Got a crazy forwarded political email from your family? Post them here.

The Something Awful Forums > Discussion > Debate & Discussion > Got a crazy forwarded political email from your family? Post them here.

Keshik: Oct 27, 2000

quote:

US Tax System Explained with Beer

Our Tax System Explained: Bar Stool Economics

Suppose that every day, ten men go out for beer and the bill for all ten comes to $100. If they paid their bill the way we pay our taxes, it would go something like this:

The first four men (the poorest) would pay nothing.
The fifth would pay $1.
The sixth would pay $3.
The seventh would pay $7.
The eighth would pay $12.
The ninth would pay $18.
The tenth man (the richest) would pay $59.

So, that's what they decided to do.
The ten men drank in the bar every day and seemed quite happy with the arrangement, until one day, the owner threw them a curve. 'Since you are all such good customers,' he said, 'I'm going to reduce the cost of your daily beer by $20.' Drinks for the ten now cost just $80.
The group still wanted to pay their bill the way we pay our taxes so the first four men were unaffected. They would still drink for free.
But what about the other six men - the paying customers? How could they divide the $20 windfall so that everyone would get his 'fair share?'
They realized that $20 divided by six is $3.33. But if they subtracted that from everybody's share, then the fifth man and the sixth man would each end up being paid to drink his beer.
So, the bar owner suggested that it would be fair to reduce each man's bill by roughly the same amount, and he proceeded to work out the amounts each should pay.

And so:
The fifth man, like the first four, now paid nothing (100% savings).
The sixth now paid $2 instead of $3 (33%savings).
The seventh now pay $5 instead of $7 (28%savings).
The eighth now paid $9 instead of $12 (25% savings).
The ninth now paid $14 instead of $18 (22% savings).
The tenth now paid $49 instead of $59 (16% savings).

Each of the six was better off than before. And the first four continued to drink for free. But once outside the restaurant, the men began to compare their savings.
'I only got a dollar out of the $20,'declared the sixth man. He pointed to the tenth man,' but he got $10!'
'Yeah, that's right,' exclaimed the fifth man. 'I only saved a dollar, too.
It's unfair that he got ten times more than I got' 'That's true!!' shouted the seventh man. 'Why should he get $10 back when I got only two? The wealthy get all the breaks!'
'Wait a minute,' yelled the first four men in unison. 'We didn't get anything at all. The system exploits the poor!'
The nine men surrounded the tenth and beat him up.
The next night the tenth man didn't show up for drinks so the nine sat down and had beers without him. But when it came time to pay the bill, they discovered something important. They didn't have enough money between all of them for even half of the bill!
And that, ladies and gentlemen, journalists and college professors, is how our tax system works. The people who pay the highest taxes get the most benefit from a tax reduction. Tax them too much, attack them for being wealthy, and they just may not show up anymore. In fact, they might start drinking overseas where the atmosphere is somewhat friendlier.

David R. Kamerschen, Ph.D.
Professor of Economics
University of Georgia

For those who understand, no explanation is needed.
For those who do not understand, no explanation is possible.

Would a chatlog be kosher for this thread? It isn't very long, especially if I were to edit it, but it really illustrates quite clearly the mentality of a lot of the Glenn Beck audience.

# ¿ Aug 28, 2009 03:06

Adbot: ADBOT LOVES YOU

# ¿ Apr 28, 2024 10:48

Keshik: Oct 27, 2000

crime fighting hog posted:

I'm down.

I pretty much never ever read chatlogs because they are invariably self-serving and uninteresting, so I want to be clear that I am not posting this because I believe my arguments are particularly witty, insightful, or biting (though I am proud of when I got him to defend slavery). I do however believe that my friend who I had this argument with represents one of the more cerebral variety of the GOP protesters against healthcare reform (no, really, I have known him a long time and he is not normally as frighteningly stupid as this may make him seem), and for that reason I think it's worthy of analysis. I've re-read his arguments a number of times and I keep coming back to the conclusion that the people who oppose healthcare reform are unanimously misinformed, misguided, or are deliberately and dishonestly trying to perpetuate misinformation and poor critical thinking skills among other people by any means available.

edit: gently caress me that is rather a lot of scrolling. here, you can read it here if you choose: http://pastebin.com/zEL4EESd

Keshik fucked around with this message at 02:22 on Oct 20, 2011

# ¿ Aug 28, 2009 05:18

Keshik: Oct 27, 2000

chesh posted:

Keshik, I hit my head against a literal brick wall while reading the transcript of you hitting your head against a figurative brick wall.

I especially liked the bit where he was fine with a group of people getting together and doing it, but they can't use the word government because government is only there to support some vague and oversimplified idea of liberty.

Yeah, that's the part where I was being way more polite than I felt was appropriate because my friend, who'd accused me of ignorance, clearly had no understanding of the concept of the social contract or of any political philosophy.

