Register a SA Forums Account here!
JOINING THE SA FORUMS WILL REMOVE THIS BIG AD, THE ANNOYING UNDERLINED ADS, AND STUPID INTERSTITIAL ADS!!!

You can: log in, read the tech support FAQ, or request your lost password. This dumb message (and those ads) will appear on every screen until you register! Get rid of this crap by registering your own SA Forums Account and joining roughly 150,000 Goons, for the one-time price of $9.95! We charge money because it costs us $3,400 per month for bandwidth bills alone, and since we don't believe in shoving popup ads to our registered users, we try to make the money back through forum registrations.
  • Locked thread
Zeroisanumber
Oct 23, 2010



Nap Ghost

Mr. Funny Pants posted:

Non-insane gun enthusiasts have been trying to swat this one down for years. I've lost count of how many times I've tried to debunk it in various gun forums. You need 67 votes in the Senate to ratify a treaty, and at no time during Obama's presidency could you get 67 votes declaring the sky blue. And even granting the virtual impossibility of it passing, the treaty explicitly says that nations retain control of their internal gun laws.

Hell, Obama signed a bill (the big consumer credit protection act) with a pro-gun amendment ending Reagan's ban on firearms in national parks. Obama obviously wouldn't have signed it if he had a choice, but he didn't think it was a big enough deal to veto the thing.

The fearmongering is the only way that some of the big gun groups can get money anymore. The NRA, GOA, and other sundry groups won the anti-gun argument at a national level. They've been reduced to swatting down laws at a municipal level and working to get reciprocity for concealed carry.

Adbot
ADBOT LOVES YOU

Zeroisanumber
Oct 23, 2010



Nap Ghost

Dr. Tough posted:

The local far-right paper gets the best letters.

Yeah. Why should I need a license to be a doctor?! I can doctorfy just fine without any fancy education or experience, and I don't need the government telling me otherwise!

Zeroisanumber
Oct 23, 2010



Nap Ghost

xrunner posted:

Even without his extensive record of lunatic positions Bork would never have been confirmed. His role in Nixon administration's firing of the Watergate Special Prosecutor where he followed through with what he knew was an illegal order after the AG and Assistant AG resigned rather than follow the order demonstrated to everyone he was an unethical tool.

Bork is a tool and a fanatic, but to give him credit he was actually going to resign rather than follow through on the order. Atty General Elliot Richardson convinced him to follow through because Nixon was going to eventually find someone to fire Archibald Cox and the resignation of Richardson and his assistant William Ruckelshaus had already made Nixon look like total poo poo. Richardson reasoned that the point had been made and any further resignations would just hurt the Justice Dpt.

Zeroisanumber
Oct 23, 2010



Nap Ghost

Judeccahedron posted:

http://www.nytimes.com/1987/07/26/u...dismissals.html

Supposedly, he did it to keep the investigation going, according to this article. I guess I can understand his carrying out the order insofar as if he didn't do so, someone else inevitably would have. However, I don't really agree with his carrying it out.

Of course, what ultimately wound up happening in the end is that Nixon resigned rather than face impeachment when even the RNC was leaning on him, and Ford wound up pardoning him. And the funny thing is, I've even seen some people on blogs try to pass Nixon off as being better than Clinton because Nixon resigned.

Ford did the right thing by pardoning Nixon. It forced Nixon to admit his wrongdoing and allowed the country to move on from Watergate.

Zeroisanumber
Oct 23, 2010



Nap Ghost

Pope Guilty posted:

No, what Ford did was establish that there would be no legal consequences for Republican criminals. He set up the next thirty years.

Bullshit. Watergate poisoned the political discourse in the country, prevented any business from getting done in Washington, and a Nixon trial would've consumed Ford's presidency. What Ford needed was a way to end it while forcing Nixon to admit guilt for what he'd done. A pardon accomplished all of that, and utterly destroyed any chance that Jerry Ford would be reelected.

Years later, Ford was given an award by the John F. Kennedy library for that act of political courage. Teddy Kennedy was the keynote speaker at the event and said:

Senator Edward Kennedy posted:

''I was one of those who spoke out against his action then. But time has a way of clarifying past events, and now we see that President Ford was right. His courage and dedication to our country made it possible for us to begin the process of healing and put the tragedy of Watergate behind us.''
http://www.nytimes.com/2001/05/22/u...xon-pardon.html

Zeroisanumber
Oct 23, 2010



Nap Ghost

Helsing posted:

Do you have a source for this? Its not that I find your account implausible, I'd just be fascinated to read more about the incident.

Most of the anecdotes come from a book called, "Five Presidents Under the Shadow of Watergate" by Bob Woodward. Woodward's too comfy with his insider status to do much groundbreaking journalism these days, but his years of access to presidents and their various cabinet members and staffs makes him a good chronicler of presidential administrations, and his anecdotes are great.

Zeroisanumber
Oct 23, 2010



Nap Ghost

fed_dude posted:

Maybe it's because we spent the last four years making legitimate criticisms of Obama, and were constantly called racist with all our criticisms dismissed. It seemed to work well for the left, so the right is trying it on for size. I mean, seriously, over and over again I was told that I could not possibly criticize Obama unless I was racist. So now the shoe is on the other foot, and lefties are upset.

