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.

(Talking Points Memo)   A full list of everything that went wrong at the RNC   (2012.talkingpointsmemo.com) divider line 290
    More: Florida, RNC, limping, roll call vote, bright spot, Tampa, Ann Romney, vice presidential candidate, Clint Eastwood  
•       •       •

6233 clicks; posted to Politics » on 31 Aug 2012 at 9:41 AM (1 year ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



290 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | » | Last | Show all
 
2012-08-31 03:58:56 PM

badaboom: Farker Soze: Have at it, Corky.

Wow, a joke about Down's syndrome. How sensitive of you. Would be pretty embarrassing if you knew I had brother with Down's who attends one of those special needs schools. But you go on with your superior self.


That brother is you, isn't it.
 
2012-08-31 04:00:31 PM

badaboom: Wish it was that simple to take money from Defense and put it toward education. Would be great if we did not have to spend a dime on war. Too bad everyone else is spending.


The US currently outspends the next ten countries combined on defense. You're saying we can't take half ow what we spend on defense and still be OK?
 
2012-08-31 04:01:41 PM

badaboom: Would be pretty embarrassing if you knew I had brother with Down's who attends one of those special needs schools.


Are they tailoring what kinds of crayons he's allowed to eat based on what state you happen to live in?
 
2012-08-31 04:04:04 PM

sprawl15: badaboom: Would be pretty embarrassing if you knew I had brother with Down's who attends one of those special needs schools.

Are they tailoring what kinds of crayons he's allowed to eat based on what state you happen to live in?

Farker Soze: Sure, I'll do that, Arnie.


Bet you love a good racist joke too. Must be the life of the party.
 
2012-08-31 04:10:51 PM
Another far left kook heard from.

webpages.charter.net
 
2012-08-31 04:25:37 PM

badaboom: sprawl15: badaboom: Would be pretty embarrassing if you knew I had brother with Down's who attends one of those special needs schools.

Are they tailoring what kinds of crayons he's allowed to eat based on what state you happen to live in?Farker Soze: Sure, I'll do that, Arnie.

Bet you love a good racist joke too. Must be the life of the party.


Oh, I got one, Lennie! A black presidential candidate and a white presidential candidate walk into a bar. The black candidate tries to order a drink, but the white candidate says no, you can't do that, if you want something done right you have to have a Real American do it. Hahahah, that silly negro, thinking he can do things! LOL
 
2012-08-31 04:37:03 PM
badaboom:

Wait, you want to be taken seriously?

Go back to ranting about evolution and how people from Utah need to learn a different history than people from Texas.
 
2012-08-31 04:40:48 PM

badaboom: cameroncrazy1984: badaboom: Yeah, that's it. You got me. Now tell me why you are voting for Obama.

1) PPACA
2) bin Laden
3) he plans to cut the deficit by using a sane strategy of raising taxes on the wealthy and cutting fraud and waste out of government.

See, when your candidate actually has a record worth noting and has articulated a plan for the future, it's very easy to answer that question.


Funny, cause 1 and 3 are actually the reasons why I am voting against him. And 2, well that's not a reason to elect someone is it? You do realize a Republican would have done the same exact thing. At least we can agree bin Laden being dead is a good thing. But hard to reconcile the whole drone, gitmo still open etc with the hard left. Which Obama is it? The Nobel Peace prize Obama or the America Fark, Yeah. Can't be both.


Both John McCain and Mitt Romney explicitly said in 2008 that they would not authorize a mission to get Bin Laden if he were found in Pakistan.
 
2012-08-31 04:59:30 PM

Farker Soze: badaboom: sprawl15: badaboom: Would be pretty embarrassing if you knew I had brother with Down's who attends one of those special needs schools.

Are they tailoring what kinds of crayons he's allowed to eat based on what state you happen to live in?Farker Soze: Sure, I'll do that, Arnie.

Bet you love a good racist joke too. Must be the life of the party.

Oh, I got one, Lennie! A black REPUBLICAN presidential candidate and a white DEMOCRATIC presidential candidate walk into a bar. The black candidate tries to order a drink, but the white candidate says no, you can't do that, if you want something done right you have to have a Real American do it. Hahahah, that silly negro, thinking he can do things! LOL



You need to be more specific to get the necessary chuckles. You left this up to interpretation. See, the Democrat is the racist in the above joke. Probably would not be funny at your dinner parties. Remember to be more specific.
 
2012-08-31 05:06:08 PM
You're being obtuse, Benny. Everyone knows that there will never be a black Republican nominee. The racist base won't have it. There is only so much suspension of disbelief you can throw into a joke without squashing the funny.
 