But yeah, that really does represent the best of the arguments being produced by the right-wing. My friend works in our nation's capitol for a non-profit that specializes in training conservative political operatives. His mindset is what is being taught to hundreds of people who will work in the political arena and on the staffs of major policy makers.

That is frightening to me.

# ¿ Aug 28, 2009 21:45

Keshik: Oct 27, 2000

Got this one a couple days ago:

quote:

The Difference between Republicans and Democrats:

This is Maria, South Carolina Republican Governor Mark Sanford's mistress:

This is Golan, New Jersey Democratic Governor Jim McGreevey's mistress:

Any Questions?

I sent this reply:

quote:

This is Ashley, former mistress of Democratic Governor of New York, Eliot Spitzer:

This is Dave Karsnia, an airport bathroom hookup of Senator Larry Craig, Republican:

This is Mike Jones, mistress and drug dealer to Ted Haggard, leader of the National Association of Evangelicals:

This is an example of what gets Republican Representative Mark Foley all hot and bothered:

This is an artist's rendition of Republican Florida State Representative Bob Allen's lover:

# ¿ Sep 4, 2009 03:07

Keshik: Oct 27, 2000

quote:

What would you say if I gave you 11 reasons why the elections in 2010
will be the most important in the history of the United States?

1. What if I had told you in October 2008, before the last
presidential election, that before Barack Obamas first 100 days in
office, the federal government would be in control of both the
mortgage and the banking industries? That 19 of Americas largest
banks would be forced to undergo stress tests by the federal
government which would determine that they were insufficiently
capitalized so they must be supervised by the government?

Would you have said, Cmon, that will never happen in America?"

2. What if I had told you that within Barack Obamas first 100 days
in office the federal government would be the largest shareholder in
the US Big Three automakers Ford, GM, and Chrysler? That the
government would kick out the CEOs of these companies and appoint
hand-picked executives with zero experience in the auto industry and
that executive compensation would be determined not by a Board of
Directors but by the government?

Would you have said, Cmon, that will never happen in America?

3. What if I had told you that Barack Obama would appoint 21 Czars,
without congressional approval, accountable only to him not to the
voters who would have control over a wide range of US policy
decisions? That there would be a Stimulus Accountability Czar, an
Urban Czar, a Compensation Czar, an Iran Czar, an Auto Industry Czar,
a Cyber Security Czar, an Energy Czar, a Bank Bailout Czar, and more
than a dozen other government bureaucrats with unchecked regulatory
powers over US domestic and foreign policy?

Would you have said, Cmon, that will never happen in America?

4. What if I had told you that the federal deficit would be $915
billion in the first six months of the Obama presidency - with a
projected annual deficit of $1.75 trillion - triple the $454.8
billion in 2008, for which the previous administration was highly
criticized by Obama and his fellow Democrats? That congress would
pass Obamas $3.53 trillion federal budget for fiscal 2010? That the
projected deficit over the next ten years would be greater than $10
trillion?

Would you have said, Cmon, that will never happen in America?

5. What if I had told you that the Obama Justice Department would
order FBI agents to read Miranda rights to high-value detainees
captured on the battlefield and held at US military detention
facilities in Afghanistan? That Obama would order the closing of the
Guantanamo detention facility with no plan for the disposition of the
200-plus individuals held there? That several of the suspected
terrorists at Guantanamo would be sent to live in freedom in Bermuda
at the expense of the US government? That our returning US veterans
would be labeled terrorists and put on a watch list.

Would you have said, Cmon, that will never happen in America?

6. What if I had told you that the federal government would seek
powers to seize key companies whose failures could jeopardize the
financial system? That a new regulatory agency would be proposed by
Obama to control loans, credit cards, mortgage-backed securities, and
other financial products offered to the public?

Would you have said, Cmon, that will never happen in America?

7. What if I had told you that Obama would travel to the Middle East,
bow before the Saudi king, and repeatedly apologize for Americas past
actions? That he would travel to Latin America where he would warmly
greet Venezuelas strongman Hugo Chavez and sit passively in the
audience while Nicaraguan Marxist thug Daniel Ortega charged America
with terrorist aggression in Central America? Would you have said,
Cmon, that will never happen in America?

8. Okay, now what if I were to tell you that Obama wants to dismantle
conservative talk radio through the imposition of a new Fairness
Doctrine? That he wants to curtail the First Amendment rights of
those who may disagree with his policies via internet blogs, cable
news networks, or advocacy ads? That most major network television
and most newspapers will only sing his phrases like state run media
in communist countries?

Would you say, Cmon, that will never happen in America?

9. What if I were to tell you that the Obama Justice Department is
doing everything it can to limit your Second Amendment rights to keep
and bear arms? That the federal government wants to reinstate the
so-called assault weapons ban which would prohibit the sale of any
type of firearm that requires the shooter to pull the trigger every
time a round is fired? That Obamas Attorney General wants to
eliminate the sale of virtually all handguns and ammunition, which
most citizens choose for self-defense?

Would you say, Cmon, that will never happen in America?

