|
Lee Harvey Oswald posted:Gotta love Soddy Daisy Also, I love it when people wave what they think are quotes from the Bible around. Had to go google that one. 1. It was Paul to the Ephesians, not Jesus. And he said "in your anger, do not sin." 2. And attributed to Jesus, in Matthews 5:22: "But I tell you that anyone who is angry with a brother or sister will be subject to judgment." Welp.
|
# ? Jun 25, 2012 02:49 |
|
|
# ? Apr 18, 2024 12:54 |
|
quote:If they don't trust in God, don't spend our money. If you don't like this nation under God, make a new nation for yourselves. It must be wonderful to be so ignorant.
|
# ? Jun 26, 2012 01:51 |
|
Good god is LZ an idiot. A journalist tells everyone it's none of their business when the government does bad poo poo because his guy is in office. http://www.cnn.com/2012/06/26/opinion/granderson-fast-furious/index.html
|
# ? Jun 26, 2012 18:06 |
|
natetimm posted:Good god is LZ an idiot. A journalist tells everyone it's none of their business when the government does bad poo poo because his guy is in office. Its actually worse than that quote:Were they legal? That's his argument for Holder and Oliver North holy poo poo. They did illegal poo poo that probably didn't work but they did it for America. He literally quotes Jack Nicholson's character in A Few Good Men unironically.
|
# ? Jun 26, 2012 23:25 |
|
Shalebridge Cradle posted:Its actually worse than that Someone in the comments section actually pointed out that Jack Nicholson was the villain who murdered someone and got convicted and the guy was quoting him. It's just extremely annoying to see someone who claims to be a professional journalist tell everyone to just shut up and stop acting questions when guns we sold to drug dealers ended up getting used to kill someone here in the country. To top it off, this guy is usually playing the part of the progressive journalist in his other columns. It's amazing how people will sacrifice their own credibility and moral judgement just to toe the political line of some loving politician.
|
# ? Jun 27, 2012 00:37 |
|
Shalebridge Cradle posted:Jack Nicholson's character in A Few Good Men unironically. I've always found a good measure of someone is who they think was the bad guy in "A Few Good Men"
|
# ? Jun 27, 2012 00:41 |
|
Goatman Sacks posted:I've always found a good measure of someone is who they think was the bad guy in "A Few Good Men" Wait so I can see how you could think Jack Nicholson isn't the bad guy due to you being an authoritarian idiot. But errr, who exactly do these people think was the bad guy? Tom Cruise?
|
# ? Jun 27, 2012 03:23 |
|
Orange Devil posted:Wait so I can see how you could think Jack Nicholson isn't the bad guy due to you being an authoritarian idiot. But errr, who exactly do these people think was the bad guy? Tom Cruise? The monsters who dare to question our hero's actions, yea.
|
# ? Jun 27, 2012 03:49 |
|
Shalebridge Cradle posted:Its actually worse than that What the poo poo? LZ Granderson posted:We still don't have access to all of the messy facts surrounding the Iran-Contra scandal that erupted during the Reagan administration. All we know is that weapons were sold to Iran in exchange for hostages and that the proceeds from those sales were used to illegally fund rebels in Nicaragua who were supposedly fighting Communism. LZ Granderson posted:North was a fall guy. Not for President Reagan but for all of us. Just as Holder has become a villain to many who are pointing fingers at him. You've got to be loving kidding me. How could he be this loving stupid and/or this much of a loving liar? Weapons weren't sold to Iran "in exchange for hostages," they were sold to launder money intended to fund Nicaraguan death squads. Yeah, the first few exchanges involved some hostages but the rest were straight up sales directly to the Iranian military with millions of dollars in profits for the US, on top of the already huge markup from the private Iranian arms dealer who acted as an intermediary. The entire point of the scheme was to illegally circumvent the Boland Amendments which restricted US aid to the Contras. It takes an incredibly dishonest rear end in a top hat to twist selling weapons to an avowed enemy of the US (i.e. the exact definition of "treason"), who had just taken American citizens hostage a few years prior, in order to launder money at a profit for use in funding right-wing, Central American death squads as "keeping America safe."
