood
that is relative. If it happened over night, yes it would be omg complicated. It would result in a depression. Companies would just have to close down because they couldn't find the materials that they need to produce their product line and would not have the capital to research substitutes.Quote:
Originally Posted by FirstBlood
But that is very unlikely. If given time, like 50 to 75 years, oil based plastic could be phased out of many things.
^ mod plz
So, Ron Paul? Hero or Menace?
For the simple fact that Ron Paul is scaring the shit out of the political establishment by showing them what a successful viral Presidential campaign looks like (and by successful I don't mean victory, I mean getting attention and getting funding outside the normal whoring yourself out method) Ron Paul is a god-damned American hero and I'd vote for him if I could. Of course, I'd vote for him only because I know he'd lose, I can't get behind some of his politics.
If he was genuinely against federal involvement he wouldn't be authoring bills calling for a federal definition of life beginning at conception and he wouldn't be trying to overturn Supreme Court rulings (Roe v. Wade) via the federal legislature.Quote:
Originally Posted by Tommy Tallarico
From the bill: "the Congress recognizes that each State has the authority to protect lives of unborn children residing in the jurisdiction of that State."Quote:
Originally Posted by SpoDaddy
Sounds almost like his Federal bill is re-enforcing state's rights. Also notice the phrasing "has the authority", but is not mandated. This is such a heated issue, and there are obviously two sides. So WHY would anyone want the decision made at a Federal level? Why have one decision rule over a whole country with differing and diverse opinions?
The deal is he'd be against a Federal bill BANNING abortion as well, he has said exactly that. The abortion issue is probably the one place where some hardcore Libertarians have a problem with Dr. Paul.Quote:
Originally Posted by SpoDaddy
I'm pro-choice and always leaned left and I support the man completely. I think letting the states decide on this difficult issue is the Constitutional way to handle it. And with all the problems we have today, I think abortion is just a distraction the media likes to bring up to watch the mud fly. I can't believe so many women are passionate and super concerned about whether or not they'll be able to get a fetus sucked out of them easily or have to drive for hours to get it done.
If my wife gets shot and killed and is pregnant the asshole who did it gets charged twice. How does one reconcile that with current abortion laws?
I don't want to get into a huge abortion debate in this thread, and I can clearly see where some people may have a problem with Ron Paul's stance. He may be a conservative old guy (personally) but I think he has shown that he believes in individuals ruling themselves, not the government. I.E. He is not your king and we all have the right to believe as we wish.
I'll add that I'm heading up to New Hampshire Saturday to knock on doors (in freezing weather) for this GQ Man of the Year. That's right, Judd Apatow, Kanye West and Ron Paul......
Jesus fuck, the wording on that bill is bullshit. I definitely don't like this guy.Quote:
Originally Posted by sphere79
I turned it off after CNN pulled this stunt. I'm sure, in the name of balance, they'll let a GOP supporter ask questions to the wrong side of the aisle as well. :rolleyes:Quote:
Originally Posted by FirstBlood
What exactly is wrong with that.
These debates would be better if they let people from the opposition party ask the questions, then we wouldn't have a bunch of softball questions with canned bullshit answers.
I support debate like that on both sides. As long as they're actually asking real pertinent questions then I say good.
Political discourse in this country has become a disaster. Look at the fucking "Town Halls" that Bush had so many time, with all prescreened republicans and only preplanned questions. That's crap. Lets have some actual questions and answers from the people who want to run this country.
What Japan said. + rep
EDIT: Ok yeah, the guy was from the Hillary camp, but he was a 70 year old gay Brigadier General with more than 40 years of service in the Army. I'd say that he was qualified to ask the question. It's not as if he was some random liberal protestor asking Giuliani or Romney why they flip-flop?
like SpoDaddy?Quote:
Originally Posted by bbobb
I agree. My problem is that it absolutely will not be equitable. CNN was sabotaging, not challenging equally.Quote:
Originally Posted by bbobb
When you consider the entirety of the Fox network I think it balances out.
Jesus man, Hillary has her own questions fed to her, Obama keeps thinking he's Denzel Washington, McCain is senile, Rudy can't stop taking credit for everything in the world, and Paul is not even in their league.Quote:
Originally Posted by bbobb
I vote for keeping them as far away from each other as possible.
