Click HERE to see this thread with all of the graphics, features, and links.

The fact that this ***** actually has supporters seriously shakes my faith in humanity.

You preach it, Fortitude!!!

http://oi53.tinypic.com/2zgf8mo.jpg

If we talk about a crazy person enough they become an icon!

People supported Obama, Carter, Palin, Bush, Hitler, etc. So what's your point?

The problem with humanity is that we follow leaders.

I love her. Every day she comes up with some new idiocy for me to laugh at. Like when she accidentally claimed she had the spirit of John Wayne Gacy.

If she wins the primaries, we can guess who her VEEP is gonna be...

http://pajamasmedia.com/zombie/files/2010/12/sarah_she_wolf.jpg


ugh, should I vote Green, Socialist, or Socialist Workers in 2012?

Palin will never VP for Bachmann. I think she'd rather not run than play second fiddle again.

Originally posted by Darth Jello
If she wins the primaries, we can guess who her VEEP is gonna be...

http://pajamasmedia.com/zombie/files/2010/12/sarah_she_wolf.jpg


ugh, should I vote Green, Socialist, or Socialist Workers in 2012?

Isn't all of those equal to a vote for Republicans?

Well let's see, if not Palin, we've got David Duke, Louie Gohmert (Pile), Bachmann's husband whom she submits to (another Cheney relationship?)...

I'm gonna place a bet on former Bush expert on women's issues W. David Hager. You remember, the guy who treats ailments with prayer and Jesus who's wives keep divorcing him because his idea of Christian submittable involves dry anal rape while they're sleeping?
Yeah, that guy.

q2nK1sskUG4

James Watt could be another possibility. As for her husband being gay, well, at the very least we know that family is committing Medicare/Medicaid fraud for a living.

Originally posted by The Dark Cloud
People supported Obama, Carter, Palin, Bush, Hitler, etc. So what's your point?

The problem with humanity is that we follow leaders. Huh...these are all some seriously different people with seriously different ideas...Perhaps Reagan could get tossed in there as well?

Originally posted by Grate the Vraya
Huh...these are all some seriously different people with seriously different ideas...Perhaps Reagan could get tossed in there as well? Sure, I have no objection to Gramps Caligula being added to that list.

Also, I completely disagree with Carter being on that list. It's honestly been too short of a time for me to judge whether Palin, Obama, or even Bachmann belong on that list.

Originally posted by King Kandy
q2nK1sskUG4 Dear Right-Wing Christian women. If your husband hates gays and sounds like Oscar Wilde consider yourself a beard.

Originally posted by Fortitude
The fact that this ***** actually has supporters seriously shakes my faith in humanity. The fact that it shakes people's faith in humanity restores my faith in humanity.

Originally posted by Grate the Vraya
Huh...these are all some seriously different people with seriously different ideas...Perhaps Reagan could get tossed in there as well?

Good point. I actually voted for Reagan in 1984...before I knew any better.

She's like a hybrid of Anne Gorsuch, Elizabeth Dilling, and this chick form high school I kinda had a crush on.

Originally posted by Darth Jello
She's like a hybrid of Anne Gorsuch, Elizabeth Dilling, and this chick form high school I kinda had a crush on. Lmao! That's a PERFECT description! I'm gonna describe her like that now.

Yeah, Gorsuch was a classic, crazy christian republican. I still think she was the only head of the EPA to believe that toxic and nuclear waste has no harmful effect on life.

Bachmann is one of the most conservative politicians in the country. She makes the rest of the tea party seem like moderates. Seems like she may well carry the nomination since her poll numbers are neck to neck with Romney.

She won't win the Republican nomination. She looks nice now with the lights still off, but the Reps aren't going to nominate someone too unelectable to win the general election.

If they go with anybody, it's going to be a Romney, or someone not in the field yet (like Rick Perry from Texas).

her popularity should not shake your faith in humanity, only in america.

Best thing about Bachmann is that she steals Palin's thunder.

Originally posted by Mindship
Best thing about Bachmann is that she steals Palin's thunder.

What's the difference between the two? Not much that I can see.

Originally posted by The Dark Cloud
What's the difference between the two? Not much that I can see.

Here's two different answers to that question, from either end of the politcal spectrum:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=439x1291244

http://www.theconservativejournalblog.com/2011/06/26/the-difference-between-michele-bachmann-and-sarah-palin/

Originally posted by Quiero Mota
Here's two different answers to that question, from either end of the politcal spectrum:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=439x1291244

http://www.theconservativejournalblog.com/2011/06/26/the-difference-between-michele-bachmann-and-sarah-palin/

Bachmann may be smarter than Palin (which as one of the sites points out makes her scarier), but from an ideology standpoint Bachmann and Palin are clones, their far right wing views make Reagan look like a communist.

I'm tired of extremists on both sides sitting in our country's highest office. Obama needs to go, he's too far to the left and too much of a non entity when confronting Tea Party Republicans. But then I'm not impressed by any of the Republicans so far and several of them (see thread title) really scare me.

We need a moderate Democrat like Clinton, or a moderate Republican like Eisenhower (does such a thing exist anymore though) in the White House. Unless I see one running, I'll vote third party, or not at all.

How in the hell is Obama far left? George Soros is far left. McGovern was "far left." Obama's stepped up drone strikes on Pakistan, essentially continued American status quo with Israel/Afghanistan/Iraq, and compromised far too early with Republicans on universal healthcare. None of that screams "far left" to me. It screams moderate Clintonite (IE, political opportunist).

ya, as a non-American that "obama is left wing" stuff is hilarious

Obama would not only be a conservative candidate in Canada, he would be so conservative as to be unelectable here, at least going by the policy decisions he makes

I guess you guys do have a point, Obama has reneged on nearly every campaign promise. He's definitly moved towards the center since becoming President. I do think he's ineffective and needs to go though, but what's the alternative?

