If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Working for Change)   Arianna Huffington's list of forgettable news for 2004   (workingforchange.com) divider line 207
    More: Amusing  
•       •       •

14578 clicks; posted to Main » on 31 Dec 2004 at 7:08 PM (9 years ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



207 Comments   (+0 »)
   

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | » | Last | Show all
 
2004-12-31 10:09:14 PM  
I always think its interesting when people label things "war." The word "War" implies that there is a conclusion, a victor and a loser. War on drugs, war on terror... these kind of "wars" have no conclusion.

More people need to read 1984.
Orwell was a genious(...prophet?)

/War is Peace
//Slavery is Freedom
///Ignorance is Strength
//// are extraneous
 
2004-12-31 10:15:24 PM  
Has anyone noticed that the UN is composed of a single parliamentary body, mostly composed of single-vote nations that were drawn up after the collapse of colonialism. It would be the same if the American government knocked off the house of representatives, and just went with the Senate, except that there were hundreds of states, and a lot of them were bankrupt, morally reprehensible, totalitarian units, whose only goal was to join up with their peers and vote down, say (ha ha) the US and Israel. Which is pretty much all legislation these non-contributing countries can come up with (while sucking up US aid to the tune of billions of $$).

The UN is formed on lines very similar to the US Articles of Confederation, which no one even remembers, because they got trashed in a few years before the Constitution got drawn up. Why? Because they were totally unworkable. You don't give Rhode Island an equal vote against New York, for example. And that was 200 years ago.
 
2004-12-31 10:18:56 PM  
TheGoblinKing:

Yeah, he's so dumb he beat your best intellectual minds in running for the Presidency. Twice.


1) He didn't win in 2000 it was handed to him by the Supreme Court, or have you forgotten that?

2) Look at the records of voting fraud in Ohio, look at the shiatty broken machines (1 per precinct) in Dem areas of Ohio. Look at what the head of Diebold said.

2004 was stolen.

STFU asshole and drop dead you god forsaken douche!!
 
2004-12-31 10:18:59 PM  
Boo farking hoohoohoo.

Gawd, I can't stand Bush and his farking statist corporate welfare crusading administration, but
LIBERALS MAKE HIM LOOK LIKE A FARKING GENIUS.

Every year the Democrats and Republicans are even more indistinguishable from each other, and every year they have to biatch and whine and complain about how the other one is ruining the country as if there was a damn bit of difference. The less differentiation between them there is, the more they have to carp about the polarization of society so they can go on pretending that they stand for anything but the same thing: Bigger government, more restrictive laws, and socialist agendas.

Both want welfare. Dems for people, Republicans for corporations (which will improve the lot of the people working for them, yah?)

Both want restrictive laws. Dems for guns, Republicans for abortions.

Both want to take your money and give it to someone else. The only thing they don't agree on is who else to give it to.

Fark 'em both.
 
2004-12-31 10:20:34 PM  
Ceph: But they don't. Most of the land is federally owned wildlife parks and preserves. In order for it to be private land, the government would have to sell the land.

That was sort of my point:P
It's one thing if the government was preventing these people from using their own land in a certain way, it's something different all together if it's not theirs on the first place.
 
2004-12-31 10:21:56 PM  
For those slamming Ms. Huffington: let's not forget where her words and thoughts are regularly published, versus where yours are currently appearing.

Some of you have the "Everyman"/ostrich view down to a T.
 
2004-12-31 10:22:21 PM  
TheChaz:

He didn't win in 2000 it was handed to him by the Supreme Court, or have you forgotten that?

Presidents aren't elected by popular vote, they are elected by the Electoral College, or have you forgotten that?
 
2004-12-31 10:25:56 PM  
Halfmast Trousers:

2004-12-31 10:15:24 PM Halfmast Trousers [TotalFark]

The UN doesnt legislate anything. The UN has no authority beyond that given to it by the Security Council on a case by case basis. The UN has no army or constituents.

Railing against the UN is like beating up a retard. Fun yes, but pointless.
 
