|
Boxman posted:There's little doubt that, if pressed for examples, he would note how Lincoln was a Republican. Just drop a link to the wiki on the Southern Strategy and move on. In the 80's, a Democratic senator dug up expense reports to prove that Reagan was incompetent. He touted the $300 toilet seat and the $400 hammer. It turned out that that was just a method of accounting wherein you attribute all the labor and repairs/replacement to an item involved with that, for its expected lifetime or whatever. The military as a result switched over to a different accounting system, because they got real sick of people saying "Why does it a toilet seat cost $300!" without realizing that includes the cost of cleaning and fixing that toilet seat for 10 years. But no one remembers that. If you're just looking for a quick "shut the gently caress up" point out that that was under Reagan.
|
#
?
Oct 24, 2012 15:45
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 10, 2024 07:39 |
|
|
zeroprime posted:This popped up on facebook: I agree, outsourcing the work to a private company is a waste of time. Just let the government build the roads themselves.
|
|
#
?
Oct 24, 2012 15:53
|
|
|
Wait weren't the Bobs characterized as soulless contractors paid to fire people whose jobs they didn't understand in order to make short term profits for management? Also the other guy's job had a totally legitimate purpose? Seems like they are making a point AGAINST removing government from the equation to me even if they don't realize it.
|
|
#
?
Oct 24, 2012 15:57
|
|
|
Conservative misses the point of a book/movie/song/whatever? NEVER!
|
|
#
?
Oct 24, 2012 16:04
|
|
|
XyloJW posted:In the 80's, a Democratic senator dug up expense reports to prove that Reagan was incompetent. He touted the $300 toilet seat and the $400 hammer. This is actually a pretty standard method of attack. You saw the Republicans pulling the same poo poo with the Stimulus, "It cost $250,000 per job!!!!"; completely ignoring the other costs associated with the person doing their job and the fact that those jobs resulted in benefits beyond just some guy getting a paycheck. Though they'd be pretty quick to point out the flaws if you suggested a private corporation who spends $30B a year to employ 75,000 people was a massive waste of money ($400,000 per job?!?!)
|
|
#
?
Oct 24, 2012 16:06
|
|
|
The Government is the freaking mechanism by which people collectively do poo poo like build roads. The Government is US. I don't understand logic that says State governments can accurately gauge and serve the needs of its people but the federal government is a scary foreign body trying that can't do anything.
|
|
#
?
Oct 24, 2012 16:08
|
|
|
Bombadilillo posted:The Government is the freaking mechanism by which people collectively do poo poo like build roads. The Government is US. I don't understand logic that says State governments can accurately gauge and serve the needs of its people but the federal government is a scary foreign body trying that can't do anything. Even better is if the states hypothetically broke into tiny little fiefdoms you know GOP (or whatever the equivalent would be in this new world scenario) would say how state government doesn't understand what people at the town level need. It's just "smaller government = good" end of story.
|
|
#
?
Oct 24, 2012 16:25
|
|
|
I wish I could find the Bloom County strip where they make smaller and smaller circles representing countries, towns, etc until only Hodge and Portnoy are left in one house. Edit: Found it 
Eggplant Squire fucked around with this message at 16:45 on Oct 24, 2012 |
|
#
?
Oct 24, 2012 16:28
|
|
|
The Israeli libertarians strike again! They basically took 4 of the 5 points of the truism list (with the title: 4 Truths Nobody Can Deny):quote:1. What one person receives without working for, another person must work for without receiving My refutations: quote:1. Exactly! Just like stockholders do nothing and get their profit on the workers` backs. I didn't know the Liberal Movement (Israeli libertarians) are promoting Marxism's surplus value theory!
|
|
#
?
Oct 24, 2012 17:10
|
|
|
On my Facebook feed I saw this gem This came from "The Blacksphere" I guess he has a shiny ear or something but man this is some stretching.
|
|
#
?
