Reason Magazine
- reason.com
- reason.tv
- reason.org
- Donate
- Site Search:
Reason on Facebook
Reason on Twitter
Reason on YouTube
Reason RSSGet Reason E-mail Updates!
Manage your Reason e-mail list subscriptionsadvertisements
Notes From the Health Care Debate Fascist Race War
Over at Alternet, indefatigable Nazi-hunter Sara Robinson offers her "7 Ways We Can Fight Back Against the Rising Fascist Threat: Why the right-wing extremism must be stopped in its tracks or else we face the threat of outright violence and goon rule." I am particularly fond of steps 3, 4, and 6:
Third: Brush up on our nonviolent resistance -- but leave the heavy lifting and rough enforcement to the cops. [...]
Fourth: We need to make absolutely sure that the media get the story right. [...]
Sixth: Shut down the hate talkers.
Confirming Robinson's diagnosis is self-described "actor/wise-ass" Steven Weber of The Huffington Post:
There are mad men in the house.
Stripped of power, backed into a corner, emasculated, mean. Mean and mad.
Dangerous mad.
Guns? Nazis? Euthanasia? Hey: you angry? Then express your anger like a civilized person, not a rake-wielding moron, foaming at the mouth, espousing quarter-baked beliefs of doom and death panels which have been injected into your malleable squash with all the subtlety of a turkey baster filled with cottage cheese shoved into a sheep's rectum.
A dispassionate observer might conclude that such a mentality is ultimately not worth the effort to rehabilitate; that the total immersion into the mob ideology as directed by its de facto leaders (who have more in common with the fascist/socialist dictators their opponents supposedly possess) renders such a person incapable of reason and devoid of sense, responding only to fight or flight, black and white, reward and punishment, good and evil.
Who agrees with the effete coastal elitist? Pitchfork Pat Buchanan!
Who are these folks? Why are they angry?
Ed Rubenstein, who has written for Forbes, National Review and the Wall Street Journal, blogs on VDARE.com that if one uses the household survey of job losses for June-July, Hispanics gained 150,000 positions, while non-Hispanics lost 679,000. Guess who got the stimulus jobs.
Going back to the beginning of the Bush presidency, Rubenstein says that "for every 100 Hispanics employed in January 2001, there are now 122.5. ... (But) for every 100 non-Hispanics employed in January 2001, there are now 98.9."
And, just as Jesse Walker predicted, we are seeing the return of the militia scare, in the form of a new report by the Southern Poverty Law Center:
Bart McEntire, a special agent with the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives, told SPLC researchers that this is the most growth he's seen in more than a decade.
"All it's lacking is a spark," McEntire said in the report.
Meanwhile, conservative-mugged-by-George W. Bush economist Bruce Bartlett writes that "the Obama-hating town-hall mobs have it wrong—the person they should be angry with left the White House seven months ago."
|8.13.09 @ 9:22AM|#
"Rubenstein says that "for every 100 Hispanics employed in
January 2001, there are now 122.5. ... (But) for every 100
non-Hispanics employed in January 2001, there are now 98.9."
question for the crowd: why do the BrownPeople take all our jobs? I
forget - if only SomeOne could remind me...
|8.13.09 @ 9:23AM|#
"During the bleak days of Iraq, demonstrators carried swastikas
and Hitler portraits of Bush habitually. Nicholson Baker wrote a
novel in which characters are contemplating killing Bush. Films
were praised imagining the assassination of the president. Michael
Moore, courted by the Democratic elite, lamented that bin Laden on
9/11 had hit a blue state - and once compared the killers of
Americans in Iraq to Minutemen.
Al Gore customarily used excessive language like "brown shirts."
Senators Durbin, Kennedy, and others compared our soldiers to
Saddamites, Pol Pot's killers, and Nazis. Ward Churchill compared
the victims in the Twin Tower to "little Eichmanns." Sen. Robert
Byrd likened Pres. George W. Bush's policies to what transpired in
Nazi Germany. Linda Ronstadt, Harold Pinter, Scott Ritter, Ted
Rall, and George Soros agreed with Fidel Castro, the Iranians, and
North Koreans in comparing Bush to Hitler.
Jonathan Chait wrote in the New Republic on why "I hate George W.
Bush." Garrison Keillor likened Bush's Republicans to "brown shirts
in pinstripes." Even old hero Sen. John Glenn said of the Bush
agenda: "It's the old Hitler business."
http://corner.nationalreview.com/post/?q=MzMzYmFkNmEwZjcxOGViNDE2YWNjNzBkM2Y3YzdjMjM=
Now after the election of BO, a few old ladies in tennis shoes show
up at some town halls and the opposition has gone over the edge. It
is fascism I tell you.
|8.13.09 @ 9:25AM|#
I am particularly fond of steps 3, 6, and 7:
Do you mean 3,4 and 6? 'Cause that's what you showed.
And these town hall protesters...some of the ones I've seen sure
seem like their questions have been fed to them. All they need to
do, as someone else pointed out here, is bring in a selected
excerpt of the bill in question, read it to the lawmaker(s) and ask
them to explain what it means and why they support it.
Then they could get reallyIntrepid and upload TheirResponses to
youTubE.
Kyle Jordan|8.13.09 @ 9:26AM|#
Is anyone else starting to get the feeling that this may be a
powder keg waiting to blow? The sides are getting more and more
heated with each other.
This could be fun.
P.S.
I used to think you were cool Weber. Brian wouldn't act like
this.
|8.13.09 @ 9:27AM|#
"Third: Brush up on our nonviolent resistance -- but leave the
heavy lifting and rough enforcement to the cops. [...]"
Be sure to get our cops there to beat the shit out of anyone on the
other side. Check
"Fourth: We need to make absolutely sure that the media get the
story right. [...]"
Be sure the media only reports the government line. Check
"Sixth: Shut down the hate talkers."
Marginalize anyone who disagrees with us as "haters" and use
whatever brute tactics we have to make sure they can't get their
message.
That is a great concept of democracy and free speech they have
here. But, it is the other side that are fascists. Gee, project
much?
Kyle Jordan|8.13.09 @ 9:31AM|#
John,
Stop it. You're gonna give yourself a heart attack or stroke is you
keep thinking like that. The idiot left have absolutely no desire
and possibly, capacity, to not be utter hypocrites.
Both sides are so goddamn stupid that it's really fun to watch this
grow and grow. We're so completely beyond the point of reason in
politics here in the US that I think we may have to wait until it
all burns and start over fresh at this point.
Time for some more "Life of Brian"...
Rich|8.13.09 @ 9:31AM|#
Report Warns Of Rise In Reports Warning of Rise In Militia Groups Across U.S.
Spoonman|8.13.09 @ 9:32AM|#
We're so completely beyond the point of reason in politics here in the US that I think we may have to wait until it all burns and start over fresh at this point.
Shit, I wish I thought that point was coming. I'm worried that all this bullshit is more sustainable than most libertarians think.
|8.13.09 @ 9:33AM|#
Has anyone ever seen Buchanan and lonewhacko in the same room at the same time? Just wondering.
<strike>strike through</strike|8.13.09 @ 9:34AM|#
Over at Alternet...
...there's a blog that's craptastic even by blog
standards.
Is the proprietor in the fourth grade or the fifth?
Gunboat Diplomacy|8.13.09 @ 9:35AM|#
"Is anyone else starting to get the feeling that this may be a
powder keg waiting to blow?
No, but that IS what these assholes want. That piece of shit Ed
Schultz (of the Ed Show) had Ron Paul on last night in order to get
his take on the guy who showed up with a (legally carried) gun.
Unfortunately, I had to leave before he was on, but the implication
was that the protesters want to shoot Obama. The Left has jumped
the shark.
BTW, If G-d came down and said I could execute (humanely) any one
person and not be held accountable, Ed Schultz would be on the
short list.
|8.13.09 @ 9:35AM|#
The appropriate answer from everyone on the "right" (guess that includes us libertarian folk, too) is, "I know you are, but what am I?"
Rich|8.13.09 @ 9:37AM|#
"All it's lacking is a spark," McEntire said in the
report.
Something like this?
Warty, you made me do it. ;-)
|8.13.09 @ 9:37AM|#
"We're so completely beyond the point of reason in politics here
in the US that I think we may have to wait until it all burns and
start over fresh at this point."
The problem is that there is sort of a Newtonian law of politics in
that every action by one side produces an equal reaction on the
other. The Dems acted like complete children for 8 years. Now, a
few people show up at town hall meetings and do exactly what the
Left has been doing for 40 years or more and the left pees their
pants and starts shouting racist and facist and militia.
It would be entertaining except that these lunatics have power. God
help us if some nut ever takes a shot at the Obamasiah or some
tweedle dee and tweedle dumb manage to set off another bomb at a
federal building. You thought the Patriot Act was bad. These people
will go insane.
Kyle Jordan|8.13.09 @ 9:40AM|#
"Shit, I wish I thought that point was coming. I'm worried that
all this bullshit is more sustainable than most libertarians
think."
I very much think that you could be correct here. The one think
that gives me... (wait for it.....wait for it.....) hope... is that
for as stupid as I feel Americans are, they are at least, and in my
opinion, greedier than that. Once a large enough segment sees that
they could be getting a "better" deal, they'll begin to really tip
the scale towards the point of absurdity and we will be fairly
close to an end/possible reboot.
Not the cheeriest outlook either way.
<strike>strike through</strike|8.13.09 @ 9:40AM|#
That piece of shit Ed Schultz (of the Ed Show) had Ron Paul
on last night in order to get his take on the guy who showed up
with a (legally carried) gun. Unfortunately, I had to leave before
he was on...
I'm happy to report that Ron Paul handed big Ed his ass on a
platter.
Spoonman|8.13.09 @ 9:42AM|#
I'm happy to report that Ron Paul handed big Ed his ass on a platter.
Fuck yeah. Details?
Spoonman|8.13.09 @ 9:42AM|#
Once a large enough segment sees that they could be getting a "better" deal, they'll begin to really tip the scale towards the point of absurdity and we will be fairly close to an end/possible reboot.
We aren't past the point of absurdity? What do you see it as?
Kyle Jordan|8.13.09 @ 9:43AM|#
"It would be entertaining except that these lunatics have power.
God help us if some nut ever takes a shot at the Obamasiah or some
tweedle dee and tweedle dumb manage to set off another bomb at a
federal building. You thought the Patriot Act was bad. These people
will go insane."
Yep. I've said the same thing several times.
I guess I try not to think about it but fuck, things really look
bad when it all is observed.
Why the fuck can't people just leave others alone?
Kyle Jordan|8.13.09 @ 9:47AM|#
We're past it. Right now it's going downhill. What I was saying is that the sheeple in my vagues scenario would do something that would ratchet up the pace quite a bit. Like going from a slide to a rolling tumble towards the cliff.
|8.13.09 @ 9:48AM|#
"I very much think that you could be correct here. The one think
that gives me... (wait for it.....wait for it.....) hope... is that
for as stupid as I feel Americans are, they are at least, and in my
opinion, greedier than that. Once a large enough segment sees that
they could be getting a "better" deal, they'll begin to really tip
the scale towards the point of absurdity and we will be fairly
close to an end/possible reboot."
I think people just want some peace and quiet. I think that is half
the reason why independents voted for Obama. He seemed like a
reasonable guy and letting the Dems have power for a while would
get people to shut the fuck up and stop screaming all the time. A
lot of people just wanted the arguments of the last 8 years to be
done with.
Instead of taking that cue and telling the country, the last years
are over, we are going to start again and try to get along with
each other, the Dems ran around in their underwear all over the
house screaming trying to restart all of the arguments everyone
thought were finished. Now we have the tea party movement and the
Dems are screaming just as long and just as loud about that even
though they have all the power.
After Clinton, Bush and Obam, the country desparately needs another
President like Eisenhower or Ford. Just someone who doesn't have to
be on TV every stinking day. Someone who doesn't feel the need to
remake the country in their own image. Someone who isn't trying to
write themselves into the history books. And most importantly,
someone who doesn't think their domestic enemies are the agent of
the devil. Sadly, I don't think our current political system can
give us another Eisenhower or Ford. It can only give us maniacal
narcissists.
Spoonman|8.13.09 @ 9:48AM|#
Eh, I think our best hope of that is hyperinflation, not people,
Kyle.
/Since when are things so fucked up that my best hope is food
riots? Jesus.
Spoonman|8.13.09 @ 9:49AM|#
Fuck that, John, give us another Coolidge. Just somebody who doesn't do shit for four years and lets everybody settle the fuck down.
Xeones|8.13.09 @ 9:49AM|#
We're all fascists, now, X-man.
Don't you force a label on me, you fascist.
I, Kahn O\'Clast|8.13.09 @ 9:52AM|#
Protesters on both sides have demonstrated their relative crazy with all the talk of Nazis and hatred/fear of the president. But while I am opposed to the health care overhaul (as I understand it to be evolving) I am not sure that it rises to the level of waging an unjustified war. Sure the dollar costs will be similar, and some people will liken the new system to being water-boarded, but absent actual "death panels" in which thousands are put down against their will, health care reform hardly rises to the level of the Iraq War.
|8.13.09 @ 9:53AM|#
Hey: you angry? Then express your anger like a civilized
person, not a rake-wielding moron, foaming at the mouth, espousing
quarter-baked beliefs of doom and death panels which have been
injected into your malleable squash with all the subtlety of a
turkey baster filled with cottage cheese shoved into a sheep's
rectum.
he sez, as he plants his flag on the moral high ground.
|8.13.09 @ 9:53AM|#
Spoonman,
Coolidge would be a dream. Of course, he would actually cut the
size of government and the media would call him a radical nut mass
murderer for it.
Zeb|8.13.09 @ 9:53AM|#
"Which side are the fascists on again?"
That was my question when I saw the title for this post. I read
until the words "right-wing extremism" before I figured out who is
being called fascists this time.
<strike>strike through</strike|8.13.09 @ 9:53AM|#
I'm happy to report that Ron Paul handed big Ed his ass on a
platter.
Fuck yeah. Details?
Watch it here.
|8.13.09 @ 9:56AM|#
Here's how you know who the real fascists are: Whichever side claims that someone else burned down the Reichstag is the fascist side.
|8.13.09 @ 9:57AM|#
absent actual "death panels" in which thousands are put down
against their will
Just wait 'til the film of predator drones blasting old folks'
homes starts appearing on the Nightly News. They don't
call him the "Surgeon General" for nothing.
|8.13.09 @ 10:05AM|#
Don't laugh but Bush I would be okay. Bush I was an old guy. He
didn't care about reforming the country. He got a few things done.
He fixed the S&L mess and really laid the ground work for the
surplus we got under Clinton. I remember during the 92 campaign the
media was saying that he just didn't act like he wanted to be
President. Looking back at the last 20 years, maybe we shouldn't
have seen that as a bad thing.
I think we need to stop electing anyone under the age of 60. These
guys in the 40s and 50s are just too shallow and insecure for the
job. A grouchy old man who is sketpical of grand schemes would work
nicely.
|8.13.09 @ 10:08AM|#
I actually agree that, as a general rule, these guys in their 40s (I count Bush II in that, because he acted like he was younger) seem to lack something in the role. Less action, more contemplation.
|8.13.09 @ 10:12AM|#
yes Pro. What kind of person sets a three month deadline to completely rework the most contenous and emotionally charged 15% of the economy? And then acts shocked when people get upset about it? Someone who has no self awareness or understanding of how things actually work, that is who.
|8.13.09 @ 10:17AM|#
History will look back on the 90s and the Aughts as the Era of the Juvenile Presidents.
I, Kahn O\'Clast|8.13.09 @ 10:18AM|#
Bush#1 wasn't bad. Not really sure the Panama invasion was quite
appropriate even if Noriega was an ass.... Handled Iraq more
sensibly that his son did. And he did the unpopular move of raising
taxes to help close the deficit which cost him the next election
but was the right thing to do, ultimately. And he also was more
responsible for NAFTA than Clinton was, of which I approve. And he
was a cool head when the Soviet Union collapsed. Had the US tried
to press advantage there, hardliners would probably resurfaced and
things could have turned out much much worse.
So I could go for another GHWB.
|8.13.09 @ 10:21AM|#
History will look back on the 90s and the Aughts as the Era
of the Juvenile Presidents.
In other words, our two Boomer presidents.
|8.13.09 @ 10:25AM|#
I had forgotten about NAFTA. Bush I was kind of a work a day President who got a few significant things done that needed to be done but didn't overreach. That would be nice. He antagonized the nuts on both sides. Any man that can get Ross Perot, Pat Buchanan, and Ralph Nader to hate them can't be that bad.
Warty|8.13.09 @ 10:42AM|#
FNM influence?
Faith No More? Don't think so. Those dudes are a bunch of famous
Swedish metal musicians who formed a punk band for some reason.
|8.13.09 @ 10:48AM|#
"Third: Brush up on our nonviolent resistance -- but leave the
heavy lifting and rough enforcement to the cops."
Cops? Who needs cops when you have SEIU thugs to do the rough
stuff?
MNG|8.13.09 @ 10:49AM|#
You know, a fair amount of commentators here drop the "fascists!" language pretty easily whenever they talk about their political opponents, so for those folks, wtf is up with you being upset at people comparing these angry yelling disruptive fuckers to brownshirts?
Gilbert Martin|8.13.09 @ 10:49AM|#
This stuff is just too funny.
The people who are opposed to the massive expansion of government
power in virtually every aspect of existence being proposed by
Obama and the Democrats are the "facists" instead of the supporters
of it.
Down is the new up.
Dry is the new wet.
Etc. etc.
MNG|8.13.09 @ 10:51AM|#
"when you have SEIU thugs to do the rough stuff?"
Yeah, just the other day a SEIU nut walked into an aerobics class
and shot up several people. And a few months ago some SEIU nut
holed up in his house and ambushed and shot some cops when they
came out.
Oh, no, my bad, those were right-wing anti-liberals/anti-government
types like the kind showing up at these events...
So no wonder people are a little more worried about such folks than
they are SEIU thugs...
MNG|8.13.09 @ 10:52AM|#
Like old faithful, Gilbert Martin shows up to make my point for me. Conservatives are incapable of being satirized, they are walking satire...
|8.13.09 @ 10:56AM|#
The older presidents, imo, are past that "blind ambition" stage.
They have reached the point where they know you can't race full
steam ahead making huge wholesale changes to the country.
or maybe old age and treachery is more subtle?
|8.13.09 @ 10:56AM|#
Yeah MNG it is just terrible and unfair. SEUI members beat up
one black guy and call him a nigger and they are marked for life.
Isn't every union allowed at least one racial slur and beating
every few years?
Are you honestly comparing the people who show up at townhalls to
some nut who went bizerk and shot 14 people? If you are, you are a
troll worse than Lonewacko. Do you really want to play that game?
Because if you do, I guess we can talk about how environmentalists
are the same as ELF and the Unibomber or how legitimate anti-war
protesters are the same as the anti-semetic Hamas supporters who
show up at their marches. If you don't want to play that game, shut
the fuck up about it.
MNG|8.13.09 @ 10:57AM|#
I thought my liberal friends who called Bush a fascist dictator
were insane.
A fascist dictator does not have his major programs (Social
Security reform) crushed. He does not barely win re-election. He
does not have top ten movies made exclusively to mock him
(Farenhheit 9/11). Etc.
