Gas Bandit's Political Thread V: The Vampire Likes Bats

There's your official tyranny, gun nuts!

Don't tread on me? The people of Ferguson are being trod upon, and HARD.

Go get 'em! Stop talking and get to shooting.

Or is that rhetoric all just a big bag of bullshit?
 

GasBandit

Staff member
There's your official tyranny, gun nuts!

Don't tread on me? The people of Ferguson are being trod upon, and HARD.

Go get 'em! Stop talking and get to shooting.

Or is that rhetoric all just a big bag of bullshit?
You might just be getting your wish, you angry, angry little man.

Gun sales spike in Missouri
http://rt.com/usa/180084-gun-sales-ferguson-protests/

However, it seems the demonstraters of Ferguson would rather help themselves to free rims and electronics, steal ATMs, loot convenience stores, and burn local businesses to the ground.

The moral high ground is getting bulldozed fast.
 
Yep. It's all bullshit. Nothing but cheap talk to get ones face on Fox News.

It's not tyranny until it happens to rich white folks, eh?


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk HD
 
Yes, but it want be reported as tyranny unless it happens to white men. Otherwise it's just the unfortunate way society is ordered.
 
FTFY. Historically, anyway.

--Patrick
Which isn't what he was trying to say.

You might just be getting your wish, you angry, angry little man.

Gun sales spike in Missouri
http://rt.com/usa/180084-gun-sales-ferguson-protests/

However, it seems the demonstraters of Ferguson would rather help themselves to free rims and electronics, steal ATMs, loot convenience stores, and burn local businesses to the ground.

The moral high ground is getting bulldozed fast.
Unfortunately, the only thing being reported is the looters, but what people are uploading, tweeting, that other social media stuff, shows sniper rifles aimed at people gathering on campuses and churches holding signs and police shooting rubber bullets and gas door-to-door. So while there are definitely civilians causing problems, there are also police causing problems, and they seem to want to take it out on the peaceful protestors and journalists. Seriously, why arrest the journalists if the police are doing nothing wrong? They know what they're doing, and videos have caught them saying "stop videotaping us" and the like.

I mean, fuck, I can't make fun of Charlie anymore the next time he calls the U.S. a militarized police state. They took that away from me!

According to the news, Obama's just been briefed on the situation and will get briefed again today. I'm sure that'll be a clear statement of events. :rolleyes:

(Wow, we really do have a crappy eyeroll icon. Hrm.)
 
Good article here asking a pretty obvious question that I for one had missed:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs...hy-arent-libertarians-talking-about-ferguson/

Seriously. Libertarians, or Ancaps or sovereign citizens, love to get tumescent about overreach of police. So right now, where are they? It's almost as if their libertarian views only apply to whites.
Your argument got kinda destroyed already. A direct rebuttal to that article: http://www.mediaite.com/online/libertarians-have-not-been-silent-about-ferguson/

That link was even in a comment on the story you linked man. So good on spreading the FUD about Libertarians w/o research, just like the original article you linked.
 
Recent-ish announcement by the Governor states that the Feds and State Police are on their way to relieve St. Louis County police of their duties in Ferguson, and that three of the state's legislature have requested a full federal investigation of the department.
 

GasBandit

Staff member
Good. Heads need to roll in the FPD, obviously. Probably even higher up the chain, too.[DOUBLEPOST=1408034575,1408034166][/DOUBLEPOST]Tired of waiting for government to build a road, English entrepreneur puts in his own, finances it with tolls. People overjoyed to have another option besides a 14 mile detour.



Libertarianism. Fuck yeah.
 
Last edited:

Necronic

Staff member
See, I can't help but see the libertarian/tea party reaction to Ferguson in stark contrast to the reaction to Cliven Bundy, and it doesn't look good. Even Rand Paul's arguments in the oped he just released, while good on their own, seem tame in comparison to his defense of Bundy, who he lauded as a hero.

I'll give credit to Paul for getting out in front of this one, more or less, and addressing the racial aspects of this. And ok, I'll give credit to the people mentioned in Eriols argument. But what about the rest? They were chomping at the bit to protect Bundy, this time it feels more like their hand is being forced.
 

Necronic

Staff member
I would consider people being tear-gassed in their own backyards to be significantly worse than government capturing illegally grazing cattle on public lands (it wasn't private property). That said your point on the timeline of things is completely fair. Ferguson is a very recent event. But the Bundy affair set a precedent that will color the hell out of their responses here, when and if they come.
 

Necronic

Staff member
As a fellow, far more left leaning Texan, I am also happy. Is there anyone who actually likes the guy? Mainly I just don't want to see him clutter up the republican primaries, but still.
 

