OBAMA AND SOTOMAYOR DISCUSS THEIR DIFFERENCES
White Sox.
Yankees.
(Barack Obama and Sonia Sotomayor)
Picture by: dunno source. Caption by: Motya via Advanced Lol Builder
-
-
Copy & paste this:
Show Only: Democrats | Republicans | Media | Military
« Previous Don’t look now, but… | EVERYBODY WAS KUNG FU FIGHTING Next »
OBAMA AND SOTOMAYOR DISCUSS THEIR DIFFERENCES
» 289 comments
Leave a Reply
-
Recent Comments
Geary on Gay Rights: Coming to a Theate… KingOfScotland on Money Shot crazyalwayswins on Talking Horse Pleads the … Bob the eternally un… on Gay Rights: Coming to a Theate… Bob the eternally un… on Gay Rights: Coming to a Theate… Tommycat on Gay Rights: Coming to a Theate… Pratrp on Gay Rights: Coming to a Theate… Pratrp on Gay Rights: Coming to a Theate… Bob the eternally un… on Gay Rights: Coming to a Theate… Pratrp on Gay Rights: Coming to a Theate… 
Cheezburger Company BlogPrint on Demand
More I CAN HAS CHEEZBURGER?
I Can Has Cheezburger? - Lolcats n Funny Pictures
Animal Videos: Baby Penguin Cuddle
Lolcats - Lolcats n' Funny Cat Pictures
Kappa Alpha Tau
I Has A Hotdog - Loldogs n Cute Puppies
Cyoot Puppy ob teh Day: Redy 4 mai kloseup
Animal Capshunz - All of the Internet's Animals. Captioned
I Know the Answer
Animal Gifs - Cute and Hilarious Animal Gifs
THE BREAD. ITS TOO MUCH.
Daily Squee - So cute your brain might explode.
Not So Shy Panda
Historic LOLs - Captioned Portraits of Yore
Poor Reginald
My Food Looks Funny - Funny Food Photos
Let's Get Hammered!
So Much Pun - Visual Puns and Jokes
He's Right About Almost Everything
ROFLrazzi - Lol Celebs and All That's Fab Funny in Showbiz
HELENA BONHAM CARTER
Totally Looks Like - Stuff That Looks Like Other Stuff
This Strawberry Totally Looks Like Goldfish Cracker
Must Have Cute - See. Want. Must Have!
Tweedy Squirrels
![\"Quantcast\"/](\"http://pixel.quantserve.com/pixel/p-94wNw88f65Rhk.gif?labels=MTVN%20Digital%20Tribes\")
This one really isn’t that funny, there were plenty of others that were better(like the gaff about Clinton).
Caption should have been Obama asking her if his breath was ok =]
Captain should have been “just tell everyone it’s a curling iron burn.”
Captain should have been “just tell everyone it’s a curling iron burn.”
*raises one eyebrow*
I should have said that? That’s what turtle necks were invented for.
YAY! Avatar’s working! Thanks HST for your help the other day!
Pleasure’s all mine, capt. rarw!
Dammit! It stopped working!
I see it. I’ll be in my bunk
Haha! I saw it earlier but now it’s back to the green swatstika from before. Maybe only you guys can see it.
Only guys can see it.
*returns to bunk*
Naw, I can see it too.
Firefly reference FTW!
I appreciate that reference, fellow browncoat.
Why is no one else but me writing lols about Raymond Burris? He’s hilarious. I’ve got one I just did, check it out on my lolz page, it’s funnier than this. Actually, yesterday when I thought I had to fart, but it wasn’t just a fart, THAT was funnier than this. Getting a paper cut on my eyeball would be funnier than this. Yeesh.
Roland Burris?
Or did you mean this guy? {link}
Oh you mean Plaxico Burress? Yup, pretty funny!
Hrmrm, yeah. That’s who I meant. Zombie Seth needs more coffee…
*Gives Seth Two Shot Double Mocha Latte*
It’s ok…maybe Perry Mason SHOULD be the new Senator from Illinois
Zombie dance!
Wow anyone unfunny weak-sauce Obama caption.
*another
WHITE SOX!
PHILLIES!
REDS!
Sorry love, but I will never forgive the Reds for 1975.
Cubbies! (because the Red Socks are no longer the bottom of the barrel)
Not much of a fan… it’s just the team closest to me that I could think of
BAIRNS!
…Oh wait, wrong sport…
Hey if we’re going with the wrong sports I’d yell, “UK WILDCATS!!!”
* basketball and football that is!
I don’t know anything about sport… I paid no attention to the football until the bairns got to the cup final. (And lost)… I always think that sport is for playing not for watching. (And this is why I’m no good at pub quizzes)
Wait… whut? Aren’t bairns babies?
Children, yeah… People born in Falkirk are “bairns o’ Falkirk” though (apparently Saint Modan turned up and said “better meddle wi the deil than the bairns o’ Falkirk”) so that’s what the football team’s called….
Thanks for the knowledge AC… I’ll be leaving for Glasgow July 25!! Can’t wait… finally get to drink some real Scottish Ale!!!
Have fun!
“Scotland has two seasons: July and winter”
You picked the right time to go
I (unlike my husband) have only 2 goals while there: 1. Drink alot of ale…and …2. Buy some really great wool sweaters for next fall/winter…
Can I add that I love when AC types in a Scottish Accent?
Aye…
Sexy.
^
… Glad my words amused someone, tho.
I suppose it’s the same way that I like seeing “y’all” and “di’nt” written here…
White Sox!
Still not finding the funny.
Indeed, the Clinton was the funny! Happy day.
Sotomayor is looking for the funny in BO’s mouth.
And all she finds is teh sexeh.
I bet Obama’s breath smells like success.
Well, apparently, his kids call him “Stinky” for a reason.
Well, he was a smoker until last year.
“Was.” Okay.
That’ll definitely give a person the stink breath.
That’s why I only smoke marijuana.
good girl
how did this one even make it? not funny at all…
Ooookay… for the non US readers…
a) What is a Sotomayor?
b) Why white socks (unless with white shoes)?
c) Yankees? Isn’t your north/south war long over?
d) Why is your president trying to kiss that woman (who I don’t recognise as his wife)???
Hmm??
