Author Topic: "A black sheriff?!": The Official Topic of Obama and New Era American Politics  (Read 2049832 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Phoenix Dark

  • I got no game it's just some bitches understand my story
  • Senior Member
Yea dude, you should be hip with the republican who's actually a serious man with respect to the budget: Paul Ryan.
010

Brehvolution

  • Until at last, I threw down my enemy and smote his ruin upon the mountainside.
  • Senior Member
Here is a pretty entertaining read on the Koch family. It's long though.

http://www.newyorker.com/reporting/2010/08/30/100830fa_fact_mayer?currentPage=1
©ZH

Howard Alan Treesong

  • キング・メタル・ドラゴン
  • Icon
乱学者

Beardo

  • Member
Here is a pretty entertaining read on the Koch family. It's long though.

http://www.newyorker.com/reporting/2010/08/30/100830fa_fact_mayer?currentPage=1

Vast right wing conspiracy? Is it 1997 again?

Brehvolution

  • Until at last, I threw down my enemy and smote his ruin upon the mountainside.
  • Senior Member
Here is a pretty entertaining read on the Koch family. It's long though.

http://www.newyorker.com/reporting/2010/08/30/100830fa_fact_mayer?currentPage=1

Vast right wing conspiracy? Is it 1997 again?

Quote
Many of the ideas propounded in the 1980 campaign presaged the Tea Party movement. Ed Clark told The Nation that libertarians were getting ready to stage “a very big tea party,” because people were “sick to death” of taxes. The Libertarian Party platform called for the abolition of the F.B.I. and the C.I.A., as well as of federal regulatory agencies, such as the Securities and Exchange Commission and the Department of Energy. The Party wanted to end Social Security, minimum-wage laws, gun control, and all personal and corporate income taxes; it proposed the legalization of prostitution, recreational drugs, and suicide. Government should be reduced to only one function: the protection of individual rights. William F. Buckley, Jr., a more traditional conservative, called the movement “Anarcho-Totalitarianism.”

Of course these rights would be debatable.

How can you defend this shit, Beardo? If these people had their way, we would all work for Koch. Earn credits to pay to rent your apartment from Koch and buy goods from the store Koch owned. You would own nothing in their world. The only way you could be rich would be if you were born into it.

Quote
In 1997, for instance, the E.P.A. moved to reduce surface ozone, a form of pollution caused, in part, by emissions from oil refineries. Susan Dudley, an economist who became a top official at the Mercatus Center, criticized the proposed rule. The E.P.A., she argued, had not taken into account that smog-free skies would result in more cases of skin cancer. She projected that if pollution were controlled it would cause up to eleven thousand additional cases of skin cancer each year.  :duh

In 1999, the District of Columbia Circuit Court took up Dudley’s smog argument. Evaluating the E.P.A. rule, the court found that the E.P.A. had “explicitly disregarded” the “possible health benefits of ozone.” In another part of the opinion, the court ruled, 2-1, that the E.P.A. had overstepped its authority in calibrating standards for ozone emissions. As the Constitutional Accountability Center, a think tank, revealed, the judges in the majority had previously attended legal junkets, on a Montana ranch, that were arranged by the Foundation for Research on Economics and the Environment—a group funded by Koch family foundations. The judges have claimed that the ruling was unaffected by their attendance. :smug
Quote
Ideas don’t happen on their own,” Matt Kibbe, the president of FreedomWorks, a Tea Party advocacy group, told me. “Throughout history, ideas need patrons.” The Koch brothers, after helping to create Cato and Mercatus, concluded that think tanks alone were not enough to effect change. They needed a mechanism to deliver those ideas to the street, and to attract the public’s support. In 1984, David Koch and Richard Fink created yet another organization, and Kibbe joined them. The group, Citizens for a Sound Economy, seemed like a grassroots movement, but according to the Center for Public Integrity it was sponsored principally by the Kochs, who provided $7.9 million between 1986 and 1993. Its mission, Kibbe said, “was to take these heavy ideas and translate them for mass America. . . . We read the same literature Obama did about nonviolent revolutions—Saul Alinsky, Gandhi, Martin Luther King. We studied the idea of the Boston Tea Party as an example of nonviolent social change. We learned we needed boots on the ground to sell ideas, not candidates.” Within a few years, the group had mobilized fifty paid field workers, in twenty-six states, to rally voters behind the Kochs’ agenda. David and Charles, according to one participant, were “very controlling, very top down. You can’t build an organization with them. They run it.

