chemvictim wrote:Repubs good, Dems bad. We know.

I think they're all worthy of contempt.

True. But it irks me that people blame the Repubs for the stalemate, when it's because they can't trust the Dems to keep their word.

bhodilee wrote:CNN is reporting that the hacker group anonymous has declared "cyberwar" on Israel. I'm not going to comment further for fear of getting my life hacked to pieces. But you can look it up if you'd like.

That's a smart move on their part. Not. I'm waiting to see their identities revealed by the Israeli hackers.

MarkDaSpark wrote:True. But it irks me that people blame the Repubs for the stalemate, when it's because they can't trust the Dems to keep their word.

kind of like how the dems don't trust the Pubs to keep theirs? I mean, I know the Pubs are the party of Boy Scouts and Religious people, two ABSOLUTELY trustworthy type organizations.

bhodilee wrote:kind of like how the dems don't trust the Pubs to keep theirs? I mean, I know the Pubs are the party of Boy Scouts and Religious people, two ABSOLUTELY trustworthy type organizations.

Exactly. Because I'm an Eagle Scout, and I'm also Religious. I just don't throw it in people's faces.

And I trust fellow Boy Scouts and religious people more than I trust the Dems I've met. Well, except for those here on WW. Them I trust! The ones I've actually met.

jawlz wrote:Entitlements (social security, medicare, etc) should be dialed WAY back, all the redundancies in government should be eliminated, federal education funding should be eliminated or SUPER reduced (education is a state issue, not a federal one), miltary spending should be cut back by a decent amount, etc etc. There is a ton to cut. I just don't think that everything should be eliminated or completely privatized.

However, of all the above programs you cite, the military is the only one enumerated in the Constitution.

rjquillin wrote:However, of all the above programs you cite, the military is the only one enumerated in the Constitution.

I am all for an extremely limited federal government that bears no resemblance whatsoever to what we have today. To that end, I am pro-secession, however unrealistic and problematic that is.

However, when I said 'I wouldn't go that far,' I was responding specifically to Kyle's post in favor of putting tolls on sidewalks and privatizing police and fire departments.

MarkDaSpark wrote:Exactly. Because I'm an Eagle Scout, and I'm also Religious. I just don't throw it in people's faces.

And I trust fellow Boy Scouts and religious people more than I trust the Dems I've met. Well, except for those here on WW. Them I trust! The ones I've actually met.

You would do well to never trust me

I don't like either institution, but I also don't particularly enjoy the Dems. I just don't buy it's all their fault and the Republican's are this wonderfully magnanimous group that plants trees and helps impovershied paraplegic orphans in their spare time.

bhodilee wrote:You would do well to never trust me

I don't like either institution, but I also don't particularly enjoy the Dems. I just don't buy it's all their fault and the Republican's are this wonderfully magnanimous group that plants trees and helps impovershied paraplegic orphans in their spare time.

But they are!

And remember, we haven't met yet!

MarkDaSpark wrote:And I trust fellow Boy Scouts and religious people more than I trust the Dems I've met. Well, except for those here on WW. Them I trust! The ones I've actually met.

I am genuinely afraid of some of the very religious people from my hometown, based on their facebook posts alone. They're not well.

I just thought I'd circle back to the property tax debate, since I just got my notice of next year's taxes here in lovely South Dakota.

I'm thinking I might have to go protest my assessment, because my taxes are slated to go up by a whopping 90 cents per year. Time to exercise my second amendment rights, as some people say.

coynedj wrote:I just thought I'd circle back to the property tax debate, since I just got my notice of next year's taxes here in lovely South Dakota.

I'm thinking I might have to go protest my assessment, because my taxes are slated to go up by a whopping 90 cents per year. Time to exercise my second amendment rights, as some people say.

You should probably secede.

coynedj wrote:I just thought I'd circle back to the property tax debate, since I just got my notice of next year's taxes here in lovely South Dakota.

I'm thinking I might have to go protest my assessment, because my taxes are slated to go up by a whopping 90 cents per year. Time to exercise my second amendment rights, as some people say.

SD is so ridiculous cheap to live in. If they allowed wine shipping and had less snow, I'd totally move to Rapid City.

Racist thing: Whenever I'm in Rapid City I like to play "Mexican" or "Indian". I know it's completely messed up and racist, but it entertains me greatly. And I'm probably wrong most of the time.

bhodilee wrote:SD is so ridiculous cheap to live in. If they allowed wine shipping and had less snow, I'd totally move to Rapid City.

