Well, I kinda have to wonder whether the "elitism" we all saw in high school is still at work. I mean, what are most of these politicians if not jocks/posh kids/cheerleaders? How many nerd/geeks are in Congress besides Al Franken?
I have to say that Fraken has impressed me as Senator. At least on tech issues he seems to get it right most of the time. Which is a bit surprising considering his Hollywood background and their love of destroying tech that might negatively impact their business model.
Story the first: A GOP judge in arch-evangelical Lubbock, Texas, predicts that there could be civil war if Obama wins a 2nd term.
Story the second: A GOP Sheriff candidate in New Hampshire would use deadly force to stop abortions.
Jesus fucking christ, how do these people get into office or onto ballots?
I'm surprised there isn't some sort of law preventing the taxation of a local populace by a local government with the intent to use the money for armed revolt if they guy they don't like wins.
They're so deluded. They honestly think that Obama has turned the US into Soviet Russia. Meanwhile, most of his more Leftist campaign planks and promises have been abandoned, and the ones that he attempted to implement were either half-assed or thwarted.
Meanwhile, Bush Jr. plunged us into more than a decade of downward spiral toward an authoritarian police state and a ruined economy and they're FINE with that.
WTF.
That's not to say that Obama hasn't added lots of authoritarian sprinkles to the cake, himself. Hooray for assassinating US citizens on the president's say-so and etc.
That's not to say that Obama hasn't added lots of authoritarian sprinkles to the cake, himself. Hooray for assassinating US citizens on the president's say-so and etc.
They lead with "we stand for Freedom, Prosperity, Individual Rights and Righteousness"
They follow with "we will accomplish this by removing fetters placed by the government on its citizens and taking the fight to the bad guys"
And end with "so now we're going to give your farm away to international financiers, start illegal wars, beat up Mexicans and arrest you for smoking pot so you can be slave labour in private prisons"
Liberals are more like Microsoft with "we are going to decriminalize drugs, promote worker's rights, end wars and try to prevent market crashes" by "writing and restructuring the current system" because "we believe in Equality, Justice and Non-Violence".
When you try to lead with concrete actions judged by their results, your results have to be perfect, and in today's media atmosphere it is very easy to make something appear less than perfect (even if it's just by creating a show called "Is this perfect?" and having people argue about it, thus creating doubt). Once something is shown to be not perfect, or is commonly understood to be no perfect, you don't want to get emotionally invested.
On the other hand, when you get people emotionally invested in a brand, that brand can almost do no wrong since all they have to do is appear to those feels to shore up their base.
This is why The Daily Show and Occupy are so popular (and so scary to the Right) but the Democrats are not. Also why "Hope and Change" won Obama the election. ALSO also why populism, left or right, pretty much always ends in ass holes taking power.
Can't see youtube at work, sorry.
Are you trying to say that Obama HASN'T authorized the assassination of a US citizen..?
Perfect example. This is absolutely a thing that is happening and if a Republican was doing it he wouldn't lose any support from his base but the same people in the media would be mad (and obviously they should be).
My whole house is Apple (except the laptops, Apple laptops are robbery) and I'm Left of Marx.
The Dems aren't even Left of Eisenhower but they're the default party of the Left and they're very bad at getting lefties interested in voting for them (until charming handsome dudes like Barry-O come along with his smooth voice and sweeping vague notions of progress, never mind his extra-legal murders).
The point is that leading will feelings and leaving results as a distant, almost vestigal third is a better way of capturing the hearts of large groups of people than trying to use results to stoke feelings.
Personally I don't think humans should be trusted to be in charge of anything that affects more than 200-300 people.
You understand that doctors calculate pregnancy as 2 weeks before conception right? So when a woman gets a positive pregnancy test, even though she ovulated/conceived 2 weeks ago, the actual gestational age of the pregnancy is 4 weeks. Baring someone having really messed up cycles or ovulation monitoring.
This law is bad because it is telling women what they can and can't do with their bodies. Using the common medical definition of gestational age isn't what should be focused on here.
I'm reading the actual bill right now (or what I think is the last version of it) and it is really fucked up. The two week medical definition that everyone is freaking out about feels like major misdirection on the media or bill writers' parts so no one sees how horrible everything else in it is.
The bill isn't defining the pregnancy state of every woman in Arizona. The bill just legally defines the gestational age of a pregnant woman's pregnancy in weeks from last menstrual period. If you want to get your rage on for today here's the bill itself: HB 2036
Comments
Story the second: A GOP Sheriff candidate in New Hampshire would use deadly force to stop abortions.
Jesus fucking christ, how do these people get into office or onto ballots?
Meanwhile, Bush Jr. plunged us into more than a decade of downward spiral toward an authoritarian police state and a ruined economy and they're FINE with that.
WTF.
That's not to say that Obama hasn't added lots of authoritarian sprinkles to the cake, himself. Hooray for assassinating US citizens on the president's say-so and etc.
Are you trying to say that Obama HASN'T authorized the assassination of a US citizen..?
http://www.salon.com/2010/04/07/assassinations_2/
They lead with "we stand for Freedom, Prosperity, Individual Rights and Righteousness"
They follow with "we will accomplish this by removing fetters placed by the government on its citizens and taking the fight to the bad guys"
And end with "so now we're going to give your farm away to international financiers, start illegal wars, beat up Mexicans and arrest you for smoking pot so you can be slave labour in private prisons"
Liberals are more like Microsoft with "we are going to decriminalize drugs, promote worker's rights, end wars and try to prevent market crashes" by "writing and restructuring the current system" because "we believe in Equality, Justice and Non-Violence".
When you try to lead with concrete actions judged by their results, your results have to be perfect, and in today's media atmosphere it is very easy to make something appear less than perfect (even if it's just by creating a show called "Is this perfect?" and having people argue about it, thus creating doubt). Once something is shown to be not perfect, or is commonly understood to be no perfect, you don't want to get emotionally invested.
On the other hand, when you get people emotionally invested in a brand, that brand can almost do no wrong since all they have to do is appear to those feels to shore up their base.
This is why The Daily Show and Occupy are so popular (and so scary to the Right) but the Democrats are not. Also why "Hope and Change" won Obama the election. ALSO also why populism, left or right, pretty much always ends in ass holes taking power. Perfect example. This is absolutely a thing that is happening and if a Republican was doing it he wouldn't lose any support from his base but the same people in the media would be mad (and obviously they should be).
The point is that leading will feelings and leaving results as a distant, almost vestigal third is a better way of capturing the hearts of large groups of people than trying to use results to stoke feelings.
Personally I don't think humans should be trusted to be in charge of anything that affects more than 200-300 people.
http://www.upworthy.com/a-tea-partier-decided-to-pick-a-fight-with-a-foreign-president-it-didnt-go-so-we?g=2
http://thenewcivilrightsmovement.com/pregnancy-begins-2-weeks-before-conception-now-the-law-in-arizona/politics/2012/04/13/37993
This law is bad because it is telling women what they can and can't do with their bodies. Using the common medical definition of gestational age isn't what should be focused on here.
I didn't think about that because all I ever see is Pregnant rats, mice and rabbits :-p
The bill isn't defining the pregnancy state of every woman in Arizona. The bill just legally defines the gestational age of a pregnant woman's pregnancy in weeks from last menstrual period. If you want to get your rage on for today here's the bill itself: HB 2036
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/bill-destler/todd-akin-rape-global-warming-_b_1833817.html?utm_hp_ref=tw