Secret cabals and five Jewish bankers and shadow governments aside ... did you hear Obama called the H1N1 outbreak a national emergency so he can declare Martial Law and push his Liberal agenda down our throats? All the bigwigs of conservative radio are covering it today.
Secret cabals and five Jewish bankers and shadow governments aside ... did you hear Obama called the H1N1 outbreak a national emergency so he can declare Martial Law and push his Liberal agenda down our throats? All the bigwigs of conservative radio are covering it today.
I kinda wish it was true just so all of those retards could be disappeared and I wouldn't have to deal with the results of their inanity.
Secret cabals and five Jewish bankers and shadow governments aside ... did you hear Obama called the H1N1 outbreak a national emergency so he can declare Martial Law and push his Liberal agenda down our throats? All the bigwigs of conservative radio are covering it today.
Man, lack of creativity.
enlightenedbum on
Self-righteousness is incompatible with coalition building.
Secret cabals and five Jewish bankers and shadow governments aside ... did you hear Obama called the H1N1 outbreak a national emergency so he can declare Martial Law and push his Liberal agenda down our throats? All the bigwigs of conservative radio are covering it today.
I heard he did to cover up the fact that Barnett vs. Obama wasn't dismissed and to draw attention away from his desecration of the Constitution. Hey, what's with the Rick Astley video?
Secret cabals and five Jewish bankers and shadow governments aside ... did you hear Obama called the H1N1 outbreak a national emergency so he can declare Martial Law and push his Liberal agenda down our throats? All the bigwigs of conservative radio are covering it today.
I posted this in the SE ++ politics thread yesterday.
Front page of Infowars. One poster thought it was from Fox News.
Secret cabals and five Jewish bankers and shadow governments aside ... did you hear Obama called the H1N1 outbreak a national emergency so he can declare Martial Law and push his Liberal agenda down our throats? All the bigwigs of conservative radio are covering it today.
I posted this in the SE ++ politics thread yesterday.
Front page of Infowars. One poster thought it was from Fox News.
Poe's law needs to be amended to include Fox News.
Infowars: Where the stupid burns brighter than the sun, but not as bright as Freerepublic.
EDIT: Looks like the NY Conservative Party has a real winner in Hoffman.
In a nearly hour-long session, Mr. Hoffman was unable to articulate clear positions on a number of matters specific to Northern New Yorkers rather than the national level campaign being waged in a three-way race for the vacant seat of now-Army Secretary John McHugh.
Perhaps no one noticed. Perhaps no one cared. But hours after a liberal news forum brought attention to a series of days old controversial photos on the Republican National Committee's Facebook page, the photos were finally taken down.
Among them was a picture of President Barack Obama eating fried chicken, subtitled with a call to prohibit interracial marriage. The photo's caption read: "Miscegenation is a CRIME against American Values. Repeal Loving v. Virginia."
Miscegenation refers to the "marriage or cohabitation between a man and woman of different races." Loving v. Virginia was a landmark Supreme Court case that, in 1967, struck down all of the US's laws against interracial marriage.
This is the photo as it appeared on the GOP's Facebook profile on Monday:
Members of the liberal news forum Democratic Underground launched a discussion about the photos on Sunday night.
"That's blatant f---ing racism, against Facebook rules and basic human decency," one upset commenter stated.
Another commenter noted the Obama photo had been on the RNC Facebook page since October 20. "So it has been up five days and not one person administering the site did anything about it. Apparently the site administrator finds this correctly sums up Republican philosophy."
The photo was posted by a Facebook user named "Gee Dub," apparently in reference to President George W. Bush. A comment by someone using the same user name, posted to the comments section of the RNC's photo page, stated:
"Racism is necessary in our capitalistic system. To subject ourselves to the the socialist ideal of equality will surely destroy the American way of life. As a black man, racism has served as a great inspiration for me to work harder. God bless the Republican Party and God bless America."
It was impossible to tell whether the writer was being sincere, or acting as a "troll" pretending to be a black man in favor of racism.
Other photos causing consternation included one of Mother Teresa, in which the revered religious activist was shown feeding a child. The caption underneath read, "Enabling scab-eating mouth breathers will do them no good. How do we expect them to take care of themselves?" That photo, also posted by Gee Dub, was also removed.