This word fascist needs to be retired in our political
discourse.
|8.13.09 @ 10:57AM|#
"Oh, no, my bad, those were right-wing
anti-liberals/anti-government types like the kind showing up at
these events..."
You can't be serious.
|8.13.09 @ 10:58AM|#
Both sides are so goddamn stupid that it's really fun to watch this grow and grow. We're so completely beyond the point of reason in politics here in the US that I think we may have to wait until it all burns and start over fresh at this point.
Nope, that's an even of probability zero. I'll bet you large sums
of money that that won't happen. The perennial Marxist idea of "if
we only lose too much, then things will suddenly swing back our way
once the contradictions are heightened" never works. As a mental
defense mechanism, it's a way to deal with a situation you don't
like, but it never works for predicting the future.
Oh, no, my bad, those were right-wing anti-liberals/anti-government types like the kind showing up at these events...
Ah, so MNG is fine with associating liberals and progressives with
Jim Jones and animal rights extremists, then?
MNG|8.13.09 @ 10:59AM|#
Look John, the people being focused on at these events are espousing rhetoric very similar to that found on those recent right wing nuts who shot up people...People are going to make that connection.
|8.13.09 @ 10:59AM|#
"I thought my liberal friends who called Bush a fascist dictator
were insane."
Do you include John Glenn ("its just that Hilter business") and Al
Gore ("brown shirts") among the list of insane? Just wondering.
MNG|8.13.09 @ 11:00AM|#
Except liberals don't even espouse the same basic points as the ELF, so there's that difference.
|8.13.09 @ 11:01AM|#
"Look John, the people being focused on at these events are
espousing rhetoric very similar to that found on those recent right
wing nuts who shot up people...People are going to make that
connection."
Then I guess people are right to make the connection between people
who criticize Israel and call it an Apartheid state and Islamic
radicals calling for another Holocaust. I guess people are going to
connect the Sierra Club with ELF and the unibomber.
Two can play that game. And it is a retarded and destructive
game.
|8.13.09 @ 11:02AM|#
"Except liberals don't even espouse the same basic points as the
ELF, so there's that difference"
No not at all. That is why liberal Congressional leaders call those
who oppose cap and trade "traitors to the earth". If they really
are traitors to the entire planet, can you blame people like ELF
for acting violently on it?
|8.13.09 @ 11:03AM|#
I'm curious just how long it will be before the MSM trots out all the _______ supremacists and anti income tax folks and truthers and birthers and such and connects them to the Libertarian party through blogs and other very tenous associations. It will be closely followed by the connection between hard right republicans and libertarians. It is almost certainly gonna happen. Any bets on how soon?
MNG|8.13.09 @ 11:03AM|#
Poor analogy. The Sierra Club is not acting in such an angry,
unpredictable manner. And it's points differ a lot from the ELF's
points.
The protestors are acting in an angry unpredictable manner, much
like the shooters. And their points are pretty much the same
ones.
|8.13.09 @ 11:05AM|#
"Al Gore called Bush a fascist dictator?"
He said George Bush and his supporters were brown shirts and used
brown shirt tactics. That is calling someone a Nazi.
You are worse fraud than Joe MNG. You say that, you thought that
liberals who called Bush a Nazi were insane. But then when you are
confronted and asked to call specific liberals who did just that
insane, you snivel and whine that that is not what they
meant.
Just admit it that in your view no liberal is ever over the line.
No liberal tactic or remark is ever objectionable. And stop
insulting our intelligence by pretending that you have any
standards whatsoever when it comes to your own side.
MNG|8.13.09 @ 11:07AM|#
btw
I personally think it's an incorrect connection to make. Some of
the protestors are nuts, sure, maybe even worrisome nuts, and
actively disrupting things is just an asshole thing for anyone to
do.
However, if you want to understand why so many people are afraid of
these protestors I've just explained why.
|8.13.09 @ 11:07AM|#
"The protestors are acting in an angry unpredictable manner,
much like the shooters. And their points are pretty much the same
ones."
OMG they are unpredictable. Look it is a bunch of old people in
tennis shoes. Run!! This from the same person who no doubt things
the roving bands of protestors who go to G8 summits and break
windows are just A-Ok. This is pathetic MNG. Even for you, this is
pathetic.
|8.13.09 @ 11:09AM|#
You mean this SEIU thug?
Elston K. McCowan is a former organizer now the Public Service
Director of SEIU Local 2000 and board member of the Walbridge
Community Education Center, and is a Baptist minister, has been a
community organizer for more than 23 years, and now, he is running
for Mayor of the City of St. Louis under the Green
Party.
He's like the perfect storm of asshole. Union leader + Baptist
minister + community organizer + Green Party candidate.
Impressive.
I hope the guy who got beat up, who apparently has no health
insurance, sues the pants off the SEIU.
|8.13.09 @ 11:09AM|#
"However, if you want to understand why so many people are
afraid of these protestors I've just explained why."
Who is afraid of the protestors? The only person that has gotten
beaten up at any of these things was that poor black guy in St.
Louis. The only people who are afraid of the protestors are people
who are terrified that somone besides them will actually get a say
about anything. Free speech and assembly is just a bitch isn't
it?
|8.13.09 @ 11:09AM|#
The protestors are acting in an angry unpredictable manner,
much like the shooters.
Dear God, MNG. Do you really not see how stupid this makes you
look?
The protestors are actually acting in a very angry,
predictable manner. And none of them has been violent,
unlike the Dem/SEIU operatives recruited to "keep order" at some of
the town halls.
I mean, really, you're saying "Look, there's somebody who is angry,
and non-violent. And over there is somebody who is angry, and
violent. There's practically no difference!"
|8.13.09 @ 11:10AM|#
Let me see if I have this straight- the people opposing the
expansion of the central gov't- they're the fascists?
From John Flynn, "As We Go Marching" (1944)
"When you can put your finger on the men or the groups that urge
for America the debt-supported state, the autarchial corporative
state, the state bent on the socialization of investment and the
bureaucratic government of industry and society, the establishment
of the institution of militarism as the great glamorous
public-works project of the nation and the institution of
imperialism udner which it proposes to regulate and rule the world
and, along with this, proposes to alter the forms of our government
to approach as closely as possible the unrestrained, absolute
government- then you will know you have located the authentic
fascist." p. 252
MNG|8.13.09 @ 11:11AM|#
"He said George Bush and his supporters were brown shirts and
used brown shirt tactics."
Let me see the quote.
I think he was talking about the asshole mob down in Florida. To
the extent brownshirts intentionally disrupted opponent's meetings,
to say brown shirt tactics were used is not totally wrong, though
its hyperbole. The reason people hate the brownshirts is not just
that they disrupted but that they beat the shit out of people.
Warty|8.13.09 @ 11:11AM|#
walked into an aerobics class and shot up several
people.
That's pathetically low, moron. Did you read the gym shooter's
website, dumbass? He was happy that Obama won the election, retard.
Not only that, shithead, but he WAS COMPLETELY OUT-OF-HIS-MIND
CRAZY. Idiot.
|8.13.09 @ 11:12AM|#
The exercise class shooter seemed to think that if he couldn't
have a woman, then it was OK to go shoot a bunch of them. The
ex-husband thought he had the right to make his wife come back to
him.
Linking these two fuckwads to the anti-Obamacare movement is
disingenuous in the extreme.
I don't know what stooping to sub-Tony levels of bullshit is
supposed to accomplish.
|8.13.09 @ 11:13AM|#
Yes MNG, Showing up in large numbers and demanding to be heard is just like brown shirts. Brown shirts showed up with ball bats and beat and killed people. They terrorized entire populations. It is not hyperbole. It is just lying.
MNG|8.13.09 @ 11:13AM|#
RC
But the latter group is saying the same extreme things...That's
"the hook."
|8.13.09 @ 11:15AM|#
MNG,
If you don't like the protestors fine. If you think they are jerks
and are not representative of what they country actually
represents, fine. If you think they should be ignored, fine. But
shut up with the "they are unpredictable and dangerous" bullshit.
That is sub moronic.
|8.13.09 @ 11:15AM|#
He's like the perfect storm of asshole.
Genetic engineering will eventually create the perfect asshole. We
need to find a way to add the "journalist" gene somehow.
|8.13.09 @ 11:16AM|#
MNG,
Are the mobs who routinely show up and shout down unPC speakers at
universities "unpredictable and dangerous"?
|8.13.09 @ 11:17AM|#
"Genetic engineering will eventually create the perfect asshole.
We need to find a way to add the "journalist" gene somehow."
I bet he writes an opinion collmn for some local rag. There is real
chance that the asshole singularity has been reached.
|8.13.09 @ 11:17AM|#
Johnny Longtorso, the journalist gene is now obsolete due to universal access to the interweb. We're all journos now.
Warty|8.13.09 @ 11:19AM|#
I bet he writes an opinion collmn for some local
rag.
No, he writes a political column for a college newspaper, and he
dates the paper's sororitute "sex columnist". They go to Take Back
The Night rallies together.
|8.13.09 @ 11:20AM|#
No, but that IS what these assholes want. That piece of shit Ed Schultz (of the Ed Show) had Ron Paul on last night in order to get his take on the guy who showed up with a (legally carried) gun. Unfortunately, I had to leave before he was on, but the implication was that the protesters want to shoot Obama. The Left has jumped the shark.
Why the FUCK would anyone bring a gun to a presidential appearance?
Who gives a shit if it's legal. It's also legal to take a shit on
the dinner table, but you don't do it because it's insane. The guy
carrying the gun claimed it was for self defense (paranoid much?)
yet carried a sign that read "water the tree of liberty" [with the
blood of tyrants and patriots].
There's always someone crazier out there. If this guy is somehow
representative of a mainstream, then we really have to worry about
what the actual nuts are itching to do.
|8.13.09 @ 11:23AM|#
"I'd like to see how long it would take before I could make
Klein cry."
About two mintues. He would be snivelling and talking about how you
are redneck and just don't understand what enlightened people like
him and his buddies on the journolist do.
Xeones|8.13.09 @ 11:25AM|#
MNG, you're INFINITY a fascist. By the rules of today's
political discourse, this means i win the debate.
Tony, shut the fuck up.
I'd like to see how long it would take before I could make
Klein cry.
Fascist, homophobe.
|8.13.09 @ 11:25AM|#
Klein's sole purpose in life is to make people think that maybe Glen Greenwald isn't such a dousche after all.
MNG|8.13.09 @ 11:25AM|#
"Are the mobs who routinely show up and shout down unPC speakers
at universities "unpredictable and dangerous"?"
Lord yes. The worst is BAMM.
|8.13.09 @ 11:26AM|#
A weepy little emo douche was stalking one of my student workers a few years ago. I asked her if she want me to talk him into committing suicide. She was too soft-hearted.
|8.13.09 @ 11:26AM|#
Tony, in NH it's not only legal to open carry, but quite common
which is why the police and secret service didn't bat an eye. Only
Chris Matthews went ape shit.
That said, we'll probably never know if or for how long the SS
sniper was trained on him.
Warty|8.13.09 @ 11:27AM|#
SugarFree, all it takes to make a grown man cry is an ankle lock. It would be trivial on a half-man like him.
Gunboat Diplomacy|8.13.09 @ 11:28AM|#
"However, if you want to understand why so many people are
afraid of these protestors I've just explained why."
False assertion. No one is afraid of the protesters. It is a
media-generated canard.
|8.13.09 @ 11:30AM|#
Xeones,
You're a serial accuser and, therefore, an unreliable witness.
You're an ISTIST!
Is Klein gay? I figured he dated some hatchet-faced harridan with
vulvodynia he met in Gender Studies class.
|8.13.09 @ 11:30AM|#
I asked her if she want me to talk him into committing
suicide. She was too soft-hearted.
You asked? You soft-hearted weenie.
|8.13.09 @ 11:31AM|#
Warty, I mean with just words. I'll even take the handicapped of avoiding jokes about Judaism.
Xeones|8.13.09 @ 11:31AM|#
It would be trivial on a half-man like him.
Get right in his face, use a slightly raised voice, punctuate with
light pushes on his chest. It will break him.
Belicose@Bradenberg|8.13.09 @ 11:32AM|#
That's pathetically low, moron. Did you read the gym
shooter's website, dumbass? He was happy that Obama won the
election, retard. Not only that, shithead, but he WAS COMPLETELY
OUT-OF-HIS-MIND CRAZY. Idiot.
Every leftist man has a gym class shooter on the inside. They may
even claim to be feminist, but their passive aggressive hatred for
women eats away at their insides with the only respite from that
pain due to their fear of women is to lash out at those who are not
their ideological kin. That solvent is only effective for so
long.
MNG|8.13.09 @ 11:33AM|#
"No one is afraid of the protesters. It is a media-generated
canard."
That statement is like Algernon retarded.
Gunboat Diplomacy|8.13.09 @ 11:33AM|#
"Why the FUCK would anyone bring a gun to a presidential
appearance?"
Second Ammendment, dipshit.
Xeones|8.13.09 @ 11:34AM|#
Is Klein gay?
Who knows? I doubt he scores with ANYBODY.
You're still a fascist, though. Fascist.
MNG|8.13.09 @ 11:36AM|#
When a guy shows up at a public event with a gun and a sign saying in effect "it's time to start killing people" that's a little disturbing to many folks...
|8.13.09 @ 11:36AM|#
Vulvodynia
It's something the Feministing gals complain about all the time.
Shooting pains in the sculch that totally have nothing to do with
not being attracted to the beta male "feminists" they force
themselves to date.
|8.13.09 @ 11:36AM|#
I bet he writes an opinion collmn for some local rag. There
is real chance that the asshole singularity has been
reached.
A True Asshole (tm) would write for something that could qualify as
the MSM. Fred Clark (blogs under the name 'Slacktivist') is an
evangelical and a 'journalist' for a mainstream paper, and does
acting. He may be a better candidate for The Bionic Asshole ("We
have the technology. We can make him faster, stronger, more
asshole-y...").
|8.13.09 @ 11:40AM|#
I agree with MNG (I know, holy shit, right?) that many people
are afraid of the protesters. Let's see, there's the people who
think guns are magic, Democratic politicians who worry about
re-election, and Chris Matthews.
I'm sure there are others, but MNG is right that little bitches are
afraid of the protesters.
MNG|8.13.09 @ 11:40AM|#
Sorry, it's BAMN (by any means necessary). When I worked with Ward Connerly's group fighting affirmative action this student group would show up and shout down speakers. Assholes.
Xeones|8.13.09 @ 11:41AM|#
that's a little disturbing to many folks...
As long as those folks are the ones in power, i'm completely ok
with that. A government SHOULD fear its people, fascist.
Gunboat Diplomacy|8.13.09 @ 11:42AM|#
"That statement is like Algernon retarded."
Hey fuckwad, go link me a quote of someone saying, "I am afraid of
the protesters."
You're like fucking Tony Lite.
|8.13.09 @ 11:44AM|#
"Why the FUCK would anyone bring a gun to a presidential
appearance?"
To defend yourself from union goons.
guy in the back row|8.13.09 @ 11:44AM|#
subtlety of a turkey baster filled with cottage cheese
shoved into a sheep's rectum
Do you need to attend an Ivy school to learn such rich prose?
|8.13.09 @ 11:46AM|#
Someone who doesn't feel the need to remake the country in
their own image. Someone who isn't trying to write themselves into
the history books. And most importantly, someone who doesn't think
their domestic enemies are the agent of the devil.
Only people like that on the national stage are Ron Paul and Joe
Biden.
|8.13.09 @ 11:47AM|#
Is there anyway with INCIF to tag a commenter's handle to change it to another handle instead of just filtering them?
Belicose@Bradenberg|8.13.09 @ 11:50AM|#
Tony doesn't like guns because he knows what he would do with
one if he ever had one. That is, shoot women for all the years of
rejection and slow twisting lies he has to tell himself.
MNG is happy in his relationship, but it is a beta male one, and so
he too is aware of the shadow that lingers in the darker depths.
Don't give in, Mr. MNG. You too can remain a relatively healthy
minded and happy person, just not to the extent of a non leftist
man.
Gunboat Diplomacy|8.13.09 @ 11:51AM|#
"Tony doesn't like guns because he knows what he would do with
one if he ever had one. That is, shoot women for all the years of
rejection and slow twisting lies he has to tell himself."
FTR, Tony is openly gay (NTTAWWT).
|8.13.09 @ 11:51AM|#
But the latter group is saying the same extreme
things...That's "the hook."
What are you talking about, MNG? So far, the discussion has covered
two groups that have used violence - the Dem/SEIU operatives, and
the nutbars who can't get laid. Exactly what "same extreme things"
are they saying that the anti-Obamacare people are also saying?
Xeones|8.13.09 @ 11:53AM|#
Only people like that on the national stage are Ron Paul and
Joe Biden.
Retard Joe isn't trying to write himself into the history books
because he's illiterate, and can't.
Ron Paul would just have somebody ghostwrite the history books.
Belicose@Bradenberg|8.13.09 @ 11:55AM|#
The absolute worst though is Steve Smith. If he doesn't have a woman tied up in his basement with a few missing fingers, it would be surprising to say the least.
|8.13.09 @ 11:56AM|#
If he doesn't have a woman tied up in his
basement
Does Bigfoot have the manual dexterity to work knots?
Tony|8.13.09 @ 11:57AM|#
Second Ammendment, dipshit.
Just because you have a right doesn't make it necessary to practice
it at all times in the most obnoxious way possible.
It is scary to me that the people most concerned about their 2nd
amendment rights are also the craziest and stupidest.
MNG|8.13.09 @ 11:57AM|#
Xeones, I generally agree, but the ones in power ain't sweating it, it's the other citizens who have come to the event. It's just bad form at the least...
|8.13.09 @ 11:58AM|#
Does Bigfoot have the manual dexterity to work
knots?
He developed it after the folly of trying to use duct tape.
Ben Kenobi|8.13.09 @ 12:00PM|#
"Why the FUCK would anyone bring a gun to a presidential
appearance?"
Why the fuck do you care? More people need to learn to mind their
own business.
|8.13.09 @ 12:02PM|#
Just because you have a right doesn't mean you should be allowed to exercise it.
Xeones|8.13.09 @ 12:03PM|#
MNG, an awful lot of town-hall-having congressthings have been squawking over these disruptions, famously including Speaker of the Motherfucking House Nancy "They Had Swastikas" Pelosi. I'd say there's some sweating going on.
MNG|8.13.09 @ 12:03PM|#
Ben
People care when angry men with extreme right wing views bring guns
to events because of all the recent news stories about angry men
with extreme right wing views shooting people.
Belicose@Bradenberg|8.13.09 @ 12:04PM|#
Most commentators come here to engage in thoughts with like
minded souls. That is what a normal person does. Some moderate to
liberal types come here for constructive debate and general
amusement, like New Mejican, Elemenope, and MNG on most days. That
too is normal.
Than there are the lefty trolls who come to the site day in and day
out to spit spite at those of whom they have nothing in common.
That is double Y territory because the only purpose for that sort
of behavior is to feed a pathology. Get to a shrink Tony,
Edward/Leftiti/William, and Steve Smith.
MNG|8.13.09 @ 12:05PM|#
"But your assessment of MNG is spot on."
