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.

(New York Magazine)   Everyone is entitled to his own opinions, but not to his own facts   (nymag.com) divider line 45
    More: Obvious, gifts, opinions  
•       •       •

7600 clicks; posted to Politics » on 10 Nov 2012 at 5:44 PM (1 year ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



Voting Results (Smartest)
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


Archived thread
2012-11-10 06:28:10 PM
5 votes:
Two quotes and an anecdote:

"Faced with the choice between changing one's mind and proving that there is no need to do so, almost everyone gets busy on the proof."

-- John Kenneth Galbraith

All right, that's almost a reasonable excuse for the current repub attitude.

"I'm not upset that you lied to me, I'm upset that from now on I can't believe you."

-- Friedrich Nietzsche

And that's why I will never, ever, ever vote for a repub again, for any office. Ever.

Finally an anecdote. I've been seeing a lot of "Can't we all just get along?" type statements here and on Facebook. The argument is that civility and respect oblige progressives to reach out the hand of friendship -- again -- to conservatives if we are to have a return to political normalcy. This is why that can't, shouldn't, happen.

When I was a teenager I used to hang out with a friend named Jay. One day we were playing Risk. Late in the game I had beaten him down to a single army and he was about to lose that. "Oh, please," he said. "Leave me this one teeny little army so can say in the game. Just this one army." I said sure, why not. When it was his turn he sat up and pulled out the dozen armies he'd been hiding, and proceeded to win the game. Did I say anything? No. Did I ever let him pull that stunt on me again? Heck, no. When he twisted my arm to play backgammon with him for money and he ended up losing $75 the first night, did I offer to forgive the debt? Oh hells no, although in his defense he didn't ask me to and, after I relieved of of fifty more bucks the following night when he attempted to recoup his losses, he never offered to play me for money again.

We've already endured eight years of "It's your own fault, you were stupid enough to believe us" under the Bush regime. The Scott Walker affair demonstrated again, that repubs say what they please to get into office, then pursue completely different, unannounced agendas once they're in power. The Democrats need to press their advantage, mercilessly, if they hope to implement their programs. At least we're up front about what we want to do. The repubs cannot be allowed to regroup, to reframe their lies in a different format to achieve their unscrupulous goals. There is, for instance, a long battle ahead of us to undo the past twelve years of gerrymandering which is the only reason the repubs have held on to their House majority. There is no room any more for compromise. The repubs must be utterly destroyed before a new, clean conservative movement can rise from their ashes.

Pars republicanorum delenda est.
2012-11-10 05:52:03 PM
5 votes:

Silly Jesus: Would you be in favor of voters having to demonstrate some modicum of intelligence / relevant knowledge prior to voting?


sure (all the questions are true or false)
1) president obama was born in america
2) president obama is a christian
3) the universe is over 8000 years old
4) evolution is a fact. our understanding of its processes are theoretical
5) there were and are no weapons of mass destruction in iraq
6) 9/11 really happened

we dont even need to LET the voter know the right answer
if they answer false for 1 of the questions, their vote doesnt count
if they answer false to 2-5 of the questions, their vote wont count for the rest of their life
if they answer false to all 6 questions, they are taken out back and shot

TADA
problem solved
2012-11-10 08:07:15 PM
4 votes:
Here's a sad reality for people to chew on.

FOXNEWS, talk radio, Breitbart, and the rest of the fascist-lite media outlets only have a captive audience because 30+ years of middle class decimation have left a large portion of this population desperate and frustrated. Working people have watched as their earning power, political clout, and pensions have been systematically looted and sold off to the highest bidder; all while the cretins at the very top have exponentially grown their own bottom lines. In an environment like this, it's no wonder that so many people ended up falling into the arms of the perpetually angry conservative media machine which gleefully tosses out a scapegoat every week. When people become desperate, they look for a savior. The sick irony is that the candidate the GOP ran in this election couldn't have possibly been a more perfect example of the type of bastard responsible for the predicament the middle class finds itself in.

The Democrats are certainly not without guilt in this equation. They have not championed the working class in this country for a very long time and have allowed the right-wing to fill in the gaps with flag-waving and petty wedge issues like gay marriage. If Republicans are guilty of manipulation, Democrats are guilty of cowardice. Both are guilty of bending to corporate money.