Just get wootleggers, like I do.

Can't make any promises on the snow, though. But having grown up in western New York where 100 inches is nothing special, this place is a lightweight.

coynedj wrote:Just get wootleggers, like I do.

Can't make any promises on the snow, though. But having grown up in western New York where 100 inches is nothing special, this place is a lightweight.

I don't like snow, and I'm getting rapidly tired of cold in general. Not tired enough to brave the gauntlet of California idiocy, but close.

bhodilee wrote:I don't like snow, and I'm getting rapidly tired of cold in general. Not tired enough to brave the gauntlet of California idiocy, but close.

You could try Florida.

chemvictim wrote:You could try Florida.

Double H. Hurricanes and Humidity.

bhodilee wrote:Double H. Hurricanes and Humidity.

More like Triple H;
Hurricanes, Humidity and Heat.
iirc

rjquillin wrote:More like Triple H;
Hurricanes, Humidity and Heat.
iirc

good call

Reasons to move (back) to the South.

I still say a lot of these things. "You couldn't pay me to live in New York" is one.

chemvictim wrote: Reasons to move (back) to the South.

I still say a lot of these things. "You couldn't pay me to live in New York" is one.

is this meme still active? yawn.

canonizer wrote:is this meme still active? yawn.

Was new to me. Sorry.

chemvictim wrote: Reasons to move (back) to the South.

I still say a lot of these things. "You couldn't pay me to live in New York" is one.

And every one of them is a reason I could never live in the south... Except for the beer funneling one. That I'm cool with.

mother wrote:And every one of them is a reason I could never live in the south... Except for the beer funneling one. That I'm cool with.

Even Jack and coke? Really?

I don't think I could move back to the south because I've become terrified of bible-thumpers and mosquitoes. But I miss the laid-back attitudes. And my family. You know.

chemvictim wrote:Even Jack and coke? Really?

I don't think I could move back to the south because I've become terrified of bible-thumpers and mosquitoes. But I miss the laid-back attitudes. And my family. You know.

You're right, Jack and Coke is ok too.

Because this is healthy

Seriously, boycott the electoral college so the House gets to pick the president? While legally permissible, why would you ever contemplate this as a rational solution. feast me running, even the kind of thing that gets the Secret Service on your doorstep is a better idea than that.

I swear, we need to just let Israel step on the Palestinians. There's cease fire negotiations going on, so what does Hamas do? That's right, they blow up a Bus, and then PRAISE IT.

Hamas praised the attack, but did not claim responsibility.
"We told you #IDF that our blessed hands will reach your leaders and soldiers wherever they are," the al Qassam Brigades, the military wing of Hamas, said on Twitter. "You opened the Gates of Hell on Yourselves."

That's the equivalent of, well, of, ummm, I can't come up with any equivalent version of feasting someone while shaking their hand.

And somehow, the rest of the world thinks Israel should just let this happen?

I'm literally just dumbfounded.

Edit: More goodness

Egyptian President Mohamed Morsy, who has tried to broker a peace deal, said Tuesday that the "travesty of the Israel aggression on Gaza will end in a few hours."

And this is the guy trying to broker the peace deal????????

Edit*2: This one did make me chuckle though

Pope Benedict, speaking from Vatican City, also issued a plea for peace

Cause, ya know, either side gives a giblet what you think.

bhodilee wrote:Because this is healthy

Seriously, boycott the electoral college so the House gets to pick the president? While legally permissible, why would you ever contemplate this as a rational solution. feast me running, even the kind of thing that gets the Secret Service on your doorstep is a better idea than that.

Feast me running is my new favorite saying. This election continues to confuse and depress me. I remember when Bush won, I was disappointed because I didn't like him and I thought he won by playing on people's fears about gays, but life went on. This seems different. Anti-Obamites continue to make personal insults against people who supported Obama or just didn't condemn him loudly enough. (I'm talking about people I know, not randoms). They keep bringing up the "End Times," and say that it's caused by liberals, people like me. Again, these are people I know, and I can't figure out how anyone thinks it's okay to behave that way. It's nuts.

bhodilee wrote:I swear, we need to just let Israel step on the Palestinians. There's cease fire negotiations going on, so what does Hamas do? That's right, they blow up a Bus, and then PRAISE IT.