Look GD, you said something retarded, I called you on it, it
happens. No need to get your panties in a twist over it.
|8.13.09 @ 12:05PM|#
Just because you have a right doesn't make it necessary to
practice it at all times in the most obnoxious way
possible.
I mean, that dopey "First Amendment" shouldn't include the right to
make politicians fell unloved or uncomfortable. It's wrong, and
hurtful.
Tony|8.13.09 @ 12:05PM|#
I have a right to spit in my grandmother's face. That doesn't
make it polite.
You have a right to carry a gun. That doesn't make it appropriate
to do so at a presidential appearance while holding a sign implying
you want him dead. I don't want you arrested for exercising your
right, I want you ridiculed and shamed for doing so in an obnoxious
and threatening way.
Second amendment fanatics are the strongest argument against the
second amendment.
Belicose@Bradenberg|8.13.09 @ 12:11PM|#
FTR, Tony is openly gay (NTTAWWT).
I'll have to recalibrate my super computer used for
micro-psychohistory for that bit of information.
Run for the hills, everybody, Tony has the bomb!
|8.13.09 @ 12:13PM|#
I have a right to spit in my grandmother's face. That
doesn't make it polite.
And politicians who want to take money from one group of citizens
and redistribute it "fairly" amongst another group are exactly the
same as your kindly old Granny.
Can you pull the tablecloth out from under the dishes without
breakinhg anything, too?
Tony|8.13.09 @ 12:15PM|#
I'll have to recalibrate my super computer used for micro-psychohistory for that bit of information.
I'll help you out. Rejection is not as much of a psychological
motivator since if I ever get rejected it's pretty easy to find
someone else to fuck in short order.
Straight guys suffering a pussy drought have a scary tendency to
become terrorists, though.
Gunboat Diplomacy|8.13.09 @ 12:16PM|#
"Just because you have a right doesn't make it necessary to
practice it at all times in the most obnoxious way possible."
Epic. Fail.
MNG|8.13.09 @ 12:17PM|#
Look, certainly many liberals have to get over their "guns are
magic" mentality (usually born from ignorance I find). But those of
us more comfortable with firearms should also be able to understand
why people would be nervous about someone carrying a gun with a
sign indicating that it is time to start killing people.
When a neo-Nazi exercises his 1st Amendment rights in an asshole
way we can agree he has the right to do so but that he still is
bothering people.
|8.13.09 @ 12:18PM|#
Straight guys suffering a pussy drought have a scary
tendency to become terrorists, though.
This makes no sense. It's single guys doing the killing. If you
were correct, it would be married men that were going postal.
|8.13.09 @ 12:18PM|#
Steve Smith is the gentle forest ape of the Pacific Northwest, not a Super Mutant.
Gunboat Diplomacy|8.13.09 @ 12:19PM|#
"Look GD, you said something retarded, I called you on it, it
happens. No need to get your panties in a twist over it."
Still waiting for that link, bitch. You knmow, the one where the
person is quoted saying, "The scared me."
MNG|8.13.09 @ 12:20PM|#
To be honest, I'm more bothered by people who aim to be
disruptive than the guy carrying the gun in NH. He seemed to just
be registering his opinion to me.
I can see why some people would be made nervous of course, but he's
just being obnoxious at worst, an active citizen at best.
Tony|8.13.09 @ 12:21PM|#
Gunboat,
You can't possibly disagree with that sentence. I want to know why
he felt it necessary to bring a gun to a presidential appearance,
and saying because he has the right is not a reason.
MNG|8.13.09 @ 12:22PM|#
"Still waiting for that link, bitch."
Hey GD, no reason to badger your mother. She's, er, busy with me at
the minute anways. Doesn't have a free hand to look up a link for
ya if ya understand.
Belicose@Bradenberg|8.13.09 @ 12:22PM|#
Well, thanks for the assistance, Tony. Just to make the data
more complete so we can better gauge when to duck, answer
this:
Does your hatred of women stem from the fact that you will never be
as pretty as even an average looking woman? (ducks)
|8.13.09 @ 12:23PM|#
Alert: Liberulz, get your smelling salts ready!
Q: What do JFK and Obama have in common?
A: Nothing, yet.
|8.13.09 @ 12:23PM|#
Straight guys suffering a pussy drought have a scary
tendency to become terrorists, though.
Can you explain this to MNG, please.
Tony|8.13.09 @ 12:24PM|#
Does your hatred of women stem from the fact that you will never be as pretty as even an average looking woman? (ducks)
I love women, and I'm prettier than most.
MNG|8.13.09 @ 12:24PM|#
Bradenberg is like some strange cross between Jung and a
retarded woman.
It's your side that's been going out and shooting people lately,
not ours. If anyone should be breaking out the psychology...
Warty|8.13.09 @ 12:25PM|#
I want to know why he felt it necessary to bring a gun to a
presidential appearance
Probably because he always carries a gun everywhere he goes. We
exist, shithead.
Belicose@Bradenberg|8.13.09 @ 12:25PM|#
SugarFree | August 13, 2009, 12:19pm | #
Belicose@Bradenberg,
You forgot Chad.
In my defense, he is very forgettable.
MNG|8.13.09 @ 12:26PM|#
P Brooks
I know you don't much about liberals, but this liberal never
expected Obama to be JFK, and for that matter I'm no big fan of
JFK...As for Obama, he's better than Bush is about what I can say,
which I hope you can get is not exactly high praise from me...
MNG|8.13.09 @ 12:28PM|#
Warty
If you want or feel the need to carry a gun everywhere you go I
don't have any real beef with you. But certainly you can respect
and acknowledge that your doing so at a public event might make
people around you nervous or upset?
And please don't say "well of course they might, but fuck them, I
have a right to do that." Because that's what people who smell
funny say when its pointed out that people might be bothered by
their smell...
|8.13.09 @ 12:28PM|#
Tony, the rest of the statement is "with the blood of tyrants and patriots." Maybe he was saying, by bringing his loaded gun, that if he wants to end his life he'll do it himself, rather than by govt doctor counseling.
MNG|8.13.09 @ 12:29PM|#
"But certainly you can respect and acknowledge that your doing
so at a public event might make people around you nervous or
upset?"
Especially if you're carrying a sign about killing people...
Belicose@Bradenberg|8.13.09 @ 12:30PM|#
It's your side that's been going out and shooting people
lately, not ours. If anyone should be breaking out the
psychology...
On a scale of 8 to 10, MNG, how much sympathy do you feel for the
gym class shooter? Come on, breath in, relax a little, let it out.
Admitting it will do you some good.
Warty|8.13.09 @ 12:30PM|#
MNG, I don't carry a gun very often, mostly because it's a big pain in the ass. I do, however, like to go barefoot outside. Draw your own conclusions.
|8.13.09 @ 12:31PM|#
This comment thread, racists, amuses me greatly, fucktards.
However the seemingly willful, fascists, miss-characterization of
people, libtards, attempting to peaceably engage their
representatives, bitches, is saddening.
Wow, where'd those extra words come from? Ah well, whatever, I
guess it fits with the tone of the thread.
I'd like to add that saying that just because it's my right to do a
thing doesn't mean I should be allowed to do it, is about the most
silly and ignorant thing I've heard in a while.
Tony|8.13.09 @ 12:32PM|#
Probably because he always carries a gun everywhere he goes. We exist, shithead.
Hey if you want to live in your paranoid version of a Rambo movie
that's your business.
Had a conversation with a friend about this yesterday. He said to
forget about the moron with the gun because during the Bush admin.,
if a plane carrying Bush and Cheney crashed into a mountain he'd
probably have champagne and nibblies to celebrate.
But am I wrong to feel there's something just a little frightening
about redneck guy + gun + sign advocating killing public officials
+ presidential appearance + American presidents' habit of getting
their heads blown off?
Citizen Nothing|8.13.09 @ 12:33PM|#
I think anyone who goes on a shooting spree is, pretty much by
definition, pro gun.
And I wouldn't be surprised if most abortions are provided by folks
who are pro-abortion, and most folks who are sentenced to death are
sentenced by those who are pro death-penality.
robc|8.13.09 @ 12:34PM|#
I have a right to spit in my grandmother's face.
Actually, no you dont. That is assualt and/or battery.
Kyle Jordan|8.13.09 @ 12:34PM|#
"In far more important news, Les Paul died."
FUCK THAT!!!!! FUCK THAT SHIT!
Damnit! This sucks.
Belicose@Bradenberg |8.13.09 @ 12:35PM|#
I love women, and I'm prettier than most.
Tony, come on now, if you really loved women, wouldn't you throw
some dick their way?
Warty|8.13.09 @ 12:35PM|#
I guess it fits with the tone of the thread.
Fuck off, you menses drinker.
Tony|8.13.09 @ 12:35PM|#
I'd like to add that saying that just because it's my right to do a thing doesn't mean I should be allowed to do it, is about the most silly and ignorant thing I've heard in a while.
Nobody said that. Being allowed to do something doesn't always mean
you should. Anyone who practices good manners understands this.
robc|8.13.09 @ 12:36PM|#
American presidents' habit of getting their heads blown
off?
Lincoln
McKinley
Kennedy.
Am I missing any, because that doesnt sound like neough to call a
"habit". And, yes, I even went loose with "head blown off".
Xeones|8.13.09 @ 12:36PM|#
But am I wrong to feel there's something just a little
frightening about redneck guy + gun + sign advocating killing
public officials + presidential appearance + American presidents'
habit of getting their heads blown off?
Yes. But then, you're wrong about pretty much everything, with the
exception of drugs. You're alright on drugs, fascist.
Warty|8.13.09 @ 12:36PM|#
But am I wrong to feel there's something just a little
frightening about redneck guy + gun + sign advocating killing
public officials + presidential appearance + American presidents'
habit of getting their heads blown off?
Yes. Now choke yourself.
Citizen Nothing|8.13.09 @ 12:37PM|#
In far more important news, Les Paul died.
Wow. I was just at the Rock and Roll Hall of Fame yesterday --
they've got an interesting exhibit detailing his fight with Gibson
to finally produce the solid body electric guitar.
Tony|8.13.09 @ 12:37PM|#
Tony, come on now, if you really loved women, wouldn't you throw some dick their way?
The problem is my dick wouldn't be aerodynamic enough if it were
aimed at a woman.
|8.13.09 @ 12:38PM|#
But am I wrong to feel there's something just a little
frightening about redneck guy + gun + sign advocating killing
public officials + presidential appearance + American presidents'
habit of getting their heads blown off?
Only if you're an elected official, should you be frightened, and
that is precisely the point.
|8.13.09 @ 12:39PM|#
I thought McKinley was shot in the torso.
I don't know about everyone else, but I'm sick of your McKinley
conspiracy bullshit.
|8.13.09 @ 12:39PM|#
Citizen Nothing, that depends on ones definition of pro-gun. Mine involves pushing for our second amendment rights. If I were a criminal, or thinking of becoming a criminal, I'd much prefer more strict gun controls, making my illegal violent act much safer. So, I'd likely consider myself in support of anti-gun legislation.
Warty|8.13.09 @ 12:41PM|#
I'd likely consider myself in support of anti-gun
legislation.
You would, fascist.
MNG|8.13.09 @ 12:41PM|#
"Come on, breath in, relax a little, let it out."
I'm pretty relaxed GD, as I said up thread your mom saw to
that.
And curiously "let it out" is what she said to me to...
|8.13.09 @ 12:41PM|#
The problem is my dick wouldn't be aerodynamic enough if it
were aimed at a woman.
There's a feminist joke in there somewhere.
Citizen Nothing|8.13.09 @ 12:42PM|#
Do you know there's a huge monument on the Antietem battlefield,
commemorating (then Sergeant) McKinley's ability to get coffee and
grub to Union troops under fire?
True story.
Tony|8.13.09 @ 12:43PM|#
Only if you're an elected official, should you be frightened, and that is precisely the point.
Bullshit. Elected officials should not have to live in fear of
being shot. They should have to live in fear of not being
reelected.
These protesters don't like the party in charge. The responsible
citizenshippy thing to do is work on getting your guys elected next
time. Not threaten social unrest. These are all policy differences,
but some have turned it into a battle for civilization itself,
which is crazy talk since civilization barely survived the last
time their guys were in charge.
Citizen Nothing|8.13.09 @ 12:43PM|#
That's really the best reason I've ever heard for voting for a president who actually got elected.
MNG|8.13.09 @ 12:44PM|#
"Do you know there's a huge monument on the Antietem
battlefield, commemorating (then Sergeant) McKinley's ability to
get coffee and grub to Union troops under fire?"
By any chance was it built during the McKinley administration?
T|8.13.09 @ 12:44PM|#
But am I wrong to feel there's something just a little
frightening about redneck guy + gun + sign advocating killing
public officials + presidential appearance + American presidents'
habit of getting their heads blown off?
Here's a little thought experiment. If you had any intention of
offing the president, would you be the guy standing there with a
pistol openly displayed and holding a sign? Really, even somebody
as bedbug crazy as Squeaky Fromme knew better than that.
Xeones|8.13.09 @ 12:45PM|#
I don't know about everyone else, but I'm sick of your
McKinley conspiracy bullshit.
You can't keep the truth buried forever, you fascist!
Citizen Nothing|8.13.09 @ 12:45PM|#
Shorter Tony:
The majority is always right, so shut the fuck up you wingnuts.
MNG|8.13.09 @ 12:45PM|#
"These are all policy differences, but some have turned it into
a battle for civilization itself, which is crazy talk since
civilization barely survived the last time their guys were in
charge."
Tony, this was a great comment until after the second comma, where
you essentially do the same over the top hyperbole-mindset you
denounced so well earlier.
Citizen Nothing|8.13.09 @ 12:46PM|#
By any chance was it built during the McKinley
administration?
I'm willing to bet on it!
|8.13.09 @ 12:46PM|#
People who go on "shooting sprees" are more likely to be
anti-people than anything else.
(NTTAWT)
Belicose@Bradenberg|8.13.09 @ 12:46PM|#
The problem is my dick wouldn't be aerodynamic enough if it
were aimed at a woman.
Just because it is tethered doesn't mean you can't pop it around
the court a few times before it inevitably snaps back.
MNG|8.13.09 @ 12:46PM|#
"You can't keep the truth buried forever, you fascist!"
The truth maybe, but we can keep McKinley buried forever. Face it
X, he ain't coming back to save you, "we've" seen to that...
Xeones|8.13.09 @ 12:46PM|#
but some have turned it into a battle for civilization
itself, which is crazy talk since civilization barely survived the
last time their guys were in charge.
Once again, pot and kettle are hanging out on either side of a
comma in one of Tony's sentences, not speaking to each other.
T|8.13.09 @ 12:47PM|#
The responsible citizenshippy thing to do is work on getting
your guys elected next time. Not threaten social unrest.
So, civil disobedience is never justified?
|8.13.09 @ 12:47PM|#
Yes, Tony, there is something wrong about feeling terrified just
because another, upon whom is hung the amorphous moniker "redneck,"
shows up with a gun at the site of a presidential appearance.
Tony, even if some person gunned down Obama, so what?
robc|8.13.09 @ 12:47PM|#
I thought McKinley was shot in the torso.
I even went loose with "head blown off".
^^^I already covered that.
Garfield was the one I couldnt remember. So, two to head, two to
torso?
Not exactly an epidemic.
|8.13.09 @ 12:49PM|#
2 things:
1. CBS ran a story yesterday (it was their #2 story) on its morning
show on the rise of scary right-wing militias, based entirely on
the SPLC report. In fact, it was an SPLC press release with better
production values.
2. On the Steven Weber/Huffpo piece quoted above: Nothing says
"those people are crazy!" like an unhinged, spittle-flecked blog
post about the crazies.
Xeones|8.13.09 @ 12:49PM|#
^^^I already covered that.
Criticizing my pedantry is a very fascist thing to do, robc. You
sure you wanna go down that road?
Enyap|8.13.09 @ 12:49PM|#
MNG, the aerobics class shooter was a 48yo virgin whole took out his rage on a class full of women, how exactly does that relate to being antigovernment. Please get your damn facts straight dumbfuck.
|8.13.09 @ 12:50PM|#
They should have to live in fear of not being
reelected.
So you're on board with us in scrapping McCain-Feingold, and all
the other incumbent protection measures currently in place?
Citizen Nothing|8.13.09 @ 12:51PM|#
There's a huge statue of McKinley within sight of my office. We just need David Blain to bring him to life.
|8.13.09 @ 12:53PM|#
Tony does not appear to understand that the position he takes, as usual, supports mob rule and violence.
Citizen Nothing|8.13.09 @ 12:54PM|#
Of course, giant McKinley would probably just be shot by giant Leon Czolgosz.
Tomcat1066|8.13.09 @ 12:54PM|#
Just because you have a right doesn't make it necessary to
practice it at all times in the most obnoxious way
possible.
And yet, you keep exercising your freedom of speech, don't
you?
But am I wrong to feel there's something just a little
frightening about redneck guy + gun + sign advocating killing
public officials + presidential appearance + American presidents'
habit of getting their heads blown off?
Well, since the poster made referense to the quote about the tree
of liberty needing to be watered with the blood of patriots and
tyrants, and since we can safely assume that the gentleman with the
poster and the pistol considers himself a patriot, then what
concern would Obama have? I mean, unless you consider him a
tyrrant.
|8.13.09 @ 12:55PM|#
Zombie Coolidge for Emperor!
If I get invited for dinner at the White House, I think I'll
decline.
Citizen Nothing|8.13.09 @ 12:56PM|#
And Czolgosz was...wait for it... an anarchist.
See where this is going?
Tony|8.13.09 @ 12:57PM|#
And yet, you keep exercising your freedom of speech, don't you?
I don't use it to shout down speakers at town halls. Human social
interaction is governed by more things than the law, you know.
|8.13.09 @ 12:58PM|#
Bullshit. Elected officials should not have to live in fear
of being shot. They should have to live in fear of not being
reelected.
This would be all well and good if it wasn't eminently clear that
in the last big election, many, many people voted for someone they
knew little about, and much of what they knew was false. Not only
that, but despite many of our best, civil efforts, criminal
nut-jobs are re-elected, while small government proponents, looking
out for our rights, are maligned, and voted out. Eventually you
have to acknowledge that the "civil" efforts aren't working, and
the system is broken. Where does that leave freedom loving people?
What should we do when we see our rights and freedoms being
bargained away? Call our congress critter for the umpteenth
time?
Tomcat1066|8.13.09 @ 12:59PM|#
Yes, it is. But just because it's legal doesn't mean you have to do it, right? I mean, that's your whole argument against carrying a firearm to Obama's town hall after all.
Gunboat Diplomacy|8.13.09 @ 12:59PM|#
"Hey GD, no reason to badger your mother. She's, er, busy with
me at the minute anways. Doesn't have a free hand to look up a link
for ya if ya understand."
Epic, Epic. Fail.
MNG|8.13.09 @ 12:59PM|#
"how exactly does that relate to being antigovernment. Please
get your damn facts straight dumbfuck."
Enyap
Go read the guy's diary you dumbfuck. Or have someone read it to
you.
Tony|8.13.09 @ 1:00PM|#
So you're on board with us in scrapping McCain-Feingold, and all the other incumbent protection measures currently in place?
I'm in favor of public financing of elections, yes.
