You might also notice that nearly every time the word comes up over there it's being used to attack someone the left disagree with politically. In fact, I bet you can Google examples of the left using that slur against every single Republican that ever lived including even the black ones and Abraham Lincoln. But you rarely find it used against Democrats, even ones who were in the KKK. Makes you wonder if they know what it means and if they do, do they care?
You might also notice that nearly every time the word comes up over there it's being used to attack someone the left disagree with politically.
Yeah, no doubt. They definitely did their best to cut and splice the bites where it sounded accusatory. (Or maybe that was just good editing). But accusations aren't the same things as discussions. And discussions can't be had by people too sheepish or embarrassed or defensive to have them. Hmmm... I wonder if any examples of such people exist?
That's a title, Zippie Bag. Titles are meant to be provocative. The questions asked and the methodology, however, you can see are objective. Most people understand that as a common and legitimate way of conducting surveys - as opposed to publicizing their results.
But why question your need to judge books by their covers (and articles by their titles) when you're trying to prove you're affiliation is with opponents of racism? Oh, that's right - another rhetorical question.
Well, have at it. Show us an example of the racist charge by a lefty not aimed at a political enemy.
I guarantee you that you can't get through this discussion without doing it yourself, and of course you already have in the broadest brush possible right off the bat.
You missed the point again, (non-racist) book-cover-judger. The point was that every use of that word in the clip was probably not an accusation (or charge) at all, but just its use in the context of whatever they were reporting or discussing.
You dismissed the survey results, so we know you're not even interested in seeing the role said phenomenon plays in Obama-opposition. (Yes, by definition those opponents would be those opposing him). But it's all good because I'm sure we'll have the standard reflexive defense showing up here of how Southern white Democrats were racist before the majority of them left the party (where to, I wonder?).
As far as plastic products go, zippie bags are near the top for utility and resourcefulness. I just don't get this 60's era prejudice against plastics...is it the dolphins thing?
To be honest, though, I don't even think the 538 results show that much of a divide. The places where they're most pronounced center around questions having to do with poverty and, most specifically, government programs - not all that much a shocker given conservative fixations on government social welfare.
I just don't get this 60's era prejudice against plastics...is it the dolphins thing?
Their manufacture makes use of additives that act as estrogen mimics and fuck up the male hormone system. You can measure genital characteristics in these baby boys that show increased (or as your counsel might be tempted to say "enhanced") feminization.
Most people like natural things. Not acting artificial, not eating artificial, not prefering artificial to natural objects of beauty. I remember when smooth white plastic was the decor du jour. Very ugly.
Of course, some people are disturbed by a more natural existence and feel that the cartesian straight-line universe should be imposed on every aspect of our everyday items, if possible - endocrine disruption be damned!
Well, both are fixated on the welfare thing. One side sees it as the solution, and the other as the problem. I think 50 years of ever increasing levels of it is a pretty good study to draw conclusion from.
Who here would want their child to have easy access to welfare from a disconnected, non-demanding far away government? Not me.
I think 50 years of ever increasing levels of it is a pretty good study to draw conclusion from.
That's because you judge books by covers. The more accurate answer is decreased standards of living over at least the last 34 years of anti-government policy and slashing of social welfare programs.
Who here would want their child to have easy access to welfare from a disconnected, non-demanding far away government?
Probably someone who cares enough about their kids (and others) to understand the difference between preferences and needs of last resort.
"act as estrogen mimics and fuck up the male hormone system."
Like soy, tofu, yoga, leftism, and the modern university education, whatever that is. I avoid all those things. I see what they do to men, and it's just sad.
Yeah. I kind of don't mind a porn-star who's willing to look a bit scary-sleazy.
Dirty sleazy is what scares me. Like when Bag rubs phthalates all over his balls (they lead to liver cancer, too, Boss - just an FYI), and calls it the manly response to yoga. Or whatever.
I don't like tofu/soy or natural estrogen mimics either, but the evidence doesn't show that they decrease your penis size the way your modern chemical affectations do.
Obviously you don't know anyone on welfare. I've even been on it myself. Need has nothing to do with it. California pays 1/3 of all the welfare in the country. Are there really so few needy people anywhere else or is it because California refused to follow the welfare reforms from the Clinton era. Maybe it's because CA is totally run by the left. That will make you needy as all hell.
Obviously you don't know anyone on welfare. I've even been on it myself.
So instead of resenting the fact that you were on welfare, your opposition to it is based completely on observation?
