Y'know, I'm feeling much happier right now too.
Gas Bandit's Political Thread V: The Vampire Likes Bats
- Thread starter GasBandit
- Start date
A
Armadillo
Isn't one of the main reasons you hate him because you claim he says things like that about his ideological foes? Just sayin'.
Isn't one of the main reasons you hate him because you claim he says things like that about his ideological foes? Just sayin'.[/QUOTE]
Oh wow, I'm sorry, I didn't realize you were new here.
A
Armadillo
Isn't one of the main reasons you hate him because you claim he says things like that about his ideological foes? Just sayin'.[/QUOTE]
Oh wow, I'm sorry, I didn't realize you were new here.[/QUOTE]
Hey there, nice to meet ya! Hell of a smoking baby you got there! What kind of mileage does it get?
Isn't one of the main reasons you hate him because you claim he says things like that about his ideological foes? Just sayin'.[/QUOTE]
No, that's why I dislike him.
Believe it or not, but DarkAudit is not my alt.
C
Chazwozel
No, I'm not saying that at all. My point is, if we accepted your argument as sound and valid, logically it could also be used to champion freedom to perform unarguably reprehensible acts as well. Has nothing to do with homosexuality, just the argument itself.
No links today. In fact, it might be a while. I just learned that the traffic director who was supposed to be coming back has now decided she's not coming back at all, and the person who was covering for her was already gone. I may be scarce for months while we look for, hire, and I train a new traffic director.
Sometimes I think the only reason I don't start stabbing people in the face is because I'll get tired and have to go to sleep before I'm done stabbing EVERYBODY in the face and then that's when they'll get me.[/QUOTE]
I'm catching the end of this and I don't feel like reading the rest of the thread, but please don't tell me you're using the 'gay marriage opens pandora's box of legalizing taboos argument. Please?
No, I'm not saying that at all. My point is, if we accepted your argument as sound and valid, logically it could also be used to champion freedom to perform unarguably reprehensible acts as well. Has nothing to do with homosexuality, just the argument itself.
No links today. In fact, it might be a while. I just learned that the traffic director who was supposed to be coming back has now decided she's not coming back at all, and the person who was covering for her was already gone. I may be scarce for months while we look for, hire, and I train a new traffic director.
Sometimes I think the only reason I don't start stabbing people in the face is because I'll get tired and have to go to sleep before I'm done stabbing EVERYBODY in the face and then that's when they'll get me.[/quote]
I'm catching the end of this and I don't feel like reading the rest of the thread, but please don't tell me you're using the 'gay marriage opens pandora's box of legalizing taboos argument. Please?[/QUOTE]
Welcome to the Political sub-forum! Please enjoy your stay. Oh, you may want to watch your step, someone left a crap ton of bad arguments on the floor and then covered it up and disguised it as genuine concern.
C
Chazwozel
No, I'm not saying that at all. My point is, if we accepted your argument as sound and valid, logically it could also be used to champion freedom to perform unarguably reprehensible acts as well. Has nothing to do with homosexuality, just the argument itself.
No links today. In fact, it might be a while. I just learned that the traffic director who was supposed to be coming back has now decided she's not coming back at all, and the person who was covering for her was already gone. I may be scarce for months while we look for, hire, and I train a new traffic director.
Sometimes I think the only reason I don't start stabbing people in the face is because I'll get tired and have to go to sleep before I'm done stabbing EVERYBODY in the face and then that's when they'll get me.[/quote]
I'm catching the end of this and I don't feel like reading the rest of the thread, but please don't tell me you're using the 'gay marriage opens pandora's box of legalizing taboos argument. Please?[/QUOTE]
Welcome to the Political sub-forum! Please enjoy your stay. Oh, you may want to watch your step, someone left a crap ton of bad arguments on the floor and then covered it up and disguised it as genuine concern.[/QUOTE]
Gays can marry in the U.S.? I think I'll go push for my rights to fuck sheep legally. Makes perfect sense!
This one nearly got past me until this week: GOP will eat itself - schism on the right puts Democrat candidate in NY 23rd Congressional district into the lead. A major split amongst right and far-right factions has allowed a Democrat to do and end-around them both. In a district that hasn't elected one since before the Civil War.
That's interesting, but here's the real question... if the Republican party DOES implode and become irrelevant, what party is going to take it's place? Aside from the Libertarians (who, quite frankly, don't have a chance in hell) are there any right leaning parties that could step up and fill the void?This one nearly got past me until this week: GOP will eat itself - schism on the right puts Democrat candidate in NY 23rd Congressional district into the lead. A major split amongst right and far-right factions has allowed a Democrat to do and end-around them both. In a district that hasn't elected one since before the Civil War.