A. She’s some Liberal(I didn’t say racist….whoops..) Obama appointed to be the new judge on the supreme court.
B. This joke wasn’t funny
C. The Yankees are a New York Baseball team….course with California down the tube, who knows what is gonna happen….
D. Well, it would seem a little bit of Clinton rubbed off on Obama(Oh that was bad….)
Hope that helped!
A. Sotomayor agreed with the Republican appointees on her Circuit Court panel 95% of the time, and out of 380 published decisions she’s written, the Supremes have overturned only 3. Liberal? Fail.
B. You’re right, it wasn’t, but for the non-US person: the White Sox are Chicago’s baseball team, and…
C. the Yankees are New York’s. They’re not actually serious rivals; that would be the New York Yankees and the Boston Red Sox.
D. Clinton libido jokes never get old, do they? Fortunately, Bush stupidity jokes don’t either.
Slan agat,
A. If she makes it trough lets be honest, she is going left.
B. Exactly, the joke sucked(thanks for telling him about the White Sox, left that out…)
C. Yes, the Yankees are New York’s team. Your also right about the Red Sox(who cares about the White Sox anyway…)
D. Eventually the Democrats backdrop of saying that Bush was an idiot(which he wasn’t) will get old, but nobody is ever going to stop making bad jokes about Clinton.
If she makes it to the trough she’ll be left? Left what?
I mean that she will lean Democrat in the court.
oh. ok.
If she makes a trough she’s a pig farmer.
If she makes it through a tough trough, she’s a tough cookie.
Man, I wish. I’m sick to death of this right leaning court Reagan, Bush, and Bush have left us with. Now, if we can just get rid of Alito or Roberts… maybe find them with “the wrong girl or any boy”…?
Bush 41 left you with a right wing poser in Souter. Sorry you’re getting screwed this year on him, considering we technically have been screwed since he got there
White Sox!
Some of us care.
Y?
She’s certainly going to be to the left of Alito, as Souter is. But with the possible exception of Mr. Justice John Paul God Bless Him Stevens, there is not one true leftist on the Court now. They range from moderate to arch-conservative.
The reason Barack has White Sox as his caption is because he’s from Chicago. (However, as of this post, the Cubs are doing better percentagewise amongst the two Chicago teams.)
Well, ONE of Chicago’s baseball teams. Go Cubs!
Oh, and since you’ve been pretty reasonable in your language I’ll give you the benefit of the doubt and address the racism claim, as there’s a chance you’ll listen and think about it:
If you take a moment to track down a more complete transcript of her talk that everyone’s been up in arms about, you’ll see that the statement was meant in irony – that there is a temptation, no matter who you are or where you’re from, to think that your background and experience make your opinions more justified. She went on to clarify that she (unlike the mostly white male jurists she’s served with) is conscious of that potential for bias and works at checking her assumptions when she makes a decision, guarding against her own biases.
Everyone has biases. Not many people are aware of them and try to correct for them.
I recently learned that the comment was “apparently” staged. As long as Congress makes sure she won’t act bias, than I am fine with Obama electing a Democrat to fill a Democrat seat(what did we think he was going to do?)
Not staged, just taken way out of context. It’s actually a very thoughtful and nuanced quote, and if you parse just the part people seem to think is offensive, you’ll see she basically said she hopes someone with a diverse life experience (like a Latina) would make better decisions than a white guy without the same life experience. But she goes on to say that white guys have made very good decisions about race in the past, she tries to judge based on the law and not life experiences, but everyone is going to have some kind of bias based on their experiences, so it’s better to be aware of it than deny it.
I watched a bit of Fox News the other day about this (just to see what the tin-foil hat folks would be saying)…of course they chopped up the entire comment to make it appear that she was making a racist comment…fair and balanced my sweet a$$!!
Fox News went to court to protect their right to lie to the American people, and won.
I totally understand where your coming from, but what if a white judge/congressman/etc said that. He would be dead in the water and called racist, right?
For me, I would have to read (or hear) the statement in its full context before I made that judgement; however, given the current political climate, quite possibly, yes.
Thats what I mean, yet she will probably make it through(unless something big turns up)
I just don’t think that what she said was racist when taken in its complete context…but the problem is that we live in a society that can only handle news in 30-second MTV soundbytes and because most of her statement was edited out, most people are only hearing a statement that SOUNDS raist without hearing the full context.
That is true, people need to hear the whole thing before they make a bold statement.
See? We’re not such a hellaciously disagreeable lot after all.
I remember reading some time back an interview with Sandra Day O’Connor in which she talked about deliberating with Thurgood Marshall on discrimination cases. She felt that his perspective as a black professional in the Civil Rights movement was of immense value to the Court in understanding what they were deciding on and what their decisions would mean. Food for thought, indeed.
Yaaaa, another reason I can’t go into politics outside being PK president… I’m verbose and tend to speak my mind bluntly. Without context, I would sound like a real bastard… Hell, WITH context, I tend to sound like a bastard.
And we wouldn’t want you any other way…in bed…with a chicken bone blessed by a voodoo priestess named Gloria…
Mmm, sweet, sweet Gloria… She can bless my bone..
>_>
Wait, what?
Don’t we all? This is the internet, man, all bastards here
And then she went and contradicted herself…in 1994. Funny, that.
a) Google can be a big help.
b) Google can be a big help.
c) Google can be a big help.
d) Never mind, you’re beyond help.
Mine was allot more informative, cept for the last bit….
Like the avatar, BTW…
a) If it doesn’t just give you info overload
b) do do
c) do do
d) I have a Mr Kettle for you on line 2; something about comparing visual spectrum reflectance.
Of course, p4t, as long as the radiant intensity observed from a lambertian surface is directly proportional to the cosine of the angle θ between the observer’s line of sight and the surface normal.
The only “difference” between these 2 pathetic communist affirmative action scum bags is one’s a female who doesn’t deserve her “job” and the other is a male. Still waiting to hear the list of accomplishments that make her so called “race” better than white people’s………..
Welcome to the 3rd world.
You are pathetic…
yep, no truer statement has been said today.
butthurt reaches a whole new level of butthurt …
….. the butthurt hurts so deep, my heart is in pain.
… the butthurt is so vast, you can find it on googlemaps streeet view.
