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.

(Think Progress)   Uninsured conservative blogger in hospital with liver failure. Liberal and conservative bloggers band together to raise money for his medical bills. Good job guys, now just 45 million more to go   (thinkprogress.org) divider line 441
    More: Hero, liver failure, medical bills, RedState, Blogging  
•       •       •

3705 clicks; posted to Politics » on 02 Aug 2013 at 9:04 AM (37 weeks ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



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

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | » | Last | Show all
 
2013-08-02 12:30:22 PM

Headso: Aristocles: And, as moral animals

reads like this guy is more animal than moral...
[www.sarawakreport.org image 506x376]


Hey, c'mon now! Animals don't act like that.  That's clearly his moral side.
 
2013-08-02 12:30:30 PM

Warlordtrooper: This is why liberals never win.  We need to stop helping conservatives.

This man deserves whatever disease he has.


He deserves to be helped like any other human. Then when he's better he deserves to get his ass kicked. But no one deserves liver failure.
 
2013-08-02 12:32:01 PM

cameroncrazy1984: Aristocles: And, as moral animals, human beings need the moral freedom to give charity and help people on their own accord.

Do we not have that? Also by what evidence are human beings "moral"?


We do not have that freedom absolutely, however, with whatever pennies Uncle Sam leaves us we do have the freedom to do as we see fit.

Your second question is very good! I'd like to think that human beings are moral creatures who can make decisions based on what is Good rather than being passive automatons.
 
2013-08-02 12:33:36 PM

Felgraf: To people arguing with Aristocles-

Please be warned he has admitted to not arguing in good faith, and is an *admitted* troll.

See http://www.fark.com/comments/7856783/85539614#c85539614 and http://www.fark.com/comments/7856783/85540067#c85540067  .

. Named after a man who claimed to know nothing, he seems to think he's a lot more clever than he is.

I just figure it would be akin to arguing with.. man, whoever it was with the lists, after the person accidentally outed themselves
/Only this troll is far, faaarr less clever.


Question is, why hasn't an admitted troll been banhammered?

It's in the goddamn FAQ.




Oh wait...never mind.



i865.photobucket.com
 
2013-08-02 12:33:37 PM

Mugato: Warlordtrooper: This is why liberals never win.  We need to stop helping conservatives.

This man deserves whatever disease he has.

He deserves to be helped like any other human. Then when he's better he deserves to get his ass kicked. But no one deserves liver failure.


Here's to hoping he gets better, realizes the folly of his previous beliefs, recants previous stances publicly and becomes a more centrist/left-of-center blogger.
 
2013-08-02 12:33:54 PM

Aristocles: We do not have that freedom absolutely, however, with whatever pennies Uncle Sam leaves us we do have the freedom to do as we see fit.


Why do we not have that freedom? Do charities not exist?

Aristocles: I'd like to think that human beings are moral creatures who can make decisions based on what is Good rather than being passive automatons.


So, your entire philosophy is based on fantasy and wishful thinking. Well, I guess everyone has their thing. Yours is being completely wrong.
 
2013-08-02 12:33:59 PM

Mugato: Warlordtrooper: This is why liberals never win.  We need to stop helping conservatives.

This man deserves whatever disease he has.

He deserves to be helped like any other human. Then when he's better he deserves to get his ass kicked. handed a bill for the services and setup with a payment plan.


As the commercial said; you can pay me now or you can pay me later.
 
2013-08-02 12:34:58 PM

Maud Dib: Felgraf: To people arguing with Aristocles-

Please be warned he has admitted to not arguing in good faith, and is an *admitted* troll.

See http://www.fark.com/comments/7856783/85539614#c85539614 and http://www.fark.com/comments/7856783/85540067#c85540067  .

. Named after a man who claimed to know nothing, he seems to think he's a lot more clever than he is.

I just figure it would be akin to arguing with.. man, whoever it was with the lists, after the person accidentally outed themselves
/Only this troll is far, faaarr less clever.

Question is, why hasn't an admitted troll been banhammered?It's in the goddamn FAQ.


Oh wait...never mind.

[i865.photobucket.com image 400x495]


Well, maybe he's an admitted ALT too.  Remember that one time at Fark camp, the moderator came in and said ALTing is fine.  So, maybe in the Fark deck of cards, being an admitted ALT trumps being an admitted TROLL?