As hard as it may be, we have to learn to empathize with the misguided souls in our country who have been duped by the right-wing hate machine. Their retreat into a non-reality based world may seem pathetic, but the underlying reasons as to why they've done it are dead serious. A lot of people in this country have been hurting for longer than they'd care to admit, but through the skillful manipulation of media, the right-wing has told these people to direct their anger at other marginalized groups rather than the vultures who've been perpetrating economic crimes for several decades. The truth is that most of us have a lot in common with that 47% who voted for Romney whether we want to admit it or not.
2012-11-10 06:01:57 PM
4 votes:
FTA: At the policy level, this is the GOP that denies climate change, that rejects Keynesian economics, and that identifies voter fraud where there is none. At the loony-tunes level, this is the GOP that has given us the birthers, websites purporting that Obama was lying about Osama bin Laden's death, and not one but two (failed) senatorial candidates who redefined rape in defiance of medical science and simple common sense. It's the GOP that demands the rewriting of history (and history textbooks), still denying that Barry Goldwater's opposition to the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and Richard Nixon's "southern strategy" transformed the party of Lincoln into a haven for racists. Such is the conservative version of history that when the website Right Wing News surveyed 43 popular conservative bloggers to determine the "worst figures in American history" two years ago, Jimmy Carter, Obama, and FDR led the tally, all well ahead of Benedict Arnold, Timothy McVeigh, and John Wilkes Booth.


WTF? I'm pretty much a Bernie Sanders-leaning liberal, but I would never rank a single GOP politician, not even W., as being as bad as those three.
2012-11-10 05:57:45 PM
4 votes:
There is something that all the Republicans seem to be missing from this last election....

1) They believed the election would be like 2010 and more voters would identify as Republicans.
2) They believed they were winning the independent vote so they couldn't loose.
3) They believe that 3 million Republican just didn't show up to vote.

The truth is that the only reason Romney won with independents and the turnout for self identified Republicans was so low was because: Those who identified themselves as Republicans in 2010 no longer identify as Republicans, instead they identify as independents but pretty much still vote Republican. So the truth was that Obama actually won the true independents.

/If Republicans don't realize the truth in the next couple of years, those ex-Republicans might actually be up for grabs.
2012-11-10 06:21:11 PM
3 votes:

FlashHarry: cognitive dissonance is the air that republicans breathe.


It's not dissonance. Cognitive dissonance requires some degree of discomfort on the part of the individual, until the dissonance is resolved by selecting one of the two incongruent thoughts or by choosing a third path that incorporates sections of both.

What the Republicans have begin to embrace--more frighteningly, to me anyway--is doublethink, the ability to hold two contradictory beliefs while simultaneously believing both of them. In doublethink, there IS no discomfort, and both beliefs can be accepted even though they cannot be true. Anybody who can do that is functionally psychotic, and needs to be handled very carefully.
2012-11-10 04:14:20 PM
3 votes:

cman: We create our own reality when the reality we have is something that we do not like.

Simple psychology, really


The enlightened mind resists this. Others just go balls to the walls.
2012-11-10 08:07:23 PM
2 votes:

IoSaturnalia:
You're just being silly now. Througout recorded history or the fossil record there are no, none zero nil counterexamples to Natural Selection. If you want to stick around 30 or 40 million years though, I'll give you 3:5 odds that penguins develop gills. What do you say to a little wager - a dollar perhaps?


I'll take you up on that bet. No vertebrate above amphibians has redeveloped gills, no matter how much time it spends in the water. Whales have already been (at least partially) aquatic for over 50 myr and don't have gills, and neither did any aquatic reptiles.
2012-11-10 07:42:41 PM
2 votes:

yousaywut: namatad: Antifun: looks like we've already identified somebody too stupid to vote this year, awesome test namatad

ROFL
alas, this guy really made my point. Your beliefs and understanding of facts do not change reality.


yousaywut: (we don't know enough about the universe to call this a fact yet)

the universe is irrelevant. we have sufficient information (facts) here on earth to know, without any doubt whatsoever), that evolution happens. that is a FACT. we have a large number of ideas about exactly how it happens, over how long a period of time, and some of the myriad details involved.

but the year mutation of the annual flu and drug resistant aids and TB are pretty much all the proof needed that evolution happens.

/EVEN if god is causing the mutation, that doesnt change the fact that it is evolution.
/unless you dont understand genetic mutation and want to pretend that it doesnt exist ...