I am hoping someone challenges him in the primary as it may force him to go farther to the left to stay credible with his party.

Originally posted by King Kandy
I am hoping someone challenges him in the primary as it may force him to go farther to the left to stay credible with his party. TBH, I can't imagine any Dem doing this. He basically killed his best possible opposition by naming her to his cabinet.

Dennis Kucinich would be a good alternative.

Originally posted by The Dark Cloud
I guess you guys do have a point, Obama has reneged on nearly every campaign promise. He's definitly moved towards the center since becoming President. I do think he's ineffective and needs to go though, but what's the alternative?

even with his campaign promises, he would be solidly right of center in canada and, afaik, most of Europe.

Originally posted by inimalist
even with his campaign promises, he would be solidly right of center in canada and, afaik, most of Europe. And in Utah, John McCain would be solidly left

Originally posted by Harbinger
TBH, I can't imagine any Dem doing this. He basically killed his best possible opposition by naming her to his cabinet.

If my understanding is correct, Hillary will not be part of the cabinet if Obama wins a second term, by her own choice, and she has no design on running for President....at least in 2012.

Moved to the center ? Are you trying to tell us Obama is not far left? Can someone please explain to me why he rammed a fradualent health care package down our throats that America doesn't want and passed a failed spending . . . I mean stimulus package? Half of his cabinet and 'czars' are corrupt. Nearly forgot too, all he wants to do is tax, tax and more taxes. Tax the rich is what he claims, but who creates jobs? The wealthy and what is the uneployment rate? - over 9.5%. Didn't he say that unemployment wouldn't go over 8%?

Don't pin this on Bush because it was Fannie Mae & Freddie Mac who started this economic mess and that was under a Democratic run Congress. I'm not soley pinning the blame on Democrats, but it is mostly their fault.

George Soros? Guy lived through Holocaust and actually says the Nazi's weren't that bad of guys. That poster of Palin as a Nazi is offensive. Many of you were probably pissed off when you saw the posters of Obama Jokerized. The Joker is a ficational character where Hitler wasn't. Big difference. Some of Obama's biggest supporters absolutely hate Conservative women like Laura Ingrimm. Why all of the hatred?

Originally posted by Darth Truculent
Moved to the center ? Are you trying to tell us Obama is not far left?

Americans are funny

Originally posted by King Kandy
Dennis Kucinich would be a good alternative.

Sanders/Grayson would be the best. They could run as Democrats and then if elected, pull a Teddy Roosevelt, flip the dems the bird, and put down the Iron Front's Antifa circle as their new party affiliation. Plus it would be really hard to block a reformist/welfare/jobs/environment agenda when the president is an incorruptible Democratic Socialist who gives the justice department full authorization to go Elliot Ness on Congress and the monied classes. Regardless of who's president though, Kucinich's wife should be first lady simply due to the constant press exposure.

As for where Obama lies politically, I would say that his economic policies are to the right of Ronald Reagan, his laziness and lack of conviction is on par with Herbert Hoover, and his pathological need to be liked by everyone is like Nixon minus the drugs but with his balls cut off. At this point, I can honestly say that I could've pulled a better president out of my ass and yes, I mean a piece of stool that's between a 3 and a 4 on the Bristol Chart has more spine, strength, and charisma than Obama.

Originally posted by inimalist
Originally posted by Darth Truculent
Moved to the center ? Are you trying to tell us Obama is not far left? Can someone please explain to me why he rammed a fradualent health care package down our throats that America doesn't want and passed a failed spending . . . I mean stimulus package? Half of his cabinet and 'czars' are corrupt. Nearly forgot too, all he wants to do is tax, tax and more taxes. Tax the rich is what he claims, but who creates jobs? The wealthy and what is the uneployment rate? - over 9.5%. Didn't he say that unemployment wouldn't go over 8%?

Americans are funny

H3EVoF-LUdU

Originally posted by Darth Jello
Sanders/Grayson would be the best.

actually, I really like Sanders, he would probably make a good leader

Originally posted by King Kandy
Dennis Kucinich would be a good alternative.

Better yet-

President Elizabeth Kucinich

http://images.politico.com/global/click/091029_liz_kucinich_ap_522_regular.jpg

Smart enough to run this nation.

http://www.bbsradio.com/host/thepeoplespeak/images/Elizabeth_Kucinich.jpg

Beautiful enough to get you to vote on that legislation and sign that treaty.

http://cache.boston.com/resize/bonzai-fba/Globe_Photo/2007/12/25/1198640979_2302/300h.jpg

Big, strong, and intimidating enough to grab your eyeballs and work you like a marionette with your own optic nerves.

Mr. Kucinich must have an anaconda in his pants...

Again, even if kucinich doesn't run or win and some other real liberal/socialist does, I want her next to the president decked out like a samurai with a face mask and a naginata. If it's a good day for america she takes the armor off. Otherwise, imagine some terrorist or crooked CEO waking up in bed with an angry six-foot redhead over his bed with his child's still beating heart in her mouth. Somebody needs to make a poster of that.

Originally posted by Darth Jello
Again, even if kucinich doesn't run or win and some other real liberal/socialist does, I want her next to the president decked out like a samurai with a face mask and a naginata. If it's a good day for america she takes the armor off. Otherwise, imagine some terrorist or crooked CEO waking up in bed with an angry six-foot redhead over his bed with his child's still beating heart in her mouth. Somebody needs to make a poster of that.

wh-why can't it be my bed she is standing over?