GasBandit

Staff member
Well, our airstrikes are already in. The Iraqis are on the ground retaking positions (including now the country's biggest dam) while we've run ~90 airstrikes over the weekend.
 

Dave

Staff member
Yeah, at least the Iraqis are taking some fucking initiative for a change. Usually they are lazy fucks who relied on us to do everything.
 
Dear god no. Do not go back . It took EVERYTHING just to get out of there after all the money, record oil company profits and dead military members, we can't afford to get stuck there again.

Although in the end if they are threatening the oils fields at all I'm sure the heads of Exxon and BP will be sending our troops in STAT so fuck everyone else.
 
Dear god no. Do not go back . It took EVERYTHING just to get out of there after all the money, record oil company profits and dead military members, we can't afford to get stuck there again.

Although in the end if they are threatening the oils fields at all I'm sure the heads of Exxon and BP will be sending our troops in STAT so fuck everyone else.
It it's just Exxon and BP, they'll hire Xi and just start gunning down people who get too close. The Iraqi's won't go against them in real force because THAT would bring us in.
 

Dave

Staff member
At least this time we'd be in the right. Actually, this is exactly the kind of thing that the UN should be stepping up for. It has nothing to do with oil. As we all know, the gulf wars did NOT procure any oil for the US, but our reasons for going in in the past were murky at best and illegal at worst (and most likely). This time there would be a clear moral and ethical aim, with a clear and defined enemy that is not wanted in the country.

I know we just got out of there, but it's our fault that ISIS is in power. We have a responsibility to shoulder here whether we like it or not.
 
At least this time we'd be in the right. Actually, this is exactly the kind of thing that the UN should be stepping up for. It has nothing to do with oil. As we all know, the gulf wars did NOT procure any oil for the US, but our reasons for going in in the past were murky at best and illegal at worst (and most likely). This time there would be a clear moral and ethical aim, with a clear and defined enemy that is not wanted in the country.

I know we just got out of there, but it's our fault that ISIS is in power. We have a responsibility to shoulder here whether we like it or not.
Sounds like a good argument for staying forever! Yay! Let's never leave because we will, NEVER leave if we keep up this line of thinking. At some point we have to say, we've made a huge mistake and we obviously can't stay here without basically colonizing this place. Because thats the alternative. Stay there forever and run the place (colonize) or leave. There's not really a terrible lot of middle ground.
 

Dave

Staff member
When does doing nothing become tacit approval? I realize this is selective, considering Syria, the Congo, Rwanda, etc. The difference, though, is that in this case we went into a country, deposed the ruler, and then left with a power vacuum that is being filled by a group of individuals who have been deemed too radical by fucking Al Qaeda! That's like a group being called too intolerant by the Westboro Baptist Church.

ISIS is not a group that threatens a single area, but instead the entire region in the middle east.
 
When does doing nothing become tacit approval? I realize this is selective, considering Syria, the Congo, Rwanda, etc. The difference, though, is that in this case we went into a country, deposed the ruler, and then left with a power vacuum that is being filled by a group of individuals who have been deemed too radical by fucking Al Qaeda! That's like a group being called too intolerant by the Westboro Baptist Church.

ISIS is not a group that threatens a single area, but instead the entire region in the middle east.
Oh, I agree there's a huge problem, and even that we in part created it but all I'm saying is we will always have a "reason" to stay there forever. Always. At some point we have to own our mistake and move on. Or stay forever. I don't really see any possible middle ground.
 

GasBandit

Staff member
More on the nature of bureaucracy -



This year alone, 29,500 individually designed beer labels have been submitted for approval to the Trade Department's Tax and Trade Bureau. And every single one of those label designs was approved or denied by a single man: Kent "Battle" Martin, a man who is the bane of the beer industry for his power to reject labels for the flimsiest of reasons.​
Here are a few of the reasons:
Battle has rejected a beer label for the King of Hearts, which had a playing card image on it, because the heart implied that the beer would have a health benefit.

He rejected a beer label featuring a painting called The Conversion of Paula By Saint Jerome because its name, St. Paula's Liquid Wisdom, contained a medical claim--that the beer would grant wisdom.

He rejected a beer called Pickled Santa because Santa's eyes were too "googly" on the label, and labels cannot advertise the physical effects of alcohol. (A less googly-eyed Santa was later approved.)

He rejected a beer called Bad Elf because it featured an "Elf Warning," suggesting that elves not operate toy-making machinery while drinking the ale. The label was not approved on the grounds that the warning was confusing to consumers.​
(via Fast co design)
 
Top