Still awaiting the first post by an American conservative who actually knows that the words “socialism” and “communism” are the names of political philosophies, and not insults.
This is particularly ironic because even American liberals are right of centre!
Still waiting for a smarmy European who actually understands that socialism and communism are polar opposites of individual liberty. In America, these ARE insults. Otherwise, Democrats wouldn’t whine so much when they are called these names. Your observation that American “liberals” are right of center just shows how hopelessly leftist YOU are. You are welcome to stay in whatever collectivist hive you call home.
Also, the published caption reeks. If the editor is afraid of anti-Obama satire, lay off giving us the opportunity and continue to show unflattering pictures of GW Bush. Stick with what makes you comfortable.
pwn!
Wow! Just…. wow.
Zoiks!!! ZING of the Week!!!
I know! Just reading that made my a@@hole pucker
Em, totalitarianism is the opposite of individual liberty. If you don’t know that, it’s unlikely you’ll know as much about politics as I forgot in the minute or so it took me to type this!
In a better mood, and quickly.
Try not to confuse a political philosophy with an implimentation of same which was actually state capitalism.
State capitalism, by definition, is fascism. If you disagree, we’re going to have to chalk it up to differences in our educational systems. Not saying whose I think came up short but you can guess.
Nice, misinterpret someone and then claim they are uneducated. You stay classy, Owen!
Right, because there are so very many shining examples of non-totalitarian communist regimes to make me look stupid. Stop waving your poli-sci pecker at me and “bone up” on some economics since communism and socialism are more economic philosophies than political philosophies. For an extreme example of how socialism, in a regression through economic collapse, ends up as totalitarian communism, read “Atlas Shrugged” by Ayn Rand. Also, if the best you have is to tell me “I’m smarter than you.” that, my friend, is some weak sh*t right there.
Ayn Rand? Please. She can’t write worth a damn, her philosophy is grade school level, and her politics are obscene. Anyone who actually admires Rand has serious issues. I’ve noticed that only college students with inferiority complexes tend to quote her. They all think they are top dogs being held down by parasites, but when you look at what they actually accomplish, you’ll see they spend way to much time whining about the unfairness of it all to actually get anything done.
I joked about you getting your poli-sci from a cereal box. Now I see that’s actually true.
ok, but Owen gets extra credit for “Stop waving your poli-sci pecker at me and “bone up” … ” I’m a sucker for language.
+ 1 internet for turn of phrase. Classic!
Notice, fellow libertarians and independents, that the lefty again resorts to insults rather than to answer the point I make. As for your read on me: dead wrong. Fifty years old, management level IT pro. Six figure salary and all that (until Obama takes it all away). I have gotten to where I am by nothing but hard work and have received no hand outs and never asked for any. I am quite shocked that you accuse ME of whining about unfairness when that is a classic lefty trick. “Life is so unfair to [insert identity group name here]. Let’s take it from these successful hard-workers and give it to these poor shlubs whom we have done our level best to keep down while at the same time accusing others of doing our dirty work.”
Ah, you started the insults. “Collectivist hive mind” is an insult. You don’t get to have it both ways, hypocrite. Either you want a down and dirty mudslinging contest or you want a discussion. Which is it?
Stop whining and insulting others and come up with something concrete instead a lot of overblown verbiage and unsourced rhetoric. Don’t assume that people who disagree with you are morons, unless you want to be treated that way yourself.
I welcome smart people of any viewpoint, even if they are disrespectful, smug, elitist jerks. That we can work on, but we don’t yet have a ‘Flowers for Algernon’ type smart pill to make idiots intelligent. So. Lets see if you can play nice amongst people who don’t necessarily agree with you, hmmm?
You need to read the thread from the BEGINNING, Seth. paws started the insults with his crack about American conservatives. and even if I did use the term ‘collectivist hive’ (minus the word ‘mind’ as you have inserted) I at least addressed HIS point. Neither of you has deigned to address any of mine, YET! The classic lefty projection continues. YOU continue to be disrespectful (cereal box, I believe, was YOUR term), smug (since you don’t seem in the least obligated to address the actual discussion), and elitist (since you seem to think that the readers of this thread are somehow incapable of following my “overblown verbiage”. I never used the word ‘morons’. In fact, I have yet to call anyone a name worse than ‘lefty’. Project, project, project. And now you presume to lay down rules for ME to follow? You CLAIM that there is some sort of ‘discussion’ going on here. You accuse me of ‘unsourced rhetoric’. At least I have some rhetoric. All you have is invective. Prove me wrong and address just one thing I have said in any of the posts in this thread without insulting me. A pointer to a non-totalitarian communist regime would be a good-faith start on your part. A pointer to any statist economic policy AT ALL that ever pulled an economy into prosperity would be better still.
For everyone else reading this who is simply (according to Seth) too moronic to just climb onto the Obama-mobile and STFU, it is obvious that your entire strategy consists of “LA LA LA LA, can’t hear you, whiner, LA LA LA, moron, LA LA LA”. You welcome nothing.
“I have yet to call anyone a name worse than ‘lefty’.”
-
Smarmy European?
Maybe he sees it as a complement? I don’t think you’re smarmy at all dear, if it’s any consolation.
Why, thank you… And I don’t think Paws4thot was smarmy either….
Or Danbala, although admittedly Danbala hasn’t been here in awhile.
My apologies. I overlooked that one, factual though it may be. So the list is up to “lefty” and “European”
I would be very outraged were it not for the fact that I laughed at “European” being an insult…
Yeah, that one gave me quite a few giggles. I don’t necessarily agree with it, but it was a funny change in what I expected.
As for non-collapsing social democracies, I have cousins in Danmark who are quite happy to live there. One is looking for work it is true. But the nurse and the IT specialist are both making very good money, and are comfortable paying the high taxes as they know that they will not be allowed to starve or die in a ditch if they were to lose everything. Sweden has a similar system, I gather. And funny thing, neither country is hemorrhaging people desperate to escape those high taxes or the ‘evils’ of socialist democracies.
Even with the taxes, I bet they have more disposable income than I would have doing their jobs here…
Spin, spin, spin. You got caught being a jerk, and you pretend to apologize. “Even though it’s factual,” eh? How do you even go about proving that someone is ‘smarmy?’ I don’t think ‘factual’ means what you think it means.
