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.

(Deadline)   Group plans "Million Muppet March" in Washington D.C. to protest Mitt Romney's threats to take funding away from PBS   (deadline.com) divider line 253
    More: Amusing, Group Plan, Washington DC, Jim Lehrer, Sesame Workshop, Big Bird, taxpayer money, PBS, objections  
•       •       •

3545 clicks; posted to Main » on 13 Oct 2012 at 11:59 AM (2 years ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



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

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | » | Last | Show all
 
2012-10-13 04:59:00 PM  

jvl: Without Government funding, how will my local PBS station afford to make programs by Deepak Chopra that explain how the universe really works?


Same way as you pay your whores. With 20s.
 
2012-10-13 04:59:38 PM  

Fart_Machine: jjorsett: This is pretty ironic, considering that Big Bird is one of the 1%.

I hate to tell you this but Big Bird is a factional character.


A tribal faction at that.
 
2012-10-13 05:06:46 PM  
 
2012-10-13 05:08:59 PM  

BullBearMS: Keizer_Ghidorah: Not sure how Obama has "hiked them all up to eleven"

Indefinite Detention:

Obama first announcing his plan for Indefinite Detention only weeks after taking office.

A radical new claim of Presidential power that is not afforded by the Constitution and that has never been attempted in American history, even by George W. Bush and Dick Cheney.

Obama still fighting for Indefinite Detention today.

Lawyers for the Obama administration are arguing that the United States will be irreparably harmed if it has to abide by a judge's ruling that it can no longer hold terrorism suspects indefinitely without trial in military custody.


Yes, so let's all make sure Romney gets in office.
 
2012-10-13 05:20:17 PM  

Keizer_Ghidorah: Not sure how Obama has "hiked them all up to eleven"


Spying on Americans:

The Obama administration is urging the Supreme Court to halt a legal challenge weighing the constitutionality of a once-secret warrantless surveillance program targeting Americans' communications that Congress eventually legalized in 2008.

and

The Obama administration is urging the Supreme Court to allow the government, without a court warrant, to affix GPS devices on suspects' vehicles to track their every move.

and

The Obama administration will tell federal judges in New Orleans today that warrantless tracking of the location of Americans' mobile devices is perfectly legal.

and

The Obama administration is urging Congress not to adopt legislation that would impose constitutional safeguards on Americans' e-mail stored in the cloud.

and

For more than two years, a handful of Democrats on the Senate intelligence committee have warned that the government is secretly interpreting its surveillance powers under the Patriot Act in a way that would be alarming if the public - or even others in Congress - knew about it.

and

When Congress immunized telecoms last August for their illegal participation in Bush's warrantless eavesdropping program, Senate Democratic apologists for telecom immunity repeatedly justified that action by pointing out that Bush officials who broke the law were not immunized - only the telecoms. Here, for instance, is how Sen. Jay Rockefeller justified telecom immunity in a Washington Post Op-Ed:

Second, lawsuits against the government can go forward. There is little doubt that the government was operating in, at best, a legal gray area. If administration officials abused their power or improperly violated the privacy of innocent people, they must be held accountable. That is exactly why we rejected the White House's year-long push for blanket immunity covering government officials.

Taking them at their word, EFF - which was the lead counsel in the lawsuits against the telecoms - thereafter filed suit, in October, 2008, against the Bush administration and various Bush officials for illegally spying on the communications of Americans. They were seeking to make good on the promise made by Congressional Democrats: namely, that even though lawsuits against telecoms for illegal spying will not be allowed any longer, government officials who broke the law can still be held accountable.

But late Friday afternoon, the Obama DOJ filed the government's Weeners to EFF's lawsuit (.pdf), the first of its kind to seek damages against government officials under FISA, the Wiretap Act and other statutes, arising out of Bush's NSA program. But the Obama DOJ demanded dismissal of the entire lawsuit based on (1) its Bush-mimicking claim that the "state secrets" privilege bars any lawsuits against the Bush administration for illegal spying, and (2) a brand new "sovereign immunity" claim of breathtaking scope - never before advanced even by the Bush administration - that the Patriot Act bars any lawsuits of any kind for illegal government surveillance unless there is "willful disclosure" of the illegally intercepted communications.