Oct 24, 2012 17:39
|
|
|
Boxman posted:There's little doubt that, if pressed for examples, he would note how Lincoln was a Republican. Just drop a link to the wiki on the Southern Strategy and move on. I just linked Palin's "Shuck and Jive" racist FB post with out comment as a reply.
|
|
#
?
Oct 24, 2012 17:46
|
|
|
http://www.salon.com/2004/10/09/bulge/ Edit: I decided to google "obama earpiece" to see what others were saying about it and found these awesome ads 
prom candy fucked around with this message at 17:50 on Oct 24, 2012 |
|
#
?
Oct 24, 2012 17:48
|
|
|
Something tells me if there is a GLOBAL BANKING COLLAPSE by the end of the year unless the wealth that guy is talking about is bullets and gasoline it's not going to be very helpful.
|
|
#
?
Oct 24, 2012 17:58
|
|
|
My uncle is very conservative, and he thinks he's ridiculously clever by saying "I don't need to hoard anything. I've got guns, and I'll just use it to steal from the hoarders." Yes, he's the only guy with guns apparently.
|
|
#
?
Oct 24, 2012 18:04
|
|
|
seigfox posted:I just had this pop up on facebook. I had a half-hour to blow so I went on a rant. This happened (I'm red): Assuming the businesses that wanted roads to their shopping centers were willing to build roads...to where would they build them? Will they build a road to my house? Will they build a road to every house?
|
|
#
?
Oct 24, 2012 18:22
|
|
|
myron cope posted:Assuming the businesses that wanted roads to their shopping centers were willing to build roads...to where would they build them? Will they build a road to my house? Will they build a road to every house? If they'd do it on their own, why did Eisenhower have to build the Interstate system in the 1950's? Oh right, I forgot, there were no businesses, ever, prior to 1950. Ratmtattat posted:On my Facebook feed I saw this gem Plus the pictures are taken from different angles. vvvv - I was thinking that, too. "If you look at this picture, from this angle, there is maybe, possibly, a bump under his jacket!" I wonder why the target of these attacks are the incumbents. I don't remember similar claims from 2000 or 2008, and no one made those claims about Kerry in 2004, or Romney now. Is it just a "Our current President is so stupid he needs help debating, vote this fucker out!" mindset? Sarion fucked around with this message at 18:48 on Oct 24, 2012 |
|
#
?
Oct 24, 2012 18:31
|
|
|
Ratmtattat posted:On my Facebook feed I saw this gem This is somehow even dumber than the poo poo about Bush wearing some sort of radio in the 2004 debates.
|
|
#
?
Oct 24, 2012 18:44
|
|
|
Could he just be wearing it so he could hear the moderator?
|
|
#
?
Oct 24, 2012 18:48
|
|
|
Sarion posted:Plus the pictures are taken from different angles. Could be the perception of stupidity. People think Romney and Kerry are skeevy as hell and flipflopping liars, but no one really accuses either of idiocy. People have always accused Bush of idiocy, and racist fuckwits have ginned up the idea of Obama being a moron which has caught on with non-racists. So seeing them perform competently in a debate means you start looking for how this could be the case.
|
|
#
?
Oct 24, 2012 19:29
|
|
|
bobkatt013 posted:Could he just be wearing it so he could hear the moderator? He isn't wearing anything. Those pictures make it clear that the person who made it is delusional, there's nothing there.
|
|
#
?
Oct 24, 2012 19:37
|
|
|
Got my early ballot the other day. Filled it out, mailed it out, done. My mom wanted to know who I voted for. You know who the gently caress I voted for, you bitch. It's not the guy whose VP wants me to be forced to have a rape-conceived baby if I get raped! It's not the guy who said he will remove Planned Parenthood and overturn Roe V Wade. Oh, but I forget. Obama is the bad one because he wants you to pay for poor people. There was a prop about raising sale tax by one penny on every dollar. I voted for it because we need to fix the roads and improve schools. My mom voted against because "they didn't put a limit on it so the tax is there forever!" Yes, mom. You will be paying an extra $2 on a $100 purchase and this will never ever benefit you ever again.
|
|
#
?