|
# ? Jun 27, 2012 08:03 |
|
The unwillingness of the Democrats to hammer on Reagan worship with the fact that he literally sold weapons to Iran during their current state's most fundamentalist, America-hating phase is completely baffling to me. It's inches away from treason, and done in the pursuit of contempt of Congress and murder of innocent Nicaraguans in order to subvert democracy, and the Dems can't be bothered to call that poo poo out the way the GOP does with its attacks on FDR. Pathetic.
|
# ? Jun 27, 2012 08:21 |
|
Pope Guilty posted:The unwillingness of the Democrats to hammer on Reagan worship with the fact that he literally sold weapons to Iran during their current state's most fundamentalist, America-hating phase is completely baffling to me. It's inches away from treason, and done in the pursuit of contempt of Congress and murder of innocent Nicaraguans in order to subvert democracy, and the Dems can't be bothered to call that poo poo out the way the GOP does with its attacks on FDR. Pathetic. Yeah, it's actually kind of amusing how Republicans are constantly berating Democrats when their own people do much worse, if not the same exact thing for which they are accusing Democrats. E.g. I was watching The Daily Show tonight and Jon Stewart was making fun of Republican politicians and pundits comparing Obama granting Holder's request for an executive privilege assertion to keep Fast & Furious documents secret to Watergate. Then he aired a string of clips of these same people comparing several other things Obama has done to Watergate, including the Solyndra thing, and there was a chart with Obama's and Nixon's heads with 4 Watergates in Obama's column to Nixon's one Watergate. It's just so amusing to me how Republican malfeasance is basically the metric for lovely presidential behavior and Republicans are constantly exaggerating things they don't like about Obama to an absurd degree. I may be extremely critical of Obama but even I can admit it's incredibly dishonest for these people to criticize him for the very same things Bush, Reagan, Nixon, and other Republicans did to even greater extents. Fast & Furious is a massive fuckup but it really pales in comparison to politically motivated firings of US attorneys and Alberto Gonzalez and other members of the DoJ basically lying to Congress about it.
|
# ? Jun 27, 2012 09:18 |
|
LZ Granderson posted:We still don't have access to all of the messy facts surrounding the Iran-Contra scandal that erupted during the Reagan administration. All we know is that weapons were sold to Iran in exchange for hostages and that the proceeds from those sales were used to illegally fund rebels in Nicaragua who were supposedly fighting Communism. Um. Aren't those actually the messy facts?
|
# ? Jun 27, 2012 19:10 |
|
Ernst and Young CEO/Boy Scouts of America board member Jim Turley comes out in favor of openly gay young men being allowed join the Boy Scouts http://goingconcern.com/post/ernst-youngs-jim-turley-comes-out-against-boy-scouts-exclusion-gay-members Jim Turley posted:"I support the meaningful work of the Boy Scouts in preparing young people for adventure, leadership, learning and service, however the membership policy is not one I would personally endorse," Turley said in a statement released by his company. "As I have done in leading Ernst & Young to being a most inclusive organization, I intend to continue to work from within the BSA Board to actively encourage dialogue and sustainable progress," Turley said. Chuck Norris does not like. Also, Barry Sotero is making are children gays. http://www.politico.com/blogs/click/2012/06/norris-obama-creating-progay-boy-scouts-127378.html Politico posted:Chuck Norris speculated on Tuesday that the Obama administration had something to do with Boy Scouts of America board member James Turley's pledge to work to change the organization’s policy against gay scouts and leaders. With all this talk about Reagan I can only hope that Chuck Norris doesn't run for some random state office which leads to higher office which leads to..... The SituAsian fucked around with this message at 19:39 on Jun 27, 2012 |
# ? Jun 27, 2012 19:35 |
|
Pope Guilty posted:The unwillingness of the Democrats to hammer on Reagan worship with the fact that he literally sold weapons to Iran during their current state's most fundamentalist, America-hating phase is completely baffling to me. It's inches away from treason, and done in the pursuit of contempt of Congress and murder of innocent Nicaraguans in order to subvert democracy, and the Dems can't be bothered to call that poo poo out the way the GOP does with its attacks on FDR. Pathetic. Because any negative word said about Reagan by Democrats gets repaid tenfold. Reagan is the demigod of the Republican party and was perfect in every way; anything said about him gets drowned out in a chorus of WELL OBAMA IS A SOCIALIST AND REAGAN STOOD STRONG AGAINST COMMUNISM AND AND
|
# ? Jun 27, 2012 19:53 |
|
Glitterbomber posted:The monsters who dare to question our hero's actions, yea. Do these people reckon Denzel Washington is a villian in Under Siege as well?
