|
Mitchicon posted:I think a lot of libertarians grow up after awhile. Everyone has personality quirks. If having a dumb opinion disqualified people from being friends, no one would ever have any. Plus there's obviously a difference between someone who holds an ignorant opinion but is decent to people they come across, and someone who is straight out hateful. One of my friends is a conspiracy nut and also sort of racist but he's not mean or hateful to anyone, just paranoid and with a slightly warped perspective. He Knows And Is Cool With Black People, which he'll readily point out, and it's true. Like normal adult human beings, there are a variety of issues that we have vastly differing views on that we have to accept to agree to disagree over. It's a basic social skill. Retreating into a psychologically protected bubble of people who agree with you is unhealthy. There is no one correct way to handle everything in the world so your best bet is to synthesize as many perspectives as you can.
|
#
?
Jun 15, 2013 03:57
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 13, 2024 02:02 |
|
|
  In case if you are wondering, that is a giant picture of Ayn Rand on the hood.
|
|
#
?
Jun 15, 2013 23:36
|
|
|
Figures it'd be on a lovely car. The Dalai Lama next to a wax model of himself. vvvv Post a dope picture man! Frog Act fucked around with this message at 00:24 on Jun 16, 2013 |
|
#
?
Jun 15, 2013 23:38
|
|
|
Dope timepiece.
|
|
#
?
Jun 15, 2013 23:57
|
|
|
big business sloth posted:Dope timepiece. Well being enlightened doesn't give you perfect knowledge of all time. Fandyien posted:vvvv not the DnD pics thread.
|
|
#
?
Jun 16, 2013 00:38
|
|
|
Phone posted:
Please tell me they got some huge bullshit penalty, suffered the peoples' curse, crashed, or otherwise didn't finish.
|
|
#
?
Jun 16, 2013 00:50
|
|
|
Phone posted:
This is literally the best car I've ever seen in my life. Holy poo poo. 
|
|
#
?
Jun 16, 2013 01:21
|
|
|
Ah, the week in LL101: I don't think anyone ever gave a gently caress about any of this.  I love this argument: If the founding fathers were a little off about every American being armed with M16s, then it stands to reason nobody should have free speech.  BENGHAZI! I knew you'd get around to it eventually, LL101.  Change subject, add strawman.  Michelle Obama is the only First Lady ever to go on vacation.
|
|
#
?
Jun 16, 2013 01:26
|
|
|
VideoTapir posted:Please tell me they got some huge bullshit penalty, suffered the peoples' curse, crashed, or otherwise didn't finish. It's just a track day, but the oil line to the turbo is pissing everywhere and it didn't finish the day. It went Galt... to the pits.
|
|
#
?
Jun 16, 2013 02:23
|
|
|
VideoTapir posted:Please tell me they got some huge bullshit penalty, suffered the peoples' curse, crashed, or otherwise didn't finish. It's 24 Hours of LeMons, they'll try to get radial engines into cars, put a plane body onto a car, or some other hilarious joke on the car. Hopefully these guys got this penalty trying to emulate Glenn Beck. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Hd3CSPK3n5I
|
|
#
?
Jun 16, 2013 02:31
|
|
|
I don't even know where to start with this: loving  . I don't know why I even bother with Uncle Sam's Misguided Children anymore.
|
|
#
?
Jun 16, 2013 16:39
|
|
|
the2ndgenesis posted:I don't even know where to start with this: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/He_who_does_not_work,_neither_shall_he_eat code:
|
|
#
?
Jun 16, 2013 16:51
|
|
|
the2ndgenesis posted:I don't even know where to start with this: Ah yes, I remember the classic story of Jesus telling everyone to screw off and get their own bread and fish. Lazy moochers just weren't bootstrapping hard enough. e: Also posted in the Idiots on Facebook thread, but I think it's just as applicable here:  Oh good, posted way back in April 2012, so that surely gave the Right the chance to rise up in time for the election... oh... yeah Nikaer Drekin fucked around with this message at 16:58 on Jun 16, 2013 |
|
#
?
Jun 16, 2013 16:54
|
|
|
Uncle Sam's Misguided Children is the worst. It takes every single conservative idea and puts it so far right even Reagan would blush. Sidenote: what's the consensus on GMOs? My mom is freaking out about the upcoming WA initiative that labels GMOs and she's freaking out about those who are against it.
|
|
#
?
Jun 16, 2013 16:56
|
|
|
Nikaer Drekin posted:Ah yes, I remember the classic story of Jesus telling everyone to screw off and get their own bread and fish. Lazy moochers just weren't bootstrapping hard enough. The crazy thing is that that image is kinda hosed up whether or not it's intended to be a joke. If USMC posted it as a joke then they're implicitly acknowledging that Jesus would never have espoused the extreme FYGM ideology that they love so much. The alternative is that they posted it seriously, which means that they're 100% okay with projecting that ideology on a man whom they claim to revere and worship. A man who, so they say, decried the excesses of the rich and extolled the virtues of charity to the poor. That image just blows my mind the more I think about it. 
|
|
#
?
