Do you have adblock enabled?
 
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.

(National Review)   The latest scourge that's ravaging our children and causing trillions of deaths every day: Fun. I mean, amusement park rides   (nationalreview.com ) divider line
    More: Dumbass, Ed Markey, amusement rides, structural engineering, secretary of states  
•       •       •

5224 clicks; posted to Main » on 13 Feb 2013 at 9:29 AM (3 years ago)   |   Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



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


Oldest | « | 1 | 2 | » | Newest | Show all

 
2013-02-13 12:16:07 PM  
Guy's clearly a tool.  That being said, this thing is concentrated evil masquerading as a ride:

www.astronomy-images.com

and it's awesome.
 
2013-02-13 12:24:58 PM  
I'm amazed that a NRO article criticizing a democratic politician did not attempt to tie his wacky pet cause to the Democratic Party or Obama.
 
2013-02-13 01:04:29 PM  
I agree with NRO about something. I need a shower.
 
2013-02-13 01:21:51 PM  
So what is the big deal? I highly doubt that anybody needs to use a roller coaster. The fact is that there is a greater than zero chance that a child will be killed by one. The only reason people could want to keep them around is if they want to kill children. To me, the solution is obvious.
 
2013-02-13 02:26:52 PM  

umad: So what is the big deal? I highly doubt that anybody needs to use a roller coaster. The fact is that there is a greater than zero chance that a child will be killed by one. The only reason people could want to keep them around is if they want to kill children. To me, the solution is obvious.


Don't have offspring?
 
2013-02-13 02:48:06 PM  
Don't trust those carnie folk.
 
2013-02-13 03:09:39 PM  

Haoie: Don't trust those carnie folk.


They smell like cabbage and have small hands.
 
2013-02-13 07:14:55 PM  

oldfarthenry: justneal: awesome i got a add for great wolf lodge and it's death slids in the article!!

Took the kiddies there years ago. They had to shut the pool down for twenty minutes while the "floater" went through the filter system. It was off-putting.


Friend of mine, who has a 4 year old went there. "Oh, it's GREAT! You should go!!"
I, whose youngest child is 20something, said "Yeah, I don't think so."
 
2013-02-14 01:02:01 AM  

StrangeQ: Just Another OC Homeless Guy: CheekyMonkey: Dear NRO-

Since when is "owning bunk beds" an "activity"?  I understand you aren't the brightest bulbs, but really...

Humor. It's humor. Strange concept, I know, but there you are.... (I guess it's true: libs/progs don't have a sense of humor.)

[img717.imageshack.us image 300x300]


Old and busted ad hominem attack. Please get some new material.
 
2013-02-14 01:05:48 AM  

StrangeQ: Just Another OC Homeless Guy: Diogenes: Just Another OC Homeless Guy: StrangeQ: NRO?  Aren't they the ones that just criticized Obama for calling Nazis "senseless" because they simple cannot allow themselves to agree with a single thing he says, ever?  Yeah, not making the mistake of clicking on one of their garbage links again.

What are you babbling on about?

"Nazism may have been an ideology to which the United States was - and to which the president is - implacably opposed, but it is hardly "senseless."

Those poor, misunderstood Nazis.  Good thing the NRO is there to defend them and their sensible goals.

Oh, I see. "Senseless" and "sensible" are two of those words that are seriously affected by CONTEXT. (I am almost 100% certain that my next sentence will be gleefully taken out of context.)  Given the goals and "morality" of the German National Socialists (Nazis), then, yes, the Holocaust was "sensible" (to them).

Think of it in terms of sensory selectivity, as in http://www.fark.com/goto/7586573/http://www.npr.org/blogs/health/2013 / 02/11/171409656/why-even-radiologists-can-miss-a-gorilla-hiding-in-pla in-sight and http://www.fark.com/comments/7586573/82472436#c82472436

Holy fark, talk about a contrast between senseless/sensible.  You really can't do it, can you?  You farking pudding headed conservatives really can't take even the most mundane, agreeable, not containing any possible objectionable content statement the president makes and just agree with it without having your farking brains leak out of your ears.  You need farking help.


You're not one for really paying attention, are you? If you had been, you would know I'm not a conservative. (Hell, I even voted for our current Glorious Leader.) But then again I suppose it's easier and less of a mental strain to just willey-nilley label people into the little boxes that your junior high social sciences teacher indoctrinated you about.
 
2013-02-14 01:07:54 AM  

CheekyMonkey: Just Another OC Homeless Guy: CheekyMonkey: Dear NRO-

Since when is "owning bunk beds" an "activity"?  I understand you aren't the brightest bulbs, but really...

Humor. It's humor. Strange concept, I know, but there you are.... (I guess it's true: libs/progs don't have a sense of humor.)

I get the attempt at humor, in that it's moderately amusing to point out that an idiot politician's pet cause is something which causes far fewer fatalities than other things which are considered every-day normal.  My point is that the sentence is poorly-constructed.  Owning bunkbeds, skateboards, bicycles or sleds are not only NOT activities, but are also NOT inherently dangerous.  Skateboarding IS an activity, and can be dangerous.  OWNING a skateboard is passive, and NOT in-and-of-itself dangerous.  See the difference?