If all else fails, we can always move to Canada.

I recommend it

Originally posted by inimalist
wh-why can't it be my bed she is standing over? You want Elizabeth Kucinich to kill your child?

Originally posted by Darth Jello
You want Elizabeth Kucinich to kill your child?

don't judge me

Originally posted by inimalist
I recommend it
Sounds like you may be having an illegal immigration problem of your own soon...

I think we'd call it "tax base expansion" or "labour force growth"

Originally posted by inimalist
I recommend it

I'm there now. It's hot as **** and it turns out that in Quebec all the official signs are in French only.

Originally posted by Symmetric Chaos
I'm there now. It's hot as **** and it turns out that in Quebec all the official signs are in French only.

our constitution has a clause, the "non-withstanding clause", that allows, for 4 years, the government of the country or province to establish laws that violate certain freedoms. The government of Quebec has used the non-withstanding clause to ensure that French is the most prominent language on all signs, including those of private businesses.

even weirder, there are growing numbers of people in that province who only speak French, and in the rest of Canada, no matter if there is any French population whatsoever, all government services must be available in French. we are forced to take French language classes from grade 4 to grade 9 (I remember how to say grapefruit).

where in Quebec are you?

Originally posted by inimalist
our constitution has a clause, the "non-withstanding clause", that allows, for 4 years, the government of the country or province to establish laws that violate certain freedoms. The government of Quebec has used the non-withstanding clause to ensure that French is the most prominent language on all signs, including those of private businesses.

That's odd. I assume it's an enumerated group of things that can be violated?

Originally posted by inimalist
even weirder, there are growing numbers of people in that province who only speak French, and in the rest of Canada, no matter if there is any French population whatsoever, all government services must be available in French. we are forced to take French language classes from grade 4 to grade 9 (I remember how to say grapefruit).

That's pretty obnoxious. We had to take 2 years of Spanish and 2 years of French before we got to choose foreign language courses (I think the state requires 4 years of "foreign language". I only remember how to eat crepes.

Now for college I have to do language again

Originally posted by inimalist
where in Quebec are you?

Montreal. Beautiful city, especially after being in New York a few days ago.

Originally posted by Symmetric Chaos
That's odd. I assume it's an enumerated group of things that can be violated?

only the important ones

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Section_Thirty- three_of_the_Canadian_Charter_of_Rights_and_Freedo
ms

Section 2: freedom of conscience, freedom of religion, freedom of thought, freedom of belief, freedom of expression, freedom of the press and of other media of communication, freedom of peaceful assembly, and freedom of association.

Section 7: right to life, liberty, and security of the person.

Section 8: freedom from unreasonable search and seizure.

Section 9: freedom from arbitrary detention or imprisonment.

Section 10: right to legal counsel and the guarantee of habeas corpus.

Section 11: rights in criminal and penal matters such as the right to be presumed innocent until proven guilty.

Section 12: right not to be subject to cruel and unusual punishment.

Section 13: rights against self-incrimination

Section 14: rights to an interpreter in a court proceeding.

Section 15: equal treatment before and under the law, and equal protection and benefit of the law without discrimination.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Canadian_Charter_of_Rights_and_Freedoms

we also have the "reasonable limits clause", Section 1, that states all rights are subject to limits that are "reasonable". So like, we don't have unlimited free speech here, because it is deemed reasonable to restrict hate speech or what have you

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ Section_One_of_the_Canadian_Charter_of_Rights_and_
Freedoms

Originally posted by Symmetric Chaos
That's pretty obnoxious. We had to take 2 years of Spanish and 2 years of French before we got to choose foreign language courses (I think the state requires 4 years of "foreign language". I only remember how to eat crepes.

Now for college I have to do language again

its a waste of time, as far as I'm concerned, I've never met a person who thought it was meaningful, unless they were politics professors from Quebec. I didn't learn french, and really don't want to because of it. imho, it actually makes people much less sympathetic towards Quebec's politics

what languages are you taking in college?

Originally posted by Symmetric Chaos
Montreal. Beautiful city, especially after being in New York a few days ago.

very nice ya, Montreal is one of the nicest place in Canada.

if you get the chance, check out the old part of Quebec city, its really nice too, and really holds onto that "Quebecoise" culture

Originally posted by inimalist
only the important ones

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Section_Thirty- three_of_the_Canadian_Charter_of_Rights_and_Freedo
ms

<snip>

we also have the "reasonable limits clause", Section 1, that states all rights are subject to limits that are "reasonable". So like, we don't have unlimited free speech here, because it is deemed reasonable to restrict hate speech or what have you

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ Section_One_of_the_Canadian_Charter_of_Rights_and_
Freedoms

Huh, according to wiki it's supposed to be a check on the power of the judges. It strikes me as the worst possible way to do so. It's interesting that the federal govt has never used it.

Originally posted by inimalist
its a waste of time, as far as I'm concerned, I've never met a person who thought it was meaningful, unless they were politics professors from Quebec. I didn't learn french, and really don't want to because of it. imho, it actually makes people much less sympathetic towards Quebec's politics

Yeah, forcing people to learn French seems like it would just get everyone irritated.

Originally posted by inimalist
what languages are you taking in college?

I'm going to be taking Spanish because its the one I have the most experience with and has the most practical use. Personally I think learning another language is an important part of getting an education but at the same time I speak English so I've never had a need to speak anything else in my life, hard to get any will power behind it.