I don't oppose restrictions to welfare but I feel it's important to make sure that those energized in opposition to it aren't just grinding their own axes. Show me the evidence that it makes things worse or that abuses of it outweigh whatever good it does and I'll listen.
But then, I was never on it so I don't have some personal narrative to prove or redeem by my position.
Where did Chick go? He's been given ideas for a chemistry-rich thread to now post about. If he can devote entire posts to the odors of poop, surely he can crank one out in exploration of phthalates on the hormone receptor systems of mammals.
Either that, or he should be creating a Chirbit of his own "Love the chemists!" plea pronto.
I think 50 years of ever increasing levels of it is a pretty good study to draw conclusion from.
That's because you judge books by covers. The more accurate answer is decreased standards of living over at least the last 34 years of anti-government policy and slashing of social welfare programs.
Wrong again.
Poverty was on the steady decline until 50 years ago when LBJ gave us the Ingrate Society.
And decreases in standards of living are the big achievement of the Left.
Nobody has put more people on welfare than our current Fuhrer.
But all Ritmo needs is to go here to see who has wrecked everything.
Or take a look at all the material that places the blame for the current economy on Whitewater Willie.
@R&B: Actually, I was thinking of writing a phthallocentric post in a different context, so you have correctly adduced my bloggerly intentions. Were I paid for these endeavors in anything but your praise, I might be more timely.
And you can tell when edutcher's losing (not that he ever wins) when he pretends that Herbert Hoover and Calvin Coolidge and George W. Bush were never presidents and had no effect on economic policy.
Quick. Can someone set up the PayPal button to raise pledges for readers of the belief that each praise I make of chickenlittle should be worth at least a nickel per compliment?
And you can tell when edutcher's losing (not that he ever wins) when he pretends that Herbert Hoover and Calvin Coolidge and George W. Bush were never presidents and had no effect on economic policy.
Those who express less tolerance for unpopular groups tend to favor income redistribution and to be less supportive of capitalism and its discontents.…
Last, both redistributionists and anti-capitalists expressed lower overall happiness, less happy marriages, and lower satisfaction with their financial situations and with their jobs or housework.
The funny thing is, most Republican upward wealth redistribution promoters aren't all that well-to-do at all. ed's unemployed and ST was a mooch who lives like a vagabond. But because they lack respect for reason, they require a sense of order achieved through the justification of hierarchies that tell them that anyone with money is a natural-born-leader who automatically deserves their respect and adulation.
A number of wealthy people retain some decency about them. Those who have no other values however are empty and just need to surround themselves with "things" to feel less empty the way their poorer counterparts need to fill their bodies with food to achieve much the same effect.
That's why American connies love them. They identify with the emptiness and sense of symbolism that such materialism, for its own sake, exemplifies.
And Chip's cite needs updating. Money only improves happiness to a certain level, typically twice that of subsistence or so. Beyond that, it's all up to the person. The money can do no more at that point.
If Chip were as wealthy as his admiration for it indicates he'd like to be I have a feeling he'd understand that, though.
BTW, I think that "better definition of hell on earth" would be what all those cracked mirrors went through after you saw your reflection in them. Seriously, you've got a face like the wrinkled vagina of an ex-con. I mean, I've seen more beautiful bowling ball bags. Really, Timmy, you need to get that thing stretched out and ironed or something. It's positively Neanderthalish, just ghastly.
Obviously I read it, since no one else mentioned it, but only Troll would think the column was funny (rather warped sense of humor), but the point is, somebody wanted this guy destroyed politically.
You've got a lot of nerve talking about people leading empty lives, Ritmo.
You're life is so empty that the only excitement available to you is these dreadfully vile vicious battles on the internet over things you don't even give a shit about..
You have absolutely no life. Don't you know that that is your message here?
The only excitement available to Tommy is figuring out whose dick to suck next, and then bragging about it on his blog - amidst the posts about toy pianos and CDs of cover songs that teenagers could create. And his love of whores. Yes, whores! Tommy knows his own kind when he sees them.
Really, just empty, stupid, stupid stuff. And then anger at a black hamster having white hamster babies!
Yes, this is the stuff of teenage septuagenarian Shouting Thomas' life. He's like an uglier, older version of the Fonz.
Only the Fonz knew enough to call it an act and get paid much better for it.
From Ritmo's link: "Occupying privileged position within society has this natural psychological effect of insulating oneself from others."
Exactly what I'm talking about when I say devoid of self awareness.
For a proponent of big government, top down economics and policy to be lecturing conservatives about privileged positions and insulation is rich. It's a mindset that never even tried to examines its own presumptions. It even imagines itself so elite that it is above elitism. Awesome!
