Here, have a nice comic that explains the situation in Lake Erie.
When I was a kid, Lake Erie was a joke: it was a polluted cesspool with rivers that caught on fire. Places like Erie and Love Canal were the punchlines of a national sense of disgust with abuse of the environment, and amazingly, people got together and changed things: new tighter regulations, clean up of the worst cases (well, that was begun but never finished), and in general, we saw a reduction in pollution around the country.
Then…fucking Ronald fucking Reagan fucking fucked everything up. Trees cause pollution. Regulation is bad for the economy. And every Republican since has followed the same script, right up to “drill baby drill”. Even the Democrats are getting in the act.
And the end result is that everything is turning to shit again.
Super rich, self-interested feudalists ruin it for everyone.
The weirdest thing about St. Reagan to me his how much he was changed in general revisionist history of many conservatives today. He was awful in his own right, definitely but it’s even more bizarre when he’s invoked in the current political discourse. Gone are the scandals with Iran or the Contras, gone are the tax increases, gone is the amnesty for immigrants, gone is the immense rise in deficit. In the real Reagan’s stead stands some kind of holy economic and moral messiah and everything he touched turned to gold. A demigod who, of course, would agree with the current brand of Tea Partiers on pretty much everything and never did anything they would hate today’s politicians for. Appealing to Reagan is kind of meaningless when you make him this malleable , when this empty shell is employed merely to say “I am right because (my interpretation of) Reagan would agree with me”.
Americans are actually far more environmentally conscious than the media or politicians like to pretend. It’s one of the many complete failures of the corporate media that makes environmentalism be considered politically ‘extreme’ or weird in any fashion.
@2 – “The weirdest thing about St. Reagan to me his how much he was changed in general revisionist history of many conservatives today. ” It’s not weird, it was a strategy – aided and abetted by gutless Democrats.
Reagan also happens to benefit because Bush was so much worse. (Something those of us who were experienced Reagan first-hand would not have thought possible.)
One of Reagan’s VERY FIRST first acts after taking office was to remove the solar panels Carter had farsightedly put on the White House. http://usgovinfo.about.com/od/thepresidentandcabinet/tp/History-of-White-House-Solar-Panels.htm Imagine how much better off we would be right now if we had had more democratic presidents with far-sighted environmental and energy aims.
Also, Rick Perlstein (a respected historian of conservativism) is currently the target of a smear campaign over his new book about the Reagan era. Everyone should buy it. http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/books/2014/08/rick_perlstein_s_book_on_reagan_the_invisible_bridge_reviewed.html
@saganite 2:
Reagan would never be able to be elected to the Republican party nowadays.
Did Reagan specifically have something to do with inhibiting Lake Erie clean-up, phosphate control, or the wider Great Lakes Initiative? His anti-government rhetoric was definitely unhelpful, as were the nutcases he appointed to various positions (e.g. James Watt), but I’m curious if there’s some direct relationship here.
One good thing about Reagan, when he saw a problem he would come up with a solution. So, trees cause pollution? Let’s fix that:
I think, too, that we’ve got to recognize that where the preservation of a natural resource like the redwoods is concerned, that there is a common sense limit. I mean, if you’ve looked at a hundred thousand acres or so of trees—you know, a tree is a tree, how many more do you need to look at?
Ronald Reagan, Mar 12, 1966
Just after his death, I was hired to do research for someone who was trying to write a book on Reagan.
Rather than having me research what actually happened, the guy just wanted me to find cases where Reagan demonstrated the principles that this guy claimed Reagan had shown as a “great leader.” It quickly became apparent to me that having my name associated with this book wasn’t going to do me any sort of favors at all, so I bailed.
-I call bullshit on this. This was done in Reagan’s SECOND term. Also, there is a fairly good (but poorly edited) conservative book criticizing Reagan’s complacency on the U.S. budget deficit- it’s called The Great Deformation and I’m reading it right now. It’s by Reagan’s former budget director, so he knows what he’s criticizing.
http://www.jimmycarterlibrary.gov/newsreleases/2007/07-19.pdf
This one is overblown to the point of being a myth. The panels (solar water heaters, actually) were removed for roof renovation. And then when the roof was finished, new panels weren’t installed. As far as I know, Reagan wasn’t personally involved in the decision making. I guess he could have ordered new panels put up there, but then again so could the three presidents who succeeded him before Obama.
Kevin @ 6. Reagan would most certainly still be able to be elected to the Republican party today, you clearly underestimate Ronnie’s sleazability to adapt.
It doesn’t appear that the Reagan administration (especially Reagan’s second term) was particularly bad for Lake Erie.
http://newswatch.nationalgeographic.com/files/2013/04/Untitled.jpg
Remember Reagan’s second term? Yeah, neither did he.
Like the way you expressed your disgust for Ronny Raygun Professor Myers. From the time he was elected I despised what he stood for/stood against–with much of that toxic political residue filtering down through the the past 35 years, influencing (more accurately, poisoning) the political, social, scientific and environmental areas to this day. If only we could turn back the clock and try again
(I was always pleased that his namesake’s articulate son, Ron Reagan, (as well as sister Patty), turned out to be pretty progressive.)
Which is of course completely irrelevant to the point being made: that today’s right drastically misrepresents Reagan’s actions.
Actually, it appears from your link that Reagan’s presidency was when things stopped improving for Lake Erie. But you are again demonstrating your matchless ability to miss the point, which is that Reagan, in the service of his and your rich ideological masters, launched the ignorant and destructive attack on environmentalism that has been pursued by the right ever since, culminating in anthropogenic climate change denialism.
as a Californian I loathed him way before he ran for president.
we are just now barely starting back to where we were before he was governor.
He sounded good if you watched him make a speech on the TV but the same speech on the radio sounded like some kind of fantasy world he was describing strangest thing I ever experienced.
uncle frogy
Dude, you have VERY poor reading comprehension, and this I have noted before I think.
look back on the original post.
where does PZ blame Reagan for the pollution of Lake Eerie?
nowhere.
now then, tell me, before I dismiss you forever for being a complete putz, DOES PZ blame Reagan for?
be specific. Even quote him if you like.
after that, tell me what point PZ was making by using the example of Lake Eerie.
I swear, you must have failed English.
The goal set by various initiatives back in the early ’70s, or perhaps by the EPA, was 11,000 tons of phosphate loading per year, down from the ~25,000 that was common before that. I’m still not sure who all was involved. But that goal was met, and it made a vast difference in the livability and fisheries of Lake Erie. It’s a major environmental success story, and we shouldn’t forget it. Regulation works. But that was the level that was determined and has been (mostly) adhered to since.
Now we’re in a situation where maybe we need to set the loadings lower. And the usual assholes will of course object, because they place their own short-term benefit above the long-term public good. But this whole Reagan-hating thing is weird. I still can’t see what he had to do with it specifically. I already tried asking what exactly that was, and thus far no one has given a clear answer.
Yes of course. The title of the tread was, “Did I ever tell you how much I despise Ronald Reagan?”, and the grievance that prompted this was the pollution of Lake Erie, but just how crazy could anyone be to assume that he was making a connection between the two? Totally out of nowhere, wasn’t it?
Adding to the above, the whole reason why all this Reagan, Reagan, Reagan shit gets old is that Reagan is dead and he has virtually nothing to do with what people my age care about. I’m old enough to vaguely remember Reagan’s reelection, and my grandmother’s huge disappointment in the result (she was a loud and unapologetic FDR Democrat). Which is to say that I straddle the Gen-X and Millennial arbitrary divide, an age group for whom Reagan is mostly an abstraction.
Really, Reagan? I despise the Republican Party because of the whole Gingrich/GWBush era of Republican politics. That is what people my age really grew up with. And this is why Millennials have voted for team-D by a roughly 2-1 ratio. The Republicans have no idea how devastating this will be for them in the decades to come. Good.
But there are environmental problems to deal with. Serious ones. Not because of Ray-gun, not directly at least, but because of what Republicans do right now, and they suck. And I still have no idea what this had to do with Lake Erie, other than the fact that the solution will have to be something that we all agree on rationally, and yet Republicans will probably still oppose it, and that is what we need to fight. Not the ghost of some long-dead asshole.
Maybe PZ could clarify but I interpret it more as saying that Reagan brought the “small government anti-regulation, anti-environment” streak to the forefront in the Republican party, which they’ve been riding high on in the last decades. Reagan may not have done so much directly in regards to today’s issues (or to the issue of Lake Erie), but he certainly influenced the direction politics would take. Namely, a very, very bad direction.
yes, it was, if you didn’t even bother to actually read what was written.
like you did, you fucking putz.
please don’t. It’s obvious you haven’t got the slightest clue what you’re talking about.
yes, you fucking putz, really:
http://www.laprogressive.com/2008/09/11/blame-ronald-reagan-for-our-current-economic-crisis/
http://tpzoo.wordpress.com/2009/02/05/krugman-reagan-deregulation-lead-to-economic-crisis/
http://www.slate.com/id/2101842/
go figure, actions have repercussions. some of them long lasting.
why do people like you INSIST on being ignorant of history?
why?