« Last Edit: August 23, 2010, 04:07:59 PM by Zero Hero »
©ZH

Beardo

  • Member
Quote
How can you defend this shit, Beardo? If these people had their way, we would all work for Koch. Earn credits to pay to rent your apartment from Koch and buy goods from the store Koch owned. You would own nothing in their world. The only way you could be rich would be if you were born into it.

What the fuck is wrong with you? You really think I wake up in the morning wishing for this shit? You're fucking distinguished mentally-challenged if that what you think conservatives actually want.

The rub is that YOU actually do want this exact garbage that you think you are against, only you give it a different name. Not with a corporation but with the government. You want a cradle to grave nanny-state where we all are not allowed to do anything without some kind of bureaucratic nightmare. Oh please, Mr. personal overseer can I scratch my ass? Oh, I need a form-77 before I can scratch my ass? Oh okay. You know what I do when I dont want to deal with a big corporation. I just stop using them. Thats it. It's actually very easy. How do you stop using government. You can't. You're dystopian nightmare is the exact thing that you are wishing for.




Positive Touch

  • Woo Papa
  • Senior Member
sometimes i think it's funny how dumdum libertarians think more government control means less freedom for the average person, when in actuality it just mostly means more restrictions for wealthy business owners
pcp

Dickie Dee

  • It's not the band I hate, it's their fans.
  • Senior Member
Quote
How can you defend this shit, Beardo? If these people had their way, we would all work for Koch. Earn credits to pay to rent your apartment from Koch and buy goods from the store Koch owned. You would own nothing in their world. The only way you could be rich would be if you were born into it.

What the fuck is wrong with you? You really think I wake up in the morning wishing for this shit? You're fucking distinguished mentally-challenged if that what you think conservatives actually want.

The rub is that YOU actually do want this exact garbage that you think you are against, only you give it a different name. Not with a corporation but with the government. You want a cradle to grave nanny-state where we all are not allowed to do anything without some kind of bureaucratic nightmare. Oh please, Mr. personal overseer can I scratch my ass? Oh, I need a form-77 before I can scratch my ass? Oh okay. You know what I do when I dont want to deal with a big corporation. I just stop using them. Thats it. It's actually very easy. How do you stop using government. You can't. You're dystopian nightmare is the exact thing that you are wishing for.





:lol

:-\

Where to even start
« Last Edit: August 23, 2010, 06:15:43 PM by Mamacint »
___

Mandark

  • Icon
In Beardo's mind:

Filling out forms = zomg dystopian nightmare!  :usacry

Irritation at filling out forms = rugged frontier rebelliousness!  :punch




Mind you I think that'd make for some terribly dull sci-fi, but whatever gets you going, man.

Van Cruncheon

  • live mas or die trying
  • Banned
but what does beardo do when the CORPORATIONS OWN THE GUBMINT
duc

Eric P

  • I DESERVE the gold. I will GET the gold!
  • Icon
In Beardo's mind:

Filling out forms = zomg dystopian nightmare!  :usacry

Irritation at filling out forms = rugged frontier rebelliousness!  :punch




Mind you I think that'd make for some terribly dull sci-fi, but whatever gets you going, man.

but...the unincorporated man!
Tonya

Mandark

  • Icon
The funny/sad thing is that there are some good points to be made against certain regulatory/licensing/zoning laws that are more trouble than they're worth.

But mostly what you hear are dumb, dogmatic rants like Beardo's.  Government is always bad and crushing your freedom with rules and regulation and it's terrible horrible awful and there's no benefit and wah wah wah.  It's just so silly.  How can you respond to that?

Brehvolution

  • Until at last, I threw down my enemy and smote his ruin upon the mountainside.
  • Senior Member
Quote
How can you defend this shit, Beardo? If these people had their way, we would all work for Koch. Earn credits to pay to rent your apartment from Koch and buy goods from the store Koch owned. You would own nothing in their world. The only way you could be rich would be if you were born into it.

What the fuck is wrong with you? You really think I wake up in the morning wishing for this shit? You're fucking distinguished mentally-challenged if that what you think conservatives actually want.