... stuff threads don't pick up ...

Cause, ya know, either side gives a giblet what you think.

I especially liked how

Israel launched the conflict eight days ago with a stated goal of ending the frequent rocket attacks on southern Israel from inside Gaza.

Israel "launched" the conflict? Gotta love how the MSM makes it Israel's fault for defending themselves.


Oh, and how they (Hamas) are "militants" and not Terrorists.


Edit: Or as Mother posted on FB:

MarkDaSpark wrote:Israel "launched" the conflict? Gotta love how the MSM makes it Israel's fault for defending themselves.


Oh, and how they (Hamas) are "militants" and not Terrorists.


Edit: Or as Mother posted on FB:

You have an excellent point. Our own government classifies Hamas as a terrorist organization. Therefore, you'd think our media would represent them as such, and not Militants. Also, yeah, Mother had another post on Facebook that notes how Israel is always listed first, making them seem the aggressor. This is a perfect example of that. Israel "launched" the offensive to stop the rocket attacks from Gaza.....um....ok then.

chemvictim wrote:Feast me running is my new favorite saying. This election continues to confuse and depress me. I remember when Bush won, I was disappointed because I didn't like him and I thought he won by playing on people's fears about gays, but life went on. This seems different. Anti-Obamites continue to make personal insults against people who supported Obama or just didn't condemn him loudly enough. (I'm talking about people I know, not randoms). They keep bringing up the "End Times," and say that it's caused by liberals, people like me. Again, these are people I know, and I can't figure out how anyone thinks it's okay to behave that way. It's nuts.

As you didn't support Bush, you likely don't remember the abuse he and his supporters suffered. I spent a significant amount of time on college campuses around the time of Bush's reelection, so the hatred of Republicans was obviously magnified, but comparisons of Bush to H-i-t-l-e-r and his supporters to Na-z-i-s and i-d-i-o-t-i-c country-bumpkins were prevalent, and not exactly uncommon throughout many parts of the country. It was every bit as nasty as what the wing-nuts are now saying about Obama and his supporters.


A good chunk of that is a result of people living in bubbles of like-minded people and not engaging in any real fashion with different points of view. It is very easy, when this happens, to see the other side as nefarious rather than simply misguided. I have been able to spend time people in different groups that are affected by this - from the 'bible-thumping,' 'all liberals are commie atheists!' types to the urban-dwelling 'everyone in the middle of the country is a slack-jawed, racist wishbone' types. I am slightly more annoyed by the latter group, as they in general have more education and proclaim to have more tolerance, but in actual deeds show little of that tolerance and often even less open-mindedness (but that annoyance may be increased as a function of geography and living mainly surrounded by them as opposed to another group).


edit yay woot filters!

jawlz wrote:As you didn't support Bush, you likely don't remember the abuse he and his supporters suffered. I spent a significant amount of time on college campuses around the time of Bush's reelection, so the hatred of Republicans was obviously magnified, but comparisons of Bush to H-i-t-l-e-r and his supporters to Na-z-i-s and i-d-i-o-t-i-c country-bumpkins were prevalent, and not exactly uncommon throughout many parts of the country. It was every bit as nasty as what the wing-nuts are now saying about Obama and his supporters.


A good chunk of that is a result of people living in bubbles of like-minded people and not engaging in any real fashion with different points of view. It is very easy, when this happens, to see the other side as nefarious rather than simply misguided. I have been able to spend time people in different groups that are affected by this - from the 'bible-thumping,' 'all liberals are commie atheists!' types to the urban-dwelling 'everyone in the middle of the country is a slack-jawed, racist wishbone' types. I am slightly more annoyed by the latter group, as they in general have more education and proclaim to have more tolerance, but in actual deeds show little of that tolerance and often even less open-mindedness (but that annoyance may be increased as a function of geography and living mainly surrounded by them as opposed to another group).


edit yay woot filters!

It hasn't stopped. I read reports where celebrities that supported Romney were subjected to personal attacks and abuse as well.


And I especially liked the characterization of attacks on UN Ambassador S. Rice as "racist". Unlike those same type of attacks on Sec'ty of State C. Rice. Right.

Dog whistle time.

The Bush election was awhile ago, but as I recall I often criticized him. What I did not do was call my friends and family stupid, or wishbones, or blame them for everything I saw wrong with the world, threaten to secede, blame them for God's abandonment of the country, etc. I'm talking about behavior on a personal level. To me, that's different from making fun of a politician or insulting a celebrity on the internet.