There are legitimate criticisms that you can make about Obama, but it's undeniable that there is an ugly strain of racism that's become more pronounced in the Republican base since Obama was elected.

Zeroisanumber
Oct 23, 2010



Nap Ghost


That's actually a very good move on his part. Cain knows that his chances of winning the nomination are zero, so why not embrace the big bucks conservative donors out there?

Zeroisanumber
Oct 23, 2010



Nap Ghost

Glitterbomber posted:

Dave Foley is really scummy about his "poverty", he "can't go home" because he refuses to do anything to defend himself and refuses to pay what the court said. It sucks how there are dudes screwed over like that but Dave doesn't give any reason to think he's one.

Foley got boned pretty hard when Phil Hartman was murdered. Until then News Radio was one of the top-rated comedies on television. The show was never the same after Phil was gone, and ratings declined to the point where the show was canceled.

When Foley was divorced, the judge set his alimony payments at a level that would've been fair in his News Radio heyday, but were unsupportable after the show was canceled and he was thrown out of work. Since Canadian law allows a person who's behind on their alimony to be arrested and jailed, Foley can't leave the US and go home to Canada without being subject to arrest. What money he did have was used up fighting the ruling, so he's pretty broke.

He's gotten pretty bitter about it.

Zeroisanumber
Oct 23, 2010



Nap Ghost

Boondock Saint posted:

http://www.telegram.com/article/20111211/NEWS/112119840

This guy contradicts himself so bad in this piece in an effort to criticize Obama and T Roosevelt. It's pretty funny.


Also, who the gently caress uses the word poppycock to title an opinion piece?

Me, but I like old words, and I know it's a personal flaw.

Zeroisanumber
Oct 23, 2010



Nap Ghost

Bruce Leroy posted:

I know the withdrawal of most troops was part of the agreement previously made with the Iraqi government, but wasn't the US military going to leave far more troops stationed in Iraq before the Iraqi government refused to give all American soldiers blanket immunity for crimes committed in Iraq?

That seems far less like "honorably leaving" and more like "let's get the gently caress out of here before we get arrested and put on trial for the hundreds of thousands of people who died directly and indirectly due to our actions."

It's not blanket immunity, but troops who commit crimes in Iraq would be tried in a US court instead of an Iraqi court. Standard clause in any SOF agreement that we have anywhere in the world.

Zeroisanumber
Oct 23, 2010



Nap Ghost

Brown Blitzkrieg posted:

Look I'm almost on your side (in that I hope D'Souza dies soon), but you can hardly say Stalin killed millions of people. Millions of Nazis, yes, and also a lot of people died from a famine, but why blame a leader for a natural disaster? Seriously, that's like saying President Bush killed people thousands of people by making Hurricane Katrina happen.

The famine under Stalin was the result of policy, not nature. Please take some time to read up on Stalin,, the man was a mass murderer.

Zeroisanumber
Oct 23, 2010



Nap Ghost

King Dopplepopolos posted:

IIRC, weren't millions of people also killed during Stalin's Great Purges? I think those started well before the war, though.

Yes. He starved half of Ukraine to death as a matter of policy.

Zeroisanumber
Oct 23, 2010



Nap Ghost

Borneo Jimmy posted:

Here's a pure injection of crazy straight from the Huffington Post.
http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/rak...l?utm_hp_ref=tw


tl;dr Beyonce's clothing will enfluence young teenage girls to become prostitutes.

If Beyonce influences young girls to do anything it will be to replace their puny human forms with a being made of raw ambition, and I'm not certain that that's a bad thing.

Zeroisanumber
Oct 23, 2010



Nap Ghost

VideoTapir posted:

This lady clearly isn't the sharpest tool in the shed...but how anyone, ever, with this kind of attitude (not thinking you can give away a national cemetary plot, and wanting to give it to him; but having that sort of craving for peace) would think it would be a good idea to talk to Fox News, even a Fox affiliate, is a good idea is something that I will never comprehend.

http://joeforamerica.com/2013/05/bo...d-at-arlington/

This guy used the word "fartknocker" and now I'm reading it in Butthead's voice.

Zeroisanumber
Oct 23, 2010



Nap Ghost

Kid Fenris posted:

Ah yes, Charlotte Allen, best known for blaming the Newtown shooting on a lack of male teachers and buckets.

Her articles actually make a lot of sense if you approach it from the perspective of a person who's incredibly myopic and can't comprehend anything that takes place outside of her sheltered world. "Why didn't the kids just charge?" is a question that can only be asked by someone who lacks anything approaching empathy and has never felt the Fight or Flight instinct kick in even once in their lives.

Zeroisanumber
Oct 23, 2010



Nap Ghost

Kro-Bar posted:

Why are white people falling all over themselves to defend Paula Deen's racism?

This is from my local college paper, in an article titled "Culture should be forgiving"



Being a white person, I hang out with a lot of other white people, and some of the dumber ones think that the reaction in the media and her being fired from Food Network was a dramatic overreaction. White people with a brain in their head think that the reaction was appropriate.