In other words, beyond even the outrageously broad "state secrets" privilege invented by the Bush administration and now embraced fully by the Obama administration, the Obama DOJ has now invented a brand new claim of government immunity, one which literally asserts that the U.S. Government is free to intercept all of your communications (calls, emails and the like) and - even if what they're doing is blatantly illegal and they know it's illegal - you are barred from suing them unless they "willfully disclose" to the public what they have learned.
 
2012-10-13 05:22:12 PM  

Fark_Guy_Rob: Guys are making 300k a year to move their hands inside a puppet.


The only puppet people should be concerned about is the President. No matter which side wins, he's still a puppet, as is most of the government you think you elected.

Big Bird is probably more in control of Sesame Street than any President is of the nation.
 
2012-10-13 05:22:37 PM  

BullBearMS: Keizer_Ghidorah: Not sure how Obama has "hiked them all up to eleven"

Spying on Americans:

The Obama administration is urging the Supreme Court to halt a legal challenge weighing the constitutionality of a once-secret warrantless surveillance program targeting Americans' communications that Congress eventually legalized in 2008.
......


Right, so let's do whatever we can to make sure R-Money gets the chance to start a third Republican war.
 
2012-10-13 05:24:53 PM  

gimmegimme: BullBearMS: Keizer_Ghidorah: Not sure how Obama has "hiked them all up to eleven"

Indefinite Detention:

Obama first announcing his plan for Indefinite Detention only weeks after taking office.

A radical new claim of Presidential power that is not afforded by the Constitution and that has never been attempted in American history, even by George W. Bush and Dick Cheney.

Obama still fighting for Indefinite Detention today.

Lawyers for the Obama administration are arguing that the United States will be irreparably harmed if it has to abide by a judge's ruling that it can no longer hold terrorism suspects indefinitely without trial in military custody.

Yes, so let's all make sure Romney gets in office.


yeah because a totally farked up civil rights country can only be helped by being totally farked up economically too.

and if yours was sarcasm, sorry. as much as i hate where we are with civil rights and the war on terrortm adding economic suicide doesn't help.
 
2012-10-13 05:26:03 PM  

OscarTamerz: Democrats and muppets, two groups equally used to having somebody's arm up their asses controlling their every movement.

[images1.wikia.nocookie.net image 300x295]


From the way you talk in the "us vs. them" point of view, I'd say it's YOU (and everyone else who believes there's really a system in place for us to elect leaders) who has been controlled by the puppeteers.

The puppeteers have been in control for a long time, and you all wave your hands at each other and stomp around angrily on cue when they pull your strings.
 
2012-10-13 05:26:09 PM  
So we have everything else taken care of now, we have time for this?
 
2012-10-13 05:26:43 PM  

gimmegimme: BullBearMS: Keizer_Ghidorah: Not sure how Obama has "hiked them all up to eleven"

Spying on Americans:

The Obama administration is urging the Supreme Court to halt a legal challenge weighing the constitutionality of a once-secret warrantless surveillance program targeting Americans' communications that Congress eventually legalized in 2008.
......

Right, so let's do whatever we can to make sure R-Money gets the chance to start a third Republican war.



www.addictinginfo.org

THIS TIME, WITH RUSSIA HAR HYARR
 
2012-10-13 05:27:20 PM  

Curious: gimmegimme: BullBearMS: Keizer_Ghidorah: Not sure how Obama has "hiked them all up to eleven"

Indefinite Detention:

Obama first announcing his plan for Indefinite Detention only weeks after taking office.

A radical new claim of Presidential power that is not afforded by the Constitution and that has never been attempted in American history, even by George W. Bush and Dick Cheney.

Obama still fighting for Indefinite Detention today.

Lawyers for the Obama administration are arguing that the United States will be irreparably harmed if it has to abide by a judge's ruling that it can no longer hold terrorism suspects indefinitely without trial in military custody.

Yes, so let's all make sure Romney gets in office.

yeah because a totally farked up civil rights country can only be helped by being totally farked up economically too.

and if yours was sarcasm, sorry. as much as i hate where we are with civil rights and the war on terrortm adding economic suicide doesn't help.


No worries; I'm repeatedly pointing out to BullBear that his attitude is counterproductive. We all agree that our two-party system has problems, but we can't hand the keys to sociopaths who have outward contempt for our country and our system of government and want to facilitate Armageddon.
 