Gee, you sure seem miffed about that.
I don’t think you should attribute your own ignorance and thoughtlessness to your contemporaries in general. My experience is that many of them are capable of understanding that even things that happened before they were born may still be of significance.
I fucking hate conclusions based on poor reading comprehension. I’m very glad you comprehended that in reading my comment.
*pats head*
@ Ichthyic
-No; you do.
PZ:
-A crystal fucking clear statement, in my opinion.
-If you mean I “got a 5 on the A.P. English Language exam”, then yes, I did fail English.
@ Area Man #21
-Exactly.
@NG #16
-Is David Stockman a part of “today’s right”? Yes. Does he “drastically misrepresent Reagan’s actions”? No. Not all of “today’s right” “drastically misrepresents Reagan’s actions”.
-Nope; look at the last two years of his presidency.
Also, Ichthyic, one of your links doesn’t work and another has a video that doesn’t load.
Environmental policies forwarded by the Reagan administration that are directly contributory to where we are now would include:
– an executive order eliminating price control on oil and gas
– gutting DOE funding for renewable energy sources by 85%
– eliminating tax breaks for wind turbines & solar technologies
– rolling back fuel efficiency standards for automobiles
– deliberately fostering and expanding the coal industry
This is a FAR from exhaustive list, and quite separate from his clownhornery on social and economic policy.
@irishup
Thanks for the list.
-A good policy decision. That way, gas prices could return to realistic levels.
-The results of these policy decisions are uncertain. It’s not at all clear that tax breaks & subsidies would create significant efficiency increases for renewable energy.
-Two very, very bad things which increased air pollution (though I don’t see how water pollution was significantly affected).
Wow, most ironic internet statement of the week.
Enopoletus Harding 10
No there isn’t. Largely because the right’s obsession with deficits has nothing to do with economic best practices and never has.
Area Man#19
You already gave a pretty succinct answer when you first asked the question:
That’s the tip of the iceberg, but covers the gist of it; he appointed anti-government, anti-environment religious wackos and corporate shills to control of agencies intended to do things like regulate the environment and corporate malfeasance, slashed budgets for same, and thus paved the way for the rampant plundering of the commons and financial chicanery that has characterized the last 40 years in the U.S.
And Reagan paved the way for that too; both those assholes got their start as political players under Reagan, Bush as Veep and Gingrich as an ally in Congress. (Incidentally, I’m of the same age group where that shaped my political views, but I have a thing called a sense of history, and am capable of understanding why the things that led to that state of affairs are still significant).
Wrong Bush. I think Jr’s first foray into politics was weaseling out of the Texas ANG so he could work on his father’s presidential campaign. I’m sure someone will correct me, though.
rossthompson, George HW Bush was Reagan’s veep. And he – while perhaps not as dramatic as his soon – has some pretty gross views.
2. saganite 6 August 2014 at 8:17 am
“The weirdest thing about St. Reagan to me his how much he was changed in general revisionist history of many conservatives today”.
Isn’t it interesting that many politicians get the historical revision to fit either parties way of saying the one is better than the other. Forget the fact that voting on the individual and what s/he stands for should be the real reason to vote for that person.
“He was awful in his own right definitely”
Unfortunately, I was in Junior high when he started his first term and I was ignorant to politics as my dad told me “don’t talk about politics or religion, you’ll only get into arguments”. which baffled me because how does one figure out what they believe in/stand for without having civil discourse on the matter. Although in my opinion Alec Baldwin (a very good actor) is a nut job on his political views. At least his dad sat down with the brothers and discussed current events and then let them make up their own mind.
“but it’s even more bizarre when he’s invoked in the current political discourse.
“Gone are the scandals with Iran or the Contras, gone are the tax increases”
well, right now we have a POTUS
“gone is the amnesty for immigrants,”
How many immigrants have gone in during Reagans’ two terms as apposed to Obamas or George JR? This is a question out of ignorance, not for argument sake, I did not follow politics in the eighties as I was in junior high and high school. I was into sports and the usual “guy things” at that time.
“gone is the immense rise in deficit”. Hmm not sure about this one. Fanny Mae and Freddie Mac where “everyone deserves the RIGHT to own their own home”, even if they can’t afford it. Of course the two wars of George JR the war monger. didn’t help. “weapons of mass destruction”. Hmm let’s think, N. Korea does and flaunts that fact, oh yea they don’t have oil. otherwise USA troops would be right there and that “Pillsbury dough boy” of a leader would be gone.
“In the real Reagan’s stead stands some kind of holy economic and moral messiah and everything he touched turned to gold”.
Well, looking back Reagan was much better than Carter, we didn’t have the oil problems (it seemed) with Reagan that we did with Carter. But at the time the contrast of leadership was just that big. So yes, people capitalized on that and made him out to be the “one of the greatest president of the twentieth century”. He of course had flaws. just like V.P. “No new taxes”. an of course that had nothing to do with not being re-elected? yup just like today they do it loop a statement that came back to bite him in the (pick your spot).
A demigod who, of course, would agree with the current brand of Tea Partiers on pretty much everything and never did anything they would hate today’s politicians for. Appealing to Reagan is kind of meaningless when you make him this malleable ,
“when this empty shell is employed merely to say “I am right because (my interpretation of) Reagan would agree with me”.”.
Yes, now that he is dead anyone can say that “Reagan would agree with me”. because he isn’t alive to rebuff that delusional statement.
I hope this comes across as being genuine and not rude. I am ignorant in many aspects of politics. George JR is the reason I changed to independent. I am tired of the “lesser of two evils” It seems neither DNC nor RNC will do anything but keep their wallets fat. At least most of them.
Ops I hit the wrong key!
“Gone are the scandals with Iran or the Contras, gone are the tax increases”
well, right now we have a POTUS who is in my opinion a socialist Marxist and his parents were “allegedly” out spoken communists so that played a factor in the molding of his mind, as well as him “sitting 20 years under a “black theology teacher”. He wants to take from the rich and give to the rest. Well that isn’t how USA is supposed to work. Capitalism, in all its imperfections is still the best way. Of course that isn’t why all the people from other countries are coming here. This is a Republic (or used to be) The presidents from Clinton have gotten worse and I can’t wait for this POTUS to leave, he wasted FOUR years trying to force a bill down the throats of all Americans that 80% didn’t want. Oh cash for clunkers? really? and how did that go? bailing out the car companies who could have filed a particular bankruptcy that would allow the to re-organize? I don’t get this dudes way of thinking. The tenth amendment was put in the constitution for a reason. If congress would pass a bill that would allow people to shop for health insurance across state lines like car insurance, the cost would be very competitive and not have the government tell every company what they must cover. This dude is treasonous just like his Predecessor, but obviously for different reasons. sorry if I have gone of point I have a little add and get fired up a little. don’t take anything I say personally. I am human just like everyone else. If I happen to be wrong I can handle that, and being pointed out, but be respectful and please for my knowledge have references?
So why is BHO letting that Marine sit in a Mexican jail? is he too busy golfing or fundraising? A true leader would never let this happen.
What.
jmzsil
While we are not, at present, able to find a place in our magazine for your work (returned enclosed), we would urge you to continue trying. Authors willing to take such new bold directions in the Fantasy genre are few and far between, and we feel that, with practice, yours might be a valuable talent.
This seems relevant:
http://www.theonion.com/articles/embarrassed-republicans-admit-theyve-been-thinking,19248/
Quick, to the googles… “marine jail mexico”, lets see.
Well, that’s easy. He’s in jail, because he broke the fucking law. Wow, who would have seen that coming? And the media opinion seems to be that he’ll be out soon anyway. Too bad he won’t actually face any punishment for illegally transporting loaded firearms across international borders, because that kind of criminal behavior needs to be stopped. Why the hell would the POTUS be expected to do something? A “true leader” wouldn’t circumvent the law to aid a criminal.
“well, right now we have a POTUS who is in my opinion a socialist Marxist ” Proof positive that you have no fucking idea what you are talking about or what those words mean.
And here we have proof that jmzsil is a brain dead Tea Party troll.
And a rather incompetent one. Jmzsil left out Kenyan, Moslem, terrorist and UFO alien.
Ummm….what does the second sentence have to do with the first? Or anything at all? The complaints against Reagan are PRECISELY about what he stood for, so…..
Sports and the usual guy things, huh? Don’t tell me you are on those people? The toxic masculinity kind of people?
That doesn’t have to do with the federal deficit….
lolwut? That is the worse definition of “better” I have ever seen.
Oh god. No. Just no.
My dog whistle sense is tingling.
One, no he doesn’t. Two, even if he did, what is so wrong about that? Especially considering how obscenely rich the rich really are in this country?
Citation needed.
Serious Business.
You tell me. It might not have been a major help, and there is mixed interpretation of its effects, but most say that it was a net benefit.
STATES RIGHTS!1!!1!