2012-08-31 05:08:41 PM

Farker Soze: You're being obtuse, Benny. Everyone knows that there will never be a black Republican nominee. The racist base won't have it. There is only so much suspension of disbelief you can throw into a joke without squashing the funny.


There all a bunch of Uncle Toms anyway right? Gullible tokens. You are right, how silly.
 
2012-08-31 05:18:31 PM

badaboom: You are right, how silly.


Damn right I am, Simple Jack. At least you're throttling back the retard.
 
2012-08-31 05:26:46 PM

cameroncrazy1984: badaboom: Wish it was that simple to take money from Defense and put it toward education. Would be great if we did not have to spend a dime on war. Too bad everyone else is spending.

The US currently outspends the next ten countries combined on defense. You're saying we can't take half ow what we spend on defense and still be OK?


Short answer: no we can't. Long answer...

It's extremely complicated. The first question is whether or not we change our global philosophy. Now, I'm a confessed (yet unapologetic) imperialist; I've said as much upthread, so my -personal- belief is that we can't afford to do that. Let's set that aside, however, and say that is a valid option. When we are no longer in the business of projecting global power and keeping sure the dollar is king (yes, keeping the dollar as the de facto global currency is as much a military matter as it is an economic one), then yes, we can start downscaling our military to a quarter of what it is.. maybe even less. The tradeoff becomes that we have a lot less leeway economically in maintaining our status as a global leader. I'm not saying it couldn't be done or that we'd become Canada overnight (no offense, Canada), but if not for the effects of our global power projection, the debt ceiling fiasco would've -destroyed- our country as we know it.

The second issue doesn't involve reducing the scale of our force, but rather its -cost-. This is something I would LOVE to see addressed but frankly I see as even less likely than changing global philosophy. I'm not even talking about human resources either.. hell, if anything we're getting soldiers at a damned -bargain-. Let's use a simplistic example: the good ol' Tomahawk missile - roughly a cool mil a pop. I want you to think for a moment -why- that missile costs $1 million each. Think about materials, manufacturing, etc., everything that goes into making one and why it adds up to a million. THAT is the issue here. Unfortunately, the bulk of the problem there lies in a self-serving Congress (all of it, this isn't a partisan issue at all) and really only one that can be self-corrected. In other words, as long as selfish assholes populate Congress, and as long as constituents that can't see he big picture keep voting them in, this will never change. Eisenhower was a damned prophet.

/I think I got a little rant-y there
 
2012-08-31 05:38:49 PM

Farker Soze: badaboom: You are right, how silly.

Damn right I am, Simple Jack. At least you're throttling back the retard.


Shame you don't realize that "retard" is as offensive as "ni**er". Probably a problem with your upbringing so I won't blame you.
 
2012-08-31 05:40:09 PM

cameroncrazy1984: badaboom: Wish it was that simple to take money from Defense and put it toward education. Would be great if we did not have to spend a dime on war. Too bad everyone else is spending.

The US currently outspends the next ten countries combined on defense. You're saying we can't take half ow what we spend on defense and still be OK?


No! Why, if we cut defense spending in half, do you know who would have the second largest Air Force in the world?

Oh. The US Navy.
 
2012-08-31 05:45:19 PM
Oh, boo hoo, I'm sorry I offended your delicate PC sensibilities, Karl.
 
2012-08-31 05:47:43 PM

Farker Soze: Oh, boo hoo, I'm sorry I offended your delicate PC sensibilities, Karl.


So you don't find the word retard to be offensive? How embarrassing.
 
2012-08-31 05:50:43 PM
Not as embarrassing as not being able to list one single policy reason why you like Romney, Radio.
 
2012-08-31 05:57:18 PM

Farker Soze: Not as embarrassing as not being able to list one single policy reason why you like Romney, Radio.


But you already know why I like him.
 
2012-08-31 06:05:47 PM

badaboom: Farker Soze: Not as embarrassing as not being able to list one single policy reason why you like Romney, Radio.

But you already know why I like him.


Yes, we know, generally: because you're retarded. But specifics, Raymond, specifics!
 
2012-08-31 06:14:23 PM

Farker Soze: badaboom: Farker Soze: Not as embarrassing as not being able to list one single policy reason why you like Romney, Radio.

But you already know why I like him.

Yes, we know, generally: because you're retarded. But specifics, Raymond, specifics!


You are getting there. There can only be a few reasons why someone would like Romney over Obama. Besides the intellectual deficiency you mention the only other reasons can be racism, homophobia, and a hatred for woman, right? Rank them in whatever order you wish.
 