10. What if I were to tell you that the Obama plan is to eliminate
states rights guaranteed by the Tenth Amendment and give the federal
government sweeping new powers over policies currently under the
province of local and state governments and voted on by the people?
That Obama plans to control the schools, energy production, the
environment, health care, and the wealth of every US citizen?

Would you say, Cmon, that will never happen in America?

11. What if I were to tell you that the president, the courts, and
the federal government have ignored the US Constitution and have
seized powers which the founders of our country fought to restrict?
That our last presidential election may have been our last truly free
election for some time to come? That our next presidential election
may look similar to the one recently held in Iran?

I know, I know what you will say, That will never happen in
America.

# ¿ Sep 8, 2009 02:29

Keshik: Oct 27, 2000

I absolutely love an email exchange I won't bother posting because it's dumb, but where a friend sent me a Lew Rockwell rant that had a couple very key factual errors in it that undermined the whole thing, and they were errors you could very easily demonstrate with a quick Google search.

His response to my pointing out these errors which undermined the entire point?

"That doesn't matter, it is big government"

It isn't even ignoring stuff that is contradictory to your worldview, it's ignoring everything that does not confirm your worldview. Nothing is ever innocuous, ever.

# ¿ Mar 6, 2010 09:04

Keshik: Oct 27, 2000

Take a look at this poo poo.

edit: since when are attachments not working?

Only registered members can see post attachments!

# ¿ Sep 25, 2011 19:54

Keshik: Oct 27, 2000

I'm Shaq in these posts. I can't really, just...

Granted my analogy in the last one isn't perfect, but trolling?

I've got months of this poo poo. It's the same guy from my post in this thread back a couple years ago. What the hell?

# ¿ Oct 20, 2011 02:18

Keshik: Oct 27, 2000

I have no idea, but literally everything is about politics for him. A mutual friend from high school announced her engagement and he made comment about gay marriage.

This person works for a 'nonpartisan' ultra-conservative organization and volunteers his time for a bunch of 'nonpartisan' ultra-conservative groups.

# ¿ Oct 20, 2011 03:49

Keshik: Oct 27, 2000

Taking a break from writing a paper to look at Facebook, and run into these:

Accompanying these images were comments by my Randite friend and all of his ultra conservative friends to the effect that they wondered whether dumb leftists would even get the point. I look at them and am astonished that anyone can be so stupid as to make these or to agree with them.

It's moments like that when I really begin to seriously think the American experiment is beyond recovery.

# ¿ Dec 8, 2011 12:26

Keshik: Oct 27, 2000

Kim Jong III posted:

Just another reducto like "imagine if are country was run like a FAMILY!" that ignores, oh, any evidence to the contrary.

What's great about this poo poo is that it's exactly what the Physiocrats and Adam Smith demonstrated to be the central flaw in the mercantile system, itself based on Xenophon's Oeconomicus which was about household management and got conflated by dumbasses into being about the successful running of a state.

Everything comes full circle.

# ¿ Jan 27, 2012 00:19

Keshik: Oct 27, 2000

Facebook:

quote:

Derick weighs into the health insurance for contraception debate: contraception is a low-cost/high-frequency event. It's not like a broken leg or cancer, which is a high-cost/low-frequency event. It's therefore not really insurable. Insurance, by definition, converts high-cost/low-frequency events into low-cost/high-frequency events. What people therefore want when they ask for contraception to be covered by insurance is a subsidy.

Generally speaking, it's bad government to subsidize lifestyle choices to which others are morally opposed.

My reply:

quote:

I think this position would be tenable if being 'morally opposed' to contraception were really about moral opposition to contraception and not about wanting women to suffer consequences for having sex. Limbaugh actually nailed the position on the head when he described Sarah Fluke as "a woman who is happily presenting herself as an immoral, baseless, no-purpose-to-her life woman. She wants all the sex in the world whenever she wants it, all the time, no consequences. No responsibility for her behavior."

That's what's really at stake. Not the moral values of Catholics; 98% of Catholic women have used birth control, 70% actively use it now.

It's women having sex without consequences. The consequences are the important part. Opposition to hormonal birth control is based on wanting women to be punished for having sex.

Too mean?

# ¿ Mar 3, 2012 02:44

Keshik: Oct 27, 2000

From Facebook, latest GOP outrage at something totally reasonable, and my response:

http://www.cato-at-liberty.org/pool-closed-until-further-notice/

http://thehill.com/images/stories/blogs/flooraction/jan2012/hotelletter.pdf

Took me about 20 minutes to find the letter and look into the whole thing, which is ultimately a non-issue as I explained. May be of help to anyone who hears similar poo poo.

# ¿ Mar 15, 2012 02:14

Keshik: Oct 27, 2000

Ok, so, more Facebook nonsense:

A link to this blog entry got posted:

quote:

President Obama Insulted My Dad

Said President Obama today:

�If you�ve got a business, you didn�t build that. Somebody else made that happen.�

My father lost his job as an electrician in 1968, due to cutbacks and his lack of seniority. He then started his own electrical company�out of the trunk of his car. No one helped him. His parents didn�t support him, and in fact, his own father told him he was stupid for even trying.