I dunno, I'm just asking questions!
 
2013-08-02 12:38:55 PM

Dr Dreidel: Let's say he's been without insurance for the last 3 years. His portion of an employer's plan premium would have been about $951/year, or $79.25/month. For 3 years or 36 months, he chose to spend $2,853 on everything but planning for this kind of contingency. $2800 wouldn't be near enough to cover this illness, sure, but the insurance he bought with it would have, even if you figure in a $10k deductible (his goal was $25k).


This is one argument I never like.  I mean, what if that $2,800 went to food, or house payments, or car payments, or car upkeep, or any of a bajillion needs that were more immediate at the time?  That's why it's a bad argument for a mandate, but a good one for universal healthcare: with UHC, he wouldn't have to choose between dying of liver failure and dying of starvation, or pneumonia because he didn't have anywhere but an alley to sleep.  But with a mandate, that forces him to be dying of starvation.

/I'd rather he not have to choose.
 
2013-08-02 12:40:18 PM
BarkingUnicorn:
  Subjects have empathy and feel compassion (the urge to act upon empathy to relieve another's suffering).  They are not sociopaths; they simply resist the urge to express empathy, compassion, and kindness when they believe doing so will make them feel better, e. g,  get some strokes from the researchers, and express empathy, compassion, and kindness when they believe doing so will make them feel better.  Standard normal behavior, not sociopathic. Researchers are  misinterpreting their observations.

...

No, we don't have any way to tell what's going on in a person's mind.  That's why conjecture and conclusions about such things and polygraph tests are inadmissible in courts. A shrink's "evaluation" is merely his opinion, unsupported by any direct experience.  It consists of assumptions derived from observations of behavior, and behavior is neither emotion nor mentation.


You go from telling us exactly what is their mind to telling us that the researchers, psychologists, etc. have no way to tell what is happening. You can't have it both ways. You also imply in your first paragraph that there is such a thing as a true psychopath but then back track on that in your followup post.

No offense, but you might want to stay out of science in general and research altogether.
 
2013-08-02 12:40:49 PM
So he was an alcoholic who isn't taking responsibly for himself...and made fun of dying people and Muslims...and right now there are thousands of other people with mounting medical bills who don't get a fund online that went viral. Seriously?
 
2013-08-02 12:40:49 PM

cameroncrazy1984: Why do we not have that freedom? Do charities not exist?


I said we do not have that freedom absolutely, as we are deprived from making charitable decisions ourselves when the government takes our money.

cameroncrazy1984: So, your entire philosophy is based on fantasy and wishful thinking. Well, I guess everyone has their thing. Yours is being completely wrong.


Just because I said "I'd like to think that x is true" doesn't mean that "x" is not true.
 
2013-08-02 12:41:33 PM

coeyagi: Maud Dib: Felgraf: To people arguing with Aristocles-

Please be warned he has admitted to not arguing in good faith, and is an *admitted* troll.

See http://www.fark.com/comments/7856783/85539614#c85539614 and http://www.fark.com/comments/7856783/85540067#c85540067  .

. Named after a man who claimed to know nothing, he seems to think he's a lot more clever than he is.

I just figure it would be akin to arguing with.. man, whoever it was with the lists, after the person accidentally outed themselves
/Only this troll is far, faaarr less clever.

Question is, why hasn't an admitted troll been banhammered?It's in the goddamn FAQ.


Oh wait...never mind.

[i865.photobucket.com image 400x495]

Well, maybe he's an admitted ALT too.  Remember that one time at Fark camp, the moderator came in and said ALTing is fine.  So, maybe in the Fark deck of cards, being an admitted ALT trumps being an admitted TROLL?

I dunno, I'm just asking questions!


I am an admitted alt.
 
2013-08-02 12:41:56 PM

coeyagi: js34603: coeyagi: What is it with asshole alcoholic conservative bloggers?

Is this guy going to get a portrait made of him in armor, standing in front of Valhalla?

Can we just start lining up at his gravesite with very full bladders instead?

So I just want to verify you're really mad at this guy because he said mean things on the Internet about Ebert right?