Here’s paws exact post:
Still awaiting the first post by an American conservative who actually knows that the words “socialism” and “communism” are the names of political philosophies, and not insults.
This is particularly ironic because even American liberals are right of centre!
How is that insulting, hmmm? It isn’t.
Ahh, you know Freudian psychological terms, how quaint. Tell me, are your accusations towards ‘lefties’ projection, as well, or does that term only apply to your opponents? How did Freud define projection again? I may have forgotten.
You haven’t made any points to address. If I’ve misread things and you actually do have some sort of argument you are trying to put together, be my guest and lay it out in plain terms. That’s what I mean by overblown verbiage. You write a lot of words that say very little of substance.
You claim that socialism and communism are insults, and use them as such, then claim you don’t insult people. Do you have some kind of memory impairment?
The only ‘evidence’ you use to back up your ‘points’ (I use that term loosely) is a fictional account, as if it proves a real point.
How is what you say NOT invective? Please, enlighten me. I seem to have missed any factual content somehow.
The Mondragon Collective in the Basque region of Spain is a good example of a non-totalitarian socialist state. So is most of Europe, and parts of South America. The people love Chavez, except for the oil thieves of course.
Statist economic policy? FDR. I look forward to your ill informed rant claiming that FDR’s policies extended the great depression. Shooting down that argument is a bit of a hobby of mine, and I have facts, figures, and graphs at my fingertips.
Now, maybe you could show me where I’ve said anything insulting to YOU, as opposed to insulting to an IDEA. No? Can’t find any? I thought not. But then again, you thought paws was being insulting, too.
It’s painfully obvious that you think you are smarter and better informed than everyone else here. I will enjoy disabusing you of that notion immensely.
Oh SNAP!
Lost my first reply for some reason after I hit “Add Comment” Is there a maximum depth on reply threads?
Anyway, I have since read purple switch’s windbag accusation (which doesn’t seem to apply to Seth for some reason).
Here it is in nutshell form, so purple doesn’t fall asleep in the middle:
Condescension-as-oratory shows you really aren’t after a discussion as much as you claim to be.
I do NOT think I am smarter and better informed than SOME of the people here (Miles, take a bow). I am however, probably among the most intellectually honest.
I said non-totalitarion COMMUNIST, not socialist.
Mondragon is a CORPORATION not a GOVERNMENT. (see what I mean about intellectual honesty?)
Venezuela will be able to keep all their oil (in the ground) now since they have chased away all the “thieves” who knew how to get it out.
Were you planning on ignoring my points and insulting me indirectly all evening, since you seem to have no interest in backing up your statements with either fact or reasoning? Just save me a bunch of time here.
What does your condescension show? Besides your intellectual dishonesty, that it…
Mondragon may be a corporation, but it functions like a government. Schools, social services, cooperative housing: they do it all. If you are any kind of anarchist, it’s an interesting case study. Mind you, they do social anarchism, not individualist anarchism, but it’s still anarchism.
Venezuela seems to be doing fine getting their oil, hmm, maybe we don’t need the owning class after all?
There aren’t currently any non totalitarian communist regimes because the US overthrew them all. Does the name Allende ring a bell?
Oh, and one more thing. Go ahead and throw me some links to your FDR graphs. Because he DID prolong the depression.
Links to come when the post gets moderated.
Frik, PK mods didn’t like the links. Heck, just look at the wikipedia article on the great depression and look at the graphs. Those graphs are from historical data, and completely accurate. When you look at the raw data, the only logical claim is “FDR fixed the depression quicker than anyone expected.”
I know Seth, right? I can’t put a link in my name to my LOLZ, and last time I included links in a post (to show someone who was asking about the Kung-Fu-Fighting lyrics), they were from lyric sites and still got banned. They were clean sites, too.
Did you learn political science from the back of a cereal box?
I’ve always preferred the wonderful discourse on Socialism that could be found on the back of Count Chocula as opposed to the commentary on the Oppressive Monarchy System found on AlphaBits…
And for pure red communism, one can’t beat the Frankenberry box.
But you can only get BooBerry in Blue States… (my personal favorite Kid Cereal)
HEE HEE!! Here’s a favorite cereal…
Along with Das Cap(ital)’n Crunch.
Check out these weird cereals. I especially like “Corn Crackos” and “Sir Grapefellows.” Note the banana on the Cornflakes box…
Ahhhh… innocence and nostalgia.
Ahahaha, “Fruit Brute,” I think I met him at the Eagle in San Francisco.
“Freakies,” it’s part of a complete orgy!
Or, you know, if you are into the bi-racial thing, there’s “Rice Honeys” and “Cocoa Freakies.”
OMG!!! I forgot all about Quisp and Freakies!!! I used to love those… I’m trying to remember the one cereal I used to eat before they banned the red dye #5…
Banned by the The House Committee on Un-American Activities after that commercial, “Trix are for Reds!”
…. Yes, because saying “you have a different political belief rather than the way America is designed!” is really an insult… and if it’s another American, it’s not an insult, it’s just you lying/exaggerating about their opinion. I’m an American, and “communist” doesn’t ring as an insult to me- just that there’s an idiot who’s using extreme views as an example to try and invalidate my opinion. Peace, back to schoolwork.
I hope it’s English 101 you’re going back to. Would you mind re-writing this for clarity?
*snerk*
Here it is in a nutshell: saying that someone is [insert political philosophy here] isn’t an insult. It just makes the person who said it look like they’re exaggerating someone’s opinion so they can invalidate it on the grounds that it isn’t part of America’s general policy.
So, what is it that was so unclear about my post?
I really didn’t get that this is what you were saying. I do disagree with you in specific reference to the names of the two philosophies in question. Without meaning to sound condescending (something I despise in others), your reference to schoolwork earlier makes me think that there is an age-related divide in how we view these terms. Communism and most socialist policies are antithetical to the elements of American culture that made our ascent to world-power status possible and sustainable. With Obama in charge and the value of the dollar and US Treasuries a subject of (anxious) laughter among Chinese economists, we are already seeing how the accelerating decline in our financial strength is having an effect on our standing in the world.