2012-10-13 05:27:30 PM  

Curious: gimmegimme: BullBearMS: Keizer_Ghidorah: Not sure how Obama has "hiked them all up to eleven"

Indefinite Detention:

Obama first announcing his plan for Indefinite Detention only weeks after taking office.

A radical new claim of Presidential power that is not afforded by the Constitution and that has never been attempted in American history, even by George W. Bush and Dick Cheney.

Obama still fighting for Indefinite Detention today.

Lawyers for the Obama administration are arguing that the United States will be irreparably harmed if it has to abide by a judge's ruling that it can no longer hold terrorism suspects indefinitely without trial in military custody.

Yes, so let's all make sure Romney gets in office.

yeah because a totally farked up civil rights country can only be helped by being totally farked up economically too.

and if yours was sarcasm, sorry. as much as i hate where we are with civil rights and the war on terrortm adding economic suicide doesn't help.


So Obama protecting the fraudulent bankers who destroyed our economy from the legal and fiscal consequences of actions is just what we all needed?

That's going to keep them from doing it again?

Oh, wait. It's just going to make it more likely.
 
2012-10-13 05:29:18 PM  

BullBearMS: Curious: gimmegimme: BullBearMS: Keizer_Ghidorah: Not sure how Obama has "hiked them all up to eleven"

Indefinite Detention:

Obama first announcing his plan for Indefinite Detention only weeks after taking office.

A radical new claim of Presidential power that is not afforded by the Constitution and that has never been attempted in American history, even by George W. Bush and Dick Cheney.

Obama still fighting for Indefinite Detention today.

Lawyers for the Obama administration are arguing that the United States will be irreparably harmed if it has to abide by a judge's ruling that it can no longer hold terrorism suspects indefinitely without trial in military custody.

Yes, so let's all make sure Romney gets in office.

yeah because a totally farked up civil rights country can only be helped by being totally farked up economically too.

and if yours was sarcasm, sorry. as much as i hate where we are with civil rights and the war on terrortm adding economic suicide doesn't help.

So Obama protecting the fraudulent bankers who destroyed our economy from the legal and fiscal consequences of actions is just what we all needed?

That's going to keep them from doing it again?

Oh, wait. It's just going to make it more likely.


So who should I vote for then?

And don't be vague and say "anyone but Obama". I want an actually breathing human being to vote for.
 
2012-10-13 05:30:05 PM  

Funbags: No kids, so I don't really have a dog in this race, but if Sesame Workshop didn't get their annual $7 million dollar subsidy, they would just shut down? They couldn't find a sponsor(s) interested in marketing to an impressionable demo that never changes the channel?

I guess that's why networks like Nickelodeon and Disney are so unprofitable.


PBS's programs are intended to educate, not just entertain? Spongebob and Disney exist to sell toys and and videos; they do nothing for literacy or early childhood development.
 
2012-10-13 05:30:33 PM  

BullBearMS: Curious: gimmegimme: BullBearMS: Keizer_Ghidorah: Not sure how Obama has "hiked them all up to eleven"

Indefinite Detention:

Obama first announcing his plan for Indefinite Detention only weeks after taking office.

A radical new claim of Presidential power that is not afforded by the Constitution and that has never been attempted in American history, even by George W. Bush and Dick Cheney.

Obama still fighting for Indefinite Detention today.

Lawyers for the Obama administration are arguing that the United States will be irreparably harmed if it has to abide by a judge's ruling that it can no longer hold terrorism suspects indefinitely without trial in military custody.

Yes, so let's all make sure Romney gets in office.

yeah because a totally farked up civil rights country can only be helped by being totally farked up economically too.

and if yours was sarcasm, sorry. as much as i hate where we are with civil rights and the war on terrortm adding economic suicide doesn't help.

So Obama protecting the fraudulent bankers who destroyed our economy from the legal and fiscal consequences of actions is just what we all needed?

That's going to keep them from doing it again?

Oh, wait. It's just going to make it more likely.


Good point. We should suck away enthusiasm for Obama because R-Money will crack the whip on those bankers.
 
2012-10-13 05:31:57 PM  

BullBearMS: gimmegimme: BSABSVR is what you're advocating.

No. No it's not.

Both parties favor endless war. I do not.

Both parties favor protecting the fraudulent bankers who destroyed the economy. I do not.

