is anyone really surprised
is anyone really surprised that it’s written in crayon?
(Teabaggers)
I think it was written by her.
Picture by: Superkermit Caption by: lyds1012 via Our LOL Builder
You May Like:
Show Only: Democrats | Republicans | Media | Military
« Previous SIZE DOES MATTER | PATRIOTISM Next »
» 766 comments
-
Recent Comments
The Steve on Let’s imagine the look o… mabsba on TRAIN ORIGAMI Nucky, the Official … on TRAIN ORIGAMI mabsba on WOOPS The Steve on WOOPS EddiePscetti on TRAIN ORIGAMI Rando the Filthiest,… on WOOPS Rando the Filthiest,… on WOOPS mabsba on WOOPS Nucky, the Official … on WOOPS 
Cheezburger Network Blog
Wow, and we almost went a whole day without one that’s gonna piss people off. Almost.
And FTR, misspelled signs on both sides of the aisle are ALWAYS funny to me.
This is what happens when they make teachers tell kids that there’s no “worng” answers.
Spelling still counts!
and man one walked side by side with t-rex’s!
Wait, that didn’t happen? Crap! No wonder I flunked history!
mmmhmmm moses had raptors on the ark, they behaved very well
Oh, ok. Thank God I got at least that one right!
Oh there are still wrong answers in my kids school. In fact, right now I’ve got him redoing a worksheet he only got a 70% on. I don’t intend to harp real hard on grades as they get older, but the kid had better be doing his best.
That’s what I always told my kids.. if they did their best, that’s all that counts.
My parents are both retired teachers. You would not believe (or maybe you would, you seem pretty smart) the kind of crap they had to put up with from parents, and administrators, both of whom seemed only to willing to let such unimportant things as knowing math and science slide if it made the kids FEEL better.
Seriously. One parent once chewed my mother out because part of a third-grade lesson included the statement “bears can be dangerous.”
I see it at the university where I work, too… a student demanding that a professor give him a “do-over” on a test. A test which was ONLINE, do-it-on-your-own-time, and OPEN-BOOK, and the student still managed to fail.
Hey, as a teacher in modern America, I have only encountered perfect students, parents and administrators — every thing is perfect… everyone passes and they all move on to college. It’s the college Prof’s problem now — gotcha, sucker!
i was gonna say
I’m not about the “feel good” schooling. I mean, I certainly am for kids having high self esteem, but not at the expense of their learning. Both of my kids are exceptionally bright, so when I say “do your best,” I expect good things. And that student with the test you described is a moron.
Rando, the problem today is that the kids all have great self-esteem. The down side is that they never earned it. They have been given everything because, hey, we don’t want to damage their self-esteem, it doesn’t matter that they can’t do squat, or that they don’t want to think, but hey, they feel good about themselves.
Exactly! I heard a lovely quote by Bob Keeshan (Captain Kangaroo to those of us old enough to remember – host of a sweet kid’s show from back when I was a kid). He said that kids today know all about their rights, but nothing about their responsibilities. Real education (by parents AND teachers) should deal with BOTH, in my humble opinion.
bullshit. you know not my school. we will pwn3d you.
In my district we are lucky if the kids COME to school to begin with. It starts at home people. I watched a second grader led out in handcuffs one year. Not kidding. I love to tell those who are critical of today’s teachers to step on inside our world for a day, just one little day. You try to hold a kid back and the parents threaten to go to court over it. The administrators freak out and cave in…and there you go.
Hey, if I were Emperor, every teacher would be issued a handgun and allowed a 10% casualty rate.
Although I’ve been thinking that things might go even better if you were allowed to shoot the parents, instead. They’re almost always the real cause…
“MY Johnny would NEVER have done that!!”
“Ma’am, we have him on videotape. See?”
“You-you FAKED that!”
*BLAM!* “…Idiot.”
i don’t know about the handgun – blood is awfully hard to get out of stuff, but a nice whip, or even a metal ruler across the knuckles would make any parent sit up and pay attention during parent/teacher conferences… not for use on the children mind you, but on the parents, i don’t condone child abuse by anyone, but corporal punishment for someone who’s old enough to make a child could be a good thing, especially when done in public (ala puritan stocks on town squares)
Tazers. Give us tazers and a side of rancid beef.
What about a large stick, isn’t that enough?
pain helps all mammals learn faster, at least in social aspects. you can hurt someone without injuring them.
kids need to get tougher anyways.
It makes plants produce more fruit too.
@slaggingham:
You, Sir or Sirress, win an Internets!
It will be delivered posthaste!
And lots of hugs and kisses, too . . . ‘cept you don’t want those, ’cause I’m recovering from da FLU :::dunDUNNNN:::
dont try that in colorado. the columbine shooting left every cop with a shotgun parading the streets and teenagers and grownups getting controled by the goverment and constantly getting beaten up and falsley accused for shit. in my school i draw a little stick firefight and i am sent to the office and get 3 detentions. its messed up man.
Giving them 50% is way too lenient IMHO.
[old woman mode]
In my day, if you didn’t turn anything in you got an 1 (that’s an F). Period. New school policies suck indeed…
[/old woman mode]
Wait…what? No way.
*is kinda happy to be across an ocean, safely sitting in the midst of archaic customs such as reading books and knowing your multiplication table by heart*
This doesn’t piss me off, there are people everywhere that have lost the skills of spelling and grammar.
Maybe the person that wrote it is dyslexic, I don’t really know. I feel like the biggest reason we see so many screwed up signs from the right these days is that most of the lefties are carrying uniform, printed signs.
I don’t care about the spelling of the signs. I’m just glad to see people standing up for what they believe in, regardless of what that is, and refusing to be railroaded by the the government. That’s liberty and I hope we don’t get so complacent about it that we let it slip away.
Of course, there are always the misspellings that are freakin’ hilarious because they change the meaning. But yeah, plain old misspelling? Meh…
Edit: I feel like the reason we see MORE screwed up signs from the right…
“I feel like the biggest reason we see so many screwed up signs from the right these days is that most of the lefties are carrying uniform, printed signs”
Yeah, isn’t Collective Individuality awesome? Nothing makes me giggle more than people who would normally RAGE at the thought of ‘conforming’ turning right around and joining a huge collectivist movement.
“…But I AM an individual! Just look at all my tattoos! Where do I sign up for my Borg implant?”
FTR, I laugh at “individualists” joining organized religions and having one guy in a funny hat/collar/robe tell them how to live their lives, too.
I’m really tired today because I’m running on 4 hours of sleep. I’m not sure if you’re trying to insult me or agree with me.
I wasn’t really trying to point anything out other than the fact that…well…most liberal protesters seem to have printed signs.
Now, I suppose you could infer from that fact that their supposed “grassroots” movements are ultimately backed by some corporation or another, but I think that’s pretty flimsy evidence. Other than that…I wasn’t really trying to say anything. Just FTR.
Congradulations slaggingham! You’ve discovered political parties! Tomorrow, we’ll cover the difference between opinion and fact! See you then! /eyeroll
No1askedme isn’t an individual.
I hardly see how you could reach such a conclusion through a blog.
But you’re right, I’m actually two people!
Hey! That’s cheating.
Refer to “life isn’t fair” comments below.
Just to impart a little balance here:
Anti-war and presumably liberal protesters with an unfortunate spelling error on their carefully-made banner.
Diss FTW!
one little O
Heh, such a pesky word, “to”. Maybe we should ban it from the language and replace it with…hell, I dunno…too tired to come up with anything clever.
ok, as a liberal, i laugh at that one too, but now i want to ask who the many are that are getting 5 years, and what the 5 years they’re getting are for.
but mostly, let this be a lesson why you should never trust bill gates and spell-check
B&E, definitely B&E.
who is “tomany” anyway?
No no, it’s “Tom Any.” They’re protesting Mr. Any. Why, I don’t know.
There is a Toma NY?
Of course not. Every one knows Toma is in Burkina Faso.
I think it’s funny that my spell check still asks me if I meant “Osama” when I try to type “Obama”.
That is a good one.
Like I said, both sides are funny when they do that.
Yep, standing up and protesting their boss’ tax increase, and Limbaugh’s tax increase, and Hannity’s tax increase, and Beck’s tax increase. In other words, it was a 3% hike on those making OVER $500,000 a year – no wonder Fox invented it, THEY all fall under that income level! Isn’t it nice they convinced people to do their dirty work for them!
I thought it was a 4% increase.
I will have to double check that. Even so, the people in that tax bracket had so many tax cuts handed to them during the Bush years that the 4% is still just a drop in the bucket. The people who block the flat tax idea the most are the wealthy – no loopholes, and they’d end up paying their fair share!
You are joking right?
First, the top 1% paid 36% of all income taxes in 1999 (the year before Bush took over), and over 40% by the time he left office.
The top 5% paid 55% in 1999, and over 60% by the time Bush left office.
Do you have any idea how much the rich would love a flat tax? We have a progressive tax in place so that the top 50% of income earners pay 97% of all taxes. The bottom 50% pay less than 3% of all the taxes paid in this country. If we went to a flat tax it would most likely be a Federal Sales tax. You would be taxed when you spend money instead of when you make it. Rich people would just buy their big ticket items from other countries. The bottom 50% of income earners are the ones who would be hit hardest by a flat tax.
BS, Rando. The “both sides are equally guilty” meme is pure MSM claptrap. I defy you to find a picture like this from a “leftist” protest.
When liberals start showing up at political rallies with semi-automatic military weapons and pistols strapped to their pants and shoulders, then we’ll talk about “both sides doing it.”
That’s not fair! There are only a very few groups of “conservative” wackos that really do that, and no true conservative would be caught dead supporting that sort of behaviour I assure you. I’m almost certain that there are groups of “liberals” who do/have done the exact same thing. There are crazy people an all sides of the field, so chill the hell out!
Just like no true Scotsman eats oatmeal with cream on it? Fallacy fail. The organizers of the teabagger movement have close ties with neo-Nazis, secessionists, Dominionists, and other whackjobs. The Left has its own whackjobs, but they mostly damage property. They don’t shoot people, or spread rumors about government death panels, or make up video games about Sarah Palin leading a guerrilla batallion.
No, the left just makes video games where you try to kill W.
Stop Bush 2.0, Ragdoll Bush, Virtual Jihadi, etc.
Just like no true Scotsman eats oatmeal with cream on it? Fallacy fail. The organizers of the teabagger movement have close ties with neo-Nazis, secessionists, Dominionists, and other whackjobs. The Left has its own whackjobs, but they mostly damage property. They don’t shoot people, or spread rumors about government death panels, or make up video games about Sarah Palin leading a guerrilla batallion. Click my name for a good run-down of the connections.
I’m just trying to be fair, yo.
You mean like those Black Panthers?
history win!
They have to keep the site hits up somehow…
I think you pretty well nailed it. FTR, as much as I like to see idiot protesters with misspelled signs get made fun of, this kind of LOL is just irritating.
The image is lousy with JPEG artifacts, but even so, does the text look a little off?
ya looks like some looney wrote it in crayon on the back of a truck tail gate
Looks like someone wrote it with a glue stick and put glittter on it. Sort of.
Actually, jumbo crayons write like that. Maybe that’s what they used?
least its not fingerpaints, angry angry finger paints
-puts on his renfest pirate hat- YAR!
That’s why I always use happy finger paints!
where do you buy happy finger paints?
cause the angry finger paint i use keeps biteing
Just mix in a marihuana extract and they’ll calm right down.
Large amount of rum works as well. For me anyway.
See, I tried that. And it seems my fingerpaints are mean drunks.
Mine get like that if I give them vodka. It has to be rum for them. They are very picky fingerpaints.
Do you mean marijuana?
Yes. I didn’t think PK would allow the proper spelling.
Oh… was just making a comment in line with the misspelling theme of the LOL, no slam intended.
No worries. It’s all good. It’s good if my grammatical/spelling mistakes are pointed out.
I have a distorted sense of humor — sorry. The only one’s who can figure me out is Jane (who has an inside track) and Eddie.
Crap! For a second I thought you said Gene and Eddie and I was going to get all excited that someone else knew the Stray Cats. *sigh* I’ll go now. Nothing to see hear. *ninja vanish*
*snicker* Here. Here.
*stray cat struts*
Fox News: Always keeping people Infromed on the sactity of marriage and the corruption of Washigton and will always push English as the offical language.
And how Obama is commander and theif. LOL
Glad to see you admit that….
To be fair, this is how the parties solve problems. Democrats: throw money at it until it goes away. Republicans: ignore the problem until it goes away or people give up on fixing it. Both sides: try to distract the public from any problems as long as possible with pointless diversions like gay-marriage and gun-control legislation.
BOTH parties have simple become Red Meat for the masses (Think Bread and Circuses) simply to ensure power. I think there are some genuine people on both sides, but often get drowned out by the corruption in Washington.
Hmmm, a genuine politician? I highly doubt it.
This we can definitely agree on. Like I said on the FB board, no major reform ever comes out of Washington until it’s been watered down to the point of being totally useless.
FB board?
facebook.
or it has completly been forgotten by use of empty promises and distractions.
true, cant really argue the truth. both parties have strenghts and weaknesses.
Ha ha ha. For the record, I *don’t* like everything Obama has done, although most of it has been because I don’t think he’s been nearly liberal enough so far. Really kind of wishy-washy.
That’s funny, I didn’t like everything Bush did because some of it was way too liberal for me.
Most other networks other than Fox News: Always complaining that life is not fair.
Well, it’s not. It’s true.
i agree, if life were fair, i’d be 5ft5in, 135 lbs which last i checked was about the national average height/weight for women in the us, and i’d love to be that tall. so no, life isn’t fair
Life is simultaneously fair and unfair in that life, optimally, is equally unfair to all. Sometimes our cultures skew this though…
Oh bull shit. Life is NOT equally unfair to all. No way is that true.
If human society were logical it would be, but artificial constructs like money and social classes have disrupted the balance. Normally the genetic traits vs. environment pressures keep things balanced, but humanities’ evolution is far slower than its progress, so we get things like an illogical concept of attractiveness, outdated social hierarchies, and the stock market, which grants wealth (and therefore “fitness”) based on pure luck. When senseless and uninhabitable attributes like that make people more “fit” without anything being special about them, the balance of unfairness tips somewhat. It’s really complicated, and it overlaps a lot with the aspects of humanities’ corrupted evolutionary patterns, but when you gather all the data together the trend becomes obvious.
Damn spellcheck! “Uninhabitable” ought to be “uninheritable”.
It sounds like you are broke, unattractive, and antisocial. Don’t blame it on science. That’s the kind of thinking that got you into this mess!
Don’t worry. Obama will make life fair for you. He can enact a government program that requires all women to be 5′5″ and 135lbs or pay a fine.
lol!!
…you’re a moron if you think he’s complaining… All the Democrats are trying to do is make the legal system more fair. If you have a problem with that I suggest you move to Mexico where the government is all about oppressing the massive “working class” for the convenience of the wealthy.
As opposed to what our government is doing now? Oppressing the “wealthy” for the convenience of the “working class”. TBH, the only people suffering from the Democrats legislation is the working class. The middle class is getting stepped on here and in Mexico. Look at the taxes and the health care bill and notice, if you don’t accept the public option, you’ll be fined. That’s all ‘guest’ was making reference too.
Not really. The taxes on the “middle class” have actually been reduced. The only increases in income taxes was a 3%( 4%?) increase on those making over $500,000 a year. Also, the health care bill simply provides a government insurance option, you can still get insurance from a private company if you want. Think things through before you post something.
Not really. While “income taxes” on the middle class may (I say MAY) not go up they’ve waffled on that more than once aalready… we will all pay, as we always do, in the form of higher prices for the various things/people that are taxed.
Higher fees and taxes and bills and fines always get passed along to us, the consumer. Didn’t you know that?
Yes, but it’s indirect. We can choose to reduce what we spend on goods each month, but we can’t decide to reduce what we pay in income taxes on matter how much we want to.
… indirect? Yeah, we’ll reduce yout standard of living, but it’ll be indirect, so it’s ok. (also, we’ll blame it on evil corporations who raise their prices so we can still get reelected.)
Yes, the bill doesn’t *outlaw* private insurance, imagine how many people are going to buy private insurance if they can get government coverage “for free” (eg paid for with other peoples’ taxes).