|
# ? Jun 28, 2012 00:24 |
|
Orange Devil posted:Do these people reckon Denzel Washington is a villian in Under Siege as well? "The Siege." "Under Siege" was the Stephen Segal Die-Hard-On-A-Boat movie.
|
# ? Jun 28, 2012 02:59 |
|
How important is Family Circus to you?quote:A piggish attack on an American cartoon family I like that slight against "freedom of speech" at the end. The strip in question: Stephen Pastis and Jeff Keane (who is doing Family Circus now) are friends. They love to troll each other both in their comics and in real life.
|
# ? Jun 28, 2012 16:24 |
|
From the Wall Street Journal.quote:What Is the American Creed? "Smart people are ruining this country." -Yale professor. Someone on another forum posted:In summation: We should uphold liberty, freedom, and equality, and we should uphold the most liberty, freedom and equality for white, upper-middle class English speakers.
|
# ? Jul 3, 2012 22:35 |
|
The MSJ posted:How important is Family Circus to you? Example of the iconic family strip "The Family Circus"
|
# ? Jul 3, 2012 22:42 |
|
The MSJ posted:How important is Family Circus to you? Pearls Before Swine is the best cartoon strip and that writer should be ashamed of their poor taste in humor.
|
# ? Jul 3, 2012 23:00 |
|
Nick_326 posted:From the Wall Street Journal. Even more ironic is that this guy was targeted by the UNAbomber, and is confined to a wheelchair, missing a hand, and otherwise pretty severely handicapped. Without a variety of "liberal" legislation to protect those with disabilities, he'd probably have been pretty hosed after the bombing. Good thing the free market convinced Yale to provide him with wheelchair-accessible offices and classrooms, along with other accommodations so that he could still perform his job duties. Or did he do it through his own bootstraps? Either way, gently caress you, got mine.
|
# ? Jul 4, 2012 00:12 |
|
Pope Guilty posted:The unwillingness of the Democrats to hammer on Reagan worship with the fact that he literally sold weapons to Iran during their current state's most fundamentalist, America-hating phase is completely baffling to me. It's inches away from treason, and done in the pursuit of contempt of Congress and murder of innocent Nicaraguans in order to subvert democracy, and the Dems can't be bothered to call that poo poo out the way the GOP does with its attacks on FDR. Pathetic. The reasons Democrats don't nail Reagan on this stuff in foreign policy is because they do exactly the same things and intend to continue doing them. Whereas Republicans are genuinely against the legacy of the New Deal.
|
# ? Jul 4, 2012 00:22 |
|
VideoTapir posted:"The Siege." "Under Siege" was the Stephen Segal Die-Hard-On-A-Boat movie. I thought it was Die-Hard-On-A-Train? Is that 2? Either way, I mix these titles up.
|
# ? Jul 4, 2012 01:58 |
|
Politico posted:Calling the Boy Scouts “as integral a part of American life and culture as hot dogs, baseball and Grandma’s apple pie,” Norris also attacked the president for his lack of involvement in the BSA, which declares the sitting president its honorary leader. Given that current studies estimate about 10% of people are gay, they're also pretty drat integral to America. At that ratio, we've potentially had a few (closeted) gay presidents already.