GasBandit
Staff member
Holy crap that's an old post. No, that's not what I was saying. I wasn't saying the act of legalizing gay marriage itself would, I said the argument they were using to do so could have been used for pretty much anything. It should just be enough to say that the Civil Rights Act of 1964 applies here, have a whole bunch of big gay weddings and be done with it.
Now, on to the present, and the future!
As many of you know, I'm a fan of Socks and Barney... they have another good one today -
So after weeks of focusing and floundering on healthcare and global warming; and ignoring the needs of our troops in Afghanistan, suddenly we get this announcement from Washington: we are going to cut top executive pay at the biggest corporations that took bailout money. Of course many Americans are now rejoicing! "Great! These evil rich people are getting exactly what they deserve!" Then, the very next day we see the White House pulling away from bearing any responsibility on the issue. Officials in the administration say that they didn't have much to do with the decision at all. It all came from one man: Kenneth Feinberg. The Pay Czar. This Obama appointee (without any sort of Congressional approval), single-handedly decided to cut CEO pay for these executives. Is Obama going to take responsibility for ANYTHING that comes out of his White House? So now the question is ... how far will this go? Just the other day, Obama also announced plans to increase lending to small businesses and give them access to rescue funds. Will Kenneth Feinberg eventually have the "authority" to slash salaries of top executives at these small businesses that take bailout funds? Let's take a closer look at this Kenneth Feinberg fellow ... how did he come to have so much "authority" that he is able to cut salaries at private corporations in this country? If you'll remember months ago, Congress decided that it wanted to crack down on millions of dollars in AIG bonuses. There was only one slight, teeny-tiny little problem - Congress does not have the Constitutional authority to do so. Then magically, Obama creates a new czar in his administration. This man would be a "special master on compensation." Ta-da! Now if the government wants to punish certain companies, all it has to do is call on its compensation czar.
Pretty clever, huh?
The day after our special master on compensation decided to slash executive pay, the Obama administration decided that it would be a good idea to clamp down on banks while we are at it. The Federal Reserve decided to curb executive pay packages "that encouraged bankers and other executives to take the kinds of reckless risks that contributed to the housing bubble." The housing bubble came from Washington, not from bank board rooms. It was Washington that told these banks that their future growth would be halted or curtailed if they didn't make sure that pretty much anyone with a pulse that wanted a home loan could get one. It was Washington that set up these extraordinary systems whereby banks could make the loans and then pass of the liability to the American taxpayers. It was WASHINGTON, not the banks, that took the reckless risks.
Goooin' up! Again. I guess the Democrats got jealous that Dubya made everybody think that the Republicans were the reckless spenders, so they've made damn sure that label stays where it belongs!
George Will explains how Obama has established the Social Security COLA as "the capstone to the architecture of the entitlement culture that is modern liberalism's crowning achievement."
The White House says that the government's economic stimulus spending has already had its biggest impact and probably won't contribute to significant growth next year. So... that was it? Aren't we glad we poured all that money down a rathole, for practically no effect whatsoever?
Where does the Constitution authorize Congress to require all Americans to carry health insurance? The Chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee can't answer that.
How out of touch are Republicans? This out of touch.
Healthcare is not about your health, it is about control.
The latest Gallup polls show an alarming drop in President Obama's approval ratings ... the worst drop for any president in his first year in office.
Looks like more Americans are figuring out the truth about this global warming scam.
Our Social Security system is going to come crashing down soon. Will that lead to the end of entitlement culture?
Could we be looking at a Fairness Doctrine for the Internet?
Darkaudit's favorite incompetent central Florida Representative is in trouble for bringing a poster on the House floor that could be construed as promoting his re-election campaign.
Victor Davis Hanson says that the real key to being a "popular" America seems to be to empathize with non-Western totalitarians. Hence Obama's popularity.
Our Health and Human Services Secretary says she will donate swine flu vaccinations to foreign countries before meeting US demand.
Want the latest on the ACORN video sting?
The government in Norway has decided to publish all tax returns online.
Fathers, don't let your daughters grow up to be westerners.
M
makare
that guy completely lost me after the whole pages argument at the beginning. What does the length of the bible have to do with the health care bill which amounts to a legal document?
Although, what can be expected it isn't like the man's article itself is dependent on citation, reference or fact checking.
and gotta love the slippery slope fallacy at the end.
delicious.