For a proponent of big government, top down economics and policy to be lecturing conservatives about privileged positions and insulation is rich. It's a mindset that never even tried to examines its own presumptions. It even imagines itself so elite that it is above elitism. Awesome!
Presumptions such as elitism being a "government-only" phenomenon? Presumptions such as business lacking an elite?
That nonsense sounds like your lack of an education talking. And no, not getting a degree doesn't make you a populist. It makes you uneducable. Anyone with a brain can educate himself even, but you're too mentally lazy to bother with that.
I don't give a fuck about the "size" of the government. (Although someone less senseless than you might note that it is a big country). And who even knows what "top down economics" means. Must be another one of your own personal definitions.
Other than that, it's a typical Bag comment. All emotion, propaganda and narcissism. Not much else.
ed - do you have to do much preparation before sucking Laughing Hyena Thomas' dick? Is there a ritual to it? Do you do something to it to make it taste less like cigarette ash?
Seriously, you're like the twentieth guy at a gang-bang, led there by Thomas, who wonders when he's going to get a shot. You really don't have anything to say.
Ritmo: "I don't give a fuck about the "size" of the government.".
You come in a long line of fools throughout history. Do you really think you know more about economics and government impact on it than me? Do you really? And you think that superior understanding you have comes from listening to a university full of people who never held a unsubsidised job, who never ran a business, who never hired, or trained a single person to make things of tangible value outside there own fully subsidized world. Do you really understand the effects of tax policy when you pay a fraction of the cost of your share of the nation's expenses. Do you even understand how little you understand? Let me help you. If you only know it from a book or the internet, then you only know what someone told you is true. Which means you actually know nothing for sure yourself. That must burn down deep.
Hell, the guys who you trust to tell you how it works didn't even get their understanding first hand. They trusted someone else, who told them what a guy like me said to some other guy who collected the data to write his thesis.
I think there are people who know a hell of a lot more than you, people who know the difference between macroeconomics and microeconomics, for instance... (which eludes you), people who know the difference between families and governments, and I take what they say a hell of a lot more seriously than I take all your bluster and pride, as if they were substitutes for reason and logic.
What you are saying is as dumb as saying that potatoes are smarter than farmers. Just because you engage in a largely autonomic activity doesn't make you smarter than the astute observer of your actions. No, the moon is not smarter than the astronauts and astronomers who figured out how to get there. No, the murderer is not smarter than the judge and lawyers who try and argue the case. No, the businessman can't figure out how to create a stable currency.
Most people know the difference between relative knowledge and absolute omniscience and ignorance. You are not one of them. You are just a guy who has one talent, and is stupid enough to think that makes him a god. But the research explains that, too.
The moon god is smarter than Copernicus, because it actually revolves around the earth. Copernicus is simply the lowly observer and explicator of this motion. He lacks the power of the Moon God, though! Moon God makes big bright moon object in sky move in circles! Copernicus is just a pipsqueak scientist who understands how it happens! Copernicus and Galileo ain't SHIT compared to Moon God!
"The moon god is smarter than Copernicus, because it actually revolves around the earth. Copernicus is simply the lowly observer and explicator of this motion. He lacks the power of the Moon God, though! Moon God makes big bright moon object in sky move in circles! Copernicus is just a pipsqueak scientist who understands how it happens!"
So between you and me who is the "lowly observer" and who is the Pope who knows better because he read it as written by other "wise" men.
Pope didn't care about evidence or observation at all, grasshopper. And "wisdom" was not defined by possession of empirical facts.
One would think Galileo's ordeal should have changed the way that process works but you seem to relitigate it by leaving it all up to "other forces", inexplicable mysteries, miraculous exertions, a generalized hatred of knowledge and, oh yeah - businessmen being businessmen.
If I hated knowing things as much as you do I might find it all to be really impressive, awe-inspiring stuff.
You only know what you have been told. Kind of like a tourist on vacation in the land of facts jotting down what the tour guide tells you, and thinking you understand what it's like to live there. Everything you know is second hand at best, and most is so far from the chain of custody that it may be made up of whole cloth, and yet there is no way for you to know for sure.
Good night, and tip your bus driver. Tomorrow we dine at Medieval Times Dinner and Tournament to get the real story of European life in the Middle Ages.
It is extremely rare to see someone get angry with Bago who is the probably the most even keeled commenter here IMHO. Ritmo just can't handle the truth.
chickenlittle said... For those keeping score at home, R&B led off with the first personal attack in the third comment.