Both parties favor the free trade agreements that have allowed the obscenely wealthy to move the manufacturing jobs to nations where they can pay slave labor wages and ignore environmental regulations without a financial penalty when they bring those goods back into the US. I do not.

Both parties favor the retarded drug war. I do not.

Both sides are bad, so stop voting for both of them.

[dl.dropbox.com image 515x320]


You are at least somewhat close to the truth. Of course, the lack of real choice is exactly what is desired by the true powers-that-be. They want people to be occupied with the "us-vs-them" arguments, the social debating, the whining, and all the garbage the news and politicians can throw out there to entertain the masses. Meanwhile, the system-- the WORLD-- keeps working the way it always has, with the exact same people still in charge and making everything happen the way they intended it to.

Illusion of choice, indeed. And the thing is, the candidate you think is better? He/She/It is no choice, either. If they're sincere, then there's no way they will be selected by those who actually determine our "leaders", and even if they were picked, they wouldn't have any power anyway. The Presidency is a lie. Politicians are essentially actors being paid big bucks to make it look like they're doing something, when in fact they're just publicly debating and rubber-stamping the laws, rules, and moves that were decided for them by their taskmasters.

We do not live in a democracy. We do not even live in a democratic republic. This is a plutocracy, as is the rest of the world, and it's been that way for longer than any of us have been alive.

The sooner you accept that, the sooner you can get on with your life and stop arguing with "the other side" about minor, exceptionally stupid differences in personal philosophy.
 
2012-10-13 05:33:33 PM  

gimmegimme: Good point. We should suck away enthusiasm for Obama because R-Money will crack the whip on those bankers.


You're just going to invite yet another blue wall of text that accomplishes nothing.
 
2012-10-13 05:33:57 PM  

gimmegimme: Good point. We should suck away enthusiasm for Obama because R-Money will crack the whip on those bankers.


Oh look. Both sides are bad, so vote Democrat. How original.
 
2012-10-13 05:34:32 PM  

gimmegimme: BullBearMS: Curious: gimmegimme: BullBearMS: Keizer_Ghidorah: Not sure how Obama has "hiked them all up to eleven"

Indefinite Detention:

Obama first announcing his plan for Indefinite Detention only weeks after taking office.

A radical new claim of Presidential power that is not afforded by the Constitution and that has never been attempted in American history, even by George W. Bush and Dick Cheney.

Obama still fighting for Indefinite Detention today.

Lawyers for the Obama administration are arguing that the United States will be irreparably harmed if it has to abide by a judge's ruling that it can no longer hold terrorism suspects indefinitely without trial in military custody.

Yes, so let's all make sure Romney gets in office.

yeah because a totally farked up civil rights country can only be helped by being totally farked up economically too.

and if yours was sarcasm, sorry. as much as i hate where we are with civil rights and the war on terrortm adding economic suicide doesn't help.

So Obama protecting the fraudulent bankers who destroyed our economy from the legal and fiscal consequences of actions is just what we all needed?

That's going to keep them from doing it again?

Oh, wait. It's just going to make it more likely.

Good point. We should suck away enthusiasm for Obama because R-Money will crack the whip on those bankers.


He's one of those "So vote third party" without actually specifying which third party candidate to vote for.

Unless all the disgruntled Democrats/Republicans unify to form a united third party, nothing will change.

/My two cents on the whole third party thing
 
2012-10-13 05:35:15 PM  

BullBearMS: gimmegimme: Good point. We should suck away enthusiasm for Obama because R-Money will crack the whip on those bankers.

Oh look. Both sides are bad, so vote Democrat. How original.


So who should we vote for then?

/still waiting for an answer from you
 
2012-10-13 05:36:35 PM  

ZeroCorpse: You are at least somewhat close to the truth. Of course, the lack of real choice is exactly what is desired by the true powers-that-be. They want people to be occupied with the "us-vs-them" arguments, the social debating, the whining, and all the garbage the news and politicians can throw out there to entertain the masses. Meanwhile, the system-- the WORLD-- keeps working the way it always has, with the exact same people still in charge and making everything happen the way they intended it to.

Illusion of choice, indeed. And the thing is, the candidate you think is better? He/She/It is no choice, either. If they're sincere, then there's no way they will be selected by those who actually determine our "leaders", and even if they were picked, they wouldn't have any power anyway. The Presidency is a lie. Politicians are essentially actors being paid big bucks to make it look like they're doing something, when in fact they're just publicly debating and rubber-stamping the laws, rules, and moves that were decided for them by their taskmasters.