That's why you're here in this thread on the Internet wishing for his death and hoping to piss on his grave right? He said mean things on the Internet? Just want to make that clear. If that is it could you maybe say something like "This conservative blogger said mean things about Robert Eber so I hate him and hope he dies a horrible death so I can piss on his grave." That would be great, thanks.

That and he's a conservative blogger who says stupid things that thousands of idiots believe on RedState.com, a notorious drivel site that further ruins the political discourse of this country.  But you forgot to point that piece out too...


Cool cool, you can toss the I disagree with him politically part in there. So now I just want you to say "This guy I disagree with politically said mean things on the Internet so I want him to die a terrible death, and I want to piss on his grave."
 
2013-08-02 12:42:10 PM

EmmaLou: So he was an alcoholic who isn't taking responsibly for himself...and made fun of dying people and Muslims...and right now there are thousands of other people with mounting medical bills who don't get a fund online that went viral. Seriously?


Well, maybe they should have been a just a little more publicly hateful of dying people and Muslims if they wanted public sympathy!
 
2013-08-02 12:42:26 PM

Bloody William: I'm tired of trolling as a concept. I want honest, spirited debates, none of this weird psychological playground shiat.


If anyone in charge is reading, let me second this. If it's about finances I would gladly pay $10 a month for what BW just described.
 
2013-08-02 12:43:51 PM

Mugato: Warlordtrooper: This is why liberals never win.  We need to stop helping conservatives.

This man deserves whatever disease he has.

He deserves to be helped like any other human. Then when he's better he deserves to get his ass kicked. But no one deserves liver failure.


As a Buddhist even I would vote for this option.
 
2013-08-02 12:44:34 PM

sammyk: As someone that has lived through a liver transplant I have to say this guy is proper farked. Most likely outcome is he does not survive and his family is left destitute. 25k doesn't even get started on keeping him alive long enough to even be considered to be put on the list.

First off it seems he has a history of drinking. Even if it is not the primary cause of liver failure no transplant team will even start the workup until he has demonstrated 6 months of sobriety. There are no shortcuts on this. Transplant teams have heard it all and seen it all. You will not fool them and they will gladly let you die if you continue to drink. Same for smoking. Same for not following Dr's orders.

Now during that 6 month period he's going to have a lot of Dr's appointments. Mine were weekly. Let's not forget weekly bloodwork that runs about 2k per week.

Now that's just routine stuff. He is in the hospital so I am going to guess ICU because when your liver puts you in the hospital its always farking critical. Lots of fun things can happen. Like when my kidneys said fark it we feel like failing too. Ah yes multi organ failure is a grand old time. It put me in ICU for 16 days at around 80k/day. Or he could have his esophageal varices burst. Super fun time. I lost consciousness when it happened to me. My wife tells me the ambulance crew was busy dropping IV's into me anywhere tehy could get a vein because I had already lost 5 liters of blood and the plasma was leaking out of me as fast as they could drop it in. MUCHO THANKS TO BLOOD DONORS EVERYWHERE!!!!! About then my doctors started thinking I was death proof. I did not feel like it. That was not the end either but it was the worst of it. Well except for the time TB decided to setup camp in the fluid in my belly that was supposed to be there so My body really didn't know how to fight it.

When I wasn't in the hospital trying to die I had a miserable existence. Most days I was just hoping I would piss or shiat. Sounds like a sim ...


Damn.  I can't think of anything worse than that.  Glad you made it.
 
2013-08-02 12:45:17 PM

Aristocles: Except that the government uses money that they obtain via compulsion (taxes).


Your're not compelled to live here. Feel free to emigrate. I hear Somalia is almost regulation-free.
 
2013-08-02 12:47:38 PM
js34603:
Cool cool, you can toss the I disagree with him politically part in there. So now I just want you to say "This guy I disagree with politically said mean things on the Internet so I want him to die a terrible death, and I want to piss on his grave."

You trot this out in every thread. Is hyperbole on the Internet such a difficult concept for you?
 
2013-08-02 12:48:41 PM

coeyagi: What is it with asshole alcoholic conservative bloggers?


Well, think of how much self-loathing the average wingnut must feel. I mean, that is not a group with which emotionally healthy people associate. Now multiply that self-loathing by about 10, and that is where the the typical wingnut media personality lives (Limbaugh, Coulter, Beck ,etc.). They recognize that their entire world-views are utterly without merit, devoid of even the tiniest scrap of truth or virtue. And every time they look in the mirror they see the faintest glimmer of the innocent children they once were, before Republican ideology turned their hearts to ignorance, bitterness and hate. And they have to live with that knowledge; that they are utterly without worth or merit, and there is no possibility that that will ever change.