Gunboat Diplomacy|8.13.09 @ 1:01PM|#
""Come on, breath in, relax a little, let it out."
I'm pretty relaxed GD, as I said up thread your mom saw to
that."
Belicose@Bradenberg is not me, dumbass.
Citizen Nothing|8.13.09 @ 1:02PM|#
i.e., Tony cares no more for the First Amendment than the Second.
Tony|8.13.09 @ 1:02PM|#
Eventually you have to acknowledge that the "civil" efforts aren't working, and the system is broken.
Because your guys weren't elected?
MNG|8.13.09 @ 1:02PM|#
"Tony does not appear to understand that the position he takes,
as usual, supports mob rule and violence."
Uhh, LM, didn't you just say "so what if someone shoots the
President?" That seems a bit more supportive of violence to me. I
mean, WTF buddy?
Glibertarian|8.13.09 @ 1:02PM|#
"Just because you have a right doesn't make it necessary to
practice it at all times in the most obnoxious way possible."
And just because citizens have the "right to petition the
Government for redress of grievances", doesn't mean they should be
allowed to actually, like, do it.
Citizen Nothing|8.13.09 @ 1:03PM|#
Or, more fairly, Tony's understanding of the First is as flawed as is his understanding of the Second.
Gunboat Diplomacy|8.13.09 @ 1:04PM|#
"These protesters don't like the party in charge."
These AMERICANS don't like the PRESIDENT in charge (FIFY):
RASMUSSEN POLL: Obama Approval Rating Falls to New Low: 47
%...
http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/obama_administration/daily_presidential_tracking_poll
Tony|8.13.09 @ 1:04PM|#
So, civil disobedience is never justified?
It is certainly justified when an injustice is being perpetrated on
you and there are no institutional recourses. A president trying to
enact an agenda that was part of his campaign platform isn't quite
the same thing.
|8.13.09 @ 1:04PM|#
I'm in favor of public financing of elections,
yes.
No potential for fraud, waste, or abuse there!
ouch|8.13.09 @ 1:06PM|#
MNG, I don't carry a gun very often, mostly because it's a
big pain in the ass
Try using a holster. (It's a lot less painful.)
MNG|8.13.09 @ 1:08PM|#
From the Pittsuburgh shooter's online diary: "Good luck to
Obama! He will be successful. The liberal media LOVES him. Amerika
has chosen The Black Man."
Later he remarks that he got a raise "even in this Obama
economy."
Tomcat1066|8.13.09 @ 1:11PM|#
It is certainly justified when an injustice is being
perpetrated on you and there are no institutional recourses. A
president trying to enact an agenda that was part of his campaign
platform isn't quite the same thing.
Bullshit. That logic indicates that if a President, as part of his
campaign platform, tried to reinstate segregation (yes, it's a
hypothetical), that civil disobedience wouldn't be
appropriate.
Civil disobedience is appropriate whenever you are trying to fight
a perceived injustice. It doesn't matter if you're trying to stop a
war (that could also have been part of a campaign platform) or
trying to prevent a healthcare package that they feel will only
make the problems worse.
|8.13.09 @ 1:13PM|#
A simple case of buyer's remorse. Obama promised hope and change and people said "Yes Change!" Now the change they voted for is suddenly scary and holy shit, it's expensive too. Everybody wants something different, but very few want to change.
Oh no not this again|8.13.09 @ 1:13PM|#
First, let me say i really liked the posts about interests
rates, and almost got sidetracked by that douche bag state
legislator. But i saw 200+ comments and figured there may be a few
good chucks in here. I should have skipped it as i have the clones
due to the tacit "Rethuglican" support that's prevalent throughout
the posts and comment section. My curiosity got the better of me. I
trekked through fifty, and i couldn't take it anymore.
Hence,
JOHN stop getting all your news from Fox news, NRO, or TOWNHALL .
com. Seriously, it has really fucked up your logic in your pursuit
of perpetually gotcha leftist games. Check you closet, im sure
there's a Che wearing smoking homo in there ready to quote some
MArx on your ass or something.
Try The Economist, it's a lot smarter, but still has a hint of that
bias you so crave. After that who knows, maybe you can read
American Prospect and form a counter opinion absent the racist
lefty boogie mans that Sean Hannity et al have drilled into your
big retarded head.
Thank you for reading about my day here at HIt and run
PS
STFU until further notice
Sincerely,
someone who's tired of scrolling through drivel.
Tony|8.13.09 @ 1:13PM|#
Liberals weren't very happy under Republican rule. And we
protested all the time. Peacefully for the most part. In fact some
of the biggest protests in the history of the world occurred under
Bush. But we knew what we were protesting. Teabaggers don't appear
to be acquainted with a single fact in this debate. They're
protesting phantom bogeymen Glenn Beck invented out of thin air.
Such as:
Obama will take our guns!
Obama will kill my granny!
Obama will set up concentration camps for white people!
Keep your government hands off my medicare!
Again, I'm not telling you that you shouldn't be allowed to
protest. I'm saying that if there's any pragmatic point to
protesting, it is best to be informed by facts and not mere
hysteria.
MNG|8.13.09 @ 1:14PM|#
Richard Poplawski, who weeks ago lured police to his home and killed several of them "feared "the Obama gun ban" that he felt was "on its way." Poplawski also "didn't like our rights being infringed upon."
Belicose@Bradenberg|8.13.09 @ 1:16PM|#
The progressive mind has now been explained.
Zombie
Ants Controlled by Fungus
Tony|8.13.09 @ 1:16PM|#
Civil disobedience is appropriate whenever you are trying to fight a perceived injustice. It doesn't matter if you're trying to stop a war (that could also have been part of a campaign platform) or trying to prevent a healthcare package that they feel will only make the problems worse.
I suppose it depends on how you define civil disobedience. Are you
talking about illegal acts? Merely protesting an item of policy is
one thing. Not understanding the difference between a policy change
and the end of civilization as we know it is another.
MNG|8.13.09 @ 1:16PM|#
"Motivated by a desire to kill liberals and Democrats, gunman
Jim David Adkisson fired a shotgun at members of the congregation
during a youth performance of a musical, killing two people and
wounding seven others."
"During the interview Adkisson stated that he had targeted the
church because of its liberal teachings and his belief that all
liberals should be killed because they were ruining the country,
and that he felt that the Democrats had tied his country's hands in
the war on terror and they had ruined every institution in America
with the aid of major media outlets. Adkisson made statements that
because he could not get to the leaders of the liberal movement
that he would then target those that had voted them into
office."
Citizen Nothing|8.13.09 @ 1:17PM|#
Dear Oh no,
You really should have read through to the Zombie Cavlin
Cooledge.
That is all.
Twit.
The Angry Optimist|8.13.09 @ 1:17PM|#
Poster "Oh no" @ 1:13 is so tired of scrolling through drivel, that he felt the need to add his own. Thanks for the irrelevant mental masturbation, yo. Next time, do it in a private place.
Oh no not this again|8.13.09 @ 1:17PM|#
Tony, even if some person gunned down Obama, so
what?
Sorry to interupt, but you do realize if that was to happen, what
would rise from the ashes would be stronger, scarier, and definitly
more socialist than before, don't you?
DISCLAIMER: I no own gun, and yes i'm guilty of not voting for him,
but love his cute ass just the same. Those ears are so sexy just
want to give em a pinch on the cheek.
|8.13.09 @ 1:18PM|#
No, Obama won't kill my granny. He will, however, kill any Indian chiefs he gets his hands on.
The Angry Optimist|8.13.09 @ 1:18PM|#
MNG, really, do you know how breathtakingly dishonest it is for
you to try to tie lone gunmen and protesters together?
This is way beneath you.
Citizen Nothing|8.13.09 @ 1:18PM|#
"Poplawski also "didn't like our rights being infringed
upon.""
Most guys who do killing sprees don't like their rights being
infringed upon.
It's true.
MNG|8.13.09 @ 1:19PM|#
So you know, when folks angry at liberals show up to public events with a gun and a sign proclaiming it's time to start killing people in the name of some right wing cause, it just might make some folks a lil' nervous...
Gilbert Martin|8.13.09 @ 1:20PM|#
"Like old faithful, Gilbert Martin shows up to make my point for
me. Conservatives are incapable of being satirized, they are
walking satire..."
That's funny coming from someone who has been a walking parody his
whole life.
Citizen Nothing|8.13.09 @ 1:20PM|#
MNG, I think they'd have to show up with a egg whisk or something, wouldn't they?
Citizen Nothing|8.13.09 @ 1:21PM|#
Sorry, MNG, I completely misread your post. I though you said "when liberals show up...with a gun."
MNG|8.13.09 @ 1:21PM|#
TAO
Try to pay attention. My point all thread has been to try to point
out why it is some people are nervous or upset about the actions of
some of the protestors.
So you have no frame of reference here, TAO. You're like a child
who wanders into the middle of a movie and wants to know...
Belicose@Bradenberg|8.13.09 @ 1:21PM|#
By the way, that one was for you, 'Oh no not this again'. With
your hard on for the Fox, I knew you would apreesh.
No need to thank me, just drink your chamomile and stop sulking
already.
MNG|8.13.09 @ 1:23PM|#
As I said upthread, personally I thought the dude in NH seemed
like a concerned and active citizen. Eccentric, yes.
But given recent history, I can see why some people were made
nervous by him, or any angry right wing person coming to a public
event and getting all loudly angry.
Citizen Nothing|8.13.09 @ 1:23PM|#
Did I type Cavlin Cooledge? I picked the wrong day to give up sniffing glue.
|8.13.09 @ 1:24PM|#
Tony, who are my guys? As far as I can tell, I only have a
couple people in the whole of the federal government, that actually
attempt to uphold the constitution, let alone are "my guys". We
have a system in which people have been voting themselves goodies
for years, which is slowly eroding our independence. People don't
realize the full impact (or even a small portion) of their
votes.
I ask, where are those of us who just want to be left alone to
manage our own affairs in peace to go as government becomes more
and more invasive? What are we to do when it is apparent that a
large portion of the population is intent on seeing us all enslaved
for their misguided utopian visions?
Or, when will people in this country wake up to the fact that
punishing the rich, and taxing/regulating companies into moving
out, is a sure way to not having, first the rich, and second, any
jobs? When will people realize that we shouldn't have what we can't
pay for? When will politicians finally admit that much of the past
100 years of legislation has been misguided and unconstitutional,
and should have been enacted by states, or localities, not the
federal government?
I just don't see it happening until we have something sufficiently
impactful, to cause a complete restructure, but even then I have
little hope that it will turn out better.
/rant off
|8.13.09 @ 1:25PM|#
it just might make some folks a lil' nervous...
Wel, put yer Big Girl panties on, Granny!
The Angry Optimist|8.13.09 @ 1:25PM|#
Right, MNG, so when you said this:
Yeah, just the other day a SEIU nut walked into an aerobics class and shot up several people. And a few months ago some SEIU nut holed up in his house and ambushed and shot some cops when they came out.
Oh, no, my bad, those were right-wing anti-liberals/anti-government types like the kind showing up at these events...
It was to merely make the benign point that "people" (WHO? - Get a
link!) are "afraid" of protesters because lone gunmen talk like
they do.
Get real. I'm not buying that horseshit.
T|8.13.09 @ 1:26PM|#
Just as a hypothetical, is it the fact that he had a gun or the
fact that he displayed it openly? Where I live, we only have
concealed carry (of handguns, anyway) so if I show up at a protest
with my TJ quotes on a sign, you folks have no clue if I'm
packing.
Are you still disturbed by the idea? Or is it just that it was
visible? Honestly, I'm confused here. Help me out.
MNG|8.13.09 @ 1:26PM|#
If I was at a Nixon rally in 1969 and an armed Black Panther looking dude came up to the event I'd be a little nervous too...It amazes me how people cannot even fucking understand other people's motivations and mindsets...
Oh no not this again|8.13.09 @ 1:26PM|#
TAO,
But i enjoyed myself so much, i decided to stay and wank
again.
Are you worried that you all sound the same?
Sorry if you want to equate lefty protesters with what's going on
now, but that requires a prescription which due to recent celebrity
death jacking can no be filled.
If i remember correctly, which may be a stretch. They were
protesting things like murder, torture, killing civilians, and
unjust war. Much different than the false assertion that grandma is
gonna get her plug cranked then tanked down the toilet because only
good socialists get to stay buried.
But you go ahead and be crude, shrill, and otherwise irrelevent.
Enjoy yourself, i hope your anger holds out a good long time.
The Angry Optimist|8.13.09 @ 1:27PM|#
In other words, MNG, your real point here was to smear your
opponents and defend the unions by saying "hey, you guys talk like
the lone gunmen did!"
Yeah, and we also talk like Thomas Jefferson, so shut up.
The Angry Optimist|8.13.09 @ 1:28PM|#
Poster "Oh no" - yeah, we get it. The things your side was
protesting were valid. These aren't, because they are on the other
side.
Not exactly an insight.
Oh no not this again|8.13.09 @ 1:29PM|#
I almost forgot. No hit and run thread is complete without
TEH UNIONS......ARGLKEBARGLEARGLE
MNG|8.13.09 @ 1:29PM|#
TAO
Someone tried to equate a fear of SEIU goons with a fear of right
wing extremists.
But that's a bad analogy as I pointed out.
Don't make me school you again and have you go all "waah, you're a
dishonest debater I'm leaving." It was worse than your "waaah, you
just want to tear down but never build up" nervous breakdown.
Seeing grown men cry makes me uncomfortable, so why don't you run
along and re-read The Fountainhead...
Oh no not this again|8.13.09 @ 1:30PM|#
TAO,
I never said that, but how interesting you went for the easy way
out. Oh there's lots of things to not like about the lastest
episode of health reform. I just like to make fun of people who act
like dumbasses in public. It's easy to kick and scream, but will
that be enough to win though?
The Angry Optimist|8.13.09 @ 1:31PM|#
you only "school" me in your own small mind, tiny stuff. Maybe
you want to reiterate how you don't mind punching people to
"temporarily enslave" them?
Your comparison was transparent. And I note that you still haven't
provided any evidence that people are actually afraid. Last time
you were asked for it, you resorted to "I FUCKED YOUR MOM", which
is MNGspeak for "I don't have any evidence".
Sean W. Malone|8.13.09 @ 1:31PM|#
Hey guys. What are we talking about this time?
Ohhh... some idiot's blog. Sweet. Tony's here I see. Good, good
times. Also - let me just say that William Kosick or whatever the
hell his polish last name was did an appearance on Chris Matthews
of all places and made me very very proud.
On national TV a man was allowed to say he carried a gun because it
was his right to do so and essentially, "use it or lose it". Makes
me want to go buy a handgun.
MNG|8.13.09 @ 1:32PM|#
You see, SEIU "goons" haven't run out and shot up places
recently, while right wing extremists have.
And SO when a right wing extremist shows up at a public event with
a gun and a sign saying in effect "people have to be killed every
now and then" yes, people might be upset and nervous.
So the analogy is pretty piss-poor as we used to say.
Gilbert Martin|8.13.09 @ 1:32PM|#
Gee I wonder why the Dems and their talking head puppets in the main-stream media didn't scream "terrorist" at all those ACORN operatives who were staking out the homes of financial executives and ginning up death threats against them.
MNG|8.13.09 @ 1:33PM|#
Come now TAO I explained this on the other thread. You had no answer so you made a one sentence assertion and ran away crying....Go back and read the thread and do the best you can, this one is about something else.
Tomcat1066|8.13.09 @ 1:33PM|#
I suppose it depends on how you define civil disobedience.
Are you talking about illegal acts?
You know, things like the sit in's in the 60's? While technically
illegal, no one is harmed in any way. Shit just gets
disrupted.
Yeah, I know what it means.
Merely protesting an item of policy is one thing. Not
understanding the difference between a policy change and the end of
civilization as we know it is another.
No shit. What you're not getting is that people are pissed, not
just because of the bill, but the method in which it's being rammed
down the nation's throat. The Democratic leadership's reponse
hasn't exactly helped engender trust with a soul. Calling people
who oppose these bills "nazis" sure as hell doesn't make me want to
talk nice. I'll do it, but I don't fault others for taking
offense.
Democrats and Republicans both look the other way when "their guy"
tries this shit. It's wrong no matter who's doing it.
The Angry Optimist|8.13.09 @ 1:34PM|#
And SO when a right wing extremist shows up at a public event with a gun and a sign saying in effect "people have to be killed every now and then" yes, people might be upset and nervous.
What people?
Like John said, you're playing the guilt by association game and
claiming you're making a benign point. It was dishonest when Dunphy
did it with the "full of holes" comment, and it's dishonest when
you do it.
Belicose@Bradenberg |8.13.09 @ 1:34PM|#
Oh was it just last February and early March, it seems so long
ago on this hazy August day that the liberals were quite pleased
with the mobs that gathered to lynch AIG executives and all the
riffraff on Wall Street.
Yes, quite pleased with the mobs doing their bidding, even though
the actions of these liberal legislatures were crony capitalist to
the gills, they enjoyed the extra 'hand' the unruly mobs gave
them.
Obama declared to the men of Wall Street, 'I am the only thing
between you and the pitchforks.'
Now the pitchforks are turned to the liberal democrats. Not so much
fun now is it.
Oh-ho-ho, laughing my ass off, you are not going to get your way,
and you are pissed. Kick all the sand you want, just adds to the
funny.
|8.13.09 @ 1:34PM|#
How long until Team Constitutional Scholar finds a way to use the Patriot Act to "protect" right-thinking Americans from the scourge of delusional cranks?
The Angry Optimist|8.13.09 @ 1:34PM|#
Sorry, MNG, I can't read that thread because I'm hungry, and it's your fault for not sending me food. I'm IN NEED!
Enyap|8.13.09 @ 1:35PM|#
Right MNG, he was driven to kill by his anti government views, not his relationship troubles. That's why he shot up a Obama rally instead of a women's fitness class. Any other incidents you wish to connect to right wing extremist, even though anyone outside of a partisan dickhead like yourself could see it was not a motive.
|8.13.09 @ 1:36PM|#
What right wing extremists are you referring to MNG? Those peaceably protesting unconstitutional, unread, unfinished legislation which will reduce choice, and increase costs and national debt? Yeah, they're much worse than people following orders of their union leaders, trying to block regular folks trying to express their concerns to their representatives.
Oh no not this again|8.13.09 @ 1:36PM|#
You know i've only head of ACORN once or twice before 2008 as a
voter mobility org. aimed at the poor. Big scary boogie man right
there. Did it take you all of ten minutes picking that group's name
out of a hat as your new pet librul demon? Good job (clapping
sounds, but not the Clap)
I've only heard of the SEIU thugs at two places, HERE and FOX NEWS.
Big surprise.
Guys, word up (hand twanging), if you don't want to mistakenly
called Republicans you have to do a much better job of
seperating.
The Angry Optimist|8.13.09 @ 1:36PM|#
"Some guy whose politics weren't really known shot up some
women, so I am therefore justified in being afraid of a calm man
with a pistol on his hip."
What fucking nonsense.
MNG|8.13.09 @ 1:37PM|#
Alright, if you want your ass handed to you again. I noticed
your pussy ass ran off yesterday during our debate, and then came
back and had no answer even hours later.