2004-12-31 10:28:40 PM  
B82:

2004-12-31 10:01:03 PM B82

BillCosby

What exactly are we supposed to do about terrorism in Russia, Indonesia, and Iran? Invade?


Whatever it takes. Anything is better than nothing.
 
2004-12-31 10:30:26 PM  
Arianna is right on!

Neoconazis are deluded, asshat, traiterous mothergrabbers, who all deserve to be swept out to sea in a tsunami.

Mothergrabbers! HA HA! Sam Jackson would be proud.
 
2004-12-31 10:32:06 PM  
What exactly are we supposed to do about terrorism in Russia, Indonesia, and Iran? Invade?

Whatever it takes. Anything is better than nothing.


BWAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA... You're kidding right? Do you know what would happen if the US tried to invade Russia to stop terrorism? More people would die in a shorter period than ever before in human history.
 
2004-12-31 10:39:56 PM  
costermonger I'm not supporting his point, but a US invasion of Russia would be much more effective than previous attempts (Hitler, Napoleon, etc.). Winter wouldn't be nearly as much of a problem if you started with carpet bombing, using B-2's based out of the states that could fly all the way across, could air-drop supplies from any "friendy" European nation. We don't have the traditional supply-line range of past invasions.
 
2004-12-31 10:40:14 PM  
costermonger:

2004-12-31 10:32:06 PM costermonger [TotalFark]

What exactly are we supposed to do about terrorism in Russia, Indonesia, and Iran? Invade?

Whatever it takes. Anything is better than nothing.

BWAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA... You're kidding right? Do you know what would happen if the US tried to invade Russia to stop terrorism? More people would die in a shorter period than ever before in human history.



I didn't say invade Russia farktard. I said "whatever it takes." That includes negotation of various sorts, economic pressure whatever.
 
2004-12-31 10:44:48 PM  
BillCosby:

BillCosby

Halfmast Trousers:

2004-12-31 10:15:24 PM Halfmast Trousers [TotalFark]

The UN doesnt legislate anything. The UN has no authority beyond that given to it by the Security Council on a case by case basis. The UN has no army or constituents.

Railing against the UN is like beating up a retard. Fun yes, but pointless.


Right you are. Time for a reassessment of who gets to be on the "Security Council," I'm thinking. France seems to be constantly present, though their very present is an accident of geography (big size in Europe) and the fact that they were given some bit out of pity in postwar Europe even though they got trounced and haven't done a shiat to help the cause since then.

I'm thinking the new security council ought to include the US, Japan, India, Britain, Germany, maybe Canada, or some other countries that can break the European deadlock after working so hard to get themselves on the map. And honest democracies, as the term can best be defined, instead of some backwater totalitarian state. As for France, WFT? Where do they figure in anywhere?
 
2004-12-31 10:45:25 PM  
BillCosby

I'm very sorry, I'm not capable of reading your mind. If you post "whatever it takes" after someone else says "What exactly are we supposed to do about terrorism in Russia, Indonesia, and Iran? Invade?" it's obviously my fault I assumed you meant war.

BTW, calling me a farktard sure does make your point more clear, asshat.

Sidi

A conventional war against Russia would be more successful than past attempts, but I wouldn't bet too much on everybody keeping their finger off the "button".

Even now that the cold war is over, a war between Russia and the USA would go nuclear pretty quickly.
 
2004-12-31 10:50:09 PM  
costermonger:

Ceph: But they don't. Most of the land is federally owned wildlife parks and preserves. In order for it to be private land, the government would have to sell the land.

That was sort of my point:P


Sorry, I missed your point. I offer you a poeticly peaceful beer of apology, good sir. ;)
 
2004-12-31 10:52:32 PM  
Halfmast Trousers: the new security council ought to include the US, Japan, India, Britain, Germany, maybe Canada

I agree that Germany should be on the UNSC in place of France, but I'm not so sure about Japan and Canada. Canada can get on the UNSC any time they want (African nations will do whatever they say), it's probably not neccesary to have Canada on permanently.