For those who aren't comatose, Shouty freaks out whenever a "racism"-tagged entry gets uploaded, regardless of who comments on it. It's only fair to dispense that precaution, unless you enjoy his frenzied and abusive tirades. Or don't you aim to please such favored customers as he?
April Apple said... Ritmo: "I don't give a fuck about the "size" of the government.".
That's what makes your side so fucking frightening.
What? The fact that it can keep track of the hundred-fold growth in population since 1790 and not freak out at the government growing in similar (or probably lesser) proportion since?
AJ Lynch said...
It is extremely rare to see someone get angry with Bago who is the probably the most even keeled commenter here IMHO.
Baggie's good-naturedness is noted. As are his wonton lies. The former is appreciated by all. The latter only by you... and your club.
Four against one and still not a decent point to be found in all of that. How pitiful.
Maybe you can name your team "The Kitchen Sink Throwers".
82 comments:
Occam's Racism cuts both ways
Well, if you think Barry's wrong about anything, it's racist.
The science is settled.
Oh, here you go again. Queen Shouty-bait. She'll be shutting/shouting it down any minute now.
You might also notice that nearly every time the word comes up over there it's being used to attack someone the left disagree with politically. In fact, I bet you can Google examples of the left using that slur against every single Republican that ever lived including even the black ones and Abraham Lincoln. But you rarely find it used against Democrats, even ones who were in the KKK. Makes you wonder if they know what it means and if they do, do they care?
I just don't see what the big deal is all about.
You might also notice that nearly every time the word comes up over there it's being used to attack someone the left disagree with politically.
Yeah, no doubt. They definitely did their best to cut and splice the bites where it sounded accusatory. (Or maybe that was just good editing). But accusations aren't the same things as discussions. And discussions can't be had by people too sheepish or embarrassed or defensive to have them. Hmmm... I wonder if any examples of such people exist?
Just asking the question "Are white Republicans more racist than white Democrats says it all about the lack of self-awareness involved.
"And discussions can't be had by people too sheepish or embarrassed or defensive to have them.
We could talk to this guy.
That's a title, Zippie Bag. Titles are meant to be provocative. The questions asked and the methodology, however, you can see are objective. Most people understand that as a common and legitimate way of conducting surveys - as opposed to publicizing their results.
But why question your need to judge books by their covers (and articles by their titles) when you're trying to prove you're affiliation is with opponents of racism? Oh, that's right - another rhetorical question.
" (Or maybe that was just good editing"
Well, have at it. Show us an example of the racist charge by a lefty not aimed at a political enemy.
I guarantee you that you can't get through this discussion without doing it yourself, and of course you already have in the broadest brush possible right off the bat.
You missed the point again, (non-racist) book-cover-judger. The point was that every use of that word in the clip was probably not an accusation (or charge) at all, but just its use in the context of whatever they were reporting or discussing.
You dismissed the survey results, so we know you're not even interested in seeing the role said phenomenon plays in Obama-opposition. (Yes, by definition those opponents would be those opposing him). But it's all good because I'm sure we'll have the standard reflexive defense showing up here of how Southern white Democrats were racist before the majority of them left the party (where to, I wonder?).
Rhythm and Balls said...
That's a title, Zippie Bag. Titles are meant to be provocative.
Zippie bags hold water. I know because I did the experiment. It's something anyone can do at home.
That's nice, Chick but can you retain milkshakes in Ziplock bags and if so might it still be possible to poke a straw through there and drink them?
As far as plastic products go, zippie bags are near the top for utility and resourcefulness. I just don't get this 60's era prejudice against plastics...is it the dolphins thing?
Well, Dr Evil couldn't count on AnUnreasonableTroll, so here's Ritmo, trying to shout everybody down with the Gray Lady's fave "analyst".
So, why do we need to ask Nate Silver if white Democrats are more racist?
Just let them speak.
To be honest, though, I don't even think the 538 results show that much of a divide. The places where they're most pronounced center around questions having to do with poverty and, most specifically, government programs - not all that much a shocker given conservative fixations on government social welfare.
I just don't get this 60's era prejudice against plastics...is it the dolphins thing?
Their manufacture makes use of additives that act as estrogen mimics and fuck up the male hormone system. You can measure genital characteristics in these baby boys that show increased (or as your counsel might be tempted to say "enhanced") feminization.
Most people like natural things. Not acting artificial, not eating artificial, not prefering artificial to natural objects of beauty. I remember when smooth white plastic was the decor du jour. Very ugly.
Of course, some people are disturbed by a more natural existence and feel that the cartesian straight-line universe should be imposed on every aspect of our everyday items, if possible - endocrine disruption be damned!