2012-08-31 06:17:29 PM
Fark had MUCH better trolls last election cycle. They weren't as good as the trolls leading up to '04 and the '06 midterms, but that was an era of legendary trolling when they were at the top of their game. This election has been so weak on the troll front I actually miss Farkers like Czar and Snowflake, and the rest of the Legion of Derp. Hell, even a visit from Afternoon would be refreshing at this point.
 
2012-08-31 06:22:28 PM

badaboom: Rank them in whatever order you wish.


Damn, that's a hard task, Forrest. It varies and seems to change so often. For this month I'm going to go with hatred for women, then homophobia, then racism. Thanks for clearing that up.
 
2012-08-31 06:27:03 PM

pinchpoint: Fark had MUCH better trolls last election cycle. They weren't as good as the trolls leading up to '04 and the '06 midterms, but that was an era of legendary trolling when they were at the top of their game. This election has been so weak on the troll front I actually miss Farkers like Czar and Snowflake, and the rest of the Legion of Derp. Hell, even a visit from Afternoon would be refreshing at this point.


Ah, yes, McCain Democrat, the internet dentist, gary and winterwhile were in their prime... those were truly the golden days.
 
2012-08-31 06:28:53 PM

Farker Soze: badaboom: Rank them in whatever order you wish.

Damn, that's a hard task, Forrest. It varies and seems to change so often. For this month I'm going to go with hatred for women, then homophobia, then racism. Thanks for clearing that up.


Wouldn't want to disturb your myopic view of the world.
 
2012-08-31 06:33:07 PM

The Bestest: It's extremely complicated. The first question is whether or not we change our global philosophy. Now, I'm a confessed (yet unapologetic) imperialist; I've said as much upthread, so my -personal- belief is that we can't afford to do that. Let's set that aside, however, and say that is a valid option. When we are no longer in the business of projecting global power and keeping sure the dollar is king (yes, keeping the dollar as the de facto global currency is as much a military matter as it is an economic one), then yes, we can start downscaling our military to a quarter of what it is.. maybe even less. The tradeoff becomes that we have a lot less leeway economically in maintaining our status as a global leader. I'm not saying it couldn't be done or that we'd become Canada overnight (no offense, Canada), but if not for the effects of our global power projection, the debt ceiling fiasco would've -destroyed- our country as we know it.


You don't understand that we could cut our military spending half and still accomplish those goals. There is literally zero need for us to spend several orders of magnitude more than the next TEN countries combined. We can still be imperialists with half the military spending.
 
2012-08-31 06:36:46 PM

badaboom: Farker Soze: badaboom: Rank them in whatever order you wish.

Damn, that's a hard task, Forrest. It varies and seems to change so often. For this month I'm going to go with hatred for women, then homophobia, then racism. Thanks for clearing that up.

Wouldn't want to disturb your myopic view of the world.


No? You disagree, Warren? Is it hatred of women, racism, and then homophobia?
 
2012-08-31 06:41:20 PM

Farker Soze: badaboom: Farker Soze: badaboom: Rank them in whatever order you wish.

Damn, that's a hard task, Forrest. It varies and seems to change so often. For this month I'm going to go with hatred for women, then homophobia, then racism. Thanks for clearing that up.

Wouldn't want to disturb your myopic view of the world.

No? You disagree, Warren? Is it hatred of women, racism, and then homophobia?


I am just happy to confirm your beliefs. My good deed for the day.
 
2012-08-31 06:51:21 PM

badaboom: My good deed for the day.


careful there, you're going to get your Objectivism card confiscated, Sloth.
 
2012-08-31 07:04:30 PM

cameroncrazy1984: You don't understand that we could cut our military spending half and still accomplish those goals. There is literally zero need for us to spend several orders of magnitude more than the next TEN countries combined. We can still be imperialists with half the military spending.


Depends on what you mean. If you're saying we can maintain our level of projection while severely downscaling, I disagree. I currently think that while the scope of our military is large enough to achieve our global goals, it's only barely so with little wiggle room. A "surprise war" would severely strain us. I'm loathe to call Bin Laden an evil genius, but he definitely had an end game beyond killing a few thousand people, and he unfortunately largely succeeded due to the predictability of our response.

Now, if you're saying we should maintain our scope but "spend smarter, not spend more" I agree, but as I said, the difficulty therein relies on getting 500+ suits and ties on the same page and having a much, MUCH more streamlined procurement process.
 
2012-08-31 07:05:37 PM

Farker Soze: badaboom


get a room
 
2012-08-31 07:19:29 PM

The Bestest: Farker Soze: badaboom

get a room


Hey, I'm providing a valuable community service. If we can contain the derp to this played out thread, everyone wins.
 