Jun 16, 2013 17:02
|
|
|
seiferguy posted:Uncle Sam's Misguided Children is the worst. It takes every single conservative idea and puts it so far right even Reagan would blush. I personally believe GMOs are a strawman for anarchist hippies to try to convince you that the government and corporations are working together to give you pure cancer, and therefore burn it all down. Normal people think maybe the FDA should keep an eye on things. They also found SHOCKING STUDDIES that show that if lab rats EAT PESTICIDES they get cancer. Therefore pesticide resistant plants are giving you cancer.
|
|
#
?
Jun 16, 2013 17:12
|
|
|
seiferguy posted:Uncle Sam's Misguided Children is the worst. It takes every single conservative idea and puts it so far right even Reagan would blush. The scientific consensus is that there are basically no significant health risks from eating genetically-modified food, or almost all genetically-modified foods anyway (there might be one or two specific strains that may have some health risks associated with them, but it's inconclusive, and the vast majority are definitely, perfectly safe). I'm personally of the opinion that they should still be labeled, because people have a right to know what they're eating, but I'm not going to crusade for it or march in a protest about it or freak out on the Internet about it, because it's just not that serious an issue to me. There's more important stuff to worry about.
|
|
#
?
Jun 16, 2013 18:56
|
|
|
seiferguy posted:Uncle Sam's Misguided Children is the worst. It takes every single conservative idea and puts it so far right even Reagan would blush. It isn't so much that it is genetically altered, it's (usually) Monsantos business practices and the concept that you can own DNA that get people riled up.
|
|
#
?
Jun 16, 2013 19:01
|
|
|
Mister Bates posted:The scientific consensus is that there are basically no significant health risks from eating genetically-modified food, or almost all genetically-modified foods anyway (there might be one or two specific strains that may have some health risks associated with them, but it's inconclusive, and the vast majority are definitely, perfectly safe). Actually, labelling may be a bad thing too. Food irradiation is a perfectly safe and good thing that can be done to food, but people freaked the gently caress out when it started being a thing because people are absolutely terrified of the word radiation because of its association with nuclear energy (despite 'radiation' just being a physical process undergone by shitloads of things, including the sunlight those same people use to illuminate their own lives every day), and lobbied various governments into labelling requirements on all irradiated food. Guess what, sales of irradiated food plummeted when people could suddenly pick up two jars of food and see that one had been 'treated with radiation' and the other hadn't been, despite the irradiated one probably actually being healthier for the person buying it. GMOs can actually do a lot of good in the world (not to say that they're 100% good, but in all likelihood they're going to lead to a lot more good results than bad ones), by doing things like creating drought-resistant strains of crops, crops that can be grown in harsher climates, crops with higher yields, and so on--it's essentially the 21st century version of selective crop breeding (replanting the crop seeds from the crops with the highest yield, so that over many generations you cause the plant to evolve with higher yields, for example) and GMO foods could be one of our only hopes of billions of people not starving to death thanks to climate change, much like the Green Revolution is credited with saving over a billion people from starvation. But a lot of people feel the same gut revulsion towards genetically modifying food that they feel towards irradiating it (or they just hate Monsanto, which may be more justified), and labelling requirements could lead to a similar result.
|
|
#
?
Jun 16, 2013 19:10
|
|
|
TURN IT OFF! posted:It isn't so much that it is genetically altered, it's (usually) Monsantos business practices and the concept that you can own DNA that get people riled up. I take it you haven't heard the "Frankenfood" crowd, then? Because seriously, the people who are crusading the hardest for GMO labeling aren't doing it on business ethics grounds alone. The phrase "the effects of GMO food on the human body", or some variation of it, is a fairly common thing. There are people who believe that GMO foods are inherently carcinogenic or toxic because of some lovely French or Russian studies. poo poo, even the "Monsanto is a bad company because ethics" thing is just a modern evolution of "Monsanto is an evil company that poisons people on purpose". Kugyou no Tenshi fucked around with this message at 19:22 on Jun 16, 2013 |
|
#
?
Jun 16, 2013 19:11
|
|
|
I definitely think Monsanto is a terrible company up with the likes of Wal-Mart but I do agree that GMOs as a whole aren't inherently bad (or rather, they will be great for society). I have a few conservative friends on FB that actually post March Against Monsanto banners which is actually kinda weird to me
|
|
#
?