A
Armadillo
I'm not SUPER up on this race, seeing as how it's not my district, but what I have heard is that the Republican candidate is about as conservative as Richard Simmons is straight. For the stimulus, for Obama's health care reform, endorsed by ACORN. Endorsed by the founder of Daily Kos.This one nearly got past me until this week: GOP will eat itself - schism on the right puts Democrat candidate in NY 23rd Congressional district into the lead. A major split amongst right and far-right factions has allowed a Democrat to do and end-around them both. In a district that hasn't elected one since before the Civil War.
So yeah, the Republicans will eat themselves as long as they continue to put up Democrat Lite candidates.
Republican != Conservative. But in today's GOP, folks like Nelson Rockefeller would be run out of town on a rail in an instant.
Looks like the Congressman leading the fight against Charlie Rangel has problems of his own. Glass houses much, Congressman?
Twitter shuts down fake accounts run by Connecticut GOP. Party officials fail Consitutional Law 101 by claiming 1st amendment rights. Sorry folks. Doesn't apply. Twitter's a private concern, and can do as they damn well please with their service.
Looks like the Congressman leading the fight against Charlie Rangel has problems of his own. Glass houses much, Congressman?
Twitter shuts down fake accounts run by Connecticut GOP. Party officials fail Consitutional Law 101 by claiming 1st amendment rights. Sorry folks. Doesn't apply. Twitter's a private concern, and can do as they damn well please with their service.
GasBandit
Staff member
Yeah, I guess if being called on ethics violations were being in trouble, Charlie Rangel would have been gone a long time ago... among many others.
that guy completely lost me after the whole pages argument at the beginning. What does the length of the bible have to do with the health care bill which amounts to a legal document?[/quote] It is noteworthy to me that the health care bill is 250 times as long as the document which created our government, 65 times as long as the Communist Manifesto, but about equivalent to the length of a religious text. Apropos, even.
The there's no slope too slippery to be fallacious when describing the objectives of government. The government always wants more governmental control. That's no more a slippery slope than to say if I let you take your next breath then you'll only want to take 10,000 more.
---------- Post added at 01:15 PM ---------- Previous post was at 01:13 PM ----------
1) String em both up.
2) The 1st amendment is to protect private citizens against government, not to protect the government against private concerns. Douchebags.
STOP MAKING SENSE DA.
Yeah, I guess if being called on ethics violations were being in trouble, Charlie Rangel would have been gone a long time ago... among many others.
[/quote][/QUOTE]
Here, since you like to ignore what is in articles except for what you want to read, I'll post it up.
Here, let me help you with that...From the Article said:
Republicans raised ethics questions (probably pissed at being bitch slapped by a Freshman Senator)
House Ethics officials made no comment
The site was launched with personal funds
The poster was O.K.'d by the house majority leaders office (in other words, he checked to make sure it wasn't breaking rules)
So stretch away, Mr. Armstrong. There's nothing concrete about an investigation, or saying he is in trouble. It just says Republicans have their panties in a bunch.
LOL @ the Stretch Armstrong reference.
For that matter, they also fail ID Theft Laws if they don't meet the standards for parody.
Looks like the GOP doesn't just want to make fake twitter accounts, but also send out fundraising letter disguised as official census letter.
Disgusting.
Disgusting.
The tea partiers are getting more brazen, and in this guy's case more stupid.
It's one thing to spout this garbage on your own time and your own personal email address. It's another thing entirely to do so using an Army email address. Retired or not, this moron is in for all sorts of trouble.
It's one thing to spout this garbage on your own time and your own personal email address. It's another thing entirely to do so using an Army email address. Retired or not, this moron is in for all sorts of trouble.
Is there a stipulation by the Army that the email can't be used for that type of purpose? I guess I don't understand why he would be in trouble.
Nuts? Sure. Not sure why he'd be in trouble though.
Is there a stipulation by the Army that the email can't be used for that type of purpose? I guess I don't understand why he would be in trouble.
Nuts? Sure. Not sure why he'd be in trouble though.[/QUOTE]
To paraphrase Star Trek, the charge is mutiny, Krisken. You simply do not do such a thing via an official Army *.mil email address. It's little different than standing on a soapbox in the middle of a base urging disobedience. It's a violation of the UCMJ. Not to mention the misuse of government resources.
M
makare
Yeah, I guess if being called on ethics violations were being in trouble, Charlie Rangel would have been gone a long time ago... among many others.
that guy completely lost me after the whole pages argument at the beginning. What does the length of the bible have to do with the health care bill which amounts to a legal document?[/quote] It is noteworthy to me that the health care bill is 250 times as long as the document which created our government, 65 times as long as the Communist Manifesto, but about equivalent to the length of a religious text. Apropos, even.