“Communism and most socialist policies are antithetical to the elements of American culture”
Are you going to go on claiming this highly contentious position as fact without debate?
Well, I’ll admit this- there’s a 34-year age separation between us, so I’m going to assume that there is at least a slight variation in how we see the world. It would be A) stupid and B) make me sound even MORE like a 16 year old not to acknowledge that you probably know more about the world today than I do, but I don’t believe that means it’s not worth debating (even if I have to do the occasional bit of research) issues with adults or thinking that I’m not intelligent enough to post here- that would be far too much representing the whole argument that American teenagers don’t really give a flying fig about the world around them.
Anyway, to go back to the issue at hand, I don’t believe Communism works, but I don’t think that it’s an insult, even in America- it’s merely another idea that, while being extreme, people can still chose to lean towards or far, far away from. Basically, I was trying to say that even in America, Communist doesn’t seem like an insult- it seems like (what is usually) a vast exaggeration of someone’s opinion, that if someone tries to use as an insult, makes them seem like an ass. I mean, it looks to me that American policies try to stay somewhere in between Communism and anarchy, in the sense that they try to give as much personal freedom as possible without allowing something or someone to run the country into the ground. So, in the eyes of a (this one) 16 year old, calling someone a Communist is really just saying they have an extreme viewpoint, not an insult.
Sorry, I doubt that post made sense- I just finished working out for quite a while and I’m exhausted. If that was a waste of time to read, I apologize- I need to get some rest and I’ll clarify tomorrow if you didn’t see what I was trying to say, just give some feedback. XD
I don’t want to hijack your converation, tyler, but communism and anarchy are not in any way opposites. I think you mean totalitarianism, or possibly fascism. Basically a form of government that does not tolerate dissent.
While some historic communist states have been totalitarian, the ideals of communism aim to realize freedom for everyone. Whether this is possible or workable is debateable, but that’s what it’s about.
Oh. Sh*t. Typo! >.< I meant to write fascist there, but my friend was talking about people who join "groups for anarchy" while i was typing. My bad!
Tyler, my hat is off to you. You are right, you have every right to have your opinion taken seriously. The post made complete sense. But I still think that the terms have the effect of being an insult even if what you say is true. There are not a lot of politicians in our country that would embrace those terms even if they are applied accurately.
“…in the sense that they try to give as much personal freedom as possible without allowing something or someone to run the country into the ground. ” An interesting take and not where I thought you were going with this. I would have said, “without allowing that personal freedom to infringe on the freedoms of others” but maybe we are saying the same thing. I get a sense that you mean politicians at the end there whereas I mean everyone, political and non-political alike.
No need to apologize, if I made you doubt yourself I’m sorry. It was only that first post that I found confusing.
FFS….
Don’t talk about things you know so little about. It just gets embarassing.
Like any responsible system of government, both communism and socialism seek to put power into the hands of the people. Communism seeks to do away with the need for government, often through an ‘evolutionary socialist’ phase, and allow people to govern themselves. Socialism is a form of government action based on a society’s duty of care toward all it’s members. Essentially, taking from the rich (normally by taxes) to keep the poor from starving.
Communism empowers people by giving them better control of governance (in theory). Socialism empowers people by freeing them from economic slavery (in theory). Both are good and needful things.
Like any system, both can and have been abused and corrupted. This does not change what they are and the good both could potentially do.
The fatal flaw in both these systems is that eventually you have to force people to act against their natures. Communism and socialism claim to be about fairness. There is nothing fair about someone who can make 100 widgets a day getting the same rate of pay as someone who can only make 20 (or none at all because he knows the governement will take care of him whether he makes his 20 or not). I can’t believe we are still having this conversation in the 21st century. I especially love the phrase “flawed implementation”. The Soviets just got it a teeny bit wrong. All we have to do is tweak it a bit, maybe include some umbrella drinks at the re-education camps, and it will all work out right, THIS TIME.
An interesting assertion, do you have any data to back it up? Does any socialist state pay the same wages to productive and non-productive members?
In fairness, that was likely a dig at communism, not socialism. I did mention both.
Why does how much you can produce dictate how much you should have? What’s the logical argument for a necessary link there? Surely it’s fairer that everyone gets enough?
Leninism is a fair ways from communism. Stalinism is almost its horror-comedy parody. You could equally criticize capitalism on the basis that fascism was into the free market.
And human nature is always a fun one. Where did it come from? Evolution (whether directed by blind chance or the hand of God, whatever your preference). It has grown and changed. It can continue to do so. People can and do choose to act for the good of others over their own, and might do so more often if their society applauded such moral behaviour rather than championing egoism.
I think socialism should provide everyone with the basic necessities of life, and the free market should provide the rest. People WANT fairness. Most average people like it when excellence in others is rewarded, as long as they aren’t starving.
I go a little further left than that, taking a (very, very, very) long-term aim of a truly ungoverened communist utopia. The kind of socialism you’re talking about is, to my mind, a huge leap in the right direction. With all respect to your ideals, it’s not something I’d settle for as a final destination.
I’m an anarcho-syndicalist. I want communism on the small scale, socialism on a middle scale, and a free market on the global scale. Punish free riders (those who don’t share in the cost of providing basic necessities and social stability) by not trading with them.
In the long run I think we’ll reach a post-scarcity society. An ungoverned communist utopia is one likely result of that. As in Iain M. Banks “Culture” series.
I’m of the opinion that we’re far more likely to have a mass die-off due to overpopulation, which is very tragic. I’d rather envision a society with much fewer people, where the global scale isn’t really relevant. Groups of people of a size that they can live off their own labor without needing mass trade.
Maybe I’m just a Luddite. I’ve never read Ian Banks, the clearest idea of what I’m thinking of was Huxley’s Island (without the whole ‘drugs are the answer’ sub-theme). You got an ISBN you could ship me? Always looking for good reading.
I’m am always conflicted when I read the words of space hippies like you two. No, that isn’t an insult. It is a statement of how damn foreign your thinking is to me.
All I can see is the made for television, low budget horror film of how both of those ideas could go horribly wrong because people are creatures of conflict. I’m afraid that whatever is able to sustain a society like that will be many generations removed from the primates I see around me and before me in the mirror.
Sounds nice though, for what that is worth.
Like Attack of the Killer Tomatoes?