Yet another photo showed former presidential candidate John Kerry with what at first sight appears to be a rifle pointed at his head. The picture was framed in such a way that a gun several feet away from Kerry was made to look like it was aimed at his temple. That photo was removed as well.
None of the photos in question appear to have been posted by the administrator of the GOP's Facebook site.
The anti-interracial marriage photo comes on the heels of a recent controversy over a Louisiana justice of the peace who refused to issue a marriage license to an interracial couple, sparking outrage among social-justice activists and minority groups.
While most Republicans were quick to distance themselves from the justice's sentiments, at least one high-profile Republican politician -- Sen. David Vitter of Louisiana -- has been criticized for failing to condemn the justice's actions.
The Obama photo was posted to the GOP's Facebook page less than a week after the Louisiana justice's controversial move was made public.
Conservapedia is a comedy goldmine. Can never tell the difference between a joke article or a serious one.
I wonder how much of conservapedia is joke articles.
Darkchampion3d on
Our country is now taking so steady a course as to show by what road it will pass to destruction, to wit: by consolidation of power first, and then corruption, its necessary consequence --Thomas Jefferson
0
Options
RentI'm always rightFuckin' deal with itRegistered Userregular
Conservapedia is a comedy goldmine. Can never tell the difference between a joke article or a serious one.
I wonder how much of conservapedia is joke articles.
A ton
I used to be part of a group of guys who trolled CONpedia (as we used to call it) a long, long time ago
My personal favorite thing to do was was take the Iraq article, delete everything that was written in it and substitute the words "Mostly harmless" in its place
We also used to make up "facts" about republican leadership and add it to their respective pages
Did you know that Rumsfeld enjoys fucking kittens in his off time? Or that Bush was born with 3/4 of his brain removed? Only the part that controls motor functions is now left
Conservapedia is a comedy goldmine. Can never tell the difference between a joke article or a serious one.
I wonder how much of conservapedia is joke articles.
A ton
I used to be part of a group of guys who trolled CONpedia (as we used to call it) a long, long time ago
My personal favorite thing to do was was take the Iraq article, delete everything that was written in it and substitute the words "Mostly harmless" in its place
We also used to make up "facts" about republican leadership and add it to their respective pages
Did you know that Rumsfeld enjoys fucking kittens in his off time? Or that Bush was born with 3/4 of his brain removed? Only the part that controls motor functions is now left
That is [strike]terrorism![/strike] ducks.
emnmnme on
0
Options
RentI'm always rightFuckin' deal with itRegistered Userregular
Anyways yeah it was a dick thing to do, but our rationalization for it was was its express mission statement was spreading misinformation so turnabout was fair play
This was briefly mentioned last page, but there's a minor conspiracy on some conservative blogs and news sites on the fact that Obama has not had his daughters vaccinated against H1N1. Some quotes, rather long:
Recently President Obama declared a national emergency on swine flu. Yet, when asked on CNN whether he would have his daughters vaccinated, he was confused without his teleprompter and started to stutter. But then he slyly stated that he didn’t know if enough of the vaccine would be available to vaccinate his daughters. I am sure that the president of the United States would be able to secure vaccination dosages for his daughters. Could it be that he knows something about the vaccine he is not telling people?
But for you Obama purists, could Barack and Michelle have missed a national teachable moment? With so many parents across the country afraid of giving their kids the H1N1 vacine, you’d think The One would want to show leadership and confidence in his decisions, while providing comfort to a lot of worried parents by giving his own daughters the injection. Alas no - yet another disappointment from this administration. Obama’s daughters are not vaccinated for H1N1. You can watch an interesting video below with Don Imus’ Wife Deirdre saying Obama’s Daughters should be H1N1 vaccinated on TV. Holy cow.
Fox News, "First Daughters Not Vaccinated Against H1N1"
President Obama's school age daughters have not been vaccinated against the H1N1 flu virus. White House Press Secretary Robert Gibbs says the vaccine is not available to them based on their risk.
The Centers for Disease Control recommend that children ages 6 months through 18 years of age receive a vaccination against the H1N1 flu virus. At this time only children with chronic medical conditions are receiving the vaccination because their immune system is not strong enough to fight off the strain. The CDC also says a regular seasonal flu shot does not protect against the virus.
Just wanted to bring it up. This is what I don't like about discourse these days. If Obama got the shots for his daughters anyway, people would call him selfish. I feel bad for him: he can't win.