It would create conditions where market forces will eventually drive private insurers out of business, and all that will be left would be the public option.
The only way a ‘public option’ would be remotely fair would be if it was not allowed *ANY* public funding, and instead had to support itself SOLELY by the premiums it charged customers. But then it would be just another insurance company.
Pre-existing conditions: You can’t buy insurance against fire on a house that has already burned down, why would you expect to be able to buy insurance against sickness if you are *already* sick?
So, genius, how are the sick supposed to pay for the care for their illnesses if they don’t have insurance?
How about low or no interest loans from the government that will only cover the costs of the care and don’t have to be paid back by the family if the sick person dies?
Wait a second, I thought government intervention into health care was bad?
The problem is that under the bill as it stands now, there will still be anywhere from 15-35 million people still left uninsured. How is that better than what we have now?
The point is that this healthcare insurance overhaul is supposed to benefit those without insurance. So why aren’t we focusing on those who don’t have insurance? We’re not, we’re revamping an entire program that doesn’t need revamping. It needs fixing, not a complete overhaul!
I totally disagree. It most certainly does need a complete overhaul. I really don’t see how a couple stop-gap solutions are really going to help. Stuff like tort reform is really just avoiding the real issue here. And if we’re NOT going to overhaul the system, then it’s going to take oodles of government regulation to keep health care in line anyway. It’s NOT going to do it on its own. It won’t. And if we don’t overhaul the system, then there is a laundry list of problems that need to be addressed. The uninsured is only one part of it.
The problem is that this “end all” measure that they’ve come up with does nothing more than put the power in the government’s hands, and doesn’t insure any more people than we have now. Plus, considering the fact that Medicare, Medicaid, and Social Security (the biggest legal Ponzi scheme ever) will be bankrupt before too long, do you really think that the government can handle yet another program of that size?
On top of that, when has a government estimate of cost EVER been REMOTELY close? When Obama claims that this will be budget neutral, all I see is money running out of the Treasury as fast as they can print it because for some reason that no one thought of, now we’re an additional 9 billion over budget.
This gives me a sad face. No woman in my family is over 5′4″. I’m 5′2″ and my grandmother is only about 4′8″. Although I’d like to see ANYONE try to fine her for it!
on my father’s side, everyone is tall (5-6 to 5-10) and so are all my sibs — me, i take after my mother and her side – stumpy at 5-2 if i stretch (but at least i’m not dumpy and frumpy too, lol).
My best friend’s wife is 4′11″. My teenage sons are taller.
On the other hand, every single other media outlet has, at least, a slight liberal slant.
“every single other media outlet has, at least, a slight liberal slant.”
Are you f’ing kidding?? Every SINGLE OTHER media outlet?? Seriously? Maybe if ALL you watch is FOX News they do.
Maybe if all you watch is the other media outlets Fox News seems slanted? IMHO they all slant.
Yes, they do all slant. But to say that ALL the other, non FOX News outlets slant liberal is ridiculous. Although…since FN slants soooo far right it only makes sense to believe that every body else slants “liberal” in comparison.
There is/was quite a lot of discussion here some decades back about how left all media was. (Everyone knows what journalists are like, right? Pinkie-commie-hippie-libtard types, the lot!)
Then when someone actually sent out a form and quite a few journalists (I’m afraid I can’t remember the percentage, when it was or anything atm :p ) it turned out that the majority of those who responded were lefties, but the ones who worked in political reporting were righties. :p (I mean percentage-wise within the section, not everyone of them.) This might be one of the reasons why the left get less airtime and less newspaper coverage whether they’re in charge or in opposition. That, and the media being afraid to be labeled as “overly lefty” all the time.
So, yeah … Just a small anecdote. Other than that, I see a tendency that lefties see right-slants more easily and vice versa. Go figure. :p
I was being sarcastic, answering your remark. Fox is slanted, but you are foolish if you don’t see the slant in the other outlets.
But do they ALL have a liberal slant?
I can’t think of one that doesn’t
There’s an old saying, “Reality has a liberal bias.” Not sure how true it really is, but some people seem to embody the idea quite effectively.
It’s not an old saying, it was said by Jon Colbert at some point which couldn’t be long ago enough to make it an old saying. Also, Jon Colbert has a liberal bias, which makes him no judge of reality imo.
No, it’s been around longer than that. I forget where I first heard it though. As for the bias accusation, I hereby refuse to deal with that, on the grounds that he is a comedian, and his own beliefs are an enigma.
Then you need to learn the definition of reality. Reality is all about perception. You can’t deny someone’s perception without forfeiting your own. Sorry.
You just made my point! Thanks kind sir.
So… you agree that you have no idea what the definition of reality is then?
Yes, neither I, nor what’s his name does. He has no right to say that “reality” has a liberal bias. How can he define reality but I can’t?
I wasn’t arguing that. You see most of the time on this board, you read a post, then you infer something that’s not there and try to throw it on the person. I didn’t say he had any more right to discern reality than you do. I merely stated you needed to learn the definition of reality.
But, you needn’t of said it, because I was not saying I knew the definition of reality, I was saying he did not have the right to define it for everyone.
Now you’re just being argumentative, because that’s all you do on these boards. He stated his view on reality, you said “which makes him no judge of reality”
Every person is their own judge of their reality. He didn’t say “noob’s reality has a liberal slant” therefore you inferred that he was talking about your reality. Once again, you’re doing what you do best: adding to someone’s statement so that you have something to argue over.
He didn’t say MY REALITY HAS A LIBERAL SLANT, he said REALITY HAS A LIBERAL SLANT, which implies, my, yours and everyone elses. Now please, accept I was right and let’s move on. You obviously need to have the last word, so I will let you, I’m done with this thread.
I’m not saying that the euphemism is necessarily always correct, I’m just saying that sometimes people go overboard with the “liberal slant” accusations.
If reality is all about perception then it can’t have a set definition. My definition of reality must be different than yours because we cannot possibly have the same perception. Therefore if reality cannot be defined, then it must not exist. How can something exist, yet not have a definition? Conversely, if reality is all about perception, then his definition of reality has to be correct for him. Therefore, reality has an infinite number of definitions. How can anyone’s definition of reality be wrong if it is in fact based on their own perception?
I’ve heard of Jon Stewart, and I’ve heard of Steven Colbert. Who the hell is Jon Colbert?
the unholy love child of the two
Lol! I’m not up on my liberal celebrity types…
Colbert is not really liberal.
The sky is green.
By his own words Colbert is a staunch Catholic who holds MANY conservative views, but also some liberal ones. He’s what we would call a normal person.
more of your liberal LIES
Well, he’s on that horrid Comedy Central network, and we all know that only liberal comedians are on the Comedy Central. The conservative comedians are kept in the basement of the White House for Obama to torture at his leisure. Duh.
Who the fcuk is Jon Colbert? Is that like Branjelina? Or, oh! Bennifer!
What about Charritter Troll?
Stephen.
Can you name me one that doesn’t?
No, they don’t, Danbala.
YES, they do.
The problem Justa that HoW has with what you’re saying is that because something is to the left of you, doesn’t mean it’s liberal. I can think of plenty of news “organizations” that aren’t liberal but have been painted that way because they’re to the left of fox news.
It’s all relative… relative to where to stand on the spectrum. It’s why the Europeans laugh at the right wing of this country when they call Obama a socialist. It’s because Europe knows what being left is. And they laugh at our ignorance.
And HoW I’m sorry if I stepped on your toes, but that’s how I read what you’re saying.
Doesn’t matter what the euro news thinks of us. Most of the mainstream news has taken a decidedly left slant for years now.
And ftr, I don’t watch Fox News, and never have. But I do get sick and tired of the bashing because they don’t tote the liberal line. If you check sources other than the mainstream media, you would be astonished at what gets left out. That is where I get my point of view. After a while, it gets painfully obvious what their position is.
You know what? I don’t want the NEWS to have a liberal or conservative slant. It’s supposed to be news. Objective, fairly reported news. Unfortunately even the definition of objective has become subjective. Objective no longer exists.
I’m pretty sure that I said that they are all slanted.
Oh, wait no… I DID say that they’re all slanted. What’s your point, now? Or are you being argumentative just to be argumentative?
Just pointing out that you act like it’s only Fox News even when you admit it’s not.
“you act like it’s only Fox News even when you admit it’s not”
You’re projecting. I don’t “act” like anything. If you feel the need to protect FOX News, go right ahead. I admitted that all media outlets are slanted. I’m not sure what else you’re looking for.
You bash Fox, when you admit they all do it. I’m for equality, equal news bashing for all!
I agree. The newspaper in my town, and county, did a huge editorial on why everyone should vote for Obama. The kids in my graduating class (in a 4 year accredited and recognized college in New Jersey) had no idea who was running against Obama, because all that was on the news was Obama. Only only a left leaning media would ignore comments that he made, and yet, harp on about how much Cindy spent on clothes.
ignore the second only…
Ever think that, maybe, you’re a little too conservative for you own good? Because there are plenty of “right leaning” new outlets out there.
Name one, besides FOX. And give me an example of some right leaning programming or story they have reported on. Go.
CNN
Lol! good one.
Indeed. Remember their affair with Obama’s campaign last year? Or the venom soaked interview with Palin? Or the reporter at the TEA party who attacked one of the proterers? Not literally, of course.
and look at the michael jackson report, they did a report on how michael jackson appeared in someones tree. watch the vid on cracked.com, its by wayne gladstone, somewhere between video pages 3-8
90% of talk radio, CNN yes, they are a mix of the two at least half of editorials in news papers, LOTS of magazines.
Ooooooo, magazines and radio. Well that makes up for ABC, CBS, NBC, PBS and just about all the newspapers that are still in business.
Newspapers don’t count. Nobody reads those anymore.
I see a bailout coming!
infromeds, now available at CVS.
side effects may include:delusions, hallucinations, psychosis, paranoia, confusion, loose stools, more frequent stools that may be hard to control, and gynecomastia.
Oh yeah, I saw an ad for those on Fox News!
You don’t watch Fox News because if you ever did watched Fox News long enough to see a commercial then I am sure you would give up your liberal ways
P
I’d never watch Fox News that long because I’d have thrown something through the TV screen long before I hit commercial.
Sometimes I switch between FOX and CNN just for a laugh.
Am I the only one sitting here having flashbacks of Jib Jab’s “What we call the News?”
Sometimes, I run with scissors.
I do that, but with Fox and MSNBC
i took a swing at watching fox news a few times, each time coming way flabbergasted they could get away with calling themselves news. then again, when i catch it on it’s usually sean hannity or o’reilly – baffoons, both of them (i do love how o’reilly will claim he’s only a correspondent when someone makes a jab at him being opinionated, yet within 10 minutes he’ll look at the camera and go on about what a great and objective journalist he is…).
anyway.
*pulls out umbrella and lawn chair and uncorks a bottle of wine*
i forgot the beer this time, sorry, wine anyone?
So what channel would you consider news and whom would you consider a correspondent?
*pours semper a glass*
well, i could be wrong but a correspondent usually covers a story then expresses their opinion on the story, breaking it down form their perspective (such examples would be Olbermann, Maddow, Walter, Shields, Brooks, O’Reilly, Hannity & Beck).
a journalist *should* relay a story objectively, stating only what is known as fact. Wolf Blitzer is the primary guy who comes to mind, but the majority of true journalists are most commonly found not on TV – they’re always so busy jabbering about they seem too caught up in the fact they’re on TV And therefore we must be interested in their opion… bleh.. The Weather Channel does a better job than most at least. But if you follow BBC, AP and PBS you’ll have a better chance of finding more journalists than correspondents, if that’s what you’re looking for.
*thanks for the wine*
)
Thanks for your answer. I was just wondering.
…and that 3 of the “F”s are written backwards.
*2 of the 3.
They’re not backwards. That’s an old style for writing a lower case “F” and is still perfectly acceptable.
Man…I should proof my comments before I post. I meant UPPER case “F”.
Only in cursive, not in block printing.
Villany is correct on that one
True, but it almost looks like a 7, which would also be kind of an old style for writing a 7 with a line through the middle. LOL
But “Fox News” is a proper noun and should be capitalized, and this person went all caps on their poster (minus the “i” in KEEPiNG, which seems to have been too difficult for them), so there’s no reason they should be going lower case.
Never mind, then.
How about this then? “F consistency FAIL”
Yeah, I don’t really get why they do the weird F twice, unless the weird F is only to start a word. In which case, we can go back to “infromed” to make fun of them. LOL
The third F is off because it was photo shopped to make conservatives look stupid and the guy who did the deed didn’t notice the other F’s which explains the misspelling and the one F that has a different font than the other two?
I think we’ve established that the other F’s were done on purpose. And a different FONT than the other two? It’s f’ing handwritten! What font are you talking about? And for the record, teabagger protesters don’t need photoshop to look stupid.
So it seems to be established that any protester on the right side of the isle is labled a teabagger. What are protesters on the left called? Union workers? Wrong? Just asking.
I would also like to know why it upsets most of the left when someone excersises their right to free speech?
I’m not upset by them exercising their right to free speech. I’m upset by the fact that they’re wrong. *shrug*
Nope. You are. *shrug back*
Nuh-uh. You are. *double shrugs*
I’m rubber your glue. Whatever you say to me bounces off me and sticks to you. *infinite shurgs*
Oh yeah? Well, I’m getting THIS for you for Christmas! (linky in name)
@ rando – how could you do that? it burns, it burns the eyes
(thanks for the spew
)
$19 for that! OMG. I’m in the wrong business.
I pictured him doing the M.C. Hammer dance.
Too funny. Thanks Rando
)
Yeah, my wife dug that up on a site called Regretsy, which takes the worst and most ridiculous items from another site called Etsy and posts them Failblog-style. In fact, I could probably give Failblog about a year’s worth of material from that site.
@semperfidd – because the right side of the aisle have been telling us on the left side of the aisle that we are communists, anti-american, socialists, and baby-killers since the 1920’s.
it’s time to suck it up, agree that we’re all americans, that we all want what is best for this country, that it’s okay to disagree without becoming nasty and hateful about it, and that ‘love it or leave it’ has to apply equally to anyone who isn’t of native american descent!
Very good answer. Thank you. I would disagree with only one part. The part that says that we all want what is best for this country. I would have to say that people who think like VNV for example would not fall into that category. IMO of course.
I don’t want whats best for this country at all. I want whats best for the planet Earth and whats best for the future. That’s is where we differ drastically. You can’t get your mind past a dotted line on a map.
…which in the long run is what is best for any country.
Thank you D & VNV. Well said.
Yup. It is always best if someone takes what you have or might have and gives you what you want. Becareful what you wish for. You might get it.
* gives you they think you want and need* my bad
Insult adding FAIL. Maybe you should be in a protest!
Jackass epic win. Did you play Risk much as a kid?
What would be best for the planet Earth is for there to be no humans. As for what is best for an Earth with humans, who is to decide? You? I think that is where the big divide is between you and most free people. So is it best for the world if all people live free with the freedom to choose or is it best if all people have to comprimise and live under some sort of tyranny or world order? Either way you would be forcing something on somebody for your version of “the greater good”. You can’t get your mind off of world domination and your jealousy to people that have.
“What would be best for the planet Earth is for there to be no humans.”
I only wish I could describe in words how much of an idiot I think you are.
Eliminate Poverty vs. Destroy All Humans
Yeah. One of us is a bit loopy. And it ain’t me.
You will never eliminate poverty, there is no way to do it. First of all, poverty is subjective. If there are no rich, then there are no poor. So, if all of our standard of living came down to that of the poorest of the poor who are considered living in poverty, we would have in effect eliminated poverty. It’s a nice idea, with a huge emotional pull, but it is not possible to do. So why don’t you say what you really mean? You want to eliminate the rich? You don’t want anyone to have more than anyone else. Because you don’t “feeeeeeeeeeel” good about it.
“I only wish I could describe in words how much of an idiot I think you are.”
Typical world domination VNV response. So you don’t agree with my statement that the Earth as a whole would be better off without humans?
How about answering my question of bright one?
So is it best for the world if all people live free with the freedom to choose or is it best if all people have to comprimise and live under some sort of tyranny or world order?
