|
The Republicans have the right policies for 50% of the country, though.
|
#
?
Feb 5, 2016 19:06
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 30, 2024 10:49 |
|
|
Jerry Manderbilt posted:my dad says that "i know an evangelical family from princeton, and they're nice people!" and this completely invalidates any criticism of evangelicals as prosperity gospel fart-sniffers in his mind A lot of utterly miserable pieces of poo poo can be friendly in person to people they don't have a problem with, and that's perfect exoneration of all faults to many people.
|
|
#
?
Feb 5, 2016 19:09
|
|
|
FuzzySkinner posted:So uh, best case for the country would be a Clinton/Sanders ticket correct? Clinton would never be Sanders' vp and I think a lot of Sanders appeal goes away if he's veeping for Hillary.
|
|
#
?
Feb 5, 2016 19:12
|
|
|
Deified Data posted:The Republicans have the right policies for White men don't make up half of the entire country any more.
|
|
#
?
Feb 5, 2016 20:08
|
|
|
Gretchen Carlson is outraged that Maddow hugged Clinton and Bernie after the debate. She analyzed the video to see who hugged who first and said everyone would be outraged if a Fox News moderator hugged a Republican candidate (really, people wouldn't care and I don't know that they haven't). She told us all to be on the lookout moving forward. Carlson has the mind of a 15-year-old girl so I think this is her and not an official Fox News talking point. But I'll have to see the Five to be sure since I missed Outnumbered. The painful gauntlet of the stupidest news channels on TV.
|
|
#
?
Feb 5, 2016 20:15
|
|
|
I think Gretchen's overlooking the possibility that Republicans are a little less comfortable with being human than Democrats are.
|
|
#
?
Feb 5, 2016 20:18
|
|
|
Its an understandable mistake when you put it like that.
|
|
#
?
Feb 5, 2016 20:23
|
|
|
It is kind of weird that she hugged them, though.
|
|
#
?
Feb 5, 2016 20:30
|
|
|
Why? Its just basic courtesy. Its not like they're strangers. What's the difference between a handshake and a hug unless you're repulsed by the touch of other humans or something?
|
|
#
?
Feb 5, 2016 20:34
|
|
|
I think a handshake is more professional and hugs are a little bit more personal.
|
|
#
?
Feb 5, 2016 20:35
|
|
|
Agreed in general, but again its not like they're strangers or random business associates. Maddow's known Bernie how long and interviewed him how many times? Its a lie to pretend that people who work together don't develop personal relationships. Its also one of the more uncomfortable aspects of politics when you see colleagues and friends start making really vicious personal attacks on each other and then just shaking it off when the campaign is done. And some people just like to hug. Its a really stupid thing to care about in a political campaign. Even Carlson was like "I know Maddow is a Democrat and will probably vote Democrat but still... BIAS!" Because her outrage was just utterly meaningless even if you find it socially odd. STAC Goat fucked around with this message at 20:46 on Feb 5, 2016 |
|
#
?
Feb 5, 2016 20:38
|
|
|
Hugs are becoming more like handshakes these days. They're much more common than they used to be, especially in professional settings.
|
|
#
?
Feb 5, 2016 20:48
|
|
|
I agree that it is absurd that anyone is outraged about it.
|
|
#
?
Feb 5, 2016 20:48
|
|
|
It's a lot less weird than seeing Cruz's daughter reject his cheek kiss. http://www.thestranger.com/blogs/slog/2016/02/03/23521768/ted-cruz-attempts-to-force-his-daughter-to-hug-and-kiss-him
|
|
#
?
Feb 5, 2016 20:49
|
|
|
anonumos posted:It's a lot less weird than seeing Cruz's daughter reject his cheek kiss. No, I get that. I get that completely. I think recoiling from Ted Cruz's touch is probably just a natural human instinct. Fight or Flight kicking in or something. And I say that as someone who has never met Ted Cruz. That poor girl has known him her entire life.
|
|
#
?
Feb 5, 2016 20:55
|
|
|
Keeshhound posted:White men don't make up half of the entire country any more. A policy doesn't have to benefit you for you to think it's correct. In fact sometimes it can directly harm you and you'll embrace it with open arms.
|
|
#
?
Feb 5, 2016 20:58
|
|
|
anonumos posted:It's a lot less weird than seeing Cruz's daughter reject his cheek kiss. lmao never saw the finger flick
|
|
#
?
Feb 5, 2016 21:43
|
|
|
Hugging is completely inappropriate given the setting and whatnot. Unlike, you know, the never ending sloppy, verbal blowjobs that Fox News gives all of the time.
|
|
#
?
Feb 5, 2016 22:05
|
|
|
Phone posted:Hugging is completely inappropriate given the setting and whatnot. Excuse me sir, I think you'll find that the Fox News hand picked "Undecided Voter Panel" will do everything in its scripted power to do the opposite of giving Trump a verbal blow job 
|
|
#
?
Feb 5, 2016 22:08
|
|
|
Phone posted:Hugging is completely inappropriate given the setting and whatnot. Does that make Hannity the phlegmy drip-that-won't-fall-off on Fox's chin?
|
|
#
?