Would you want to face that kind of life sober?

The alcoholism is a deliberate, slow suicide. But that's all wingnuts are capable of, because they aren't brave enough to suck a shotgun to orgasm.
 
2013-08-02 12:50:05 PM

Mugato: stoli n coke: If he's an alcoholic, unless he's very rich or famous, the odds of him getting a transplant are pretty slim.

How can they prove he's an alcoholic?

/may be relevant to my interests someday


One thing doctors automatically assume is that you are completely lowballing them on how much you drink. They are going to factor up whatever you tell them by a certian amount...
 
2013-08-02 12:50:07 PM

Arsten: BarkingUnicorn: MSFT: BarkingUnicorn:   Sociopaths cannot feel empathy.  Please stop misusing that term.

There was an article on BBC a few days ago about a recent study showing that psychopaths have the ability to selectively emphathize with others. This may lead to some breakthrough treatment programs in the future.

Looks like this is it.

I read it via Fark earlier; I don't buy it.  Subjects have empathy and feel compassion (the urge to act upon empathy to relieve another's suffering).  They are not sociopaths; they simply resist the urge to express empathy, compassion, and kindness when they believe doing so will make them feel better, e. g,  get some strokes from the researchers, and express empathy, compassion, and kindness when they believe doing so will make them feel better.  Standard normal behavior, not sociopathic. Researchers are  misinterpreting their observations.

I don't know. If you look at human medicine, the brain is largely unknown, and we don't find things mainly because we don't think about things outside our own experience. But, we already know that empathy and kindness can be turned off by other emotions. If you fly into a rage and start beating a guy on the street, you won't feel a whole lot of empathy for him. You may regret it for other reasons (Oh, no! Going to jail!), but you probably won't feel empathy for his messed up face. Usually when you fly into a rage and do that, your brain justifies it. You'll walk away and go "That's what you  deserve" instead of "Oh fark, I really screwed up your face. I'm sorry, bro."

I mean, look at empathy: You have people who feel almost nothing for other people or animals ("sociopath") and you have others that cry and bemoan when they see a guy get shot int he nuts with a baseball on the news or watch ol' yeller take one to the dome, and everything in between those two extremes.

I personally believe that most of this contradictory evidence about mental abilities is that mental states are more fluid t ...


In short, we don't know and we can't know.  So we spin whatever delusions make us feel better ("make sense," because "sense" enables the delusion of predictability, and the ego desperately desires to predict that it will continue to exist even it never did).
 
2013-08-02 12:51:32 PM

coeyagi: Maud Dib: Felgraf: To people arguing with Aristocles-

Please be warned he has admitted to not arguing in good faith, and is an *admitted* troll.

See http://www.fark.com/comments/7856783/85539614#c85539614 and http://www.fark.com/comments/7856783/85540067#c85540067  .

. Named after a man who claimed to know nothing, he seems to think he's a lot more clever than he is.

I just figure it would be akin to arguing with.. man, whoever it was with the lists, after the person accidentally outed themselves
/Only this troll is far, faaarr less clever.

Question is, why hasn't an admitted troll been banhammered?It's in the goddamn FAQ.


Oh wait...never mind.

[i865.photobucket.com image 400x495]

Well, maybe he's an admitted ALT too.  Remember that one time at Fark camp, the moderator came in and said ALTing is fine.  So, maybe in the Fark deck of cards, being an admitted ALT trumps being an admitted TROLL?

I dunno, I'm just asking questions!


Interestingly, some mods feel that the reason Fark is lacking in reasonable conservatives is not because of alts like that who make conservatives look bad with every post, but the REAL fault lies with the ones who call them out on their lies and bullshiat.

Spreading and spamming debunked BS lies is OK.
Debunking said lies is bad and you should feel bad.
 
2013-08-02 12:52:54 PM

cubic_spleen:  they aren't brave enough to suck a shotgun to orgasm.


What a terrible, beautiful phrase. I'll definitely be stealing that one.
 