Originally posted by inimalist
very nice ya, Montreal is one of the nicest place in Canada.

if you get the chance, check out the old part of Quebec city, its really nice too, and really holds onto that "Quebecoise" culture

Already on the list. Right now I'm really waiting for the heat wave to end. Going up on the Mont this morning was not a great idea.

Back on topic, did anyone forget that Michelle Bachmann is ineligible to run for president under Amendment 14, Section 3?

Originally posted by Darth Jello
Back on topic, did anyone forget that Michelle Bachmann is ineligible to run for president under Amendment 14, Section 3?
Even if that did apply, I bet she could push her way through congress.

Originally posted by King Kandy
Even if that did apply, I bet she could push her way through congress. A lot of her quotes could be interpreted as actively fostering rebellion and congress would need a 2/3rd's vote or she would need a presidential pardon to run.

Originally posted by Symmetric Chaos
Huh, according to wiki it's supposed to be a check on the power of the judges. It strikes me as the worst possible way to do so.

It has to do a lot with conflict between the federal and provincial governments during the time of Trudeau (70s).

basically, to get western provinces, namely Alberta, to agree to the charter, they needed a way to prevent the federal courts from being able to overrule provincial matters. Alberta is essentially the Texas of Canada, and they hate the idea that the federal government would be involved in their affairs.

I agree though, I am very much not a fan of it at all. I'm totally in favor of provincial rights, but I think the idea that they have the right to undermine what should be the most basic of human rights (I mean the real important stuff, like innocence before guilt) is retarded.

Canadian federalism is actually a really interesting topic, lol. In a lot of ways, Alberta gets shafted

Originally posted by Symmetric Chaos
It's interesting that the federal govt has never used it.

yes and no. popular opinion says that use of the notwithstanding clause would be so detrimental to the party in power that they would almost certainly be elected out of office. Voting rights are something the state can't take away, so if they tried to curb free speech, that party would likely lose a good deal of power in the next election, and after the 5 year period, the clause would not be invoked again.

the "its ok because they probably wont do it" argument doesn't sit well imho, however. When was the last time any government willingly gave up power it had accrued to itself?

Originally posted by Symmetric Chaos
Yeah, forcing people to learn French seems like it would just get everyone irritated.

I think it would be far more effective it if was a french or quebecoise culture course, rather than french language. languages are so hard to learn, and nobody cares enough to actually put in the effort, especially when they are 10 and there is no language immersion.

Learning the quebecoise perspective of the plains of abraham, the roots of the FLQ crisis, the Duplessis era or the quiet revolution would not only be more interesting and digestible for students, it would probably have more of the desired effect that french language classes are trying to promote (ir: Quebec is special among provinces so it is ok that they have special rights and privileged etc).

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Plains_of_abraham
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/FLQ_crisis
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Maurice_Duplessis
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quiet_Revolution

understanding quebec is probably the most important dynamic in canadian federal politics

Originally posted by Symmetric Chaos
I'm going to be taking Spanish because its the one I have the most experience with and has the most practical use. Personally I think learning another language is an important part of getting an education but at the same time I speak English so I've never had a need to speak anything else in my life, hard to get any will power behind it.

lol, I had the exact same experience with Arabic, only I didn't take it because I thought it would be useful, I just didn't want to be afraid of muslims on the subway... (ya, I know)

Originally posted by Symmetric Chaos
Already on the list. Right now I'm really waiting for the heat wave to end. Going up on the Mont this morning was not a great idea.

ha!

Originally posted by Darth Jello
Back on topic, did anyone forget that Michelle Bachmann is ineligible to run for president under Amendment 14, Section 3? Just to spare everyone the trouble of looking it up:Originally posted by Darth Jello
A lot of her quotes could be interpreted as actively fostering rebellion and congress would need a 2/3rd's vote or she would need a presidential pardon to run. I've gotta admit, you had my hopes up for a second there, but I looked up insurrection. Insurrection is defined as an act of rising in revolt, rebellion, or resistance against civil authority or an established government. Totally different from a verbal attack. Outside the fourteenth amendment, the word insurrection is only referenced once in the Constitution, but it appears to be defined as a fairly violent act.If a case were made against her right to run for president, I'm fairly confident the supreme court would rule in her favor. I certainly would, political views aside.

EDIT: The fourteenth Amendment is for confederates anyway. Now THAT's insurrection!

I'm studying Canadian politics next time I get the chance. Inimalist, that stuff looks weird, but it looks way more benign than the weird stuff we get down here.

shes a ****. nough said

Originally posted by Symmetric Chaos

I'm going to be taking Spanish because its the one I have the most experience with and has the most practical use. Personally I think learning another language is an important part of getting an education but at the same time I speak English so I've never had a need to speak anything else in my life, hard to get any will power behind it.


Overall, do you think Spanish is an easy or hard language for a non-native speaker to learn?

Originally posted by Quiero Mota
Overall, do you think Spanish is an easy or hard language for a non-native speaker to learn?

It's not that hard for an English speaker. A lot of words are cognates of either well known or only slightly obscure English words. Its the grammar that drives me nuts, but that's happened in every language I've even taken a class in (Japanese, Latin, Spanish, French . . . English).

Originally posted by Quark_666
Just to spare everyone the trouble of looking it up: I've gotta admit, you had my hopes up for a second there, but I looked up insurrection. Insurrection is defined as an act of rising in revolt, rebellion, or resistance against civil authority or an established government. Totally different from a verbal attack. Outside the fourteenth amendment, the word insurrection is only referenced once in the Constitution, but it appears to be defined as a fairly violent act.If a case were made against her right to run for president, I'm fairly confident the supreme court would rule in her favor. I certainly would, political views aside.

