Conservatives say stupid shit

[chunksmediocrites]

There's a difference between slow and intellectually lazy, built on a lifetime of conclusions gleaned from knee-jerk opinions, cherished and polished until something shiny distracts you.

[ZEZOZE]

ah. look. a button.

whose mind are you changing in a forum where most everybody agrees with you?

and i'm lazy?!

well yeah...i suppose i am.

[seebs]

Originally Posted by ITSOZAZ

so you use people with cf as an example of why abortion is a good thing? am i reading this right?

I use a specific person I was friends with as an example of why people ought to at least have thought about the question. I am not saying the right answer is always "abort", I'm saying that people who handwave over challenges and difficulties without considering them are doing the world a disservice.

[ZEZOZE]

oh well. i think that's a shitty thing to do.

perhaps chunks will do an analysis of me so you can determine whether you should feel ashamed or not. lol.

[Ari]

Originally Posted by ITSOZAZ

oh well. i think that's a shitty thing to do.

Why? Cause thinking hurts?

[ZEZOZE]

Originally Posted by Ari

Why? Cause thinking hurts?

sometimes.

[SR71]

This really belongs in a thread called Conservative Chicken Hawks are Big Weenies. It's that whole "in an organized militia" thing. Smacks of communism, right? Rugged individualists, ya know?

Ted Nugent: Vietnam Draft Dodger - YouTube

[Iacchus]

The rhythm of the Universe!

[SR71]

Originally Posted by Iacchus

The rhythm of the Universe!

Wrong thread!

[thedoc]

Originally Posted by SR71

Wrong thread!

Not really, as good here as anywhere.

[freemonkey]

Nancy Pelosi planning to amend the First Amendment of the US Constitution to end Citizens United.

[ChuckF]

Wow, I like that dramatic image of a person/corporation with tape over its mouth.

[seebs]

Originally Posted by freemonkey

Nancy Pelosi planning to amend the First Amendment of the US Constitution to end Citizens United.

I'm trying to think of a reason for which it is important that corporations have free speech rights, and I'm not coming up with a ton. The only concern I'd have would be the right of people to talk freely about what they want -- which may include "things that are good for the corporation I work at or own".

[LadyShea]

Minority Leader Pelosi said that the move to amend the Constitution was part of a three-pronged strategy that includes passage of the DISCLOSE Act, which would further regulate disclosure requirements for organizations that run political ads, and promotion of taxpayer funding of political campaigns. Ms. Pelosi said, “Our Founders had an idea. It was called democracy. It said elections are determined by the people, the voice and the vote of the people, not by the bankrolls of the privileged few. This Supreme Court decision flies in the face of our Founders’ vision and we want to reverse it.”

Public funding of elections should be the only goal. Without private direct funding of individual candidates, corporations could not purchase individuals. "People" could still donate to the election pool (to be equally distributed) all they want, if they truly are donating because they care so hard about the democratic process. Also, "people" could still speak freely all they want when speech no longer includes campaign contributions.

[Crumb]

Originally Posted by LadyShea

Public funding of elections should be the only goal.

Public funding of campaigns might be great, but it doesn't really address the Citizen's United/Super-PAC issue. Since that is all spending outside of political campaigns it must be addressed in addition to your standard campaign funding. Correct me if I am wrong, but I believe the SCOTUS has rendered it almost impossible to be addressed any other way than by a Constitutional amendment.

[seebs]

Originally Posted by LadyShea

Public funding of elections should be the only goal. Without private direct funding of individual candidates, corporations could not purchase individuals. "People" could still donate to the election pool (to be equally distributed) all they want, if they truly are donating because they care so hard about the democratic process. Also, "people" could still speak freely all they want when speech no longer includes campaign contributions.

I'm pretty not-comfortable with that. It seems to me that actual humans certainly ought to be allowed to pool resources to buy TV ads and things. Furthermore, who decides which candidates "count"? Consider all the abuses possible by having multiple candidates who do nothing but dilute the election money pool, or the problems inherent in using tax money to fund white supremacist hate speech...