How 'bout you find out a little more about him besides the one line I pulled from a bill he co-authored. The guy doesn't exist to please lobbyists, like 98% of all other politicians. He doesn't take Federal matching campaign funds. He turns down the Congressional pension (worth millions) - he actually GIVES back what he feels he's overpaid as a Congressman every year. He's voted the same way since day one - never raising taxes or supporting bills he feels violate our Constitution, even if he supports the ideas they back.Quote:
Originally Posted by bbobb
Congress currently has an 11% approval rate, we all know they are riddled with corruption and back-door deals. This country continues to depend on more and more borrowed money as we funnel manufacturing jobs out of the US. My choices are MORE government with the Democrats or MORE government (while we tell you it's less) with the Republicans. I want these assholes out of my wallet and out of my life - we CANNOT afford to continue to spend, tax and borrow. We need a drastic turnaround and there's ONE candidate out of all the two-party offerings who even mentions our monopoly-money "Federal Reserve" problem. ONE candidate who isn't a member of the CFR and approves of usurping our sovereignty as a country. ONE candidate with the only foreign policy that we can afford if want to have a strong defense and not go bankrupt policing the world.
His website gets more hits than ANY of the other candidates. As a Republican, he gets the most donations from the military (yes, the anti-frivolous war Repub) and has had the single highest donation day (4.2+ million dollars) of all his counterparts. He has more Meetup members, more Myspace and more YouTube support than all of the other Republicans combined, and most of the Dems too.Quote:
Originally Posted by Biff-chan
So if he's not in the "bought and paid for" or "corporate media's darling" league than that's a good thing. I'm sick of smug tool "commentators" telling ME who can and cannot win. I'm sick of our circus of a media where Hulk Hogan's divorce is more important than real discussion about our national currency tanking. He may not win the primary, but when he does well in many states and takes NH - people are going to be shocked. There really is a Revolution of sorts going on - it doesn't exist on the television but it's grassroots, it's real and it's ALL people from all political backgrounds coming together.
Do you really think Ron Paul would get elected, really?
3/4 of you Paul supporters will be sitting on your ass on election day.
I really think someone like Ron Paul would never get elected because the majority of the USA is full of people like SpoDaddy.
More people vote for American Idol than the President. Showbiz is what works on them.
Hardly, CNN is just another media conglomerate. Not some bastion of far-left politics. Otherwise why are the real leftists being marginalized by the network? Kuicinich gets altogether a minute's worth of airtime per debate, and Gravel has been barred from CNN entirely.Quote:
Originally Posted by Yoshi
If the GOP candidates think that they're being shafted on CNN they'll whine about it on air to bolster support from frothing morons who think CNN is run by Fidel Castro and the Global Gay Conspiracy. In reality, they'll get some pointed questions which they'll dodge entirely and then talk about what an ugly sea hag Hillary is.
You're right, the majority of the country sees through a Pat Buchanan clone trying to hide his extreme views behind a "states' rights" argument. The anti-abolitionists used the same "states' rights" argument to maintain slavery; "states' rights" is a great way to maintain the status quo while appearing above the fray.Quote:
Originally Posted by Cowutopia
That's actually a good point just because with leaving big, moral decisions up to the states you can come out with states that have horribly immoral systems set up like slavery, and if you're pro-life you might equate abortion to something as awful as slavery.
I am pro-abortion for a number of reasons but I do concede that it is killing a person.
I feel like the Slavery issue was actually similar to the abortion issue. Being pro-abortion is incredibly self-serving, but allowing a child into the world that is unwanted or that will be fucked up by drugs or that will not have the support it needs to live is not something I am for. Slavery was incredibly self-serving and when it began the people for it were still in the popular moral high ground.
Women who go around getting multiple abortions and not being careful about pregnancy, and women who don't care because they feel abortion isn't anything to feel bad about really disgust me, but the abortion is better than the alternative imo. I was in a relationship where we had to get an abortion, and I don't regret it, but I'm still not happy about it and feel a little bad. I know having the child would have ruined my life, her life, and the child's life though.
I thought states rights and small federal government were cornerstones of the republican party.
EDIT: also: wiki:Quote:
Compared with Democrats, many Republicans believe in a more robust version of federalism with greater limitations placed upon federal power and a larger role reserved for the States.
lol, you're trying to equate this to slavery? If anything, opposing a woman's right to choose or a gay couple's right to a union with state-sanctioned benefits is more oppressive than bringing it closer to the direct democracy. Though, ideally, it should be entirely in the hands of individuals. That is Ron Paul's problem, he doesn't go far enough. Still, a step in the right direction is better than two steps in the wrong one, which the fascist transvestite and religious nutjobs that make up the GOP top tier advocate on one or both issues.