No, I don't think that is what you want. But it's exactly what the people who conservatives vote for want.
©ZH

Beardo

  • Member
How can you respond to that?

You cant and you wont.

My nightmare scenario of self sacrifice to the state exists on earth. Your corporation dystopian society does not and has never existed.

Beardo

  • Member
Oh I forgot Places like North Korea are probably "workers paradises" to you guys.

Mandark

  • Icon
What are you on about?

Beardo

  • Member
What's the corporatist equivalent to Pol Pot?


Koch?  :lol

Phoenix Dark

  • I got no game it's just some bitches understand my story
  • Senior Member
FoC redeemed
Quote
Are Ron and Rand Paul on opposite sides of the Cordoba House debate? Rand, running for Senate in Kentucky, has taken the standard GOP line on the project -- namely, it's up to New York officials to decide the project's fate, but personally he's against it. And now, in an extremely strongly-worded statement posted to his movement's website Friday, father Ron ripped into opponents of the Cordoba House project, saying that the rhetoric taking on the plan is clearly "all about hate and Islamaphobia."
http://tpmdc.talkingpointsmemo.com/2010/08/rand-vs-ron-cordoba-house-drives-wedge-through-the-paul.php?ref=fpb

:bow
010

Howard Alan Treesong

  • キング・メタル・ドラゴン
  • Icon
wow, uh, go Ron Paul?
乱学者

Mandark

  • Icon
Mandark: "I agree some regulation is an unnecessary hassle"

Beardo:  "But what about North Korea!"

 :wtf

Pop quiz!

Which of the following aspects of North Korea makes it a dystopian nightmare?

A)  Lack of a transparent and fair judiciary.
B)  Fiat rule with no legitimate electoral system or civil society institutions.
C)  Suppression of communication both within the country and internationally, including no free press.
D)  Use of the military to keep people trapped within the country.
E)  An inefficient and somewhat redundant bureaucracy.
F)  The fact that liberals love it so damn much.


Remember, there can be more than one answer!

ToxicAdam

  • captain of my capsized ship
  • Senior Member

But seriously, don't fall too hard for Voinovich.  He's all "Grrrr!  Deficits!" now, but he voted for the all the worst budget-busters of the Bush era (tax cuts, Iraq, Medicare Part D) and some of the medium-sized ones to boot.  If you really care about this stuff you shouldn't be letting him off the hook so easy.


Voinovich voted against the stimulus because of the way the money was spent, not the total sum itself.


Quote
Instead of funding federal responsibilities that are shovel-ready, like highways, sewers and housing, which would put people back to work quickly and the results of which would contribute to our nation's economic growth, this bill is filled with items that should be funded through the regular appropriations process and compete with other federal priorities in President Obama's budget request.

Said at the time of passing the stimulus bill. Not exactly the words of libertarian-esque Republican you like to pillory on the forum.


Mandark

  • Icon
Voinovich voted against the stimulus because of the way the money was spent, not the total sum itself.

Be honest now.  It was a bit of both, and you truncating the press release.

Quote
When the Senate voted recently on the non-stimulative spending bill, Sen. Voinovich expressed his disappointment that Congress and the president did not do the work the American people asked them to do: ensure that each and every dollar in this bill is focused on creating jobs, jump-starting the economy and responding to the human needs brought about by the deep recession our country is experiencing. The $789 billion spending package will add more than $1.1 trillion to the national debt over 10 years when interest is included. The Congressional Budget Office projects that this bill will push the deficits for 2009, 2010 and 2011 to well-over a trillion dollars on average. Because of this, the conference report raises the debt limit to an astounding $12.1 trillion compared to today’s already staggering debt of $9.85 trillion. When Sen. Voinovich came to the Senate in 1999, the debt was at $5.6 trillion – less than half of what it is soon to become. Sen. Voinovich said he voted against the bill because it is weighed down by too much spending that is not stimulative and will not provide the jump-start our economy so desperately needs. Instead of funding federal responsibilities that are shovel-ready, like highways, sewers and housing, which would put people back to work quickly and the results of which would contribute to our nation’s economic growth, this bill is filled with items that should be funded through the regular appropriations process and compete with other federal priorities in President Obama’s budget request. Alternatively, Sen. Voinovich worked closely with a group of Senate Republicans who hoped to forge a bipartisan compromise with the Democrats. This group identified roughly $300 billion in spending that arguably does not belong in this bill.