Do you have any evidence for this either?
Treasonous? Because of fucking health care reform? Get a fucking grip.
Be less passionately and confidently wrong if you don’t want to deal with harsh criticism.
Yes, that is what I was pointing out. Not George W Bush, as the person I replied to impled.
Like saying that atheists shouldn’t be considered citizens, for example.
he wasted FOUR years trying to force a bill down the throats of all Americans that 80% didn’t want.
You know that to get close to that 80% (but not all the way there), you have to include people who think it doesn’t go far enough, right? Polls consistantly shows that 60%-75% of people wanted reform, with a single-payer system being the most popular option.
And if you ask people about each individual feature of the ACA, they overwhelmingly think every one is a good idea, and should be implemented, even if they think that the ACA itself is CommieNazi socialism.
But because we can’t come up with a law that the Republicans can’t convince people to dislike on the grounds that it was proposed by a
blackDemocratic president, we have to stick with the same broken system that’s caused so much pain?Quick! Somebody tell jmzsil about colonialism and the process of decolonisation.
It did, after all, begin with 13 colonies somewhere near him. It was still in progress in the 1960s and I’m pretty sure the late parents of President Obama were aware, perhaps even well-informed about it. As was just about everyone with a working brain.
So, a person grows up with well-informed people about him and that makes him a one-man evil empire. On which planet?
Point of fact, I think the original reference was not to Dubya, but to his father. Because the current clusterfuck got started under Reagan, with Bush and Gingrich as two of his foot soldiers.
Well, lets go see, shall we?
Area Man @21:
that has FUCK ALL TO DO WITH LAKE EERIE ITSELF, you damn fuckwit.
The statement is detailing the ATTITUDES that were changed because of Reagan’s antienvironmental policies, hirings, and public statements.
funny, Saganite, right after you posted, was not at all unclear on what PZ actually said. You however, are fucking doubling down on your stupidity.
way to go, champ.
you wouldn’t know irony if it frenched your mother.
what does it matter? you’re not going to read or comprehend them anyway.
I do believe that Dalilama’s original reference was to HW.
I read the conversation as:
“The problem started with Dubya.”
“No, it predates him – look at his father’s shenanigans.”
Well, let’s look at that conversation in its original words:
So what you are saying is “Gingrich/GWBush” were mentored by HW B. Hmm not surprised. The Bush duo is both a Skull and Bones member. Not sure if that plays well in this reply as I am still waking up. Saturdays,
Esteleth is Groot: sorry I have ADD and some other things that make my mind scramble. I also have been diagnosed with tourettes. Not looking for sympathy, just respect, I appreciate the “what”? from you, (which I probably would have now that I read it a day later. Yes I can wonder about myself at times) over the lady telling me about writing fantasy. I wrote in my “Bio” or whatever it is called that I had already read some stuff and there are people that just blow up and call people names(they are physically adults, but can a person agree to disagree?) instead of speaking with civil discourse. Wow, I am on disability and I can treat people better that. Some of the people on this chat board, I get freedom of speech, yet the language is very interesting in some of these comments. Of course(with bi-polar and tourrettes) I could stoop to the level of those who spew hatred at me, but I am not a fan of that. I would rather read it as humor when pointed at me. Or maybe take notes? Start a science fiction book? ; ) have a great weekend
jmzsil #56
(Not a lady, by the way.)
Just to be clear, my accusation that you were writing fantasy had nothing to do with your prose-style. It had everything to do with your contentions, especially those regarding Obama’s political leanings.
Daz: Experiencing A Slight Gravitas Shortfall: I am sure that was sarcasm, but I am researching for a concept I have for writing non-fiction, it could be “Fantasy genre”, Can you let me know what classes to take so I can polish my vernacular? My writing is usually better than my speaking because of my ADD and tourrettes. Because of this “gift” I have a limited filter and it doesn’t usually bother me when I rebuff someone, it is only when I offend someone I care about.
Of course not all of my points can be refuted. BHO has played golf more than just about all of the presidents in the twentieth century, and who is going to get the Marine out of that slime ball of a jail in Mexico. I could mention a few more but I don’t want to waste no more time (for you of course)
Nice to know I’m not the only sarcastic know-it-all (as my step mom used to tell me)in this world.
Have a great Weekend. I do not take what you said personally,(I watch MSLSD I mean MSNBC.) Totally dig Rachael Maddow. dug her two exclusives “Why We Went” & “Why We Stayed” Had an Idea why but wow. That was a great piece she did.).Of course I hope you don’t take all I say personally, I can be wrong but just like many guys don’t like to admit it. I am just having fun. So If you are the master sarcasm? That’s o.k. I welcome your humor. British humor, what is your take?
microraptor: Thanks for the link! I have heard of theonion.com but never knew much about it. I think I should read this one.
jmzsil #58
(Call me Daz; it’s easier.)
So he likes golf. Is this illegal? Immoral?
He committed a crime in Mexico. Mexico has both the legal and moral rights to incarcerate him.
You did. Especially amusing and fantastical was the contention that Obama is in any way a Marxist. In fact, I’m thinking of popping off to London to attach a dynamo to Marx’s coffin. I reckon you’ve given it enough spin to power half of England’s homes for a good six months.
I keep getting told British humour is different, but I’ve never worked out in what way. (I’m British, by the way.)
Dave Ex-Kwisatz haderach: DO YOU PAY ATTENTION TO THE NEWS? This MARINE didn’t see a sign b/c it was not properly placed. He is NOT the only one to have this happen. The President can ohhh delegate? or isn’t there someone in a position to handle this ten minute situation? CRIMINAL BEHAVIOR? really? and all presidents since Reagan who have signed illegals as automatic citizens should not have been punished? He wouldn’t circumvent the law? he already has! just like his predecessor! and as opposed to all the ones who cross the border at night to avoid detection from mexico and the other south American countries? really? could you just go find a dry land bridge and take a nose dive? Ha ha just giving back to you. I find you humorous. my tourrettes is AWSOME along with my bi-polar I can out run smack on just about anyone. Have a awesome week end I am positive you do deserve it. **Scooby doo giggle**
Oh no I just seen a coffee mug for “I MISS W”…. are they kidding? and Hannity saying “W was a GOOD man”. pasha! I almost spit out my water. what a tool.
Fredrick sparks that’s o.k. you just need to get back on your meds. I take mine so I can tolerate people like you. You know there is such a thing as the FIRST AMENDMENT I have a right to my opinion. If you can prove me wrong try civil discourse or don’t reply to me. I will only ignore you.
raven I am a independent waiting for the Constitutionparty.com to be a viable party in my state. the only one I trust now. the other two are both crooked. remember what happens when you ASS U ME? yes I told it the truth.
This is a rude blog asshole. And you are being one, starting with you are wrong until you evidence yourself right. Which you haven’t done. So you are ignored as an ignorant over opinionated fuckwit. And you prove it with each incoherent post.
jmzsil
Please do not use mental health issues, the insinuation of mental health issues or the possibility of mental health issues as a slur, either directly or by implication.
Anyone who thinks Obama is a Marxist is someone who can be safely ignored because they’re fucking ignorant about both Obama and Marxism.
Googled the incident. Others who have also been arrested on gun charges by Mexico thought registering with the US customs was the same as registering with the Mexican side. Stupid. Don’t feel sorry for any of them.
anteprepro: ewww no thanks I call those kinds especially the pro body builder(or the wish they were) juice bitches. I will never put anything like that in my body. right now I am not even taking protein powder of course I just started working out 3 wks ago after a 20 YEAR layoff. Yes I worked 2 jobs for 80% of my adult life. I didn’t use crazy chemicals then and I sure as hell am not going to start now.
fannie may and Freddie mac had NOTHING to do with our economic situation? maybe not the majority of it but it didn’t help. and yes putting enough house keys into the hands of those who were not qualified is stupid and was part of the 2008 situation. period. anyone who replies to this particular statement will not be replied to so don’t waste my time.
THE RICH ARE RICH BECAUSE OF THE IRS LOOPHOLES YOU IMBACIL that is why and for you to say what is wrong with that, smack yourself maybe the “Marbles” in your dome will get organized just a little better than now?
A “net benefit” is relative. if it’s 20% and they lost half a billion on the idea what net benefit is that? why should the rich have 50% or more taken from them just b/c they have the ability talent and leadership abilities to make the money. it is not right to take their money just because? I’m on disability (only three years, too long) but I hate how our government is getting too big, the tenth amendment states the federal government is to be limited, and the affordable health care act is a private sector thing, the government gets involved and it becomes socialism. Fact. look at Canada I know four people two still there and a married couple who live in my state the 2 in CA said you never know what DR you will see. the two here say the system at the time (2007) was much better.