"MNG | August 12, 2009, 12:59pm | #
SO TAO what you are saying is that it is OK to enslave someone when
they are not in the right, or when they violate someone's
rights?
Which is of course what I've said all along. The doctor is doing
something wrong, is violating the rights of the dying man.
Thanks for playing!"
That was my last word for you. Live the dream bigshot.
Gunboat Diplomacy|8.13.09 @ 1:38PM|#
"Again, I'm not telling you that you shouldn't be allowed to
protest. I'm saying that if there's any pragmatic point to
protesting, it is best to be informed by facts and not mere
hysteria."
The science is settled...
Oh no not this again|8.13.09 @ 1:38PM|#
But Belicose,
Did they barge in and shout down the poor oppressed bankers. Was
their voice diminshed at all? Or did the crowds outside, stay
outside holding their signs looking all sad and stuff?
MNG|8.13.09 @ 1:38PM|#
Enyap
Er, did you read my posts above? Like the shooter of the cops, or
at the church? Like I said, get someone to read them for you or act
them out with puppets if you're not getting it.
The Angry Optimist|8.13.09 @ 1:39PM|#
Dude, that is a terrible argument, for the reasons that Fluffy outlined. I didn't need to add anything to that. Bottom line, you should sell all of your worldly possessions and ship the money to Africa, you murderer.
JB|8.13.09 @ 1:41PM|#
Leftists keep pushing and backing freedom-loving Americans into
a corner. They have plenty of socialist paradises to choose from,
but freedom-loving Americans have nowhere to go.
I predict push-back will happen at some point, and the Leftists
should get out before that happens.
The Angry Optimist|8.13.09 @ 1:42PM|#
I don't get it - a man has a gun on his hip with a sign, and
that's justification for being nervous, but we're supposed to be
A-OK with the Secret Service and the guns on their
hips?
Um, why?
Belicose@Bradenberg |8.13.09 @ 1:45PM|#
Oh no not this again | August 13, 2009, 1:38pm | #
But Belicose,
Did they barge in and shout down the poor oppressed bankers. Was
their voice diminshed at all? Or did the crowds outside, stay
outside holding their signs looking all sad and stuff?
Poor fell, victim of the 48 hour news cycle. Unaware of any greater
context. Blame it all on Fox, and rock on, gold dust woman!
Gunboat Diplomacy|8.13.09 @ 1:46PM|#
"Motivated by a desire to kill liberals and Democrats, gunman
Jim David Adkisson fired a shotgun at members of the congregation
during a youth performance of a musical, killing two people and
wounding seven others."
The faith-based thugs of Oakland's Your Black Muslim Bakery
Here is the situation regarding the enterprise known as Your Black
Muslim Bakery, located on San Pablo Avenue in Oakland, Calif. Its
founder, a man named Yusuf Bey, was arrested in 2002 and charged
with forcing an underage girl to have sex. Subsequent investigation
suggested that he had a long history of rape and abuse of his
followers and had by this means fathered numerous children out of
wedlock. Bey died in September 2003 before his case could come to
trial. His son Yusuf Bey IV has since been arrested twice, first on
suspicion of leading a gang that had trashed two Oakland liquor
stores and intimidated their owners, and second (and perhaps less
Islamically) for running over a San Francisco bouncer with his car.
Nedir Bey, one of Yusuf Bey's "spiritually adopted" sons, is also
alleged to have beaten a possible business rival with a flashlight,
while another member of the gang tortured the victim with a heated
knife.
http://www.slate.com/id/2171745/
I wonder who they voted for?
Sean W. Malone|8.13.09 @ 1:46PM|#
JB,
Hasn't the "push back" to some extent already started? I don't want
to see civil war really, but let's be honest, when the alternative
to freedom is a jackboot up your ass (and to all you
liberals/socialists out there right now, I'm referring to
you most of all here), what choices really remain?
At some point, we are going to have to either take back the country
and reaffirm its Constitution or get the hell out. Where we might
go is anyone's guess at this point though... I vote some place
warm. Or alternatively, space. And by "we", I mean people who
actually give a shit about liberty.
MNG|8.13.09 @ 1:48PM|#
TAO
You guys think you're cute with the "enslavement" thing, but it's
built on shabby foundations that a freshman philosophy student
could notice.
You guys say "enslavement=coercion" because when you enslave
someone, you make them do things you want them to do but they don't
want them to do. And so, making a doctor help when he doesn't want
to, that's ENSLAVEMENT!
But then, you guys believe in making people do things they don't
want to do via force too. For example, you support using force to
make a thief put that apple he stole back.
But then you say "but that's different, we only support using force
to make someone do something when the person is doing something
wrong!"
Well no shit Sgt. Brilliance. Of course so does my side. We think
that in withholding his skills from the dying man the doctor is
doing something wrong. We think this is wrong because the
consequences of his action or inaction are human suffering and/or
death.
This is hardly some new fucking concept or widely discredited one.
In fact, utilitarianism has a longer history than your goofy
objectivism and is more widely respected in more philosophy
departments and law schools.
But you're "response" is to say "bad faith arguing, I'm going home,
mommy!" A typical thing for a cocky adolescent whose skills and
knowledge didn't match, when challenged, the confidence he had in
his black-and-white worldview...
The Angry Optimist|8.13.09 @ 1:50PM|#
Right - I'll wait for notice that you sold all of your stuff and
sent the money to Africa.
Murderer.
Do you know the difference between "WAAAH!" and "MNG, you're a
fucking waste of time"?
Maybe not, not that I particularly care. your opinion of me matters
not.
Gunboat Diplomacy|8.13.09 @ 1:50PM|#
"Try to pay attention. My point all thread has been to try to
point out why it is some people are nervous or upset about the
actions of some of the protestors" by posting lone gunman stories
in lieu of providing a shred of evidence.
FIFY
The Angry Optimist|8.13.09 @ 1:51PM|#
In fact, utilitarianism has a longer history than your goofy objectivism and is more widely respected in more philosophy departments and law schools.
Ooh, and in other news, clearly [Top 40 Artist[ is the best
musician on the planet.
Any other appeals to popularity/authority you wish to make?
MNG|8.13.09 @ 1:51PM|#
"I don't get it - a man has a gun on his hip with a sign, and
that's justification for being nervous, but we're supposed to be
A-OK with the Secret Service and the guns on their hips?"
Maybe because we haven't had Secret Servicemen opened fire on
groups of people lately?
Well, I know you are terrible at the analogy game, but what makes
an analogy apt or not involves many of the characterstics at play;
the more that match the stronger the analogy, see? And you left out
that it was not just "a man with a gun" it was a man with a gun
with at a public event most people would think a gun doesn't belong
holding a sign with a rightwing oriented message about killing
people.
Jesus, are you on crack or something today?
Enyap|8.13.09 @ 1:51PM|#
Trying to link Poplawski a neonazi to the healthcare protesters is every bit as retarded as trying to link them to a angry 48yo virgins.
Oh no not this again|8.13.09 @ 1:52PM|#
But Belicose,
Was i wrong? DId they storm in and stop wall street from
functioning? Did someone get trampled or shouted down? I don't
remember hearing about it? Oh wait there was some pitchfork comment
wasn't there, but even that was said at a conversational level. Oh
no corporate accountability to the MAX.
I don't get my news from the tee bee, sorry.
The Angry Optimist|8.13.09 @ 1:54PM|#
MNG - it was man openly carrying a weapon. BFD. Try not to wet
your panties over it.
In other news, you still haven't provided any evidence that people
were even "afraid" of the guy.
MNG|8.13.09 @ 1:54PM|#
People with one undergraduate class in logic are stupider than
people with none, because they think they've got some handle on the
matter. "Oh, that's one of those argument ad populum my prof talked
about, I so got you dude!"
But it's not, is it TAO? Look at it again. I don't mention
utilitarianism is true because it is so widely respected and
accepted, I argue that it is absurd to say someone is arguing from
bad faith when he invokes utilitarianism, seeing as how
utilitarianism is so widely respected and accepted.
Summer school is now in session. Sit up straight Mr. Optimist, and
spit out that gum!
Oh no not this again|8.13.09 @ 1:55PM|#
But i did see him on TV. He looked retarded and starved for attention.
|8.13.09 @ 1:56PM|#
Sean, I'm thinking some kind of sea-stedding is the most likely
possible course other than taking back the country. Of course by
saying that I'm sure that some on here consider me a right-wing
extremist. Fits I guess since I fit quite well into the definitions
provided by both my state MO, and Nopolitano.
Of course, as my office mates inform me, the constitution is an
old, moldy document that is completely irrelevant anymore
anyway.
Gunboat Diplomacy|8.13.09 @ 1:57PM|#
"Last time you were asked for it, you resorted to "I FUCKED YOUR
MOM", which is MNGspeak for "I don't have any evidence"."
Thank you TAO.
The Angry Optimist|8.13.09 @ 1:57PM|#
The invocation of utilitarianism was not what made your argument
bad faith. It was the fact that you knew that you were totally
distorting and were full of shit and still persisted.
Kind of like now. Kind of like always.
MNG|8.13.09 @ 1:58PM|#
Er, even the right wing guys upthread noted that surely someone
out there is afraid of what the guy did. It's not rocket
science.
You don't think some people are afraid of even just a guy carrying
a gun in public? I mean, even if the people who were afraid are the
pussy liberals that roam your fantasies, they are out there right?
I mean, WTF what a terrible argument!
But my point has been all along that given the widely reported news
stories of shooters motivated by right-wing anger, an angry right
wing guy with a gun at a public event might make folks afraid or
nervous. Again, you don't have to be Sigmund Freud to understand
this...
JB|8.13.09 @ 1:58PM|#
Hasn't the "push back" to some extent already
started?
Not really. This stuff is all minor. I predict a lot more violence
in the days to come.
The only way I see forestalling that is these three things
happening:
1. Democrats like Obama, Pelosi, and their ilk calm down and stop
trying to push awful legislation. Stick to a few, small targeted
reforms in certain areas and include some that actually involve
reform instead of making things worse and handing out free money to
all their crooked buddies.
2. Cutting the deficit and debt by cutting spending. Raising taxes
to do this would be a very, very bad idea.
3. Avoiding inflation by doing #1 and #2 fast enough.
Honestly, I don't see any of those happening. People are very
pissed because they see the current spending and know that their
taxes are going to go up tremendously. Every Tom, Dick, and Bob I
talk to understands this and it doesn't matter how much Obama lies
about it.
The Democrats are calling Americans 'Nazis' for understanding basic
math and that is infuriating people.
Sean W. Malone|8.13.09 @ 2:00PM|#
"But then, you guys believe in making people do things they don't want to do via force too. For example, you support using force to make a thief put that apple he stole back.
But then you say "but that's different, we only support using force to make someone do something when the person is doing something wrong!""
This was the most retarded straw-man I've ever seen. In my
life.
Well done MNG. You fucktard.
"We" favor the NON-INITIATION of force
you twat. If someone is beating you up, you can hit back! If
someone's stolen from you, you may reclaim your stolen
property.
The reason it's ok to use force against a thief or a murderer is
because that's a correction - a defense - against the initiation of
force. The fact that a thief doesn't want to give the stolen goods
back has no bearing on that point.
Any freshman philosophy student could find the holes in
what you just said - because what you said is the most idiotic
failure to understand basic tenants of libertarian philosophy I've
ever seen. A strawman like that deserves kudos... And possibly a
medal for dumbest thing I've read today.
OH no not this again|8.13.09 @ 2:01PM|#
Is JB John, no wait, he's a pinch smarter so he can't be him. He does have that Fox news smell to him though.
MattXIV|8.13.09 @ 2:01PM|#
MNG,
You know, a fair amount of commentators here drop the "fascists!" language pretty easily whenever they talk about their political opponents, so for those folks, wtf is up with you being upset at people comparing these angry yelling disruptive fuckers to brownshirts?
I'm not one to throw "facist" or "Nazi" around trivially, largely
because it make the person doing so seem shrill and lacking
perspective, but there's an in-kind difference between when
protestors do it to heckle the authorities and when the authorities
do it to try to shut down debate. What the Dems are doing now is
more analogous to the Republicans accusations that people who don't
agree with them sympathize with terrorists in order to circumscribe
the "acceptable" debate, and much worse than the everyday name
calling that's common to any group of sufficiently excitable
dissenters.
The Angry Optimist|8.13.09 @ 2:01PM|#
an angry right wing guy with a gun at a public event might make folks afraid or nervous.
First of all, you said that people "are" worried, not "might be" -
an assertion you have still failed to provide any evidence
for.
Second of all, what proof do you have that he was "angry"? This is
just you attempting to paint the man as an "angry right-wing
nutcase, just like those lone shooters".
It's obvious to everybody, including you, and yet you persist in
claiming a benign motivation. Nobody believes you.
MNG|8.13.09 @ 2:02PM|#
And I'll note that you still haven't tried to offer some
principle for distinguishing your "enslavement" from mine and hell
you've had over a day to do so.
Because you don't have one, which is typical.
Gunboat Diplomacy|8.13.09 @ 2:02PM|#
"You know i've only head of ACORN once or twice before 2008 as a
voter mobility org. aimed at the poor."
Flaunting your ignorance becomes you.
|8.13.09 @ 2:02PM|#
But then, you guys believe in making people do things they
don't want to do via force too. For example, you support using
force to make a thief put that apple he stole back.
It takes an amazing display of dishonesty to pretend not to
understand the difference between forcing a doctor to do something
against his will and punishing a criminal. Who do you think is
fooled by this blatant false equivalency?
Forcing people to work for you or the benefit of someone else is
slavery. All the bullshit you want to shovel is not going to change
that. A slave doesn't give a fuck why he's a slave, so being a
slave for the sake of your defintion of fairness is not
sufficient.
Utilitarianism is widely respected. By people who are comfortable
with sacrificing the individual. Who gives fuck what collectivist
assholes think about anything?
Utilitarianism supports slavery. Utilitarianism is comfortable
killing 50 random people to save 51 random people. It's a monstrous
philosophy adhered to by moral midgets.
Sean W. Malone|8.13.09 @ 2:02PM|#
"holding a sign with a rightwing oriented message about
killing people.
So now Thomas Jefferson is "right wing"? Shit... I must be confused
about my history entirely.
Oh no not this again|8.13.09 @ 2:03PM|#
Over these last ten years or so, i still haven't learned which
is worse being a called a Nazi or being called a Nazi enabler. I
guess the world will never know.
Well i've abused this lunch break for all it's worth. Be good Ye
all, i think im hooked for another day.
You betcha.
Gunboat Diplomacy|8.13.09 @ 2:04PM|#
"That was my last word for you."
Another broken MNG promise. I wonder who he gets that from?
Oh no not this again|8.13.09 @ 2:04PM|#
Gunboat,
Don't be pretending Acorn was all the rage a few years ago. Your
dementia is showing.
Smooches
MNG|8.13.09 @ 2:04PM|#
Where TAO pussies out Mr. Malone steps up.
Mr. Malone
Why is using force to make the theif put the apple back OK or not
"enslavement" but my forcing the doctor to treat the dying man is
not OK and is enslavement? You offer that one is done as a
"correction", by which you mean that it is done to right a
wrong.
Well, the withholding of needed treatment is a wrong. I'm
correcting it.
Thanks for playing!
Gunboat Diplomacy|8.13.09 @ 2:05PM|#
I live in the ghetto, dipshit. I have seern this racist organization in action for more than 8 years.
The Angry Optimist|8.13.09 @ 2:05PM|#
And I'll note that you still haven't tried to offer some principle for distinguishing your "enslavement" from mine and hell you've had over a day to do so.
This is such a blatant lie. Fluffy argued it. I argued it.
SugarFree is showing it to you now.
This version of "What argument?" is a tiring game and it's why I
told you fuck off yesterday - because you're arguing in bad
faith.
Sean W. Malone|8.13.09 @ 2:06PM|#
Did you (MNG) actually even watch this?
William
Kostric on Hardball
MNG|8.13.09 @ 2:06PM|#
"Second of all, what proof do you have that he was
"angry"?"
Uh, the sign about killing people?
"you said that people "are" worried, not "might be" - an assertion
you have still failed to provide any evidence for. "
Jesus you are dumb. OK, Tony is worried, he said so upthread. The
people on tv are worried. Etc. They are people.
You lose.
The Angry Optimist|8.13.09 @ 2:07PM|#
Well, the withholding of needed treatment is a wrong. I'm correcting it.
Universalize that. Every withholding of everything "needed" is
wrong, and is therefore correctable by force.
What kind of world is that, MNG? It's a world of slaves. The fact
that you refuse to recognize that your principle is not
universalizable is appalling.
Gilbert Martin|8.13.09 @ 2:08PM|#
"But then, you guys believe in making people do things they
don't want to do via force too. For example, you support using
force to make a thief put that apple he stole back."
LOL
What nonsense.
The thief was the one who instituted force against the victim to
begin with.
The Angry Optimist|8.13.09 @ 2:08PM|#
Uh, the sign about killing people?
That's not evidence of anger.
MNG|8.13.09 @ 2:09PM|#
"Forcing people to work for you or the benefit of someone else
is slavery."
So if I vandalize your house, and I am forced to clean the paint
off, that's slavery?
Hmm, all the elements are there.
Force? Check.
Making someone do something for the benefit of another?
Check.
Are you going to fall on the "correction" thing? Addressed it
upthread.
TAO
See how easy this is? Bad faith huh?
Gunboat Diplomacy|8.13.09 @ 2:10PM|#
"Was i wrong? DId they storm in and stop wall street from
functioning?"
Have the protestes stop Washington from functioning?
Fish in a barrel.
JB|8.13.09 @ 2:10PM|#
Is JB John, no wait, he's a pinch smarter so he can't be
him. He does have that Fox news smell to him though.
And you know what is 'fishy' right?
You would know being such a fishy cunt.
I get most of my news from reason and the internets. I don't watch
tv news at all and I'm a hardcore libertarian. I do hate Leftists
more than Rightists because they are much more dangerous currently
and throughout history.
Also, if I could keep even 90% of my income, I could buy all the
social freedom I want. I would much rather have economic freedom
over social freedom because you can always buy social freedom (just
look at the current status of drugs and prostitution).
Sean W. Malone|8.13.09 @ 2:10PM|#
Wow, MNG, you are retarded aren't you?
"Why is using force to make the theif put the apple back OK or
not "enslavement" but my forcing the doctor to treat the dying man
is not OK and is enslavement? You offer that one is done as a
"correction", by which you mean that it is done to right a
wrong."
Because the DOCTOR IS A FREE GODDAMN HUMAN BEING WHO HAS THE RIGHT
TO USE HIS SKILLS AS HE SEES FIT! AND NOT IN WHATEVER WAY
YOU THINK IS "RIGHT".
Do you have no understanding of force? Do you have not the
slightest ability to make a distinction between someone who is
violating another person's right to personal sovereignty by harming
their physical person or stealing their property and someone who is
or might refuse service to someone else?
Do you not realize that if you are forcing someone to do something
with their time, their property or their life that is against their
will - to whatever extent - it is YOU who are the
fucking aggressor!?
A doctor is a human being you piece of shit, not a health-care
providing machine for you to point at whoever you want and who
should be bound by your concept of "wrong".
The Angry Optimist|8.13.09 @ 2:10PM|#
I note that you keep falling back on acts, not on failures to
act.