We do not live in a democracy. We do not even live in a democratic republic. This is a plutocracy, as is the rest of the world, and it's been that way for longer than any of us have been alive.

The sooner you accept that, the sooner you can get on with your life and stop arguing with "the other side" about minor, exceptionally stupid differences in personal philosophy.


2.bp.blogspot.com

I'm Mitt Romney and I approve this message.
 
2012-10-13 05:38:32 PM  

ZeroCorpse: This is a plutocracy


I agree wholeheartedly.

ZeroCorpse: minor, exceptionally stupid differences in personal philosophy


The rule of law is hardly a minor philosophy.

Indefinite detention in military prisons without a trial until the end of the "war on terror" is well worth speaking out against.
 
2012-10-13 05:39:17 PM  

thamike: legion_of_doo: Romney might kill Sesame Street, but Obama already killed NASA.

Oh, yeah, NASA's really suffering right now. 0.5% of the federal budget (down by about 1 tenth of a percent from 2001) and mean old Obama refocused it for things like Mars exploration and the Orion MPCV. Just look at the team at NASA Jet Propulsion laboratory. They are obviously miserable.

[www.csmonitor.com image 600x400]

F*cking ZeroFartBongo, that traitor.


Why aren't there any the brothers in that picture?
 
2012-10-13 05:39:59 PM  

Mrtraveler01: BullBearMS: Curious: gimmegimme: BullBearMS: Keizer_Ghidorah: Not sure how Obama has "hiked them all up to eleven"

Indefinite Detention:

Obama first announcing his plan for Indefinite Detention only weeks after taking office.

A radical new claim of Presidential power that is not afforded by the Constitution and that has never been attempted in American history, even by George W. Bush and Dick Cheney.

Obama still fighting for Indefinite Detention today.

Lawyers for the Obama administration are arguing that the United States will be irreparably harmed if it has to abide by a judge's ruling that it can no longer hold terrorism suspects indefinitely without trial in military custody.

Yes, so let's all make sure Romney gets in office.

yeah because a totally farked up civil rights country can only be helped by being totally farked up economically too.

and if yours was sarcasm, sorry. as much as i hate where we are with civil rights and the war on terrortm adding economic suicide doesn't help.

So Obama protecting the fraudulent bankers who destroyed our economy from the legal and fiscal consequences of actions is just what we all needed?

That's going to keep them from doing it again?

Oh, wait. It's just going to make it more likely.

So who should I vote for then?

And don't be vague and say "anyone but Obama". I want an actually breathing human being to vote for.


WHY?

Why is it so important that you feel like you're "doing something" or at all involved in the selection of our leaders... Even when it's certain that your vote is about as useful as a propeller on a condom?

The fact is that no matter who you "vote" for, the people in charge will select the person who best achieves their goals of distracting you from what they are doing in the background.

You're worried about voting for which big, green face the Wizard of Oz projects on the screen, and not even considering that you can't get rid of the actual Wizard behind the curtain. Nor would you want to, because if you did the world would fall apart.

Go vote for Obama. Or for Romney. Or for a chair. Or for a squirrel named "Nutty" for all I care... but I'm telling you, it doesn't mean shiat. It's just an action they allow you to mimic in order to feel like you have some control over the results.

The role has been cast. You're just calling in votes on the reality show, now.
 
2012-10-13 05:42:14 PM  
Holy balls, this is stupid.
 
2012-10-13 05:44:27 PM  
dl.dropbox.com
 
2012-10-13 05:44:31 PM  

thamike: Holy balls, this is stupid.


No, no. I think that BullBear and ZeroCorpse are making good points. Think about the 2000 election. We would be in the EXACT SAME PLACE had Kerry won the Supreme Court Election. Right? It doesn't matter who sits in the chair.
 
2012-10-13 05:47:01 PM  

Whodat: If PBS can't live of the licensing of the Sesame Street characters etc. they have horrible business sense. BTW, Caroll Spinney makes about $314000 a year. Big Bird is very close to being a "1%er".


You know how I know that you have no clue whatsoever about the difference between CTW and PBS?
 