Well, both are fixated on the welfare thing. One side sees it as the solution, and the other as the problem. I think 50 years of ever increasing levels of it is a pretty good study to draw conclusion from.
Who here would want their child to have easy access to welfare from a disconnected, non-demanding far away government? Not me.
Clearly people love plastics, as they do petroleum, and cars, and cheap energy and foreign made products and being lied to.
You can measure genital characteristics in these baby boys that show increased (or as your counsel might be tempted to say "enhanced") feminization.
What a wicked-sick homophonic pun that the German call plastics Kunststoffe.
"I just don't get this 60's era prejudice against plastics...is it the dolphins thing?"
Lol. Chick's preference versus mine.
I think 50 years of ever increasing levels of it is a pretty good study to draw conclusion from.
That's because you judge books by covers. The more accurate answer is decreased standards of living over at least the last 34 years of anti-government policy and slashing of social welfare programs.
Who here would want their child to have easy access to welfare from a disconnected, non-demanding far away government?
Probably someone who cares enough about their kids (and others) to understand the difference between preferences and needs of last resort.
"act as estrogen mimics and fuck up the male hormone system."
Like soy, tofu, yoga, leftism, and the modern university education, whatever that is. I avoid all those things. I see what they do to men, and it's just sad.
So R&B prefers inked pornstars?
(file under minutia).
Yeah. I kind of don't mind a porn-star who's willing to look a bit scary-sleazy.
Dirty sleazy is what scares me. Like when Bag rubs phthalates all over his balls (they lead to liver cancer, too, Boss - just an FYI), and calls it the manly response to yoga. Or whatever.
I don't like tofu/soy or natural estrogen mimics either, but the evidence doesn't show that they decrease your penis size the way your modern chemical affectations do.
"needs of last resort"
OK, now that was pretty funny.
Obviously you don't know anyone on welfare. I've even been on it myself. Need has nothing to do with it. California pays 1/3 of all the welfare in the country. Are there really so few needy people anywhere else or is it because California refused to follow the welfare reforms from the Clinton era. Maybe it's because CA is totally run by the left. That will make you needy as all hell.
However, it's interesting to note the prevalence of soy in Asian cultures and the coincidence(?) of small penis size there as well.
You can call that racist if you want but I'm just looking out for my Asian bros.
http://www.everyoneweb.com/WORLDPENISSIZE
"the evidence doesn't show that they decrease your penis size"
Dammit! Another cure I'll have to give up on.
Obviously you don't know anyone on welfare. I've even been on it myself.
So instead of resenting the fact that you were on welfare, your opposition to it is based completely on observation?
I don't oppose restrictions to welfare but I feel it's important to make sure that those energized in opposition to it aren't just grinding their own axes. Show me the evidence that it makes things worse or that abuses of it outweigh whatever good it does and I'll listen.
But then, I was never on it so I don't have some personal narrative to prove or redeem by my position.
Where did Chick go? He's been given ideas for a chemistry-rich thread to now post about. If he can devote entire posts to the odors of poop, surely he can crank one out in exploration of phthalates on the hormone receptor systems of mammals.
Either that, or he should be creating a Chirbit of his own "Love the chemists!" plea pronto.
Rhythm and Balls said...
I think 50 years of ever increasing levels of it is a pretty good study to draw conclusion from.
That's because you judge books by covers. The more accurate answer is decreased standards of living over at least the last 34 years of anti-government policy and slashing of social welfare programs.
Wrong again.
Poverty was on the steady decline until 50 years ago when LBJ gave us the Ingrate Society.
And decreases in standards of living are the big achievement of the Left.
Nobody has put more people on welfare than our current Fuhrer.
But all Ritmo needs is to go here to see who has wrecked everything.
Or take a look at all the material that places the blame for the current economy on Whitewater Willie.
PS You can tell when Ritmo's losing.
He always gets out the projector.
@R&B: Actually, I was thinking of writing a phthallocentric post in a different context, so you have correctly adduced my bloggerly intentions. Were I paid for these endeavors in anything but your praise, I might be more timely.
And you can tell when edutcher's losing (not that he ever wins) when he pretends that Herbert Hoover and Calvin Coolidge and George W. Bush were never presidents and had no effect on economic policy.
Quick. Can someone set up the PayPal button to raise pledges for readers of the belief that each praise I make of chickenlittle should be worth at least a nickel per compliment?
;-)
Show me the evidence that it [welfare] makes things worse...