|
# ? Jul 4, 2012 05:22 |
|
Muscle Tracer posted:Given that current studies estimate about 10% of people are gay, they're also pretty drat integral to America. At that ratio, we've potentially had a few (closeted) gay presidents already. We pretty much have, yeah. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/James_Buchanan
|
# ? Jul 4, 2012 06:01 |
|
Roadside_Picnic posted:The reasons Democrats don't nail Reagan on this stuff in foreign policy is because they do exactly the same things and intend to continue doing them. Whereas Republicans are genuinely against the legacy of the New Deal. Yeah, but Republicans know that going against the legacies of the New Deal and the Great Society (i.e. Social Security and Medicare) is anathema to most of the nation, so they really just talk about the New Deal and Great Society in the abstract rather than mentioning their actual accomplishments and legacies, just like they never really talk about all the stuff in the PPACA because people actually like the specific regulations it created. This is why pretty much everyone who isn't a libertarian rear end in a top hat was against Paul Ryan gently caress-you-got-mine budget. Even those tea baggers carry protest signs about "keep your socialism away from my Medicare!" or use their Medicare-provided mobility scooters to get to protests. These people love Medicare and Social Security but they've bought into the Orwellian propaganda and double-speak from the GOP and assholes like Frank Luntz.
|
# ? Jul 4, 2012 10:30 |
|
Muscle Tracer posted:Given that current studies estimate about 10% of people are gay, they're also pretty drat integral to America. At that ratio, we've potentially had a few (closeted) gay presidents already. If I remember correctly the 10% figure was from the Kinsey report which is hardly current, and his methodology was too poor to make any generalizations. I've never heard that figure from anyone in a position to be acquainted with actual current studies, assuming there are any that are definitive enough to make that kind of sweeping conclusion.
|
# ? Jul 4, 2012 14:37 |
|
Arglebargle III posted:If I remember correctly the 10% figure was from the Kinsey report which is hardly current, and his methodology was too poor to make any generalizations. I've never heard that figure from anyone in a position to be acquainted with actual current studies, assuming there are any that are definitive enough to make that kind of sweeping conclusion. Trying to gauge the actual demographics for the homosexual population is incredibly difficult and fraught with numerous problems and confounds, but the thing is that the numbers are almost always going to be underestimations rather than overestimations because of so many people being closeted due to anti-gay prejudice. I can't remember which thread it was in or the title of the study so I've been having trouble finding it, but there was this interesting study out of Germany where they assessed homosexual interactions among adolescent and young adult males over several decades. The interesting part of it was that the proportion of the population admitting to homosexual sexual encounters (ranging from things like mutual masturbation to oral sex to anal sex) as adolescents and young adults (both those who were predominately heterosexual and predominately homosexual in their overall orientation, very much like Kinsey's sexual orientation continuum) was actually higher in the 1970s and 1980s and lower over the past 20 years as there's been more research into the genetic and in utero origins of sexual orientation. The study's authors hypothesize that this change in reporting rates was not due to an actual change in the rate of homosexual encounters, but rather that the publication of research on sexual orientation and it's genetic roots, combined with the widespread misunderstanding of sexual orientation as a binary phenomena, caused the public to view any homosexual encounters whatsoever as meaning that a person is entirely and exclusively homosexual, rather than being someone who is experimenting or is predominately heterosexual with somewhat more than incidental homosexual experiences and attractions. Basically, adolescent and young adult males were still having homosexual encounters, but they stopped reporting it because they feared that admitting to them would mean that they were 100% gay rather than just exploring their sexuality or having a nuanced, non-binary sexual orientation. It's kind of like people decades ago not reporting any Black ancestry due to the whole "one drop" thing, i.e. they were considered entirely "Black" simply because they had some Black ancestry, even if they were mostly of some other, non-Black ancestry, especially White.
|
# ? Jul 5, 2012 02:30 |
|
Orange Devil posted:I thought it was Die-Hard-On-A-Train? Is that 2? Either way, I mix these titles up. Come on. Cake scene. Pause, rewind, play. Pause, rewind, play. Excuse me a moment.