Said President Obama today:

�Look, if you�ve been successful, you didn�t get there on your own� You didn�t get there on your own. I�m always struck by people who think, well, it must be because I was just so smart. There are a lot of smart people out there. It must be because I worked harder than everybody else. Let me tell you something � there are a whole bunch of hardworking people out there.�

Obama is right. There are a lot of smart people out there. And a lot of them weren�t as smart as my father, who created one of the most enduring electrical contracting companies in the state of South Carolina from scratch.

Obama is right. There are a lot of hardworking people out there. And many of them didn�t work as hard as my father did to become such a great business success�against all the odds and with little help or outside support.

My Dad is the smartest and most hardworking person I know. It is true that most people can�t become successful without at least some help.

But Dad would not have been a success if he wasn�t Jack Hunter, my father�an individual with unique talent, skills and ambition that many others lack.

My father is the perfect example of the American Dream. His achievements were hard-fought and well earned.

And he did it on his own.

It feels like this is just more Randite bullshit, but is there a trend or something in conservative circles right now to pretend that John Donne was wrong? Is anyone able to parse the thing about 'societal' obligations? Why societal is in quotes, or anything about this poo poo?

# ¿ Jul 17, 2012 07:25

Keshik: Oct 27, 2000

I would but that's me.

edit:
Ok, just finished reading last couple pages of this thread. How the gently caress is telling the President, "Um, no, in fact, some men are indeed islands" a conservative talking point now?

Seriously, is this our political discourse?

Keshik fucked around with this message at 07:38 on Jul 17, 2012

# ¿ Jul 17, 2012 07:35

Keshik: Oct 27, 2000

Sarion posted:

Good responses Keshik!

Thanks. In case anyone cares, this is the response I got:

quote:

How many businesses have you started, Keshik? How many private sector jobs have you had, Keshik?

From where do you get this understanding of what it takes to create something of value that others will voluntarily exchange with? Where do you derive this understanding of what it takes to create a successful enterprise?

# ¿ Jul 17, 2012 23:55

Keshik: Oct 27, 2000

I've actually got a rule I force myself to abide by, and it's to never be condescending in debate, especially when the person I'm talking to is being condescending or similarly rude. When you do that, it's just that much easier for it to become adversarial. Granted, they always start in with the ad-homs and ridiculous bullshit anyway, but at least I can reassure myself that not only is my position the superior, but that I defended it in a mature and rational way.

Unless I break that rule by not arguing at all and just posting the word 'fart'

# ¿ Jul 18, 2012 01:05

Keshik: Oct 27, 2000

Now, a few things. I'm M and he is J. We've been friends for a little over fifteen years now, and even after he joined the extreme right wing, I considered him to be among my closest friends. This says more about how few friends I have than about his capacity to insult me, as you might glean from this exchange I'm sharing here. It's a little upsetting to have my 'university existence' demeaned by this person who has known me for as long as he has for a number of reasons, but chiefly they are because he knows that I know, because we went to the same university as undergraduates, that he failed out of the school where I earned my BA, and that he failed out again from the school where I am now earning my MA. I don't bring this up because I'm not an rear end in a top hat, but goddammit loving gently caress.

I can't even understand what the hell he's even saying in his third post there. I'm not posting this ongoing thing as a way of going 'hey look at me own this guy on facebook.' I'm genuinely baffled by this rhetoric because it is a mixture of ad-hominems, references to insane abstract concepts totally irrelevant to the discussion, and attacking things I haven't said.

I cannot parse this poo poo. What the gently caress? The President said something that was undeniably loving true and it becomes an argument? What?!

Keshik fucked around with this message at 05:55 on Jul 18, 2012

# ¿ Jul 18, 2012 05:52

Keshik: Oct 27, 2000

Thank you for that link, I copy pasted the rebuttal from the Obama for America campaign. I should really pay more attention to the poo poo the Obama campaign emails me but I just reflexively delete it because I don't want to read another request for money.

# ¿ Jul 18, 2012 06:03

Keshik: Oct 27, 2000

Iceberg-Slim posted:

You know you live in an Upside-down Land if...

You have to have your parents signature to go on a school field trip but not to get an abortion.

There's a lot in these idiotic lists to be outraged by, but speaking as someone who's spent weeks working on nothing, nothing but appellate cases of girls having to petition to circumvent parental notification laws due to incest...

Anyone that opposes those exceptions is inarguably in favor of fathers raping their daughters. Full stop, no disputing it, just loving die you utter scum.

# ¿ Jul 18, 2012 14:15

Keshik: Oct 27, 2000

Sarion posted:

Keshik - If you want to keep going with that conversation,

I can't, he deleted the entire posting and the comments below it. I like to imagine that it's because this person who I've known and liked for many years doesn't know how to give even a little bit of ground by admitting that maybe the ideology he subscribes to and the rhetoric he imbibes might not be completely correct all of the time. It's perhaps condescending of me to believe this, but I think for people like my friend, so much of their own self-worth is wrapped up in the positions they identify with that they are unable to accept even the most measured and reasonable criticism.