We do have enough facts to prove micro-evolution that much is true. But until a flu germ becomes ebola or a parasite macro-evolution has not been confirmed. (that I am aware of I don't actually keep up with biology sciences so I could be mistaken).


You should probably shut up before you dig yourself even deeper.

Your wrong. You're being willfully obtuse and ignorant.

Your argument basically is this:

"What if 2 + 2 actually equals FIVE, and it's only SEEMED to equal 4 all these years because some invisible, undetectable force has been hiding the truth from us, and making all of our equations work even though our math was wrong!"

2 + 2 equals FOUR. Fact. Evolution occurs. Fact.
2012-11-10 07:18:17 PM
2 votes:

Antifun: looks like we've already identified somebody too stupid to vote this year, awesome test namatad


ROFL
alas, this guy really made my point. Your beliefs and understanding of facts do not change reality.


yousaywut: (we don't know enough about the universe to call this a fact yet)


the universe is irrelevant. we have sufficient information (facts) here on earth to know, without any doubt whatsoever), that evolution happens. that is a FACT. we have a large number of ideas about exactly how it happens, over how long a period of time, and some of the myriad details involved.

but the year mutation of the annual flu and drug resistant aids and TB are pretty much all the proof needed that evolution happens.

/EVEN if god is causing the mutation, that doesnt change the fact that it is evolution.
/unless you dont understand genetic mutation and want to pretend that it doesnt exist ...
2012-11-10 06:44:59 PM
2 votes:

cman: mjjt: USA is one of few countries that doesn't have a national educational curriculum and allows local groups like Texas Board of Ed to control syllabus.

That may be a good thing. I dont know about you, but I dont want someone from Texas to control what can or cannot be taught in my Maine schools.


With a national educational curriculum, it is unlikely that Texas would have enough influence to rewrite history books for other states. The fact that no other state has gone so far off the deep end as Texas has indicates that the rest of the country would, as a group, vote down Texas' attempt to push their agenda on other states. That's kinda the whole point of a national educational system.

/Must . . . resist . . . urge to make joke about Maine failing to . . . teach about apostrophes. . .
2012-11-10 06:03:01 PM
2 votes:

Aldon: Those who identified themselves as Republicans in 2010 no longer identify as Republicans, instead they identify as independents but pretty much still vote Republican.


this is the tea party. they fancy themselves as "independent," but what they are is simply the farthest right, most racially motivated wing of the republican party. they are the GOP's "republican guards."
2012-11-10 05:46:35 PM
2 votes:

Silly Jesus: Follow-up question for you then...

You obviously think it important for people to make informed decisions as to not suffer drastic negative consequences (getting people killed). Would you be in favor of voters having to demonstrate some modicum of intelligence / relevant knowledge prior to voting?


No, but I would greatly prefer that those either in power, or achieving to power, not push false narratives that get people killed.

A large percentage of the voting population being idiots is a necessary, but unfortunate, side-effect of preserving the right to vote for everyone. If you're trying to make real the ideal of "all men are created equal," then even people who have fewer functioning neurons than teeth in their heads have to be included in that. The sociopathy of political elites who are willing to use that idiocy to gain or retain power by any means, even those means that are patently evil, is what pisses me off.
2012-11-10 05:40:18 PM
2 votes:

Silly Jesus:

You obviously think it important for people to make informed decisions as to not suffer drastic negative consequences (getting people killed). Would you be in favor of voters having to demonstrate some modicum of intelligence / relevant knowledge prior to voting?


The voter test? Again? Give it the fark up. You aren't allowed to disenfranchise voters, and you aren't allowed to change the rules of the game because you arrogantly see yourself as more informed that the general populace.
2012-11-10 05:29:42 PM
2 votes:

Silly Jesus: Isn't this sort of similar to sports fans? Even if a team is an underdog you can find fans who will swear on the life of their unborn child that their team will win the Superbowl World Series Cup. Are the losers derided for believing in their team? "You must have been an idiot to think your team would win. Look how delusional you were!"

/mostly serious


Delusional sports fans are left to their delusions 1) because that's part of the fun, and 2) because, unlike politics, pushing a false narrative doesn't get people killed.
2012-11-10 05:16:16 PM
2 votes:

namatad: They either knew that they were losing and were faking it to try and keep the numbers up and to get the vote out. Which is fine.