Anyways, when a Senator of either party says that spending on X will stimulate the economy better than spending on Y, my assumption (barring some solid wonkish evidence) is that X will simply funnel more dollars to their constituencies or pet projects.  Don't have any reason to assume Voinovich is uniquely scrupulous.

Phoenix Dark

  • I got no game it's just some bitches understand my story
  • Senior Member
http://www.votesmart.org/voting_category.php?can_id=21745&type=category&category=10&go.x=3&go.y=6

For the Bush tax cuts, Iraq war, medicare part D, etc.

yea...don't want to hear him talking about fiscal responsibility.
010

ToxicAdam

  • captain of my capsized ship
  • Senior Member
Because he voted for programs that are not initiated by Democrats, that is fiscally irresponsible?  Sure okay.

Quote
Anyways, when a Senator of either party says that spending on X will stimulate the economy better than spending on Y, my assumption (barring some solid wonkish evidence) is that X will simply funnel more dollars to their constituencies or pet projects

If this were true, than why would he say this?

Quote
this bill is filled with items that should be funded through the regular appropriations process and compete with other federal priorities in President Obama's budget request.

Which strikes me as amazingly prescient given what we know about the outcome of the stimulus bill today and it doesn't outrightly dismiss all the spending in the bill. He just thought that much of it was unnecessary, rushed spending that should have been done through the proper channels. It wasn't like Ohio was left out in the cold for this bill. 8.2 billion dollars was spent in the state. I don't even think that number factors in the potential high speed rail that may come our way. I don't think you would confuse Voinovich for Ben Nelson in terms of looking for a bigger handout.




« Last Edit: August 23, 2010, 11:05:06 PM by ToxicAdam »

AdmiralViscen

  • Murdered in the digital realm
  • Senior Member
How can you respond to that?

You cant and you wont.

My nightmare scenario of self sacrifice to the state exists on earth. Your corporation dystopian society does not and has never existed.

mediansalarylinegraph1980-2010.jpg
costoflivinglinegraph1980-2010.jpg
top2%incomelinegraph1980-2010.jpg

Phoenix Dark

  • I got no game it's just some bitches understand my story
  • Senior Member
Because he voted for programs that are not initiated by Democrats, that is fiscally irresponsible?  Sure okay.

No, because he voted for programs that exploded the deficit but now pretends to be a fiscal sage with a democrat in office.

Sherrod Brown has voted to increase the deficit many times but guess what, I don't care. He's not running around claiming to be something he's not.
010

Mandark

  • Icon
Because he voted for programs that are not initiated by Democrats, that is fiscally irresponsible?  Sure okay.

No, because he voted to spend lots more money while slashing revenues.  Are you saying those three items weren't fiscally irresponsible, on a very large scale?

Tristam

  • Member
Yea dude, you should be hip with the republican who's actually a serious man with respect to the budget: Paul Ryan.

What do you mean "serious"?

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/08/06/opinion/06krugman.html?_r=3&hp

Quote from: Krugman
Mr. Ryan’s plan calls for steep cuts in both spending and taxes. He’d have you believe that the combined effect would be much lower budget deficits, and, according to that Washington Post report, he speaks about deficits “in apocalyptic terms.” And The Post also tells us that his plan would, indeed, sharply reduce the flow of red ink: “The Congressional Budget Office has estimated that Rep. Paul Ryan’s plan would cut the budget deficit in half by 2020.”

But the budget office has done no such thing. At Mr. Ryan’s request, it produced an estimate of the budget effects of his proposed spending cuts — period. It didn’t address the revenue losses from his tax cuts.

The nonpartisan Tax Policy Center has, however, stepped into the breach. Its numbers indicate that the Ryan plan would reduce revenue by almost $4 trillion over the next decade. If you add these revenue losses to the numbers The Post cites, you get a much larger deficit in 2020, roughly $1.3 trillion.

And that’s about the same as the budget office’s estimate of the 2020 deficit under the Obama administration’s plans. That is, Mr. Ryan may speak about the deficit in apocalyptic terms, but even if you believe that his proposed spending cuts are feasible — which you shouldn’t — the Roadmap wouldn’t reduce the deficit. All it would do is cut benefits for the middle class while slashing taxes on the rich.