Feb 5, 2016 22:20
|
|
|
You probably shouldn't hug the moderator. But you also probably shouldn't be tossing up plans to carpet bomb cities of civilians either. The truth is in the middle.
|
|
#
?
Feb 5, 2016 22:37
|
|
|
It would probably be an issue if Maddow had hugged Bernie and flipped Hillary off.
|
|
#
?
Feb 5, 2016 22:39
|
|
|
What about kissing the moderator? Is that appropriate?
|
|
#
?
Feb 5, 2016 22:43
|
|
|
Lips: No. Cheek: Sure. Forehead: Creepy. Now I expect Trump to try and tongue Megyn Kelly.
|
|
#
?
Feb 5, 2016 22:45
|
|
|
I support hugging because this increases the chances that future Republican stuff will have to pander to fundies and show "Christian side hugs."
|
|
#
?
Feb 5, 2016 22:50
|
|
|
PhazonLink posted:I support hugging because this increases the chances that future Republican stuff will have to pander to fundies and show "Christian side hugs." Also the massive Republican field would be a hilarious circus of hugs and avoidances like the end of a football game.
|
|
#
?
Feb 5, 2016 22:52
|
|
|
You are not seriously debating the appropriateness of Rachel Maddow giving out hugs. That is not happening. I refuse to believe it.
|
|
#
?
Feb 5, 2016 23:17
|
|
|
Dr. Faustus posted:You are not seriously debating the appropriateness of Rachel Maddow giving out hugs. Maybe instead, you should...  Embrace it
|
|
#
?
Feb 5, 2016 23:19
|
|
|
Radish posted:I'd respect it more if they just said that Jesus was asking for way too much of the average person and that you can be a good Christian without following 100% of the bible. However that creates an issue where they can't claim they are forced to follow the antigay stuff. I thought that Jesus was pretty clear that most people wouldn't meet the highest standard; at least when it comes to sex, since you shouldn't have it or the worldly attachments that follow from it, but it would be "better to marry than to burn." (paraphrased). Much of Buddhism is explicitly for the lay follower who is just trying to be a good person rather than for the person who wishes to actively seek nirvana. Confucius made a similar distinction between the sage, who renounces the world and is the best possible type of person, and the Jun Zi, the ideal person who remains embroiled in the world. Few people have the opportunity and ability to become a sage. Although the term means "gentleman" or more literally "lord's son," the implication is that the jun zi cultivates in themselves and others the character one would desire to instill in a child learning to be a good ruler. Basically, it's a pretty universal thing. Hodgepodge fucked around with this message at 00:01 on Feb 6, 2016 |
|
#
?
Feb 5, 2016 23:58
|
|
|
Back to important stuff; Guillotine Shaprio
|
|
#
?
Feb 6, 2016 01:48
|
|
|
Goatman Sacks posted:Back to important stuff; It wasn't just him, the worst of tcot gleefully danced on a murdered black teenager's grave on what was supposed to be his birthday. But the conservative movement doesn't have a race problem, no sir
|
|
#
?
Feb 6, 2016 01:55
|
|
|
Goatman Sacks posted:Back to important stuff; They don't call him TaliBen for nuttin' 
|
|
#
?
Feb 6, 2016 02:10
|
|
|
Goatman Sacks posted:Back to important stuff; What a piece of poo poo.
|
|
#
?
Feb 6, 2016 02:22
|
|
|
Goatman Sacks posted:Back to important stuff; drat, every time i think he "isn't as bad as crowder/milo" i am proven wrong. what a rear end in a top hat.
|
|
#
?
Feb 6, 2016 02:36
|
|
|
Goatman Sacks posted:Back to important stuff; If only Emmett Till hadn't opened up his mouth when patronizing a white lady's store.
|
|
#
?
Feb 6, 2016 02:42
|
|
|
Dapper_Swindler posted:drat, every time i think he "isn't as bad as crowder/milo" i am proven wrong. what a rear end in a top hat. Crowder still seems like a wannabe to me, but Milo getting his Twitter check mark taken away pushed him over the edge into full-blown alt-right neo-naziism. Ben's more like that John Nolte character on Twitter in that they seem to get their rocks off on just being insufferable assholes to as many people as possible.
|
|
#
?
Feb 6, 2016 02:45
|
|
|
Nonsense posted:If only Emmett Till hadn't opened up his mouth when patronizing a white lady's store. He probably believes that unironically.
|
|
#
?
Feb 6, 2016 02:46
|
|
|
Trayvon Martin would've turned 21 today if Zimmerman had been able to win a fight with a 17 year old that he had jumped in the dark for no reason
|
|
#
?
Feb 6, 2016 02:48
|
|
|
Zimmerman being such a gently caress up of humanity even then, and worse now, compounds further how absolutely revolting that tweet is.
|
|
#
?
Feb 6, 2016 02:57
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 30, 2024 10:49 |
|
|
Ben Shapiro would have been 32 today (well back on Jan 15) if a transgender lady didn't touch him on the shoulder. 
|
|
#
?
Feb 6, 2016 03:16
|
|