“treasonous” not b/c of health care necessarily but other actions or the lack there of. Bengazi? if GW told his staff I am going to bed tell me what happens in the morning, people would call for his head. I may be at a disadvantage due to my dad never involving me in current events and the mainstream media well don’t know what to say. Faux news ehh cnn maybe msnbc sometimes.
not against “constructive criticism”. I obviously am behind the curve here. but that is why I am here so I can learn. replying with links and letting me know why I am wrong with civil discourse would be very helpful. I try to be nice but It isn’t about the criticism as much as it is when people are rude. so If I say something out of ignorance then please, correct me, occasionally or if it is too much of your time than you surely can ignore me, I won’t be offended about that, I grew up with sisters.
ross Thompson: Please put your race card away! I am not saying no one is thinking that way Most of the time the DNC and RNC argue for argument sake, pretty sad yes?
I totally agree with you on the broken system, however just like car insurance, we should be able to go to different states and see what the other companies offer. people get a group of family members/friends and look at the options for those who work for someone who doesn’t offer insurance. If that was a reality then the cost of insurance would be affordable for a lot more for then and now. remember nothing is free someone has to pay for what anyone gets for free. I am on disability (begrudgingly) I used to work 2 jobs 80% of my life so if that isn’t an emasculating feeling. but I still pay a premium each month for my doctor visits and prescriptions. doctor visits only cover 80% can be good for a physical but major surgery? glad I am healthy.
I hope I am not coming across rude or disrespectful I try not to. some other people on here are either sarcastic or down right rude. but that could be a reflection on their upbringing. I’ll blame all my meanness on my alcoholic step-mom. ; ) have a excellent weekend.
Maureen brian I live in the Midwest so I my state is not even close to the original 13. nice try.
rossthompson
Hrrm. Possibly Area Man’s historical ignorance is greater than I thought; Gingrich didn’t do anything during GW’s term to compare with what he did during the first Bush presidency, so the specific mention of Gingrich led me to assume that the missing H was a typo. If Area Man was referring to the second president Bush and his cronies, I’d have expected a name like Cheney or Boehner to be associated with his.
jmzsil
raven I am a independent waiting for the Constitutionparty.com to be a viable party in my state.
It’s cute how you think this makes you look less of an idiot.
Daz: Sir my sincere apologizes on the lady part
I am fine with your not liking my view on BHO but I do not like his views the way he conducts business how he carries himself. I do not hate him, that is a wasted energy but I do not like things he has said or done since he started as POTUS. I will not give references I am an Independent. George JR helped me with that decision in his first term. so with that have a great weekend.
@Dalillama
Really? Look at their core principles.
http://www.constitutionparty.com/our-principles/seven-principles/
Over half of them on their face ludicrous, and the other half are probably understood in a similarly bad way too.
1- No abortion rights. No assisted suicide.
2- Freedom of conscience, aka probably in support of Hobby Lobby decision.
3- No gay marriage. No gay adoption. As commanded by god.
4- Absolute private property rights. EL: Bullshit. We need wealth redistribution programs, including heavier progressive taxation and very heavier estate taxes.
5- Interpreting the constitution according to actual intent of the founders. EL: Maybe yes? I bet they have a particular bullshit interpretation ala Scalia.
6- Big up for federalism. EL: I guess they’re on the right side legally, but IMHO federalism is overrated as a desired legal principle.
7- Oh yeah, immigrants are bad, close the borders, and the rest of that xenophobia bullshit.
@Dalillama
Oh I see, you were quoting jmzsil. My bad. I was a little surprised when you said that. That seemed out of character.
Funny how telling people I’m male* always leads to an apology for thinking me female, as if that’s somehow an insult, rather than for assuming any gender at all.
*Just out of interest, does my nym have a feminine sound in US English? That mistake’s been made a few times. Which is odd: most assumptions of gender I’ve seen have been the reverse, as if male is default until shown otherwise.
How do you square that with the belief you stated in #53?
Nope.
His lawyers? Do you believe that joining the armed forces gives you the right to break the law in foreign countries without consequences?
Ignorance of the law is no defence, If a retired member of the Mexican armed forces were caught smuggling (guns / drugs / people) into the US, would you expect them to get off on the grounds that they didn’t see a sign explicitly forbidding it? Or would you think that maybe they should know what the relevant laws are?
They probably didn’t see a sign. That means they’re innocent, right?
If you really believe that racism hasn’t strongly informed Republican politics since Nixon then you’ve not being paying attention. Look up “Southern Strategy”. Listen to what modern Republican politicians actually say about minorities.
And the GOP stated, quite baldly, before Obama took office, that their primary goal would be making sure that his presidency failed. They said that this was more important than helping the country. That is to say, before Obama did anything, they went on TV and said that if he proposed legislation that they agreed with, they would block it just so that Obama would not be able to claim any successes. And they’ve been living up to that these last six years. That is not “arguing for the sake of argument”, that is naked and blatant obstructionism at the cost of the nation.
DAZ! I knew you rocked! ; ) I felt a sense of British humor in your reply. Im 46 and remember AB FAB that had me rolling and kids in the hall. this was in the nineties. Probably by the time us received these funny shows they were not new?
I just recently seen a new Britt show that has a character of an older gay guy on and was talking to an older lady about a particular young man who isn’t all that masculine and walks in a certain manner, the older man finally asked, was it if he was gay or had a boy friend. the young man had a very perplexed look on his face.
Now, you will definitely have a different view on America as you don’t get all the spin we get from the “drive by” media, and the cable news. I try to learn in between 7th and 12th grade but didn’t know how. The fact my dad worked his arse (SP) off and then came home and sat only to repeat 5 days a week he installed & repaired elevators and escalators for many years. So we never talked about current events. now I can’t blame him now, but as I was growing up it would have been nice to have that kind of bond. he was a card carrying democrat and a union man(born ’24) He almost flat lined when he found out I was registered as Republican, no I didn’t vote straight down the R line. I tried to listen to the people running but if I was in doubt I left that one blank. I just found out a few days ago that in Australia that it is a federal law that everyone must vote. It’s said here that we have a right and a duty to vote but too may people are disenfranchised about politics, “my vote won’t count”. to them I say if you don’t vote don’t complain. everyone that thinks that way if they changed their way of thinking they would change elections.
When situations are going on that should require the POTUS attention he is either playing golf or fund raising. not illegal but that is some terrible priorities, or maybe the last three did? BHO is good at delegating, but I think some things should be left to the man in charge so to speak. What about bengazi? nothing was done and the admin blamed it on a youtube.com video. that proved false. and the little ms rice is just plain not in her element.
again the MARINE didn’t see the sign as it was night. he is not the only person to have that happen to. So, I think(I may be wrong) his jailing is for what some American politicians’ have been doing with the rounding up of those who have been crossing the boarder some time before.
“spin to power half of England” is it getting really bright? I am Irish and Bohemian(blame me parents!) I can talk all day long. lol…. I worked for a lady who moved from your country. she owned a tea shop no longer exists it was Lady Carolines British Tea Shop.
I would have said about you laughing at me about calling bho a Marxist. if your going to put explosives on marx grave, please take pictures! lol…
Please do have yourself a brilliant weekend.
If you ever have links to get the rocks in my head to get with the program I will gladly accept them, when ever you have time.
nerd of red head yes you are.
rossthompson
I don’t, because Esteleth wrote #53, not me.
EnlightenmentLiberal #74
Yes, apologies for the borkquote there; I’m not sure what happened.
Again, you highlight the fact that he was a marine. Why do you think that has any bearing in this case?If he wasn’t a marine, would his crime have warranted jail time? If so, why does being a marine make you immune to prosecution? If not, why do you keep bringing it up?
And also again, he broke the law. The fact that he didn’t see a sign explicitly informing him of what the law was does not excuse him. Can you imagine someone claiming in court that the house they broke into didn’t have a sign saying it was illegal to steal things? It’s a long-established legal fact that ignorance of the law is no defence. Why shouldn’t the Mexican government arrest him for running guns into their country? Why should the POTUS try to get every American citizen who breaks the law abroad out of prison? Why can’t this MARINE take responsibility for his own actions?
My apologies. I’ll try and pay more attention in future.
Daz: as far as the “implication of mental health” I will cease for you. I forget that I have tourrettes not an excuse, I am on permanent mental disability, having tourettes is not fun, my “filter” isn’t always in check. it is better than when I was younger. I can get a little rambunctious at times. also with add I can speak b/f I think. depending on what spills out of my mouth I get laughs or dirty looks. I try to hard to be funny sometimes. Thank God not like I used to be.
The way you made your statement you were offended, so please accept my Apologies. You have been respectful to me, So again I am sorry.
gee nerd of a red head nice language.
dalilama I know you are but what am I? ha ha you are a vertical smile.
Daz:
Not to my ears. Until now, I didn’t know your gender, and made no assumptions.
jmzsil #77
I don’t watch sit-coms. They are the lowest common denominator of comedy. Predictable jokes, plots which rely on half the cast being so dumb they can’t spot an obvious mistake and the other half being so dumb they make that mistake. And so on.</meta>
Citation please. Assuming you can provide those, were these situations foreseeable, with a predictable time-scale, so that he should have been ready and waiting for them?