Semper, that’s the worst most rigged question I have ever heard. You sound like FOX news. Do you want freedom or tyranny? Do you buy your mom a mothers day card or do you want her dead? Should you try to alleviate suffering or do you destroy the human race? Its set up so there is only one answer. Lets try a better question.
Do we let 2% of the world population dominate the lower 65%?
“Do we let 2% of the world population dominate the lower 65%?”
We do, because your alternative is .000004% of the population dominating the other 99.999996%.
Mmm, Central Committee Planning!
Its not a loaded question. Maybe you have not completely figured out your plans for world domination yet but I have a news flash for you….To get to your Utopia you are going to have to supress someones freedom and it will be more than the 2% you speak of.
That’s not my alternative. Where did that come from?
Why does everyone act like I am taking over the world? I mean, its flattering. Honestly. But I am talking about a movement much bigger than myself. And I have a funny feeling like our options are either to address our current problems and try to fix them or to let the planet go off in the inevitable powder keg. Your opinion is to ignore any traces that there is a problem.
If I’m wrong I’ll go to jail. Peacefully, quietly, I’ll enjoy it. But if I’m right, and we can stop this thing, then we will have saved the lives of million of registered voters.
VNV, from what I understand, your idea is to take from those that have and give it to those that don’t have. Where am I wrong?
You are wrong in what you think I would want to take. You are wrong in what you think I am going to give. Oh, and you are wrong about how much you think those you think I’m going to take from have to begin with.
Ok, good, glad to meet you. We have no argument.
I’m not even touching this one…
Cain’t touch THIS…
THIS:
@ VNV, sorry sir, but lots have people have had the thought that their line of thinking is what should be done in the entire world. Rome for a start.
For the longest time I vehemently disagreed with VNV, but then he quoted Ghostbusters, and now I want him to marry my daughter.
You aren’t the boss of us.
No. I don’t work at McDonalds.
That doesn’t mean he doesn’t have a valid point.
VNV, quit being a prick to everyone that doesn’t have your one world vision. Your type of thinking has been tried, and it always fails.
He can have all the points he wants, most are on the top of his head.
Hmmm, lots of hair gel perhaps?
@ justacarolinian
I was actually brought into this conversation. And no, my type of thinking has never been tried. Yours, however, has.
Just in the sense of being Fair and balanced, I don’t think anyone on this board has any right to EVER tell anyone else to not be a prick to someone who doesn’t share their world vision.
That goes for VNV, Justa, Semper, Rando, Myself, SB… everyone.
Not a one of us has the right to be a prick to the other because we have differing views. Not a single one of us.
And we all have been pricks at one point or another.
None of us can climb up on the high horse here because right now we’re all riding Shetland ponies.
You see, in order for our whole “equality” thing to work out people have to realize that equality doesn’t mean special treatment. It means we all sacrifice a little in different areas, some will sacrifice more where another will have to sacrifice nothing. On the other had, another would have to sacrifice more in a different area where some would not have to sacrifice at all.
My point is that in order for us to work together, to live together, and to fix things, we’re all going to have to sacrifice things. No one here on this board is advocating “take all of yours so I don’t have to give anything”. But it’s the mindset that seems to plague BOTH ideologies.
In order to fix things we’re all going to have to sacrifice SOMETHING. That’s the business… period.
Word to your mother.
You are absolutely right. I was just having a conversation with a friend tonight about ways that we want to change for the better, and I think one thing I want to change is how I respond when I don’t agree with others’ political views, etc., especially on the internet, when it’s so easy to be disrespectful, in the comfort of your own home, without looking the other in the eye.
I don’t want to be closed-minded or rude. I am going to try to make positive choices in the way I respond when I am strongly opposed to the viewpoints of others. However, this doesn’t mean that I won’t occasionally sacrifice principal to go for the punchline, so don’t expect too much lol
Eh. I’ll likely still be an asshole. Palin ornament, anyone?
Sorry Rando, by font i was simply referring to the style of the F, or as you called it “the weird F.” I will try to keep it simple so that your little liberal brain can understand.
Wow, aren’t you the trollish little fvcktard. I knew what you meant. I just think it’s funnier to make fun of a jackass like you.
Yeah, it is easier than arguing the point. Especially when you are wrong. Liberals find themselves in that position often.
Lol. “Who’s in this picture?”: Teabaggers
LOL, “teabaggers”. It gets me every time!
That, Topper, is the extra helping of awesomesauce on this LOL.
Embrace the reply button. Please. For he is your friend.
He even told me so the other day. Yep, he did.
Of course. Those that defile everything. And yeah, those f’s are quite stylized. Kind of annoying because they almost appear to be backwards…
*referring to teabaggers*
Informed? I didn’t even know the plan was to provide competition for the Private insurence companies to get them to lower the costs till my friend showed me her current event today. Is that even the plan?
Well that’s what they want to you hear. They protect the very insurance companies that deny us coverage for ‘pre-existing’ conditions and deny us coverage for anything that isn’t curable with a bandaid. I mean people, they are HEALTH INSURANCE companies and they are being defended for thier atrocious practices.
How does ANY company grow and innovate people? Competition. The last time I checked, since when was billons in profits not be enough?
Yup. Buy insurance or we will tax you. By the way, we have some cheap insurance over here for you. How can we afford to keep the price so low you ask? Well, we don’t have to make a profit. We can just keep going in debt and taxing the rich. Right..competition…NOT.
Insurance that doesn’t exist to make a profit? That sounds like a pretty good idea to me.
Yup. It works well in public education. Errr…hmmm
…and in fiction.
It actually does. So what’s your point?
So you think that everyone gets a good public education and is getting their moneys worth? That explains alot about what you write on this website.
Not at all, but that’s mostly due to monetary issues; especially here in California. Yet, has the education system failed entirely? Even here, where the schools literally don’t have enough money to keep running without some help, I have done fine. The schools are running, people are being educated fully and effectively, and people are graduating from colleges and universities. Where’s the problem? Blame the politicians (especially the governator) for the public education “crisis”, not the system. Besides, do you have any better ideas?
Ha, the whole state is failing…
Yeah, the housing market crash hit us hard. And it doesn’t help that we have to pay other states to import our water.
And it doesn’t hurt that those running your government can’t seem to do things right.
Yeah… Why oh why did we ever elect Arnold Shwartzinegger?! I mean, of all the people in the world, an action movie actor?! Everyone was complaining about “experience” during the presidential election; where was that back then?!
California has a ton of problems. They are hemorrhaging businesses to states that have less corporate taxes because California has some of the highest in the country. In addition to the taxes they have more regulations, especially environmental. Not to mention property taxes and the high cost of real estate in California compared to most of the rest of the country. Businesses that started there have figured out that is cheaper and more efficient to move their operations to other states. Arizona, New Mexico and Texas all have had a huge influx of tech jobs that were almost all in Northern California a decade ago. California also makes their tax payers pay for public education and health care for illegal immigrants. Most of those illegal immigrants are paid under the table so they don’t pay into the tax system to help offset the cost. Workers who are losing their jobs because either the company they worked for decided to relocate or because the water was cut off to the farm that they worked on to save a minnow from extinction are also leaving and moving to other states that are still hiring people and have a much lower cost of living. At the same time, there are more and more Californians who don’t have a job, some of them here illegally, that are drawing unemployment benefits. In Imperial county, on the Mexican border, unemployment is over 30%. So, California has 1). Less businesses paying taxes 2). Less workers paying taxes 3.) More people drawing unemployment. Oh, and did I mention California spends 92% MORE than it did ten years ago with a $144.5 billion annual budget?
You can blame radical environmentalists for that.
Remember kids: Litigate to Legislate!
For some reason I saw the word “Legolas” in there, and I was very confused.
No, you can thank government de-regulation of the lending industry for the housing crash.
No, that was the CRA that forced banks to lend to people that could not normally qualify. This created a huge demand for housing because there was a whole bunch more people who could get houses and created the housing bubble. The price of houses went up abnormally high in a short time. Then when their loans adjusted they couldn’t afford payments, plus the recession, a lot of houses in default.
This was covered waaaaayyyy back in a post by Seth. Basicly the CRA loans were technically forced in some cases, but studies show that CRA loans have a 5% lower default rate than conventional loans, so that argument is false. I don’t have a citation unfortunately, like I said I’m just repeating what Seth said way back and he had a citation. You can look for the post if you like, but it’s probably not worth the time. Besides, I grow tired of the blame game. Lets just agree to say, “Shit got messed up, now we gotta fix it.”
No, the default rate is not at issue, the housing bubble is. Because of lax standards forced by the CRA more people were getting houses and it artifically inflated the price. It’s not about whether CRA people defaulted or not more than anyone else.
Yeah, but that happened everywhere. I guess you could argue that the CRA may have amplified the effect to some extent, but they aren’t expressly to blame for the housing crash. To be honest, I blame the morons who fell for the banks’ schemes to begin with. It takes a special kind of moron to take a $250,000 loan out on a $200,000 house and use the extra to buy two new cars…
if it was your water, it would have fallen there and you wouldn’t have had to import it.
therefore because of waste, population overgrowth, living in a desert area you have to purchase water or do you think that other states should just give it to you?
sounds kind of communist to me…
oops, missing punctuation, my bad.
that should have read: water; or do
I’m not saying we should get it for free. Not at all, that’s just unfair to our neighbour states. All I’m saying is that it’s not helping our economic situation. I don’t have an issue with it, it’s just something few people are aware of, so I brought it up.
What?? A government run operation is having problems delivering what it says it will? Big surprise.
“Not at all, but that’s mostly due to monetary issues; especially here in California”
So all the taxes, welfare policies and enviornmental policies that California has enacted have not helped out the monetary issues? If it didn’t work for one state what makes everyone so darn sure it will work when applied to the nation because that is essentially what the current administration is heading towards.
“Blame the politicians (especially the governator) for the public education “crisis”, not the system”
What about blaming them for most of the problems in California and not just the education system. If I recall California had a few problems when Brown was there. I also think there would be alot more problems if the governator had not been in office.
What can I say, California is at a decided economic disadvantage. We have too many people living here to be able to lower regulations and still maintain a decent quality of life. We have to buy most of our water from our neighboring states, which isn’t cheap, and every year we have about 15 wildfires or so, it isn’t cheap. Property is expensive because of the weather and businesses don’t like it. We have issues that are far beyond our ability to control. However, don’t you EVER come to the defense of our “governor”. He’s caused nothing but problems ever since he was elected, and he has lied his way through his whole term. No one likes him, not even the Republicans, so don’t try to defend him. We’ve always had these problems, but our state government was able to cope with them fairly well until about the time he was elected.
Oh I am not defending your poor excuse for a republican governor, but blaming him for the problems of your state is akin to blaming Bush for the problems of the US. Bush didn’t pass the laws the congress did. The same holds true for Obama. Although he will get the praise or boos for what happens with his administration while he is in office, ultimately it is the congress that will be passing any legislature. I am already planning on my end to help the situation by trying to help vote out Harry Reid. I hope you are doing the same for pelosi and the other idiots you have in charge of your state.
I’m not saying all the problems are the governor’s fault, most of them aren’t. What I am accusing him of doing is making the problems worse! Like I said, California has plenty of unavoidable problems, but we’ve done ok in the past so saying all the problems are the government’s fault is ridiculous. I agree with you on the congress being in charge, but you can’t ignore the power of the president. The president wields his/he greatest power not in law, but in influence. Being president suddenly makes one’s opinions far more significant, and something like that cannot be ignored. As for who to vote in or out, I’ve got my mind set on who I want to be gone as election season rolls about.
A lot of your water problems are due to environmentalists deciding there are endangered fish in the California water supplies, and that using it would cause their extinction, so we’ll just not use the water… Brilliant, isn’t it?
Ummm, no. We just don’t have very much water. Sure there are some protected sources, but they wouldn’t really help. Considering the state is half desert, and we have the highest population of all the states, it’s more of an overpopulation issue. What’s your problem with environmentalists anyways? This is the second time you’ve blamed them for things that are beyond their control. It’s not like they can just magically move the endangered species somewhere else more convenient.
geologically, California is a region that either gets too much water or too little. nevermind hannity coming down here and using his scientific expertease to sell out a crucial link in the local food chain (that “useless” little fish that happens to feed all the salmon and other important californian aquatic animals. What an A-Hole know nothing pundit.
FURTHER MORE, if we didnt have to grow 1/3rd of the nations agriculture then there would be no shortage. Nearly all the water reclaimed from the feather river and other Sierra Nevada projects goes to the central valley.
I agree that we created this problem, lets cut off the rest of the nation, grow enough produce only for ourselves, and see the food prices skyrocket in the other States. A little economic embargo amongst the states, I dont see why we should subsidize the rest of the nation. We can make more money selling more rice to china actually.
Then Rando, you are uniformed. Look up how many insurance companies that are non profit. Such as Blue Cross/Blue Shield. You would be shocked to know how much of our health care is paid by non profits.
non-profits that make alot of money-nods-
Making money is different from making profits… -nods-
Actually that’s exactly what it is.
Profit: A financial gain, especially the difference between the amount earned and the amount spent…
I am unimpressed…
step one :steal underpants
Do I want to know what step 2 is?
yes, but step 3 : PROFIT!
Then I probably don’t want to know what step two is because I really can’t see any logical way to get from one to three. My brain is already on holiday.
mina hun, its a south park joke from the underpants gnomes. they stole underpants for step one, step three was profit!
*headdesk* Pop culture knowledge fail. I stopped watching South Park a few years ago.
-shoulder rub- awww, its still funny, ooh venture brothers came back last nite!
I’ll have to start watching it again. I’ve recently become slightly obsessed with Mad Men.
never seen it. but love me some venture brothers
I’ve never seen it. Family Guy’s pretty much the only grown up cartoon I’ve seen in a while. Yeah, I know, I’m weird.
venture brothers is a thing of pure beauty, check out seasons 1-3, cause it follows a story. you best catch up!
it has a butterfly themed villian!
“You would be shocked to know how much of our health care is paid by non profits.” The answer: not enough.
Have you actually read a newspaper (online or not) from a country that has single payer health care? You might be surprised.
bitter troll reads the guam daily, nothing on health care…nice pig report…weather report is crappy
Health care in Guam. You get sick, you die. Ok, maybe not that bad.
no really, they linch you for the sniffles..since they have no health care
April 23, 2008 in Health Care Around the World, International Health Care Systems
Great Britain represents all that is good and bad with centralized, single-payer health care systems. Health care spending is fairly low (7.5% of GDP) and very equitable. Long wait lists for treatment, however are endemic and rationing pervades the system. Patients have little choice of provider and little access to specialists.
Percent Insured. ~100%
Funding. Great Britain has a single payer system funded by general revenues. With any centralized system, avoiding deficits is difficult. In 2006, Great Britain had a £700 million deficit despite the fact that health care spending increased by £43 billion over five years.
Private Insurance. 10% of Britons have private health insurance. Private health insurance replicates the coverage provided by the NHS, but gives patients access to higher quality care, and reduced waiting times.
Physician Compensation. Unlike in the case of other single payer systems such as Norway, most physicians and nurses are mostly government employees. In 2004, the NHS negotiated lower salaries for doctors in exchange for reduced work hours. Few physicians are available at night or on weekends. Because of low compensation, there is a significant shortage of specialists.
Physician Choice. Patients have very little physician choice. However, under the experimental London Patient Choice Project, patients waiting more than six months for treatment will be offered a choice of four different treatment providers.
Copayment/Deductibles. There are no deductibles and almost no copayments except for small copayments for prescription drugs, as well as for optical and dental care.
Waiting Times. Waiting lists are a huge problem in Great Britain. Some examples: 750,000 are on waiting lists for hospital admission; 40% of cancer patients are never able to see an oncologist; there is explicit rationing for services such as kidney dialysis, open heart surgery and care for the terminally ill. Further, minimum waiting times have been instituted to reduce costs. “A top-flight hospital like Suffolk Est PCT was ordered to impose a minimum waiting time of at least 122 days before patients could be treated or the hospital would lose a portion of its funding.”
Benefits Covered. The NHS system offers comprehensive coverage. Because of rationing, care might not be as easy to get as advertised. Terminally ill patients may be denied treatment. David Cameron has proposed that the NHS refuse treatment to smokers or the obese (see 7 Sept 2007 post).
*
Tanner, Michael D. (2008) “The Grass Is Not Always Greener: A Look at National Health Care Systems Around the World” Cato Policy Analysis no. 613.