When are you selling your stuff to send the money to Africa?
oh no not this again|8.13.09 @ 2:12PM|#
Gun boat I live in south Chicago and take trips to Roseland and other ghetto places for work and I've never seen this racist acorn in action. In conclusion mines bigger than yours stfu
Sean W. Malone|8.13.09 @ 2:12PM|#
God god you are an idiot MNG... What the fuck!?
You used to be semi-reasonable... An idiot, but semi-reasonable,
and now you've gone completely off the deep end.
Can you please at least fucking TRY to make a distinction between
someone who initiates force against another person and
someone who uses force to stop a crime?
The Angry Optimist|8.13.09 @ 2:12PM|#
To MNG, "forcing" someone to make amends for the force they initiated is the same thing as "forcing" someone to work for free, without any notion of responsibility.
Gunboat Diplomacy|8.13.09 @ 2:13PM|#
1:52 - "I don't get my news from the tee bee, sorry."
1:55 - "But i did see him on TV. He looked retarded and starved for
attention."
Dude can't last 3 minutes.
Epic, Epic, Epic. Fail.
|8.13.09 @ 2:13PM|#
At some point, we are going to have to either take back the country and reaffirm its Constitution or get the hell out.
In a stable democracy you "take your country back" by influencing
public thought via free speech and assembly and work to get
representatives who share your views elected to office.
Just because you assert that things the government is doing
violates the constitution doesn't make it so. We have people whose
job it is to determine whether that's the case, and it's not
yours.
And I dearly hope our courts eventually get around to deciding that
imprisonment and torture by presidential fiat is
unconstitutional.
Returning taxation to Clinton levels and enacting a social program
that is nearly a century in the making is hardly the end of
American civilization.
My problem here is this ahistorical, propaganda-fueled hysteria
that actually subverts all of the goals of pragmatic democracy.
Rightwingers and libertarians alike have a real problem with
assuming that their fringe beliefs are some sort of default and
that any policy that doesn't accord with their idea of utopia is
treason.
MNG|8.13.09 @ 2:13PM|#
Ha ha TAO, you play the Kantian very poorly...I know you
better.
But I don't have to universalize it that way, now do I? I can do it
this way:
"Any person who has something that would directly save the life or
decrease the suffering of another human being is morally bound to
give that thing."
But even better, I can just do what you asked. Yes, everyone should
do whatever they can to provide what they have to reduce human
death and suffering. That's hardly unthinkable (note, if you gave
so much that you, or your dependents, would suffer, then you have
to factor that against doing it; also utilitarians take human
psychology as important, if actual humans could not live saving
other people 24 hours a day without collapsing or going insane,
then they should do less, because in doing so they would, you got
it, maximize the good, which is their ultimate criteria
overall)
|8.13.09 @ 2:14PM|#
Well no shit Sgt. Brilliance. Of course so does my side. We
think that in withholding his skills from the dying man the doctor
is doing something wrong. We think this is wrong because the
consequences of his action or inaction are human suffering and/or
death.
Of course you pick the example most conducive to your argument,
when that isn't even at argument. The Hippocratic oath, provides
this, and is agreed upon by people on both sides, at least until
it's a baby not quite born yet, or someone who has too little
quality of life.
But what about people who don't want to have their money, time, and
choice forcibly taken from them, to support things that not only
don't agree with but are morally opposed to? Why is it that I have
to provide money for corrupt and wasteful programs that I believe
are harmful, in the long run, to their supposed benefactors? Why do
polititians think it is their right to take my earnings to do
things which I otherwise would have the freedom to choose or not as
I see fit? Why do we think the government can decide better how to
invest for my retirement? Why do we think they can decide better
how to care for my health? And even if they could, what right do
they have to take my choices away from me? If I want to eat steak
and cake for dinner every night, that should be my choice. If I
elect to not have health insurance, that also should be within my
rights. These things are in no way analogous to theft. Unless you
turn it around, and talk about how the government is legally
stealing from me.
MNG|8.13.09 @ 2:15PM|#
Shorter TAO
To MNG, forcing someone to do something when its right to force
someone to do something is the same as forcing someone to do
something when it is right to force someone to do something.
You stupid fuck, you can't even see it, can you?
Gunboat Diplomacy|8.13.09 @ 2:15PM|#
"The Democrats are calling Americans 'Nazis' for understanding
basic math and that is infuriating people."
Maybe they just mean that the Germans have better schools.
The Angry Optimist|8.13.09 @ 2:16PM|#
if you gave so much that you, or your dependents, would suffer, then you have to factor that against doing it; also utilitarians take human psychology as important, if actual humans could not live saving other people 24 hours a day without collapsing or going insane, then they should do less, because in doing so they would, you got it, maximize the good, which is their ultimate criteria overall
That's so fucking arbitrary it makes me laugh. Really, what it is,
is a way for you to not have to give up your comfortable existence
for the children of Africa, because it would "make you suffer" -100
"happiness points" and (according to your made up fairyland
measurements), the children of Africa would only benefit +99.
What a joke.
JB|8.13.09 @ 2:17PM|#
In a stable democracy you "take your country back" by
influencing public thought via free speech and assembly and work to
get representatives who share your views elected to office.
Just because you assert that things the government is doing
violates the constitution doesn't make it so. We have people whose
job it is to determine whether that's the case, and it's not
yours.
Fuck you, Tony. I don't care how many of you vote to take away my
fundamental rights. I don't care if there are a billion of
you.
You and your ilk really want to go up against people with that
attitude when you can move to your socialist paradise of
choice?
You fuckers better start thinking about that.
MNG|8.13.09 @ 2:17PM|#
You see, we differ on what falls into the category of "things
you can use force to make someone do." We both think such a
category exists.
And I've given you the criteria for why a particular act falls into
that category. All you can say is "when its someone responsibility"
or "as a correction" (another way of saying "when its right to do
so", question bet much?)
The Angry Optimist|8.13.09 @ 2:17PM|#
MNG - I see you trying to draw a false equivalency. We all see that. SugarFree saw it coming a 1/2 hour ago.
Sean W. Malone|8.13.09 @ 2:19PM|#
"Just because you assert that things the government is doing
violates the constitution doesn't make it so."
Tony, the whole point of our Constitution - the REASON it
was written in common language - was so that it would be easily
understood by all of the people. Your ignorance on the meaning of
the US Constitution has been thoroughly examined over many threads
around here, but that ignorance doesn't make any of this shit any
less unconstitutional.
The US Constitution is remarkably clear about what is and what
isn't a power granted to the Federal Government, and what rights
the people retain. You may have heard of the Bill of Rights, which
was written specifically to guarantee such things.
If you can point to the sections of the US Constitution that give
congress the right to do one millionth of the things they've done
in the last century, you get a gold star.
Gunboat Diplomacy|8.13.09 @ 2:20PM|#
"Uh, the sign about killing people?"
Which is why it was okay to beat up that man in St. Louis. I mean,
he was selling Don't Tread on Me flags.
MNG|8.13.09 @ 2:20PM|#
It's arbitrary? It's all guided by "one simple principle"
(libertarians should like that). The right action is the action
which has the consequences that maximize the good, with the good
defined as human welfare.
But you know this, or should. Now I think it's you arguing from bad
faith. Should I go waaah and run home now?
MNG|8.13.09 @ 2:21PM|#
"draw a false equivalency"
Remember what I said about that guy with the undergrad course in
logic?
|8.13.09 @ 2:22PM|#
See how easy this is? Bad faith huh?
It is easy. You argued in bad faith by taking what I said out of
context with little apparent effort.
The Angry Optimist|8.13.09 @ 2:22PM|#
Rule: Force people to hand over their property when someone is
suffering.
Rule: Allow people to keep their property, but encourage them to
help the less fortunate.
I contend that Rule 2 is better for human welfare than Rule 1.
Prove me wrong.
MNG|8.13.09 @ 2:22PM|#
If they are not equivalent then show me why.
Others have tried and been answered.
Jordan|8.13.09 @ 2:23PM|#
So, I guess if there was ever a shortage of doctors (oh wait, there is now), it would be immoral not to draft people into med school. Why aren't you in medical school, you monster?
Enyap|8.13.09 @ 2:23PM|#
I see MNG has given up on his laughable attempt to link the aerobics class shooter to right wing extremism.
Gunboat Diplomacy|8.13.09 @ 2:23PM|#
"oh no not this again | August 13, 2009, 2:12pm | #
Gun boat I live in south Chicago and take trips to Roseland and
other ghetto places for work and I've never seen this racist acorn
in action. In conclusion mines bigger than yours stfu"
You said you were leaving.
Liar.
MNG|8.13.09 @ 2:24PM|#
TAO
Again, easy stuff. In my example (the callous doctor) the first
rule would certainly be superior in terms of minimizing human
suffering. You disagree?
But you meant as a general rule, didn't you my adorable little
closet rule utilitarian?
The Angry Optimist|8.13.09 @ 2:25PM|#
yes, as a general rule. General rules are the only rules that allow people to order their lives in a way where the law isn't constantly chaotic.
MNG|8.13.09 @ 2:26PM|#
"I see MNG has given up on his laughable attempt to link the
aerobics class shooter to right wing extremism."
I did? Pshaw. Did you get someone to act out his diary? He had
plenty of the good old fashioned racist right wing hate as a
motivator, it's plain to see.
And on that note, I see you ducking the church shooter and cop
killer events like Bruce Lee in a ninja fight.
|8.13.09 @ 2:27PM|#
Tony, I would like to see you, or anyone else actually support the majority of the current federal programs in light of Article 1 Section 8, and the Tenth Amendment. I have yet to see any coherent justification for the government being able to tell me how much wheat I can grow for my family, or for public education, or for NEA, or well, most other programs. You say there are others who's job it is to determine this, but enough of them haven't been doing their job properly for decades as to completely screw the results.
|8.13.09 @ 2:27PM|#
Sean,
I think you don't understand the constitution. So there!
Now that got us real far didn't it?
You do more than imply that most everything the government has done
in the last century is obviously illegal. If it's so obvious then
why do only a few fringe libertarians believe it? It's not within
the realm of possibility that your understanding of the law and the
constitution is either seriously flawed, or simply not taken
seriously by most people?
|8.13.09 @ 2:28PM|#
The right action is the action which has the consequences
that maximize the good, with the good defined as human
welfare.
And the individual can take a boot in the face if he doesn't like
it.
The definition of human welfare defines the good. If you think
killing bitchy uppity women who won't put out so as to send a
warning to the others, then shooting up an aerobics class makes
perfect sense. Such a small sacrifice on their part to maximize the
welfare of so many. The philosophy of monsters.
Sean W. Malone|8.13.09 @ 2:28PM|#
I see you keep using my "correction" point incorrectly
MNG.
When someone violates your liberty, you do have the moral
right to stop them. I thought it was clear enough...
If you or your property are physically violated. That is - if they
are harmed, destroyed or taken (injured, killed or enslaved) -
those are examples of someone else initiating force against you.
You have the right, maybe even the moral duty, to fight back.
Your problem is that you don't seem to grasp any distinction
between defending yourself and attacking someone else.
When you claim the "right" to a good or a service, you are claiming
the "right" to steal that good or service from the person(s) who
either own or created it. But you have no such right sir. Theft is
not a right you get to retain.
Regardless of how you feel about it, you don't get to take
from other people to fund or support things that you think are
important. Quite on the contrary, because it is
you who are the aggressor in trying to steal from
other people or conscript those who's skills you deem necessary to
you, I - and everyone else - have the right and maybe duty to do
everything in our power to stop you.
You are the aggressor MNG. Don't you get that?
The Angry Optimist|8.13.09 @ 2:29PM|#
The right action is the action which has the consequences that maximize the good, with the good defined as human welfare.
And because no one has it in their power to define what the "good"
or "human welfare" is, we should let people freely figure it out on
their own.
JB|8.13.09 @ 2:30PM|#
Jb has a victim complex like Johns
I would say you have a cunt complex, but no, you just are a
cunt.
Gunboat Diplomacy|8.13.09 @ 2:32PM|#
Obama Delegate / Organizing for America Organizer Pretends to Be
a Doctor at Townhall
The Lone Star Times and blogger Patterico reveal that a woman named
Roxana Mayer, who claimed to be a general practitioner at town-hall
event with Rep. Sheila Lee Jackson, is not in fact a doctor and was
a Democratic National Convention delegate for Obama from
Texas.
http://lonestartimes.com/2009/08/13/obama-camp-plants-fake-doc-che-fan-at-jackson-lee-forum/
Sean W. Malone|8.13.09 @ 2:32PM|#
Tony... are you fucking kidding? Before you came here, I doubt
seriously that you'd ever even heard of the parts of our history as
basic as even the Federalist Papers.
I'm not going to have a debate about the Constitution with you,
first, because you're an idiot and a remarkably ignorant one to
boot, and secondly because (again) the Founders wrote the
Constitution in as plain English as they possibly could
specifically so that ordinary people - as opposed to only lawyers -
could understand it's meaning.
The fact that most people don't understand it, don't care or are
likewise ignorant of it has no bearing on that fact. Is it all that
surprising that a government which controls about 95% of all
education, has created a populace that thinks everything the
government does is legal & righteous? It's worked everywhere
else in the world, so why not here? Ever been to China?
Sean W. Malone|8.13.09 @ 2:36PM|#
And aelhues:
I agree, Seasteading would be a great choice, but I personally have
some strong doubts about that movement's leadership skills or
ability to get the job done.
It doesn't help that Patri seems to spend most of his time hosting
parties & going to the gym.
Gilbert Martin|8.13.09 @ 2:38PM|#
"To MNG, forcing someone to do something when its right to force
someone to do something is the same as forcing someone to do
something when it is right to force someone to do something.
You stupid fuck, you can't even see it, can you?"
We can see "it" perfectly clear.
"It" being your bullshit attemtp to draw an equivelency between a
situtation where a person inititially used force against someone
and a situation where someone didn't.
Art-P.O.G.|8.13.09 @ 2:39PM|#
Apologies if someone's already pointed this out, but has anyone
ever seen William and 'oh no' in the same place at the same
time?
It's also fitting how this thread is every bit as contentious as
one a' those political rallies I hear so much about.
|8.13.09 @ 2:44PM|#
"oh no" was too verbose, if just as stupid, to be E/L/M/W.
I'm pretty sure he's a new incarnation of "concerned observer."
Same writing style, diction, (mis)capitalization and desperate
irrelevance.
|8.13.09 @ 2:45PM|#
As you say Sean, the group doesn't provide me much hope. However
the point is that there really isn't anywhere else to go. That is
unless Mexico collapses, and all the socialist leaning people
conveniently move to Venezuela, so we can move in behind them, and
take over. Or maybe Global Warming will be kind, and open up much
currently uninhabitable land that we could make a new nation
in.
Truthfully though, I'm loath to lose the United States to
socialism, or even socialism light (ooh look, it's even in the
name...united STATES). I'd sure like to see some kind of serious
return to constitutionality, liberty and freedom.
Sean W. Malone|8.13.09 @ 2:46PM|#
I'm really perplexed why most of our leftist trolls &
commenters continually change their handles.
It's not that hard to see through guys like LoneWacko, obviously,
regardless of what he calls himself. Lefiti is the same way... So
they're not really remaining anonymous. And worse, they just look
like right pussies.
Says the guy who uses his real name.
Sean W. Malone|8.13.09 @ 2:48PM|#
"As you say Sean, the group doesn't provide me much hope.
However the point is that there really isn't anywhere else to
go."
If I actually had some money I would happily start a competing
organization to the Seasteading Institute, but that may have to
wait. I'd prefer I was able to actually develop the capital in the
meantime, but things are looking bleak.
|8.13.09 @ 2:49PM|#
Says the guy who uses his real name.
The Monarch: [sighs] jollyrancher82, never get henchmen.
jollyrancher82: You know, that's not my real name.
The Monarch: Well how was I supposed to know!? I used my real
name.
jollyrancher82: I just thought, you know, 'the Monarch'. I thought
you were into cosplay.
The Monarch: Real name. And I am into costumed business,
not costume play.
|8.13.09 @ 2:50PM|#
It's easy to understand Sean, their masters tell them we, not of the socialist persuasion, are evil and violent, and will hunt them down if they slip and let a bit of their identity through. Witness MNG's paranoia of people who go to townhall meetings to tell their representatives what they think.
|8.13.09 @ 2:52PM|#
MNG-
My question to Tony (12:47) is not some kind of proof that I
support the initiation of violence. The point is that, imo, the
prospect of a statist politician being gunned down is not something
about which to be frightened.
IOW, the slaying of of a thug who initiates the use of force upon
others, every day, is not, and should not, be "frightening" to the
civilized amongst us.
Xeones|8.13.09 @ 2:52PM|#
It's worked everywhere else in the world, so why not here?
Ever been to China?
Tony doesn't need to go to China. He's busy advocating to bring
China here.
Art-P.O.G.|8.13.09 @ 2:53PM|#
Damn, and I thought concerned observer was just another incarnation of Edward. Whoops, that's what I get for having that long (mostly involuntary) H&R hiatus.
Art-P.O.G.|8.13.09 @ 2:55PM|#
desperate irrelevance
I think this is why I got Edward and concerned observer confused.
Xeones|8.13.09 @ 2:57PM|#
Edward/Lefiti/Morris/William is instantly recognizable -- his comments always have that same barely-restrained, incoherent fury, usually couched in terms of an utterly irrelevant accusation leveled at some strawman with "Libertarian hurr hurr" written on its chest.
Xeones|8.13.09 @ 2:59PM|#
Oh, i forgot the random, lengthy quotations of Torah and Midrash whenever Sullum posts, for some reason.
oh no not this again|8.13.09 @ 3:01PM|#
Stop projecting sugarfree. My political opinions are irrelevant to the snarking present. Just having a few laughs while people bend over backwards sticking up for those republicans who think ranting or screaming at their representative will contribute to anything beyond partisan ass banging. Something stinks is that collectivism I smell around here
The Angry Optimist|8.13.09 @ 3:06PM|#
"oh no" - well, you're on here talking about it, aren't you?
Care to enlighten us all as to why that is?
Perhaps you can figure out why the President is so bent on getting
this bill through so early. I'll give you three guesses.
Tony|8.13.09 @ 3:08PM|#
Tony... are you fucking kidding? Before you came here, I doubt seriously that you'd ever even heard of the parts of our history as basic as even the Federalist Papers.
Actually I'm a pretty thoroughly educated person. Just one who
happens to believe that the founders' writings are merely
brilliant, not sacrosanct. If you want to believe that the majority
of actions taken by the government over the majority of the
country's history are illegal, knock yourself out. But we do have
courts to determine these things, and some nut with a gun fetish
who thinks he's jesus isn't necessarily the better arbiter.
I'm not going to have a debate about the Constitution with you, first, because you're an idiot and a remarkably ignorant one to boot, and secondly because (again) the Founders wrote the Constitution in as plain English as they possibly could specifically so that ordinary people - as opposed to only lawyers - could understand it's meaning.
Of course you mean so that educated land-owning males could
understand it, but we can put that aside. I know the constitution
up and down and nowhere does it even say this country has to be
capitalist. Your pet political theories are not justified in the
constitution, you just say they are. It's not a libertarian
treatise, it's a framework for a relatively strong federal
government, complete with clear procedures for amending it.