So what? Anyone with any common sense will appraise themselves of a country’s fire-arms regulations, before carrying fire-arms into that country. They will also assume that they need to declare fire-arms at that country’s customs inspection. He obviously did neither. As someone else mentioned, ignorance of the law is not a legal defence. And why the emphasis on him being a marine? Does that make him immune from the law and/or having to exercise common sense?
side note: please leave off the childish “I know what you are” so-called humour, chiding people for language, and so on.
enlightenment liberal: with all due respect, our countries infrastructure cannot handle all the people coming here. It’s not about hating people. when the illegals come over then find a way to get on welfare. we don’t have the money to support these people. I didn’t look at the link yet, but I will in due time.
Tony!
Thanks. It wasn’t really important, I just wondered if my nym might be the reason I seem to buck the trend.
W fake-cleared more brush on his faux cowboy ranch than any president in history.
fuck me, can this even BE a more ridiculous point to make?
the words would choke in your throat if you spoke them aloud.
enlightened lib your take on the seven principles is wack. you can disagree but that “heavy progressive estate taxes on people who own their own homes? your progressive mind is in the kool aid too much. people who earn their money/wealth should not be penalized. your thinking is just not rational.
Incidentally, the jailed gunrunner’s name is Andrew Tahmooressi. He’s in the slammer after being found guilty by a court.
ross t: no! the man/marine informed the people of what he had and that they were registered to him. the wall needs to go up 200 feet across.
Oh fuck, jmzsil is not only a libertarian but he’s one of the “Constitutional Party” wackaloons. No wonder he thinks Obama is a Marxist. He’s so far to the right that he probably thinks everyone to the left of Ron Paul is a Marxist.
Oh, gee, another civility proponent. Someone’s at the wrong blog.
That doesn’t mean, however, that the commentariat cannot be civil. In fact, it happens all the damn time (oooh,heavens to betsy, I used a coarse word there; I should be spanked). What also happens is that there are commenters who post offensive things, or make bigoted comments, or are abusive, or advocate for horrible crimes (I can think of two commenters across FtB that are warmongering assholes, who have advocated genocide before-though they fail to see that it’s genocide. They do so in nice words, which might fool some people, but not others. They do not deserve to be treated civilly). If you’re the type of person that leaves nasty droppings in a thread, you’re likely to get called out for it, and whining about tone is not going to get you anywhere on this blog. If you want a blog where tone is of utmost importance, go start your own.
Tony!
Where do we line up?
Jessie, still nothing show your opinions aren’t anything but arrogant bullshit on your part. You, like liberturds, have nothing but slogans and ignorant posturing.
Oh fuck. I’m still repainting the Spanking Parlour. Could you use the Tickling Dungeon for now please?
R.T. Southern strategy will do thank you.
of course the rest of your rebuttal towards me isn’t impressing me at all.
Yes the RNC is crap. the DNC has spin of their own as well. it just seems to depend on who is in office at the time.
Sorry ,my iPad did a spell correction on jmzsil’s name.
Nerd #97
Who is this Jessie of whom you speak? Wrong thread?
RT MEXICO DIDN’T HAVE THE SIGN IN A PLACE VISIBLE OR PROPER LIGHTING PERIOD. I’M DONE WITH YOU.
Nerd:
Don’t forget the libertarian disdain for the rights of LGBTQI, women, and People of Color.
Great, so he was transporting weapons that were registered to him in America, and that should override the fact that such weapons are illegal in Mexico? Is Mexico a sovereign nation that has the right to set its own gun laws, or is it required to conform to US gun laws?
No, I suspect the only thing that would impress you is “Oh, you are so smart and wise; please may I give your balls a tongue bath?”.
Shame your arguments are not merely crap, but boringly so.
So the fuck what? He broke the fucking law, was caught, tried and punished. The fact that there wasn’t a fucking sign saying “please don’t break the law” is fucking laughable.
Why the fuck are you so hung up on this fucking sign?
Fuckity fuck.
OH DAMN! well, there goes my day. Here I was, posting away in the hopes of impressing yon rube, and I find out it was all for naught.
*sniff*
thought that needed some emphasis.
Well, I know my arse was stuffed with baggies of heroin, my tyres were full of cocaine, and my wig was made from marijuana. There wasn’t a sign telling me I couldn’t bring them in though!
India is smaller, and has 4 times the number of people in it the US does. Per captia, England has WAY more people to manage with its infrastructure.
you do your country no credit with your ignorant rants.
I’m now amused at imagining a real dope wig.
gives dreadlocks whole new meaning…
you know, I’m going to take the opportunity to trace back that phrase “drunk the kool-aid”….
I believe that came from Jonestown, did it not?
yes, yes it did.
what was the primary characteristic of the people who drank the poisoned kool aid?
they did not critically examine what they were being told to do.
what characterizes the modern American ignorati?
why, the exact same behavior. They watch Fox News, get misinformed, and think that since their neighbors agree with them, why then they must be right and the rest of the world must be wrong (Which is why Nixon’s Southern Strategy has been so successful as well, btw).
then, with absolutely pure psychological projection, they claim it is everyone ELSE that is “drinking the Kool Aid”.
I laugh, then I cry.
jmzsil:
I’m sure you’ll produce a citation for this any minute now (note: said citation cannot come from your ass)
translation: It’s not about hating people, but I’m not even going to refer to immigrants as people, I’m going to call them “illegal”. So I may as well just say I hate them, bc I don’t deign to treat them as human beings.
Damn, could that dog whistle be any louder?
Also, I need citations for this belief that immigrants are finding a way to get on welfare. And not just one or two, but whole swaths of them, since you’re oh so worried.
How do you know we don’t have the money to support them?
How do you know that they even need financial support?
Seeing as I’m late to the party, is there a citation for this piece of dreck too?
Icthyic
I don’t know that I’d have picked India as an example, given the general state of infrastructure over there, especially because of all the other stupid in jmzsil’s statement. Like the fact that there’s ~1.5 million people per year immigrating to the U.S. (the majority of whom are adults who can begin contributing to the economy immediately) compared to ~4 million people being born here every year, all of whom are pure economic drain for at least the next decade and a half. Or the fact that American infrastructure is in the shitty state that it currently is because of dipshits like jmzsil. etc.
Fox News, of course.
the reality is exactly the opposite; it’s basically IMPOSSIBLE to file for welfare if you are not a legal resident of the US.
hell, it’s not easy even if you are a native born citizen! I challenge idiots like Jmzsil to actually go down to their local welfare office, and see what it is like to apply for welfare.
I would, since the point was that it was a matter of numbers.
@jmzsil
How can you support a party so strongly when you haven’t even read its core principles? It took me 3 minutes. Shame on you.
And shame on you for supporting gay bigotry, Christian theocracy and Christian legal privilege. Shame on you for support legal bans on abortion and assisted suicide. Shame on you for promoting laissez-faire economics. Shame on you for promoting absolute private property rights and absolute inheritance rights at the cost of everyone else. Shame on you for being against a social safety net, food stamps, welfare, public education, and funding for the common good.
To be fair, he claims in post #69 to be claiming disability, so he probably does know how implausible it is for undocumented immigrants to claim benefits.
“I’m sorry, your honor. I wouldn’t have shot at that couple in the van if you had properly posted the signs saying that it wasn’t legal to do so in this jurisdiction! And as they say in my neck of the woods, ignorance of the law is an absolute defense! So, I will just be on my way now. No hard feelings, y’all. Pinky swear that it won’t happen again.”
Doesn’t matter fuckwitted idjit. He had no business bringing his guns into Mexico. Why don’t you understand the concept of their country, their laws? Too stupid from watching Faux news and busy sloganeering fuckwittery to think beyond those slogans to what the evidence says.
My favorite part of the ‘poor persecuted marine’ who was smuggling loaded guns into Mexico is that his defenders have claimed he had the guns because he was suffering from ptsd.
Yep, their defense is that he is mentally ill so he should be released, be given back his guns and sent back to the US. So much for the gun-nuts clain that mentally ill persons shouldn’t be allowed guns because only mentally ill people cause gun violence.
Author: Nerd of Redhead, Dances OM Trolls Comment:
I challenge idiots like Jmzsil to actually go down to their local welfare office, and see what it is like to apply for welfare.
To be fair, he claims in post #69 to be claiming disability, so he probably does know how implausible it is for undocumented immigrants to claim benefits.
Just and FYI I personally have known people who came from “south of the boarder” and figured out a way to get SS#s and Birth Certificates that they spend a lot of money acquiring but it works. I worked at a place were this front area manager was dating a Mexican girl that spoke very little English he told me how they do this. I am not sure why he didn’t report this but what ever.
oh thanks for the compliment, how about a little civil discourse? like people instead of idiots? or are you incapable of being polite. I am sure you are, just try it or “fake it till you make it”….. you might even make some true friends?
o.k. don’t waste anymore of your time replying to me. I don’t want you to waste your energy. but I will look up those links, thanks for that much.
jmzsil:
The things you’ve said don’t warrant civil discourse. I don’t bring civility to the table when talking to someone who is dehumanizing immigrants.