2013-08-02 12:54:04 PM

Mugato: Warlordtrooper: This is why liberals never win.  We need to stop helping conservatives.

This man deserves whatever disease he has.

He deserves to be helped like any other human. Then when he's better he deserves to get his ass kicked. But no one deserves liver failure.


Not all that long ago, I would have agreed with you but the bagger crowd has expended any goodwill from me. These animals do everything they can to hurt people for nothing more than the sake of hurting people. I hope he has a long and painful go of it, which ends with him dying in a pile of his own piss and shiat for the whole world to see. I hope his daughters' lives are destroyed by it and his wife ends up sucking diseased dick in an alley to fund her crack habit when the banks and insurance companies take everything they have. It's sad, but the only thing to get them to learn is if they experience the agony they so gleefully celebrate when other people endure it.
 
2013-08-02 12:54:22 PM

MSFT: BarkingUnicorn:
  Subjects have empathy and feel compassion (the urge to act upon empathy to relieve another's suffering).  They are not sociopaths; they simply resist the urge to express empathy, compassion, and kindness when they believe doing so will make them feel better, e. g,  get some strokes from the researchers, and express empathy, compassion, and kindness when they believe doing so will make them feel better.  Standard normal behavior, not sociopathic. Researchers are  misinterpreting their observations.

...

No, we don't have any way to tell what's going on in a person's mind.  That's why conjecture and conclusions about such things and polygraph tests are inadmissible in courts. A shrink's "evaluation" is merely his opinion, unsupported by any direct experience.  It consists of assumptions derived from observations of behavior, and behavior is neither emotion nor mentation.

You go from telling us exactly what is their mind to telling us that the researchers, psychologists, etc. have no way to tell what is happening. You can't have it both ways. You also imply in your first paragraph that there is such a thing as a true psychopath but then back track on that in your followup post.

No offense, but you might want to stay out of science in general and research altogether.


Believe me, I will.  I prefer the delightful wonderment of not knowing, and the cynical comfort of knowing that I don't know.

I suppose I should  have prefaced my remarks with, "IMHO," but it seems obvious to me that everything about Mind is just someone's opinion.
 
2013-08-02 12:54:34 PM

Warlordtrooper: This is why liberals never win. We need to stop helping conservatives. This man deserves whatever disease he has.


I disagree. I don't know much about this man other than what's been posted in this thread. But I know I don't want to emulate his life or his lack of compassion. I'm better than that.
 
2013-08-02 12:54:55 PM

NeverDrunk23: Interestingly, some mods feel that the reason Fark is lacking in reasonable conservatives is not because of alts like that who make conservatives look bad with every post, but the REAL fault lies with the ones who call them out on their lies and bullshiat.


I don't think there are any "reasonable" conservatives, they all have the exact same arguments some just use crazy hyperbole and poor spelling and others use prettier verbiage.
 
2013-08-02 12:54:57 PM

The Why Not Guy: Bloody William: I'm tired of trolling as a concept. I want honest, spirited debates, none of this weird psychological playground shiat.

If anyone in charge is reading, let me second this. If it's about finances I would gladly pay $10 a month for what BW just described.



Seriously, what do the moderators even do around here besides say "Moderators can't greenlight articles!"? I get the feeling that half the trolls are just admin alts. Look at JWP, it's impossible to get that many freaking greenlights unless you either A. don't work at all for 7+ years or B. greenlight your own headlines.
 
2013-08-02 12:56:32 PM
I'm sure that the conservative blogger will completely miss the whole message and try to use this as a way to prove that all government programs are worthless and that only private charities are needed.
 
2013-08-02 12:56:34 PM

Riothamus: The Why Not Guy: Bloody William: I'm tired of trolling as a concept. I want honest, spirited debates, none of this weird psychological playground shiat.

If anyone in charge is reading, let me second this. If it's about finances I would gladly pay $10 a month for what BW just described.


Seriously, what do the moderators even do around here besides say "Moderators can't greenlight articles!"? I get the feeling that half the trolls are just admin alts. Look at JWP, it's impossible to get that many freaking greenlights unless you either A. don't work at all for 7+ years or B. greenlight your own headlines.


Real news. Real funny. Perhaps this mission statement has something to do with it.
 
2013-08-02 12:56:48 PM

Godscrack: [cdn.ebaumsworld.com image 639x385]


Oh Lawd!
 