|
# ? Jul 5, 2012 07:49 |
|
Is that the one where he saves everyone by showering people in wildflower petals from his military helicopter?
|
# ? Jul 5, 2012 08:37 |
|
VideoTapir posted:Come on. Cake scene. Pause, rewind, play. Pause, rewind, play. Excuse me a moment. My parents always thought I liked that movie because of the action. The Dark One posted:Is that the one where he saves everyone by showering people in wildflower petals from his military helicopter? No, that's "The Patriot." I've seen way too many Stephen Segal movies.
|
# ? Jul 5, 2012 09:08 |
|
Saw this from a newspaper website I used to work for in southern Minnesota:Some guy that loves bullet points posted:Letter to the Editor: It's like a fountain of right wing talking points, both old and new!
|
# ? Jul 5, 2012 17:55 |
|
Is Acorn ever going to go away?
|
# ? Jul 5, 2012 18:18 |
|
A letter in which a Jack C. McVickers demonstrates that he does not understand civics. Also he doesn't realize that during the Korean War South Korea was allied with the US or that the entire point of the war was to defend that country from communism.quote:Can you help me out here?
|
# ? Jul 5, 2012 19:13 |
|
Orange Devil posted:Is Acorn ever going to go away? No. The Republicans have fairly successfully redefined ACORN as a criminal organization, rather than a organization that broke no laws while helping underprivileged individuals that was wrongly destroyed by a conservative activist that loves the selective edit. It's a real win for them.
|
# ? Jul 5, 2012 19:27 |
|
Lee Harvey Oswald posted:Gotta love Soddy Daisy Haha, this reminds me of a full page ad that was taken out yesterday (4th of July) in Memphis, TN's local newspaper, the Commercial Appeal (I'm pretty sure it was the Appeal). It had a bunch of quotes talking about America being a Christian nation and how religion should be taught in public schools, etc. Apparently the ad was bought by Hobby Lobby.
|
# ? Jul 5, 2012 20:10 |
|
Can someone, in a nut-shell, explain the whole acorn thing to a non-american?
|
# ? Jul 5, 2012 20:12 |
|
Baronjutter posted:Can someone, in a nut-shell, explain the whole acorn thing to a non-american? Obama worked (briefly?) with ACORN as a community organizer in Chicago. ACORN was a large group with the main goal of helping poor/homeless people get aid, housing, and yes, vote. During the 08 election ACORN did their job of collecting voter registration cards. Under federal law they can never, at any point, refuse, destroy, or demand alterations to the cards because that's disenfranchisement. While doing this, some people made a joke of putting Donald Duck or the like as their info. When Obama won, the right pretended someone used Donald Duck for a second vote, actually went to vote, and voted for Obama, which would have been fraud if it, you know, it ever happened. During this, James O'Keif, a failed journalist, altered tapes to pretend ACORN helped him, as a persona of a pimp with child runaways, provided information for how to get housing and tax breaks and such. The combo of VOTER FRAUD and ACORN LOVES CHILD PROSTITUTION was an overwhelming drone from the right, leading to them to sever multiple federal grants to ACORN in housing and such, which crippled the organization and eventually lead to them totally breaking. The right pretends they still exist, in the shadows, like COBRA, working for Obama personally.
|
# ? Jul 5, 2012 20:17 |
|
It should also be noted that the "pimp" video was heavily edited to the point that it cannot be ascertained on what outfit that sniveling rat faced git was wearing during the recording of ACORN employees and after investigation by several independent sources is was proven that at no point did ACORN break any laws, contrary to the position of the aforementioned git who still lives with his parents while basking in the selfmade glow.
|
# ? Jul 5, 2012 20:57 |
|
|
# ? Apr 18, 2024 12:54 |
|
So a really important and effective charity org was utterly destroyed based on rumours and outright deception and when later proven to have been undone by lies, republicans still hold it up as not only a past scandal but an ongoing evil organization continuing to do what it was proven not to have done? What a country!!
|
# ? Jul 5, 2012 21:00 |