Sorry fuckwit, your idiocy will be called out. You are nothing but a loudmouthed bigot who dehumanizes all those you don’t agree with or like. Why should your insensibilities be taken seriously? And they won’t be.
And shame on you for supporting gay bigotry, Christian theocracy and Christian legal privilege. Shame on you for support legal bans on abortion and assisted suicide. Shame on you for promoting laissez-faire economics.
Shame on you for promoting absolute private property rights and absolute inheritance rights at the cost of everyone else. What the hell does this statement mean? If I earned it and was wise with my resources, I shouldn’t be penalized just b/c I died and then my children have to sell the home/farm just to pay the taxes? really, that is just corrupt politics. PERIOD!
Shame on you for being against a social safety net, food stamps, welfare, public education, and funding for the common good. YOUR WRONG.
First of all I never said I was promoting Laissez-Faire economics, I don’t know enough about it. Ayn Rand was a big proponent of it but I have never gotten around to it.
Gay bigotry? I have had two gay roommates in the past, so I don’t think I qualify. I don’t agree with the lifestyle but it doesn’t mean I am going to accost anyone who lives this lifestyle. I like watching Rachel Maddow, At least she shows her references on the screen long enough if one wanted to take a note they could others don’t we are just supposed to drink the R flavored koolaid or D flavored koolaid.
I am not the stereo typical Christian you see on TV. in fact I don’t like using that term as the “west” has bastardized the term. God is the judge and in the Bible sin is not shown on a curve. America in general does, but there is a place in a Epistle that Paul writes a list of those who will not see heaven, they are not numbered. You can read it for yourself the net has every English translation you can want or not.
A theocracy? no thank you. that is why people left their country to come here. The country has a lot of biblical influence of course anyone who reads the constitution, bill of rights, etc, will see this.
Abortion?: Source: Patheos.com Atheist and civil libertarian journalist Nat Hentoff said that “Being without theology isn’t the slightest hindrance to being pro-life.” Atheist philosophy professor Don Marquis declared abortion is “immoral” because it denies developing fetuses “a future like ours.” The host of CFI’s Point of Inquiry, Robert M. Price, author of books like Jesus is Dead and The Case Against the Case for Christ, called abortion “second-degree murder” on one of his podcasts.
Read more: http://www.patheos.com/blogs/friendlyatheist/2014/03/11/yes-there-are-pro-life-atheists-out-there-heres-why-im-one-of-them/#ixzz3A73jra5h
Then you can riddle me this batman, a woman decides not to have a baby o.k. but then that guy in CA murdered his 8month pregnant wife and he sits on death row for double premeditated murder, Now as Spock would say, “that’s not logical”. one is o.k. one is death sentence. how is this? I am so sure you know everything that there is to know about life. : )
Not against the safety net, I promise you. Oh public education? really? how are we 27th average in math and sciences among ALL the “developed” countries. We used to be in the top five fifty years ago? Not sure the exact decade but a lot went wrong with the public system, it is broke. there are great teachers but how they are forced to teach or how to teach, the system is broke and needs about a billion dollar repair job. That is probably a low estimate.
good bye.
I dehumanizing? o.k. how about If you don’t like what I know is true ignore me. you are really interesting. whatever you want to believe.
jmzsil:
The words you’ve left scattered in this thread speak volumes about your opinions of immigrants you fucking idiot. No, I’m not going to ignore you because you’re acting like a bigoted shitweasel, and I’m not going to tolerate that. If you don’t want to be called an asshole, then stop acting like an asshole.
jmzsil, there’s a very easy way to be left alone here: stop posting.
Sir DAZ! AS USUAL That statement rocked! whoooooooooooooo loved it!
jmzsil:
Also “what you know is true”?
WTF?
I asked you upthread to produce citations for these things you know are true, and you haven’t done so.
Here’s a link to my requests for citations for your bigotry.
Fucking asshole whining about peoples’ tone while making bigoted statements about immigrants. People like you make me sick. Whine about how it’s so bad to be called vulgarities, yet you have prejudicial and bigoted views about segments of the population.
The above, which you wrote is pure bigoted bullshit. In my book, bigotry is infinitely worse than being called a fuckface. One has an effect on actual human beings and contributes to their oppression and ongoing systematic discrimination. The other is a harsh word.
dude libertarians? do you know how many say I don’t care what a person does as long as they keep it in their bedroom? they don’t care and not just LGBTQI any lifestyle that isn’t considered “normal”. of course that is a very relative term. where do they bash women or people of color? At least as a whole? just curious.
jmzsil @123
Like many conservatives and liberturds you don’t fucking understand what free speech is all about. Free speech means the government won’t prosecute you for talking about politics. Free speech doesn’t mean you are guaranteed an audience nor does it mean your speech won’t be criticized. If you show by your speech that you’re a fucking asshole then it’s Nerd of Redhead’s free speech to tell you that you’re a fucking asshole. Free speech goes both ways, something you fucking liberturds forget.
DAZ: the dude supposedly informed the police as soon as he was stopped, it was dark and the sign was not lighted properly if at all. so I shall leave “the I know…. off any replies, any ideas for a more proper replacement? : )
As for that fucking joke of a link @ 127, that’s to a horrible article by a guest writer on Hemant’s blog talking about supposed secular arguments against abortion.
You ought to read the link and the comments.
But I’ll sum up my position on abortion:
•I fully support the right of all women to have easy, affordable (or even free) access to abortion, no exceptions. Between an existing woman and developing fetus, I side with the woman each and every time.
•women, like men, have the right to bodily autonomy at all times. That means even when or if they become pregnant. Bodily autonomy is the right of all individuals to make decisions about their bodies. No one gets to violate that right. Bodily autonomy provides the foundation for a our right to self defense. Bodily autonomy is a right that human PEOPLE have, which is distinct from human beings.
• further to the last point, fetuses are genetically human beings, but they are not persons. They do not have self-awareness, they have no awareness of the passage of time, they have no rights and responsibilities, they have no consciousness, they can’t feel pain. They lack the traits that define personhood in humans.
• further to both points, even IF a fetus were a person…if developing fetuses somehow had every right all humans have, that still wouldn’t give them the right to use the body of a pregnant woman against her desires. No human being has that right. You cannot compel blood or organ donations, and you can’t harvest organs from dead people without prior consent. Fetuses do not get the magical right to override a womans’ bodily autonomy. Ever.
• So-called “secular” arguments against abortion, just like religious arguments against abortion ultimately deny women the right to bodily autonomy by creating a non-existent right for fetuses-the right to make use of a woman’s body against her wishes-which has the effect of reducing a woman to a walking incubator, and removing one of her fundamental human rights. When you do this, you relegate women to the position of second class citizens. That denial of human rights is abhorrent and dehumanizing. Every single goddamn anti-abortion activist is arguing for women to be treated as less than human (under the guise of concern for a fucking fetus).
•I’m pro-choice because the decision should always rest on the woman in the situation. If she wants to carry the fetus to term, I support her. If she wants to abort the fetus, I support her.
Why are you defending the fuckwitted idjit? The sign is irrelevant to him not obeying Mexican gun laws. You haven’t produced one whit of evidence that he is not subject to Mexican laws in Mexico. So, your claims are dismissed as fuckwittery, and your attitude dismissed a JAQing off.
wow nice language again. I don’t care what you think about me. you are you and I am me. do your thing and i’ll do mine. I am having a fantrifically fantabulous day.
jmzsil:
Libertarians deny the rights of women, people of color, and LGBTQI in the workplace every fucking time they talk about ending the minimum wage, ending unions, or eliminating anti-discrimination policies.
Also, being lesbian, transgender, gay, bisexual, intersex, or queer is every bit as “normal” as heterosexual. Libertarians say that shit because they view LGBTQI individuals as nothing more than walking sex bots who do nothing but fuck. They don’t want to hear about or discuss or be party to sex they don’t approve of. That right there is bigoted enough for me. Then they add to that by having no problem with heterosexual displays of affection like kissing or holding hands. No, the problem is when *other* people do it. Those people they don’t approve of. Those people whom they think do not deserve to participate in society to the same extent they do.
And what is up with you referring to Daz? He hasn’t commented since #110.
jmzsil:
Yes, I use fucking coarse language. Get over it. If you can’t deal buzz off you bigot.
jmzsil:
So you’re proud to be a bigoted asshole. Gotcha.
dude the true definition of fetus is from latin which means young lad or offspring. a nurse told me this. then I looked it up. did you know in I think japan or at least an Asian country the parents/family celebrate the first birthday of the baby at 3 months outside of the womb? and they are no Christians. for what it’s worth.
jmzsil #wherever-the-hell-it-was
It’s not difficult. Read what people say instead of merely looking for snippets to rebut. Address what they say.