Wow. You have a cite. Too bad I’m not buying it.
Yes, I usually have a cite. We conservatives like to do a little thing called research on issues instead of just going with what our bleeding little hearts tell us to do. You should try it. There is plenty of information and you can check the figures with other sources and see that they match up. 40% of cancer patients never see an oncologist in the UK. How does that make you feel Rando? My niece and my grandfather both died of cancer here in the U.S., but it wasn’t because they didn’t get the best treatment they could here. Some things just can’t be fixed no matter what you throw at it. Government, money, free health care: none of it will save you when it is your time to go, and we all have to go.
Too bad your cite is from the Cato Institute. These quotes are from Sourcewatch.org (link to page in my name).
“Cato was founded in 1977 by Edward H. Crane and Charles Koch, the billionaire co-owner of Koch Industries. [2] Koch industries is the largest privately owned company in the United States. Though diversified, the company amassed most of its fortune in the oil trading and refining. [3]
From that same site, referenced from Cato’s own description:
“Cato argues for the abolition of the welfare system, against the U.S. government pursuing an interventionist foreign policy, in favor of civil liberties and limits on executive power, and in favor of more relaxed immigration policies and for a more deregulated healthcare system.[4]“
Profit Bad, Government Good. Ugh.
No, totally wrong. Profit gained from screwing people over: bad. Government which we can control; and without any incentive to screw us over since its purpose goes beyond the generation of profit unlike corporations, providing a relatively cheap healthcare option you can choose to use or not: good. Learn to think.
You mean there is no power or money involved in government? Wow! I did not know that.
Where’s the incentive to take advantage of people? If you’re an elected official and you screw over your citizens, you won’t be re-elected. The public won’t tolerate being abused unless they have to, and even then some people just won’t take it; regardless of the costs. Besides, are you really that trusting of the corporations; over whom we have absolutely no influence?
Yes, it’s called competition and it’s the same principal behind voting government out of office if you don’t like them. If you don’t like a product, don’t buy it, or start a boycott. Most businesses are out to make a profit, not rule the world.
Competition doesn’t work when you have an oligopoly. They act just like the oil companies, they work together to keep prices illogically high and minimize losses. It’s more about pleasing the shareholders than providing a decent service, and it shows. They can make more money by collaborating and having little distinction than by trying to out-do each other and pricing policies competitively. Even if that weren’t happening here (which it really is), is it really so bad to make sure everyone is insured? Besides, we’ll actually save money in taxes by providing a public option. Right now people too poor to afford insurance use the emergency room as a general physician, and when they can’t pay the hospital bill the taxpayers are stuck with an $80 bill for a procedure that would have cost under $10 at a conventional doctor’s office. Also, since these people aren’t receiving consistent medical care due to their lack on insurance, they are generally less healthy, and tend to be less healthy, and when they develop a serious condition that is easily preventable with proper treatment, they once again go to the emergency room for treatment with no way of paying for it, and we get stuck paying the $50,000 surgery bill. I really don’t see why anyone is opposed to this reform!
Because it’s change, and change is always scary.
Exactly. Once this stuff finally gets through, and we’ve had it for a bit, people will get over it. It’s the fear of major reform. Although I have my doubts at this point that serious reform will actually happen. Sad, really.
I wonder how the people reacted in countries that have universal health care when it started, if it’s similar to the battles we’re facing here.
I so hope for the sake of our country and our freedoms, that this “reform” thing doesn’t happen and those idiots in the government stop spending.
Maybe it is scary because change is not always good.
They’re Democrats, they’ll keep spending until the problem is fixed. It’s not a great fix, but it’s better than ignoring the problem. That’s not to say Democrats like spending, they dislike it too, but they see it as the primary tool of the government. Admittedly, access to nearly infinite funds is a rather potent tool for reform.
P.S. As for change not always being good, I’ll have to disagree with you personally on that. I have no rational explanation, I simply hate monotony. As long as things are changing I’m entertained, and that’s really all there is too it for me. Selfish yes, irrational yes, but it doesn’t affect the way I vote much so I’m not really hurting anyone.
No, not all change is good. Some changes are long overdue. And nothing ever gets changed without people freaking out.
To No1
“They’re Democrats, they’ll keep spending until the problem is fixed.”
What have they fixed by throwing money at it? Education? Poverty? Healthcare? Welfare? Social Security? I am not saying that the Repubs are doing much better but in the case of Welfare, setting it up where the states benefit by having more people on the welfare payroll is probably not a good idea.
I’m not calling for Government Run healthcare. I’m saying that something has to be done about the system in general.
If it’s reforming the prices of medical coverage so premiums aren’t so high or that normal people can afford medical treatment, or creating a government option to promote competition to keep prices down…so be it.
“Don’t Get Sick” isn’t a solution and leaving it as it is isn’t a solution.
blindly throwing money at anything wont fix anything, never has never will.
ignoreing the issues and saying its a myth till your screwed is just as bad
comeing up with a plan and dealing with it is the way to go, might not have to even throw money at it.
problem is if you come up with a plan no matter what the other side will fight against it.
You know what, normal healthy people don’t need “consistent” medical care. You eat right, get excersize and take good care of yourself all you will really need is catastrophic care. No one is turned away for any life saving medical care in this country, no one.
You never know when cancer will appear. There’s not much you can do to prevent it from occurring, but once it’s there it’s there. You usually won’t find it in time unless you visit the doctor consistently, and even if you find it early, you can’t get any treatment for it if you don’t have insurance. No one should need to wait until their life is in jeopardy to receive care for a condition.
Yes, there is, diet rich in fresh fruits and vegetables and grains and small amount of meat, plus consistent exercise seems to bring down the incidence of cancer, heart disease, stroke, diabetes, and now they are showing links to old age diseases from diabetes… So, your health is what you make it unless it is genetic. I think education would be key here.
You’re right, n00bs, education is extremely important. However, it’s not everything. And a good diet isn’t going to save you from cancer, that’s silly. Plus, there are plenty of catastrophic things that CAN and DO happen, and do you really think people are going to be able to afford the $20,000 hospital bill (or higher even) if they do have to go to hospital uninsured? Most people can’t. And when they can’t, that bill gets tacked on to everyone else’s bill. Requiring everyone to have insurance makes sure that everyone has that safety net. I don’t like it either, but it makes sense.
Oh, and if you do get cancer without insurance, good luck getting insurance afterwards. Not happening.
You can’t do anything to prevent pancreatic cancer and it’s hard to detect. It happens, and if it isn’t treated immediately it’s almost always fatal. If you don’t have insurance you won’t get either. Besides, yeah, some people may have “genetic predispositions” towards certain condition. So what? It’s not their fault, but is it really ok with you if someone with a history of heart disease starts showing signs of congestive heart failure cannot get treatment just because they cannot afford insurance? Think about this, some people are born with diabetes. It’s not their fault and it cannot be cured, is it really ok that there’s no insurance company in the world that would willingly insure them?! If you don’t believe me you can look it up. There is no way in the world that ANYONE with a chronic health condition will ever be insured by a company, it’s just “bad business” to insure them. These are the people that need health insurance the most, and most of them were born with their conditions. How is that fair?! Isn’t it worth a little tax bump (which the current plan wouldn’t actually do) to insure these people so they can live their lives somewhat comfortably?!
I wasn’t talking about the people who can’t help it. I was talking about the people who can. Don’t you know that many of our modern ailments come from obesity? Or stress? Smoking and drinking and drug use? Those things can be controlled. The others not, and those people should be taken care of.
I see your point, although it would be nice if you had clarified earlier. However, there is no constitutional way to exclude certain individuals from receiving government insurance, should it pass. I forget what the exact precedent is, but I know it’s the same reason those special “taxes” congress wanted to impose on the bank CEOs were ruled unconstitutional. I don’t like it, but thems the rules. To do what your suggesting would require a new amendment.
And there are other medical problems other than cancer that can cost an arm & a leg to fix. I have a friend who clenches her jaw at night and needs a mouthgard to prevent her teeth from cracking. Want to know how much that is uninsured? $500. I need glasses, not because I didn’t take care of my eyes, but because of genetics. My glasses can cost upwards of $300 without insurance. Get the flu? My boyfriend did. It was $150 for the doctors visit at Patient First so he could get a note and not get fired for not coming into work and BC/BS only paid for $30 of it.
No, we don’t need healthcare reform. Not for kids who are just out of college and can’t get a job with health insurance. Not for families who are barely getting by and an illness or accident could put them into debt for the rest of their lives.
Oh, nobody is denied life saving medical care…but what happens when they’re in recovery and can’t go to work? That’s hundreds of dollars lost for their family. Can’t pay rent because you couldn’t go to work? Evicted. Now what?
We don’t need government run health care to accomplish those things, we need to reform the system we have and make it affordable to people who need assistance and not penalize those that don’t. Also, what insurance pays your rent if you are out of work? I never heard of anything like that except maybe workers comp.
Also, what insurance pays your rent if you are out of work?
Isn’t that what the duck tells us to get AFLAC for?
The only way what you’re suggesting is going to happen is going to be vast amounts of regulation, and isn’t that totally anticonservative? Because if you think an “free market” for health care is gonna do it, you’re wrong. There is way too much wrong with America’s health care system to just fix it. The current system is a failure.
So is government run social security and medicare.
“If you’re an elected official and you screw over your citizens, you won’t be re-elected.”
But it won’t matter, as long as you hide your graft money somewhere smarter than your fridge.
Then later, when the scandal has faded, you can pick up tons of cash as a political speaker at any university where the political climate is such that the powers-that-be will forgive your pecadilloes.
(For Republicans, that’s Bob Jones and Brigham Young. For Democrats, that’s Columbia, Berkeley, Harvard… and almost everywhere else.)
Yes, but that means the exploitation eventually stops. With corporations we have no way of stopping it. They can abuse us as much as they like, and all we can do is sit there and take it while the government bickers about how to try to fix it for three decades. You seem to think government is pure evil. I’ll admit it’s not perfect, but it never will be. If you cannot accept that then fine, dissolve the government and put the businesses in charge, we’ll see how much you love them then.
It’s not an all-or-nothing choice here.
The government is not pure evil.
Businesses are not pure evil.
Neither are either pure just and holy.
Of course there ARE differences… if I don’t like the way McDonald’s does business, I can go to Burger King. or Wendy’s. If I don’t like AT&T I can buy from Verizon, or Sprint.
If I don’t like the way the government is doing something… well, I can vote for the other guy, maybe (in my area a lot of Democrats have such a lock on the populace that they run unopposed… there hasn’t been a change of power in Philadelphia -cesspool- in 60 years). But that’s no guarantee he will WIN.
With businesses, I can effect a personal choice into a personal change. With government, that’s MUCH more difficult.
Also… have you EVER known the government to willingly GIVE UP a power which it has taken? I mean, up until 2006, we were still paying a 3% long-distance phone call tax that was first levied to pay for the SPANISH-AMERICAN WAR. (1898.)
(Sorry for the caps, I don’t do bold well.)
To paraphrase Gandalf… There is only one Uncle Sam… and he does not share power.
Very true. However, I don’t see how providing government run health insurance would give them any power to exploit us any more than usual, and the competition could convince the corporations to get their act together. In the end we’ll just have to see how it plays out. I think that the situation is bad, but stable enough to be subjected to some experimentation. Sorry about exploding like that earlier, I’m in a bit of a bad mood today, but dinner helps.
Hey No1, you mean like the power the govt in the UK has? You can’t get this surgery if you smoke? Or no joint replacement because you are 10 lbs over the idea weight? Would that be more power over us?
You think that doesn’t happen here? A little girl in Colorado was just denied health insurance for being a little underweight for her age. Somehow that is better than the British?
Where do you think Colorado got the idea?
Also, most of the politicians we feel are screwing us over are not in our voting area. For instance, Nancy Pelosi represents the 8th district of California. Since many of her voters live in San Francisco they will continue to vote for her no matter how liberal she gets. As the Speaker of the House, she has a lot of power to steer legislation in the direction she wants to see it go. She can also strong-arm weaker, centrists Democrats into playing ball by holding committee chair appointments and big donor money over their heads. It has a huge effect on me directly, but I can”t cast a vote against her unless I move to San Francisco.
Don’t tell me to learn to think when you don’t know what the hell you are talking about.
1. Who gets to decide what profit is good and what profit is “screwing people over?” If people are voluntarily paying for a good or service and they don’t like what they get they can go somewhere else. Just the fact that one person is making money off of someone else could be considered screwing them over.
2. We have very little control over the government other than when we vote. Even then our individual vote is only one of millions and has little real impact since most of us live in an area where people mostly think like us anyway.
3. The government has no incentive to screw us over? Any time there is a large amount of money at stake there are people who will try to screw us over and just because they work for the government doesn’t mean they will suddenly lose their desire to make easy money. That is where pork-barrel spending comes from, kick-backs, and a large part of the corruption in politics. Not to mention that many politicians feel indebted to certain groups because of continued financial support for their political careers which can cause them to vote for or against things based on how it will effect their biggest contributors.
4. A relatively cheap health care option, maybe. An option, I don’t think so. You will be forced to have insurance of some form, whether it is the government “option” or a private company. Although one form of the bill prohibits individuals from buying anything other than the government “option” within a year of the bill going into effect. Also, in countries with a single-payer system like the UK, patients don’t always get to chose whether or not they will receive care. For example, as I showed in another post here, 40% of cancer patients in the UK never get to see an oncologist because the waiting lines are so long. Why? Because when you forcibly cut the costs of health care, which you have to do to increase the number of people who are covered while at the same time lowering the overall costs, you cut things like doctors’ salaries, money to hospitals for supplies and advanced equipment, and things like that. So, when doctors become government employees who have a cap on how much they can make, that decade of time and money they spend training for their career in medicine starts to seem like a waste of time. They begin to look at other lines of work that would reward them for their investment in a good education. Those who decide they don’t care about making money will find that they have less equipment to work with and are limited on the care they can provide for their patients based on budgetary limits.
Everyone has noticed that “informed” is misspelled, right? I’ve scanned most of these comments and haven’t seen it mentioned yet.
I actually tend to write my F’s that way… a holdover from cursive writing.
democrats suck the life out of our country
I had no idea your mom was a Democrat!
Oh super mega win!!! You are ON today, VNV!
A. ROFL
B. WIN *tips hat*
LMAO, nice one VNV!
So VNV, are you saying all Democrats have really white teeth?
Good show, sir! Bravo. Bravo I say!
*golf claps*
Oh please. That kind of ignorant garbage is what is sucking the life out of our country. Do you really think half the country is trying to destroy the other half? Do you really think only Republicans are actual Americans? Seriously, if Democrats were out to destroy the country, it’d be done already.
“if Democrats were out to destroy the country, it’d be done already.”
Not as long as there are still Republicans around.
)
Go drown in a pool of UNSWEETENED Lipton plskthxbai.
(The unsweetened part was very necessary)
Wow. An insult. How unusual from the “compassionate party”.
We’re compassionate. Just not to Republicans.
Or gun owners, or Christians, or anyone in upper middle class or rich (unless they are a hollywood actress/actor or a politian), the military….I could go on and on
Well, they’re not very nice to us either, are they?
Sorry.
We of the more frothy liberals tend to be less forgiving of our more conservative counterparts. Some of us have a hard time having conservative friends outside the confines of PK just for the reason of really, really, contrasting views on stuff.
Also, my brother’s ex-wife is a Republican. He’s more liberal than I am. I still don’t know how they even made it to their wedding day.
wait …when did the liberal’s declare war on the christains?
*saunters in casually sipping a baby-rita*
It started with our “War on Christmas”, I believe. Or taking prayer out of schools.
*mixes up some more baby-ritas*
oooh then the removal of jesus and god from the money…cause you know jesus wanted to be on money
Well, according to many conservatives, we liberals are all godless heathens. Now, it is true that many liberals are godless heathens (just kidding!), but not all of us are. But I think liberals are fairly universal in wanting to keep religion as far away from government as possible, even the religious ones.