Oct 25, 2012 00:26
|
|
|
Cowslips Warren posted:Got my early ballot the other day. Filled it out, mailed it out, done. My mom wanted to know who I voted for. Not even. If it's a penny on the dollar, it's $1 for a $100 purchase. And I bet you that doesn't apply to most daily essentials, because sales taxes usually don't. Consumption taxes as a rule apply most heavily to the wealthy, especially in a recession, because they're the ones who are buying new cars every year and paying actually large amounts of sales taxes on their consumption. For those of us who spend most of our money on rent and food (almost all food is excluded here in Canada, don't know about the US), we end up paying much less sales tax on each dollar of our disposable income than the wealthy do. As an example, I spent $57.09 on groceries today and a grand total of $0.47 of that was sales tax, which is 13% here. And that was only because I splurged and bought two bags of candy. Literally everything else I bought, from milk to vegetables to frozen pizza, is sales tax free.
|
|
#
?
Oct 25, 2012 00:34
|
|
|
Do you live in SC? I think we have a proposition about raising sales tax by a penny. Her argument was really, "it'll be there forever!"? As if future laws couldn't change it?
|
|
#
?
Oct 25, 2012 00:35
|
|
|
vyelkin posted:Not even. If it's a penny on the dollar, it's $1 for a $100 purchase. And I bet you that doesn't apply to most daily essentials, because sales taxes usually don't. Consumption taxes as a rule apply most heavily to the wealthy, especially in a recession, because they're the ones who are buying new cars every year and paying actually large amounts of sales taxes on their consumption. For those of us who spend most of our money on rent and food (almost all food is excluded here in Canada, don't know about the US), we end up paying much less sales tax on each dollar of our disposable income than the wealthy do. In Tennessee we tax everything - though some things are exempt from city taxes - but we have been relatively good on our budgets so far. I really dig a consumption tax over income tax, but I see how (if there aren't exemptions or negative tax refunds) they can be regressive as poo poo.
|
|
#
?
Oct 25, 2012 00:37
|
|
|
Here enjoy a post from my facebook by a cousin of mine. Leaving in spelling errors for factual-ness! I love ya but this country is still a lot better off than most and that's because we've never had a govt that has total rule over our everyday lives. Look at how miserable people like you and I are in N. Korea or in these other dictatorship or socialist ruled countries. Their citizens are completely dependant on government for basic needs such as food and water. These sick rulers are living in palaces and castles while their people starve and die of diseases due to their own power hungry egos. Obama is just like these wackos. This country will fall apart at the seams if he is re elected. He will let it happen and then he will attempt to have the military ration out food and basic needs to us so that we are also completely dependant on him. Look at a World History book man. After wwi Germany was in economic shambles and Hitler promised all these great changes and improvements if was elected chancellor. Well ya see how that turned out for Germany. Obama will break this country down and rebuild it to be completely dependant on what he decides to hand out to the people. I fortunately will not know what its like to live like that because I will join a militia fighting his army and I will be dependant upon God and what he provides me just as the Hebrews did after they left Egypt. A nation that turns its back on God is destined to failure. If history is not known and studied it will repeat itself. I love you cuz and this doesn't change the fact that as family we have to stick together no matter what. How should I save my relations from this militia stuff? Rkelly fucked around with this message at 00:44 on Oct 25, 2012 |
|
#
?
Oct 25, 2012 00:39
|
|
|
sicarius posted:In Tennessee we tax everything - though some things are exempt from city taxes - but we have been relatively good on our budgets so far. I really dig a consumption tax over income tax, but I see how (if there aren't exemptions or negative tax refunds) they can be regressive as poo poo. Oh yeah, also if you're poor in Ontario you get an HST (and a couple other minor taxes, mostly on resource development) rebate each month of about $24. It's not a lot but considering how little I buy and how little of what I do buy has HST on it, I can guarantee you there have been months where I made more off that rebate than I spent in sales tax. Our HST here is actually surprisingly progressive, but that doesn't stop people from complaining about it all the time.
|
|
#
?