I suppose you can say that.
same here… sounds nice thought doesn’t it?
Yeah, I thrashed that one out with Froo a while back. When I say very long term goal, I mean hundreds if not thousands of years, when we have all had a chance to evolve towards something less rage-driven. Right now, what I want would be a disaster, no question.
I’m still gonna call you a space hippie as a term of endearment.
‘space hippie’ makes me smile. ‘Hippies… IN SPACE!’ In space, no-one can hear your babble.
Send that idea to Matt and Trey. STAT.
it’s a good one.
These are the voyages of the USS Drummer Boy, the largest freighter powered by the experiment LSD Drum Line Drive Propulsion System Thingie v6.9
There was a PCP core based drive but it proved too unstable.
The problem I see with the is the hippie engineer. I guess you just have to hope nothing breaks down, becuase it’s not getting fixed any time this week. ‘Packed schedule, man, just packed’.
Isn’t Simon Pegg a potsmoker in Shaun?
Well considering that the LSD drive powers their bongs, I can see the engineer being very motivated to maintain its upkeep.
Hippies can get things done, they just need a little more of a reason than other people.
Nope, near alcoholic but I never saw any pot smoked. His friend used to sell pot but that is the only reference in the movie as the guy bringing in some kind of income.
Huxley’s “Island” was brilliant. He doesn’t say ‘drugs are the answer,’ though. He says, ‘hallucinogens, used as a part of an educational/psychological/developmental regime, may have value,’ and I can state from personal experience that he’s correct.
I saw his widow speak at a conference called ‘Mind States,’ and she was still pushing the “LSD is good for kids” idea.
Oh, and “Consider Phlebas,” by Iain M. Banks, ISBN-13 number: 978-0316005388. It’s the first book in the Culture series, and some of the best high concept space opera I’ve read.
lol space opera? WTF??
Sorry, are you asking what the term means, or claiming that “Consider Phlebas” isn’t space opera?
Quoting wikipedia, “Space opera is a subgenre of speculative fiction or science fiction that emphasizes romantic, often melodramatic adventure, set mainly or entirely in space, generally involving conflict between opponents possessing powerful (and sometimes quite fanciful) technologies and abilities. Perhaps the most significant trait of space opera is that settings, characters, battles, powers, and themes tend to be very large-scale.”
@JTC: You need somebody to do your googling for you or something? Everyone else manages to look up the terms they don’t know. {http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Space_opera}
Like literary power ballads, then?
@ Seth…looks like you’ve got it covered.
Uhhm, no, it was a WTF
reaction to “space opera.”
People do that all the time here. In case you don’t want to look that up.
Besides, everything is more epic… IN SPACE!!!
Yes, like literary power ballads. Star Wars is definitely space opera. Star Trek might be considered space opera. Blade Runner is NOT space opera. Does that help?
Epically.
@JTC: I know people ask for definitions of stuff all the damn time around here, when clearly we’re all capable of looking it up. It wastes time and bandwidth. Sorry, one of my pet peeves.
Yes to Star Wars, no to Star Trek.
Star Trek was a series of incidents with occasional Space Operaness. They had a sprinkling of galaxy sized plots but they never lasted too horribly long.
Star Wars was one continuous space opera. Everything about it was large scale and galaxy affecting. Everything was about the rise and fall and rise of galactic spiffyness.
so sayeth the DWN for what worth that holds. For the record, I am more into Star Trek than Star Wars. I like the Sith too much to be into Star Wars as hardcore as I could be.
Sure, I easily googled the clinical definition myself, but now I’m getting the real definition.
See what I did there?
The Sith have nothing on the Mandalorians.
Whups, better zip up. My geek is falling out everywhere.
Eh, Evil dudes wearing black and wielding red light sabers. I try to keep my goals simple.
Individualistic ass-kickers with a hard-bitten mercenary mentality and serious family values, who trust no-one outside their adoptive clan. And have the best training, guns and armour.
To each his own, I guess.
Eh, true. You choose the stock military badass and I choose the stock ronin badass. Either is perfectly valid.
It is quite possible that you don’t even deserve what freedom you have if you are willing to let falsehoods, rumors, and out of context comments control your extremist opinion, and if you have no notion to do any background check of your own to find out things for yourself rather than relying on opinionated arguments that leave out whatever information contradicts the extremist bile that comes out of the party of “No.”
David Axelrod called. He wants his talking points back.
Ignoring the whole “you’re too stupid to be allowed to opine.” meme you having going here, I’d like to focus on that phrase in your first sentence, “It is quite possible that you don’t even deserve what freedom you have if…”. Very telling. DOJ tells the state of Georgia that they are not allowed to verify that only US citizens can vote whose faces match the names on voter rolls and you want to revoke NO_MO_BAMA’s freedom because he telegrams his anger and frustration at the political double standard extant in America? He probably has a job. Me? I work from home and can Hayek your Alinsky all day.
Considering my point was not directed at him expressing his anger, and directed more so at the apparent lack of understanding on information gathering that brought about this anger, I don’t feel a need to clarify my position on that. So, until you have something to bring up in a reply that actually replies to my own reply, please enjoy whatever work it is that you are doing from your home currently.
You made several assumptions, insinuations, and statements of opinion in your response to NO_MO_BAMA that I am going to assume you are treating as factual:
1. He is willing to let falsehoods, rumors, and out of context comments control his opinion.
2. His opinion is extremist.
3. He has arrived at this opinion without doing research.
4. He relies on the opinionated arguments of others.
5. The Republican party is the party of “No”.
6. The Republican party is a source of extremist bile.
7. The Republican party disseminates half-truths and falsehoods.
8. Because of all this, NO_MO_BAMA is in danger of losing his freedom.
With the exception of #5 and #8, all these points are simply YOUR opinion, which, considering how we all know you as well as you presume to know NO_MO_BAMA, could be the result of 1, 2, 3, 4, 6, and 7 being true of you (substituting Democrat for Republican as appropriate).
#5 is straight out of the DNC playbook and completely ignores all the times George Bush went to Democrats in Congress and got told “No”. This is the inspiration of my David Axelrod comment.
#8 is the one topic of discussion I see in your post that is worth debating. If you think that the other stuff is factual, let’s see something other than the “unsourced rhetoric” that Seth excoriates above. How’s that for a reply to your reply?