If I learned anything from studying political science as an undergraduate, it's that if there is a way to potentially control the electorate, people will attempt it. I am convinced but unable to prove that the entirety of the Republican media establishment, and Fox News particularly, has set itself to the task of building high self-brand connections between their constituents and their Randite ideology, to insure against reason threatening their agenda.

I've been accused by close friends of being condescending in denying them agency over their own decision making by warning them that they are being manipulated. Most recently it was by a female friend, who I tried desperately to warn that her new boyfriend is a manipulative, narcissistic sociopath whose charm and affection is a front intended to establish control over her. I still believe I was right, but as has been pointed out to me by uninvolved people since then, the reason she's no longer speaking to me has as much to do with his successfully convincing her to perceive faults in a good friend she didn't see before as it does with the fact that my warnings that she was being manipulated were received by her, emotionally, as outrages to her self-esteem.

I think that a lot of the people we discuss in this thread have been so manipulated into tying their self-image into the ideology sold to them by the ruling class that they are truly incapable of reacting reasonably to reasonable objections to the rhetoric they are fed and which they repeat. Criticism of the ideology is criticism of the ego, and I do not know the solution to that dilemma.

I hope someone more intelligent than me is able to find one.

Keshik fucked around with this message at 18:26 on Jul 18, 2012

# ¿ Jul 18, 2012 18:16

Keshik: Oct 27, 2000

Spatial posted:

Someone wrote a witty paragraph on this subject a while back. Could someone repost it?

That particular form of parody has existed for at least one hundred and ten years. Possibly earlier. The following is usually attributed to Sidney Webb:

quote:

The practical man, oblivious or contemptuous of any theory of the social organism or general principles of social organization, has been forced, by the necessities of the time, into an ever-deepening collectivist channel. Socialism, of course, he still rejects and despises. The individualist town councillor will walk along the municipal pavement, lit by municipal gas, and cleansed by municipal brooms with municipal water, and seeing, by the municipal clock in the municipal market, that he is too early to meet his children coming from the municipal school, hard by the county lunatic asylum and municipal hospital, will use the national telegraph system to tell them not to walk through the municipal park, but to come by the municipal tramway, to meet him in the municipal reading-room, by the municipal art gallery, museum, and library, where he intends to consult some of the national publications in order to prepare his next speech in the municipal town hall, in favour of the nationalisation of canals and the increase of Government control over the railway system. `Socialism,' Sir, he will say, `don't waste the time of a practical man by our fantastic absurdities. Self-help, Sir, individual self-help, that's what made our city what it is.

If anyone knows of an earlier version, I'm happy to hear it.

# ¿ Jul 18, 2012 18:25

Keshik: Oct 27, 2000

jojoinnit posted:

I know that you have to spend to get out of a recession

I'd warn you against language like this. It's believed that stimulus spending is the best way to bring an economy out of recession, but there is disagreement on that point. While experience has shown over and over again that austerity measures are basically the worst possible response to a recession, economics is more pseudo-science than science, and I'd encourage everyone talking about economic policy against stating anything like this as fact or as something that you 'know' to be true.

You believe - and evidence supports the idea - that stimulus spending is the fastest way for an economy to recover from recession.

You don't know that. Knowing something implies that it's fact, believing is an admission that it is an opinion. Informed opinion, to be sure, but opinion, and therefore open to new ideas.

# ¿ Jul 18, 2012 18:34

Keshik: Oct 27, 2000

Boxman posted:

EDIT: ThePeteEffect, I would strongly recommend against using an analogy that compares federal budgeting to household spending. It opens a nasty can of worms.

This, a million times this. I might make an effortpost at some point about the Physiocrats and Adam Smith and the Oeconomicus and the fact that a number of very intelligent people worked very hard in the 18th century to completely dismantle the mercantilist system, which modeled the economic system of nations on Xenophon's work about the management of a household.

Actually, gently caress effort. Someone get McCaine to do it.

# ¿ Jul 18, 2012 18:56

Keshik: Oct 27, 2000

Nostrum posted:

I had never heard of this but god drat, what a simultaneously horrible and incredible story. I can see the right wing spin coming though: racism is actually good because if she were treated like a human being with rights they would have never taken cells without her consent.

HeLa is one of the most fascinating stories in all of medicine. HeLa has reproduced so many times that the total mass of the cancer cells in labs around the world exceeds the mass of Henrietta Lacks many times over. HeLa is so robust that she's tainted a huge number of unrelated cell-lines.

When we're all dead and gone, HeLa will go on.

# ¿ Jul 19, 2012 20:25

Keshik: Oct 27, 2000

Yeah, those facts are totally bullshit. Pure fiction.