Oct 25, 2012 00:40
|
|
|
In Michigan there's a ballot proposal (Prop 5) that will require 2/3s of the legislature (or a statewide referendum,  ) to increase (statewide) taxes on anything in any way ("in order for the State of Michigan to impose new or additional taxes on taxpayers or expand the base of taxation or increasing the rate of taxation.") It sounds horrifying but I can see it passing because of MY TAXES SHOULD BE LOWER 
|
|
#
?
Oct 25, 2012 00:44
|
|
|
For fucks sake, my Dad just sent a panicked mass email to all of his contacts about how the Obama administration lied about details about the attack on the Benghazi consulate, and how they should vote for Romney or America is doomed. Unfortunately for him, he's too computer un-savvy to realize that it sent to all of his BUSINESS CLIENTS as well and they're understandably pissed off that he's broadcasting his political views to professional contacts, even though I'm sure he mistakenly overlooked the fact that his clients were included in that list. To my knowledge this is the only time he's ever sent out a political mass email. damnit Dad 
|
|
#
?
Oct 25, 2012 01:48
|
|
|
Sleepy Robot's Dad posted:BREAKING NEWS 10/24/2012 To anyone wondering, this was the email. Rest assured, the html version has a wide variety of formatting features like caps, bolding, italics, and bolded italicized caps.
|
|
#
?
Oct 25, 2012 01:51
|
|
|
myron cope posted:In Michigan there's a ballot proposal (Prop 5) that will require 2/3s of the legislature (or a statewide referendum, It sounds like the kind of thing that got California into it's mess. You can pass laws to create all kinds of government services, but any taxes have to go through referendum. As a result, raising taxes in California is nearly impossible, unless I'm completely off base about how it works.
|
|
#
?
Oct 25, 2012 01:52
|
|
|
THis Benghazi poo poo is making me insane. Obama did say the next day it was a terror attack right?
|
|
#
?
Oct 25, 2012 01:53
|
|
|
Sleepy Robot posted:To anyone wondering, this was the email. Rest assured, the html version has a wide variety of formatting features like caps, bolding, italics, and bolded italicized caps. Holy poo poo, a real sighting! The birth of a fwd:fwd:fwd! Sorry man, not so much that you got the email, as the fact that your dad sent it to everyone. Hopefully it won't hurt his business. Now, if you want to respond to it, you could point out that "what they knew" was that a group claimed credit for the attack. However, this means nothing. When 9/11 happened, groups around the world came out of the wood work to claim credit for it. Even if the attack had been totally random, groups would try to claim credit. These groups have to make a name for themselves to survive. They WANT people to think it was them, even if it wasn't. As far as the administration was concerned it was just one more piece of evidence that was likely bullshit, on top of a pile of more useless bullshit. Intelligence gathering requires a lot of filtering to determine the good info from the bad. Even if this group was the one responsible, it doesn't matter because at the time it was insufficient evidence to pin it on that group over any other group.
|
|
#
?
Oct 25, 2012 01:59
|
|
|
euphronius posted:THis Benghazi poo poo is making me insane. Obama did say the next day it was a terror attack right? Only if you have a rudimentary understanding of how language works. Obama never explicitly stated that it was a terror attack so if you are an idiot it is definitely possible to interpret the following as a complete non-sequitur in the middle of a speech about the Sept 11 attack. Obama posted:No acts of terror will ever shake the resolve of this great nation, alter that character, or eclipse the light of the values that we stand for. Today we mourn four more Americans who represent the very best of the United States of America. We will not waver in our commitment to see that justice is done for this terrible act. And make no mistake, justice will be done.
|
|
#
?
Oct 25, 2012 02:06
|
|
|
euphronius posted:THis Benghazi poo poo is making me insane. Obama did say the next day it was a terror attack right? The problem is he didn't say the exact words, "This was a terrorist attack." He said, "No acts of terror will ever shake the resolve of this great nation, alter that character, or eclipse the light of the values that we stand for. Today we mourn four more Americans who represent the very best of the United States of America. We will not waver in our commitment to see that justice is done for this terrible act. And make no mistake, justice will be done." Somehow people are ignoring the actual context of a statement. It's the equivalent of a rape occurring and me saying, "Rape is a horrible tragedy" during a conversation about the event but someone claiming that I never said that this exact attack was horrible. It's idiotic but they can manage to claim to be factually correct but in reality they are lying.
|
|
#
?