Given your knee-jerk reaction to immediately to label me as a "lib/prog", I understand that you may not have the intelligence to comprehend the subtleties of the English language, but let me assure you:  Words have specific meanings.


Ah, yes, the Grammar Nazi. One step up from a Spelling Nazi. In either case, it indicates that you've really got no other arguments.
 
2013-02-14 01:09:11 AM  

Diogenes: Just Another OC Homeless Guy: Diogenes: Just Another OC Homeless Guy: StrangeQ: NRO?  Aren't they the ones that just criticized Obama for calling Nazis "senseless" because they simple cannot allow themselves to agree with a single thing he says, ever?  Yeah, not making the mistake of clicking on one of their garbage links again.

What are you babbling on about?

"Nazism may have been an ideology to which the United States was - and to which the president is - implacably opposed, but it is hardly "senseless."

Those poor, misunderstood Nazis.  Good thing the NRO is there to defend them and their sensible goals.

Oh, I see. "Senseless" and "sensible" are two of those words that are seriously affected by CONTEXT. (I am almost 100% certain that my next sentence will be gleefully taken out of context.)  Given the goals and "morality" of the German National Socialists (Nazis), then, yes, the Holocaust was "sensible" (to them).

Think of it in terms of sensory selectivity, as in http://www.fark.com/goto/7586573/http://www.npr.org/blogs/health/2013 / 02/11/171409656/why-even-radiologists-can-miss-a-gorilla-hiding-in-pla in-sight and http://www.fark.com/comments/7586573/82472436#c82472436

A sensible person would have concluded that the author of that article could have chosen her words more carefully.


Actually, I agree with that. But then people here on Fark wouldn't have had anything to "debate" about.
 
2013-02-14 01:19:47 AM  

thurstonxhowell: Just Another OC Homeless Guy: Oh, I see. "Senseless" and "sensible" are two of those words that are seriously affected by CONTEXT. (I am almost 100% certain that my next sentence will be gleefully taken out of context.) Given the goals and "morality" of the German National Socialists (Nazis), then, yes, the Holocaust was "sensible" (to them).

So you would agree that it is totally worth taking the time to correct someone for saying murdering millions of people was senseless?


In the context of the dominant culture and moral-set of western civilization, what the Nazi's did was "senseless." My point is that that word is entirely normative (subjective). I don't really have a problem with Glorious Leader saying that.

It was "sensible" - given their religion, culture and ethics, for the Aztecs to murder hundreds of thousands of people by cutting their beating hearts out on the steps of their pyramid. The Spaniard  Conquistadors didn't think so. They thought - given their religion, culture and ethics, to enslave everyone in sight and steal all the gold.

It was "sensible" - given their religion, culture and ethics, for both the ancient Egyptians and Imperial Chinese Court to kill thousands of warriors and other people to accompany their God-Kings into death. Most people today - given their religion, culture and ethics, don't think so.

I could go on; the list is endless.

Having actually read the article, I think that was the point that was attempting to be made. It was done poorly, but there you are. What's humorous is the automatic derp wargarrble from the libs and proggies on Fark caused by  two facts: the article appeared to be critical of Glorious leader; and it appeared in that most hated and despised rag, NRO. I suspect that if the exact same things had been said in generalities, and had been said in, oh, The New Yorker or some other liberal source, the reaction would have been entirely different.
 
2013-02-14 01:20:42 AM  

Diogenes: thurstonxhowell: Just Another OC Homeless Guy: Oh, I see. "Senseless" and "sensible" are two of those words that are seriously affected by CONTEXT. (I am almost 100% certain that my next sentence will be gleefully taken out of context.) Given the goals and "morality" of the German National Socialists (Nazis), then, yes, the Holocaust was "sensible" (to them).

So you would agree that it is totally worth taking the time to correct someone for saying murdering millions of people was senseless?

Not at all.  He'll contort himself to defend a conservative in any event.


I often defend conservatives because the liberal position is even more ridiculous.
 
2013-02-14 04:44:22 AM  

justneal: awesome i got a add for great wolf lodge and it's death slids in the article!!


I have no idea what this means.
 
2013-02-14 04:57:04 AM  

Priapetic: Guy's clearly a tool.  That being said, this thing is concentrated evil masquerading as a ride:

[www.astronomy-images.com image 425x638]

and it's awesome.


I went on one of those years ago with my girlfriend at a state fair. She screamed so loud, my friends heard it at the other end of the fair. They even asked me if I heard it.
/csb
 
2013-02-14 05:00:57 AM  

umad: So what is the big deal? I highly doubt that anybody needs to use a roller coaster. The fact is that there is a greater than zero chance that a child will be killed by one. The only reason people could want to keep them around is if they want to kill children. To me, the solution is obvious.