2012-10-13 05:47:21 PM  

BullBearMS: [dl.dropbox.com image 421x543]


We're still waiting for you to provide some concrete path to success.
 
2012-10-13 05:48:03 PM  

BullBearMS: ZeroCorpse: This is a plutocracy

I agree wholeheartedly.

ZeroCorpse: minor, exceptionally stupid differences in personal philosophy

The rule of law is hardly a minor philosophy.

Indefinite detention in military prisons without a trial until the end of the "war on terror" is well worth speaking out against.


You're not getting me.

No matter WHO you vote for, the results are the same: The will of the people who are really in charge. The plutocrats. The guys who have been pulling the strings for at least a few hundred-- if not a few thousand-- years.

So all this worry about detention without trial, or rule of law is sort of pointless. Whatever you do, you aren't going to change it. You can debate it all you want-- That's your right (for now). But the debate is essentially useless because the people in charge will make the moves they want to make, whether it's Romney or Obama or Dick the Wonder Turtle in the White House. Sure, the person they select has some public responsibilities, and will have some minor effect on the way things turn out, but ultimately the President is powerless in the face of his masters.

And Presidents who don't play their role the way they're supposed to? They end up being written out of the plans. We've seen it before. We'll see it again.

So get your honest, decent man in the White House. Go ahead. Get a man who will turn against the guys who are really in charge, and he will end up underground before his term is up, and someone will take his place to return it to the status quo, and life in the world will continue EXACTLY the way the powers-that-be WANT it to.

You have free will, but unless you and a billion other people rise up against the guys in charge (and I don't mean national governments, either), nothing will ever change unless they decide it changes.

Bleak? Sure.

Deal with it, because that's the way it really is.
 
2012-10-13 05:48:07 PM  

gimmegimme: thamike: Holy balls, this is stupid.

No, no. I think that BullBear and ZeroCorpse are making good points. Think about the 2000 election. We would be in the EXACT SAME PLACE had Kerry won the Supreme Court Election. Right? It doesn't matter who sits in the chair.


Right. Because when Obama said he would "fix the economy" what he really meant was protect those who destroyed it from prosecution!
 
2012-10-13 05:48:17 PM  

Diogenes: It obscures the larger issue that you can't pay for his tax plan by fishing through the national couch cushions for loose change.


The problem comes from having people in office that think you "pay" for a tax plan. If they thought about taxes as "revenue" instead of "spending" and then spent just what was brought in, things would be much better.
 
2012-10-13 05:51:17 PM  

BullBearMS: gimmegimme: thamike: Holy balls, this is stupid.

No, no. I think that BullBear and ZeroCorpse are making good points. Think about the 2000 election. We would be in the EXACT SAME PLACE had Kerry won the Supreme Court Election. Right? It doesn't matter who sits in the chair.

Right. Because when Obama said he would "fix the economy" what he really meant was protect those who destroyed it from prosecution!


Are you really saying that Bush and Gore would have had the same exact reaction to 9/11? Are you really implying that the two men would have pushed for the same deregulation that led to the Bush Recession?

Benjimin_Dover: Diogenes: It obscures the larger issue that you can't pay for his tax plan by fishing through the national couch cushions for loose change.

The problem comes from having people in office that think you "pay" for a tax plan. If they thought about taxes as "revenue" instead of "spending" and then spent just what was brought in, things would be much better.


He's right. It's not as though government has planned its expenditures far into the future. You can just call up Wal-Mart and order one of the next-generation aircraft carriers they're advertising on their web site.
 
2012-10-13 05:53:08 PM  

ZeroCorpse: No matter WHO you vote for, the results are the same: The will of the people who are really in charge. The plutocrats. The guys who have been pulling the strings for at least a few hundred-- if not a few thousand-- years.

So all this worry about detention without trial, or rule of law is sort of pointless. Whatever you do, you aren't going to change it. You can debate it all you want-- That's your right (for now). But the debate is essentially useless because the people in charge will make the moves they want to make, whether it's Romney or Obama or Dick the Wonder Turtle in the White House. Sure, the person they select has some public responsibilities, and will have some minor effect on the way things turn out, but ultimately the President is powerless in the face of his masters.


That kind of ignores the Progressives who took back the nation from Plutocratic control during the Guilded Age.

It can be done.

it has been done.

Unfortunately, we did not learn the lesson of history, so now we are doomed to repeat it.
 