Or they were completely deluded. Which is batshiat-crazy.


lh3.googleusercontent.com
2012-11-11 12:15:46 AM
1 votes:
In the end, we all get the governments (and of course the candidates) that we deserve...ultimately, we (the politicians and the constituents) fail to come to meaningful discourse about the real issues. Instead of working to find meaningful common ground, we take the polar opposite viewpoints because we want to be "right" more than we want to cooperate.

For example, I would like to see candidates that expressed the following:
1. It's a good thing to want to provide more social services to people, a more civilized nation would do this sort of thing
2. It's also a good thing to want and encourage people to be more self-sustaining than they currently are
3. While there are exceptions, people are inherently good and would be willing to (1) give more to others while the others (2) work harder to do more for themselves, if we put our heads together and come up with cooperative solutions.

But again, we would all need to be far more mature and less focused on being "right" to see this happen...
2012-11-10 11:01:50 PM
1 votes:
It's a shame one of the best articles to appear on Fark in weeks (what? Better than American Thinker? No wai!), devolved into an evolution flame war, a rehash of the stupid literacy test debate (there's not going to be a test to vote Silly Jeebus even if you cry about it in every Fark thread), and arguing with trolls who have long since left the thread.
2012-11-10 10:15:41 PM
1 votes:
"We're an empire now, and when we act, we create our own reality. And while you're studying that reality-judiciously, as you will-we'll act again, creating other new realities, which you can study too, and that's how things will sort out. We're history's actors...and you, all of you, will be left to just study what we do."

-Karl "Turdblossom" Rove
2012-11-10 10:06:41 PM
1 votes:

quickdraw: I really really thought they knew and were just faking it.


They have that crazy look in their eyes.
2012-11-10 09:42:27 PM
1 votes:

Silly Jesus: Halli: Silly Jesus: Your position is asinine. Nobody could possibly set a baseline for knowledge? IQ test? US Naturalization Test? One question "Who is the VP?" test. You don't think that anyone exists of sufficient intelligence to implement such a test, including you? You're at least literate. Don't sell yourself short. I at least have faith in you that you could pass the most basic of these tests.

Wasn't this whole test thing tried before in the States? Do you remember how that went?

Also you would fail any test for being a Trump supporter.

Are you implying that minorities would perform poorly on a test of intellectual competence? That's pretty racist of you.

/not a Trump supporter...just thought if I could give a large sum of money to cancer children with little to no effort and didn't, I might be a dick


I don't think asking if tests were used before implies that minorities would perform poorly on a test of intellectual competence. The reality is that when tests were used in the past, they were administered unfairly and subjectively--different questions for different groups, and whites were exempted from the literacy test if they could meet alternate requirements (the grandfather clause).

/I know, I know, "This time we'll get it right! We promise!"
2012-11-10 09:31:24 PM
1 votes:

randomjsa: Of course, it's not only that Obama is a much bigger liar and distorter of reality, it's that the media doesn't call him on it because they're in the tank for him. If they're not helping him lie then they're actively working to give him a pass on everything he screws up.


Just once - once- I would like to see a link offered, backing your claims. A real link with raw data, not the blogs you get your information from. Don't get stuck on stupid, son.

So, for the 324th and likely last time, I ask you to provide some sort of credible evidence that the entire media is "in the tank" for Obama. I know it makes assholes like you sleep better at night, thinking it's not really the GOP's fault (personal responsibility!), but Rush Limbaugh having said it does not make it true. Go to schleeps widdle baby, in the morning momma will be here to reassure you that it was really the evil media that lost the election for you. Christ you're an insufferable cockbag. Grow the fark up, you p*ssy, and own the mistakes.

/if you're really this misled and ignorant and not a troll, I genuinely feel sorry for you
//oh wait, no I don't
2012-11-10 09:13:23 PM
1 votes:

yousaywut: My thoughts were changed long before this. I added words (in my head) to a question/statement then responded to the misinterpreted statement and ..............get this now.............I was incorrect and have since changed my position regarding the truthiness of said statement.


You are a true internet rarity, and I salute you. With a beer. Which I'm going to get now.

