This forum is in permanent archive mode. Our new active community can be found here.

Republican? Just scream and lie.

1142143145147148315

Comments

  • edited January 2012
    On Florida's Space Coast, Gingrich Aims For The Moon

    I listened to this on the way to work this morning and just gave a good guffah at this whole notion. I also agree with Emi, on how I would like to see this happen, but it's not honestly plausible right now.

    This is just a stupid political ploy that Leroy is doing to make him look charismatic, which he really needs since I think he looks like a fucking gnome. As the article says quotes him, "I come at space from a standpoint of a romantic belief that it really is part of our destiny".

    He also compares this grandiose promise to the grandiose promises of Lincoln and Kennedy. Both positively well known past POTUSs.

    The problem is many people won't see past that. While the big hot button issues for the election are the economy and jobs, people are tired of hearing of all the doom and gloom of it. People want to think of happy times and be given the promise of better days. Newty Gnome Leroy knows how to play politics, even though I think it's a bit dated and I don't think the nation will swallow it. Just the old fogeys.
    If he's trying to build a base on the moon, then I think Ro's theory about him will be proven true: he really is the emperor. Next he'll put a laser on it and everyone will feel the power of his fully operational battle station
    I TOLD YOU!
    Post edited by Rochelle on
  • I think the moonbase/SciFi Space program pandering is frustrating, because as a space program nerd I really want stuff like that in the far future. However, I separate stuff I want from what I need. One does not buy designer shoes when they are starving. There are far more important issues on our collective plates right now. I agree with Rym and Scott that we should have a semi-moratorium on manned space flight for the time being.


  • huh...

    Well, I for one would like to congradulate PA for having solved all of their problems late last week as they obviously had a lot of time on their hands early this week.
  • Wow. It's like nobody ever told them anything about American Government.
  • The resolution was dubbed “noncontroversial” so it could be brought to the House floor quickly and without committee hearings. It passed unanimously.
    The stupid... it burns...
  • I hate Pennsylvania so much for so many reasons. Mostly because it's between me and Maryland and takes three goddamned hours to drive through.
    But this...this is particularly stupid.
  • edited February 2012
    Well, THAT's interesting.

    So, Anonymous has been attacking white supremacist groups, and they managed to break into a bunch of things owned by Jamie Kelso, a notorious white supremacist. And I don't just mean defaced their website(though, they did exactly that while they were there), They stole a TON of stuff - Private emails, private forum posts and messages, usernames, unencrypted passwords, credit card details, the fucking lot. Why am I speaking of it here? Well, as you might expect considering the thread - It's full of Paul. Huge amounts of members talking about supporting Ron Paul, working with Paul, volunteering for paul, private emails to and from, and even old ronnie regularly meeting with a number of members and taking conference calls with the A3P board of directors.

    More news as this develops, but it's certainly interesting. And considering the file of stuff that Anonymous pulled is a good gig or so in size and is apparently mostly text, I can't see them faking quite THAT much information. I'm downloading it as we speak, just to have a captain at the contents, should be good for a laugh.

    Here's a link to the International business times discussing it. Full file is available on partyvan and other places where quality Operation Blitzkrieg files are found.

    Oh, and when they hacked the page, they put rainbow dash on it.
    Post edited by Churba on
  • Here's a link to the International business times discussing it.
    Full fledged retardation in the comments section there.
  • Here's a link to the International business times discussing it.
    Full fledged retardation in the comments section there.
    Seriously. Some of those comments are barely coherent.
  • It's not very surprising that a White Surpremecist group supports him, considering that he is fairly overtly racist and would work to remove things like the Civil Rights act. I'd be surprised if he supports the White Supremecist group though.
  • edited February 2012
    It's not very surprising that a White Surpremecist group supports him, considering that he is fairly overtly racist and would work to remove things like the Civil Rights act. I'd be surprised if he supports the White Supremecist group though.
    Well, the fact he was regularly meeting with members and calling the board of directors is pretty damning by itself. Judging a man by the company he keeps, y'know? I'll be digging though the infodump as the night goes on, I'll share more when I know more.

    Post edited by Churba on
  • It's not very surprising that a White Surpremecist group supports him, considering that he is fairly overtly racist and would work to remove things like the Civil Rights act. I'd be surprised if he supports the White Supremecist group though.
    Well, the fact he was regularly meeting with members and calling the board of directors is pretty damning by itself. Judging a man by the company he keeps, y'know? I'll be digging though the infodump as the night goes on, I'll share more when I know more.

    Yeah, but I don't see this as surprising really. The more I think about it, the more it's just "Well, that makes sense.". If you've read anything about him that is not propaganda, you can tell he's all for tiny Federal government. You can also tell he's also racist, sexist, and not a fan of "The Gays".
  • Don't forget, also a massive conspiracy theorist and a kooky survivalist.