And this paragon of Oklahoma probably wonders why people think his state is full of gibbering retards. Anyhow, new GOP thread, wherein we can discuss how parody is officially dead.
From a link on your post:
NSF has also provided federal financial support for:
The ―Human Rights Data Project‖ which concluded that the United States has been “increasingly willing to torture „enemy combatants‟ and imprison suspected terrorists,” leading to a worldwide increase in “human rights violations” as others followed-suit.
Research conducted by several universities to determine why white working-class voters voted Republican in recent national elections. The study is an attempt to explain what the authors describe as the
“puzzling behavior” of white working-class voters who vote for Republican candidates that support economic priorities that “seem to favor the wealthy at the expense of redistributive policies that would provide immediate benefits to larger segments of the population;”
A UC Berkeley study to test the impact of terrorism threats on the presidential race (the study found that it would not be a smart move for John McCain in the last election to play up imminent terrorist threats)
Production of “The NewsHour with Jim Lehrer,‖ in order to provide “Complete, live, prime-time, gavel-to-gavel coverage of 2008 Democratic and GOP national conventions;”
Research conducted by Paul Krugman, which the NSF website touts as “one of the country‟s foremost liberal commentators on economic, political, and policy issues.”
Would a Democrat want to fund something that's basically a commercial for the Republican party? Same thing here.
Also, part of the problem why some people don't respect self-styled intellectuals and the education establishment, is that for alleged free thinkers, they pretty much think, do, and say basically the exact same things. Left-wing views and opinions that are never challenged or debated, just reinforced even when they're painfully and obviously wrong or at least imperfect.
I'd love to see your typical college professor ask "Just playing devil's advocate, but what if a rectum isn't a sexual organ?" or "By embracing abortion, birth control, and denouncing housewives, has feminism destroyed itself by reducing the birth rate below the 2.1 kids per woman required to keep a society going"? Or "Hrm, Honor killings are part of some cultures; can one ethically be a progressive multiculturalist when some cultural attributes are misogynistic, homophobic, and murderous?"
When you literally have 90%ish of your faculty or reporters in some organizations of the same ideology, how is that intellectually stimulating?
Your views never get challenged or debated, you just sit in your ideological circle-jerks and just parrot each other and blather on about how much the right sucks which lends itself to dogmatic thinking in exclusive echo chambers where dissenting views are denounced as heresy (racist, sexist, homophobic, ignorant, whatever), hounded out, and not debated.
Hell, at least Fox makes an effort to hire liberals.
Your views never get challenged or debated, you just sit in your ideological circle-jerks and just parrot each other and blather on about how much the right sucks which lends itself to dogmatic thinking in exclusive echo chambers where dissenting views are denounced as heresy (racist, sexist, homophobic, ignorant, whatever), hounded out, and not debated.
Yeah, but here's the difference: we go out and get sources (facts) from all sorts of places, then make a conclusion within the realm of logic.
"By embracing abortion, birth control, and denouncing housewives, has feminism destroyed itself by reducing the birth rate below the 2.1 kids per woman required to keep a society going"?
God, you picked like...the dumbest question. Do you even know what feminism is?
SkyGheNe on
0
Options
KalTorakOne way or another, they all end up inthe Undercity.Registered Userregular
So is widowson's argument basically that the left-wing is all group-think?
Oh, that must be why they can't pass even severely watered-down legislation in Congress. Because democrats are totally unanimous.
I dunno, I got from his argument that ancient, outdated arguments should be argued for over and over in every subject in higher education institutions just for the sake of controversy, and that educated people come to consensuses not because of study and scientific progress, but because nobody's bringing up any other viewpoints.
I mean, is it fair that today's liberal-dominated medical schools just dismiss without consideration the merits of leeches and bleeding? These methods were used for hundreds of years, they must have some merit!
Also, part of the problem why some people don't respect self-styled intellectuals and the education establishment, is that for alleged free thinkers, they pretty much think, do, and say basically the exact same things. Left-wing views and opinions that are never challenged or debated, just reinforced even when they're painfully and obviously wrong or at least imperfect.
This is extremely ignorant. Do you have any idea how many factions exist within the Democratic party? Do you really think that English Professors have the same exact views as Union Construction Workers?