EDIT: The fourteenth Amendment is for confederates anyway. Now THAT's insurrection!

Well, they did allow a 1%er and former military officer into congress that called for armed rebellion and shooting his opponents anyway so maybe it's just one of those things they gloss over nowadays like that whole ban on bills of attainder.

jello: do you think hate speech is protected under free speech?

Originally posted by Quiero Mota
Overall, do you think Spanish is an easy or hard language for a non-native speaker to learn?
I'm not that experienced, but i've taken Japanese as well and compared to that, Spanish was easier.

Obama has dual citizenship due to his dad and that makes him an illigitimate leader. Nobody says anything about that.

Originally posted by Darth Truculent
Obama has dual citizenship due to his dad and that makes him an illigitimate leader. Nobody says anything about that.
1. He doesn't have dual citizenship (it takes more than just having a foreign parent).
2. There's nothing in the constitution about dual citizenship. In fact, the US has no laws at all governing dual citizenship, because the gov doesn't recognize them.

Dual citizenship or not, fact is that 14th amendment gives full rights simply by being born in the US. Where your parents are from means zip.

The Federalist Papers voice concerns about Englishmen running America because American culture was based off English culture. I think they'd laugh at the threat of takeover by the Hawaiian natives in an ultimate scheme to give influence to Muslims.

Pretty sure Jefferson had dual citizenship with America and France, too.

Originally posted by inimalist
jello: do you think hate speech is protected under free speech? The court has ruled that it is and Marbury Vs. Madison still stands so it's a moot argument but personally, I think it shouldn't be and in fact isn't since all true hate speech (community standard of "I know it when I hear it", not parity, not bad taste, etc.) is not protected because it can have no other purpose than to incite violence and panic.
The whole global and domestic political situation depresses me. It's the 21st Century. We should have buried right-wing politics in a coffin, staked it, decapitated it, and burned it ten years ago. Our concerns should be fixing the environmental damage of the last century, working together to solve problems, and expanding into space, not refighting the battles of WWII with a global cult of fascist fanatics and monetary psychopaths.

Originally posted by Darth Jello
The court has ruled that it is and Marbury Vs. Madison still stands so it's a moot argument but personally, I think it shouldn't be and in fact isn't since all true hate speech (community standard of "I know it when I hear it", not parity, not bad taste, etc.) is not protected because it can have no other purpose than to incite violence and panic.
The whole global and domestic political situation depresses me. It's the 21st Century. We should have buried right-wing politics in a coffin, staked it, decapitated it, and burned it ten years ago. Our concerns should be fixing the environmental damage of the last century, working together to solve problems, and expanding into space, not refighting the battles of WWII with a global cult of fascist fanatics and monetary psychopaths.

fair enough, its consistent with your stance on talking about rebellion...

I guess this is just another moment where I can't say I'd give the state as much power as you want to

Originally posted by inimalist
fair enough, its consistent with your stance on talking about rebellion...

I guess this is just another moment where I can't say I'd give the state as much power as you want to Yet you live in a country that more or less has that amount of power.

Originally posted by Darth Jello
Yet you live in a country that more or less has that amount of power.

ya, I'm not happy about the hate speech laws in my country

Originally posted by inimalist
ya, I'm not happy about the hate speech laws in my country

How about a grand compromise. No hate speech laws but law enforcement officially ignores all activities committed by SHARP, FSU, Anti-Racist Action, and any other organization employing the philosophy or tactics of the Iron Front.

well, no

one is speech, the other is vigilantism

I worry much more about people who take the law into their own hands than I do people who express themselves

To elaborate on my original statement (I apologize for the bump, I've been gone a long time), Bachmann is hateful and insane. She has an extreme case of homophobia for no logical reason, thinks that intelligent design should be taught in schools despite likely knowing jack shit about Science, and makes more mistakes than Sarah Palin. She makes factual errors such as thinking that John Adams was a Founding Father (to justify her revisionist claim that the FF's worked tirelessly to end slavery) and refuses to admit that she was wrong. She mixed up Elvis's birth and death day.

Originally posted by Fortitude
She makes factual errors such as thinking that John Adams was a Founding Father (to justify her revisionist claim that the FF's worked tirelessly to end slavery) /B]
That was Palin, actually, in reference to John Quincy Adams.

Originally posted by inimalist
well, no

one is speech, the other is vigilantism

I worry much more about people who take the law into their own hands than I do people who express themselves

Hey, nazi boneheads are using their right to free speech when they call for a new holocaust and terrorize people in their neighborhoods and beat up old jewish ladies. They're just dealing with the inevitable natural consequences when they get their skulls shattered by pipes and lengths of hose filled with cement. I would call it less vigilantism and more of an immunological response to an infection.

IF Bachmann was a liberal progressive a lot of you folks would be having a wet dream. The fact she is conservative goes against all that you been taught about liberal progressives.

She will win the nomination and depending on who she chooses for VP will win in 2012. Perry or Huntsman the most likely choice. The latter has diplomatic relations with China and I would vote for that. Perry is a bit out there and more W lite than anything else. But she may need Texas to win, so he could be the VP choice.

Originally posted by inimalist
jello: do you think hate speech is protected under free speech?

Hate speech is not someone that has a different viewpoint. Your ego and vanity may hate it, but just because someone has a different approach to things does not make them ignorant.

Originally posted by YankeeWhaler
IF Bachmann was a liberal progressive a lot of you folks would be having a wet dream. The fact she is conservative goes against all that you been taught about liberal progressives.