2012-10-13 05:53:35 PM  

gimmegimme: BullBearMS: [dl.dropbox.com image 421x543]

We're still waiting for you to provide some concrete path to success.


I'm sure he was an American Extremist cartoon for that. 

What it really comes down to is just biatching that everyone isn't as cool and "with it" political as they are. I'd be more than happy to vote for a third party if there was a viable one, but there isn't a viable one and so it really would just be a waste of a vote.

So which third party candidate should we all unite behind?
 
2012-10-13 05:53:55 PM  

gimmegimme: thamike: Holy balls, this is stupid.

No, no. I think that BullBear and ZeroCorpse are making good points. Think about the 2000 election. We would be in the EXACT SAME PLACE had Kerry won the Supreme Court Election. Right? It doesn't matter who sits in the chair.


I think you're working under the premise that we have any control over who becomes President. We don't. Kerry "lost" because Kerry was never supposed to be in the White House. He was selected as the special guest co-star for the election reality show. Bush was the guy They wanted, and so Bush was put back in place... And it's not as if it matters, because he was as much a puppet as anyone else.

The agenda that came about under Bush was trickled down from people far more powerful than him. If Kerry had been selected by Them, then the agenda would have been similar but with a different form of delivery to make it palatable to the other half of society.
 
2012-10-13 05:54:52 PM  

BullBearMS: Guilded Age.

Gilded Age
 
2012-10-13 05:56:05 PM  

BullBearMS: ZeroCorpse: No matter WHO you vote for, the results are the same: The will of the people who are really in charge. The plutocrats. The guys who have been pulling the strings for at least a few hundred-- if not a few thousand-- years.

So all this worry about detention without trial, or rule of law is sort of pointless. Whatever you do, you aren't going to change it. You can debate it all you want-- That's your right (for now). But the debate is essentially useless because the people in charge will make the moves they want to make, whether it's Romney or Obama or Dick the Wonder Turtle in the White House. Sure, the person they select has some public responsibilities, and will have some minor effect on the way things turn out, but ultimately the President is powerless in the face of his masters.

That kind of ignores the Progressives who took back the nation from Plutocratic control during the Guilded Age.

It can be done.

it has been done.

Unfortunately, we did not learn the lesson of history, so now we are doomed to repeat it.


Sure it CAN be done.

You just call me when people get off their fat asses, stop watching American Idol and Honey Boo Boo, turn their farming tools into weapons, and decide to fight the powers-that-be to the bitter end.

I'll be over here enjoying modern living in a first-world nation, and not taking it for granted.
 
2012-10-13 05:56:20 PM  

ZeroCorpse: gimmegimme: thamike: Holy balls, this is stupid.

No, no. I think that BullBear and ZeroCorpse are making good points. Think about the 2000 election. We would be in the EXACT SAME PLACE had Kerry won the Supreme Court Election. Right? It doesn't matter who sits in the chair.

I think you're working under the premise that we have any control over who becomes President. We don't. Kerry "lost" because Kerry was never supposed to be in the White House. He was selected as the special guest co-star for the election reality show. Bush was the guy They wanted, and so Bush was put back in place... And it's not as if it matters, because he was as much a puppet as anyone else.

The agenda that came about under Bush was trickled down from people far more powerful than him. If Kerry had been selected by Them, then the agenda would have been similar but with a different form of delivery to make it palatable to the other half of society.


So what is your plan? We're on board.
 
2012-10-13 05:56:29 PM  

BullBearMS: That kind of ignores the Progressives who took back the nation from Plutocratic control during the Guilded Age.

It can be done.

it has been done.

Unfortunately, we did not learn the lesson of history, so now we are doomed to repeat it.


The thing to consider was that back then PROGRESSIVE WERE UNITED AS ONE GROUP BACK THEN INSTEAD OF 20 DIFFERENT POLITICAL FACTIONS LIKE TODAY!!! 

Jesus, how hard is that for you to comprehend?
 
2012-10-13 05:59:43 PM  

Nutsac_Jim: It seem like the
feds simply pay for sesame street and then some other guy gets to collect all the big bird animal sales.


How farking stupid are you. Sesame Street pays its own production costs. The Federal government gives a VERY small amount to PBS to cover its operating costs, and the operating costs of the PBS stations, which are all independently owned.
 
