Register a SA Forums Account here!
JOINING THE SA FORUMS WILL REMOVE THIS BIG AD, THE ANNOYING UNDERLINED ADS, AND STUPID INTERSTITIAL ADS!!!

You can: log in, read the tech support FAQ, or request your lost password. This dumb message (and those ads) will appear on every screen until you register! Get rid of this crap by registering your own SA Forums Account and joining roughly 150,000 Goons, for the one-time price of $9.95! We charge money because it costs us money per month for bills, and since we don't believe in showing ads to our users, we try to make the money back through forum registrations.
 
  • Locked thread
Handsome Ralph
Sep 3, 2004

Oh boy, posting!
That's where I'm a Viking!


http://www.nytimes.com/2011/07/13/opinion/13friedman.html

:psyduck:

So if I'm reading this right, according to Friedman, we're all hosed unless we either work in social media or are willing to reconsider our jobs/roles every three months.

I don't even...

Adbot
ADBOT LOVES YOU

Handsome Ralph
Sep 3, 2004

Oh boy, posting!
That's where I'm a Viking!


A kid from an area I grew up in was killed by a drunk driver over the weekend. Tragic as it is, turns out the driver who hit him is an illegal imigrant, so bring on the retard brigade to hijack this kids memorial page to rant about everything they hate about "liberals".

https://www.facebook.com/notes/justice-for-matt/open-letter-to-president-barack-obama/260604627292885


I'd throw the letter in quotes, but it's so horribly formatted and...well you'll see.

EDIT: Couldn't decide if this should have gone in the forwarded email thread or here.

Handsome Ralph fucked around with this message at 01:24 on Aug 24, 2011

Handsome Ralph
Sep 3, 2004

Oh boy, posting!
That's where I'm a Viking!


lothar_ posted:

Ho no, I'm not going to be roped into another Facebook Retard hatefest. Last time I did was when Japan beat the U.S. in the women's world cup. I spent literally weeks fighting with "lets nuke Japan HURRRRRRR" idiots because my outrage got the better of me. If I'm going to get into arguments with that level of stupid, it's gonna be face-to-face from now on since those usually end quickly.

Too late for me, I got roped into an argument with a friend over status updates. Her excuse was that while she's a "liberal and tolerant" person, my referring to them as "xenophobic assholes" was just name calling and wrong. I was then told that I had to understand that they are a small town, are scared about the economy and are grieving and that I had no right to feel that way. I basically concluded it by saying that I don't excuse that kind of poo poo, grief or no grief, and using the death of a drunk driving victim to push that kind of hate language, makes them assholes plain and simple.

Some people will excuse any kind of behavior I guess.

Handsome Ralph
Sep 3, 2004

Oh boy, posting!
That's where I'm a Viking!


http://www.telegram.com/article/20111211/NEWS/112119840

This guy contradicts himself so bad in this piece in an effort to criticize Obama and T Roosevelt. It's pretty funny.


Also, who the gently caress uses the word poppycock to title an opinion piece?

Handsome Ralph
Sep 3, 2004

Oh boy, posting!
That's where I'm a Viking!


Hey look, an opinion piece on Iran by none other than Mitt Romney!

A loving idiot on foreign affairs AKA Mitt Romney posted:

Beginning Nov. 4, 1979 , dozens of U.S. diplomats were held hostage by Iranian Islamic revolutionaries for 444 days while America’s feckless president, Jimmy Carter, fretted in the White House. Running for the presidency against Carter the next year, Ronald Reagan made it crystal clear that the Iranians would pay a very stiff price for continuing their criminal behavior. On Jan. 20, 1981, in the hour that Reagan was sworn into office, Iran released the hostages. The Iranians well understood that Reagan was serious about turning words into action in a way that Jimmy Carter never was.

America and the world face a strikingly similar situation today; only even more is at stake. The same Islamic fanatics who took our diplomats hostage are racing to build a nuclear bomb. Barack Obama, America’s most feckless president since Carter, has declared such an outcome unacceptable, but his rhetoric has not been matched by an effective policy. While Obama frets in the White House, the Iranians are making rapid progress toward obtaining the most destructive weapons in the history of the world.