And I do mean slash. The Tax Policy Center finds that the Ryan plan would cut taxes on the richest 1 percent of the population in half, giving them 117 percent of the plan’s total tax cuts. That’s not a misprint. Even as it slashed taxes at the top, the plan would raise taxes for 95 percent of the population.


Finally, let’s talk about those spending cuts. In its first decade, most of the alleged savings in the Ryan plan come from assuming zero dollar growth in domestic discretionary spending, which includes everything from energy policy to education to the court system. This would amount to a 25 percent cut once you adjust for inflation and population growth. How would such a severe cut be achieved? What specific programs would be slashed? Mr. Ryan doesn’t say.

Mandark

  • Icon
One of my favorite things about political threads at the Bore:  PD joking and people taking him seriously, as a result of his dry delivery and somewhat dubious posting history.

huckleberry

  • Senior Member
First soldier killed after pullout:
http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2010/aug/22/us-soldier-killed-attack-iraq (ftp://http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2010/aug/22/us-soldier-killed-attack-iraq)

The interesting part of the article is the statement that Basra had seen an increase in rocket attacks in the weeks leading up to the American troop pullout - which flies in the face of the Pentagon & WH spokesfucks who were crawling all over TV claiming that Iraq was perfectly calm.


Thanks for the clusterfuck W.
wub

Beardo

  • Member
Mission Accomplished. again

Tristam

  • Member
One of my favorite things about political threads at the Bore:  PD joking and people taking him seriously, as a result of his dry delivery and somewhat dubious posting history.

Yeah, I'm not sure the entirety of PD's political analysis in 2008 consisted of mere trolling. If it did then he's the best troll ever.
« Last Edit: August 24, 2010, 09:33:56 AM by Tristam »

Oblivion

  • Senior Member
Liberals want North Korea?  You're making some pretty big assumptions here pal.

Wait, we don't?  ??? I voted* for the communist a-rab BECAUSE of promises of murder factories and mandatory sodomization laws. This isn't change I can believe in! :punch :punch

spoiler (click to show/hide)
didn't actually vote
[close]
« Last Edit: August 24, 2010, 02:27:59 PM by Oblivion »

Beardo

  • Member
Its the exact same argument as this garbage...


Quote
How can you defend this shit, Beardo? If these people had their way, we would all work for Koch. Earn credits to pay to rent your apartment from Koch and buy goods from the store Koch owned. You would own nothing in their world. The only way you could be rich would be if you were born into it.

 ...only my point has actually manifested while liberals continue to be alarmed of some kind of corporate boogie man that wants to put a barcode on your ass.

Mandark

  • Icon
So basically you're a conservative because the DMV leads inexorably to communism.  Got it!

Van Cruncheon

  • live mas or die trying
  • Banned
how did beardo miss the late 1800s usa
duc

Howard Alan Treesong

  • キング・メタル・ドラゴン
  • Icon
how did beardo miss the late 1800s usa

that's when we had all the railroad and steel barons, right
if capitalism is so bad, why are so many of our museums, theaters and art centers are named after those kind gentlemen? :smug

trickle-down culturenomics, kill the NEA

just thinking about 1890s economics is leading to some "vertical integration" ... IN MY PANTS
乱学者

Van Cruncheon

  • live mas or die trying
  • Banned
railroad barons, oil barons, steel barons, robber barons

really, it's all because the socialists got rid of the cotton barons :spin
duc

Brehvolution

  • Until at last, I threw down my enemy and smote his ruin upon the mountainside.
  • Senior Member
It's funny how they are trained to hate the socialism of Europe and Canada(disregarding the sharp increase in quality of life) never thinking that Europe has hundreds of more years of history. They've already been through this shit.
©ZH

Fresh Prince

  • a one-eyed cat peepin' in a seafood store
  • Senior Member
http://www.smh.com.au/world/new-yorkers-denounce-attack-on-muslim-taxi-driver-20100826-13t09.html

Quote
New Yorkers, including the city's mayor, and several national US organisations, have strongly condemned an attack on a taxi driver believed to have been targeted because he is a Muslim.
:spin
888