Oct 25, 2012 02:06
|
|
|
Sarion posted:It sounds like the kind of thing that got California into it's mess. You can pass laws to create all kinds of government services, but any taxes have to go through referendum. As a result, raising taxes in California is nearly impossible, unless I'm completely off base about how it works. Prop 13: Capped the property tax and required a 2/3 majority in the state legislature to raise taxes. You can pass all sort of poo poo (we actually passed single-payer until it got vetoed by Arnold), but you can't fund it. California was literally the proving ground for Norquist's Starve The Beast ideology. Now Cali taxes are a bizarre travesty where sales tax is high, property tax is low, and income tax is somewhere in the middle. That's why our budget swings from year to year so drastically.
|
|
#
?
Oct 25, 2012 02:14
|
|
|
Anubis posted:The problem is he didn't say the exact words, "This was a terrorist attack." He said, "No acts of terror will ever shake the resolve of this great nation, alter that character, or eclipse the light of the values that we stand for. Today we mourn four more Americans who represent the very best of the United States of America. We will not waver in our commitment to see that justice is done for this terrible act. And make no mistake, justice will be done."
|
|
#
?
Oct 25, 2012 02:20
|
|
|
Edit: Dumn redundant post.
|
|
#
?
Oct 25, 2012 02:26
|
|
|
Another gem from facebook, attributed to a person I've never heard of and who google reveals nothing about.quote:."I have to say something and I don't care what people may think about it because no matter how you slice it, it's just wrong. Before the attacks on Libya, American citizens begged for added security. Denied. During the attack they begged for salvation. Denied. The president now has the blood of four innocent Americans on his hands and what did he do? Denied he knew about it and partied with Beyonce. Meanwhile, the ambassador was being beaten to death and dragged through the streets like an animal. They begged for help, and our government turned away. Families have been changed forever. This is THE single most sad and disgraceful thing. I am ashamed of my president."-Katie Garbarino
|
|
#
?
Oct 25, 2012 02:43
|
|
|
JohnClark posted:Another gem from facebook, attributed to a person I've never heard of and who google reveals nothing about. 1. The American citizens who asked for added security were in Tripoli, not Benghazi. 2. Requests for added security were denied in part because a Republican congress voted to slash spending for embassy and consulate security. 3. Asking for help during the attack didn't accomplish anything not because people didn't care but because it happened quickly enough that no one would have been able to respond in time. In fact, a number of Libyans did take action trying to protect the consulate and, afterwards, trying to get injured Americans to a hospital, but again, the attack happened quickly enough the four Americans died anyway. 4. If you honestly think that the President of the United States, the American military, or the U.S. government in general would 'turn away' from a diplomat 'begging for help' rather than trying to assist them with whatever tools they had available as soon as they could, I don't know what to tell you. It's a tragic attack but the people you should be blaming for it are the terrorists who committed it, not the president who happened to preside over it. Do you blame George W. Bush for 9/11? Those are my initial reactions, but I'm unsure on a lot of the details relating to Benghazi so you may want to wait for someone else.
|
|
#
?
Oct 25, 2012 03:04
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 10, 2024 07:39 |
|
|
Reading the thing on PolitiFact about it, it seems like it's complicated enough to be hard to fit into soundbites (or easy to turn into misleading soundbites). The Libyan embassy people apparently had requested more security, but for all of the embassy facilities, not just in Benghazi, and the actual Benghazi facility already had about the amount of personnel the people there had wanted. That an embassy in the Middle East had trouble getting through State Department bureaucracy is something that needs to be addressed, but people are talking about the incident as though angry Muslims were banging on the gates and Obama was putting the embassy on hold to get his nails done.
|
|
#
?
Oct 25, 2012 03:04
|
|