Ouch, looks like Owen is going to have to step up his game a bit I think he’s used to debating stupid people, and this may have given him a false sense of his own skill.
Totally off topic, but did you know that the worse someone is at something, the more likely they are to think they are awesome at it? They don’t even know enough to know how bad they are. Just something to think about.
Of course, which is why I am the supreme being of eating fried foods. And I will drag the corpses of my enemies through the mud for disputing my epic claim.
Dude, I freaking LOVE you
not literally, but you know, man-love.
But is it hot and fresh from the oven man-love or is it the on the bear rug by the fire fueled by the enemies of the sovereign state of Spatula man-love?
Cuz I like baked goods…
….. Once again, DWN is wonderful.
Too kind.
Get a room you two, FFS!
You’re just jealous…
Tyler does have a purty mouth.
I totally agree. You do seem to think you are awesome. I’ll deal with you later. I’m busy having a grownup conversation with Miles.
Yep, your maturity just shines through. The way you use terms accurately, and don’t slander idologies based on flawed implementations. The way you don’t hide in terminology when you come out defending hateful bile. The way you don’t use a wall of text to kill conversation, nitpicking details because you might just have an argument there.
I guess your SPAG marks don’t earn themselves, but what marks you out in adult company is being able to debate the concepts at play cleary, accurately and concisely.
Shorter purple switch: Shut Up, that’s why!
Clear, concise and totally accurate.
Impressive learning curve, there.
Shorter than the other purple switch? Than myself in the past? That’s just confusing.
I am so looking forward to your ‘grownup’ attempt to deal with me later. I really hope we haven’t scared you off by being better debaters than you, if you stick around and eat enough humble pie, maybe you can learn something. But I think you are an old dog who doesn’t want to learn any new tricks. If that’s the case, you should probably retire from the game. Otherwise, being continually shown up, shot down, put in your place and debunked will only hurt your feelings, and not spur you to grow and improve.
Considering a previous individual Owen was debating was you, Seth, I suggest you rephrase the part about who Owen has debated previously with.
Um, pot? Kettle? (For that condescension-as-debating style you enjoy so much…)
like you’re one to talk about debating styles – you consistently ignore other people’s responses to yours, nit picking out a detail here or there and throwing it out of proportion.
You seem zealous in your arguments and usually informed on bits here and there, so if you start paying attention to all the response I think you’ll do a superb job in debating your point. You’ve shown you can do research, now back it up with a good debate about something (anything).
Wallfly, I like you- link in the name, use it so I can tell you apart when I scroll through the trolls’ comments easier please?
just did, thank you very much for that link, Tyler
Great pic – a natty Alcacian? Most fly!
lol, i was going for a white-collar dingo, but it was a bad hair day
Miles,
Thanks very much for your well-thought out and polite reply. This is in stark contrast to others in this thread. I’m afraid some rancor from that other sub-thread bled over to you and for that I apologize.
Let me first say that I never actually condoned NO_MO_BAMA’s phrasing. It was simply my misinterpretation of your comment regarding freedom juxtaposed with yesterday’s DOJ decision regarding Georgia that set me off.
To deconstruct NO_MO_BAMA, I would like to say that calling Sotomayor a communist is indeed a stretch unless, as you say, he has done more research than other people have had time to do and has discovered something that other conservatives are not privy to since I don’t hear this particular accusation coming from anywhere else on the right. The jury is still out on Obama, however, since I don’t think we have seen the end of the nationalization of major industries here. Skipping over the word “scumbag” which we can stipulate is a rude insult, I’m guessing that either he or someone close to him has been a victim of the reverse discrimination known euphemistically as “affirmative action”. I also believe that he sees an expansion of affirmative action as inevitable, based on his interpretation of the “wise Latina” comment, and does not believe this would be a good thing.
The “race” scare-quote made me uncomfortable and I will not defend it. Since he has not made a reappearance all day, I’m going to dismiss his sentiments as a drive-by expression of deep frustration. It is, indeed, very sad that Chuck Schumer and John Kerry, et al. are decrying the use against Sotomayor of the very tactics they used against Clarence Thomas and Miguel Estrada.
Having said all that, I personally dispute the “out of context” defense of Sotomayor’s “wise Latina” comment. It was reported today that she gave an eerily similar speech in 1994 wherein the word “Latina” did not appear in the offending statement. Here is a link to the speech: http://theplumline.whorunsgov.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/06/31794-40th-conference-of-law-reviews.pdf
Be advised that the first page of the pdf is misleading as the entire text of the speech begins on page 2.
Quoting:
“Justice O’Connor has often been cited as saying that “a wise old man and a wise old woman reach the same conclusion in dueling cases. I am not so sure Justice O’Connor is the author of that line since Professor Resnik attributes the line to Supreme Court Justice Coyle. I am not so sure that I agree with the statement. First, if Prof. Martha Minnow is correct, there can never be a universal definition of ‘wise.’ Second, I would hope that a wise woman with the richness of her experience would, more often than not, reach a better conclusion.”
Miles, no one disputes that different people with different experiences are going to have different judicial opinions more or less often than they have the same opinion. It is the idea that she has said she believes that she as a Latina or, earlier, to fit her audience, she as a woman, will reach BETTER conclusions (than a white male, a Latino male, or just any male).
At a point earlier in the speech, she used the Menendez murder trial, that came down to a hung jury of six men for conviction vs. six women for acquittal as an example of the “good” influence of women in justice. I am uncomfortable with this sample of n=1 because (I’m making another assumption here) I’m sure that there are numerous examples of case law where hung juries were mixed or a homogeneous gender group of jurors reached an incorrect verdict. In this I am not opining on the rightness or wrongness of the Menendez decision. I am merely saying that it is a suspiciously lonely example convenient to her point.
I find it objectionable that she will get away with this prejudicial idea that any judicial opinions she comes up with are going to be intrinsically better than someone outside of her own circumstances. No conservative nominee would still be under consideration if they had said anything similar, in context or not.
Take a deep cleansing breath, NoMoBama, then call your doctor STAT to up your medication level. Sheesh.
“Barack, I told you…no tongue!”
I vant to bite your nehk! Ze arms of Pepe are upon you!!