Welfare breaks souls. Meaningless to you, Schmendrik, but those who value souls understand and hate welfare for that reason alone.
Rhythm and Balls said...
And you can tell when edutcher's losing (not that he ever wins) when he pretends that Herbert Hoover and Calvin Coolidge and George W. Bush were never presidents and had no effect on economic policy.
And you can tell Ritmo needs to go back to school if he thinks Hoover's policies were that different from FDR's.
Or that Silent Cal allowed the market to clear the way out of the country's postwar slump.
Or that Dubya tried to stop the crash instigated by Willie.
But, again, Ritmo shrieks past the graveyard when he's losing.
Ritmo blabbering about racism.
Can there be a better definition of hell on earth?
Thank God I had rehearsal tonight.
I got called to do a First Communion service on Sunday, so I can't stay around for much of this nitwit's gibbering. Gotta prepare.
Have we had any translations from Ritmo, yet?
Shouting Thomas said...
Ritmo blabbering about racism.
Actually, he shied away from that early. I guess discussing how Democrat's crypto-racism is just below the surface made all wee wee.
Thank God I had rehearsal tonight.
I got called to do a First Communion service on Sunday
Cool. Lucky kids.
bagoh20 said...
Well, have at it. Show us an example of the racist charge by a lefty not aimed at a political enemy.
I am trying to remember the name of that guy that's been in the news a bit recently. Donald something or the other. You must remember him, don't you?
I see your blogger and raise you a Northwestern Law Prof:
Those who express less tolerance for unpopular groups tend to favor income redistribution and to be less supportive of capitalism and its discontents.…
Last, both redistributionists and anti-capitalists expressed lower overall happiness, less happy marriages, and lower satisfaction with their financial situations and with their jobs or housework.
Now that certainly rings true.
were never presidents and had no effect on economic policy.
Every president has very little direct effect on economic policy.
I believe the main problem with any welfare program is that it is a highly inefficient and cold way of 'taking care of the less fortunate.'
Only if you require immorality for your happiness:
As an individual’s wealth and status rise, so does their tendency to be unethical, concludes a new study of the relationship between socioeconomics and ethics.
The study included seven different experiments that spanned real-world and laboratory settings, from rude San Francisco drivers to test subjects given a chance to take candy from children.
“Occupying privileged positions in society has this natural psychological effect of insulating you from others,” said psychologist Paul Piff of the University of California, Berkeley. “You’re less likely to perceive the impact your behavior has on others. As a result, at least in this paper, you’re more likely to break the rules.”
The funny thing is, most Republican upward wealth redistribution promoters aren't all that well-to-do at all. ed's unemployed and ST was a mooch who lives like a vagabond. But because they lack respect for reason, they require a sense of order achieved through the justification of hierarchies that tell them that anyone with money is a natural-born-leader who automatically deserves their respect and adulation.
A number of wealthy people retain some decency about them. Those who have no other values however are empty and just need to surround themselves with "things" to feel less empty the way their poorer counterparts need to fill their bodies with food to achieve much the same effect.
That's why American connies love them. They identify with the emptiness and sense of symbolism that such materialism, for its own sake, exemplifies.
And Chip's cite needs updating. Money only improves happiness to a certain level, typically twice that of subsistence or so. Beyond that, it's all up to the person. The money can do no more at that point.
If Chip were as wealthy as his admiration for it indicates he'd like to be I have a feeling he'd understand that, though.
AnUnreasonableTroll said...
Well, have at it. Show us an example of the racist charge by a lefty not aimed at a political enemy.
I am trying to remember the name of that guy that's been in the news a bit recently. Donald something or the other. You must remember him, don't you?
And somebody let those tapes out as a joke?
From Coulter's column, this guy sounds like he made lots of enemies.
Maybe somebody wants to clear out the old guard of Jewish Lefties.
ST was a mooch who lives like a vagabond.
Dumb fucking kid does it again.
I've owned the same house for 35 years where I raised a family. Raised my children through the deaths of their mother and stepmother.
What in the fuck possess this dumb jackass to fantasize like this?
Ritmo, you are one of the most depraved, ignorant assholes I've ever encountered.
edutcher said...
From Coulter's column, this guy sounds like he made lots of enemies.
Ed, did you actually read this column? It sounds like something Maureen Dowd might have written. It is funny and it is about sex.
Lol. You mad, bro? ;-)
BTW, I think that "better definition of hell on earth" would be what all those cracked mirrors went through after you saw your reflection in them. Seriously, you've got a face like the wrinkled vagina of an ex-con. I mean, I've seen more beautiful bowling ball bags. Really, Timmy, you need to get that thing stretched out and ironed or something. It's positively Neanderthalish, just ghastly.