Boogie

  • The Smooth Canadian
  • Icon
http://www.smh.com.au/world/new-yorkers-denounce-attack-on-muslim-taxi-driver-20100826-13t09.html

Quote
New Yorkers, including the city's mayor, and several national US organisations, have strongly condemned an attack on a taxi driver believed to have been targeted because he is a Muslim.
:spin

I love that url.
MMA

Positive Touch

  • Woo Papa
  • Senior Member
bloomberg has been pretty vocal about keeping the "ground zero" mosque where it is
pcp

Mandark

  • Icon
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/08/25/AR2010082503562.html

David Broder slobbers all over John McCain.  Full text:
spoiler (click to show/hide)
John McCain, your country is calling

By David S. Broder
Thursday, August 26, 2010

Now that John McCain has taken care of his political business in Arizona, it is time for him to return to Washington and the responsibilities he bears as a leader of the Republican Party and the nation.

I did not begrudge him the $20 million he spent to win Tuesday's primary, or whatever amount it was. Nor was I bothered by the doctrinal compromises the senator made to convince Arizona voters that he was, in fact, a conservative. McCain has always been a realist, doing what was necessary to survive a North Vietnamese prison camp or a tough political trap. His 2000 embrace of George W. Bush -- a man he had every reason to dislike -- showed his practicality, and it made possible his own presidential nomination in 2008.

It was easy to root for McCain to turn back the challenge from former representative J.D. Hayworth and put himself in a position to win his fifth term in November. The last thing the Senate needs is a loudmouth ex-radio talk show host like Hayworth.

What it does need badly is adult leadership, and it's now incumbent on McCain to demonstrate that he is prepared to fulfill this role for both his party and his country.

After his defeat by Barack Obama, a man about whom he harbors many private reservations, McCain was entitled to step back and catch his breath rather than plunging into renewed political battle. When Hayworth popped up in Arizona, ambitious for the Senate seat, McCain was wise to take the threat seriously and respond forcefully.

But now, as the 73-year-old senator prepares for what may well be his final term in a congressional career that began in 1982, the time has come for McCain to look to his legacy -- and conditions are right.

In a Congress in which Democrats have pitiful approval ratings and Republicans even worse, McCain is one of the few names that does not draw instant contempt from the voters. The reputation he established for independence -- for being his own man, no matter what the pressures -- has survived the vagaries of an exceptionally long career.

That reputation is his ticket to influence, and a precious gift he can bestow on others, Republican or Democrat, who are willing to join him as a dysfunctional Senate prepares to struggle with a challenging agenda both domestic and foreign.

McCain need not muscle anyone out of the way to play the role for which he is uniquely fitted. He simply needs to set his own course and form his own ad hoc alliances, as he has always done, with a Tom Coburn on the right or a Russ Feingold on the left.

One of the conspicuous failings in the past few years has been the absence of a second party making principled decisions on when to support and when to oppose the president. McCain has the best opportunity -- and the best credentials -- to restore this.

He has almost complete political freedom -- a constituency that plainly will not punish him for following his own conscience. There is enough mutual respect between him and the president that McCain's support will be welcomed by the White House and his opposition understood.

It is up to McCain to choose when and how to exert the influence he commands, not just as a senior senator but as a man whom millions were prepared to support as chief executive in two campaigns.

One obvious area where he will be needed is his favorite field, national security. Iraq, where he was prescient and persistent, still poses challenges, and Afghanistan, where Obama badly needs a Republican partner, is likely to be in crisis before it can be called a success. Behind them looms Iran, which could be this nation's next big test.

Hardly less important is the role McCain can play within his own party. In Arizona, he successfully steered the GOP away from an experiment in extremism. He needs to do this nationally as well, including taking a potentially influential role in shaping the choice of the next presidential nominee.

A load of work -- but John McCain has never shirked.
[close]

It's like a parody of all the things lefties don't like about Broder and the beltway press' treatment of pols like McCain.