And you can't forget the PRC and Russia.. If those two nations aren't on board we can kiss the last thread of UN usefullness goodbye.
 
2004-12-31 10:53:43 PM  
Ceph don't feel bad, I was laying a trap for one of the rightwingers. I'll accept the beer though.

Cheers:P
 
2004-12-31 10:59:34 PM  
JabbaTheButt:

The liberal mind makes me laugh. It is completely without logic.
I dont care what liberals have to say. As always, history will prove that they are wrong about everything.


It seems that conservatives are usually on the losing side of history. They were against abolition in the 1850's, womens rights in the early 1900's, and civil rights in the 1950's. And they were mostly royalists in the late 1700's.
 
2004-12-31 11:00:05 PM  
funny, i dont remember any of these articals.
 
2004-12-31 11:01:51 PM  
costermonger:

Even now that the cold war is over, a war between Russia and the USA would go nuclear pretty quickly.

I think we maintain our nuclear missle stock in better condition than the Russians can. Their country is moving toward shambles and threads; they can't even maintain their naval fleet anymore, let alone grossly technical and dangerous super weapons. The US, on the other hand, can produce enough [fake] wealth out its ass to maintain and expand our nuclear arsenal very quickly and deploy them just as rapidly.

At this point, I don't think anyone would challenge us on that level. Even the countries like North Korea that likely have Nukes wouldn't use them. If the US were attacked, the president would have 100% support of congress and the public to nuke them to kingdom come. "Them before us."
 
2004-12-31 11:07:01 PM  
ceph
At this point, I don't think anyone would challenge us on that level. Even the countries like North Korea that likely have Nukes wouldn't use them. If the US were attacked, the president would have 100% support of congress and the public to nuke them to kingdom come. "Them before us."

And to think I use that same argument for the possibility that Saddam and Osama might have gotten together as grounds for taking out Iraq.
 
2004-12-31 11:12:44 PM  
You know what I just realized? The last political flamewar on FARK is going to be because of Arianna Huffington.

DEAR GOD NOOOOOOO!

Please FARKmins, greenlight something else. 49 mins and counting!!!

Invade Iran!
Kerry Sux!!
Clinton is better than Bush!!!
Food for Oil in Alaska Wildlife Refuge!!!!
 
2004-12-31 11:14:31 PM  
undernova {For those slamming Ms. Huffington: let's not forget where her words and thoughts are regularly published, versus where yours are currently appearing.}
.
Why? I am an educated man with my own life experiences, I just didn't happen to marry a millionair and then switch all my political views when I was looking for a bigger audience. I have a lot more of smart things to say than that vacuous biatch, and strangley enough so do many other farkers. (and thats not saying much)
 
2004-12-31 11:20:20 PM  
This chick makes America sound like one great big orgy of self-righteous redneck moral hypocrisy.

Oh wait.
 
2004-12-31 11:21:01 PM  
like her tax returns?
 
2004-12-31 11:21:09 PM  
BTW, the hypothetical is silly, why would there ever exist in the forseable future a reason for a war between the US and Russia. Let me make a bold prediction. After the USA starts to draw down its troops from Iraq sometime next year, we are going to experience a big wave of neoisoloationism, introspection, and a non-serious attitude about things in general. Anyone who has studied the way these things happen in waves will understand what I am talking about.
 
2004-12-31 11:23:21 PM  
hhhmmmm, a man calling americans "rednecks" and "hypocrits"
is this the pot calling the cronic weed?
 
2004-12-31 11:25:28 PM  
That frigid biatch is still seething about Arnold mopping the floor with her in the governor's race.

She is perhaps one of the most annoying pundits on TV.
 
2004-12-31 11:26:37 PM  
charmed1782:

So you think drilling for oil in a wildlife reserve is a good idea then, D_I_A?

Maybe we could somehow incorporate the animals into the actual drilling, you know, strap a barrel on their backs and have them lug the oil to the tankers?


Well, Huffington's got to have fuel for her personal jet somehow, doesn't she?
 