Obviously I read it, since no one else mentioned it, but only Troll would think the column was funny (rather warped sense of humor), but the point is, somebody wanted this guy destroyed politically.
And only the Demos go after donors.
You've got a lot of nerve talking about people leading empty lives, Ritmo.
You're life is so empty that the only excitement available to you is these dreadfully vile vicious battles on the internet over things you don't even give a shit about..
You have absolutely no life. Don't you know that that is your message here?
Good night.
I hate to break it to you, Tommy. But they weren't your kids.
You've got a lot of nerve talking about people leading empty lives, Ritmo.
Lol. Especially when you're busy leading one of them yourself. In style!
The only excitement available to Tommy is figuring out whose dick to suck next, and then bragging about it on his blog - amidst the posts about toy pianos and CDs of cover songs that teenagers could create. And his love of whores. Yes, whores! Tommy knows his own kind when he sees them.
Really, just empty, stupid, stupid stuff. And then anger at a black hamster having white hamster babies!
Yes, this is the stuff of teenage septuagenarian Shouting Thomas' life. He's like an uglier, older version of the Fonz.
Only the Fonz knew enough to call it an act and get paid much better for it.
Ritmo sounds like some 13 year old in a flame war, but, considering he's firing blanks otherwise, it's all he can do.
And that's what's going in Mom's basement.
It's nice to know ed's as capable of contributing to the discussion as he is to the economy: Nada.
Which is why Ritmo stays up all night because he's got to get to work in the morning?
Sure.
In any case, we've reached that point in the festivities when Ritmo and Troll have no more arrows in their quiver and can only hurl insults.
Shout, have fun at Communion.
Some of us don't need much, ed. But I sure hope your twelve-hour slumbers and naps leave you ready for, well, for whatever it is you do all day.
From Ritmo's link: "Occupying privileged position within society has this natural psychological effect of insulating oneself from others."
Exactly what I'm talking about when I say devoid of self awareness.
For a proponent of big government, top down economics and policy to be lecturing conservatives about privileged positions and insulation is rich. It's a mindset that never even tried to examines its own presumptions. It even imagines itself so elite that it is above elitism. Awesome!
hythm and Balls said...
Some of us don't need much, ed.
But nobody stays up all night and then is worth anything on the job.
You have to have actually held a job to understand this point.
But I sure hope your twelve-hour slumbers and naps leave you ready for, well, for whatever it is you do all day.
You mean besides come up with sufficient facts to effectively rebut the talking points you're given to mindlessly regurgitate?
For a proponent of big government, top down economics and policy to be lecturing conservatives about privileged positions and insulation is rich. It's a mindset that never even tried to examines its own presumptions. It even imagines itself so elite that it is above elitism. Awesome!
Presumptions such as elitism being a "government-only" phenomenon? Presumptions such as business lacking an elite?
That nonsense sounds like your lack of an education talking. And no, not getting a degree doesn't make you a populist. It makes you uneducable. Anyone with a brain can educate himself even, but you're too mentally lazy to bother with that.
I don't give a fuck about the "size" of the government. (Although someone less senseless than you might note that it is a big country). And who even knows what "top down economics" means. Must be another one of your own personal definitions.
Other than that, it's a typical Bag comment. All emotion, propaganda and narcissism. Not much else.
ed - do you have to do much preparation before sucking Laughing Hyena Thomas' dick? Is there a ritual to it? Do you do something to it to make it taste less like cigarette ash?
Seriously, you're like the twentieth guy at a gang-bang, led there by Thomas, who wonders when he's going to get a shot. You really don't have anything to say.
What's it like being a tool without a purpose?
Ritmo: "I don't give a fuck about the "size" of the government.".
You come in a long line of fools throughout history. Do you really think you know more about economics and government impact on it than me? Do you really? And you think that superior understanding you have comes from listening to a university full of people who never held a unsubsidised job, who never ran a business, who never hired, or trained a single person to make things of tangible value outside there own fully subsidized world. Do you really understand the effects of tax policy when you pay a fraction of the cost of your share of the nation's expenses. Do you even understand how little you understand? Let me help you. If you only know it from a book or the internet, then you only know what someone told you is true. Which means you actually know nothing for sure yourself. That must burn down deep.
Hell, the guys who you trust to tell you how it works didn't even get their understanding first hand. They trusted someone else, who told them what a guy like me said to some other guy who collected the data to write his thesis.