2013-08-02 12:58:00 PM

MSFT: js34603:
Cool cool, you can toss the I disagree with him politically part in there. So now I just want you to say "This guy I disagree with politically said mean things on the Internet so I want him to die a terrible death, and I want to piss on his grave."

You trot this out in every thread. Is hyperbole on the Internet such a difficult concept for you?


Trot this out in every thread? Hard to believe since I'm not in every thread and the threads I'm in very seldom have anything to do with people dying.

Also, hyperbole is the calling card of a weak position. If you have an opinion state it, don't exaggerate it for effect. He had an opportunity to say "oh I'm just exaggerating I don't wish death on this person I disagree with", instead he did, oh what's it called, doubling down on the derp.

What's a difficult concept for me is the incredible cognitive dissonance of people who say "this guy said mean things about Roger Ebert on the Internet, so I hope he dies a horrible death and I want to piss on his grave"...on the Internet. That level of ridiculousness just kind of bugs me. I guess maybe I could attribute it to hyperbole and ignore it because we're on the same side (I have no farking idea who this blogger is, sounds like a jerk, and I doubt I agree with him politically either) like you seem to be doing, but instead I just want our angry friend there and the rest of the derpers in this thread to acknowledge the incredible stupidity of reacting to a blogger acting like a jerk by acting Ike jerks themselves.
 
2013-08-02 12:58:39 PM
BarkingUnicorn:
Believe me, I will.  I prefer the delightful wonderment of not knowing, and the cynical comfort of knowing that I don't know.

I suppose I should  have prefaced my remarks with, "IMHO," but it seems obvious to me that everything about Mind is just someone's opinion.


Which is perfectly fine - but try not to confuse you not knowing things with other people's ability to discover, test and then know things. Just because you have opted out doesn't mean the rest of us have, nor does it invalidate the findings of science that are reproducible and testable.
 
2013-08-02 01:00:35 PM

Riothamus: The Why Not Guy: Bloody William: I'm tired of trolling as a concept. I want honest, spirited debates, none of this weird psychological playground shiat.

If anyone in charge is reading, let me second this. If it's about finances I would gladly pay $10 a month for what BW just described.


Seriously, what do the moderators even do around here besides say "Moderators can't greenlight articles!"? I get the feeling that half the trolls are just admin alts. Look at JWP, it's impossible to get that many freaking greenlights unless you either A. don't work at all for 7+ years or B. greenlight your own headlines.


It certainly doesn't endear me to fork over $$ for TotalFark, that's for goddamn sure.
 
2013-08-02 01:00:42 PM

Three Crooked Squirrels: This reminds me a little of the GOPers that are staunchly against gay rights . . . until a family member turns out to be gay.  Then, they change their position overnight.  It seems to be par for the course for these conservatives - unable to back something that doesn't affect them personally, until it affects them personally.


Classic conservative story along those lines.  Back in the late 60's/early 70's Paul Harvey was probably the best known conservative voice on radio (he was Limbaugh before there was a Limbaugh) with an average of 22 million listeners daily and had a syndicated column that was published in thousands of newspapers across the country.  The toast of the town in conservative circles, you could always count on Harvey to be the echo if not the source of everything "pro-conservative" in regards to politics, society, religion, etc.  A staunch supporter of Nixon, he was constantly voicing his opinion that we needed to go all out in Vietnam, he supported Curtis LeMay's position we should drop a nuke or two on North Vietnam, or as LeMay famously put it:  "Bomb them back to the Stone Age."

One day in 1970, Harvey went on the air and completely reversed himself on the subject of Vietnam, declaring that the US should disengage themselves from the war and bring the troops home immediately. Conservatives were in a tizzy trying to figure out why their best known spokesperson had completely abandoned them on this issue.  The answer arrived the next day when Paul, Jr. filed for conscientious objector status with his local draft board.