If Bachmann were a liberal progressive she wouldn't have (or wouldn't make public) pretty much any of the views she has as a conservative regressive. That's a totally different candidate.

Originally posted by Darth Jello
Hey, nazi boneheads are using their right to free speech when they call for a new holocaust and terrorize people in their neighborhoods and beat up old jewish ladies. They're just dealing with the inevitable natural consequences when they get their skulls shattered by pipes and lengths of hose filled with cement. I would call it less vigilantism and more of an immunological response to an infection.

Once you go beyond speaking free speech no longer applies.

Originally posted by YankeeWhaler
IF Bachmann was a liberal progressive a lot of you folks would be having a wet dream. The fact she is conservative goes against all that you been taught about liberal progressives.
What does that even mean? Obviously, I would like her more if she was a liberal progressive. The whole problem is that she's the opposite.

Originally posted by King Kandy
What does that even mean? Obviously, I would like her more if she was a liberal progressive. The whole problem is that she's the opposite.

Your bias is showing. It's doubtful she would win anyway, House Members running for President don't fair well. I suppose you are against Clarence Thomas because he is conservative too?

Originally posted by YankeeWhaler
Your bias is showing. It's doubtful she would win anyway, House Members running for President don't fair well. I suppose you are against Clarence Thomas because he is conservative too?
Um, yes, I am. Isn't that how voting works (you vote for who you agree with)? Clarence Thomas isn't an elected official so there's not really a whole lot I can do about him. But I definitely do disagree with him on a huge number of substantive issues.

Originally posted by YankeeWhaler
Hate speech is not someone that has a different viewpoint. Your ego and vanity may hate it, but just because someone has a different approach to things does not make them ignorant.

idk, I think it does

in general, people who disagree with me are ignorant...

I was impressed and pleased with Bachmann's serving of the others at debate by giving them their water.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=aY8Zw5NzUXQ#t=2255s

I do not care that it may have come off as sexist. It would have been impressive if any of them did that for each other. I do not care that she did it for show. She still did it.

However, I would have rather seen one of the male candidates do that. It would have meant more especially in that forum (they were at a church). It would not have seemed so sexist. It's probably true that she has had to serve so many people their waters in the past...


Meh...moms are awesome. ***k political correctness. I do not want her to be my president, though.

Originally posted by dadudemon
http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=aY8Zw5NzUXQ#t=2255s

Oh, god, it's so artificial. The pumpkins are even plastic.

Originally posted by dadudemon
Meh...moms are awesome. ***k political correctness. I do not want her to be my president, though.

When did saying moms are awesome become "politically incorrect"?

http://www.escapistmagazine.com/videos/view/the-big-picture/2783-Correctitude (this guy summarizes all of my feelings on political correctness in one video)

Originally posted by Symmetric Chaos
http://www.escapistmagazine.com/videos/view/the-big-picture/2783-Correctitude

lol

a friend of mine just tuned me into zeropunctuation as well. escapist seems pretty dope

My God.

Originally posted by Symmetric Chaos
You're strawmanning my point! I was referring to the whole set up not Bachman's actions.

Here's a hint on when you're strawmanning: if you are taking the person's point to be something negative instead of one of a dozen other ways in which it could be seen as positive, then you probably have it either slightly wrong or horribly wrong.

You're hilarious.



Originally posted by Symmetric Chaos
Yes, actually, because having a general rule for that situation makes life easier and safer for everyone.

That would be a personal "general rule", not the rule of law. The rule of law says the person with the right of way goes first. Since you do not know who got there first, how did you know which general rule applied?

See, even when you're trying your hardest to troll, you still suck at it.



Originally posted by Symmetric Chaos
This is the part where you cry "strawman" and desperately backpedal in order to convince yourself that you didn't say something incredibly stupid.

This is the part where you reuse things I've already said about your posts in a poor attempt to troll.



Originally posted by Symmetric Chaos
And this is the part where you say something even stupider

Try harder. You can do better than this tantrum you're throwing.

Originally posted by Symmetric Chaos
that reveals to everyone reading why its impossible to understand

Yes, because everyone here is an idiot, right? But if you want me to rephrase in a simpler terms, I can. I can even draw you a graph.

Originally posted by Symmetric Chaos
what you supposedly mean based on what you actually write

How dare I make a point directly and requote it so even an idiot cannot deny it.

Originally posted by Symmetric Chaos
and renders any infantile cry of "strawman" utterly moot.

Awwww. Poor SC: resorting to name calling during a tantrum...not to mention raging about getting his trolling strawman posts called out yet again. This is two weeks in a row for you. I almost called you out in another thread for making another strawman, but I figured you'd make another fail attempt and just waited for you to retaliate at me.

Originally posted by Symmetric Chaos
When you go out of your way to make sure your words don't mean what they say it's not my fault that I misinterpret them.

I know. I should stop posting directly what I mean because a bored troll might come along and strawman my points and then throw a tantrum when I call him out.



So, you done whining since I called you out, yet again, on your strawman trolling?


Originally posted by RE: Blaxican
My God.

He's butthurt from last week when I called him out for his strawman trolling style. I strongly suspect that this will get worse and worse since he's resorted to name calling (videos that call me an ***hole don't work anymore: not direct enough). Next week, my mom will be called a whore.

Ok, cut it out now folks.

Dadude, you are making things personal rather quickly these days. Watch out for that.

Originally posted by Ushgarak
Ok, cut it out now folks.

Dadude, you are making things personal rather quickly these days. Watch out for that.