Quote:
Originally Posted by SpoDaddy
Continue to make points again Ron Paul, that's fine that's what this shit is about. But if not him then who? Give me someone else to go look into, because the people who have the country on the tip of their fingers are frauds and are going to lead to an even worse country than we are now.
A gay couple's right to union isn't dealing with taking lives, it's not even close to a similar issue. Gay rights are a no-brainer. People should fuck whoever they want, it's none of your goddamn business.
Here's why it was a good point, Gozen: Many, many, many individuals were for slavery, and believed themselves to be morally correct. We can probably all agree slavery is morally wrong.
Today there are many many many people that believe abortion is as fundamentally, morally wrong as slavery is. Objective morality is not just hard to pin down, it is impossible. The argument needs to shift away from morality and onto practicality.
I won't see this degenerate into yet another abortion issue thread, so suffice it to say that SpoDaddy's position is not nearly as nuanced as you seem to think. It is blithely attempting to paint those who oppose federal restrictions on personal liberty as being somehow synonymous with those who advocated slavery.
Why even bring slavery into this argument? Might as well have played the Nazi/Hitler card in some fashion while you're at it.
I know what he's trying to do, but in spite of it all, he came up with a good point.
http://www.questionablecontent.net/comics/1020.png
I was giving a historical example of how the state's rights argument has been used to give undue credibility to oppressive movements in the past. I wasn't equating slavery itself to anything, Gozen just doesn't comprehend proper sentences because he's a sociology major.Quote:
Originally Posted by wEEman33
So one network balances out 5+ others now?Quote:
Originally Posted by Cowutopia
Doesn't Fox own 5 channels? At least?
:wtf: the standard broadcast Fox doesn't even have a national news to my knowledge. It's Fox News against ABC, CBS, NBC, CNN, MSNBC, etc.
Nads
Because one of the purposes of the federal government is to protect the few sane people in the ass-backwards redneck parts of the country against tyranny of the majority (see: the establisment clause... oh wait, that's another thing Paul doesn't understand).Quote:
Originally Posted by sphere79
I don't doubt that you have no fucking idea what a republic is, if Jedi don't protect it.
You know damn good and well that in the part of the country you live in, you'd be required by law to attend church every week and give them their ten percent if the federal courts didn't have the power to tell the people who'd try to set that up to GTFO.
You have no fucking idea what you are talking about, and I've lived in seven different states, so I actually have a basis for comparison.
I'm an agnostic who's lived in Oklahoma his whole life; I'm intimately familiar with what I'm talking about.
ABC, CBS, and NBC are only slightly less conservative than FOX. CNN is less so, but is actually trying to be more like FOX News (see fascist dipshit Glenn Beck and frothing racist Lou Dobbs). MSNBC is 90% conservatives and then Keith Olbermann, who has more viewers than the rest put together. So come on, it's not as simple as FOX on the right and everyone else on Team Jane Fonda.Quote:
Originally Posted by Yoshi
The only station with a consistently evenhanded viewpoint is PBS, and that's after years of attempted willful subversion by conservatives that blew up in their faces.
So Oklahoma represents every state in every region of the country?Quote:
Originally Posted by The Gas
Glenn Beck and Lou Dobbs are token conservatives just like that idiot Combs is a token liberal. You're so out of touch with what moderate means that you honestly believe what you typed too. That's what scares me.Quote:
Originally Posted by g0zen
I'm sorry, Yoshi. But shouting from the opposite end of the same spectrum doesn't make you look anymore credible than I am at determining what constitutes the 'moderate' position. Beck and Dobbs have their own shows, where they spew out their garbage unabated, meanwhile Alan Combs is a meek twat quivering at the foaming shrill rantings of Sean Hannity. Many of which, to bring this dialogue full circle, have been directed at Ron Paul. If the conservative news channel's biggest enemy is the only true conservative (in the original Goldwater sense) running, then really how far out of touch are they?
Actually, I'm not at the opposite end. Fox clearly caters to the conservative crowd, and they are making a fortune from it, because everyone else is on the other end. You're the only one claiming that your stations are right down the middle.Quote:
Originally Posted by g0zen
And of course Combs is a quivering vagina. That's essentially the definition of a liberal.