2012-08-31 07:56:37 PM

The Bestest: Depends on what you mean. If you're saying we can maintain our level of projection while severely downscaling, I disagree. I currently think that while the scope of our military is large enough to achieve our global goals, it's only barely so with little wiggle room. A "surprise war" would severely strain us


Based on what evidence?
 
2012-08-31 08:54:48 PM

cameroncrazy1984: Based on what evidence?


Just look at Iraq and Afghanistan.. the multiple deployments. We were.. still are really, severely stretched in terms of both manpower and logistics. Now, I suppose you could make an argument about us spending on the "wrong" things (in terms of hardware) militarily, but again, that's primarily a Congressional issue.
 
2012-08-31 11:12:26 PM

badaboom: Wish it was that simple to take money from Defense and put it toward education. Would be great if we did not have to spend a dime on war. Too bad everyone else is spending. In my opinion, defense is one the primary responsibilities of the federal government. Nation building? Maybe not. But Education is best left to local and State.


Except that we're spending more than the next 20 nations (or more) combined. And you know, just know that there's lots of boondoggles and unaccounted for money in the DoD budget. Sure, you might get a group of teachers partying up in Las Vegas after a convention or something, but those behaviors pales by several orders of magnitude to the excess and spending that goes on with DoD procurement. The MIC also has a habit of making things wrong. That's because most of their bids are cost-plus, meaning they only profit on the plus part. So, in order to gain more profit, they make sure their cost is as high as possible by adding a lot of bells and whistle. Then, they make sure that none or few of those things work on first pass. That then requires second pass, multiple testing and so on, all of which just drains the money away.

Eisenhower was right in that we should have been careful with the military-industrial complex. We ignored that warning and that's how we have a $1T "national security" black hole.

Lastly, you mentioned that "defense" is a primary role of the US Government, which is correct, as it's in the constitution. But how we conduct this defense is not detailed in the constitution. I say having an educated workforce, having valuable and valued citizens creating goods and services and generating wealth is a great defense to the country. No country would want to attack a country that is lifting all other countries with innovative technology or leading-edge arts, science, business methodology, legal scholarship and the like.

And frankly, traditional "people-killing-people" wars are over. No one does them anymore except for a few regional skirmishes (like currently in Syria and other similar places). One nation boldly attacking another? I think we've shown the world the futility of doing so with the Iraq II/Afghanistan double-bill matinee show. It's impossible now for a country, even one as large as China, to take over and administer another country by force. It's so much easier, cheaper and politically safer to use legal contracts and quasi-legal espionage to accomplish the same goals.
 
2012-08-31 11:15:54 PM

badaboom: sprawl15: badaboom: But Education is best left to local and State.

Problem is, our society is more connected than ever before. This statement made perfect sense way back in the day when there were no common curricula and students rarely left their local area.

Nowadays, there's a vested national interest in general education.

There may be common goals, but from an efficiency standpoint, sending dollars to DC for this is often a waste. Plus you get things like no child left behind. Plus what works in Texas may not work in Oregon.


But you need a national standard to some degree so that when a family moves from Texas to Oregon, there would be some expectation of what will be covered and what were required to take on the grade that a student is placed into. If Texas does nothing but teach creationism garbage and the person goes to Oregon and have no concept of an earth that's more than 7000 years old, that kid is going to be left behind.
 
2012-08-31 11:57:11 PM

The Bestest: cameroncrazy1984: Based on what evidence?

Just look at Iraq and Afghanistan.. the multiple deployments. We were.. still are really, severely stretched in terms of both manpower and logistics. Now, I suppose you could make an argument about us spending on the "wrong" things (in terms of hardware) militarily, but again, that's primarily a Congressional issue.


Correct. It's not a monetary issue as you have been implying. If we were to put the emphasis on effectiveness rather than expense, we could spend a hell of a lot less money and be no less safe and no less imperial than we are now.
 
2012-09-01 12:57:16 AM

DeaH: FTA: "the emergence of Ann Romney as a beloved national figure"

This is from TMP? Who thinks of this woman as America's sweetheart? That is setting a low bar for the meanings of both "national figure" and "beloved."


She owns a dancing horse. What's not to love?
 
2012-09-01 01:07:12 AM

badaboom: Oh and Fartbama had the Senate AND the House and couldn't get anything done.




Sigh
 
2012-09-01 01:26:12 PM
badaboom: COME ON OBAMA!! Run on your record. Please?

i.imgur.com

Yeah?
 
Displayed 40 of 290 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report