Calling SC out when he's been following myself and others around, trolling, and using strawman posts like it's going out of style? You know I haven't reported it despite that he's bordering on harassment at this point. At least point out that I did not report jack shit so people don't think I went whining to the mods about SC.

Originally posted by Symmetric Chaos
Oh, god, it's so artificial. The pumpkins are even plastic.



When did saying moms are awesome become "politically incorrect"?

http://www.escapistmagazine.com/videos/view/the-big-picture/2783-Correctitude (this guy summarizes all of my feelings on political correctness in one video) Originally posted by inimalist
lol

a friend of mine just tuned me into zeropunctuation as well. escapist seems pretty dope

Both Yahtzee and Moviebob are great on the Escapist, my favourite of their shows was probably Extra Credits though, and they have moved over to Penny Arcade.

Originally posted by Bardock42
Both Yahtzee and Moviebob are great on the Escapist, my favourite of their shows was probably Extra Credits though, and they have moved over to Penny Arcade.

That's where they went!

I love those guys.

Originally posted by Symmetric Chaos
That's where they went!

I love those guys.

They made quite a few new videos since they left. Lucky you, having new content ahead of you!

But yeah, I love their videos, they talk a lot of sense, and also make you think more about video-games as art in general. Great stuff.

Originally posted by dadudemon
Calling SC out when he's been following myself and others around, trolling, and using strawman posts like it's going out of style? You know I haven't reported it despite that he's bordering on harassment at this point. At least point out that I did not report jack shit so people don't think I went whining to the mods about SC.

All I see in this thread is you making it personal first and as a result derailing the thread. You not reporting a purported wrong but instead bringing it into arguments in the threads is not the way we like things done.

So please do not act like that in future.

Originally posted by Ushgarak
All I see in this thread is you making it personal first and as a result derailing the thread. You not reporting a purported wrong but instead bringing it into arguments in the threads is not the way we like things done.

So please do not act like that in future.


Yes sir. But I was just responding to a video that literally calls me an ***hole, mean, a jerk, etc...and I did not call him any names, at all.

And that's that. The subject is closed.

It literally does nothing of the sort.

If you feel there is an issue, report it rather than 'call out'.

Originally posted by Ushgarak
It literally does nothing of the sort.

If you feel there is an issue, report it rather than 'call out'.

The subject is closed, at this point. If you have any further comments, please send me a PM and I'd be more than happy to respond. You and I have taken this thread off track, now.

Try and backseat mod like that again and you will receive an official warning. You do not get to make those decisions.

I did not demand you send me a PM, I politely requested you take it there. If you continue to publicly harass me, I will report your actions.

Ok, you are doing this just to be annoying now,. That's an official warning to you and a ban if you continue.

Michele Bachmann is the most "memorized" candidate, that I an see. Herman Cain also comes off as memorizing and spitting out an advertisement, but Michele has him beat. I actually think that is a detriment to her candidacy. However, she is not savvy enough to have the correct answers so she has not choice but the use rote memory to answer questions. This is my observation of the last 4 Republican debates, at least.

Originally posted by dadudemon
Calling SC out when he's been following myself and others around, trolling, and using strawman posts like it's going out of style? You know I haven't reported it despite that he's bordering on harassment at this point. At least point out that I did not report jack shit so people don't think I went whining to the mods about SC.

Don't bother...Mods only support their buddies. When I was harrass by Bardock during my global mod days not a single mod support me. Which is why I don't bother coming here anymore. KMC is the shitter for moderator buddies and trolls. I like how he's going off topic and not a damn warning to stop. Bullshit...don't waste your post.

As for my post...don't give two-shits about it.

Originally posted by dadudemon
Michele Bachmann is the most "memorized" candidate, that I an see. Herman Cain also comes off as memorizing and spitting out an advertisement, but Michele has him beat. I actually think that is a detriment to her candidacy. However, she is not savvy enough to have the correct answers so she has not choice but the use rote memory to answer questions. This is my observation of the last 4 Republican debates, at least.
What i've noticed is that she just doesn't answer the question asked. I remember once she was asked if Romney's health care plan made him unelectable, and she starts talking about how "Obamacare is killing jobs" and not saying a thing about the question. It seems like all the candidates have their own personal technique for trying to avoid answering questions.

Originally posted by King Kandy
What i've noticed is that she just doesn't answer the question asked. I remember once she was asked if Romney's health care plan made him unelectable, and she starts talking about how "Obamacare is killing jobs" and not saying a thing about the question. It seems like all the candidates have their own personal technique for trying to avoid answering questions.


lol, yup. That was the exact moment I had in mind while typing that post out. She memorizes everything because she can't answer the questions properly. So she ends up answering the questions tangentially half the time.

Originally posted by King Kandy
What i've noticed is that she just doesn't answer the question asked. I remember once she was asked if Romney's health care plan made him unelectable, and she starts talking about how "Obamacare is killing jobs" and not saying a thing about the question. It seems like all the candidates have their own personal technique for trying to avoid answering questions.

It's because she's an idiot.

I don't think she's an idiot, politically an idiot and an idiot in many important senses (like common sense, Burning a Quran and filming it? WTH?), but I don't think she's idiotic in the sense Sarah Palin is idiotic.

My main issue with her is that she uses what little actual intelligence she possesses for--at the risk of sounding cliche--evil.

Originally posted by dadudemon
lol, yup. That was the exact moment I had in mind while typing that post out. She memorizes everything because she can't answer the questions properly. So she ends up answering the questions tangentially half the time.
I think her only talking point on health care is "get rid of Obamacare!" She literally can't give any other answer when asked anything with the words health care.