So the fuck what, asswipe? If you’re a liberturd then according to your own dogma you’re supposed to be in favor of liberty. You make it obvious the only liberty you care about is reserved for white, able bodied, cis-hetro males. In other words, you’re a typical liberturd who doesn’t give a fuck about people who aren’t you or like you.
jmzsil:
What the ever loving fuck is the point to this?
I explained why I support a woman’s right to choose, and elaborated, at length on my reasons.
In response you offered nonsense.
You’re trying to swim in the 12′ end of the pool when you should be in sitting in a lounge chair.
@jmzsil
You said you support the constitution party. Those are its core principles. You are either massively ignorant (and negligent) for not knowing this, or you are a hypocrite, or you are lying right now.
Again, be a responsible citizen. Go read up on the constitution party. It took me 3 minutes. Surely that’s the minimum before you vote for them.
PS: Free speech. The moral Aesop of free speech is to throw out all of the ideas, in the hopes that the truth will come out and the falsehoods will die. For that to happen, we need to criticize everything. Free speech means free from censorship. It definitely does not mean free from criticism.
PPS: Abortion.
I have no doubt you can find the oddball atheist who is against abortion rights, but they’re wrong. I’d rather not get sidetracked into abortion, so I’ll leave it at that. I apparently already have enough ammunition with other points where you fundamentally disagree with the constitution party.
But apparently we’re having this conversation. Let me lay down the basics where you went wrong.
I don’t care if some other cultures celebrate the first “anniversary of life” 3 months after birth. Who the f cares about some random cultural practice? That has nothing to do with morality. Not only do I generally not care about tradition, but because tradition often stands in the way of fixing things that should be fixed, I actually have an active loathing for tradition.
“Potential”. This is your fundamental flaw. We reasonable people do not value potential in that way. Otherwise, we would consider it a crime to use contraception, or to avoid having sex, because that is preventing the formation of a potential new human being. The dividing line of “fertilized egg” is completely and utterly arbitrary in light of “potential to make a human being”. We reasonable people are humanists. We care about the well-being of conscious creatures, of creatures with minds. A fertilized egg has no neurons, let alone a brain, and thus it does not have a mind, and thus it has about as much value as the tip of my little finger. If you cut off my finger, I have rights and the finger does not, and I probably want it back.
“DNA”. Who cares if it has unique DNA? We care about the well being of minds, not about the well being of mindless hunks of flesh.
Then, around 6 months or so IIRC, the fetus might start developing enough brain structure that we can talk about a mind. To outlaw abortions is to forcibly conscript the mother’s body to take care of another citizen. In almost every way, that’s morally analogous to a law which requires everyone to give blood donations, or to force kidney donations. We find the idea of forced organ donations reprehensible, and for the same reason, even if the fetus has a mind, it does not have rights to the mother’s body any more than a stranger on the street has a right to a random woman’s kidneys.
Enlightenment Liberal:
Our resident right wing whackadoodle isn’t likely to educate himself on the Constitution Party, so I’ll assist (plus I didn’t even know about this group):
Those are their 7 principles. I loathe so much of what this party stands for (there are a few reasonable ideas contained within their platform, such as their opposition to the Patriot Act and opposition to the “war on terror”) It’s dehumanizing, homophobic, xenophobic, nationalistic, jingoistic, racist, sexist, misogynistic, and not different at all from the GOP.
Here is a link to download their party platform.
the dude supposedly informed the police as soon as he was stopped
Again, so what? If you tell a police officer you’re transporting illegal weapons across a national border, they’re not allowed to arrest you? Can you imagine if a Mexican came into the US with weapons that are illegal to own in the US? Would you be arguing for them to be set free with as much vehemence?
OK, there’s no way on earth you don’t know how much weight that argument has with people here by now. Why don’t you switch to the gold fringe on the flag in the courtroom instead? I bet people will buy that one.
IMPO = In My Pigheaded Opinion?
Sure, there’s no reason why Mexico would want to enforce gun laws purely for the sake of enforcing gun laws, right? I mean, it’s not like they have a problem with gun violence that they’re trying to crack down on or anything. Everything that happens in Mexico is done purely on the basis of how it affects America because obviously America is the only real country and all those other guys are just play-acting at being countries while we’re looking.
That’s… something of an understatement.
Sure, it’s not at all bigoted to vote for people who want to see homosexuals marginalised and shunned, just so long as you privately tell the one or two that you know that you don’t have anything against them personally. You’re just going to take actions to ensure they don’t have the same rights as you.
Estate taxes kick in at $5,000,000. With careful planning you and your spouse can each leave half your estate to your kids, so they won’t pay any estate taxes on the first $10,000,000 of their inheritance. Or you can set up a trust, so they won’t pay any taxes at all.
Unless all your money is tied up in a single non-liquid asset, there’s no chance of not being able to pay the estate tax without selling your home. Farms are about the one case where it’s a factor, and only 1% of farms are large enough to qualify for estate taxes, and all of those are owned by corporations, which never die.
Who said anything about you being penalized? You’re dead. Almost by definition, you cannot be penalized.
I do not accept that you have a “right” to give your property to your children when you die. Even if I accepted the argument that you worked for it and thus you deserve it (which I don’t in full), that does not imply that your children deserve it. They didn’t work for it. It was gifted to them. F that.
Also what rossthompson said.
Sir Daz: o.k. I truly see your point. Though I do have “thick skin”, I am half Irish and Bohemian. I was just tired of reading “fuckwit” for the fiftieth time. I have tourettes and have a better original vocabulary when it comes to being juvenile.
I will do my best to address what they say. Thank you.
Enlightened Lib: so what part do you accept in part? as far as property. I don’t understand why you disagree with what I said about this. Can you explain your reasoning? This is a legitimate question. I am still learning, I am never at a point that I am an expert in any subject, never will. Although I usually do not agree with most Liberals It doesn’t mean I don’t respect a person with a different view.
Let me ask, If you worked hard and had all you needed to be set in life to take care of your family, send your kids to college to have a good options, why should the government take away your property. That isn’t justice, it’s the government running (in this example) your families’ affairs.
RossT: on setting aside money for the taxes. I guess that should have crossed my mind the first time? Oh yes the rocks where not aligned at the time. Thanks for that info that makes perfect sense. If I ever “hit the lotto” not, I will do that…… : )
tony on the constitution party, yea o.k. your opinion. typical liberal when “I don’t like what another person says (even another liberal that doesn’t “tow the party line”) call them names and say liable slander and defamation of character that will shut them up. Just b/c I have a value system that I am never going to compromise? o.k. get out the Crayola box and color me what ever slur you deem necessary. Or hand them to me and I will do it myself. Thank you and have a good day. be blessed. ; )
@jmzsil
False equivalence. No one here is talking about college money. We’re talking about 10s of millions of dollars starting. This was already mentioned. Please try to keep up.
And to that, the answer is why do your kids deserve 10,000,000+ dollars more than the kids down the road? Because they happened to get lucky and born to you instead of the parents down the street?
In the real world, property is finite. One person’s enjoyment of property is denying another person the right to use it. Thus absolute private property rights are bullshit.
In the real world, money is power, and allowing individuals to gain an undue amount of money is granting them an undue amount of power. Large concentrations of money cause large concentrations of power, which is unfair to other citizens when one citizen has more political power than another. In extreme cases, it’s destabilizing to the government as a whole, such as is happening with campaign financing in the US.
Plus other considerations which I’m too lazy to write down / remember.
jmzsil:
The constitution party directly advocates for gay people like myself to be denied the right to marry-a right all humans possess. To oppose that right means they do not feel gay people deserve equal rights. Which means they do not view me as fully human.
The constitution party directly opposes abortion for any reason. This means they deny women the fundamental right that all humans have to bodily autonomy. To oppose abortion means to deny half the human population the rights they are supposed to have. That means they do not view women as fully human.
Those are two examples from the platform of the party you support. If you support a party that denies the basic human rights that we all are supposed to possess, you are a disgusting human being. Despite that, I would never advocate for you to not have all the rights every human being is entitled to.
You putrid fuckstain.
Also, I have neither libeled nor slandered you. Nor defamed your character. You support a party that denies human rights to myself and women. No, they do not word it that way, but the end result of their platform is a denial of human rights for women and gays. You support that party. Until you unequivocally state that you think gay people should be able to get married and women should be able to have full access to abortion, then you do not support either group having full human rights.
Learn to examine your beliefs, you damned douchecannon.
Protip: being steadfast in your beliefs isn’t a positive thing when your beliefs suck.
Enlightenment Liberal: Who ever told you life was supposed to be fair? We are all born into the family that we are born to. It is up to us as individuals to figure out along the way, how to get out of the situation a person finds themselves. There are way too many examples to put here. Whether college(state/academic scholarships’ ), student athlete, or military(doesn’t have to be a career, but CAN be used to be a stepping stone to a better life with a well paying career. Of course if a person finds the military the right career path awesome.
O.K., the government coming in and telling us Americans how to live and taking away what isn’t theirs to begin with, it is just pure criminal, not to mention a social-communist, “looks good on paper” ideology. It doesn’t work in the real world. Look at the “former” USSR how did that one work. Look at Greece? The affordable health care act steps all over the 10h amendment”Amendment X
The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the states, are reserved to the states respectively, or to the people.