2012-10-13 06:01:00 PM  

Mrtraveler01: BullBearMS: That kind of ignores the Progressives who took back the nation from Plutocratic control during the Guilded Age.

It can be done.

it has been done.

Unfortunately, we did not learn the lesson of history, so now we are doomed to repeat it.

The thing to consider was that back then PROGRESSIVE WERE UNITED AS ONE GROUP BACK THEN INSTEAD OF 20 DIFFERENT POLITICAL FACTIONS LIKE TODAY!!! 

Jesus, how hard is that for you to comprehend?


Yea, but the Progressives abandoned the existing parties who both were owned by the rich.

It was only after the rise of the Progressive movement that political parties adopted their agenda to survive.
 
2012-10-13 06:02:38 PM  

BullBearMS: Yea, but the Progressives abandoned the existing parties who both were owned by the rich.

It was only after the rise of the Progressive movement that political parties adopted their agenda to survive.


Right, and they united as a group. That's why they got leverage.

Splitting up into 20 different political factions doesn't help your agenda AT ALL!

That's why they need to united as one political party/group in order to get any leverage again.
 
2012-10-13 06:06:56 PM  

Mrtraveler01: BullBearMS: Yea, but the Progressives abandoned the existing parties who both were owned by the rich.

It was only after the rise of the Progressive movement that political parties adopted their agenda to survive.

Right, and they united as a group. That's why they got leverage.

Splitting up into 20 different political factions doesn't help your agenda AT ALL!

That's why they need to united as one political party/group in order to get any leverage again.


No. You're entirely wrong as usual.

They stopped voting for the corrupt political parties as the first step.

If you keep voting for the corrupt political parties despite knowing they are both corrupt, where is the incentive for those parties to change?

Once those entrenched political parties figured out they had to adapt or die, they adapted.

At least for a while. Now they have both sold us out again.
 
2012-10-13 06:11:42 PM  

BullBearMS: They stopped voting for the corrupt political parties as the first step.


A large group did yes. Because they found a more viable third option.

Unless you don't provide a viable third option, you're not going to get masses of people to vote third party. 

What makes you think that you guys are as influential as the progressive back then even though you're not as organized and united as they were?
 
2012-10-13 06:15:38 PM  

Mrtraveler01: BullBearMS: They stopped voting for the corrupt political parties as the first step.

A large group did yes. Because they found a more viable third option.

Unless you don't provide a viable third option, you're not going to get masses of people to vote third party. 

What makes you think that you guys are as influential as the progressive back then even though you're not as organized and united as they were?


BullBear HAS provided a viable third option.

Times are terrible so we should

Both parties are too entrenched to displace so our only option is to

American politics are controlled by corporations so the very first thing we should do is
 
2012-10-13 06:16:09 PM  

Mrtraveler01: BullBearMS: They stopped voting for the corrupt political parties as the first step.

A large group did yes. Because they found a more viable third option.


Horseshiat.

They realized that the existing politicians made no effort to serve the interests of anyone except the obscenely wealthy.

Just like today.

dl.dropbox.com

Stop voting evil into power.
 
2012-10-13 06:17:14 PM  

BullBearMS: Mrtraveler01: BullBearMS: They stopped voting for the corrupt political parties as the first step.

A large group did yes. Because they found a more viable third option.

Horseshiat.

They realized that the existing politicians made no effort to serve the interests of anyone except the obscenely wealthy.

Just like today.

[dl.dropbox.com image 475x315]

Stop voting evil into power.


So what's your plan to get MASSES of people to vote third party.

I see you're having a hard time understanding this.
 
2012-10-13 06:19:09 PM  

gimmegimme: Mrtraveler01: BullBearMS: They stopped voting for the corrupt political parties as the first step.

A large group did yes. Because they found a more viable third option.

Unless you don't provide a viable third option, you're not going to get masses of people to vote third party. 

What makes you think that you guys are as influential as the progressive back then even though you're not as organized and united as they were?

BullBear HAS provided a viable third option.

Times are terrible so we should

Both parties are too entrenched to displace so our only option is to

American politics are controlled by corporations so the very first thing we should do is


I know right.

All I'm saying is don't biatch and moan that people aren't voting third party when you're not doing enough to convince people to vote third party (besides looking down on them for not voting third party).
 
Displayed 50 of 253 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