No you're not.Quote:
Originally Posted by The Gas
Tommy Tallarico
How 'bout you read the thread and see that I did and discovered that I don't agree with him on quite a few issues.Quote:
Originally Posted by sphere79
Shouldn't you be getting back to Stromfront?
Silly bbobb, with your "reading."
You've got to be kidding me.Quote:
Originally Posted by Yoshi
LOL, I never get tired of these little moments we share.Quote:
Originally Posted by Yoshi
FOX New's numbers have been tanking for the past year and a half, essentially they tied their boat to the current administration and are now sinking with him.Quote:
Originally Posted by Yoshi
So now they're destroying CNN by a less enormous margin?
Right, and none of them are still even remotely in the ball park of the big three's news programs.
So, no, Yoshi. The country isn't all rabid frothing conservatives, it's just a lot of frothing conservatives leave FOX News on all the time. Everyone else watches NBC Nightly News and then goes on to eat some fishsticks.
Quote:
Originally Posted by g0zen
If the neo-cons who currently controlled the Republican party would actually nominate him - he'd do well against Hillary or any other Dems. There were recent polls that showed Ron Paul was actually one of the few who could beat a Dem in a general election. I don't know of any other Republican that gets the support from Independants and Dems that Paul gets.Quote:
Originally Posted by Biff-chan
Keep telling yourself that. I'll be making my third trip to NH to campaign for Dr. Paul (in cold-ass weather) this weekend. I've met the man, and taken calls on my personal cell phone from his son and campaign staff. And they tracked ME down. I've done far more in the real world than just posting on this message board about him - you can bet your ass I'll be voting. And prior to voting I'll be holding signs with other supporters.Quote:
Originally Posted by Biff-chan
How about they just move the fuck out their shitty town/state? Do people have ANY faith left in individual rights or are we all begging for Mommy government to intrude (oops I mean "help") to the point where they run every aspect of our lives?Quote:
Originally Posted by The Gas
I disagree with him on some his religious views and maybe abortion a bit, but I'm willing to waffle because he's spot on on everything else. He wants government completely OUT of healthcare (right now it's heavily subsidized), the opposite would be government-run socialized medicine. He wants no one outside the US to decide our fate, the opposite would UN law over-riding the US Constitution. He wants secure borders and controlled immigration. He's actually quite specific in NOT scapegoating the illegals but correctly blaming US and Mexican policy. The opposite would be NO borders, lowered US wages, and an increased burden on prisons, school systems and hospitals. He wants the Federal government out of education. States, counties and towns would have say over their curriculums. The opposite would be a homogeneous learning environment where government indoctrination gets worse. I.E., teaching kids that questioning governent is UnAmerican, when it's really one of THE MOST American things there ever was.Quote:
Originally Posted by bbobb
How witty and original.Quote:
Originally Posted by bbobb
to be fair, most of the south would probably still teach that questioning the government is unamerican. And they would probably no longer teach evolution. They might start up school prayer.
Not that I care really. Having to deal with fucked up shit like that can be good for you.
Fox delivers all of my local sports, that's really all I care about.
Goldwater hated the influence of religion on politics; to call a guy like Paul that doesn't even believe in the separation of church and state a Goldwater conservative is laughable.Quote:
Originally Posted by g0zen
How far left of Marx do you have to be to think CBS and MSNBC are mostly conservative? BTW great job irresponsibly throwing down the race card yet again. I'm assuming you're calling Dobbs a racist for his strong views on illegal immigration, which ironically are pretty liberal in comparison to Ron Paul.Quote:
Originally Posted by g0zen
Laugh away, the comparison is made all the time. I don't think the folks who compare them are necessarily stating they are 100% the same either, they just find some parallels.Quote:
Originally Posted by SpoDaddy
Actually, Goldwater Jr. officially endorsed Ron Paul a few weeks ago.
I am totally getting a freezer full of fish sticks tomorrow, now. Damn this thread. I'd kind of forgotten those existed.