/wasn't trying to be a dick earlier, it just comes naturally.
2012-11-10 08:25:02 PM
1 votes:

yousaywut: namatad: Silly Jesus: Would you be in favor of voters having to demonstrate some modicum of intelligence / relevant knowledge prior to voting?

sure (all the questions are true or false)
1) president obama was born in america
2) president obama is a christian
3) the universe is over 8000 years old
4) evolution is a fact. our understanding of its processes are theoretical
5) there were and are no weapons of mass destruction in iraq
6) 9/11 really happened

we dont even need to LET the voter know the right answer
if they answer false for 1 of the questions, their vote doesnt count
if they answer false to 2-5 of the questions, their vote wont count for the rest of their life
if they answer false to all 6 questions, they are taken out back and shot

TADA
problem solved

1: true
2: true
3: true
4: false which is why it's called evolutionary theory or the theory of evolution. (we don't know enough about the universe to call this a fact yet)
5: false Ask the kurds about that one. (whether they were still around at the time of the Iraq invasion is entirely different)

6: true



You're an idiot: TRUE.

4) Evolution is a FACT. The theory of evolution supports and explains the fact of evolution. Replace "evolution" with "gravity" and see how that works. Gravity is a fact. The theory of gravity supports and explains the fact of gravity. BTW, the theory of evolution is much more robust and fully detailed in its explanation of the fact of evolution than the current theory of gravity is in explaining the fact of gravity. Scientists still don't know what the mechanism is for objects to "tell each other their presence" so that gravity works. Are they gravitons? Warping of the space-time continuum? Vibrations of superstrings?

Evolution has a very clear and well detailed mechanism: the DNA.

5) That all depends on how one defines weapons of mass destruction. TNT itself isn't WMD, but several billion tons of it could be considered WMD. As of the time of the second Iraq war, there were no nuclear weapons, no chemical or biological weapons, not even a large store of TNT. So yeah, there were no WMD in Iraq at least at 2002 through to the present.
2012-11-10 08:09:48 PM
1 votes:
Iraq did have some old crap from before 1991, but it wouldn't have been useful as a weapon, and it's not clear the Iraqis even knew they had it. It appears from the inspection in 2003 that they really had dismantled their WMD program and destroyed all of the contents.

I believe most people who voted for Romney fit into one of these categories:

1. People rooting for 'the team'.
2. One issue voters on abortion, homosexuality, 'Christian Nation', immigration, or other issues.
3. Low-information voters.
4. Voting with their pocketbook "are you better off than you were four years ago".

I think that most people who voted for Obama would fit into the same four categories.

I think that very few people in this country are racist to the point of voting against Obama for that reason, but they are VERY loud, and they are encouraged by Fox News and Rush. I think that if Obama had been exactly the same except his dad had been an Afrikaaner, very few people on either side would have switched their vote.

But I do think the level of vitriol by the Stormfront types would be a lot lower.
2012-11-10 07:28:58 PM
1 votes:

yousaywut: True enough but it is still a theory in the common use of the word as well. It is the best theory we have at the moment but there are certain questions that stop it from becoming fact. Such as irreducible complexity and of course missing links. (I am not denying evolution just saying it is not yet a fact).


"Evolution" is a category. The facts are things like "mistakes sometimes occur when DNA is copied" or "the frequency of alleles within a gene pool can change from one generation to the next". Despite what you may think, you are denying evolution because you are still talking about obsolete and irrelevant notions such as "irreducible complexity" while the actual scientists have moved on to wondering (for example) whether paired or unpaired sections of ribosomal RNA change more quickly.
2012-11-10 07:27:00 PM
1 votes:
There is a scary reverse feedback loop that has developed over the last couple decades -

1. Republicans talk non-reality, need an outlet to convince voters of this non-reality...
2. Talk radio/Fox news arises to fill this need...
3. Many, many voters are convinced of the non-reality...
4. These voters now demand politicians that conform to the non-reality...
5. Republicans now MUST double-down on the non-reality

around and around....

Its a perpetually propagating alternate reality.
2012-11-10 07:22:48 PM
1 votes:

IoSaturnalia: yousaywut: I would love to see some folks float away it would entertaining.

That's the beauty/tragedy of the scientific 'theory' - there can be a gazzilion examples that confirm it, but it still can never be called a fact. Find but a single counterexample, and 'poof' it's gone.


yes that is what I have been saying. But hey this is Fark so please feel free to insult my intelligence next time.
2012-11-10 07:22:24 PM
1 votes:

Raharu: Here you go Silly Jesus, this should help you catch up to the rest of the world.