I think there are people who know a hell of a lot more than you, people who know the difference between macroeconomics and microeconomics, for instance... (which eludes you), people who know the difference between families and governments, and I take what they say a hell of a lot more seriously than I take all your bluster and pride, as if they were substitutes for reason and logic.
What you are saying is as dumb as saying that potatoes are smarter than farmers. Just because you engage in a largely autonomic activity doesn't make you smarter than the astute observer of your actions. No, the moon is not smarter than the astronauts and astronomers who figured out how to get there. No, the murderer is not smarter than the judge and lawyers who try and argue the case. No, the businessman can't figure out how to create a stable currency.
Most people know the difference between relative knowledge and absolute omniscience and ignorance. You are not one of them. You are just a guy who has one talent, and is stupid enough to think that makes him a god. But the research explains that, too.
The moon god is smarter than Copernicus, because it actually revolves around the earth. Copernicus is simply the lowly observer and explicator of this motion. He lacks the power of the Moon God, though! Moon God makes big bright moon object in sky move in circles! Copernicus is just a pipsqueak scientist who understands how it happens! Copernicus and Galileo ain't SHIT compared to Moon God!
If you understood economics better then you would make better use of it, wouldn't you? Maybe that's below you, and just for us potatoes.
Even the farmer(or the scientist he employs) has to ask the potato how it works. You went to school right? And this is too deep for you? Sheese!
Let me guess "microeconomics"? That must be like change - nickles quarters, etc. "Macroeconomics" must be like Benjamins. Am I close?
Nope. You are not, oh high and mighty Moon God.
"The moon god is smarter than Copernicus, because it actually revolves around the earth. Copernicus is simply the lowly observer and explicator of this motion. He lacks the power of the Moon God, though! Moon God makes big bright moon object in sky move in circles! Copernicus is just a pipsqueak scientist who understands how it happens!"
So between you and me who is the "lowly observer" and who is the Pope who knows better because he read it as written by other "wise" men.
Pope didn't care about evidence or observation at all, grasshopper. And "wisdom" was not defined by possession of empirical facts.
One would think Galileo's ordeal should have changed the way that process works but you seem to relitigate it by leaving it all up to "other forces", inexplicable mysteries, miraculous exertions, a generalized hatred of knowledge and, oh yeah - businessmen being businessmen.
If I hated knowing things as much as you do I might find it all to be really impressive, awe-inspiring stuff.
You only know what you have been told. Kind of like a tourist on vacation in the land of facts jotting down what the tour guide tells you, and thinking you understand what it's like to live there. Everything you know is second hand at best, and most is so far from the chain of custody that it may be made up of whole cloth, and yet there is no way for you to know for sure.
Good night, and tip your bus driver. Tomorrow we dine at Medieval Times Dinner and Tournament to get the real story of European life in the Middle Ages.
It will be interesting if Ritmo ever shows up here sober and stays that way.
One presumes he can't stand it when he hasn't got a rebuttal.
For those keeping score at home, R&B led off with the first personal attack in the third comment.
ARM - The subject is political figures on the "right" who are actually racist. Not the owners of sports teams who give to democrats.
Fail.
Ritmo: "I don't give a fuck about the "size" of the government.".
That's what makes your side so fucking frightening.
It is extremely rare to see someone get angry with Bago who is the probably the most even keeled commenter here IMHO. Ritmo just can't handle the truth.
I'm wondering if it isn't just plain jealousness/envy/spite as well.
Do I detect some homophobic bigotry coming from Bitchmo?
Somebody is due for a little re-education.
bagoh20 said...
...a bunch of made-up stuff.
chickenlittle said...
For those keeping score at home, R&B led off with the first personal attack in the third comment.
For those who aren't comatose, Shouty freaks out whenever a "racism"-tagged entry gets uploaded, regardless of who comments on it. It's only fair to dispense that precaution, unless you enjoy his frenzied and abusive tirades. Or don't you aim to please such favored customers as he?
April Apple said...
Ritmo: "I don't give a fuck about the "size" of the government.".
That's what makes your side so fucking frightening.
What? The fact that it can keep track of the hundred-fold growth in population since 1790 and not freak out at the government growing in similar (or probably lesser) proportion since?
AJ Lynch said...
It is extremely rare to see someone get angry with Bago who is the probably the most even keeled commenter here IMHO.
Baggie's good-naturedness is noted. As are his wonton lies. The former is appreciated by all. The latter only by you... and your club.
Four against one and still not a decent point to be found in all of that. How pitiful.
Maybe you can name your team "The Kitchen Sink Throwers".
Post a Comment