He must have been turned by Rahm…
Ah, so *that’s* why he’s such a close talker …
It’s the retractable fangs that had me fooled…
Da bulls
You’re missing the last three letters?
Daaaa Bearz.
Daaaa haters of all baseball
Daaaa linkey.
Damn I miss Chris Farley.
Amen to that…
Fat man in a little coat, fat man in a little coat!
BEES!!!! BEEEEEEEEEES!!!!!!!!!
You kids are probably saying to yourself, “Now, I’m gonna go out, and I’m gonna get the world by the tail and wrap it around pull it down and put it in my pocket!” Well, I’m here to tell you that you’re probably gonna find out, as you go out there, that you’re not gonna amount to JACK SQUAT!” You’re gonna end up eating a steady diet of government cheese and living in a VAN down by the RIVER!
I swear to God I’m going to turn this bus around…….
is someone trying to be me?
**raises hand**
I think it’s supposed to be “Red Sox” and “Yankees”. The Red Sox and the Yankees actually have a real rivalry where the White Sox and the Yankees don’t. Even then, the joke’s not that funny.
Even then, the joke’s not funny at all.
Fixed.
Do *not* for one second suggest that Barry is a Red Sox fan.
President Obama is from Chicago, why in the world would he give a fig about a Boston team? He undoubtedly roots for either the White Sox or the Cubs.
He is an unabashed White Sox fan…
no one is a cubs fan.
Have you seen the front page of Roflrazzi?
Your tongue. Bite it.
She is actually a Mets fan.
Phuck the Mets!! Phillies rule!!!
Omar Minaya, Pedro Martinez, and Carlos Beltran FTW.
Ya racist…
HAH! FAIL!
@ judson, down there.
vvvvvvvvvvv
More Flavor! Less Calories!
Oh yeah….
Less filling!
Tastes great!
…and perfect with cheese.
Ah, that’s the phrasing I was looking for. Thanks HST.
Great Taste…Less Filling….{link}
This is an extremely creepy picture and there are a lot more jokes that could have been made out of that fact.
I have a tasteless joke in mind…
From the looks of this picture, SOMETHIN’S getting tasted…
Tonsils, looks like.
And done.
Eees okay. Was hoping for dirtier, TBH.
Nice, I liked your Naptime Rebellion one too.
I need to do a few more but unfortunately I’ve been more bitter than usual so I am cutting back so I don’t produce horridly mean spirited crap.
Well they were both nice smile to take with me as I head off to work this evening.
Enjoy your evening hun. *hugs*
Death, mind dealing with Owen above? he types far too much for me to continue on my lonesome.
Well after reading through it, I would advise to let more stubborn minds slog through it. You and I should be of lighter notes and humor here. At least for now.
>.> true. then again, I still have to defend my use of english up above. >.<
Well, you’ve the will and courage, go forth and defend thyself valiantly. As for the rest, Seth is taking Owen to task. I always let them do the heavy lifting.
you always have a tasteless joke in mind
Well… Um… ya… >_>
Damn, catchy comeback fail.
Yeah, this caption is not at all funny. I appreciate the shout out to my friend’s team though.
this lol is terrabad as it makes go sense
I wonder why Obama would pick a judge who is racist against while people when he’s half white himself. Her quick, about-to-be-overturned ruling against the white firefighters pretty much proves it.
Her “quick, about-to-be-overturned” ruling upheld the trial court’s decision, was supported by at least one other member of the 2nd Circuit Court of Appeals, and is amply supported by precedent. It may still be an unsatisfactory result, but if you actually look into the case background rather than the 45-second CNN summary, it’s not an easy case at all.
Wasn’t the upheld decision that the city declined to promote anybody, because they couldn’t decide on a basis for promotion that wouldn’t get them sued for racial bias?
Roughly. The troubling part is that it’s technically (from what I’ve been led to understand) a summary judgement, which isn’t exactly the same as a verdict being handed down. It’s much harder to appeal, and was pretty much a “we’re ruling this way, now sit down and shut up” from the court.
Summary judgment means that the court resolved the case on motions for summary judgment prior to the trial date. Normally one or both of the parties will move for summary judgment after the close of discovery (the period of time in which depositions, etc. are done). Simply stated, if the moving party can show the absence of any material disputed facts and that the undisputed facts entitle the moving party to judgment as a matter of law, the court will grant summary judgment to the moving party. You can also have partial summary judgment, where some issues are resolved prior to trial of the disputed ones. The basis for the stated facts from each party has to be backed up by citations to evidence (e.g., deposition transcripts, documents entered as exhibits).
Thank you, oh resident Denny Crane
I bow in humbleness to you.
Gingrich withdrew ‘racist’ label
.
{http://edition.cnn.com/2009/POLITICS/06/03/borger.newt.gingrich/}
.
hee-hee-he
Limbaugh ready to support Sotomayor
(CNN) — A week after calling Sonia Sotomayor a “racist” in reference to her 2001 “wise Latina” remarks, conservative talk show host Rush Limbaugh said Wednesday he’s now open to supporting President Obama’s Supreme Court nominee.
“I can see a possibility of supporting this nomination if I can be convinced that she does have a sensibility toward life in a legal sense,” Limbaugh said on his radio program.
Limbaugh’s statement comes the same day former House Speaker Newt Gingrich, who himself derided Sotomayor as a “racist” last week, wrote in an op-ed that he regretted his choice of words.
On his show Wednesday, Limbaugh said his potential support of Sotomayor stems from the nominee’s unclear stance on abortion coupled with the fact that she is a Catholic.
{http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2009/06/03/limbaugh-ready-to-support-sotomayor/}
His exact words were that if she is Pro-Life, he will have to seriously rethink his stance on his opposition to her.
in theory, she should be pro-life, but i haven’t read enough to know if she is or not. i’m hoping she’s more of a centrist on it.
I’m hoping she’s a big old lefty on it.
I actually think it would funny as hell if she was put in place as a (supposed) liberal judge, and she pulled a Souter and went the opposite way on the most basic of principles. And, it would satisfy my inner neo-con.
shouldnt it be Red Sox instead of White Sox?
Barack is from Illinois, not Massachusetts.
cubs and red sox>yankees and white sox