I'd love to see your typical college professor ask "Just playing devil's advocate, but what if a rectum isn't a sexual organ?"
There are plenty of homophobic liberals, and plenty of people who are stupid enough to think that there is only a set way to have sex. For fuck's sake, some women will orgasm if you lick their ears right.
or "By embracing abortion, birth control, and denouncing housewives, has feminism destroyed itself by reducing the birth rate below the 2.1 kids per woman required to keep a society going"?
They would just have to flip through the literature to find out that this isn't so, so if it has come up, it has already been acknowledged as false so they can move on.
Or "Hrm, Honor killings are part of some cultures; can one ethically be a progressive multiculturalist when some cultural attributes are misogynistic, homophobic, and murderous?"
This is an ongoing social issue across the globe. People aren't sure how to deal with cultures that their own culture deems unethical or self-destructive. It's an ongoing debate. If you think there is a consensus on the matter you've been terribly misled.
When you literally have 90%ish of your faculty or reporters in some organizations of the same ideology, how is that intellectually stimulating?
The democratic party is not a monolithic philosophy anymore than the Teabaggers represent the whole of the Republican party. As for reporters, they aren't the ones who decide what news gets printed.
Your views never get challenged or debated, you just sit in your ideological circle-jerks and just parrot each other and blather on about how much the right sucks which lends itself to dogmatic thinking in exclusive echo chambers where dissenting views are denounced as heresy (racist, sexist, homophobic, ignorant, whatever), hounded out, and not debated.
This statement is grossly ignorant. This very forum is full of liberals arguing with each other.
Hell, at least Fox makes an effort to hire liberals.
And every other network has piles of conservatives. Moreso than liberals, if I recall.
Also, part of the problem why some people don't respect self-styled intellectuals and the education establishment, is that for alleged free thinkers, they pretty much think, do, and say basically the exact same things. Left-wing views and opinions that are never challenged or debated, just reinforced even when they're painfully and obviously wrong or at least imperfect.
I'd love to see your typical college professor ask "Just playing devil's advocate, but what if a rectum isn't a sexual organ?" or "By embracing abortion, birth control, and denouncing housewives, has feminism destroyed itself by reducing the birth rate below the 2.1 kids per woman required to keep a society going"? Or "Hrm, Honor killings are part of some cultures; can one ethically be a progressive multiculturalist when some cultural attributes are misogynistic, homophobic, and murderous?"
They don't say any of those things because all of those things are stupid.
If all of the educated people are saying one thing, and you're saying something else, consider the possibility that you might not be correct.
Posts
But he hit Reagan. And Brady.
I kinda wish it was true just so all of those retards could be disappeared and I wouldn't have to deal with the results of their inanity.
Guy needs to work on his aim. It's not like Reagan is a moving target.
Man, lack of creativity.
I heard he did to cover up the fact that Barnett vs. Obama wasn't dismissed and to draw attention away from his desecration of the Constitution. Hey, what's with the Rick Astley video?
Technically he missed Reagan but a richochet got him.
QEDMF xbl: PantsB G+
I don't think anyone gave him the memo that Republicans are for Medicare now.
Only when they have to vote on it.
Or when senior citizens ask them about it.
QEDMF xbl: PantsB G+
Actually, there doesn't even seem to be a generic choice for that style of program.
I posted this in the SE ++ politics thread yesterday.
Front page of Infowars. One poster thought it was from Fox News.
Poe's law needs to be amended to include Fox News.
twitch.tv/Taramoor
@TaramoorPlays
Taramoor on Youtube
EDIT: Looks like the NY Conservative Party has a real winner in Hoffman.
http://www.watertowndailytimes.com/article/20091023/OPINION01/310239957/-1/OPINION
http://www.conservapedia.com/Poe%27s_law
Thanks, I clicked the link and it spawned a black hole. I've been crushed into a superdense speck of matter by my own weight.
Jerk.
http://www.conservapedia.com/General_relativity
(wherein we learn that general relativity is a liberal conspiracy)
edit: also we have talked pretty extensively about the conservative bible rewrite but it is still hilarious
Pluto was a planet and I'll never forget
How the fuck do you Poe's Law Poe's Law
How is this possible
What the fuck
I wonder how much of conservapedia is joke articles.