Howard Alan Treesong

  • キング・メタル・ドラゴン
  • Icon
I, for one, cannot believe all this hate speech is leading to hate crimes. :o

America is about freedom of speech, not freedom of crime!* :maf

How could we have know that the continual vituperative vilification of a minority would lead to this? ???

spoiler (click to show/hide)
* For citizens making under $500,000 / year  :tophat
[close]
« Last Edit: August 26, 2010, 02:56:52 PM by Howard Alan Treesong »
乱学者


Brehvolution

  • Until at last, I threw down my enemy and smote his ruin upon the mountainside.
  • Senior Member
Like clockwork.
©ZH

Eric P

  • I DESERVE the gold. I will GET the gold!
  • Icon
whew

i was concerned there wouldn't be a way for beardo's posse to actually be the victim in this case but it appears as though he was able to pull out a win at the last minute
Tonya

Beardo

  • Member
Ohhhhh yeah, thats right. I forgot hate crimes are only against minorities.

Fresh Prince

  • a one-eyed cat peepin' in a seafood store
  • Senior Member
pretty sure the tea party is a minority
888

Brehvolution

  • Until at last, I threw down my enemy and smote his ruin upon the mountainside.
  • Senior Member
Typical conservative response, falsely equivocate. Threatening voicemails is the same as physically attacking a muslim cab driver and going into a mosque and pissing on everything.  Same shit guys. I can't believe this has to be pointed out.
©ZH

Howard Alan Treesong

  • キング・メタル・ドラゴン
  • Icon
Quote
"You guys better watch it," says one caller. "Now, we are going to destroy and obliterate Rush [limbaugh] and Sean Hannity," said another. "Those two guys are dead."

terrifying  :omg

imagine what caliber bullets they must be packing if they think they can put a dent in Rush Limbaugh :omg
乱学者

Oblivion

  • Senior Member
The only thing worse than committing a hate crime is threatening someone about committing a hate crime. /breitbart

pretty sure the tea party is a minority

ha!
« Last Edit: August 26, 2010, 07:40:48 PM by Oblivion »

The Fake Shemp

  • Ebola Carrier
Quote
"You guys better watch it," says one caller. "Now, we are going to destroy and obliterate Rush [limbaugh] and Sean Hannity," said another. "Those two guys are dead.

This is like the least menacing and most well-spoken death threat ever. :lol
PSP

AdmiralViscen

  • Murdered in the digital realm
  • Senior Member
"You guys better watch it" is definitely exactly the same as a leading national figure using crosshairs to denote competitive races.

Beardo

  • Member
Typical conservative response, falsely equivocate. Threatening voicemails is the same as physically attacking a muslim cab driver and going into a mosque and pissing on everything.  Same shit guys. I can't believe this has to be pointed out.

Muslims: blowing up subways and flying planes into buildings.
Non-muslims: urinating on stuff.


Clearly the muslims are the victims.

Dickie Dee

  • It's not the band I hate, it's their fans.
  • Senior Member
Beardo: All Muslims are terrorists and deserve to be pissed on.

Honestly, whose joke account is this?
___

Brehvolution

  • Until at last, I threw down my enemy and smote his ruin upon the mountainside.
  • Senior Member
Again with the typical conservative response.

Typical conservative response, falsely equivocate. Threatening voicemails is the same as physically attacking a muslim cab driver and going into a mosque and pissing on everything.  Same shit guys. I can't believe this has to be pointed out.

Muslims: blowing up subways and flying planes into buildings. Cause
Non-muslims: urinating on stuff. Effect

Clearly the muslims are the victims.
If only you could take 1 more step back and find out what was the cause to make 9/11 the effect. Or do you really think they did it because they were just bored that day?
©ZH

Phoenix Dark

  • I got no game it's just some bitches understand my story
  • Senior Member
Typical conservative response, falsely equivocate. Threatening voicemails is the same as physically attacking a muslim cab driver and going into a mosque and pissing on everything.  Same shit guys. I can't believe this has to be pointed out.

Muslims: blowing up subways and flying planes into buildings.
Non-muslims: urinating on stuff.


Clearly the muslims are the victims.

I don't think FoC ever made a post this dumb
010


Brehvolution

  • Until at last, I threw down my enemy and smote his ruin upon the mountainside.
  • Senior Member
 :lol
Quote

-- Opposition to the most radical redefinition of marriage in human history, as expressed in Proposition 8 in California? Homophobia.

-- Opposition to a 15-story Islamic center and mosque near Ground Zero? Islamophobia.

Standing up for the freedoms of individuals is a liberal trait!

:smug
©ZH