No cheatun.....

i46.tinypic.com
2012-11-10 07:06:14 PM
1 votes:

yousaywut: 5: false Ask the kurds about that one. (whether they were still around at the time of the Iraq invasion is entirely different)


W found ZERO weapons of mass destruction. ZERO.
yes, the kurds were gassed, and no, I am not going to argue the semantics of "mass destruction".
but when we invaded, they had nada. our whole reason for attacking was false.

alas, maybe that question has TOO much wiggle room and would need to be replaced.

How about more americans died in iraq war 2.0, than did during 9/11??
2012-11-10 07:01:48 PM
1 votes:

sugardave: Silly Jesus: Are the losers derided for believing in their team?

Yes.


Yes. That is the point. Their team was not believable, they chose to believe in their team anyway, and they lost because of their indefensible belief in their team. So, yes, it is proper to deride the losers for believing in their team.
2012-11-10 07:00:19 PM
1 votes:

yousaywut: True enough but it is still a theory in the common use of the word as well. It is the best theory we have at the moment but there are certain questions that stop it from becoming fact. Such as irreducible complexity and of course missing links. (I am not denying evolution just saying it is not yet a fact). I think it may become a fact within our lifetime or be completely disproven and become another oops in scientific history.) Make no mistake I am not a creationist I am merely skeptical of calling an unproven theory a fact.


Incorrect. Again you parrot usual creationist arguments, all dis-proven. You might not be a creationist, but it's fairly obvious that you've listened to their arguments (which have been dis-proven into oblivion an absurd amount of times.) As I noted before, a scientific theory is fact. It cannot and is not both proven and unproven. I urge you to read that wikipedia article myself and two others linked you to or at least quoted from.
2012-11-10 06:47:34 PM
1 votes:

yousaywut: 4: false which is why it's called evolutionary theory or the theory of evolution. (we don't know enough about the universe to call this a fact yet)


Pig pile on yousay!

This always bugs me. "The theory of relativity is only a theory; therefore, I deny the existence of nuclear weapons." "The germ theory of disease is only a theory; therefore, I refuse to take antibiotics when I'm ill." "The theory of gravity is only a theory; therefore, I am floating away into outer space gooooddddbbbbyyyyyeeeee..."

Actually that last one I'd like to see.
2012-11-10 06:43:57 PM
1 votes:

yousaywut: 4: false which is why it's called evolutionary theory or the theory of evolution. (we don't know enough about the universe to call this a fact yet)


"The formal scientific definition of theory is quite different from the everyday meaning of the word."
2012-11-10 06:42:22 PM
1 votes:

yousaywut: namatad:
4: false which is why it's called evolutionary theory or the theory of evolution. (we don't know enough about the universe to call this a fact


Sorry but that is incorrect.

Scientific theories are the most reliable, rigorous, and comprehensive form of scientific knowledge.[3] This is significantly different from the word "theory" in common usage, which implies that something is unproven or speculative.[5]

From: http://wikipedia.org/wiki/Scientific_theory
2012-11-10 06:42:10 PM
1 votes:

yousaywut: 4: false which is why it's called evolutionary theory or the theory of evolution. (we don't know enough about the universe to call this a fact yet)


I see you've fallen for the usual creationist trap of thinking the "Theory of Evolution" means "theory" in the common useage of the word. It is not. It's a theory in the scientific method. A scientific theory isn't a guess. It's fact. A guess is a "hypothesis".

Scientific theory

Scientific theories are the most reliable, rigorous, and comprehensive form of scientific knowledge. This is significantly different from the word "theory" in common usage, which implies that something is unproven or speculative.
2012-11-10 06:37:42 PM
1 votes:

erik-k: vartian: Silly Jesus:

You obviously think it important for people to make informed decisions as to not suffer drastic negative consequences (getting people killed). Would you be in favor of voters having to demonstrate some modicum of intelligence / relevant knowledge prior to voting?

The voter test? Again? Give it the fark up. You aren't allowed to disenfranchise voters, and you aren't allowed to change the rules of the game because you arrogantly see yourself as more informed that the general populace.

The average American is likely to: not be able to name a single supreme court justice, not point out where countries we're at war with are on a world map, not be able to point out their own country on a world map, not be able to describe a single one of the ten amendments that guarantee many of their most basic rights, not know who any of their local, state or federal representatives are... this could go on and on.

For most people on Fark's politics tab, observing the blindingly obvious fact that we're more informed than average isn't "arrogant." It's just a statement of fact.