BTW, Harvey had changed his name early in his radio career and then lied about it for several years following.  The reason why?  He himself had been drafted during WWII and was sent to aviation school (flight training), he stole a plane and went for a "joy ride" in order to feign mental illness and get a Section 8 Discharge from the military and it worked.  In the face of all those millions of veterans who had served, he didn't want the truth to get out that Mr. All-American Conservative was a coward who didn't want to fight for his country in WWII.  This (draft dodging) of course, seems to be another somewhat familiar trait among many conservatives; see:  Gingrich, Cheney, Limbaugh, Romney, Nugent, O'Reilly, Kristol, et al)
 
2013-08-02 01:00:44 PM

js34603: What's a difficult concept for me is the incredible cognitive dissonance of people who say "this guy said mean things about Roger Ebert on the Internet, so I hope he dies a horrible death and I want to piss on his grave"


And he advocates that people not have access to healthcare if they can't afford it, don't forget about that piece of the douchepuzzle.
 
2013-08-02 01:02:50 PM

Jairzinho: tbeatty: NewportBarGuy: Imagine if his health care were covered by a single-payer entity. He wouldn't have to beg like some homeless person.

That would be nice, right?

He'd be dead, Jim.

Oh right. The Dead Panels at the FEMA Camps.


No, the long wait for care and the lack of insight to know whether it could be improved is waht will kill people.  Don't worry though, it's fringy enough that overall mortality will be unaffected as the numbers the press reports are overwhelmed by infant mortality and they'll just change the standard like Japan did if it ever looks worse.  Single payer isn't a panacea that makes care affordable.  It is a way, however, to eliminate the "keeping up with the Jones's" mentality that pervades capitalist society.  That mentality is what highlights disparity and drives innovation as well as overall improvement.  When everyone get's the same, no one knows if it's crappy or not and a stagnate crappy will become the standard.  It doesn't take a PhD in economics to understand that single payer + finite budget = rationed care.  If the system isn't based on risk/payout, it's not insurance and will not reflect an overall push for improvement.   There's no incentive.
 
2013-08-02 01:03:30 PM

MSFT: Raharu:
Are you BojanglesPaladin's new squire?

He's our resident White Knight of Ayn Rand.

Who wouldn't jerk off to this?

[media.npr.org image 850x637]


The thing about sharks, they have these black, dead eyes...........
 
2013-08-02 01:03:45 PM

impaler: Libertarianism: the belief the government shouldn't help people because they are vile moochers that don't deserve it. Also, we are totally willing to give to charity to help these vile moochers that don't deserve it.


I am going to school and jobless so I am super in debt at this point and  basically have my own problems to deal with...  I was walking to my class and I came a lady who said "excuse me my nephew is sick can you please spare some change" I looked at her gave her an apologetic smile and replied "I am sorry" and continued walking ...she looked at me and said "Ohh wow really? okay" as if it was my responsibility to help out. I came super close to yelling at her but i just kept walking

If i did give her money I probably would have received an insincere thank you and she would probably be thinking "thats all i get?"

I normally love to help others when I can but I will probably never ever give another a begger my spare change again!

few years back there was this older guy who was homeless living in a parking, I use to always leave bottled water and half my sandwich by his sleeping bag.
 
2013-08-02 01:04:57 PM

Aristocles: as we are deprived from making charitable decisions ourselves when the government takes our money.


No we are not. The government does not take our money. If your statement were true, we couldn't pay for anything at all.

Aristocles: Just because I said "I'd like to think that x is true" doesn't mean that "x" is not true


Correct, however what you'd like to be true is proven empirically to be wrong. Humans are demonstrably immoral beings.
 
2013-08-02 01:05:32 PM

TV's Vinnie: I'm sure that the conservative blogger will completely miss the whole message and try to use this as a way to prove that all government programs are worthless and that only private charities are needed.


I feel that in the end, he'll go right back to how he was before this happened and the irony and hypocrisy will never click with him.
 
2013-08-02 01:06:25 PM

Headso: js34603: What's a difficult concept for me is the incredible cognitive dissonance of people who say "this guy said mean things about Roger Ebert on the Internet, so I hope he dies a horrible death and I want to piss on his grave"

And he advocates that people not have access to healthcare if they can't afford it, don't forget about that piece of the douchepuzzle.


So? This is where the issue gets confused because you can't tell someone to stop acting ridiculous without someone saying "he started it!" Is this 1st grade?

The guy writes things you don't like on the Internet. He acts like a jerk. I know how I'll respond, by acting like a jerk too! Truly that's how our problems will be solved.