The fact that most people don't understand it, don't care or are likewise ignorant of it has no bearing on that fact. Is it all that surprising that a government which controls about 95% of all education, has created a populace that thinks everything the government does is legal & righteous? It's worked everywhere else in the world, so why not here? Ever been to China?
Name one liberal who thinks everything the government does is legal
and righteous. My entire point here is that we have policy
differences. Yet the righties are shooting their wad on healthcare
as if it were the apocalypse. And we're sitting around pretending
that these people aren't just plain old white racists who hate
liberals because Rush told them to.
on no not this again|8.13.09 @ 3:08PM|#
And they all nod and say good job sugarfree but no one has the two cents to say he didn't actually make a point just some one liner but that's ok we all agree
|8.13.09 @ 3:10PM|#
people bend over backwards sticking up for those republicans
who think ranting or screaming at their representative who has
ignored them, failed to defend their position, or even read the
bill will contribute to anything.
Though might just be justified.
But the vast majority of these republicans, aren't acting in any
unpleasant way, except to disagree. Though you wouldn't know by the
protestations of the democrat politicians.
Michael Ejercito|8.13.09 @ 3:12PM|#
The Dems acted like complete children for 8 years. Now, a few people show up at town hall meetings and do exactly what the Left has been doing for 40 years or more and the left pees their pants and starts shouting racist and facist and militia.
Not that the behavior of those people are any more acceptable than
when the Left does it.
MNG, the aerobics class shooter was a 48yo virgin whole took out his rage on a class full of women, how exactly does that relate to being antigovernment.
He was a virgin?
How lame.
And I dearly hope our courts eventually get around to deciding that imprisonment and torture by presidential fiat is unconstitutional.
Name these people who were tortured.
Well, the withholding of needed treatment is a wrong. I'm correcting it.
But what treatment is necessary.
Many people would be willing to pay $100 to vaccinate 100 children
which would extend each child's expected life span by
decades.
But how many would pay twenty thousand dollars for one coronary
bypass for an octogenarian?
Art-P.O.G.|8.13.09 @ 3:14PM|#
You admitted yourself you were snarking, oh no. Or was there a
serious point in there somewhere?
But we do have courts to determine these things, and some nut with a gun fetish who thinks he's jesus isn't necessarily the better arbiter.
And we're sitting around pretending that these people aren't just plain old white racists who hate liberals because Rush told them to.
You're a bigot, Tony.
on no not this again|8.13.09 @ 3:14PM|#
Not a clue but it looks like he just wasted his presidency in orderto waste his time arguing with sasholes
|8.13.09 @ 3:14PM|#
And we're sitting around pretending that these people aren't
just plain old white racists who hate liberals because Rush told
them to.
It's statements like this that show your true colors. I submit, a
definition of racism is/should be, injecting race where it doesn't
belong. What does being white, black or purple have to do with
objecting to some sort of government intervention into my
healthcare choices?
oh no not this again|8.13.09 @ 3:17PM|#
He went for big and grand but he is going to get shat on but that doesn't meanwe have to give this drama any credibility
Tony|8.13.09 @ 3:19PM|#
Michael,
Again, this place suffers from a very tired false equivalence. IMO
we don't have much to fear from authoritarian communists taking
over the country. That strain of political thought has been pretty
thoroughly squished.
What does exist, however, is an increase in right-wing militancy.
It's a textbook movement in my opinion, agitated by propaganda,
unconcerned with facts, obsessed with firearms, and are vocal about
their race-based grievances. Militant right-wing movements are
nothing new, and historically they've led to some pretty awful
consequences. But let's not pretend that every protester is equally
nutty. That's lazy thinking, and it would be a remarkable
coincidence if it were the case.
Tony|8.13.09 @ 3:21PM|#
It's statements like this that show your true colors. I submit, a definition of racism is/should be, injecting race where it doesn't belong. What does being white, black or purple have to do with objecting to some sort of government intervention into my healthcare choices?
Show me a single person of color at these teabagging protests and
we'll talk.
The Angry Optimist|8.13.09 @ 3:21PM|#
Contrast this:
But let's not pretend that every protester is equally nutty.
With this:
And we're sitting around pretending that these people aren't just plain old white racists who hate liberals because Rush told them to.
you contradict yourself in less than 10 minutes. Good job,
Tony.
Xeones|8.13.09 @ 3:22PM|#
He went for big and grand but he is going to get shat on but
that doesn't meanwe have to give this drama any
credibility
The acid just kicked in, and oh no's fingers are starting to melt
to the keyboard. How does purple feel, oh no?
The Angry Optimist|8.13.09 @ 3:23PM|#
Show me a single person of color at these teabagging protests and we'll talk.
White doesn't count? How does the "color" of people somehow
validate or invalidate their message?
Tomcat1066|8.13.09 @ 3:26PM|#
Show me a single person of color at these teabagging
protests and we'll talk.
Try
here.
There ya go.
Sean W. Malone|8.13.09 @ 3:26PM|#
"Show me a single person of color at these teabagging
protests and we'll talk."
ANHHHAHAHAHAHAHZHHAHAHAHA HOLY SHIT!!
Fuck, I love you Tony. I JUST posted exactly what you said didn't
happen. Fuck me, that's rich.
I love it. Tony, the post just above yours has a "person of color"
who's in the protesting crowd getting beat up by union thugs...
Care to try again?
And... also... Who gives a shit what race people are? I mean...
Except for you.
|8.13.09 @ 3:26PM|#
but no one has the two cents to say he didn't actually make
a point just some one liner
Yes, why didn't some of you cowards call me out? Are you just
afraid of me? TAO? Xeones? Pro Libertate? Come on, you lily-livered
nincompoops! Excoriate me on behalf of poor, defenseless oh no.
He's tossed around strawmen and insults and told everyone to STFU
multiple times. He's made his case! Back him up!
|8.13.09 @ 3:27PM|#
Someone tried to equate a fear of SEIU goons with a fear of
right wing extremists.
But that's a bad analogy as I pointed out.
I would agree. Right wing extremists haven't beat up anybody at a
health care town hall.
What does exist, however, is an increase in right-wing
militancy.
[citation needed]
Tony|8.13.09 @ 3:28PM|#
White doesn't count? How does the "color" of people somehow validate or invalidate their message?
If it's just a message about policy then you'd think you'd see a
fairly representative demographic slice of the country.
What does being older, whiter, more rural, and more southern have
to do with libertarian thought? What does it have to do with the
question of the fact of the president's citizenship? What does it
have to do with parroting demonstrable talk radio lies as if they
were fact? What's the common thread? I just can't possibly imagine
what that could be.
oh no not this again|8.13.09 @ 3:30PM|#
Great thanks for asking that happened to me once when I was a kid working a register
|8.13.09 @ 3:30PM|#
http://theblacksphere.net/
Kevin was a speaker at the St. Louis event. Other than him, I saw a
number of people who were not white. The majority were white. Part
of the cause of the disparity was people like you. People assume
somehow it must be a bunch of racists, so people predisposed to
fear of white people stay away, even if they agree with the
principles. If you had gone out to your local tea party, you would
likely have seen that the vast majority of people were normal
everyday middle class citizens, who are simply getting more and
more fed up with the over reach of government. I personally brought
my kids, as it was very comfortably a welcoming, family event,
despite what the hysterical media told you.
|8.13.09 @ 3:31PM|#
Yes, Tony, calling all libertarians, Republicans, and
Southerners racist is so enlightened. And so not an argumentative
fallacy.
Is this what passes for liberal thinking these days? We really do
need an Age of Re-Enlightenment.
Tomcat1066|8.13.09 @ 3:31PM|#
"What does being older, whiter, more rural, and more southern
have to do with libertarian thought? What does it have to do with
the question of the fact of the president's citizenship? What does
it have to do with parroting demonstrable talk radio lies as if
they were fact?"
[sings]One of these things is not like the other[/sings]
Sean W. Malone|8.13.09 @ 3:33PM|#
"If it's just a message about policy then you'd think you'd
see a fairly representative demographic slice of the
country."
That would assume that there has ever been an even remotely "even"
distribution of political leanings by race or that African
Americans are not overwhelmingly huge supporters of the Democrats
and Obama specifically...
Walter Williams
from yesterday on this very topic
Sean W. Malone|8.13.09 @ 3:34PM|#
"What does being older, whiter, more rural, and more
southern have to do with libertarian thought?"
I'm not sure, considering I am a relatively young, Pacific
Northwest & Midwest raised dude who got a graduate degree in
New York City and now lives in Los Angeles...
The Angry Optimist|8.13.09 @ 3:35PM|#
What does being older, whiter, more rural, and more southern have to do with libertarian thought?
Not a goddamned thing. My hero, Ayn Rand, was a New York Jewish
female.
Tony|8.13.09 @ 3:35PM|#
more and more fed up with the over reach of government.
So it's just a sheer accident of timing that it all erupted after
the election of Obama, despite his predecessor's unprecedented
levels of government overreach.
For the record, I don't think it's as much about racism against
blacks as hatred of liberals. "Liberal" is the great scary bogeyman
the right uses these days. Perhaps it's because they can't say
nigger anymore, but perhaps not. Regardless it's pure, unthinking,
hypocritical hatred of an other, and not about policy. There are
plenty of things to have been upset about over the last decade.
That the president is enacting his primary domestic policy agenda
item is perhaps one of them, but it shouldn't have been surprising,
since he talked about it for ad nauseum during the campaign.
Rightwingers pissed that their side loss is all this is. They don't
apparently believe that sometimes losing comes with democracy. And
that should be a surprise. The last time we had a Democrat in
president a much more moderate GOP still attempted a coup. Let's
hope this time it's not a more militant attempt.
|8.13.09 @ 3:36PM|#
Blacks are what, 11% of the general population? And 90% or so
vote Democrat? So what number would show up at anything opposing
Obama or leftwing positions? Even if they really did oppose him or
those positions?
And what difference does it make? Is healthcare a racial issue?
Sean W. Malone|8.13.09 @ 3:40PM|#
"So it's just a sheer accident of timing that it all erupted
after the election of Obama, despite his predecessor's
unprecedented levels of government overreach."
Here... Let
me google that for you
Perhaps, electing a committed socialist, after one of the biggest
socialist (yes, I'm talking about Bush) disasters our nation has
experienced has something to do with it? Not sure... When the abuse
of Presidential power was rampant for 8 years, are you really that
shocked when someone who takes even more power from the people
pushes people over the edge? Bush's 23% approval rating wasn't
exactly all Dems you know.
|8.13.09 @ 3:40PM|#
Yes it "erupted" after Obama was elected, but there were plenty of complaints and calls made to representatives well before. A large number of the people you are maligning were individually vocal in opposition to the Bush enacted money spending glut, but most of the rest of the country was repeating, "we have to do something". It's not my fault that our opinions weren't more publicized, or that you didn't know about them. You're lack of awareness, and your bias doesn't make me or any other tea party participant, a racist, or any other thing you blindly accuse us of.
Art-P.O.G.|8.13.09 @ 3:41PM|#
So it's just a sheer accident of timing that it all erupted after the election of Obama, despite his predecessor's unprecedented levels of government overreach.
Michael Ejercito jogged my memory in another thread. Didn't the
Tea Parties actually start with the bailouts, Tony?
"Liberal" is the great scary bogeyman the right uses these days. Perhaps it's because they can't say nigger anymore, but perhaps not.
I don't even know when to start with this. Tony, the distinction that you draw between useful idiots on the right and useful idiots on the left seems awfully arbitrary to me.
Art-P.O.G.|8.13.09 @ 3:44PM|#
I went to a System of a Down concert a few years back, and it seemed like the ratio of black people to white people was low. I immediately assumed racism. ;)
Oh no not this again|8.13.09 @ 3:44PM|#
Sorry sugarfree, I told John and the guy who could have been his clone to STFU. It's that kind of opinion that contributes to the mess we now have at the townhalls/healthcare debate in general. They are trying to fulfill some persecution complex with the socialists as the oppressors. It's a joke, and should be treated as such. It's not my fault Reason seems to cater to these individuals, evidenced my the repeated posts concerning townhall shenanagins. Hence the my name.
Sean W. Malone|8.13.09 @ 3:45PM|#
"Rightwingers pissed that their side loss is all this is.
They don't apparently believe that sometimes losing comes with
democracy. And that should be a surprise."
For some, that is no doubt true - but again, most Republicans I've
met were, whether they liked to talk about it or not, pretty
embarrassed with Bush (this was expressed in his polling numbers) -
and most people complained that he wasn't really acting like any
"conservative" they were interested in supporting, not so much with
Iraq and such but on fiscal issues and domestic policy.
But with what team blue has done in the last 8 months, I'm betting
that as early as the 2010 election there will be a bloodbath for
"your side" too. So just keep that in mind Tony.
OH no not this again|8.13.09 @ 3:46PM|#
I wish people gave more weight and snatch their ideas from We the Living, so much better than the other two.
The Angry Optimist|8.13.09 @ 3:47PM|#
Oh, Tony? you might want to do yourself a favor and click on
Art-P.O.G.'s name before you embarrass yourself further.
Not that there's any relevance in that, but you seem to think there
is.
Of course, crying "racism" when the leaders of your orientation
racebaited after Prop 8 is hilarious hypocrisy of the highest
order.
|8.13.09 @ 3:48PM|#
I played in a soccer league in downtown St. Louis. There were only a few European whites, a few blacks, and no one that I saw of the mongoloid persuasion. It must have been a racist league.
Tony|8.13.09 @ 3:48PM|#
I just don't think there are a lot of little islands consisting
of 23% of the population each, one concerned with health care, one
concerned with Obama's birth, one concerned with socialism, one
concerned with guns, one concerned with hating gays and black
people, etc. It's very likely to be the same core constituency of
the GOP to which the GOP has granted outsize legitimacy by relying
on their ignorance to get themselves elected for a decade.
But putting all that aside, I just have one question. Can we agree
that in a democracy sometimes we don't get what we want? And that
when that happens, it doesn't automatically mean there's a fascist
takeover looming poised to kill your granny and put its grubby
government hands on your medicare?
|8.13.09 @ 3:50PM|#
Is healthcare a racial issue?
To liberals, everything is a racial issue. It's the hairshirt they
wear everyday so they can prove to themselves they are "one of the
good ones." Their self-loathing would be amusing if they could shut
up about it.
Every white liberal should quit their job so a person of color can
have it. And don't take welfare either, it reduces the amount
people of color can get. And move out of the house they could only
buy or rent because of privilege. White liberals should just sit
under the bodhi tree, absorbing the love of the oppressed races for
their noble self-sacrifice until they starve to death. Ravens can
have their eyes and stray dogs that managed to escape PETA death
factories can gorge on their flesh.
It's the only utilitarian thing to do. It would certainly maximize
my happiness.
Oh no not this again|8.13.09 @ 3:50PM|#
TAO,
You forgot, you can't vote on someones civil rights. LOL
Sean W. Malone|8.13.09 @ 3:51PM|#
"But putting all that aside, I just have one question. Can
we agree that in a democracy sometimes we don't get what we
want?"
Yes.
"And that when that happens, it doesn't automatically mean
there's a fascist takeover looming poised to kill your granny and
put its grubby government hands on your medicare?"
Not automatically... But, tossing your "government hands on your
[government provided] medicare" aside, since that was retarded... A
fascist take over of the financial & auto industries as well as
a strong attempt at health care, seems rather important, don't you
think? Not to mention that all three of those have hardly been free
from intervention or corporatist cronyism thus far...
Tony|8.13.09 @ 3:52PM|#
I'm betting that as early as the 2010 election there will be a bloodbath for "your side" too. So just keep that in mind Tony.
I'll put $10,000 down on that one. Obama's and the democrats'
popularity is surely going down. What's not as often pointed out is
that the GOP's numbers aren't going up in response, even though
those numbers are thoroughly in the shitter.
Tony|8.13.09 @ 3:53PM|#
Sean do you understand the difference between authoritarianism and a mixed economy? Not many here seem to.
Tomcat1066|8.13.09 @ 3:53PM|#
Tony,
Can we all agree that this nation isn't a fucking democracy? It's a
representative republic that has specifically delegated powers that
do not include health care.
Art-P.O.G.|8.13.09 @ 3:54PM|#
Tony, Tony, Tony,
It definitely didn't start with Obama, but does it seem to
you that the gov't seems to grab more and more power? And are you
OK with that?
Xeones|8.13.09 @ 3:54PM|#
Ravens can have their eyes and stray dogs that managed to
escape PETA death factories can gorge on their flesh.
Unfortunately for this absolutely idyllic image, the dogs and
ravens will all be sated from feasting on Warty when i am finished
with him, for i have not forgotten our blood feud.
Tomcat1066|8.13.09 @ 3:56PM|#
What's not as often pointed out is that the GOP's numbers
aren't going up in response, even though those numbers are
thoroughly in the shitter.
Since I'm a card carrying Libertarian, I'm OK with both being in
the shitter ;)
|8.13.09 @ 3:56PM|#
Art-P.O.G.,
Everyone knows that you can't be black and libertarian at the same
time. So, clearly, you are fictional and are one of the
Astroturfers®. Please report to Washington for re-education.
The Angry Optimist|8.13.09 @ 3:56PM|#
Sean do you understand the difference between authoritarianism and a mixed economy?
I don't, Tony, so enlighten me: what percentage of GDP must the
government take to turn from the latter to the former?
|8.13.09 @ 3:57PM|#
Please report to Washington for re-education.
Maybe they can get that chip off your shoulder.
Tony|8.13.09 @ 3:58PM|#
Tomcat1066,
Thanks for the civics lesson. For future reference when I use the
word democracy I mean it in a shorthand and general sense.
I believe among those specifically delegated powers are powers
defined so vaguely that they can be interpreted to result in a vast
array of legislation. And history and the courts have tended to
agree with me, for whatever that's worth.
Can someone point to the place in the constitution that requires us
to have a capitalistic economy?
The Angry Optimist|8.13.09 @ 3:59PM|#
and keep you from getting uppity.
Tony, here's your homework: give us a list of things you feel the
government absolutely should not be involved in, and why.
Tony|8.13.09 @ 4:01PM|#
I don't, Tony, so enlighten me: what percentage of GDP must the government take to turn from the latter to the former?
Authoritarianism and the level of government control of the economy
have absolutely nothing to do with each other in my opinion. On
this planet there are freer societies with more government reach
and tyrannical societies with freer markets. They're separate
issues, and again, I don't see anywhere where the constitution
requires us to have a free market economy.
Tony|8.13.09 @ 4:03PM|#
Tony, here's your homework: give us a list of things you feel the government absolutely should not be involved in, and why.
Should not because it's illegal, or should not based on my
opinion?
The Angry Optimist|8.13.09 @ 4:03PM|#
I don't particularly care about the constitution.
So, a government that takes 100% of GDP - that's not an
authoritarian state to you?
The Angry Optimist|8.13.09 @ 4:04PM|#
what do you know about "illegal"?
your opinion, Tony - just tell me things you think government
should absolutely be out of, and WHY.
Tony|8.13.09 @ 4:06PM|#
How about things that are technically legal but that I disagree
should be.
Wiretapping, torture, indefinite detention for starters, though I
hope they're declared illegal with some force in the near
future.