I called Bush stupid many times. It wasn't nice of me to do that. However, I think it would totally unacceptable to call my friend stupid for voting for him. Does that make sense? That's what people are doing now, like it's no big deal. No such thing as reasonable disagreement anymore. It sucks.

chemvictim wrote:The Bush election was awhile ago, but as I recall I often criticized him. What I did not do was call my friends and family stupid, or wishbones, or blame them for everything I saw wrong with the world, threaten to secede, blame them for God's abandonment of the country, etc. I'm talking about behavior on a personal level. To me, that's different from making fun of a politician or insulting a celebrity on the internet.

I called Bush stupid many times. It wasn't nice of me to do that. However, I think it would totally unacceptable to call my friend stupid for voting for him. Does that make sense? That's what people are doing now, like it's no big deal. No such thing as reasonable disagreement anymore. It sucks.

All I'm saying is that it's not a new phenomenon, and it didn't start with Obama. I was (personally!) called a war-monger, n-a-z-i-esque, ignorant, and small minded for supporting Bush over Kerry (and in a relatively mild-mannered way). The personal attacks have always been there, but they seemed to accelerate/become more accepted during Bush's presidency, and I will admit they show little sign of being any less acceptable under Obama. It is a sad state of affairs, but it isn't brought on by only (or even mainly) just one particular side.

chemvictim wrote:The Bush election was awhile ago, but as I recall I often criticized him. What I did not do was call my friends and family stupid, or wishbones, or blame them for everything I saw wrong with the world, threaten to secede, blame them for God's abandonment of the country, etc. I'm talking about behavior on a personal level. To me, that's different from making fun of a politician or insulting a celebrity on the internet.

I called Bush stupid many times. It wasn't nice of me to do that. However, I think it would totally unacceptable to call my friend stupid for voting for him. Does that make sense? That's what people are doing now, like it's no big deal. No such thing as reasonable disagreement anymore. It sucks.

Oh, it wasn't "just" insults, but vitriolic attacks. Basically threatening them personally.

jawlz wrote:All I'm saying is that it's not a new phenomenon, and it didn't start with Obama. I was (personally!) called a war-monger, n-a-z-i-esque, ignorant, and small minded for supporting Bush over Kerry (and in a relatively mild-mannered way). The personal attacks have always been there, but they seemed to accelerate/become more accepted during Bush's presidency, and I will admit they show little sign of being any less acceptable under Obama. It is a sad state of affairs, but it isn't brought on by only (or even mainly) just one particular side.

That's disgusting. Maybe it is a regional thing, like you said. In my experience (and I'm only talking about personal experience, not celebrities or anonymous internet commentary) it's been the other way. (I was in the south and the midwest for the Bush years) Either way, it's unacceptable. Why do we tolerate this?

MarkDaSpark wrote:Oh, it wasn't "just" insults, but vitriolic attacks. Basically threatening them personally.

I don't condone that behavior. If I knew anyone who did it, I'd be mad at them. But my liberal friends tend to be very mild-mannered and polite about politics.

chemvictim wrote:That's disgusting. Maybe it is a regional thing, like you said. In my experience (and I'm only talking about personal experience, not celebrities or anonymous internet commentary) it's been the other way. (I was in the south and the midwest for the Bush years) Either way, it's unacceptable. Why do we tolerate this?

Regionalism is certainly part of it, and I would imagine that some of it is also spillover from how intensely vitriolic things get in most places online. The best way to respond is, of course, to just continue calmly stating your case and not feed anything into the hyper-antagonistic energy (somewhat like what happened in the Russell Brand and Westboro Baptists interview, though I never really went for the comedic approach as eventually it becomes one of dismissing what the other person says rather than one of engaging what they say).

John McCain is reasonable

I like this. Be for something instead of just being against the Dems, and just be quiet about abortion so young women don't hate your guts.

I can't decide who I hate more. The repiblicans with their stupid linguistic obsession over Benghazi or the democrats with their over-spending, tax the rich, BS. I have a lot of hate for the entire lot of them at the moment.

kylemittskus wrote:I can't decide who I hate more. The repiblicans with their stupid linguistic obsession over Benghazi or the democrats with their over-spending, tax the rich, BS. I have a lot of hate for the entire lot of them at the moment.

I am in favor of hating both!