Jun 16, 2013 19:14
|
|
|
Kugyou no Tenshi posted:I take it you haven't heard the "Frankenfood" crowd, then? Because seriously, the people who are crusading the hardest for GMO labeling aren't doing it on business ethics grounds alone. The phrase "the effects of GMO food on the human body", or some variation of it, is a fairly common thing. poo poo, there are people who believe that GMO foods are inherently carcinogenic or toxic because of some lovely French or Russian studies. poo poo, even the "Monsanto is a bad company because ethics" thing is just a modern evolution of "Monsanto is an evil company that poisons people on purpose". You seem very quick to dismiss those concerns because they are also shared by some people who have a poor understanding of biology/science. Broken clocks twice a day etc.
|
|
#
?
Jun 16, 2013 19:27
|
|
|
Kugyou no Tenshi posted:I take it you haven't heard the "Frankenfood" crowd, then? Because seriously, the people who are crusading the hardest for GMO labeling aren't doing it on business ethics grounds alone. I'm modestly active in the campaign against GM crops, and have never heard the spurious arguments you mention, but you're right that Monsanto's business ethics aren't our only reason for objecting to them. The main reasons among people I know are environmental. But whatever our reasons, the fact that we don't want to buy GM foods is surely enough reason to label them, so that we have that choice? Vyelkin's argument that labelling is bad because we'll choose not to buy them WHICH IS BAD doesn't really work for me. quote:There are people who believe that GMO foods are inherently carcinogenic There are people who dismiss entire viewpoints because they once heard someone say something stupid, too. Let's do better. Oh dear me fucked around with this message at 20:13 on Jun 16, 2013 |
|
#
?
Jun 16, 2013 19:43
|
|
|
Oh dear me posted:I'm modestly active in the against GM crops, and have never heard the spurious arguments you mention, but you're right that Monsanto's business ethics aren't our only reason for objecting to them. The main reasons among people I know are environmental. But whatever our reasons, the fact that we don't want to buy GM foods is surely enough reason to label them, so that we have that choice? Vyelkin's argument that labelling is bad because we'll choose not to buy them WHICH IS BAD doesn't really work for me. The point is not that informed consumer choice is bad, it's that labelling a food doesn't necessarily lead to informed consumer choice. Labelling irradiated food didn't make the people who avoided it informed consumers, it actually made them make worse decisions, because food irradiation was proved to be perfectly safe and actually beneficial for the foods in question, but a hysterical campaign based on the premise that 'all radiation is bad' led to food labelling to appease this movement, which led to uninformed consumers avoiding products that were better for them because they weren't informed about the debate and assumed RADIATION BAD or, one step above, 'if they took the effort to make a labelling requirement, there must be something bad about that food, I'll avoid it'. Hell, I know that food irradiation is perfectly harmless and I'd still probably think twice before buying a food package with a prominent 'Hey guys, this food is irradiated, just FYI' label. In any case, this is actually pretty big derail from the point of this thread, which isn't to argue about GM foods but to refute dumb political emails/facebook messages /conversation. I don't know if there is a GM thread in D&D, but there would probably be enough demand for someone who cares about the issue to start one.
|
|
#
?
Jun 16, 2013 20:03
|
|
|
I saw an old dude in a T-shirt with "Who is John Galt?" written in that font. Is that a movie promo?
|
|
#
?
Jun 16, 2013 20:24
|
|
|
Pope Guilty posted:I saw an old dude in a T-shirt with "Who is John Galt?" written in that font. Is that a movie promo? They're just asking questions and they don't want to read a whole book to find out.
|
|
#
?
Jun 16, 2013 21:09
|
|
|
Pope Guilty posted:I saw an old dude in a T-shirt with "Who is John Galt?" written in that font. Is that a movie promo? The answer to this question is 'a sociopathic rear end in a top hat who ushers in a global apocalypse because he's being a whiny baby'. http://bradhicks.livejournal.com/393124.html
|
|
#
?
Jun 16, 2013 21:13
|
|
|
I know who John Galt is, I was just curious about that specific font.
|
|
#
?
Jun 16, 2013 21:16
|
|
|
My mom gets a ton of Uncle Sam's Misguided Children poo poo on her Facebook. The most recent is a "news report you won't find on LIERBAL MEDIA!" A high school student was jailed for wearing a pro-NRA shirt!!!!!! My mom read the article and had me read it. I asked her exactly what loving country, state, and city you can jail a minor for wearing a shirt. Because it isn't here, Mom. NO COWSLIPS IT IS HERE. Nowhere in the article does it name a school, a county, a state. It says that a 'Christian athlete was put in jail." Mom, if he wore, say a shirt with a noose and HANG IN THERE OBAMA, then yes, the school could suspend him for a few days. Maybe expel. But no loving school will jail a kid for spouting off about loving guns. If entire schools rally around football player rapists and hide them from the law, there is no goddamn way ANY school will do this, legalities and all. That thing called the law? Obama didn't pull the kid from school and make him disappear. And she is so upset that the GUVMENT and OBUMMER is spying on the phones (even if they 'can't watch us all all the time') but she had no issue with the Patriot Act. And she gets defensive when I say that people are screaming IMPEACH HIM NOW because of the wiretaps because (a) he's black and (b) they think he is a socialist communist Muslim boy. Bush, on the other hand, was someone you could have a beer with, and that fella, you don't mind if he listens to your phone calls cause he's one of us.
|
|
#
?