I live with my mom. You can do better than that.
 
2013-02-14 09:12:39 AM  

Just Another OC Homeless Guy: CheekyMonkey: Just Another OC Homeless Guy: CheekyMonkey: Dear NRO-

Since when is "owning bunk beds" an "activity"?  I understand you aren't the brightest bulbs, but really...

Humor. It's humor. Strange concept, I know, but there you are.... (I guess it's true: libs/progs don't have a sense of humor.)

I get the attempt at humor, in that it's moderately amusing to point out that an idiot politician's pet cause is something which causes far fewer fatalities than other things which are considered every-day normal.  My point is that the sentence is poorly-constructed.  Owning bunkbeds, skateboards, bicycles or sleds are not only NOT activities, but are also NOT inherently dangerous.  Skateboarding IS an activity, and can be dangerous.  OWNING a skateboard is passive, and NOT in-and-of-itself dangerous.  See the difference?

Given your knee-jerk reaction to immediately to label me as a "lib/prog", I understand that you may not have the intelligence to comprehend the subtleties of the English language, but let me assure you:  Words have specific meanings.

Ah, yes, the Grammar Nazi. One step up from a Spelling Nazi. In either case, it indicates that you've really got no other arguments.


It's actually neither a grammar nor a spelling mistake, but rather a misuse of the language.  You might want to return to grade school and find out what 'grammar' actually is, because, clearly, you don't know.

Also, why would I NEED any other "arguments"?  My ONLY issue is that the author is using a certain words in a way that is inconsistent with it's meaning, and thus, communicating poorly.  This sort of error is understandable from a layperson, but not from a journalist, who is presumably trained in such things.
 
2013-02-14 10:33:42 AM  

CheekyMonkey: Just Another OC Homeless Guy: CheekyMonkey: Just Another OC Homeless Guy: CheekyMonkey: Dear NRO-

Since when is "owning bunk beds" an "activity"?  I understand you aren't the brightest bulbs, but really...

Humor. It's humor. Strange concept, I know, but there you are.... (I guess it's true: libs/progs don't have a sense of humor.)

I get the attempt at humor, in that it's moderately amusing to point out that an idiot politician's pet cause is something which causes far fewer fatalities than other things which are considered every-day normal.  My point is that the sentence is poorly-constructed.  Owning bunkbeds, skateboards, bicycles or sleds are not only NOT activities, but are also NOT inherently dangerous.  Skateboarding IS an activity, and can be dangerous.  OWNING a skateboard is passive, and NOT in-and-of-itself dangerous.  See the difference?

Given your knee-jerk reaction to immediately to label me as a "lib/prog", I understand that you may not have the intelligence to comprehend the subtleties of the English language, but let me assure you:  Words have specific meanings.

Ah, yes, the Grammar Nazi. One step up from a Spelling Nazi. In either case, it indicates that you've really got no other arguments.

It's actually neither a grammar nor a spelling mistake, but rather a misuse of the language.  You might want to return to grade school and find out what 'grammar' actually is, because, clearly, you don't know.

Also, why would I NEED any other "arguments"?  My ONLY issue is that the author is using a certain words in a way that is inconsistent with it's meaning, and thus, communicating poorly.  This sort of error is understandable from a layperson, but not from a journalist, who is presumably trained in such things.


Sigh. Do you have any clue as to the "why" of my "kneejerk" reaction calling you a lib/proggie? No, didn't think so. I'm sure you know the word pedantic.

Also, I think you are missing your calling. You should be hiring yourself out to so-called journalists/humorists such as Dave Berry (he of the "dying from coffee filter" fame) to correct their misuses of the English language.
 
2013-02-14 10:59:52 AM  

Just Another OC Homeless Guy: Sigh. Do you have any clue as to the "why" of my "kneejerk" reaction calling you a lib/proggie? No, didn't think so. I'm sure you know the word pedantic.Also, I think you are missing your calling. You should be hiring yourself out to so-called journalists/humorists such as Dave Berry (he of the "dying from coffee filter" fame) to correct their misuses of the English language.


Yes, yes I do.  You are one of the many idiot who is incapable and/or uninterested in effective communication.  You consider loose and incorrect language usage as "good enough" and leave it up to others to guess at what you really meant to say.  Much like your last sentence.  It's up to me to assume that you meant Dave Barry, not Dave Berry.  You may consider it a small error, and me pedantic for mentioning it.  I consider likely that it's merely one of hundreds of errors that you make every day, because of laziness or apathy.

\You do realize that if everyone in the world were as imprecise as you, we would not enjoy any of the technological marvels that we take for granted, don't you?  We'd be back in the stone age, using rocks and sticks as tools, and communicating with each other with grunts and hand gestures.
 
2013-02-14 11:42:18 AM  

CheekyMonkey: idiot


Singular? Really? LOL!
 
Displayed 21 of 71 comments


Oldest | « | 1 | 2 | » | Newest | Show all


View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »
On Twitter






In Other Media


  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.

Report