That doesn't make it any less stupid.Quote:
Originally Posted by sphere79
Goldwater Jr. isn't Goldwater.Quote:
Originally Posted by sphere79
I said a conservative in the Goldwater sense, meaning one springing from "The Conscience of a Conservative" ideology. I did not mean that the two of them are entirely the same. Unlike neo-cons, I don't demand complete uniformity before allowing that there are similarities between people, or that one atleast had a strong influence on the other.Quote:
Originally Posted by SpoDaddy
LOL, go ahead and rant and rave all you like. There's no evidence to suggest this grand left-wing conspiracy in the media. It doesn't exist as anything more than a phantom in the minds of conservatives.Quote:
Originally Posted by SpoDaddy
Quote:
Originally Posted by g0zen
A crucial part of Goldwater's conservative philosophy was the separation of church and state; he's probably spinning in his grave over his son endorsing a guy that thinks churches should eclipse the states in importance. McCain is far closer to Goldwater than Paul (along with most of the other GOP candidates).
You're the only person here talking about media conspiracies; everyone else recognizes reality for what it is. First you say all the networks are conservative, then you call Fox News "The" conservative station; apparently you can't even keep your own bullshit straight.Quote:
Originally Posted by g0zen
To the extent that it exists (which is incredibly overstated), I think liberal media bias is natural and unavoidable - journalism is a much more attractive career choice to those with a liberal worldview than a conservative one.
The correct answer is that Fox = Far Right, and all other media in the US is in th middle.Quote:
Originally Posted by SpoDaddy
We don't have any true liberal media left in the US, you have to go to news from outside the country to get real liberal news.
Don't be naive; there's no such thing as a moderate major media outlet anymore. There's no money in that. People want their news and opinions at the same time.
It's hard to take someone that's never even had a speeding ticket (and has a math degree) seriously about who is or is not a pussy.Quote:
Originally Posted by Yoshi
Also: Ron Paul and all the other people trotted out for this election can eat a dick - they're all horrible.
icarus, don't be silly. Yoshi is a genius.
Yoshi: Conservatives are the only answer
Spo: 93.5% of stats are made up by the person delivering them, I rule, I like fat people, conservatives should enslave the entire planet to save it.
Gozen: You conservative swine, we are going to destroy you because you're evil.
bbobb: Hay, here's that damn reply button
Icarus: Uh, I'm over my head here, halp!
This sum it up?
Good move along.
You try so hard yet continue to fail.Quote:
Originally Posted by Biff-chan
I think he actually did pretty well.
So being caught is the key to being tough? I thought that was the key to being a fucking moron, but you're the expert on that subject.Quote:
Originally Posted by icarusfall
no, he forgotQuote:
Originally Posted by Yoshi
<IronButt> OMG PLASTIC!
Do you always have to try and be the center of attention?
Don't even front.Quote:
Originally Posted by Yoshi
Cool Ron Paul interview, on G4 of all places.
Don't even front to his front.Quote:
Originally Posted by icarusfall
It's buttplant.Quote:
Originally Posted by buttcheeks
Yeah, it is buttplant.
It's not that I don't think this guy has some good things to say, but let's not be retarded, he has no chance.
Wow... this post is just... so dumb... oh god...Quote:
Originally Posted by icarusfall
You sound like the kind of anti-government -- music heals all kind of guy. Things like the The Government trying to pass a bill making certain aspects of free speech / expression completely illegal are happening in your country. Soon you don't even be able to say that all the candidates are horrible without being labeled a terrorist in your own country and all you can do is complain about the candidates without actually ever reading about them. You won't be able to write a song questioning a shitty war your country was manipulated in to by a corrupt regime of liars, cheats and crooks. You need to take an interest in your country somehow, or you'll end up being one of the people sitting around wondering how fascism and freedom's were taken from you when it was blatant from the beginning what was happening.Quote:
Also: Ron Paul and all the other people trotted out for this election can eat a dick - they're all horrible.
The last two elections were full of like-minded puppets. At least in this upcoming election you have a vastly different array of puppets to choose from.
I'm not.Quote:
Originally Posted by Drewbacca
Why is it that you would think I haven't read up on the candidates? Amazingly, I can read up on them and still think they're bad people ALL AT ONCE?!?!Quote:
Soon you don't even be able to say that all the candidates are horrible without being labeled a terrorist in your own country and all you can do is complain about the candidates without actually ever reading about them.
There isn't anything at all agreeable with any of the candidates on the field right now?
There are bits and pieces, but no one shares my views as a whole. I'm not going to vote for someone I think has a good stance on civil rights, but thinks our current health care is just ducky (only an example). This is a problem with our 2 party system. There aren't only 2 ways of thinking about things.
