|
gohmak posted:You mean Ronald's real son. Nah, he's a fake son. The real son of Ronald Reagan, like his dad, is a GOP puppet.
|
#
?
Mar 6, 2016 21:06
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 3, 2024 16:57 |
|
|
https://twitter.com/longwall26/status/706567295070371842
|
|
#
?
Mar 6, 2016 21:06
|
|
|
computer parts posted:Too white. Yeah, about that...  Most Americans have no clue that rural health and social problems in the South are also largely racial equality issues.
|
|
#
?
Mar 6, 2016 21:09
|
|
|
comes along bort posted:Yeah, about that... Oh I'm well aware, it's a tragedy that needs to be fixed instead of just going "gently caress the South" endlessly. Fun fact: according to the following data - http://kff.org/other/state-indicator/poverty-rate-by-raceethnicity/ - the state with the lowest black poverty is Connecticut, at 15%. Now you would think the states with the worst poverty ranking would be in the Mississippi region, right? In Mississippi, the white poverty rate - which is the third highest in the nation for whites - is 16%. In other words, the best case scenario for black people in the US is roughly equivalent to the worst case scenario for white people.
|
|
#
?
Mar 6, 2016 21:17
|
|
|
It's Trump that is making the conservative movement about hate.
|
|
#
?
Mar 6, 2016 21:20
|
|
|
computer parts posted:Oh I'm well aware, it's a tragedy that needs to be fixed instead of just going "gently caress the South" endlessly. One of the biggest non-economic reasons the slavers in the South defended slavery was the social stability they viewed in basically having someone they could always look down on.
|
|
#
?
Mar 6, 2016 21:20
|
|
|
Guys look it's about state rights and election fraud prevention okay
|
|
#
?
Mar 6, 2016 21:22
|
|
|
Well one of us has handled signals Intel, actually hunted people with approved target packets (dod not cia), and gone through the viscera of a drone strike looking for usable biometrics. The other person read an editorial on The Atlantic
|
|
#
?
Mar 6, 2016 21:47
|
|
|
computer parts posted:Fun fact: according to the following data - http://kff.org/other/state-indicator/poverty-rate-by-raceethnicity/ - the state with the lowest black poverty is Connecticut, at 15%. Now you would think the states with the worst poverty ranking would be in the Mississippi region, right? In Mississippi, the white poverty rate - which is the third highest in the nation for whites - is 16%. gently caress. I did not know that.
|
|
#
?
Mar 6, 2016 21:50
|
|
|
As terrible as Reagan was, this is actually just how homophobic our whole society was back then. It's why I can't really fault politicians with long careers for not advocating marriage equality early on, when the most liberal position out there for a while was that gay people shouldn't be left for dead.
|
|
#
?
Mar 6, 2016 21:59
|
|
|
Jarmak posted:Well one of us has handled signals Intel, actually hunted people with approved target packets (dod not cia), and gone through the viscera of a drone strike looking for usable biometrics. Ah I didn't know Fried Chicken had done so much!
|
|
#
?
Mar 6, 2016 22:07
|
|
|
Good Citizen posted:Thankfully the US can't be third world due to the very definition of the word! Maybe not third-world, but a number of Republicans seem to be gunning for second-world status.
|
|
#
?
Mar 6, 2016 22:07
|
|
|
The Larch posted:Maybe not third-world, but a number of Republicans seem to be gunning for second-world status. He meant that, as the term "third world" was originally used during the Cold War to define those nations who were unaligned with either the US-led West (first world), or Soviet bloc (second world, sometimes including China, sometimes not), it is impossible for the US to be part of the third world by definition.
|
|
#
?
Mar 6, 2016 22:09
|
|
|
Captain_Maclaine posted:He meant that, as the term "third world" was originally used during the Cold War to define those nations who were unaligned with either the US-led West (first world), or Soviet bloc (second world, sometimes including China, sometimes not), it is impossible for the US to be part of the third world by definition. I know. I was attempting to joke about the American right fellating Putin, but I guess I failed.
|
|
#
?
Mar 6, 2016 22:13
|
|
|
Vienna Circlejerk posted:As terrible as Reagan was, this is actually just how homophobic our whole society was back then. It's why I can't really fault politicians with long careers for not advocating marriage equality early on, when the most liberal position out there for a while was that gay people shouldn't be left for dead. Yeah, the fact that gay rights have gone from "AIDS is a plague that God made just for gays" to gay marriage being legal in every state in less that 50 years is actually really impressive. Older politicians that have changed their stance on it pretty much get a pass since it happened so fast relatively speaking.
|
|
#
?