Hey don't donate to him. I'm not going to. Don't cry when he dies, I know I won't (unless I think about his kids too much). But stop trying to out asshole him and acting self righteous about it when you're behaving just like he would if you were the one laid up with no insurance. (Not you specifically, but quite a few others).
 
2013-08-02 01:06:54 PM

TV's Vinnie: I'm sure that the conservative blogger will completely miss the whole message and try to use this as a way to prove that all government programs are worthless and that only private charities are needed.


The Paul-Cruz healthcare plan calls for all uninsured Americans to create a conservative blog and solicit donations in the event of illness or injury.
 
2013-08-02 01:08:55 PM
You know, I've considered myself a liberal simply out of practical means, not because I'm some "bleeding-heart" or have a ton of empathy to give around.  So when I hear stories like this one, I will admit to having a bit of schadenfruede. Not that much to see him die or hate him, because I don't need that on my ledger, but being that he is conservative, he probably threw out that 47% number like it was candy. Probably a "I'm a self made man, I don't need any government helping ME out" type. Well guess what buddy, you ARE now that 47% that you despised so much, congratulations, moocher!

But it doesn't surprise me about people like him. If it was a liberal dying of cancer, he'd probably gloat endlessly until said individual died, and from the way he ranted at Roger Ebert, he definitely was. Now like I said, I don't want him to die at all. I hope he lives until his 80s in the best of health. But do I have compassion for him? No. If people want to contribute to him, that's fine, but call his ass out publicly about how he can't live up to his own standards. Make him a household name on Fark and other sites about the failures of conservatism.
 
2013-08-02 01:09:18 PM

js34603: But stop trying to out asshole him


Based on his comments and him being a modern conservative in general I don't think that is possible, so don't worry he will always hold the lowest ground.
 
2013-08-02 01:11:01 PM

js34603: MSFT: js34603:
Cool cool, you can toss the I disagree with him politically part in there. So now I just want you to say "This guy I disagree with politically said mean things on the Internet so I want him to die a terrible death, and I want to piss on his grave."

You trot this out in every thread. Is hyperbole on the Internet such a difficult concept for you?

Trot this out in every thread? Hard to believe since I'm not in every thread and the threads I'm in very seldom have anything to do with people dying.

Also, hyperbole is the calling card of a weak position. If you have an opinion state it, don't exaggerate it for effect. He had an opportunity to say "oh I'm just exaggerating I don't wish death on this person I disagree with", instead he did, oh what's it called, doubling down on the derp.

What's a difficult concept for me is the incredible cognitive dissonance of people who say "this guy said mean things about Roger Ebert on the Internet, so I hope he dies a horrible death and I want to piss on his grave"...on the Internet. That level of ridiculousness just kind of bugs me. I guess maybe I could attribute it to hyperbole and ignore it because we're on the same side (I have no farking idea who this blogger is, sounds like a jerk, and I doubt I agree with him politically either) like you seem to be doing, but instead I just want our angry friend there and the rest of the derpers in this thread to acknowledge the incredible stupidity of reacting to a blogger acting like a jerk by acting Ike jerks themselves.


I understand your position on the hypocritical aspect, but don't necessarily agree with you 100%. But for this and future Limbaugh threads you may want to just cut and paste a concise statement along the lines of "It seems hypocritical to damn a person for hateful speech by the use of hateful speech".
 
2013-08-02 01:11:36 PM

cameroncrazy1984: Aristocles: as we are deprived from making charitable decisions ourselves when the government takes our money.

No we are not. The government does not take our money. If your statement were true, we couldn't pay for anything at all.

Aristocles: Just because I said "I'd like to think that x is true" doesn't mean that "x" is not true

Correct, however what you'd like to be true is proven empirically to be wrong. Humans are demonstrably immoral beings.


To the first point, I'm saying that any money taxed away from an individual cannot be used by him or her as he or she feels fit. I'm not saying that all of our money is taxed away.

To the second point, when I say "moral," I oppose it to "amoral" not "immoral." Human beings have moral freedom, meaning they are free to act morally or immorally.
 
2013-08-02 01:11:37 PM

Headso: js34603: But stop trying to out asshole him

Based on his comments and him being a modern conservative in general I don't think that is possible, so don't worry he will always hold the lowest ground.


Shrug probably, but that doesn't mean we should have a race to see if the modern liberals here can meet him down there.
 
Displayed 50 of 441 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report