2004-12-31 11:37:35 PM  
Mmmm, I love the smell of political flamewars in the late evening.
 
2004-12-31 11:39:33 PM  
F. Scott Fitzpanarchy:

That frigid biatch is still seething about Arnold mopping the floor with her in the governor's race.

She is perhaps one of the most annoying pundits on TV.


Yea and Arnold's doing such a great farking job for what he trashed everyone else for. He can't balance shiat. The fact that economic girlie men was a successful political slogan shows just how big of doormat wish-I-had-a-dick's the women of this country have become.
 
2004-12-31 11:39:45 PM  
It should be "shiat that never should have happened"...but "A list of news we wish we could leave behind us" is close enough.

Everything she lists is a shame.
 
2004-12-31 11:40:25 PM  
I'd wager her more recent life experiences leave her in a slightly more qualified position to speak on some issues than most of us. That's a flawed argument system, anyway. The fact that I was in Iraq doesn't leave me more qualified to comment politically than you.

Sadly, I do believe your wave theory. We're not at rock bottom yet.
 
2004-12-31 11:55:30 PM  
Sorry, just came out of a coma from two years ago.

So, get me up to speed. Last I heard, Michael Moore was saying there was no proof Osama was behind the 9/11 attacks, and that an invasion of Afghanistan would be a hopeless quagmire, where the US could never win, and the refugees would pour out in unprecedented numbers.

And then something about weapons of mass destruction in Iraq, and how the poor Iraqi people had been deprived because the Oil for Food program just couldn't bring in the money they needed for survival....
 
2005-01-01 12:05:06 AM  
its not that I disagree with everything she says, I just think she is a gasbag, The talking heads I like to listen to the most lately is Charles Krauthammer, and that show with Ben Wattenberg. I find Juan Williams one of the few Liberals who I can stand anymore (can you guys please get a new bunch of cliches') O'Reilleys show is still interesting though he is the biggest narcissist in the country.
 
2005-01-01 12:51:26 AM  

I think every problem on that list could be solved with biodiesel.
 
2005-01-01 01:02:39 AM  
Ahhh, another year and another political flamewar.

Thank God for Republicans. Because the world needs shallow, gullible, stupid people too.
 
2005-01-01 01:28:38 AM  
The more people who see the truth, the more the extremists' supporters deny reality. Ahh, another year, another round of fascism....
 
2005-01-01 01:54:44 AM  
Saying we shouldn't drill ANWR is just like the stupid faulty reasoning from people who say we shouldn't promote birth control because it might promote sex, abstinence is all we can teach!!

Yeah we shouldn't drill ANWR cuz..cuz..we should be spending all the money and resources developing alternative fuels!!!

Get a clue, people. The oil has to come from somewhere. WAIT i have an idea lets not have american jobs, lets not have the oil drilled using safe environmental practices!!! While your off whining, the country will be buying oil from countries that couldn't give a fark about the environment...

Why don't you go read up on what the actual environmental impact of ANWR drilling would be. And no, greenpeace's website does not count. Go read some unbiased stuff. I bet you all wouldnt really flinch much at the thought of your city getting a new airport on it's outskirts would you? You'd all be saying "yay, about time blah blah..." Well the area affected by ANWR drilling would be about the same as a decent sized airport. Except for the fact that they will build the roads in ANWR out of ice, so that the environmental inpact will be about nill. Not to mention the polar bears etc will be safer by the oil rigs than they will in Canada WHERE THEY ARE HUNTED FOR SPORT... you dumb farks... god... I have an idea.. how about we let some rural Alaskans tell you how to run your cities!!! Yeah...
 
2005-01-01 02:04:19 AM  
DuPuma: More people need to read 1984.
Orwell was a genious(...prophet?)

Getting here late on this one, but while I agree that Orwell's concept of Big Brother has some relevance for today (and he was a genius), I think Aldous Huxley hit nail firmly on head with Brave New World. Rather than having our will controlled by by the force of totalitarian power, we have willfully and joyfully ceded our will. We are amusing ourselves to death (thank you Neil Postman, RIP), smiling numbly and wired to the gills on Paxil, Wellbutrin and Prozac (Soma).
 