A ton
I used to be part of a group of guys who trolled CONpedia (as we used to call it) a long, long time ago
My personal favorite thing to do was was take the Iraq article, delete everything that was written in it and substitute the words "Mostly harmless" in its place
We also used to make up "facts" about republican leadership and add it to their respective pages
Did you know that Rumsfeld enjoys fucking kittens in his off time? Or that Bush was born with 3/4 of his brain removed? Only the part that controls motor functions is now left
That is [strike]terrorism![/strike] ducks.
Nice edit, I liked the original better :P
Anyways yeah it was a dick thing to do, but our rationalization for it was was its express mission statement was spreading misinformation so turnabout was fair play
I dunno
boooooo
I linked the Poe's law conservapedia article in the last thread and no one gave me any attaboys.
I especially like the "analysis" section, which could easily be read like conservapedia-as-art-snob criticizing lesser attempts at parody.
http://www.dailygamecock.com/viewpoints/swine-flu-increases-state-power-1.828659
Right Pundits, "Obama's Daughters Not Vaccinated for H1N1"
http://www.rightpundits.com/?p=4920
Fox News, "First Daughters Not Vaccinated Against H1N1"
Just wanted to bring it up. This is what I don't like about discourse these days. If Obama got the shots for his daughters anyway, people would call him selfish. I feel bad for him: he can't win.
From a link on your post:
Would a Democrat want to fund something that's basically a commercial for the Republican party? Same thing here.
Also, part of the problem why some people don't respect self-styled intellectuals and the education establishment, is that for alleged free thinkers, they pretty much think, do, and say basically the exact same things. Left-wing views and opinions that are never challenged or debated, just reinforced even when they're painfully and obviously wrong or at least imperfect.
I'd love to see your typical college professor ask "Just playing devil's advocate, but what if a rectum isn't a sexual organ?" or "By embracing abortion, birth control, and denouncing housewives, has feminism destroyed itself by reducing the birth rate below the 2.1 kids per woman required to keep a society going"? Or "Hrm, Honor killings are part of some cultures; can one ethically be a progressive multiculturalist when some cultural attributes are misogynistic, homophobic, and murderous?"
When you literally have 90%ish of your faculty or reporters in some organizations of the same ideology, how is that intellectually stimulating?
Your views never get challenged or debated, you just sit in your ideological circle-jerks and just parrot each other and blather on about how much the right sucks which lends itself to dogmatic thinking in exclusive echo chambers where dissenting views are denounced as heresy (racist, sexist, homophobic, ignorant, whatever), hounded out, and not debated.
Hell, at least Fox makes an effort to hire liberals.
Margaret Thatcher
Oh, that must be why they can't pass even severely watered-down legislation in Congress. Because democrats are totally unanimous.
Yeah, but here's the difference: we go out and get sources (facts) from all sorts of places, then make a conclusion within the realm of logic.
Let 'em eat fucking pineapples!
God, you picked like...the dumbest question. Do you even know what feminism is?
I dunno, I got from his argument that ancient, outdated arguments should be argued for over and over in every subject in higher education institutions just for the sake of controversy, and that educated people come to consensuses not because of study and scientific progress, but because nobody's bringing up any other viewpoints.
I mean, is it fair that today's liberal-dominated medical schools just dismiss without consideration the merits of leeches and bleeding? These methods were used for hundreds of years, they must have some merit!
This is extremely ignorant. Do you have any idea how many factions exist within the Democratic party? Do you really think that English Professors have the same exact views as Union Construction Workers?
There are plenty of homophobic liberals, and plenty of people who are stupid enough to think that there is only a set way to have sex. For fuck's sake, some women will orgasm if you lick their ears right.
They would just have to flip through the literature to find out that this isn't so, so if it has come up, it has already been acknowledged as false so they can move on.
This is an ongoing social issue across the globe. People aren't sure how to deal with cultures that their own culture deems unethical or self-destructive. It's an ongoing debate. If you think there is a consensus on the matter you've been terribly misled.
The democratic party is not a monolithic philosophy anymore than the Teabaggers represent the whole of the Republican party. As for reporters, they aren't the ones who decide what news gets printed.
This statement is grossly ignorant. This very forum is full of liberals arguing with each other.
And every other network has piles of conservatives. Moreso than liberals, if I recall.
They don't say any of those things because all of those things are stupid.
If all of the educated people are saying one thing, and you're saying something else, consider the possibility that you might not be correct.