# ¿ Aug 14, 2012 22:18

Keshik: Oct 27, 2000

ElmerTheWasabi posted:

I got this great wall of text from a friend on Facebook:

I have a few friends who are actually smart people. They are a lot older than I am so I guess that may be why they're Republicans. Regardless, the story seems legit, but am I wrong to think that it's not the job of the Obama administration to report the news on this? Is he taking credit where it isn't due? Is he somehow taking credit for what these guys did? This just seems like some story being twisted up until it becomes more anti-Obama bullshit.

The most disgusting thing in this screed against Obama is that he appended a couple of totally apolitical and statements by friends of the deceased which have no connection whatsoever to him so as to make it seem as though they agreed with his bullshit.

Goddammit that poo poo pisses me off.

# ¿ Oct 29, 2012 23:17

Keshik: Oct 27, 2000

TheIllestVillain posted:

They originally hedged their bets on this guy but he was incredibly unreliable and well, nobody liked him.

Hey, Milt Bearden personally gave money and Stingers to that acid-throwing prick, even while thinking to himself he probably should just shoot the rear end in a top hat in the face and walk away. It wasn't totally the Pakistanis who were financing and arming the Taliban.

# ¿ Oct 30, 2012 12:13

Keshik: Oct 27, 2000

sicarius posted:

So... does this mean that he was an atheist? Interesting. I doubt it really means much or will lead to anything at all, but it explains part of why the right isn't seeking to politicize his death as much as that of Woods - whose family is, apparently, quite religious.

It's not so much that as the fact that Mitt Romney tried pulling a Mark Antony and his mom told him to go gently caress himself so the right wing backed the hell off before it blew up in their faces.

Empire State posted:

This doesn't matter in terms of facebook arguments, anyway. If someone politicizes his death with the mistaken assumption that he was religious, it would do more good to point out that they are politicizing his death (and why that is a lovely thing to do), than it would to talk about him being an atheist.

Eh, I always thought it was pretty great when Pat Tillman's family went apeshit on people for talking about Tillman going to heaven and poo poo.

I actually haven't thought about Tillman in quite a while. Didn't it turn out he was intentionally fragged by fellow American soldiers?

# ¿ Oct 31, 2012 21:35

Keshik: Oct 27, 2000

Mitchicon posted:

Did a thing happen?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=su-7y92YzrA

quote:

On the stump in Iowa Tuesday, Mitt Romney revealed that he met former Navy SEAL Glen Doherty at a holiday party some years ago. Doherty is one of four Americans killed during the September 11th attack on the American consulate in Benghazi.

Romney's story started out lighthearted, as he recounted how he and Ann mistook a holiday gathering across the street for their neighborhood party, and he ended up talking to Doherty. "He skied in some of the places I had. We had a lot of things in common," Romney said of Doherty. Both men are from Massachusetts.

"He told me that he keeps going back to the Middle East. He cares very deeply about the people there. He served in the military there, went back from time to time to offer security services and so forth to people there. You can imagine how I felt when I found out that he was one of the two former Navy SEALS killed in Benghazi on September 11th."

Romney was visibly emotional during the story, and the video of the speech was repeated throughout the day on network and cable news.

But one of Glen Doherty's best friends remembered Doherty's impression of this meeting much differently.

Elf Ellefsen met Glen Doherty skiing in Utah when he was 19, and the two men remained friends for more than 20 years.

"A guy living life wise beyond his years. Always trying to be progressive as well as do the right thing. Always challenging himself to his greatest ability," Ellefsen remembered.

He last saw Doherty a week before the final mission to Libya. "I stayed in his house (in California), we paddled out in the ocean together, spent some good quality time."

Ellefsen said Doherty recalled meeting Mitt Romney years ago, but the account was much different from what the Presidential candidate retold in Iowa.

According to Ellefsen, Romney introduced himself to Doherty four separate times during the gathering.

"He said it was very comical," Ellefsen said, "Mitt Romney approached him ultimately four times, using this private gathering as a political venture to further his image. He kept introducing himself as Mitt Romney, a political figure. The same introduction, the same opening line. Glen believed it to be very insincere and stale."[

Ellefsen said Doherty remembered Romney as robotic.

"He said it was pathetic and comical to have the same person come up to you within only a half hour, have this person reintroduce himself to you, having absolutely no idea whatsoever that he just did this 20 minutes ago, and did not even recognize Glen's face."

Ellefsen described Glen Doherty as a humble, non-political guy, and said it was ironic for him to be used during a presidential campaign.

"Whether it be Republican, Democrat, Green Party, Libertarian, it doesn't make a difference. Because this guy is using our great friend, our humble, and honorable great friend...who is truly larger than life...He has become part of the soapbox routine for politics in a presidential race."

Ellefsen said he understands why people would want to link themselves with Doherty. "Of all people to tie yourself to for advancement in life, it's not surprising that Romney or anybody else would want to tie themselves to Glen Doherty. Because he was incredible. And I can honestly say beyond a shadow of a doubt, he was the greatest person I have ever met in my life."