2005-01-01 03:04:56 AM  
TheChaz,

1) He didn't win in 2000 it was handed to him by the Supreme Court, or have you forgotten that?

Show me one recount that wasn't in Bush's favor. Only one will do. Good luck on that one.

2) Look at the records of voting fraud in Ohio, look at the shiatty broken machines (1 per precinct) in Dem areas of Ohio. Look at what the head of Diebold said.

2004 was stolen.


So was there a news story about this that broke and you are the only person that knew about it? You got any proof other than Democratic Underground or MoveOn.Org peanut? Show me proof that you are right and we can talk. Until then, I have ~ 130,000 slips of paper from Ohio that say you're wrong.

STFU asshole and drop dead you god forsaken douche!!

I think that says it all right there.
 
2005-01-01 03:43:58 AM  
Liberal dogma interspersed with obvious comments to make it look more credible.

In other news, it is only 3.40 am here and Tell Them I Hate Them has already won 'Most arrogant prick of the year award 2005'...it has to be a record.
 
2005-01-01 04:02:24 AM  
Does anyone give a rats ass what she has to say? If so, why?
Her opinion should be as about, no less, meaningful as mine, or yours.
 
2005-01-01 04:31:07 AM  
Dancin_In_Anson:

What an ignorant biatch:

"That of the roughly 550 enemy combatants held captive in Guantanamo Bay, only four have been formally charged."

Since when have POWs ever been charged with anything other than war crimes? (See Nuermburg)


I'm sad that only one Farker pointed out the logical fallicy in this argument and DIA never even bothered to refute it.

The government has stated that they are NOT POWs so they could get around all the rules that involve holding POWs.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/2383287.stm - The request of some prisoners to be considered POW so they'd fall under the Geneva Convention

http://www.cbc.ca/story/world/national/2004/11/08/guantanamo041108.html - CBC story about a judge calling for the US to say that a prisoner in Guantanamo is NOT a POW

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Camp_X-Ray - Wikipedia's entry on the thing, which you are all welcome to edit as you see fit, but realise that your edits will be subject to revision as the greater world sees fit.

As an easy memory refresher, the CBC story mentions a phrase I'm sure we all remember, "enemy combatants". Those in Guantanamo are not being held as POW's, which would make the US adhere to the Geneve Convention, they're being held as "enemy combatants", which is a marketdroid phrase to make sure that they don't have to adhere to the convention.

DIA - that entire part of your initial post has been ruled null and void. POWs are entitled to all the rights granted under the Geneva Convention, and none of those behing held in Cuba have been given POW status, therefore making your comparison to POWs invalid.

Have a nice day.
 
2005-01-01 05:53:30 AM  
"marketdroid"... I like that.
 
2005-01-01 06:08:20 AM  
being held as "enemy combatants", which is a marketdroid phrase to make sure that they don't have to adhere to the convention.

Remember back on Sept. 12th, 2001 when we were asking why they hated us. Ah to be that innocent again.
 
2005-01-01 06:35:18 AM  
Ah, another year of Republicans killing the messenger.

Happy 2005, everyone.
 
jre
2005-01-01 07:43:50 AM  
helix400:
Wow. Just wow. We should know better than those who live there how to use the land? They're too ignorant to know better? Wow, that had to be one of the snootiest, condescending answers I've ever heard

Kinda like how those New Yawk libruls who voted Kerry don't have the right idea on who's best to fight terrorism - Jethro in 'Bama knows best.
 
jre
2005-01-01 07:56:17 AM  
CrackeurJacque
How many more years or decades are you going to give W's economic policies to improve the economy?

NeoConservatism will work the same day Communism does.

The only difference is that Communism works in theory (in theory, Marge) but fails in practice, whereas NeoConservatism fails on both counts.
 
Displayed 50 of 207 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | » | Last | Show all



This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report