And just to prove it, check out that douche bag “guest” down below for a good example.
i don’t know about the rest of the liberals, but all i ever asked is that they just quit trying to convert me or prey for me because i’m one of the other people they were warned about way back when.
and don’t forget that some liberals have many gods, not just one – it kind of makes up for all the conservatives who only worship $$ /*sarchasm\
You can’t really say you have a sympathetic consciousness if it’s only for people who think and believe exactly like you. That’s like saying I don’t hate anyone except my enemies. It doesn’t really mean anything if you can’t apply it across the board.
Grow a sense of humor.
Respond to a post.
he responded to bitter troll, bitter troll asked him if he wanted sour cream and salsa and he said ” yes”
Ok, me too, and another Margarita too please.
Great. Now I want nachos!
CURSE YOU BITTER TROOOOLLLLLLl!!!!!!!
*shakes fist*
Since when is compassion a virtue? Besides, I’ve seen very little compassion from the Republicans lately, especially here on PK. For an example, look up all the “LOLs” people made with a picture of Senator Kennedy that read, “RIP (the nome of that woman he accidentally killed in that car crash who’s name I don’t remember)” or that said, “What goes around comes around”. Yeah, not hypocritical at all. Most liberals are just frustrated with all the bullshit coming out of the Republican party nowadays; I for one can only take so many lies and insults before I get pissed off. So shut up or back off.
P.S. I’m not a liberal, so you can hold the inevitable comment about me being an example of “how intolerant Democrats are.”
On this site it’s tit for tat, but I do notice how lols critical of FOX News and Rupert Murdock get voted quickly to the front page but nothing critical of Ted Kennedy saw the light of day. You can’t judge all Republicans by what you see on this site, most of them are pissed off by the bias. Also, if you’re not a liberal, what are you?
Well, you’ve got to admit, FOX “news” is pretty laughable; especially when they bill themselves as “fair and balanced.” My problems with the Ted Kennedy “LOLs” is not that they were criticizing him, it’s that they seemed to almost be celebrating or belittling his death. Almost as though he was some sort of monster for accidentally killing someone. Everyone makes mistakes big and small, and harping on someone for that even after they’ve died is just plain revolting. I’m not saying people have to idolize him or even respect him, just don’t paint his death (or anyone’s really) in a positive light.
P.S. To be totally honest, I really don’t have a distinct set of political beliefs. All my ideologies sort of a uniform mix of perspectives that apply to everything around me. I have a very abnormal perspective of the world, so my ideologies don’t really mach up well with either end of the political spectrum. I really have a hard time taking politics seriously because it’s all so abstract and convoluted, there’s no logic to the system! My views can range from militaristic to apathetic, and I rarely know my own beliefs until I think about them. So I really cannot say for sure where I fall politically.
Heh heh. Heh heh. You said “tit.”
just one? they best when in pairs
heh. heh. heh. you said “pairs”…
Don’t you see? If we wanted to destroy the country, we’d have just let you guys take over completely and watch the fun.
Yup. Would have been fun to watch most everyone prosper. Maybe you will get the chance after November 2010 to watch it
)
*”most everyone” may not include: the middle class, the poor, immigrants…
I have no doubts the right will try to muster a huge counter attack in 2010. I just pray every night it fails, or we’ll be stuck in the same rut as the last 8 years even longer.
My bad. You are so right. I see the light now. Lets promote mediocrity. Bring down the rich and bring up the poor. That way everyone will be equal and will want for nothing. Of course not much would get done. What a Utopia. Of course if we get rid of the top 10%..who is going to cover the 40% of taxes they pay? Oh yeah I forgot, we can print more money, never mind.
Oh, settle down. I’m just having fun here. And you’re the one who says “most everyone will prosper” when I *know* the middle class almost never prospers under Republican rule. And I’d fear the lower class as a pure Republican government would likely be out to either severely limit or eliminate the programs that help them survive.
I appologize. It is Monday..Monday’s suck. Unlike VNV, I don’t think it is possible for “everyone” to prosper, at least not equally. I think it would be akin to making everyone smart. I just don’t think it can happen.
If we took all the money we have in this country and put it in a big pool and divided it equally among everyone, in 10 years all the money would be with the people who had it in the first place and the ones who didn’t would be poor again. That’s because they know how to use it to their advantage, they don’t squander it, like for instance, the government does.
you mean paris hilton would remain rich cause she is so business savy?
No, she will die from some exotic VD. There are stupid rich and poor people. But think of all the money she spends foolishly, and the jobs she has created.
Well, she is a dumb-ass I’m sure, but she probably has financial advisors that invest her money and help our economy by providing jobs and products. If she just spent everything on purses and shoes she would be poor in a short time.
no no, she is rich , thus deserveing of all her money. while my vet uncle is totally deserveing to have to live with his kids cause he has no place else to go.
Exactly, if you have a lot of money you can make more really easily without having any actual skill beyond being wealthy. When that happens, what’s left for everyone else? Like it or not, the money the wealthy “create” needs to come from somewhere (unless it comes from the stock market), and more often than not it comes from the pockets of those who need it more in order to live a decent lifestyle; usually in the form of inflation/deflation and limited availability of certain resources, like land and electricity.
It’s true that those that have more can make more easily, but it’s not without creating more jobs or products, there is no other way to grow money without investing, it’s not a mushroom.
True, but they don’t invest all their money. they spend it on overpriced cars (which are inefficient and drive up gas prices), mansions (which take up excessive amounts of space that could be used to house dozens), and expensive foreign “status” products (which moves the money out of the country). It’s basic economics that you don’t invest very much of your money, and that means that the money the wealthy waste is just money coming out of everyone elses’ pockets! You don’t need to be obscenely rich to invest money, and those that do have that much money do more harm than good.
OMG, so much wrong in your post, I’m overwhelmed…
Please point out what is incorrect. I must admit, I’m not remarkably knowledgeable when it comes to the economy, and I dislike being wrong. The economy is such an illogical beast I have a great deal of trouble understanding it, so any help would be welcome.
Actually, No1, unless I’m mistaken, you’ve pretty much got it ass backwards. The rich do invest most of their money. That way they can keep having more money. No rich person with half a brain is going to spend a shitload of their money every year unless they DO want to end up broke. For the really rich, the lavish extravagances we middle class folk end up so bitter about are often just drops in the bucket. The money they make off of their money. One thing I’ll give the rich people who manage to stay rich: they ain’t stupid. n00bs is right about one thing: if you don’t know how to properly use your money, you’re gonna blow it. But that’s why trickle down fails. You give the rich more money, and they’re gonna keep it. It’s not gonna trickle down to the rest of us.
Now, as for Paris Hilton, she’s an heiress. She’s done nothing to earn her money, and she’s only famous because she’s a skanky attention whore heiress. Sure, she’s made some of her own money by somehow being famous, but the REAL money? That comes from being a Hilton. End of story.
No1… that money that the rich “waste” on mansions and yachts and cars…
Does it just evaporate?
Or does it pay the mansion architects and construction workers and yachtbuildres and car manufacturers?
Honda or Ferarri, SOMEBODY builds it, and maintains it, and they get paid to do so.
Take that away, and you’re destroying jobs of people who deserve to have them.
Think of it this way No1, a rising tide floats all boats. When the wealthy spend, we all do better.
I dunno. I HATE economics, it’s all so artificial! I can’t stand it! I guess I’ll just stop posting on it from now on then.
Yes, there are Misers, but they aren’t the ones who live extravagantly. They’re the nutters that wear raggedy clothes and keep mattresses full of cash and die alone.
Take Ebenezer Scrooge. Wealthy… but if you read the actual story, a big point of it was that he basically lived like a pauper. Threadbare clothes, cold apartment, gruel to eat… All of his money in chests, not even doing him any good.
To live extravagantly, to “waste” money, you have to SPEND money, and all that money goes flowing through the system just like it’s supposed to… to other people.
Scrooge was terrified of ‘waste.’
But don’t be sad about not understanding economics. Take comfort in the fact that you’re not alone. Nearly every class-envying Liberal is standing there beside you, having watched too many “Richie Rich” and “Scrooge McDuck” cartoons and thinking that that’s an accurate portrayal of wealth.
That’s the thing, though. The wealthy really don’t spend enough. And don’t give me the “they’ve been taxed too much” crap. The wealthy could get the living shit taxed out of them, invest a bunch and still spend like crazy. Now, the merely well-off might not be able to do that. But the wealthy? Hell yes, they could.
“A rising tide floats all boats.”
Yeah, and the people without boats DROWN.
Didn’t you know, though? If they don’t have a boat, they just didn’t work hard enough and deserve to drown. Duh.
I think what you meant to say is that you don’t want everyone to prosper! And you are right. That’s where we are different! But I am digging on how you have referred to me twice in a post I wasn’t even talking in. Thanks for the free publicity! And I will sleep better tonight knowing you have been thinking about me. And don’t try to deny it. The above is proof. We’re making such great breakthroughs!
*smooooooooooooooooch*!!!
*runs away*
Well, if we got rid of the top 10% then all the spending power would be distributed. Then everyone would be taxed equally, and magically, that same 40% is still there, just with the help of everyone. Thats the great thing about having 1 total amount of ‘wealth’ on the planet. It doesn’t really go anywhere. You can shift it a bunch of ways, but in the end, its still there.
I just think its sad that you always resort to your lame catch phrases like “Utopia”. No one is saying they can build a Utopia. You just like to say it because it sounds like make believe. But thats just your lack of imagination. You have to make things better for people. That should be humanities goal and although poverty is relative, there is still a standard of living that should be met by all, and when we make breakthroughs that raise that bar, it is our job to make sure everyone has access. You sir, are already the mediocrity. Thats why you don’t want the system to change. You want to feel better or smarter or more hard working than those below you, even though its not the truth. And you want to aspire to be rich one day and do nothing, which is what you threaten us with with our hopes of “mediocrity”. SO not only are you are hypocrit, but you are filled with think-tank catch phrases, so you are obviously not too bright either.
You are leaving out one important point. If you eliminate the top 10% who will be able to afford to pay payroll to workers? While a large number of people are employed by small business, anyone who works for a large corporation would lose their job. Large corporations need a bigger slice of the wealth to be able to maintain their daily operations. That includes paying their workers.
Wow, a Democrat that prays. There’s an oddity. Do you pray to Obama or do you actually believe there is someone more intelligent than him out there?
The middle class, the poor, and the immigrants have the same opportunities to make it in this country as everyone else. Yes, they have to work harder to make it than the trust-fund babies who have it handed to them, but that just makes them appreciate it more once they get it.
Show me a welfare recipient who has prospered by sitting at home all day and living off of government hand-outs. Democrats don’t want people to prosper, they want more people relying on the government for food, health care and shelter so they can grow their constituency. If they can’t get them on welfare, they will try to get them to work for the government so that everyone is relying on the government for all their needs.
bitter troll prays to cthulhu…for bitter troll shall be devowered last when the great elder god rises from his watery grave
I pray. Or is it prey? Which ever one I do it involves consuming those that are less powerful than I and stupid enough to be out after dark in my ‘hood.
for me it’s all about perspective: if someone wants to pray that i get a better job or get well, that’s a prayer; but when they start wanting me to find their version of religion, that’s when it becomes preying
“Wow, a Democrat that prays.”
Two things. 1) I’m a person. It’s “a Democrat WHO prays.”
2) Nice of you to generalize that no Democrats have faith. You suck, troll.
Nice little conspiracy theory there, pal. And the whole “same opportunities” thing is just a copout to avoid looking at how rough things are and that some people truly need help. You want people off welfare? Fine, so do I. I want them to use welfare until they can get back on their feet. That’s the point of it. Yes, people abuse it, and it’s sad, but people will always abuse any given program, even the charities that Republicans say will help all the people that need help. But it’s not right to dump all the people who need assistance out into the world and yell sink or swim when you know good and well almost all of them already have anchors tied to them. You don’t know these people, and you haven’t walked in their shoes.
Well if you want to argue semantics then “copout” should have been hyphenated. Like so: cop-out.
I don’t want to totally eliminate welfare. I think there are people who truly need help and I am all for that. Help them get back on their feet, give them a skill set they can use in the free market and cut them loose. The problem I have is with Democrats who want to continuously expand the list of people who “need help.” You admit yourself that there are people who abuse the system. The problem is that the system is designed so that it is easy to abuse it. Then there are non-profit groups like Acorn that receive some of that money that is supposed to go to help the “needy” and they are using it to train people on how to beat the system. Oh, and by the way, if it weren’t for Fox News no one ever would have heard about that story. The other networks weren’t exactly jumping at the chance to break that news.
The problem with changing the system to prevent abuse is that it likely will cost more to do so. Yeah, we could crack down on all the abuse out of principal, which ideally would be fine, but they don’t do it because that would actually cost more than the abuse. That being said, we agree on what welfare should be. There’s no easy answer to this issue.
“Well if you want to argue semantics then “copout” should have been hyphenated. Like so: cop-out.”
Wrong. On at LEAST 2 points:
1) Semantics studies meaning, not the finer points of punctuation.
2) A compound word often gets its hyphen removed after a long period of common usage, or, depending on the particular style of the setting, for example, an academic paper, journalism, or in medical usage. My own experience is with the medical profession, and most hyphenated compound words have their hyphens removed, as the superfluous keystrokes that they are. I say: “copout” is perfectly fine.
I’m a Republican who doesn’t pray. So with that said, let me just point out we can do just fine without you or your Imaginary Friend.
That’s a good point, thank you. I knew there was at least one Republican on here who isn’t a Christian (I think there are more). The liberals=godless heathens and conservatives=good little Christians stereotype is full of fail.
Rando: I’m semi Republican and not really anything. However I do get annoyed at those who insult religion (Repo or Demo), don’t know why. I think it’s b/c usually it’s done with such intent to hurt someone. “Imaginary Friend”, “Fairy Tale”, etc it just seems demeaning. I don’t think people would like to be demeand like that, yet they spew it out.
Don’t forget our favorite: “death cult”.
God hates it when it’s referred to as “mythology.”
by god do you mean thor? zeus? jesus?
It was a quote from Jay and Silent Bob Strike Back. In that movie they meant the Christian God because they were refering to Christian mythology. But here is another one for you.
‘No pleasure, no rapture, no exquisite sin greater than central air’
Behold.
Of course “guest” is demeaning like a douche too. But you should demean the person being demeaning, NOT the entire group.
It wasn’t aimed at the entire group, just those who push that stereotype. And some liberals do tend to push the all-Republicans-are-fundie-Christians stereotype too. It’s not one-sided at all. In fact, I tend to get really pretty pissed at the liberals who go that road, which we’ve seen here in the past. And God help the next person on either side who calls me a moderate for having faith. LOL
You are a socialist because you have faith!
I see no evidence that you and “guest” believe in the same specific definition of “God.”
(There are what, about 500 definitions just under the general Christianity heading?)
So maybe your god is real. But I’m still pretty sure that “guest’s” is imaginary.
@ guest
GOOD LORD YOU’RE A DOUCHE! Honestly, I don’t even know where to start! You must have been living in a hole your entire life! Seriously, welfare CANNOT support any kind of lifestyle, why the hell would the Democrats be working against the people that vote for them, poor people and rich people DO NOT have the same opportunities!! There are plenty of religious liberals, 86% of the world is religious, only around 60% of Americans are liberals! What the hell is wrong with you!? You’re more of a puppet than FOX “news” is! You’re worse than even Rush Limbaugh is at his worst! Please, THINK! I’d say “think for yourself”, but you obviously haven’t even gotten that far yet! Are you completely insane!? Do you listen to yourself speak!? Do you have ANY idea of how ridiculous you sound!? You really need to realize that you’re no infallible, because there’s no grain of truth to ANYTHING you have posted so far.
‘60% of Americans are liberals’
yeah, and 99% of statistics are made up on the spot.
Vote statistics are not. However, if you want a more exact number: 52.92% of the popular vote went to Obama. Therefore 52.92% of the population are liberals. So I guess I was off by a bit, but that wasn’t my point for bringing that up. I was showing that it was statistically IMPOSSIBLE for all liberals to be atheists. Since you decided to bring it up though, only 45.66% of the popular vote went to McCain. So, like it or not, conservatives are a minority in the U.S.
if everyone voted, and all liberals voted for obama and all conseritives voted McCain. but they didnt.
I can’t think of any better way to assess the public’s political affiliations. I figure the way people vote is more telling than the party they claim to be part of. As for those that didn’t vote: if they didn’t vote why should we care what side they support, obviously they’re a null set.