The Tenth Amendment helps to define the concept of federalism, the relationship between Federal and state governments. As Federal activity has increased, so too has the problem of reconciling state and national interests as they apply to the Federal powers to tax, to police, and to regulations such as wage and hour laws, disclosure of personal information in recordkeeping systems, and laws related to strip-mining. Site; law.cornell.edu/constitution/tenth_amendment.
“In the real world, money is power, and allowing individuals to gain an undue amount of money is granting them an undue amount of power. Large concentrations of money cause large concentrations of power, which is unfair to other citizens when one citizen has more political power than another. In extreme cases, it’s destabilizing to the government as a whole, such as is happening with campaign financing in the US.”
Just for clarification and me only hearing this term “undue amount of money”. can you define what you mean on just this first word in the quote in relation to the statement. Of course I see that money is power just like power corrupts and absolute power corrupts absolutely. I think I have said this already, in some fashion, get rid of the IRS and set up a better system. the IRS is Completely corrupt, and has more powers than they deserve and more than we probably want to know. That is why I and many others say they must go. Gathering taxes for the Infrastructure (and all that includes) is a necessity, however, there must be a better way.
All Americans just need the tools and access to educate Themselves (Of course this should start in grade/middle school). on the issues and all vote out the corrupt politicians. Of course in the county in my city, the moron in charge of organizing the voting places stated on camera (I think it was when BHO was running for the 2nd time). “we are not going to open up extra polling places, we don’t have the resources”. Of course this was a white man and code for “we are trying to keep the minorities from voting. He should have been canned. It wouldn’t surprise me if this happens in other states in their cities.
If we had the law Australia has, everyone has to vote, federal law.
(remember the saying “don’t hate the player hate the game” you could maybe rearrange the saying like a “don’t hate the rich person that the IRS has given all the tricks to keep his $$$, Hate the IRS” o.k. a bad sentence structure however, the facts are that we as Americans who can vote, should vote for the ones who will get in and change the system. I am not sure what would be good. some say flat tax some say only taxes on purchases(as we know rich people buy more or at least more expensive toys) but I am not a economist.
Tony! The Queer Shoop:
O.K. you want that right. What about Melissa Ethridge. and the Guy on was it American Idol? Great voice, his partner was from another country, both are not with them anymore. Even in heterosexual marriages they end up (it’s been said that 50% is a made up number, but let’s say 40%) it still doesn’t Guarantee happiness. There are (again) heterosexual people people that live together and don’t last. for same sex people who want certain rights, speak with an atty, they should be able to let one know what they can do for medical emergencies, and other things, sorry diner time , I know you hate me but I can’t return the flavor. I like it too much. I Just hope half this stuff made sense…. lol….
The IRS doesn’t make tax law; they only enforce it. The tax laws are written by lawyers funded by rich people who want the law to favour them.
So it really should be “Don’t hate the rich person for writing the rules that allow them to keep their money, blame the IRS for following the rules laid down for it”.
I see the liberturd still isn’t providing any links (evidence) for their claims, and since most liberturds are sloganeers, not evidence based thinkers *snicker*, I take with they have to say with a grain of salt the size of Utah.
jmzsil:
I’m not asking for a guarantee of marriage working. I’m asking to have the same right to get married that heterosexual people have. That’s a fundamental right that all adults in the US are supposed to have. It’s not currently a right held by gay people on a national level. It’s a right that all adults, no matter their sexuality, should have.
Remember that in 1967 the Supreme court unanimously held that:
jmzsil sharts:
What? Just….what!? “Had all you needed to be set in life” is a significantly lower threshold than being rich. And “take away your property” is not how taxation works. And even if it was, your argument is stated would be against taxing ANYONE, and the financial well being of the taxpayer is irrelevant? What the fuck are you actually against?
(Reads Enlightenment Liberal)
Wait….this is your argument against estate taxes? What the fuck? What does “being set in life” have to do with being fucking dead? How is it taking someone’s property when they are fucking dead? Is this going to turn into a Deceased American Rights debate?
Typical conservative: Hypocritical and incapable of dealing with criticism.
Google Godwin’s Law and fill in the blanks to imagine what my response to this is.
Yeah, sure. “Slur”. Play the victim more. I’m sure it will work eventually.
And now we get to what you REALLY think. But justice isn’t a matter of life being fair. It is matter of society being obligated to MAKE life fair. And that takes work. But it is our duty to strive for that, otherwise society is not worth living in.
And for some people that isn’t possible. While for others they don’t even need to because their situation is already damn near perfect.
You have become drunk on the Uber Capitalist Kool Aid. Ever hear of student debt? Hear of the fact that a bachelor’s degree is now basically the equivalent of a high school diploma in the job market because almost everyone has now? And god forbid acknowledging the existence of people with health issues or people who needed to work their way through fucking high school, who would have a tremendously difficult getting through college just because of the sheer amount of other shit they have to deal with.
And I thought you just admitted that life ain’t fair, and yet here you are spewing disingenuous pablum about how many people have a chance to succeed if they just tried harder.
Just try harder and Capitalism will work its magic and if it doesn’t, it is just because you didn’t try hard enough!
So taxation is communist huh? You know who the real criminal is? You. Because you refuse to pay for services you are stealing from the government. Like some sort of Moocher. You refuse to pay for public education that you benefit from, directly and indirectly. Refuse to pay for roads. Refuse to pay for the fire fighters and police that would save your property if need be. Refuse to pay for the legal system that defends your rights and especially those that protect labor rights ensuring that you are actually even getting money in the first place. Refuse to pay for the regulatory agencies that make sure you don’t buy rotten hamburger or toxic medicines. Refuse to pay for consumer protection that saves you from wasting money on scams. Refuse to pay for the arts, or for scientific research. Refuse to pay for waste disposal. Refuse to pay for public transportation. Refuse to subsidize the existence of senior centers, or parks, or museums, or libraries. Refuse to pay for having an authority defining property, ensuring building safety standards, and also ensuring public health standards.
You take these services, and refuse to pay for them. You are the real criminal here.
You do know that your reading of the Tenth Amendment would basically make amendments to the constitution unconstitutional? Specifically ones like giving women the right to vote and outlawing slavery?
Conspiracy theorist much?
*blink*
Like what? What is the fucking problem you are trying remedy, first of all?
Here’s the real question: Do you think YOU have the tools to educated yourself? Do you think you currently are educated?
Because, if yes, that just proves to rest of us just how little that kind of pablum means. You can have all the tools in the world available. but it won’t help if you hand them to people like yourself.
lolwut? No, Voter ID laws and other paranoid attempts to stop the boogeyman of “Voter Fraud” are blatant attempts to keep minorities from voting. Not opening up extra polling places because you don’t have the resources is not opening up extra polling places because you don’t have the resources. I mean, what the fuck? If they did “waste” their money doing so, I bet you would turn around and start whining about Gubmint Spending.
Since “don’t hate the player hate the game” is just a nonsensical meme anyway, I don’t feel particularly compelled to start feeling less outraged about rich people staying rich by playing tax games.
Which is clearly why you vote for a party full of far-right racist fuckwits.
Oh my god. Oh my fucking god. You can’t be serious? One, a flat tax would destroy the poor. You do realize that there are some things that people absolutely need, right? Food, shelter, water, etc? And there is a minimum price for some of that shit? So say that everything you need to live, at bare minimum, cost a 50 dollars per month. You get one person who made 100 dollars and one who made 1000 in that month. And you have a 10% flat tax. Well, the person who made 100 dollars is left with 40 dollars after they buy their necessities, 40% of their income left over. And the person who made a 1000 has 850 left after tax and necessities, 85% of their income. That in a nutshell is why a flat tax fucks over the poor.
And taxes just on purchases is even worse, because rich people SAVE. Because, as above, they have more money left after necessities. In the above example, the poor person is spending 50% of their income on necessary purchases, where the non-poor person is spending only 5%. Rich people buy LESS.
Therefore, ban marriage in general. This is not an argument against extending rights to gay people, this is an argument against getting married or the existence of marriage at all. Either ban marriage or legalize gay marriage. Those are your options. Otherwise you are just a disingenuous shitweasel, using apologetics to defend cultural homophobia.
Straight couples can get married and then automatically get privileges if their partner experiences a medical emergency. Gay couples can get the privilege of having to go fetch a lawyer when their partner experiences a medical emergency.
If you don’t see the problem with that picture, then you are either stupider than I thought or a truly terrible human being.
anteprepro @163
There’s also: (c) All of the above.
By PZ, I think Al Dente got the answer. Have some swill…
Why should it depend on your wealth whether your children can go to college? Do colorless green ideas sleep furiously where you come from?
If kids from poor families are allowed to go to the same colleges as kids from rich families, they might be able to network, and increase their chances of also becoming rich. Anything that increases social mobility is a bad thing that we need to fight against.