I feel sad for replying seriously to a Drewbacca post.
They were legitimate posts, We all know that unfortunately we're voting for the lesser evils here, and even then we can't see what truth's lie behind each candidate. To abstain your right to vote may as well abstain your right to saying anything.
Stephen Colbert was going to run in icarus's state. He would've gotten all of the votes from apathetic kids and those that weren't satisfied with any of the other choices. I wouldn't have been surprised if he ended up winning, only to have the message voters were trying to get across be ignored.Quote:
Originally Posted by Thief Silver
In the end, Colbert's failed attempt shows that we were all lied to as children, because not everyone can run for president. Maybe one day, some people will care enough to do something about the rest of the more awful lies that go on in politics everyday.
Tommy Tallarico
This argument is nonsense. You're saying because I don't like any of the choices given me by the people I don't like in the first place I should just vote for one anyway?Quote:
Originally Posted by Thief Silver
I'm OK with a certain level of compromise in voting for someone, but I haven't seen anyone who approaches that level yet. I'm not going to vote for someone I'd rather punch in the face just because I'd pick them last in the punch-these-jerks-in-the-face game.
Then write in a name on the ballot. Part of the reason we have a dominant two party system right now is because people like you say "my guy doesn't have a chance" and don't vote at all.
Your specific example in this instance is flawed, but the gist of your point is spot on. The states' rights platform is idealistic bullshit and anyone who can read a history book with a shred of objectivity can see why.Quote:
Originally Posted by The Gas
Again, his example of stereotype fails, but c'mon, you of all people should understand why his underlying logic is sound. How else do you explain the absolute lack of industrial growth and simultaneous lack of environmental progress in this state which is in a unique positition to be a potential leader in one or possibly both?Quote:
Originally Posted by Yoshi
I'm gonna stand up for Yoshi here and simply say that I've personally seen him show real balls in speaking up for his convictions in real life when doing so could have potential consequences for him. He might be a cretin regarding his social/political views, but a pussy he is not.Quote:
Originally Posted by icarusfall
This is absurd. You're saying that the only way to exercise your right to speech is by advocating, aiding and abetting bad leaders?Quote:
Originally Posted by Thief Silver
IAWTP. If you vote for someone to represent you, you are accountable for that person's actions once in office. If you voted for Bush, you share the guilt for the situation in Iraq, etc.Quote:
Originally Posted by icarusfall
Anybody else actually click this? I knew the tinfoil hat crowd had amazing logic-stretching skills, but damn.Quote:
Originally Posted by Drewbacca
I think you're one step ahead of yourself. It's not states' rights that's the problem. It's the leadership we have in the state using those rights. It's not much different than the KKK using free speech.Quote:
Originally Posted by Vasteel
Thanks, I think. ;)Quote:
I'm gonna stand up for Yoshi here and simply say that I've personally seen him show real balls in speaking up for his convictions in real life when doing so could have potential consequences for him. He might be a cretin regarding his social/political views, but a pussy he is not.
I was with you until this part of your post. By that logic we should all abstain from voting just to keep blood off our hands in case someone fucks up. Vote for yourself if you really can't find a single other person in the country you think would make a good President, but don't throw away your right to vote. The people you can't stand got power by looking at voting rolls and realizing that they didn't have to pay any attention to your demographic's ideas. The squeaky wheel gets the grease, make noise and you get heard.Quote:
Originally Posted by Vasteel
Yeah, I clicked it knowing it was probably tinfoil bullshit and sure enough it was. For those of you that didn't read it, the bill makes illegal "the use, planned use, or threatened use of force or violence by a group or individual to promote the group or individual’s political, religious, or social beliefs." The Coast-to-Coast AM crowd is interpreting that as "OMG if we launch a grassroots email campaign to make using 3 squares of toilet paper a hate crime against mother earth and inadvertently flood a server we'll go to prison forever! So this is how liberty dies!"Quote:
Originally Posted by The Gas
Please don't use massacred versions of posts I already made that were actually funny to try and derail this thread. If you have something to add, add it, if not, go find another thread to post a jumped the shark image in.Quote:
Originally Posted by Biff-chan
Each of Biff's posts should have a "trying too hard?" button on them. Then if, say, 40 TNLers click that button the post would be deleted and replaced with the message "Biff tried too hard".