Invading countries preventively.
Engaging in a war on drugs.
Restricting marriage in a way that unfairly discriminates.
Participating in a system of policymaking by de facto
bribery.
I could go on.
Xeones|8.13.09 @ 4:10PM|#
Jeez, TAO. Why do you hate yourself so much that you'll keep engaging that crapweasel in dialogue? Is it because you're going to be a lawyer?
Sean W. Malone|8.13.09 @ 4:14PM|#
Man, that's really funny...
"How about things that are technically legal but that I
disagree should be."
None of the things you list are actually legal according
to the United States Constitution, Tony. At least you're consistent
on this point, more or less. Legal is apparently whatever a
politician wants it to mean. Somehow I doubt you were taking the
same position 2 years ago.
JB|8.13.09 @ 4:16PM|#
Yes, Tony, calling all libertarians, Republicans, and
Southerners racist is so enlightened. And so not an argumentative
fallacy.
Is this what passes for liberal thinking these days? We really do
need an Age of Re-Enlightenment.
Leftists are fetuses in need of a medical procedure.
As evidence, I submit 'oh no'. That twat wants people to sit down
and be happy about him and Obama trying to stick their fists up our
asses. Not only 'no, thank you', but fuck you.
Sean W. Malone|8.13.09 @ 4:17PM|#
And PS. Tony, I think we've covered this before, but I have, in
fact, been to many formerly Authoritarian nations - like
Russia, for example.
As it turns out, the stuff that they're running away from now in
places like that (and Estonia, and China, and etc.) are the same
policies you and your statist ilk are driving us towards. So I'm
curious to turn the question around, Tony - Do YOU understand what
Authoritarianism is?
Tony|8.13.09 @ 4:17PM|#
TAO,
Because I have my values just like you do. Just because I'm in
favor of healthcare reform doesn't mean I think the government
should be able to do everything it wants. I happen to feel that
it's a legitimate piece of legislation, which seems to be a pretty
mainstream view since there isn't a lot of mainstream legal
hand-wringing about whether congress can do it.
|8.13.09 @ 4:18PM|#
Can we agree that in a democracy sometimes we don't get what
we want?
Does that include free (that is, incredibly
expensive, but paid for by Somebody Else) unlimited health
care from cradle to grave? I fucking hope so.
Tony|8.13.09 @ 4:20PM|#
I know you do P Brooks. I hope for the opposite. does that make one of us an authoritarian and the other a freedom lover? If so, then discourse on the subject has reached and infantile level, which is the entire thing I've been talking about this whole thread.
|8.13.09 @ 4:21PM|#
"Authoritarianism and the level of government control of the
economy have absolutely nothing to do with each other in my
opinion."
Because taking control of large parts of the economy requires no
enforcement mechanisms. This statement right here is the game
ender.
Oh no not this again|8.13.09 @ 4:22PM|#
Talk about perfect timing, i get done with reading about blackest night #2, and find John, oops, i mean JB using anal rhetoric to perpetuate his victimhood at the hands of Obama. JB, i think it's you guys waving the fists around. How many tea party protests have you've been to JB, were those fists ok?
|8.13.09 @ 4:24PM|#
If you believe the Money Fairy will pay your bills, it's hard not to think of you as infantile; it certainly makes you irrational.
Sean W. Malone|8.13.09 @ 4:25PM|#
"since there isn't a lot of mainstream legal hand-wringing
about whether congress can do it."
You are a fool of the highest order, Tony... I hope you realize
that.
The US Government quit giving a shit about it's Constitutional
limits ages ago - and it's people like you who have enabled that.
So the next time someone gets tortured, or wire-tapped, or a war is
started aggressively without so much as a vote... The next time
your due process is abridged by the patriot act, your right to
property is abridged by eminent domain of health care, the right to
speech is abridged by some campaign laws, or some other speech
code, I hope you remember that it's your own goddamn fault.
A people who don't hold their government to it's "contract"
probably deserve what they get.
Sean W. Malone|8.13.09 @ 4:27PM|#
"I know you do P Brooks. I hope for the opposite. does that
make one of us an authoritarian and the other a freedom lover?
"
YES!!! IT DOES!
You fucktard. When your position is forcing people to pay for your
basic life needs, through authoritarian control of an entire
industry and bending that to serve your own personal aims based on
coercion and theft, and the opposing position is to allow people
the freedom to contract and engage with each other voluntarily...
YES, YOU ARE THE FUCKING AUTHORITARIAN.
|8.13.09 @ 4:27PM|#
And Tony- try reading Capitalism and Freedom for an alternative take on your "politics and economics are completely separate" notion.
Meta4|8.13.09 @ 4:28PM|#
"He's made his case! Back him up!"
In his defense, he gives awesome blow jobs for crack.
Oh no not this again|8.13.09 @ 4:28PM|#
A people who don't hold their government to it's "contract"
probably deserve what they get.
So you do believe in force, or only for contracts that you
like/approve?
If this thread is around in two hours, I'll be here
Same lib time same lib channel.
Tony|8.13.09 @ 4:31PM|#
Sean,
So that means we've been an authoritarian country with respect to
medicare and social security for a very long time. Not to mention a
host of other social programs. Believe that if you want, I think
it's ludicrous.
Tony|8.13.09 @ 4:32PM|#
And Tony- try reading Capitalism and Freedom for an alternative take on your "politics and economics are completely separate" notion.
Didn't say they were separate. My point is that having a mixed
economy, as ours and every other major economy on earth is, isn't
the same thing as authoritarian communism. You act all
flabbergasted that someone would call you out on your incessant
hyperbole and Godwinning.
|8.13.09 @ 4:44PM|#
"I'll put $10,000 down on that one. Obama's and the democrats'
popularity is surely going down. What's not as often pointed out is
that the GOP's numbers aren't going up in response, even though
those numbers are thoroughly in the shitter."
I do so love stupid people!
Generic Congressional Ballot
Republicans Maintain Lead Over Democrats on Generic Ballot
The latest Rasmussen Reports national telephone survey shows that
42% would vote for their district's Republican congressional
candidate while 38% would opt for his or her Democratic
opponent.
Here's what it was 5 days after the inaguration:
01-25-09 Dem 42% GOP 35%
http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/mood_of_america/generic_congressional_ballot
Tony|8.13.09 @ 4:44PM|#
Art,
Why is the assertion that the USA has been a fascist authoritarian
nightmare for basically its entire history ludicrous? I dunno, let
me think real hard. Maybe it's because we've been one of the freest
societies in the history of the planet, that every other free
country in the world has similar and stronger social programs and
are no less free because of them?
But wait I forget this is libertarian land, where the greatest
oppression is taxes. One wonders how we've managed to persist all
these long centuries being under the iron fist of a mixed
economy.
Tony|8.13.09 @ 4:46PM|#
Welcome EAP, this conversation was missing something without your free republic talking points.
Sean W. Malone|8.13.09 @ 4:48PM|#
"So that means we've been an authoritarian country with
respect to medicare and social security for a very long time. Not
to mention a host of other social programs. Believe that if you
want, I think it's ludicrous."
DING DING! Show him what he's won!
(PS. Have you figured out the correlation between authoritarian
governing philosophy and rising costs/poorer quality of life
yet?)
This stuff is a continuum though Tony, not merely a switch on or
off. If we have 25% control, that's surely better than 75% control,
but I'm not sure at which point specifically ordinary people start
to cry uncle and recognize the control as "authoritarian"...
|8.13.09 @ 4:52PM|#
"Welcome EAP, this conversation was missing something without
your free republic talking points."
Rassmusen = free republic (which I am assuming is some sort of
publication)?
Art-P.O.G.|8.13.09 @ 4:55PM|#
Art,
Why is the assertion that the USA has been a fascist authoritarian nightmare for basically its entire history ludicrous?
I didn't use that hyperbole, Tony, but I can excoriate the social security program if you like.
Sean W. Malone|8.13.09 @ 4:55PM|#
"But wait I forget this is libertarian land, where the
greatest oppression is taxes. One wonders how we've managed to
persist all these long centuries being under the iron fist of a
mixed economy."
I wish you actually knew anything about history sometimes, Tony...
really.
The "iron fist" didn't really start til the 20th Century. We had
low taxes, only consisting of excise taxes & tariffs for
virtually 125 years. No income tax of any kind, no capital gains
taxes...
Taxes are a rather good measurement of how much you're being fucked
by a government. Not perfect, but pretty good since there is a
strong correlation between the amount of money a person has and the
amount of work & value of their productive efforts have to
society.
Likewise, the government wasn't in the business of regulating about
90% of human choices (with the only notable exception being slavery
so don't fucking bring up that canard), as they are today - and
certainly not at anything beyond the local level.
Virtually from the moment our country was founded, the guaranteed
freedoms have been slipping. 220 years later and a fucking lot of
them are just gone.
Sean W. Malone|8.13.09 @ 4:58PM|#
Funny how sometimes Tony can see the correlation between freedom
and prosperity, and yet not realize that everything he's ever
shilled for is exactly the opposite of both of those ideas.
Way to suck that tyrannical cock Tony. Let's just hope you're
loyalty is rewarded.
Art-P.O.G.|8.13.09 @ 4:58PM|#
EAP, oh no is not ChicagoTom. ChicagoTom posts sentences that form paragraphs and despite his recent shrillness, he's been a good contributor. ugarfree suggested that oh no may be concerned observer, and that would make sense.
|8.13.09 @ 5:12PM|#
Every white liberal should quit their job so a person of
color can have it. And don't take welfare either, it reduces the
amount people of color can get. And move out of the house they
could only buy or rent because of privilege. White liberals should
just sit under the bodhi tree, absorbing the love of the oppressed
races for their noble self-sacrifice until they starve to death.
Ravens can have their eyes and stray dogs that managed to escape
PETA death factories can gorge on their flesh.
I couldn't help but come back to say that that ^ is damn funny!
Thank you for making my afternoon SugarFree
Belicose@Brandenberg|8.13.09 @ 5:12PM|#
Was i wrong?
About what? You had a question?
I don't get my news from the tee bee, sorry.
If I had only that and a dubious claim to literacy going for me, I
would have hung myself years ago. You were blessed with an
obscurant mind though, as long as you don't get too far from you
self imposed bounds, I expect you to be taking your licks to the
bitter end.
Tony|8.13.09 @ 5:13PM|#
Let me see if I can put this another way. Fascist authoritarian
regimes of the 20th century had socialist economies because
socialist economies were popular. Communism is despised for good
reason and I'm against it for all the same reasons you guys are.
What you're missing is that pure capitalism is just the other
extreme and equally prone to spreading mass misery. That's why all
advanced countries have adopted mixed economies (what you might
call socialism). But the problem with authoritarian socialist
regimes isn't socialism, it's authoritarianism. I think you have a
warped idea of the correlation/causation equation.
And it's notable that unbridled capitalism has never been popular
anywhere except with the plutocratic class and, recently, a certain
segment of the American population who have been convinced that
capitalism is the economic system Jesus would prefer.
Enyap|8.13.09 @ 5:13PM|#
MNG i'm not doubting the shooters political leanings, just your claim that it was a motive for the crime. Would you care to explain how right wing thought leads to shooting up a women's aerobic class. Also I already explain how linking a neonazi who killed 3 cops to the 60% of americans who oppose obamacare is plain dumbfuckary. I'll give you the church killer and i'll even remind you of the guy who killed Dr Tillman, so out of a portion of the political spectrum that contains millions of people you can find 2 crazy murderers. Yet you expect us to believe right wing extremist are going to reenact the night of long knives.
Art-P.O.G.|8.13.09 @ 5:17PM|#
So concerned observer isn't Edward et al.?
I thought so, but Sugarfree doesn't seem to.
Tony,
The War on Drugs isn't authoritarian, or it falls within the
acceptable bounds of authoritarianism for you? I know you don't
agree with it, but still...going back further to alcohol
prohibition, it's clear that this country, despite its virtues
still has an authoritarian streak.
Tony|8.13.09 @ 5:18PM|#
Sean,
Do you really think you're less free than someone living 100 or
even 50 years ago? (And no I won't bring black people into the
equation since you requested it, though I don't see why that's
irrelevant.) Your conception of freedom really only applies to the
already wealthy, and to make up for this flaw you tack on the
faulty axiom that all anyone has to do to achieve that level of
freedom is work hard. Until we're all wealthy, then the underclass
deserve their fate of poverty and no healthcare, of basically not
being free by any meaningful definition.
Art-P.O.G.|8.13.09 @ 5:20PM|#
Also,
pure capitalism is just the other extreme and equally prone to spreading mass misery.
When/how? Examples, please?
Art-P.O.G.|8.13.09 @ 5:23PM|#
the faulty axiom that all anyone has to do to achieve that level of freedom is work hard.
And the antithesis of this is what? That no matter how hard you work, you'll never be free?
|8.13.09 @ 5:26PM|#
Hey Tony,
Care to comment on my 4:52pm post that shows difinitively just how
full of cat shit you are?
Tony|8.13.09 @ 5:28PM|#
Art,
Since I actually believe in freedom that has a tangible definition,
I believe that any powerful entity is capable of oppression. Not
just governments. Now I happen to believe that laissez-faire
capitalism leads inexorably to monopoly and concentration of wealth
with a few elites. With an impotent government these people and
their corporations are freer to exploit people, and they don't even
have a bill of rights to constrain them. Just compare the more
laissez-faire eras in this country's history to the more mixed
economy eras and compare how much individual freedom existed for
how many people.
Funny thing is it's hard to come up with examples because few
countries have been dumb enough to adopt laissez-faire. There've
been a few countries on which it's been imposed by American
neoliberals, notably in South America. What inevitably happens is
the people get a taste of this sort of banana republic "freedom"
and then go on to establish a government more strongly socialist
than before.
|8.13.09 @ 5:29PM|#
Until we're all wealthy, then the underclass deserve their
fate of poverty and no healthcare, of basically not being free by
any meaningful definition.
And, in Tony's world, the government creates wealth. By taking it
from the few, and spreading it around.
|8.13.09 @ 5:32PM|#
few countries have been dumb enough to adopt laissez-faire.
There've been a few countries on which it's been imposed by
American neoliberals, notably in South America.
Of course!
*slaps forehead*
Tony|8.13.09 @ 5:33PM|#
And the antithesis of this is what? That no matter how hard you work, you'll never be free?
I want a society in which the libertarian truism is actually
possible, and we're a true meritocracy. That's not possible when
some are more advantaged than others from birth. Which moral
principle states that a poor kid has to work 10 times harder than a
rich kid in order to achieve the same amount of success?
Oh no here we go again|8.13.09 @ 5:40PM|#
And Tony had to ruin the love by throwing out Free Republic. They have their faults, but they don't sink that low. John yes, everyone else not so much, but I'm wondering if everyone moved to the Jesse Walker post. Sooner or later someones going to trot out that let's pay everyone a millions dollars line, and then I'll throw up. SEE YA THERE
|8.13.09 @ 5:50PM|#
I'm pretty sure that anything close to pure laissez-faire capitalism has never occurred on this planet.
JB|8.13.09 @ 5:52PM|#
How many tea party protests have you've been to
JB
I'm willing to bet that you haven't been to any because you sure
are one ignorant fuck, oh no.
Keep swilling that Obama jizz around your mouth.
Stupid fucking fetus.
|8.13.09 @ 5:57PM|#
I hear the Russians have gone to a totally laissez faire, "cowboy capitalist" model.
Oh no not this again|8.13.09 @ 5:58PM|#
First of all, as someone who looked at Bush's tax cuts and
thought, "that's it, i hope he plans on doing some more soon," the
kids looking to be important and cool at the tea parties can lick
my balls.
Secondly, I'm a spitter not a swallower
Oh no not this again|8.13.09 @ 6:01PM|#
I think the Russians are only Cowboy Capitalist when it comes to old satellites that owe them money
|8.13.09 @ 6:01PM|#
Tony, my parents have been pissing away their money their entire life. When they were young, they were typical baby boomer hippie fuckups. Are you saying I should be mad as hell that some other person had parents who worked twice as hard in school, didn't waste their money on drugs, alcohol, and vacations, but rather saved that money to hand down to their children whereas I didn't get jack shit? Is there something wrong with busting your ass, paying taxes on the fruit of your labor and then instead of pissing it away giving it to your kids? It seems that to some people, such as yourself, that is unfair somehow? IMO, nobody in this world ever owed me anything. (and it's a damn good thing I feel that way...) If somebody were to have given me a big sack of money, that would be great, but it wasn't necessary. My relative success or failure in life has had little to do with my bottom-end starting point. I refuse to wallow in a loser mentality. I'm thinking that from your point of view I must be deluded? Should I be mad as hell I didn't get a car handed to me at 16 or a free ride to whatever college would accept me ro a free house? If it helps you sleep better, realize the people who grew up with an "unfair" advantage know it. They didn't do it on their own and that is something they are well aware of. I suspect it weighs more heavily on some than others - some might even become liberals.
JB|8.13.09 @ 6:05PM|#
oh no, maybe you should shut your cunt-hole of a mouth for once
and actually go to a tea party.
I went to one and there were all stripes of people from
Republicans, to Democrats, to libertarians all bitching and moaning
about the government spending too much money. Nearly every person I
talked to said it was bad when Bush did it and it's even worse when
Obama is spending more. They all understood that the government
would be raising taxes at some point and not one person believed
Obama the liar.
So who did you vote for? I don't even have to guess it's so
obvious.
MNG|8.13.09 @ 6:08PM|#
"Your problem is that you don't seem to grasp any distinction
between defending yourself and attacking someone else."
No Sean, it is you that don't have a distinction. All you can say
that the difference is aggressor vs. non-aggressor, which is just
another way of saying wrong vs. right. But I think in the cases I
authorize coercion it is right too, and I've even said why and how
I can tell.
"And because no one has it in their power to define what the "good"
or "human welfare" is, we should let people freely figure it out on
their own."
That's absurd TAO, you don't pretend to let frauders or robbers
"freely figure it out on their own." You think we should intervene
when it is plain to us that the good or human welfare is being
attacked. So do I.
""It" being your bullshit attemtp to draw an equivelency between a
situtation where a person inititially used force against someone
and a situation where someone didn't."
Again, your priority distinction is just another way of saying that
it is OK as a correction of a wrong, and I already dealt with that
idea.
Who knew that so many libertarians support enslaving people, and
they don't even have a good reason for why they support it!
Enyap-Don't forget the cop killer. That's three by your standard in
a year, three well publicized events where angry people motivated
by extreme right wing views opened fire on people. So when an angry
guy motivated by right wing extremism shows up at a public event
with a gun and a sign about how its time to start killing people,
you still re incredulous as to how people could be upset?
Okkkkkaaaaay.
JB|8.13.09 @ 6:11PM|#
Look, I went to these tea partys and I got to know the people there. I had sex with many men there, often two or three at a time, and sometimes with consent (some of them forced me, it happens because I greatly fear confrontation in person and try to extricate myself by offering myself up for some roundhole action). Yes, I caught not pitched, but we talked a
Site comments/questions:
Media Inquiries and Reprint Permissions:
(310) 367-6109
Editorial & Production Offices:
3415 S. Sepulveda Blvd.
Suite 400
Los Angeles, CA 90034
(310) 391-2245