Newt Gingrich's dodge is my favorite: Give an extremely simplistic non answer in five seconds, then say "well, since I still have some time left..." and talk about whatever he wants. I swear, he uses that almost every question.

Originally posted by King Kandy
Newt Gingrich's dodge is my favorite: Give an extremely simplistic non answer in five seconds, then say "well, since I still have some time left..." and talk about whatever he wants. I swear, he uses that almost every question.

Do you have an example or two of what you mean? I have yet to experience one of Newt's simplistic "non-answer" questions. They always seem to be relevant...but superficial.

Generally, I like Newt's approach. I like it when he calls the moderators out on their "gotcha" or "fight eachother" questions. Though


Do you think it would be okay to create another thread dedicated to the republican debates? I don't think the individual debates will garner much attention beyond one page, at the most. I think it would be easier to have one "2012 Republican Nomination Debates" thread.

Go ahead.

They aren't really non-answers, more like, he gives a super-short summary and instead of speaking on the question extensively just tries to get to the switch-off as soon as he can.

Originally posted by King Kandy
Go ahead.

They aren't really non-answers, more like, he gives a super-short summary and instead of speaking on the question extensively just tries to get to the switch-off as soon as he can.

K. I will. I just didn't want to talk about stuff in 17 different threads for basically the same shit.


Anyway...


I agree. I did not see them as being non-answers, per se. In fact, his answer on Ben Bernanke is pretty much what I would have said if put on the spot in an interview. Of course, if given plenty of time to carefully think out of my answer, I could use actual actions and statements to back that up which is what some better prepared candidates can sometimes do (just wait until the presidential debates: that's when they start to memorize facts and quotes and use them...as you obviously already know).

I do remember in like the second or third debate, he was asked a question that the rest of them took quite a while to answer and his answer was "no. " The crowd laughed. He then proceeded to give 2 or 3 sentences on why his answer was "no" but it still did not go much into detail. I still don't consider those non-answers, just superficial. Keep in mind that most people eat that shit up: they love it. It makes Newt appealing to many voters because he comes off less as a silver-tongued politician and more of a "straight and to the point" common-man.


Obviously, he is the former and not the latter, but that doesn't stop him from employing that. I do enjoy that particular aspect of his style, however. I also like some of his answers, but I do not like Newt for President.

Two weeks ago, President Obama signed a government takeover of
healthcare into law. Unemployment remains high, and federal spending
continues to increase at an alarming rate. Now, it is more important
than ever to protect our nation's founding principles of individual
freedom, personal responsibility and the free market by supporting
candidates with time-tested conservative principles like Minnesota's
own Congresswoman Michele Bachmann.
Today, thousands of you will join me to welcome Governor Sarah Palin
to Minneapolis for a rally to salute Congresswoman Michele Bachmann
for her leadership.
Even if you can't be at today's rally in person, I urge you to be
support Michele's fight against Washington liberals. Send her your
message of support today and contribute $10, $25 or $100 today to
ensure that she will continue to fight the liberal agenda in
Washington.
Michele Bachmann is under attack from extreme liberal activists for
standing up for her Constitutional conservative principles. Michele
has a proven record of promoting free markets, questioning the
encroachment of the federal government, and refusing to accept that
government officials in Washington should make decisions for everyday
Americans.
I founded Freedom First PAC in order to support candidates who will
promote these conservative principles to ensure a strong America for
future generations. Michele Bachmann is one of these proven
conservative candidates.
Thanks for your support,

She's an idiot.

Gingrich is a blowhard, I hope that adulterous old Zionist gets knocked out of the race ASAP.

Originally posted by Zeal Ex Nihilo
Gingrich is a blowhard, I hope that adulterous old Zionist gets knocked out of the race ASAP. And your preferred candidate would be... Perry?

Originally posted by Lord Lucien
And your preferred candidate would be... Perry?
My preferred candidate is one who has stood for liberty all the days of his political career, the one who isn't bought and sold by special interests. But if I had to choose between the list of secondary- and tertiary-candidates? Palin/Bachmann would come first, Gingrich would come second, and Romney would come third.

Originally posted by Zeal Ex Nihilo
My preferred candidate is one who has stood for liberty all the days of his political career, the one who isn't bought and sold by special interests. But if I had to choose between the list of secondary- and tertiary-candidates? Palin/Bachmann would come first, Gingrich would come second, and Romney would come third. But Bachmann and Palin are ****ing dumb, and I saw an interview where Bachmann openly opposed gay marriage. That's not exactly standing for liberty.

Though I disagree with your assessment of their character--I believe both are of average intelligence, perhaps slightly less intelligent than Obama himself; I believe they simply lack the refinement and Ivy League education of other political figures--my reasons for supporting them as candidates has little to do with their aptitude or political savvy. Rather, it has to do with the emotional impact it would have amongst the youthful progressives.

Emotional impact? Like the boners and the lulz?

Originally posted by Zeal Ex Nihilo
...my reasons for supporting them as candidates has little to do with their aptitude or political savvy. Rather, it has to do with the emotional impact it would have amongst the youthful progressives.


lololololol Some people like to troll, IRL.

The rage among them would be quite severe.

If I have to choose between trolling and Obama, I'll take the trolling. At least, perhaps, that will put a dent into the idea of female politicians.

Well, one thing is sure: America established the hierarchy of humans in the US:


White Males > Black Males > White Females > Native Americans > Black Females > Latin Americans


All the rest of the races fall in there somewhere between white males and Latin Americans and is much more region specific. And, yes, I am being slightly facetious but there is truth to my comparison in things such as pay, perception, racism, sexism, etc.

She's definitely got crazy eyes lol.