I asked Ellefsen what he thought of his friend's story being used on the political stump:

"Honestly it does make me sick. Glen would definitely not approve of it. He probably wouldn't do much about it. He probably wouldn't say a whole lot about it. I think Glen would feel, more than anything, almost embarrassed for Romney. I think he would feel pity for him."

Editor's note:
While it's unclear just what political, if any, motivations Ellefsen has, it is clear on his Facebook page that he's upset about the U.S. government's role in security overseas.

Ellefson isn't the only one upset with Romney. In an interview with Ross and Burbank, Barbara Doherty criticized Romney for using her son as a "political football."

"It upsets me because this isn't something political. This is four wonderful young men who have sacrificed their lives for this country and so other people could be free."

Doherty says her son never mentioned meeting Romney and likely would have if it had been as meaningful as the candidate portrayed in his speech.

"If Mitt Romney met him and was so moved by him, I'm just wondering why someone from his office never called to see what they could do and I have never received a note of condolence from anybody in that party," Doherty said.

Josh Kerns, MyNorthwest.com, contributed to this report

# ¿ Oct 31, 2012 21:49

Keshik: Oct 27, 2000

This was in my inbox this morning.

quote:

Good afternoon, USF students -

The USF Police Department has issued a notice about a planned protest coordinated by several student organizations during the week of April 8-12, 2013, that involves individuals wearing empty holsters on top of their clothing. The protest is intended to promote their support of persons with concealed weapons permits being allowed to carry concealed weapons while on campus.

You should expect to see students wearing empty holsters throughout campus next week, and some may be handing out literature about the effort.

Of course, if you should see an actual firearm being carried by anyone other than a properly identified police officer, please call 9-1-1 immediately.

ugh. just...ugh.

# ¿ Apr 5, 2013 23:08

Keshik: Oct 27, 2000

A cousin just posted an RIP Tom Clancy to facebook, effusive with praise. I feel like trolling the Texas conservative wing of my family by copy pasting the absolutely worst, most horribly racist and shitheaded Clancy quote possible. Any suggestions?

# ¿ Oct 2, 2013 16:33

Keshik: Oct 27, 2000

A) The GOP is not doing any of this because they give half a gently caress about the deficit, and have admitted as much.

B) We have spent a hell of a lot of money on two pointless wars.

C) The extreme cuts that would be necessary to make our levels of spending fall below our revenue coming in would destroy the economy and actually create a feedback effect where the revenues would fall dramatically as the economy crashes, and the economy would continue to crash more as we shut off services.

D) Until very recently, investors were so eagerly buying up US Treasury bonds that the interest rates on them were reaching 0% and even going into the negatives, meaning borrowing money at those rates literally cost us nothing at all.

E) Most people like your friend on Facebook somehow still think of national economies in a pre-capitalist mercantilist model that is based on Xenophon's Oeconomicus, a Socratic dialogue about managing a household that got warped into statecraft during the middle ages. A national economy and the budget of the largest economy in the world is not managed in remotely the same way as a single household. Honestly, students should not be taught how to balance their personal checkbook until they have passed a rigorous course in macroeconomics.

# ¿ Oct 2, 2013 19:42

Keshik: Oct 27, 2000

Okay, this one is not a crazy neo-con family member but an encounter with Twitter feminism that left me going "What the gently caress?!"

This guy proposed going after the hospitals that deny admitting privileges to doctors, and these women respond with, well, you can see below.

And I got accused of mansplaining to them for saying "Hey actually that sounds like a decent idea." Part 2 of my thing was just "If legislatures are immune to outside scrutiny, maybe the corporations that own hospitals can be subjected to external pressure."

What the gently caress. How is it mansplaining? I wanted to ask them but the last time I ever disagreed with a feminist activist on Twitter and asked for further explanation of why they disagreed with me, it turned into this whole shitstorm where I ended up being accused of being pro-rapists-in-the-military for daring to suggest that increasing the number of females in the officer corps and number of female NCOs might alleviate the problem, citing some experiences of my sister, who is a Captain in the U.S. Army.

I agree with Twitter feminists 90% of the time, and then 10% of the time they will be going after other people who agree with and support their aims and I'll be like, "Wait, what? Why are you viciously attacking someone that agrees with you?"

I really want someone to tell me not just that I am wrong here but why I am wrong. Why is this a bad idea, and more importantly why is it bad to suggest it, and equally bad to say "Hmm actually not a bad idea."

edit: names blurred only because I am not posting this to call someone out, I just want to get some feedback on the interaction.

Only registered members can see post attachments!

# ¿ Mar 7, 2014 03:17

Keshik: Oct 27, 2000

Discendo Vox posted:

1. You're proposing something that's criminally obvious, which they either already do or is ineffective for some reason.

I've never heard of any kind of name and shame campaign along these lines. It seems to me that the hospital admitting privilege laws require complicity of hospitals in closing off access to reproductive care. You can't exactly boycott hospitals but surely something could be done to put hospitals in the spotlight.