Zeroisanumber
Oct 23, 2010



Nap Ghost

Jack Gladney posted:

He was raped as a kid and spent his life terrified that the nude photos of him that his rapist took would be used to humiliate Ronny. That's not something I want to make fun of him for, but the dude is messed up.

Jesus loving Christ. That's beyond horrible.

Zeroisanumber
Oct 23, 2010



Nap Ghost

I've grown to loathe Jason Lewis more than the other right-wing shoutbots. Partly because he's a local boy, but also because he's such a cherry picking, disingenuous, homophobic, racist piece of poo poo who tries to present himself as the face of modern "mind your own business" Libertarianism. It's shitbirds like Lewis that remind me that Libertarians deserve less respect than Moral Majority types, at least the god-botherers are open about their douchebaggery.

Zeroisanumber
Oct 23, 2010



Nap Ghost


Jesus. How did this get printed. Even for a magazine that spends its every waking moment fellating the rich this comes off as some bullshit that the dimmest scions of old money wealth talk about when they're halfway through a bottle of Johnny Walker Blue.

Zeroisanumber
Oct 23, 2010



Nap Ghost

Guilty Spork posted:

I wouldn't even know where to begin picking pieces to quote from this WSJ piece about how the elite WASP overlords were honorable and everything was way better before the meritocracy that we supposedhahahaha WTF

http://online.wsj.com/news/articles...268301043949952

About a third of the way through the article I found myself humming L'Internationale and had a strong desire to guillotine the author.

Zeroisanumber
Oct 23, 2010



Nap Ghost

A Fancy 400 lbs posted:

Then why are we all here on SA?

You take life advice from SA?

Zeroisanumber
Oct 23, 2010



Nap Ghost

John Charity Spring posted:

You're speaking from a hell of a lot of ignorance here.

It's incontrovertible that the British government and the BBC, aided by the right-wing print media, have been engaged in an effort to do that - I'm not saying it's a concerted conspiracy but it's happening. Year on year, the Remembrance Day ceremonies have become more jingoistic; the tenor of the entire thing has shifted from commemoration to a celebration of the 'heroic' soldiers in Afghanistan. Branches of the Royal British Legion have started handing out t-shirts for kids saying 'Future Soldier'. The education minister, Michael Gove, keeps speaking at length about how there is an extreme left-wing Marxist stranglehold on education at all levels (I'm not even putting words in his mouth here) and that we need to re-assess World War One as a glorious justified fight for 'liberal democracy' and freedom fought entirely by 'conscious believers' in the rightness of their cause.

Why are they doing this? Ideological reasons (especially Gove, who's a total fruitcake) and as an aspect of the increasingly militaristic attitudes in this country, I'd say. But regardless of why they're doing it, it's happening. Sneering about it because I used the phrase 'the establishment' to describe precisely that doesn't change that.

Meanwhile the ability of the UK to project force outside of its borders is slightly above that of Iran, and if Argentina decided to take over the Falklands tomorrow Cameron would have zero options outside of begging the Americans for help. So why ramp up the jingoism?

Zeroisanumber
Oct 23, 2010



Nap Ghost

bobservo posted:

If Conservative pundits can't speak out against liberal Hollywood's P.C. anti-slavery agenda, who will?


"Hmm, I guess slavery was bad, but so were of a lot of other things, and I bet some slaves liked it! Sure, print this editorial using my photo and real name."

This is some subtle-rear end neo-Confederate poo poo right here. His callbacks to Gone With the Wind and Uncle Tom's Cabin are especially neat little pieces of propaganda. If I met this guy on the street I'd have to shake his hand before slamming my knee into his balls.

Zeroisanumber
Oct 23, 2010



Nap Ghost

The Warszawa posted:

Do Supreme Court opinions count as terrible opinion pieces because boy was today a doozy!

I'm really hoping for eight years of Hillary after Obama just so that we can start swapping out a couple of these awful justices. The Roberts Court isn't quite down there with Taney's court in terms of ideological mendacity, but it's not for lack of effort on their part.

Zeroisanumber
Oct 23, 2010



Nap Ghost

Pththya-lyi posted:

I missed this part. This guy's saying he literally wanted to eat the rich. As in kill them, carve them up, cook them, put them in his mouth, chew and swallow them. Being a liberal means wanting to be a cannibal.

I'm not going to say that it's a good idea, but I am going to point out that we haven't tried it yet and we shouldn't just reject an idea without at least giving it a whirl.

Mr Interweb posted:

Wait, we support the idea of female genital mutilation now?

I really have to start having better attendance at those meetings.

He's mad that we're not freaking out about what barbarians all Muslims are 24/7.

Adbot
ADBOT LOVES YOU

Zeroisanumber
Oct 23, 2010



Nap Ghost

cheerfullydrab posted:

I get such a serious vibe from this letter, I'm not even 100% sure it's real.


Emphasis mine.

That's not at all, that's good-old all-American nativism. That whole "immigrants are foreign and probably bring disease! " thing has been around since before George Washington's time.

  • Locked thread