There are real problems with centralizing this. I do see problems with companies funding election campaigns, but that doesn't mean the alternatives are totally trouble-free.

[freemonkey]

I know Pelosi said that she wants to "amend the Constitution", but the right is making it sound like she's marching in to Congress with a sword to gut First Amendment free speech rights and we'll all be wearing gags.

[ChuckF]

See, the Constitution must not be tampered with, unless it is the part about life tenure for federal judges, because that is obviously dumb, and especially the First Amendment, except for the part about Congress not establishing a religion, and especially the part about free speech, unless it is to prohibit burning the flag, which is really very different in many ways, when you think about it, because why would a corporation need to burn the flag? And also fixing it so dykes and queers and faggots can't get married, that is very important too.

[Iacchus]

Originally Posted by ChuckF

And also fixing it so dykes and queers and faggots can't get married, that is very important too.

God forbid they should have corn-hole babies out of wedlock! I thought they already had "shacking up" laws to accommodate these folks?

[ChuckF]

I agree! It's definitely no coincidence that Amendment 14 provides for equal protection. Do the math, it is all there, gay marriage is there, part of the will of God, you just have to open the eye to see it. It is the universe as revealed to me in the sixth revelation of the Hen when she spoke in 1998, when I was 15 (14+1 = 15). Fourteen is the number of Jesus Christ of Nazareth, and of the Hen, and of Homosexual Marriage (3 is the Trinity - or Trinidad), discovered in 1498). (1498 = 1998 - 500)

Observe: there are 435 words in the 14th amendment.

43.5 * 14 = 609
609 = 317 in base 14
3+1+7 = 11
14/11 = 1.272727272727272727
1*2*7 = 14

Duran Duran - Hungry Like The Wolf - YouTube

&ob=av3e
Goats on fire! Tora! Tora! Tora!

[seebs]

Side note: My mom is on many issues a bit of a knee-jerk conservative.

But the very first editorial she wrote in her career, pretty much, was one asserting that it was absolutely clear that flag-burning was protected speech, and that trying to change this would be a horrible thing.

[Iacchus]

Originally Posted by ChuckF

I agree! It's definitely no coincidence that Amendment 14 provides for equal protection. Do the math, it is all there, gay marriage is there, part of the will of God, you just have to open the eye to see it.

Is that what God meant when He said, "Be fruitful and multiply?" Or, that gays were the actual fruits thereof?

[ImGod]

Originally Posted by freemonkey

Nancy Pelosi planning to amend the First Amendment of the US Constitution to end Citizens United.

Skip the article and read the comments. They are more applicable to the thread title.

[ChuckF]

Originally Posted by Iacchus

Oh, is that what God meant when He said, "Be fruitful and multiply?" Or, that gays were the actual fruits thereof?

The fruit is the cornhole baby of the tree of knowledge of good and evil, as demonstrated by the fourteen (14) sexual positions. Only the truly gay can eat of the fruit and know God, or the universe as we create it.

The tree is represented by the number 6 (or sechs/sex) and the fruit is represented by the number 3, for the Trindidad.

6+3 = 9, which is the upside-down 6 of Aeneas
9*14 = 126, of Hadrian's reign
H+a+d+r+i+a+n = 14, the number of the Gay Christ Hen

Gay + Christ + Hen = GAY CHRISTIAN

Chickenfoot - "Oh Yeah" Music Video [HD] -...

[chunksmediocrites]

Originally Posted by Iacchus

Is that what God meant when He said, "Be fruitful and multiply?" Or, that gays were the actual fruits thereof?

OMG that is hilarious! You see, it is because the word fruitful contains the word fruit, and there is a dated slang term fruit to refer to a homosexual! Oh, you, with your wordplay puns!

Oh, the laughter that is reverberating!