Jun 17, 2013 00:16
|
|
|
Oh dear me posted:Vyelkin's argument that labelling is bad because we'll choose not to buy them WHICH IS BAD doesn't really work for me. The point is that telling people that this food is made with Scientific Procedure X isn't very helpful if people don't understand what Scientific Procedure X is and will make decisions about it irrationally.
|
|
#
?
Jun 17, 2013 00:22
|
|
|
Cowslips Warren posted:Bush, on the other hand, was someone you could have a beer with, and that fella, you don't mind if he listens to your phone calls cause he's one of us. I'm always amused by this characterization of President Bush, as by most accounts he hasn't had a sip of alcohol since his 40th birthday due to his well documented abuse of that drug.
|
|
#
?
Jun 17, 2013 00:29
|
|
|
Pfirti86 posted:I'm always amused by this characterization of President Bush, as by most accounts he hasn't had a sip of alcohol since his 40th birthday due to his well documented abuse of that drug. Joe Biden is kind of the same for Democrats.
|
|
#
?
Jun 17, 2013 00:34
|
|
|
Cowslips Warren posted:My mom gets a ton of Uncle Sam's Misguided Children poo poo on her Facebook. It seems to be a real story but it sounds like the kid was told that the shirt broke the dress code and he went "  MY RIGHTS" until the school had to call the cops to get him hauled off. Of course, the kid escalating the situation isn't mentioned in the original article but you can bet that happened since it took place in West Virginia. http://www.wowktv.com/story/22020264/8th-grade-student-arrested-over-gun-t-shirt-jared-marcum-wv-logan - edit Yeah, just look at this douchebag. And his dad is already trying to sue the school over this.  
Call Me Charlie fucked around with this message at 01:17 on Jun 17, 2013 |
|
#
?
Jun 17, 2013 00:38
|
|
|
jackofarcades posted:Joe Biden is kind of the same for Democrats. Biden just wants to bang
|
|
#
?
Jun 17, 2013 00:52
|
|
|
jackofarcades posted:Joe Biden is kind of the same for Democrats. He never had a drink in his life though.
|
|
#
?
Jun 17, 2013 00:55
|
|
|
greatn posted:He never had a drink in his life though. Next you'll tell me he never owned a TransAm 
|
|
#
?
Jun 17, 2013 00:59
|
|
|
Ferroque posted:http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/He_who_does_not_work,_neither_shall_he_eat quote:According to Lenin, “He who does not work shall not eat” is a necessary principle under socialism, the preliminary phase of the evolution towards communist society. The phrase appears in his 1917 work, The State and Revolution. Through this slogan Lenin explains that in socialist states only productive individuals could be allowed access to the articles of consumption. Mind blown. Goes to show how well read I am on socialism.
|
|
#
?
Jun 17, 2013 01:15
|
|
SavageBastard posted:Mind blown. Goes to show how well read I am on socialism. A lot of more recent right-wing theory is built on a sort of inverted socialism- where Marx and Lenin would have used "He who does not work does not eat" to condemn the capitalist class, nowadays it is invoked to condemn the working poor, or the working class in general. I suspect that this isn't attributable to Objectivism so much as to the wholehearted modeling of the right wing after the New Left during the 70s and 80s. Still funny when verbatim quotes get recycled though.
|
|
|
#
?
Jun 17, 2013 01:38
|
|
|
 Christ, look at that thing. I know there's a stereotype about "big, black scary-looking guns", but that thing looks like it was ripped out of the last Call of Duty game.
|
|
#
?
Jun 17, 2013 02:44
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 13, 2024 02:02 |
|
|
Effectronica posted:A lot of more recent right-wing theory is built on a sort of inverted socialism- where Marx and Lenin would have used "He who does not work does not eat" to condemn the capitalist class, nowadays it is invoked to condemn the working poor, or the working class in general. I suspect that this isn't attributable to Objectivism so much as to the wholehearted modeling of the right wing after the New Left during the 70s and 80s. Still funny when verbatim quotes get recycled though. You'd think that would be enough to kill that line of thought right there, but nooooo. It's a presumption that the way our (non-free, but mostly not government-regulated) market system rewards labor and ownership is an inherently correct evaluation of one's contribution to society that keeps the working poor in the non-contributing column.
|
|
#
?
Jun 17, 2013 02:44
|
|