blaen99

iTrader: (6)

How did I miss this?!?

This guy is full of lulz. If only our politicians were funny -and- headache inducing as a rule, instead of just headache inducing!

Braineack

iTrader: (62)

i dont see the problem.

blaen99

iTrader: (6)

http://tpmdc.talkingpointsmemo.com/2...it.php?ref=fpb

Oh man, some tidbits in this election cycle I'm loving. That. Is. Epic.

And it led to http://tpmcafe.talkingpointsmemo.com...nservative.php which is hilarious.

Scrappy Jack

iTrader: (2)

That was a pretty weakly written article - that's not the surprise. It's that you apparently place any level of value in it.

It seems to me that one of West's points is that the Jesse Jacksons and the Al Sharptons of the world would be financially ruined if all of the lower class citizens they claim to represent were able to actually pull themselves up the socio-economic ladder via equal opportunity (different from equal outcomes).

The undefined references to Social Security and Medicare strike me as complete non sequiturs.

gearhead_318

iTrader: (1)

blaen99

iTrader: (6)

Canttellifserious.jpg

Braineack

iTrader: (62)

The NCAA used to fight against things like minimum wage, noy they lead the race they are fighting for up a ladder without any rungs.

blaen99

iTrader: (6)

I post a humorous political link that makes me laugh my *** off, and you guys get all serious on me ><.

blaen99

iTrader: (6)

http://www.conceptualguerilla.com/?q=node/402

No clue if it's been posted before (I did search), but it's a fascinating read. I don't know if I agree or disagree with the author right now, but it's definitely a worthwhile read.

crimson_yachiru

Not so sure what is worthwhile. Even if you accept his axioms the argument breaks down, and he has absolutely no support for his "solutions" to the problem.

Also, I have a problem with this statement: "It is our mythology, and it is no more real than belief in Zeus, Hera and Aphrodite." If you are talking about bullshit and imagination, you can't use the word "real" without defining it.

To add to that, the author stated that "You’re goddamn right we can. Thomas Jefferson said so." almost certainly in reference to this quote: "derive their just powers from the consent of the governed."

Unfortunately for the author, that is a gross misunderstanding of Thomas Jefferson's quote. In order for the "general welfare" to be funded, there must be consent. Well I don't consent, so go ---- yourself. And most of the peeps who have earned their money will not consent either, which leaves your welfare programs grossly underfunded.

The author states: "we have a legitimate right to rearrange our institutions, system of laws, and government created infrastructure to extend the benefits of prosperity to everyone, not just a privileged few." Again, if by "we" you mean "the people that agree with you." The beauty about living in a democracy is that your little minority viewpoint can't be enforced on the rest of us.

And finally, this guy obviously does not understand the difference between our current economic system, a butchered crony "capitalism," and actual free-market practices.

And seriously, if this guy is so pissed at the system, he should go on strike. We'll see if his strike has any impact on the system. If his so called "cheap-labor conservatives" would go on strike, it would take only a few years for him to be begging them to come back.

jared8783

iTrader: (2)

jared8783

iTrader: (2)

this has prob been posted on this forum before but i like the caption

jared8783

iTrader: (2)

Can you say police state?



fbi seeking developers for app to monitor facebook and twitter

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2012...osts-sparking/

jared8783

iTrader: (2)

and dont forget about this

blaen99

iTrader: (6)

http://www.salon.com/2012/02/19/bill...ics/singleton/

This seriously is making me start to lose faith in the US political system.

The article itself is awful. But it gets worse.

Professional astroturfers were caught posting comments against the story.

For those who do not know, professional astroturfers are people who are paid a salary specifically to post false or half-truths to either attack a platform someone wants, or buttress a position falsely, or what have you. Yes Brainy, there are people paid to do nothing other than post on forums and websites on the internet to support a party's or a company's position/etc.. It's been known that the Republican party has been doing this for awhile, just not this blatantly (And before Brainy chimes in, yes, the Dems do this to, just not...like that...)

I'm so unbelievably disappointed in our political system right now.

olderguy

iTrader: (19)

COSTELLO: I want to talk about the unemployment rate in America.
ABBOTT: Good Subject. Terrible Times. It's 9%.
COSTELLO: That many people are out of work?
ABBOTT: No, that's 16%.
COSTELLO: You just said 9%.
ABBOTT: 9% Unemployed.
COSTELLO: Right 9% out of work.
ABBOTT: No, that's 16%.
COSTELLO: Okay, so it's 16% unemployed.
ABBOTT: No, that's 9%...
COSTELLO: WAIT A MINUTE. Is it 9% or 16%?
ABBOTT: 9% are unemployed. 16% are out of work.
COSTELLO: IF you are out of work you are unemployed.
ABBOTT: No, you can't count the "Out of Work" as the unemployed. You have to look for work to be unemployed.
COSTELLO: BUT THEY ARE OUT OF WORK!!!
ABBOTT: No, you miss my point.
COSTELLO: What point?
ABBOTT: Someone who doesn't look for work, can't be counted with those who look for work. It wouldn't be fair.
COSTELLO: To who?
ABBOTT: The unemployed.
COSTELLO: But they are ALL out of work.
ABBOTT: No, the unemployed are actively looking for work. Those who are out of work stopped looking. They gave up. And, if you give up, you are no longer in the ranks of the unemployed.
COSTELLO: So if you're off the unemployment roles, that would count as less unemployment?
ABBOTT: Unemployment would go down. Absolutely!
COSTELLO: The unemployment just goes down because you don't look for work?
ABBOTT: Absolutely it goes down. That's how you get to 9%. Otherwise it would be 16%. You don't want to read about 16% unemployment, do ya?
COSTELLO: That would be frightening.
ABBOTT: Absolutely.
COSTELLO: Wait, I got a question for you. That means there are two ways to bring down the unemployment number?
ABBOTT: Two ways is correct.
COSTELLO: Unemployment can go down if someone gets a job?
ABBOTT: Correct.
COSTELLO: And unemployment can also go down if you stop looking for a job?
ABBOTT: Bingo.
COSTELLO: So there are two ways to bring unemployment down, and the easier of the two is to just stop looking for work.
ABBOTT: Now you're thinking like an economist.
COSTELLO: I don't even know what in the world I just said!
And now you know how and why Obama's unemployment figures are improving and will continue to improve all the way to November 6, 2012

Don’t take my word for it though, you can read the CBO Report yourself: http://www.cbo.gov/ftpdocs/127xx/doc...6-Unemployment.


Now some of you youngsters will ask "Who is Abbott and Costello" Google it!

blaen99

iTrader: (6)

Bush did the same, olderguy.

The practice started with...well, I know Reagan's administration did it at the earliest, but I don't doubt someone is going to come in here and correct me that an earlier administration started the practice.

Considering A&C did a skit on it, I don't doubt it started before they made the skit.

Scrappy Jack

iTrader: (2)

You are right, the article was pretty awful. I couldn't be bothered to read through the whole thing - please quote some sections relevant to the astroturfing portion.

blaen99

iTrader: (6)

Too much to post to be frank, it's...bad

To the point of at least one poster admits they are employed by him and still proceeds with the derp.

Relevant post. Read it for yourself.

olderguy

iTrader: (19)

The skit is fabricated and not original to A&C.

Here is some interesting reading: http://www.bls.gov/cps/cps_htgm.htm