The gravity of this development cannot be overstated. For three decades now, the ayatollahs running Iran have sponsored terrorism around the world. If we’ve learned anything from Sept. 11, 2001, it is that terrorism in the nuclear age holds nightmarish possibilities for horror on a mass scale.

What’s more, Iran’s leaders openly call for the annihilation of the state of Israel. Should they acquire the means to carry out this inhuman objective, the Middle East will become a nuclear tinderbox overnight. The perils for Israel, for our other allies and for our own forces in the region will become unthinkable.

The United States cannot afford to let Iran acquire nuclear weapons. Yet under Barack Obama, that is the course we are on.

As president, I would move America in a different direction.

The overall rubric of my foreign policy will be the same as Ronald Reagan’s: namely, “peace through strength.” Like Reagan, I have put forward a comprehensive plan to rebuild American might and equip our soldiers with the weapons they need to prevail in any conflict. By increasing our annual naval shipbuilding rate from nine to 15, I intend to restore our position so that our Navy is an unchallengeable power on the high seas. Just as Reagan sought to defend the United States from Soviet weapons with his Strategic Defense Initiative, I will press forward with ballistic missile defense systems to ensure that Iranian and North Korean missiles cannot threaten us or our allies.

As for Iran in particular, I will take every measure necessary to check the evil regime of the ayatollahs. Until Iran ceases its nuclear-bomb program, I will press for ever-tightening sanctions, acting with other countries if we can but alone if we must. I will speak out on behalf of the cause of democracy in Iran and support Iranian dissidents who are fighting for their freedom. I will make clear that America’s commitment to Israel’s security and survival is absolute. I will demonstrate our commitment to the world by making Jerusalem the destination of my first foreign trip.

Most important, I will buttress my diplomacy with a military option that will persuade the ayatollahs to abandon their nuclear ambitions. Only when they understand that at the end of that road lies not nuclear weapons but ruin will there be a real chance for a peaceful resolution.

My plan includes restoring the regular presence of aircraft carrier groups in the Eastern Mediterranean and the Persian Gulf region simultaneously. It also includes increasing military assistance to Israel and improved coordination with all of our allies in the area.

We can’t afford to wait much longer, and we certainly can’t afford to wait through four more years of an Obama administration. By then it will be far too late. If the Iranians are permitted to get the bomb, the consequences will be as uncontrollable as they are horrendous. My foreign policy plan to avert this catastrophe is plain: Either the ayatollahs will get the message, or they will learn some very painful lessons about the meaning of American resolve.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/mitt-romney-how-i-would-check-irans-nuclear-ambition/2012/03/05/gIQAneYItR_story.html?tid=pm_pop

Handsome Ralph
Sep 3, 2004

Oh boy, posting!
That's where I'm a Viking!


zeroprime posted:

Wait, so is he openly admitting that the Reagan administration supplied terrorists with weapons, and that he plans to do the same?

Reagan was so serious about turning his words into action that he sent over some missiles for the Iranians to try out first.

Adbot
ADBOT LOVES YOU

Handsome Ralph
Sep 3, 2004

Oh boy, posting!
That's where I'm a Viking!


Well a friend just found this gem...

http://www.nationalreview.com/articles/335996/newtown-answers-nro-symposium?pg=1

quote:

There was not a single adult male on the school premises when the shooting occurred. In this school of 450 students, a sizeable number of whom were undoubtedly 11- and 12-year-old boys (it was a K–6 school), all the personnel — the teachers, the principal, the assistant principal, the school psychologist, the “reading specialist” — were female. There didn’t even seem to be a male janitor to heave his bucket at Adam Lanza’s knees. Women and small children are sitting ducks for mass-murderers. The principal, Dawn Hochsprung, seemed to have performed bravely. According to reports, she activated the school’s public-address system and also lunged at Lanza, before he shot her to death. Some of the teachers managed to save all or some of their charges by rushing them into closets or bathrooms. But in general, a feminized setting is a setting in which helpless passivity is the norm. Male aggression can be a good thing, as in protecting the weak — but it has been forced out of the culture of elementary schools and the education schools that train their personnel. Think of what Sandy Hook might have been like if a couple of male teachers who had played high-school football, or even some of the huskier 12-year-old boys, had converged on Lanza.


Republicans, literally children.

Bolding mine.

  • Locked thread