No1, by your thinking, just 5 years ago, 51% were conservatives. They elected GWB, after all.
McCain was not a conservative, and his main campaign promise was to cross the aisle and consort with teh libz.
He didn’t get the conservative vote. (well, some of us voted for him, as the lesser of two evils, but the hard-liners voted for ron paul.)
You’re joking…right? What the hell DO you consider to be conservative then?!
I consider Rando to be conservative.
no1, see the second half of my first sentence. In it is contained a wealth of information, including why i say he wasn’t conservative, more like a moderate, perhaps slightly right-leaning.
Aw, why’d you have to *HEAD ASPLODES*
No1, CyanEyed is right. McCain wasn’t really a conservative. I know because I actually considered voting for him back in 2000 before Bush got the nomination.
I’m gonna join the crowd here and say that not everyone who voted for Obama was a liberal. A great deal of fence sitters went with Obama (as well as many who went for McCain). And I’m sure there were at least 5 or 6 Republicans who voted for Obama just to spite McCain. And like bittiekins said, not everyone voted. How you vote is not at all an indication of how liberal/conservative you are.
And 50% of people are below-average.
Which, come to think of it, might explain No1’s touted election results… *lol*
Ah! Very good point, I hadn’t thought of that. Just a little not though, 25% are below average, 50% are average, and 25% are above.
I’m not sure what happened to my 3rd sentence here, the numbers are all that’s really important, but it came out all weird.
No1, How can you say I am a puppet who doesn’t think for myself AND that I am worse than Fox News and Rush Limbaugh at his worst? I either have to be a puppet or more extreme than them. I do think O’Reilly is a liberal. He always bashes the oil companies for making money, which is a very liberal thing to do.
I never said the Democrats were trying to give the poor a “lifestyle”, but they do give them most everything they need to live:
Government Housing: free or nearly free if you are a single mother
Food Stamps: Hundreds of dollars a month worth.
Child Tax Credits: Even if they don’t pay any taxes they will get thousands of dollars a year.
Pell Grants: Free money for college.
Student Loans: The government will now give you student loans and if you go to work for the government or a non-profit when you graduate you don’t have to pay back a penny. Just don’t go to work for one of those nasty companies that tries to make money or you will have to pay it all back with interest.
Don’t say that there is no grain of truth to what I say when you don’t even check your figures before you post them.
I would respectfully argue that investing in educating the poor is a pretty damn good investment in higher future income (e.g., becoming a taxpayer) and lower future expenses (e.g., less likely to need government assistance or prison).
And what exactly is wrong with Pell Grants and student loans???? If it weren’t for those, how many people would never have been able to go to college???
Apparently we weren’t supposed to be able to go to college, Rando. I should still be running the shrink-wrap machine because my parents didn’t have enough sense to be rich.
I call my father and grandfather nightly just to ask them why they just didn’t work harder….
Come to think of it, I suppose you could view the fact that my kids don’t qualify for Pell Grants as proof that they work!
No, they can’t just say “Hey, we’re a communist country now!” They have to do it incrementally so as to avoid detection. Just like they were trained to do in the Communist Manifesto. Don’t believe me? Try Reading the Communist Manifesto. Here’s a little taste. I can give you a government program that either accomplishes each of the goals or moves us closer to it.
1. Abolition of property in land and application of all rents of land to public purposes.
2. A heavy progressive or graduated income tax.
3. Abolition of all right of inheritance.
4. Confiscation of the property of all emigrants and rebels.
5. Centralization of credit in the hands of the state, by means of a national bank with state capital and an exclusive monopoly.
6. Centralization of the means of communication and transport in the hands of the state.
7. Extension of factories and instruments of production owned by the state; the bringing into cultivation of wastelands, and the improvement of the soil generally in accordance with a common plan.
8. Equal liability of all to labor. Establishment of industrial armies, especially for agriculture.
9. Combination of agriculture with manufacturing industries; gradual abolition of the distinction between town and country, by a more equable distribution of the population over the country.
10. Free education for all children in public schools. Abolition of children’s factory labor in its present form. Combination of education with industrial production, etc.
Along the same lines Rules for Radicals by Saul Alinsky is also interesting
What does this have to do with Democrats exactly?
I can’t wait for my turn to work in the wheat fields, can you comrade?
Meh, Democrats don’t seem to have the balls to go full commie.
You NEVER go full commie.
I thought you never go full retard…oh, I see what you did there.
I think it would be great! Knowing I helped feed the population by taking my turn in the fields! Sounds like something to be proud of!
#2 is already in place in America.
#3 is partially in place in America. (death tax)
#5 is in place in America. (federal reserve)
#10 is also in place in America. (public schools)
That’s 40% communist, holy crap pplz…
Oh noes! Not public schools!! How communist is that shit?! How horrible! Quick, dump all the public school kids out and let them fend for themselves!!!!
Oooh, and get rid of the Federal Reserve and the FDIC so Cyan & guest can lose all of their savings.
lol, not that the dollar is worth anything anymore!!
well if you dont want yours, can bitter troll have them?
Was it ever worth anything to begin with? Honestly, it’s a piece of paper. Why some people develop such an obsession over money I will never know.
I know, right? How arbitrary is the entire financial system. It’s all make believe, but it controls all our lives somehow. Sad, isn’t it?
I, personally, find it absolutely hilarious! Like when people run around panicking when stock prices fall, not only is the money not yours, it’s not even real!
And just think about it. Now its not even all paper. Its electronic credits. You log onto your computer or ATM, and those 0’s and 1’s tell you your worldy value. Corporations and the very wealthy don’t even think about the total any more, just percentage increases and that it is steadily increasing. Its like we are all playing with Monopoly money!
But you know whats real? Time. Only so many hours in a day. Only so many hours in your lifetime. Considering our lives are all equally valid, so is our time. Something is -very- wrong with the payscale.
Very very true, VNV.
Yes, it was worth something when it was backed by gold. Up until the liberal’s beloved Franklin D. Roosevelt signed Executive Order 6102 in April of 1933 which made it illegal for American citizens to trade with or hold more than a small amount of gold. They were forced by law to sell the majority of their gold to the Federal Reserve for $20.67 per troy ounce. In January of 1934, the Gold Reserve Act changed the value of that gold from $20.67 per ounce to $35.00 per ounce. That’s always a nifty way to make a profit. Force people to sell low and then artificially inflate the value by passing a law. Wasn’t FDR great? Oh yeah, and that is when paper money just became paper and not a real promissory note. Thanks Democrats!
Promissory note of what? Like we said above, money is arbitrary and isn’t real. I still don’t get how something so abstract could rule our lives like it does.
FDIC?… I don’t think i mentioned that…
It is worth noting that the Federal Reserve is not actually a Government … department thing. It’s just a bank, with a president-appointed ‘Board of Governors’ Who run it.
Oy? The board of governors serves 14 year terms!? Google has brought disturbing news indeed!
Yes, and without the FED we would have had another great depression last year rather than a recession. Why are you complaining about this stuff?! You may not like communism, I don’t either, but some of its principles are sound.
P.S. The cold war ended almost 20 years ago, get over it!
You cant prove that.
The depression thing, not the cold war thing…
The Great Depression happened because banks invested more money than they really should have, so when the stock market crashed they lost it all. They lost so much money they failed, they couldn’t return the money people had deposited into their accounts, the money had literally vanished. Considering how much money the banks lost when the stock market went to shit last year (they failed again, just like in 1929), I’d hazard a guess we’d have seen the same thing if the FED wasn’t there to give people their money.
at no1
You seem to have confused the Federal reserve with the FDIC. (on the giving ppl their money thing)
Also it was largely just normal(slightly greedy) ppl who had all their money invested, even so far as taking out large loans from banks to invest, because the market was FLYING. When the market crashed, all those loans became noncollectable. THATS where the banks lost all their money.
The cold war ended, communism didn’t.
And this country will never end up communist. Stop freaking out about it.
If we stop freaking out, it might.
No, no it won’t. The government, including the Democrats, are way too greedy to let communism take over. This country could never possibly work as a communist state. Which is unfortunate, because a true communist state would be pretty sweet. But it won’t happen. I understand that, and because of it, I do my best in our sorta capitalist society. And as much as VNV wants it too, I think he’d probably agree with me on this.
I don’t have any savings. I’m not a top 50% earner. I don’t base my opinions or cast my vote on which system or politician would benefit me the most.
What about these?
#1- Imminent Domain Laws, Property Taxes. If you think you own your property try not paying your taxes on it. Then see who it belongs to.
#4- They don’t confiscate property from “immigrants or rebels”, but they do confiscate property if you don’t pay taxes on it or use your property in the commission of a crime.
#6- What about the FCC, the FAA, the DOT, and the Post Office. All government groups set up to regulate or deliver the means of communication and transportation. The head of the FCC is talking about expanding their power and setting up regional offices all over the country so that they can monitor television and radio stations more closely.
#7- Extension of means of production owned by the state? What about General Motors (Government Motors), what about health care? Keep in mind this book was written before people realized that the service industry was a valuable commodity. ” The cultivation of wasteland and the improvement of soil” kinda sounds like the EPA to me. The EPA can also prevent you from using your land or confiscate it from you if they choose to.
#8- the “establishment of industrial armies” sounds very much like what Obama pushed for in his campaign with his Civilian Army.
#9- Gradual abolition of the distinction between town and country. Why would this be important? Because people who live in the country take pride in ownership of their property. The ratio of people who own private property is much higher in the country. A large number of people in cities either rent or own a part of a bigger building (think apartments, condos, townhouses). While there are many people who own a house in the city, that house does not usually provide them with their main source of income or a means of producing enough food to live off of for the whole year. That is why people who live in the country are much more concerned about property rights than people who live in the city. By blurring the lines between city and country they can slowly choke out the farmers and ranchers so that no one owns enough land to live off of. Ideally, everyone rents government housing. If the farmers don’t want to go, they can always cut off their water supply and claim to be saving a rare minnow.
#10- Free education. Oh no, not that. Yes, free education can be a dangerous thing when it becomes indoctrination. But that’s not going on is it? Mmm, mmm, mmm, Barrack Hussein Obama. No, that’s not happening at all. Look up the list of images and words that are banned from text books today and you will begin to see what I mean. Free education is great. However, indoctrination of our children is the goal of a communist-run public school system. It’s in the book people, educate yourselves.
you mean obama had all those words and books banned himself in such a short time?
No. That would be the public school system.
There is no widespread indoctrination going on, except maybe the Pledge of Allegiance, and the disturbingly selective history books our kids get. Funny how history books always paint America in such a positive manner while glossing over the bad parts. No, I don’t think there’s an Obama indoctrination going on. Remember that speech he wanted all the kids to see? Do you know how many school districts declined to even show it? My kids’ school district didn’t show it. It’s not nearly as bad as your conservative pundits’ scare tactics lead you to believe.
Ur paranoia. Let me show u it.
Lulz at your apathy.
Lulz at your Cold War propaganda fueled rants.
Four words not rant.
I was referring to some of your earlier posts.
I’m not apathetic. I just think you’re wrong. There’s a difference.
when fascism comes to america it will be wrapped in a flag and carrying a cross
don’t know if that quote applies here or not, but it flittered through my head reading that 10 point ???
I prefer this one:
“The next generation of fascists will be anti-fascists.”
That was Churchill. And he was right, too. All those kids screaming “fascist” at people in the 60’s-70’s? They grew old and took power. Meet the new boss…
Same as the old boss?
No, now they eat granola.
Yes, but is it granola from the industrial food complex?
No, see, granola from the industrial food complex actually tastes good. They eat the Extremely Virtuous granola that’s either homemade or sold at the farmers’ market or something and which does not taste good, because healthy and virtuous food is not supposed to be enjoyable.
“healthy and virtuous food is not supposed to be enjoyable”
How could I forget that?!! LMAO!
Although, I make a kick-ass granola but it’s the last thing from healthy: there’s enough brown sugar and honey in it to send even the healthiest pancreas into diabetic shock.
Brown sugar and honey are good. It’s that *shudders* Processed sugar that you need to worry about.
If you want to talk about fascism look at the current administration. Bush never set up a website where citizens could turn in people who spoke out against his policies. Bush never spoke out against media outlets and said that they should be ignored or go away because they were critical of his policies.
Can you link me to that website? I wanna turn you in.
Oh, and two words: Patriot Act. That is all.
I completely disagree. Democrats provide a valuable service to this country by providing fertile ground in which the seeds of great things can take root and thrive, and grow strong and mighty on what they provide…
Just like other forms of manure.
LOL!
(Okay, that one was bad, but it popped into my head and would not leave until I wrote it. I’m sorry.)
Yeah, it was bad.
I lol’d
7ox News – InFROMING the public since never. Keep up the good work boys, you’re making the Democrats look like Einstien.
*us Democrats
‘you’re making the Democrats look like Einstien.’
[inciteful comment]
And that takes a LOT of work.
[/inciteful comment]
Inciteful? In cite full? In full sight? Insightful? Don’t know why, but that word made me lol.
I’ll have whatever he/she’s having.
It’s a misspelling of the word insightful, changing the meaning from ‘enlightened’ to ‘provocative’
It’s odd, but I think the right side of my brain picked up on that while the left was going BUT THAT’S WRONG AND DOESN’T MAKE SENSE! I could feel the intention behind the word, but I wrote it off as an accident because I couldn’t name it.
Cool wordplay! Kudos to you then.
Please, at least Fox News will actually report the news, even if it’s a negative story about Republicans. MSNBC just ignores any stories that make Democrats look bad or tries to twist it to make Republicans look bad.
I’m sorry, I believe you’ve made a mistake. I’ll fix it for you.
Please, at least nobody will actually report the news, just a bunch of partisan opinions from both sides on the different news networks . Fox News just ignores any stories that make Republicans look bad or tries to twist it to make Democrats look bad.
Nice try, but I’m afraid you already admitted you don’t watch Fox News. So you have no idea what they report other than what MSNBC tells you. They don’t have to help the Democrats look bad. They do that on their own.
I watch it on occasion until my head hurts, just to remind me of why I don’t watch it. Why do I need to watch it? I already know who has their own shows there. Why watch something I know is going to just piss me off? Hell, I applaud MSNBC for putting Maddow & Olbermann on. Somebody has to balance it out a bit.
Most of the liberal news channels were around before Fox News. I think Fox helped bring balance by offering a conservative network. Plus, when you add up all the liberal networks’ viewers and compare that to Fox News’ viewers, you have a pretty balanced number.
P.S. I watch Keith Overbite sometimes for the same reason you watch Fox. I think it’s funny that he always manages to make someone from Fox News the Worst Person in the World every day. Or at least in the top 3.
but that’s the thing – they’re not really news, they’re propaganda.
but it is cute how you stoop to degrading someone by making fun of their name. kudos to you guest.
They are all propaganda, just on one side or the other. At least FOX does some real investigative reporting on what’s going on in the government. The others are hands off, unless of course there is a Republican administration.
In other words I think we need both, it’s just that FOX is the only conservative outlet while the others are all liberal, even the New York Times has come out and admitted it.
“even the New York Times has come out and admitted it” – they NYT is knocked all the time, but when they say something you approve of, suddenly they’re a valid reference…
“At least FOX does some real investigative reporting on what’s going on in the government.” – pah, FOX was up Bush’s ass when he was president and they dog everythign Obama does. You could switch Obama with Bush, keep their platforms the same and FOX woulda bombed Obama no matter what he did. I’m sure there’s some decent reporters on FOX, but by and large, it’s a fail station. I mean, come on, they should be embarassed you can find better interviewing and more truthful coverage on the Daily Show.
What I am saying is that they balance each other out. When there is a Republican in office, we have NBC, ABC… PBS and all the others that will jump all over themselves to find corruption. The same way FOX does with a Democrat administration. And at least the NYT admits to their bias. I don’t read it.
Here’s an example, you don’t hear anything negative about the current administration on any of the MSM, like ACORN corruption or that White House communications director Anita Dunn looks to Mao Zedong for inspiration. What is this woman doing in our government? We have to go to FOX to hear this type of thing, which many people consider newsworthy.
I think someone needs to step in and just tell them to cut it the hell out! We want to watch the news to learn about current happenings, not to be subjected to a torrent of partisan propaganda! We don’t need to accept the news as a propaganda machine, it’s not good for anyone and causes nothing but conflict! Down with the news giants!