Mar 6, 2016 22:14
|
|
|
Lessail posted:Ah I didn't know Fried Chicken had done so much! I know you're snidely joking (for reasons), but someone made a comment in either this or last month's thread about how there are people who have actual real world experience and expertise in certain subjects who are sometimes derided or ridiculed in here because their expertise doesn't jive with the narrative understanding of the given topic. Congrats, I guess.
|
|
#
?
Mar 6, 2016 22:17
|
|
|
Boon posted:Someone made a comment in either this or last month's thread about how there are people who have actual real world experience and expertise in certain subjects who are sometimes derided or ridiculed in here because their expertise doesn't jive with the narrative understanding of the given topic. Yeah it's cool how you can say whatever on the internet to win an argument! edit: doing "i'm x and have experience" only works so far as you have credibility and that poster has none to me so I don't believe them. Maybe when asked to back up their points they actually did so I'd be more willing to believe them. Lessail fucked around with this message at 22:23 on Mar 6, 2016 |
|
#
?
Mar 6, 2016 22:18
|
|
|
What? You've stuck out in my mind over the past few days for being continuously terrible, with very little or nothing at all to contribute to any discussion or argument but random leading quips. Everything you've said can be also said with, "LOL if you believe...." Why? Also, probably because I think you used to have a Packers avatar. Boon fucked around with this message at 22:22 on Mar 6, 2016 |
|
#
?
Mar 6, 2016 22:20
|
|
|
The Larch posted:I know. I was attempting to joke about the American right fellating Putin, but I guess I failed. Might've worked if you'd reworked it to be about Bernie, maybe? 
|
|
#
?
Mar 6, 2016 22:22
|
|
|
Boon posted:What? That poster has been asked several times to back up their claims and have failed to do so. edit: I used to have a packers avatar but man you're striking out with me now 
Lessail fucked around with this message at 22:25 on Mar 6, 2016 |
|
#
?
Mar 6, 2016 22:22
|
|
|
I guess I'm only concerned with the current discussion. What would you say he needs to back up? He's currently attacking the assertion that the government is spending vast effort to target non-valuable targets. What proof, short of him discussing things he cannot discuss because he'd be legally liable, do you need from him to agree that it's loving stupid to think that a vast apparatus is intentionally and willy nilly throwing ordnance down range? Jokes aside. Lessail posted:edit: I used to have a packers avatar but man you're striking out with me now  Oh no! I might lose your respect because my experience in strike lead me to have a different view and perspective than you despite us probably being in general agreement on nearly every topic having to do with politics!
Boon fucked around with this message at 22:30 on Mar 6, 2016 |
|
#
?
Mar 6, 2016 22:26
|
|
|
Boon posted:I guess I'm only concerned with the current discussion. What would you say he needs to back up? Anything from any kind of publication would be a start, but they refuse to do that for reasons.
|
|
#
?
Mar 6, 2016 22:28
|
|
|
Boon posted::eyeroll: Oh no! I might lose your respect because my experience in strike lead me to have a different view and perspective than you despite us probably being in general agreement on nearly every topic having to do with politics! 
|
|
#
?
Mar 6, 2016 22:29
|
|
|
Lessail posted:Anything from any kind of publication would be a start, but they refuse to do that for reasons. To be clear, you want him to produce an article which explicitly states that the US government isn't deliberately and explicitly going through great effort to target people at random? I get that you might have a beef with the dude making claims he doesn't substantiate, but just think about this here. It's you being unreasonable in this instance.
|
|
#
?
Mar 6, 2016 22:31
|
|
|
Boon posted:To be clear, you want him to produce an article which explicitly states that the US government isn't deliberately and explicitly going through great effort to target people at random? If the editorial was as stupid as they claim, then another publication should at least have one of their own (maybe even one from the same publication) that would attack it. Like not even a publication, maybe some insider tweets or something. Anything!
|
|
#
?
Mar 6, 2016 22:33
|
|
|
Boon posted:What? BURN, also gently caress the Packers. WINNER!
|
|
#
?
Mar 6, 2016 22:39
|
|
|
Didnt they not even care until some kid died or some sports figure.
|
|
#
?
Mar 6, 2016 22:46
|
|
|
Dapper_Swindler posted:Didnt they not even care until some kid died or some sports figure. Nobody really gave a poo poo until Rock Hudson died of it. He was a big turning point to get things going, but I don't think it was really until Magic Johnson announced his diagnosis that the tide really turned. gently caress Reagan, still, though.
|
|
#
?
Mar 6, 2016 22:51
|
|
|
Boon posted:No stop. I worked in this area and his "value judgement" is correct. Your opinion, on the other hand, is open speculation based on what? Common perception of US foreign policy absent all form of an inside perspective? Tell us more about how you know better than Jacques Chirac what motivated Bush to go to war in Iraq.
|
|
#
?