Most of us are also smart enough to realize that Churchill's remarks about "except for all the others that have been tried" are true also. So as much as we might whine about the vote of an idiot carrying as much weight as that of an informed person or fantasize about a world where you have to be informed to vote, we know where that leads.


Indeed, we already went through this with literacy tests in the South. It's funny how a lot of people who argue that the government can't do anything right will also argue that a voting test can be set up that will be free from abuse.
2012-11-10 06:23:56 PM
1 votes:

Aldon: There is something that all the Republicans seem to be missing from this last election....

1) They believed the election would be like 2010 and more voters would identify as Republicans.
2) They believed they were winning the independent vote so they couldn't loose.
3) They believe that 3 million Republican just didn't show up to vote.

The truth is that the only reason Romney won with independents and the turnout for self identified Republicans was so low was because: Those who identified themselves as Republicans in 2010 no longer identify as Republicans, instead they identify as independents but pretty much still vote Republican. So the truth was that Obama actually won the true independents.

/If Republicans don't realize the truth in the next couple of years, those ex-Republicans might actually be up for grabs.


Wouldn't it also make sense that a reason the demographics were more like 2008 than 2010 would be that 2010 was a midterm election, and conservatives always turn out in greater numbers than moderates and liberals in midterms? Thus it would be silly to assume the numbers would be like 2010?
2012-11-10 06:19:50 PM
1 votes:
Mitt Romney is already slithering into the mists of history

The chant is reaching fever pitch. Mouths shriek, throats split. 'Ph'nglui mglw'nafh Romney R'lyeh wgah'nagl fhtagn!'

I notice a sting on my arm. When I look down, a locust with Ayn Rand's face gorges messily on my flesh. I understand now.

Romney whips his hooded priests, screaming that 10% must have their hearts ripped from their chests to achieve Godhood.

Coulter spews acid and tar at the crowd, fusing them together in a grotesque mass. Smell is overwhelming, we wait to die.

A zombified titan stands on the stage. Shrugging his shoulders, a boulder of teeth, hair, and cartilage lands on the crowd

A mother hugs her shivering son. She doesn't notice when his mouth distends, revealing rows of razor-sharp teeth.

Romney warmly embraces the orphan before biting into her skull as if it were an apple.

Bush Sr steps on stage and we scream in rapturous agony as our skin is stretched to pieces, to the Washington Post March!

Paul Ryan is sitting just offstage at #RomneyDeathRally, pointing a camera at the crowd. He's not collecting their images, but their souls.
2012-11-10 06:01:20 PM
1 votes:
So many people are saying that Obama won because the demographics are changing. I don't think that is wholly true. Although the demographics of the country are different than they were 20 years ago, so is the Republican Party. They have become undeniably weird. I can't picture Bob Dole talking about God's rape babies.
2012-11-10 05:51:24 PM
1 votes:

FishyFred: It's looking more and more like the outcome of the war between the GOP establishment and the GOP base is going to result in the base saying "You know what? You can keep your facts."


Depends on who is considered in your term, "the GOP base". Because many of the sane republicans voted for Obama. Only the die-hard nutbags voted for Romney.
2012-11-10 05:47:33 PM
1 votes:
Facts are simple and facts are straight
Facts are lazy and facts are late
Facts all come with points of view
Facts don't do what I want them to
Facts just twist the truth around
Facts are living turned inside out
Facts are getting the best of them
Facts are nothing on the face of things
Facts don't stain the furniture
Facts go out and slam the door
Facts are written all over your face
Facts continue to change their shape
2012-11-10 05:28:36 PM
1 votes:
analogy is a helluva drug.
2012-11-10 05:09:32 PM
1 votes:

quickdraw: I really really thought they knew and were just faking it.


So yah, it is one or the other right?
They either knew that they were losing and were faking it to try and keep the numbers up and to get the vote out. Which is fine.

Or they were completely deluded. Which is batshiat-crazy.

GAT_00: There is no difference to Republicans. Opinions are facts.


And it is that kind of thinking which has pushed the GOP into this wonderful corner. They either have to admit that the far right is batshiat crazy or they have to double down.
Bwahahahahahahahahah

WE KNOW what they are going to do!!
2012-11-10 04:51:21 PM
1 votes:
I really really thought they knew and were just faking it.
 
Displayed 45 of 45 comments

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report