“At least FOX does some real investigative reporting on what’s going on in the government.”
Translation: You hate Democrats, so when Fox finds something to bash them with, you consider that investigative reporting.
Yes, and the same goes for the other side, you see how it balances out. Well, not really balance because there are so many liberal media outlets, but it does serve it’s purpose or it wouldn’t get ratings. Also, I don’t hate Democrats, I don’t hate anyone… I still am registered as a Dem but I’m very conservative.
You’re registered as a Democrat??? Were you drunk that day? ‘Cos I’m not seeing a damn thing that says Democrat to me. LOL
Anyway, I’d say MSNBC is really the counterbalance to Fox. And I’m pissed at FOX for other reasons tonight anyway, relating to not getting to see House because of a goddamn baseball game. BUT I DIGRESS. Fox and MSNBC are really the most glaring examples of biased news. I’ll admit that I like MSNBC since it’s aimed at us liberals. I don’t think the other news outlets are nearly as bad though, although there might still be some liberal bias. A little.
just to add real quick before i log off – they do not balance out- fox is propaganda, short ‘n simple. they, more than anyone else, push people to their agenda instead of just relaying what’s going on (look at that tea bagging mess for the best example). whereas msm, msnbc and cnn relay news – maybe not the most objective in all instances but they far and wide do a btter job than fox.
besides, the conservatives totally dominate on the radio.
I always find myself dumbstruck by the fact that people still listen to the radio.
Any news that has NBC is inherently slanted. NBC is owned by GE. GE is hoping that Obama will pass a law requiring all doctors to have digital medical records. They are already airing commercials for the technology in hopes that the law passes. Do you think they are going to let their correspondents bad mouth the president when they have billions of federal dollars on the line? I don’t think so. The problem with people who think government is a safer bet than corporations don’t know that the corporations have the government in their pockets. Here is what the White House has said about MSNBC and Fox News:
About MSNBC:
KAREEM DALE, SPECIAL ASSISTANT TO OBAMA: At the White House, as we always like to say, we love MSNBC.
About Fox News:
White House chief of staff Rahm Emanuel told CNN on Sunday that President Obama does not want “the CNNs and the others in the world [to] basically be led in following Fox.”
Obama senior adviser David Axelrod went further by calling on media outlets to join the administration in declaring that Fox is “not a news organization.”
“Other news organizations like yours ought not to treat them that way,” Axelrod counseled ABC’s George Stephanopoulos. “We’re not going to treat them that way.”
Asked Monday about another Axelrod claim that Fox News is just trying to make money, White House Press Secretary Robert Gibbs said that while all media companies fall under that description, “I would say sometimes programming can be tilted toward accentuating those profits.”
The White House stopped providing guests to “Fox News Sunday” after host Chris Wallace fact-checked controversial assertions made by Tammy Duckworth, assistant secretary of the Department of Veterans Affairs, in August.
Dunn said fact-checking an administration official was “something I’ve never seen a Sunday show do.”
Let’s not forget the cornerstone of MSNBC, Chris Matthews who said when he heard one of Obama’s speeches during the election “I felt this thrill going up my leg.”
As for Dunn’s complaint about Fox News’ coverage of the Obama campaign, a study by the Pew Research Center showed that 40 percent of Fox News stories on Obama in the last six weeks of the campaign were negative. Similarly, 40 percent of Fox News’ stories on Obama’s Republican opponent, Sen. John McCain, were negative.
On CNN, by contrast, there was a 22-point disparity in the percentage of negative stories on Obama (39 percent) and McCain (61 percent). The disparity was even greater at MSNBC, according to Pew, where just 14 percent of Obama stories were negative, compared to a whopping 73 percent of McCain stories—a spread of 59 points.
So when you accuse Fox News of being slanted you are showing that you don’t think for yourself. You just follow your orders from Obama and his staff.
Is the White House really supposed to enjoy the way that Fox News bashes them? The White House is not an objective news outlet. Why are you expecting them to be? If Fox News was telling the world what a lousy parent I was, but MSNBC talked about what a good job I was doing, then hell yeah I’m gonna like MSNBC better. Journalism is supposed to be objective. I don’t expect the White House to be. They’ve got what they feel needs to get done, and you don’t get things done by hanging around people who thrash you at every turn.
Fox does not “bash”, just because they report about corruption in the current administration and not something you like to hear about it is the truth and needs to be told. They don’t make things up.
meh overbite not really that funny
bitter troll finds it more amuseing the way people make fun of Obama’s name
“Obunghole”??
…nope.
That was pathetic.
bwhahahahahaha
It’s just laughable how bad it is.
You have got to be doing this on purpose.
Whatever, I have been called a douche bag on this post more than once. I don’t want to here about stooping.
My God. They really can not spell correctly. They really are that dumb.
Show me your ID.
*studies it carefully*
Yes! Indeed! Captain Obvious has decided to grace us with his presence!
Why is it so many Americans get these two words confused: LOSE and LOOSE? I just don’t get it. Help.
The same reason they screw up ‘there’, ‘their’ and ‘they’re’ & ‘two’, ‘to’ and ‘too’.
“Your” and “you’re,” “its” and “it’s,” “boobs” and… oh wait.
*giggles* you said boobs
Boooooobs… It’s not even that I’m that interested in them (female and straight), it’s just a damn fun word! boobs. boobies. bewbs.
Oh c’mon, everybody loves boobs!
Two words-”Public Education”
Isn’t that an oxymoron?
*sigh* Where do you keep getting this?! Public education is underfunded, but perfectly fine.
Which is why the homeschooled kids I know consistently outperform my public school friends in such competitions as the SAT and the application of common sense.
Not to mention other “third world” nations who have a much lower budget than we do. Why do their kids do better than ours?
I repeat, UNDERFUNDED. It’s hard to give a great education when you don’t have enough money to work with. Besides, I don’t see how anything good could come of privatizing education. Schools would just become indoctrination facilities, at least that’s how private schools are used around here.
P.S. Third world nations may not have as much money as we do here, but a dollar goes a lot farther in Ethiopia than it does here! It’s all relative.
Maybe the desire to be educated is in there somewhere. American children don’t appreciate an education like 3rd wold children do. Same with the parents that support the kids, or fail to.
Too many children who think street cred is going to make them millions, or that the man owes them something.
I think you may be onto something there, but I think there’s more to it — we undervalue education in the US in part because we tend to take it for granted. It’s been several generations since going to school was a prized opportunity for children, many of whom were instead having to work in fields and factories. I’m pretty sure my son would appreciate his education more if working 12 hours a day in a textile mill was the alternative.
I’ve said before that it would do the children of our country a huge service if there was some type of student-exchange program wherein they’d spend 3 to 6 months at about age 12 in Indonesia making sneakers or something. Nice break for the third-world child laborers, too. Of course it would probably reduce the quality of the sweatshop goods somewhat, but I think the benefits might outweigh that.
We take it for granted and we don’t pay for it.
Wouldn’t it make sense to give teachers the same kind of pay we give doctors?
Plus, we keep kids in school too long. I think we should make school mandatory until a child learns to read and do math. Then, once basic skills are mastered, they branch out to what calls to them and apprentice themselves to someone in their chosen field. They spend the rest of their academic years learning the ropes and enter the working world as adults with valuable skills and aptitude and not just wondering how much longer they can or will have to live with Mom and Dad.
I don’t know if I’d go that far, but I think education needs to do much more to prepare children for the real world. I know that once I got out of college, even having been married and working at Wal-Mart full time for 3 years at that point, the reality of job searching and what to do when it doesn’t go well and whatnot pretty much landed me flat on my face…and another 8 years in retail. Ugh.
I second desire to be educated and perceived value of education. I, for example, got a LOT out of school wen I hit college and suddenly I cared about my classes instead of seeing them as someplace I had to be all day.
Of course it’s much better when schools are government indoctrination facilities instead of private ones.
Conspiracy theory much?
No Child Left Behind perhaps?
Written by Ted Kennedy, signed by Bush, and underfunded by a Democratic Congress for most of its existence.
Who do we blame for that, exactly?
Because you’re meeting the wrong homeschooled kids?
My friend’s daughter married a homeschooled boy (he was 19, she was 17, there was a dead rabbit involved, his father is a preacher, you get the idea) who can’t even pass the GED, nor can his two older brothers.
Mom homeschooled all of them and all of them either a. live on government assistance or b. live at home
That’s not homeschooling, at least not in my state. In my state there are regulations on what has to be taught while homeschooling. What you’re talking about wouldn’t fly. Although if you’re a complete idiot, you probably have no business homeschooling.
In crayon AND misspelled! Is Dubya holding that sign?
no, but he halped* rite* it
(*misspelled on purpose)
Did we notice “Amercia” is spelled incorrectly as well?
BITTER TROLL DELARES NEW LAW! all illegal immagrants in the us will now be declared slaves! want to escape to us? fine…do it illegal and you will be SNATCHED UP and forced to work in the feilds.
Also, all jobs currently filled by illegal aliens will now be done by able-bodied people recieving welfare and unemployment benefits.
^Seems like good idea…
It is, so watch it get labeled some kind of negative -ism almost immediately.
(My money’s on “racism” or “classism.”)
good-idea-ism
Right, because Americans are tripping over themselves and each other to fill these low-paying jobs./sarcasm
Of course they aren’t. That’s the point.
They aren’t because they aren’t available. Make immigrations simpler and the immigrants would be American citizens, meaning they would pay taxes just like everyone else. Problem solved. Also, you only get unemployment and welfare pay for a few months and only as long as you’re actively looking for a job, and it’s nowhere near enough to live comfortably on. Nice try though.
If they are recieving wellfare then why should they? Now, unemployement is different, they need to spend time finding jobs, so I would count them out or they may never find another job.
but all those low paying jobs will now be filled with illegal immagrant slave labor. so there will not be any left. more welfair!
No, the illegal immagrant slaves will go home so the welfair cheats can have jobs…
Hey, we still need “volunteers” for drug testing, since they’ve decided its bad to test stuff on rabbits and pigs and chimps and things, coz they’re cuuuute, but we still have to know that the stuff works before we can market it…
So we test them on illegal immigrants? I like it! [evil laughter, thunderclap in the background.]
hey those rabbits pigs and chimps are things we could be eating or wearing, dont wanna eat nothing they tasted drugs on!
The UN says human testing is illegal because it’s “unethical”. Wusses…
Is it more ethical to market untested products? We have to find out whether it works somehow.
One of my daughters bought some type of hair product, I think, once that noted in large letters “Dermatologist tested; never tested on animals!” She felt terrible when I told her about all those poor dermatologists sitting in tiny cages in the manufacturer’s lab.
Just visiting (needed to see what my teenager was reading online) and had a comment and two questions:
Reading the posts, I’m not sure many of the posters (is that the correct term?) should be laughing at anyone’s grammar/spelling, although I acknowledge that a sign for public display should be proofed a bit more carefully. Still, errors such as not knowing when to use ‘as’ versus ‘like’ or even ‘a’ versus ‘i’ occur in most of the posts I skimmed. (“Immagrant,” anyone?)
Question 1: Please don’t take offense, but do you all have jobs? It took me over half an hour to skim this post!
Question 2: How do you know when someone replies to your post? (I saw the follow-up notification box, but it tells you of ALL comments.)
Thanks.
PS All very entertaining, although a bit crazy at times. At least I know I don’t have to block the site. (Imagine smiley icon here — I don’t know how to do those either.)
hehe. You’re mom lets you read PK!
VNV, that awful grammatical mistake had better be on purpose!
It totally wasn’t, and I have shamed myself. Your….. *cries*
Irony FTW!
Um, reading comprehension check: I AM the mom.
You said your student was coming back.
No, VNV, you totally blew the comprehension part of the pageant. I’m sorry, you need to turn in your sash.
Perez Hilton demands it!
He will stomp his feet if you don’t!
Followed by us stomping him!!
I’ll get my cleats!
Um, no. Just said I was visiting…that’s because he had this website up recently so I wanted to check it out.
Welcome to the madness that is PK. A lot of back and forth, a touch of arguing, and people from all sides of the world putting in 2 cents.
If we keep putting in our 2 cents, maybe we can end world hunger!
I have a job! It’s my day off.
I have a job, I’m slackin’
I have a job, and I am AT my job.
I’m just so incredibly efficient that I’ve already completed all my assigned tasks for the day and am therefore permitted to goof off.
I have a job. I stick around later so the traffic dies down.
I have a job, but fortunatly for me it’s an easy one where I can be on here all day. And the only way that I know of to know if someone replies specifically to your post is to look. I tried the noticfication box and it’s worthless (in my opinion).
The way to do a smiley on here is use : plus ) and it shows up
when you post. Just don’t include the word plus or any of the spaces.
Nice to know that there are parents who actually look into what their teenagers are doing. I grew up thinking mine were the only ones who did that!
Thanks for telling me. The other question was somewhat of a joke; although not entirely since I am self-employed and literally only get paid when working and then I AM working.
Teenagers are taxing. I am a little stressed about parenting this week because my friend’s wonderful. straight A, unlicensed teenager let her wonderful, straight A friend ‘car surf’ and now the other girl is dead. It’s a hard lesson for a fifteen-year-old. Makes us all wonder how any of us survive the teenage years…
sorry about the life lesson for your friend’s daughter – that is a hard one at any age.
for me, i am self-employed and keep this up on my old pc, plus when you post a comment you can have all responses sent your email, which is what i do. then if there is something i want to respond to, i’ll do a search on that page – saves time and i can bypass the things that either make my blood boil instantly, or are just too inane for words.
we do tend to pick apart protest signs that are messed up, and sometimes each other for posting bad spelling & grammar. but we aren’t as cut-throat with each other as the lame-brains who write the signs.
stick around, you might like us, but stay away from the lolcat site – lolspeak will curdle your brain faster than vinegar in cream.
Oh, but I love the kitty pictures. (That’s actually how my son found this website.) But I do hate the lolspeak.
and the dog pictures, that’s how i found my way here too. and i tried reading lolspeak – even my daughter’s slow dog knows better english than that and he’s dumber than a rock and half as useful.
(at least rocks stay when told to.)
glad to see you enjoying yourself here, pull up a chair and kick back, just watch out for the lawn, the owner gets a mite protective, but he can usually be bribed with cookies and beer.
Very kind of you. May I ask about the ’search’ thing? Is there a way to actually go directly to the post that you saw in your inbox? (I tried searching using the poster’s name and keywords from the post; nothing.)
Thanks
Er…the search can take you to different LOLs, but it won’t take you to specific comments usually, I don’t think.
Hmmm…I may be too lazy for this type of dialogue.
It’s a heck of a lot of scrolling…
I actually just figured it out! Under the ‘recent comments’ at the top (near the picture) I just clicked on your name and that took me right to your comment. As the teenagers say, Sweet!
I was going to tell you that, but I missed you by a few hours. Oh well.
Also, if you just want to scan a long page to see if anyone’s responded to your comments, hit ctrl-f and type your screen name in the search box.
Very true, diss, ctrl-f has saved me a lot of time.
OMG that’s terrible.
I think most of us here have jobs, I work full time.
To check for responses I use google chrome search function and search my username, then look at nested comments.
Enjoy.
*sighs* Yep… I’m staying the hell away from this one.
ha ha, no you didn’t.
for every time one of the libs call us “tea baggers” I’m going to call their commie love-fest protests “a$$hole licking contests”
it’s only fair.
Isn’t that what they call themselves? What is wrong with using the name that they came up with? Is it other people’s fault that they chose a name with unsavory other meanings?
sooooo the guy at the TEA party throwing tea bags around crying about how evil obama is, its wrong for us to call him a tea bagger when he calls himself a tea bagger?
is that like black people and the N word?
no, that isnt what they call themselves.
TEA (taxed enough already) parties
“teabagging” and teabagger is a sexual term for licking a scrotum. and the ones on TV and radio who call us that know this already. yet they still use it…because they think it’s funny to call people gay.
this, from the supposedly ultra-sensitive PC lefties. who want hate speech legislation enforced when you tell the truth, but not when they call someone who disagrees with them a sex act.
thus, peace rallies are now a$$hole licking contests. it’s only fair.