    And, I don't think I've ever seen him in a suit that fits him right. Seriously, Ken dolls have better tailors.
  • And, I don't think I've ever seen him in a suit that fits him right. Seriously, Ken dolls have better tailors.
    Hard to get a suit that fits right when you don't let any man touch your inseam.
  • edited February 2012
    And, I don't think I've ever seen him in a suit that fits him right. Seriously, Ken dolls have better tailors.
    Hard to get a suit that fits right when you don't let any man touch your inseam.
    MAH PENIS DEMANDS LIBERTY!

    Post edited by Churba on
  • Liberty sounds like the name of a very patriotic hooker.
  • edited February 2012
    So the Wall Street Journal recently declined to publish a letter about the evidence for man-made climate change, signed by 255 members of the National Academy of Sciences. Then the WSJ published a letter signed by 16 scientists which declares man-made climate change to be false. The letter they decided to publish was filled with errors, lies, strawmen and quote-mines. And the 16 scientists that signed it mostly have nothing to do with climatology and/or are retired. And if they actually signed that garbage, they probably should retire. Forbes takes the WSJ to task for it.
    Post edited by chaosof99 on
  • So the Wall Street Journal recently declined to publish a letter about the evidence for man-made climate change, signed by 255 members of the National Academy of Sciences. Then the WSJ published a letter signed by 16 scientists which declares man-made climate change to be false. The letter they decided to publish was filled with errors, lies, strawmen and quote-mines. And the 16 scientists that signed it mostly have nothing to do with climatology and/or are retired. And if they actually signed that garbage, they probably should retire. Forbes takes the WSJ to task for it.
    Love it. Once again, it looks like people assuming that a scientific argument has 2 equal and opposite viewpoints are simply incorrect. There's the facts, and there's !facts.

  • But science does have equivalent arguments. One is granted theory status and the other is granted "crazy" theory status. Two words are better than one, right?
  • But science does have equivalent arguments. One is granted theory status and the other is granted "crazy" theory status. Two words are better than one, right?
    That's a good point. Two words are better than one.
  • Like famous and infamous :)
  • Like Slavery and Indentured Servitude.
  • Like camp and concentration camp.
  • Like camp and concentration camp.
    That's for heavy thinkers, right?
  • If there are two sides to every argument, why aren't there pro dandruff shampoos?
  • If there are two sides to every argument, why aren't there pro dandruff shampoos?
    I think I might be using pro dandruff shampoo :-p
  • "Despite their important implications for interpersonal behaviors and relations, cognitive abilities have been largely ignored as explanations of prejudice. We proposed and tested mediation models in which lower cognitive ability predicts greater prejudice, an effect mediated through the endorsement of right-wing ideologies (social conservatism, right-wing authoritarianism) and low levels of contact with out-groups. In an analysis of two large-scale, nationally representative United Kingdom data sets (N = 15,874), we found that lower general intelligence (g) in childhood predicts greater racism in adulthood, and this effect was largely mediated via conservative ideology. A secondary analysis of a U.S. data set confirmed a predictive effect of poor abstract-reasoning skills on antihomosexual prejudice, a relation partially mediated by both authoritarianism and low levels of intergroup contact. All analyses controlled for education and socioeconomic status. Our results suggest that cognitive abilities play a critical, albeit underappreciated, role in prejudice. Consequently, we recommend a heightened focus on cognitive ability in research on prejudice and a better integration of cognitive ability into prejudice models."

    Source
  • edited February 2012
    I can buy that. I always thought that conservatism/xenophobia/prejudice tends to stem from fear of the unfamiliar. When people are ignorant of, say, foreign cultures, perhaps they lack the intelligence to understand and assimilate new information when they are confronted with these cultures, thus they fear the unknown intruding into their narrow little world. Same goes for conservatism and adapting to change.
    A smart person is confronted by something new, is curious, and adapts the new knowledge into their world view. A unintelligent person looks at the new thing, rejects the information, and becomes afraid of it because they are unable to understand it immediately.
    Post edited by gomidog on
  • So this isn't really against Republicans either, but more of an interesting thought I wanted to dissect. Found this comment on Reddit in response to the question: Why are Atheists so hated in the US?

    Comment!

    Take the time to read it in entirety before commenting, as I think it's an interesting dissection of the thoughts, although I'd like to see source material before choosing to agree/disagree. Specifically, for points 2, 3, 6, and 7. I don't have time to dissect it right now, but when I get home tonight I'll probably read it again and make a longer post. I thought you guys would find it interesting.

    Is it true? Do you disagree with any of the points?
Sign In or Register to comment.