Mar 6, 2016 22:53
|
|
|
Teddybear posted:Nobody really gave a poo poo until Rock Hudson died of it. He was a big turning point to get things going, but I don't think it was really until Magic Johnson announced his diagnosis that the tide really turned. I know Koop tried to push it earlier on i believe. but raygun didnt give a poo poo.
|
|
#
?
Mar 6, 2016 22:56
|
|
|
Unzip and Attack posted:Tell us more about how you know better than Jacques Chirac what motivated Bush to go to war in Iraq. As if that was at all the discussion that was being had or the argument that I was making. You started and continue to draw parallels between two situations which are entirely different in almost every conceivable way, yet attempting to use that to bolster your argument. E: This is a dumb argument to be having, we should really just agree to disagree and let it be. Boon fucked around with this message at 23:12 on Mar 6, 2016 |
|
#
?
Mar 6, 2016 23:00
|
|
|
Teddybear posted:Nobody really gave a poo poo until Rock Hudson died of it. He was a big turning point to get things going, but I don't think it was really until Magic Johnson announced his diagnosis that the tide really turned. There was also a poo poo ton of activism that was actually pretty effective in changing middle America's view of HIV/AIDS and, in the long run, their view of LGBT people themselves. I'm not trying to downplay modern homophobia but it used to be a lot more widespread and socially acceptable. I think a lot of the griping about "the rise of political correctness" is from people who, in the space of a few years, had to stop making homophobic jokes at work.
|
|
#
?
Mar 6, 2016 23:15
|
|
|
Lessail posted:That poster has been asked several times to back up their claims and have failed to do so. There's been nothing that's been asserted that's been backed up by data, and it can't be because the information is classified. The difference is we have one person making up an entirely speculated situation with no grounding in reality what so ever, that should be completely absurd to even someone without background in the subject because it makes no logical sense. We have another (two?) people with real life experience pointing out that there's no scenario in which the former person's speculation makes sense. Can I prove otherwise? Of course not, even if I had access to that information I couldn't post it here.
|
|
#
?
Mar 6, 2016 23:17
|
|
|
Boon posted:To be clear, you want him to produce an article which explicitly states that the US government isn't deliberately and explicitly going through great effort to target people at random? As far as I know I've never argued with this guy before, he's just flipping out because I am not posting classified info to contradict speculation from a random editorial. Or he thinks some other differently inclined editorial from an equally uninformed columnist is a source that needs to be provided.
|
|
#
?
Mar 6, 2016 23:21
|
|
Jarmak posted:As far as I know I've never argued with this guy before, he's just flipping out because I am not posting classified info to contradict speculation from a random editorial. Dude, saying "that's classified" as an explanation why you can't back up your claims is pretty weak poo poo.
|
|
|
#
?
Mar 6, 2016 23:23
|
|
|
Dapper_Swindler posted:Didnt they not even care until some kid died or some sports figure. They didn't care until Rock Hudson, the Reagans' personal friend, was dying from it... except even then they didn't care enough to help him: http://www.buzzfeed.com/chrisgeidner/nancy-reagan-turned-down-rock-hudsons-plea-for-help-seven-we?utm_term=.ayo3YqaEX#.tuPVaE9NY
|
|
#
?
Mar 6, 2016 23:28
|
|
|
Armyman25 posted:Dude, saying "that's classified" as an explanation why you can't back up your claims is pretty weak poo poo. Yeah but someone else has "real world experience" that completely proves that the US never does anything with its one-sided military might that could be considered petty/immoral/absurd/a waste of resources. Chirac's version of the story includes Bush using that as a justification. Combined with W's very public admission that God personally ok'd his decision to invade, I think some people in the thread are recklessly ignoring Bush's own stated reasoning. I mean what more would it take to convince you that there was a huge religious component to this? The Pentagon's early operational slide decks were full of Old Testament verses and various other Biblical nonsense. VVVVV Unzip and Attack fucked around with this message at 23:35 on Mar 6, 2016 |
|
#
?
Mar 6, 2016 23:28
|
|
|
Unzip and Attack posted:Tell us more about how you know better than Jacques Chirac what motivated Bush to go to war in Iraq. Uhh I don't think Chirac ever claimed the Gog and Magog story was about why Bush invaded Iraq in the first place, just that it made him uncomfortable with Bush's religious nuttiness. There were a lot of dumb and bad reasons for the Iraq invasion but none of them involve Bush wanting to bring about the apocalypse
|
|
#
?
Mar 6, 2016 23:30
|
|
|
This is so far out, it becomes straight-up comedy https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=r7e6gLht6OQ
|
|
#
?
Mar 6, 2016 23:46
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 3, 2024 16:57 |
|
|
This is the craziest, most dishonest political poo poo I've seen all week and I saw the last GOP debate.
|
|
#
?
Mar 6, 2016 23:52
|
|