So, you don’t like peace, huh? Anyone out there you really wanna kill? That’s the only American thing to do, right? Find someone to kill? Failtard.
It’s good to see McCarthyism alive and well in America.
It never went away to begin with…
Eh, it died down for a while. It’s found a new calling since we have *gasp* a Democrat in the White House again. The red scare is back, baby!
Hah! Allen, I like the cut of your jib.
Gotta love liberal pukes pointing out how “stupid” conservatives are when every welfare leach in the country votes for democrats, safe to say the average Obama voter that ACORN signed up can’t even read and who TEACHES all these stupid people you elitist dicks look down on? THE TEACHERS UNION! The most communist group in the country and they spend MILLIONS to elect democrats. They WANT people to be stupid and the current “president” proves it.
damn teachers…someone should dosomething about them…i suggest leg breaking and old fashion union busting. teach them to teach things
Teabaggers just understand what teaching is for.
Your regular middle class or poor american doesn’t need a full education. It’s this misguided liberal notion that’s created our current problems.
All they need to be taught is the bible, discipline and respect for their superiors.
They need the idea that if you work hard and do as your told you’ll be rewarded (just the belief, in the real world of course this isn’t true).
And they need clear examples of what happens if you don’t. Welfare removes these examples, that’s our problem.
All most americans need is the two motivators, fear (of losing their job, health cover, for women fear of pregnacy etc) and hope (that one day they can be rich too).
Maybe liberalism can work in more ’sophisticated’ societies in Europe, but it’s not suited to America where we have so many blacks and hispanics with their low IQs.
And the second and third little Sqwirkies build their men out of sticks and bricks…
You won’t get a ‘full education’ in a public school. Or anywhere else, for that matter.
There just isn’t the time… especially if you have one of those “mainstreamed” classes where they have to keep the lessons slow for the learning-disabled and the just-plain-dumb kids.
If you want to get one of those, you’re pretty much going to have to do it yourself.
Wow, good point. Why bother trying to teach learning-disabled or dumb kids. Hell, let’s just put them in the nuthouse where they belong so we don’t have to deal with them.
Actually, slaggingham has already established earlier that he’s against educating the stupid. So your dig isn’t too far off.
Yeah, I know. Pretty sick, actually.
No, actually let’s give the learning-disabled kids their own special classes at their own speed with teachers especially trained to handle their special needs.
And lets do the same with the GIFTED students (not the same classes of course.)
This will better enable everyone to achieve their own potential.
Seriously Rando, don’t disappoint me here. I figure you’re pretty smart. Were you in a mainstreamed class? Didn’t you ever get frustrated and/or bored waiting for a slow learner to catch up? Wouldn’t everyone be better off learning at their own pace?
I don’t believe that learning-disabled kids are uneducable. Just, not in the same way as everybody else. (Another point against collectivism, BTW. We are not all the same, and we can’t be… unless we go the route of the society of “Harrison Bergeron.”)
As for the simply unable… a 30-year veteran of teaching said it better than I ever could… “You can have all the money and the best teachers in the world… and you still can’t teach a potato algebra.”
dont they do that around, advanced placement and speical classes for slower or stupid kids?
bitter troll spent the first 2 years in a slower kid class in middle school, till they realized bitter troll should of been in advanced placement instead.
They used to. Then it became fashionable to throw everybody in with the “normals.”
So you had the normal kids fidgeting and getting bored waiting for the slow kids to catch up, and the gifted kids getting REALLY bored, to the point of acting out or completely losing touch with the rest of the class.
That’s what “mainstreaming” was, and it simply did not work.
Now, to be fair, I was in one of the separate “advanced” classes when I was a child, and it sucked too. Mostly because we were only separated for a few hours, rather than all the time, which pissed the other kids off because they thought we were getting special funtime, but also because “gifted teacher” really wasn’t a priority specialty back then, and they had NO idea what to do with us.
So they basically shat more make-work on us. “You’re smarter? Then your book report should be twice as long.”
I got more out of spending hours by myself reading everything I could reach at the public library than I ever did in school.
Of course, I also lucked out in that my parents were teachers, and I could get a whole lot of “unstructured” knowledge.
Because as we all know, no one ever gained anything by working hard, and no one ever gained any character by going through hardships. We don’t need any of that crap. And of course no one ever got any comfort from religion, got off drugs or alchohol, changed their lives or any of that rot, it’s just brain washing, everyone knows that. Oh and a front for child molesting.
This was meant to be in reply to ever intriguing Sqwirk above…
Praise be to the ever intriguing Sqwirk above
Hey, I didn’t say anything about praise…
It is through your deeds that you praise me.
Really? *looks around*
How do you know what deeds I’m doing?
That one will make you go blind ><
Okay, Sqwirk, you’ve really got me ROFL this time. You win +10 Internets today!
I gotta keep my curtains closed…
Random quotes make you “smarter”.
Duh, of course they do! The more quotation marks you throw in the more compelling your argument is! It’s basic debate stuff!
“I” “am” “even” “smarter” “than” “NEA.”
I love inappropriate quotation marks. They mean I get to tell someone he’s “wrong!”
You’ve confused the NEA with the AFT union.
Yeah, there’s more than one national teacher’s union, and the real hardcore reds go to the AFT. They’re the ones that supported the Soviet’s suppression of Czechoslovakia.
Heck, my father was president of his local NEA-affiliated union… and he’s Conservative (okay, he had to be a registered Democrat to get the job, because republican’s just aren’t allowed, but still…)
Aw… poor little high school brat doesn’t want to do his homework. Go study your grammar text book and come back when you can post like an adult, ok cupcake? *Pats NEA on head and sends on his way*
Wow, you’re more batshit than Bruce Wayne dropping a deuce. Guess what, we liberal pukes are running shit, so eat that, fvcker!!! BWAHAHAHA!!!! Quick, comrades, let’s hold a parade for ACORN and just start shooting anyone that looks like a conservative! Woohoo!
Heehee. Look, it’s irony! You just proved our “liberal pukes’ ” point with your severely grammatically challenged rant.
Typical liberal, since you can’t deny the truth of what I said, you just act like you’re somehow “smarter” than me but you’re too damn stupid to see the communist takeover we’re in the middle of and that you’re nothing but a useful idiot to the cause. If you think everyone is soooo stupid but you refuse to look at why then you’re just as stupid as everyone you claim to be superior to.
someone lost his binkie
I just read through the pages you linked.
Saying you should train (or arm) yourself because you might be physically attacked… seems like saying you should wear a hard hat when you go out because someone might drop a brick on your head from a bridge.
*hides brick*
Why would someone do that?
Gee. I just figured out how to post, but even I can use the ‘reply’ feature. (Although I think regulars call it the ‘reply button.’) Must be all that danged public education from those union public teachers.
PS Plus I learned how to make a smiley face! (Thanks, Mina.)
how to use the reply button.
step one, hit the reply link.
step two, reply
step three hit add comment
step D : Profit!
But you missed the step about collecting underwear
You’re more than welcome! I love the smiley faces. they are so much fun!
Ha! I like you already. Stick around. We have fun here.
If you can’t hit reply, then can you please specify who you’re calling a “Typical liberal”? For the record, you’re way off base if that comment was directed at me. As for the rest of your comment, I’ll give you further attention when you learn how to speak politely to people. Now then, isn’t it passed your bedtime? Off with you now. Goodnight, cupcake.
Hell, I think it may have been aimed at CyanEyed who I believe is NOT a liberal. LOL
Again with the “quotes.” Seriously, Senator McCarthy, I thought for sure you were dead. This ain’t communism, kids. We’re not even in the ballpark of communism. And if we’re moving towards it, we’re doing it so slowly that our great great grandkids will be the first ones calling each other comrade, so settle the fvck down, bitch. Just because we elect a Democrat doesn’t mean the entire country is turning into a bunch of commies. As much fun as that would be, communism is not practical enough to work in this country. And that’s unfortunate, ‘cos communism would be great if we could actually implement it. But we can’t, so more capitalism bullshit. Sleep well, capitalist pig.
meh, another “Fox News Sucks” submission to be added to the thousands.
no no its stupid old people with crayon sign is stupid!
Yea, and they’re thanking the nice people at ABC for the nice date night stories about Obama.
Because God forbid anyone says something nice about the President. That’s just liberal media bias there! REAL NEWS talks about what a complete anti-American asshole he is, right?
He has nice shoes.
Are they really his, or did he socialise them?
Socialize.
Real commies spell it with a s.
So you are a real commie. -10 IQ points.
hahaha, typical american
Well, at least this American knows that you’re supposed to capitalize words such as “American” (or “Canadian”).
TROLL’D HARD !!!!
Wow, that’s even more pathetic than the “typical American” troll. Do you just search through all the pages looking for people to yell “TROLL’D HARD” to? Are you really that hard up for entertainment?
TROLL’D HARDER !!!!
Mabs, don’t respond to the “typical american” troll. His only jingoist goal is to get your attention. We have an “ordinal post” response to this sort of garbage: “In Soviet Russia, Typical American is you!” I think it works pretty well.
And I feel special whenever I see it!
You should! It was a fantastic idea, VNV.
In Soviet Russia, Typical American is you!
testing
Mr. Johnson, what kind of test is this? Is it like one of those clinical trials? Will I get some sort of compensation if I participate?
Mr. Johnson will have to get back to you. He had to go down to the crossroads.
so, didja pass? or was it positive? what were you testing for?
/*snark.sarcasm.general b!tchyness
testes, testes, one, two,…three?
/butthead
Okay, it’s been a long time since I dated (hence did any counting of my own), but three? Did you live near Chernobyl by chance?
*snerk* HAHAHAHAHA Ok, +10 interwebs for you!
It’s a Beavis & Butthead reference.
Wow. Over 500 responses!
Listen, I’m way too high to read them all, but I thought I would take this opportunity to say that Bored to Death on HBO is my new favorite show, and if you’re not watching it, you’re a sucka.
FOX News: REJECT REALITY AND SUBSTITUTE YOUR OWN
I thought that was Adam Savage.
somehow, infromed doesn’t seem to be an incredibly obvious misspelling of the word.
“Infourmed”? “Enformed”? I mean, unless the guy is some kind of dislexic (?).
Has it occured to you that the fact that it’s written in crayon, some of the letters are not capitalized and the Fs are all backwards – that it MIGHT be intentionally mispelled to look like a child wrote it?
*considers*
Yeah no.
yeah; I was just criticizing the way it was faked.
I’m not good at recognizing shops, but this was either shopped or crayoned with deceit. It’s pretty obvious, just by what it says.
Also, if you look closely you can see that the switched letters (“o” and “r”) are written bolder than any of the other letters in their word.
Wow, the Democunts are at it again. But what do you expect from a group of people who support prostitution by underage illegal aliens?
Do you type letters to your mother with those fingers?
Wow. Support prostitution by underage illegal aliens? Where do you people come up with this stuff?
well… how about it?
How about what? Are you an underage illegal alien trying to sell me sex? I told you, I am not down with that! Now if it was just underage or illegal alien…. but not both.
</3
ACORN!!!11!!!!
No srsly, acorn.
Because whatever the hell happened with ACORN represents all Democrats. WTFever.
ACORN!!!!!!
ACORN!!!!!!!
not sure what it is, but its what anti-obama people scream all the time!!!!
ACORN!!!!!
ACORN!!!!!
surely they murdered puppies and stole the pension of hundreds of employees…
I’m trying to figure out if you believe “underage illegal alien prostitutes” are better or worse than the Republicans who are having sex with male pages…
(I was going to say Republicunts, but I refuse to sink to Dave’s level).
Does it really matter what the gender of the underage partner is?
You know what they say around here: 16 will get you 20.
Dave, as always, you are a bright ray of sunshine!
‘Shopped
looks more like the airbrush setting in mspaint.
um… i think the caption expresses the point of the sign…
Why do I get the feeling that that people who hate Fox news made this sign in an attempt to make Fox news supporters look stupid?
People who hate Fox news talk about it all the time. I don’t think anyone likes Fox news enough to make a sign about it. I call BS.
FN “supporters” (that’s Freudian in and of itself, BTW, Shouldn’t it be “viewers”? Supporters suggests that they have an agenda. Which, of course, they DO.) don’t need any help to look stupid. The fact that they believe FN is anything but an extension of the Republican Party is hysterically funny.
But its a fair and balanced extension of the Republican Party!
the fact that they think the tea party movement is part of the republican party is just as funny.
Lets dress up like Indians so we can divert punishment away from us!
I know! I mean, EVERYbody knows it is a construct of Glenn Beck. Sheesh!
There are ALOT of people at these tea party things. More then at Obama’s inauguration for the last one (the last one I heard about, I don’t keep tabs on them). Are you saying that there isn’t a free minded thinker in attendance out of all of those people? Are they all sheep following Beck and the Republican party?
If you are, that’s a bold statement. If you’re bold statement is accurate I’m moving to New Zealand.
“Free minded” is a very strong term in today’s world. We have been mind washed for generations. Americans are now domesticated animals. All we do is comsume and breed. We are like the pets of the the bourgeoisie. You may be safer in New Zealand.
Don’t encourage his move to NZ!! It’s a perfectly nice, beautiful country. There’s no need to ruin it. Plus, they have socialized medicine; meyaht would hate it there.
Do I know you? Better yet, do you know me?
Better yet, do I really want to?
obvious troll is obvious
But only you have been able to avoid this mind washing and have crystal clear thinking and can tell us all about how we are being abused. We should listen to you and you alone… Good grief.
You can believe that there ALOT of people who have avoided the brain-washing.
Those numbers at the last tea party were fabricated by Fox Noise. There were NOT more people there than at Obama’s inauguration. This has been thoroughly debunked.
And yes, they are sheep, following Beck and the Republican party. Thanks for making my point for me! Enjoy New Zealand!
Hand here’s a cite for you on that: {{http://www.factcheck.org/2009/09/how-many-protesters1/}}
This comment made me lol, because the only thing New Zealand is famous for (besides Lord of the Rings filming locations) is its sheep industry. I know the lamb at the restaurant where I work is ALL imported from New Zealand. Seriously, I think they have more sheep than people there.
It sounds like meyaht will fit right in there…
They do have more sheep than people. However, it’s an incredibly beautiful country. So can we please keep it that way and keep meyaht out.
Well, at least it’s writing. It’s more than CNN and ABC, etc. can manage. I think they’re still working with pictures.. or maybe not that far, yet.
1. Its handmade – real grassroots movements don’t use factory-made cookie-cutter signs.
2. Yes, its spelled wrong – people who are upset about things often write too fast.
3.Its called a “Tea Party” (You remember American history right? The Boston Tea Party?) *NOT* “Teabaggers” (which is an insulting term used by people to insult the people who think raising taxes on honest hard working people to give free benefits to lazy welfare recipients is a bad idea)
Yeah, thanks, we’ve been over your bullshit several times already. STFUGTFOESADITOP.
Oh, no John Harsin, do continue. I’m glad someone is making statements and not sitting on the sidelines to boo at the crowd.
Come now John. They brought it on themselves by bringing all of those tea bags to the first “grass-roots *snicker* (can’t even TYPE that with a straight face!) protest that The Fox Variety Show sponsored.
I support the Tea Party movement.
I am NOT a republican (OR a democrat).
I agree with Glenn Beck’s positions in regard to taxes, health care “reform” and corruption.
I do NOT agree with his thinking that not as many Americans believing in an imaginary being he refers to as “God” has anything to do with our problems.
Where are all these people coming from and why are they all putting their full names on here? I smell a dirty sock.
That’s a terrible photoshop. Put more effort into it next time.
This is a shop I can tell from the pixels and from having seen quite a few shops in my time.
punditkitchen: “your mom and dad discovering the internet, one thread at a time.”
I wonder if they know the alternative meaning to teabagging and would they continue to call themselves teabaggers if they did
only if they are conservative assholes
Let’s see… Mixing capitol and lowercase letters, couldn’t spell to save her life… Yep. That’s what people who call Fox “news” good information come out to be. Idiots.
agreed
Okay. Have a good one!
what is the point of empty space? trying to prove a point?
Thanks for keeping us informed you crayon writing retards
someone has a temper. funny that you’re probably a 25 year old drunk redneck and yet i have to tell you to stop insulting yourself.
ps talking to “big gun smoke makes up for tiny penis” dude