Is that unworkable somehow?

# ¿ Mar 7, 2014 06:29

Keshik: Oct 27, 2000

Rosalind posted:

Because shaming a hospital isn't going to win you any favors. It's a hospital. Even if they're doing one jerk thing and not giving these providers admitting privileges, it's still generally a place people associate as being a force of good. Pro-choice advocates attacking a hospital would probably hurt them more than help. Can you imagine the pro-life spin? "Pro-Death Advocates Now Going After Hospitals," etc.

And furthermore admitting privileges are something that are hard to get even at secular hospitals. They didn't set these policies in place to block abortions, it's just the way admitting privileges are granted. Many of them have rules like you have to be a faculty member or you actually have to practice at the hospital. In many cases, it's not something you can just ask for and receive. And then religious hospitals are about as likely to change their policies to allow abortion doctors to get admitting privileges as pro-lifers are to give up and go home.

Focusing on trying to get admitting privileges is a waste of time. Pro-choice advocates know this. Plus if they start trying to focus on this then it seems like they are admitting that admitting privileges are necessary.

This makes perfect sense, thank you.

Dopefish Lives! posted:

I used to follow this person. She has a very nasty habit of jumping all over people for the slightest issue. She once humiliated some poor woman for not knowing what "cis" means - her followers attacked the woman so viciously she was crying. While I agree with the replies to this post explaining why she might have had a problem with what you said, this particular Twitter Feminist is so relentlessly negative and hostile, I couldn't bear following her anymore.

I actually came to like her initially because she was one of the more vocal "gently caress Hugo Schwyzer" people on Twitter. Just because someone is a total rear end in a top hat doesn't mean they can't have really good opinions and good ideas. Hell, everyone that has ever worked with Ralph Nader is in pretty much total agreement that he is an unbelievable prick.

He also happens to have done more good for this country than any other American in the past fifty years.

# ¿ Mar 7, 2014 23:57

Keshik: Oct 27, 2000

dalstrs posted:

There has to be more to this story than is being reported. If they are going after him that much and the only thing they had was someone's word that he said something then it was an overreach by law enforcement.

He had unregistered firearms in a district where it is unlawful to possess such things without them being registered.

A criminal complaint was filed against him for domestic violence and making threats to use a deadly weapon.

He consented to a search of his home, which was conducted without a warrant but with his consent.

The search determined that he was in violation of the law.

He was offered a plea deal, he rejected it and insisted on going to trial.

In what way is any of that "going after him that much"?

# ¿ Mar 9, 2014 15:21

Keshik: Oct 27, 2000

You could avoid getting into it too much and just point out to him that the signature looks the way it does because he signed it with multiple pens.

edit:
It's the signature from the ACA, he signed it with twenty-two pens.

Keshik fucked around with this message at 06:02 on Mar 11, 2014

# ¿ Mar 11, 2014 06:00

Keshik: Oct 27, 2000

I'm late to the party but I'm a history graduate student, and we all have to refer to our professors as Prof. Lastname and Prof. Yesreally, and every single one of the professors hates it, save for one, and he is the reason we are discouraged from speaking to all the other professors as they have said they would prefer; Julia, Steve, Bill, Anne, David, Scott, Jenni, and so on. He has jumped up peoples' asses when he has overheard them doing so to such an extent that everyone just goes with it.

Our graduate advisor is actually a staff position and not a faculty position. The girl in that job has her PhD in history from Harvard but because of the two-body problem works here as just part of the office staff. She does teach the odd class here and there because it would be stupid to waste a resource like her, but it's also totally cool to call her by her first name because she isn't actually a professor. Most of us at least refer to her by Dr. Lastname in emails because it feels like it is intended as a direct slight not to.

He is not the most senior in the department but he is the biggest busybody. He is on the faculty senate and over his career at the university and in the department has volunteered for as many different job responsibilities as he could and will not give them up to anyone now that he has them (which is part of why our department's web page never gets updated, because he refuses to share the password with anyone and considers updating the page to be his job). Most of the other roles in the department, like undergrad advisor and grad advisor and service on search committees and on admissions committees and such, those are all just rotated around from person to person within the department and the full professors rotate the department chair around every couple of years as well, usually to whomever is not finishing a book or something.

I have a feeling if he ever gets promoted up from Associate to full Professor, the moment he gets the department chairmanship he'll have it until he dies.

Some people really really really love titles and authority.

Keshik fucked around with this message at 02:12 on Mar 21, 2014

# ¿ Mar 21, 2014 02:10

Adbot: ADBOT LOVES YOU

# ¿ Apr 28, 2024 10:48

Keshik: Oct 27, 2000

ratbert90 posted:

The president is from Kenya!

Hang on, what is this one even trying to say? That the administration tried to convince people that Vile Rat, Stevens, Doherty, and Woods weren't actually killed?

# ¿ Mar 22, 2014 10:59

The Something Awful Forums > Discussion > Debate & Discussion > Got a crazy forwarded political email from your family? Post them here.