The there's no slope too slippery to be fallacious when describing the objectives of government. The government always wants more governmental control. That's no more a slippery slope than to say if I let you take your next breath then you'll only want to take 10,000 more.
[/QUOTE]
That's the fallacy gas. There is no other possible option for me when it comes to breathing I have to breathe there is no alternative. For government action there are about a thousand different ways the choices can go. Faulty comparison.
A legislative bill references a great deal of laws which are very long. They include various potential outcomes and the way to deal with them.
If the bill just said, everyone gets health care. Nice short and sweet it would really be ridiculous.
I do not see how comparing completely different documents with completely different applications makes any sense.
Any of you read "How to Lie with Statistics"? Certain right-wing hacks need to read it again.
I never thought I'd agree with Michael Savage, but he's calling Fox's crying foul about being called out by the Obama administration nothing more than a ratings stunt, and Glenn Beck is stealing his act.
John McCain admits to being a total computer illiterate. So no wonder the telecoms have been able to put him in their pocket and introduce an anti-net neutrality bill.
The new McCarthyism in action: replace "Communist" with "Muslim".
Biden to Cheney: THBBPPTT!!
First John Stossel, and now Geraldo Rivera. Lou Dobbs is too crazy even for Fox.
John McCain admits to being a total computer illiterate. So no wonder the telecoms have been able to put him in their pocket and introduce an anti-net neutrality bill.
The new McCarthyism in action: replace "Communist" with "Muslim".
Biden to Cheney: THBBPPTT!!
First John Stossel, and now Geraldo Rivera. Lou Dobbs is too crazy even for Fox.
One can only guess why Sen. Vitter voted pro-rape.
Spout that Fox garbage on other networks, you get laughed at. On the air.
Even Fox veterans are leaving because of the excessive wingnuttery.
George Will to Cheney: you should have dithered. Instead we have Iraq.
Spout that Fox garbage on other networks, you get laughed at. On the air.
Even Fox veterans are leaving because of the excessive wingnuttery.
George Will to Cheney: you should have dithered. Instead we have Iraq.
C
crono1224
This was Limbaugh fell for then turned it around by saying well he probably thinks this stuff anyways. To be fair I don't see much fact checking on a lot of these news shows, since its basically a race to get news out and praise/condemn it. Rather than verify then you know report.
This was Limbaugh fell for then turned it around by saying well he probably thinks this stuff anyways. To be fair I don't see much fact checking on a lot of these news shows, since its basically a race to get news out and praise/condemn it. Rather than verify then you know report.[/QUOTE]
He was satirizing Dan Rather from 2004 when he forged documents on 60 minutes, as well as a CNN reporter more recently regarding the fake racist Rush comments they had been harping on the past few weeks.
C
crono1224
This was Limbaugh fell for then turned it around by saying well he probably thinks this stuff anyways. To be fair I don't see much fact checking on a lot of these news shows, since its basically a race to get news out and praise/condemn it. Rather than verify then you know report.[/QUOTE]
He was satirizing Dan Rather from 2004 when he forged documents on 60 minutes, as well as a CNN reporter more recently regarding the fake racist Rush comments they had been harping on the past few weeks.[/QUOTE]
Meh, I don't care if CNN sucks I already knew it by them fact checking SNL and not guest on their show. Also i think its been proven that rush is atleast a bit racist by the list of quotes actually attributed to him that krisken linked.
Though I am not sure if you are defending Limbaugh or just saying that everyone in media are tards. Thinking back to the one thread, I think you are defending him.
This was Limbaugh fell for then turned it around by saying well he probably thinks this stuff anyways. To be fair I don't see much fact checking on a lot of these news shows, since its basically a race to get news out and praise/condemn it. Rather than verify then you know report.[/QUOTE]
He was satirizing Dan Rather from 2004 when he forged documents on 60 minutes, as well as a CNN reporter more recently regarding the fake racist Rush comments they had been harping on the past few weeks.[/QUOTE]
Meh, I don't care if CNN sucks I already knew it by them fact checking SNL and not guest on their show. Also i think its been proven that rush is atleast a bit racist by the list of quotes actually attributed to him that krisken linked.
Though I am not sure if you are defending Limbaugh or just saying that everyone in media are tards. Thinking back to the one thread, I think you are defending him.[/QUOTE]
Just defending the "know he thinks it anyway" comment. Informing you that he simply took the opportunity to turn a potentially embarrassing correction into one of his satire bits.
umm. ok?