X = Godless Liberal - Coffee^2 (1417 hits)
Category: RomanceLabels: ETS_Sociopolitical_Commentary
Rating: 0.86 on 87 reviews (Rate this item) (V)
Submitted by electrictoothsyndrome (View user info) at 2005-11-30 10:29:41 EST
I just read a post by Cracked_Out_Cali http://www.ubersite.com/m/80105 in which he expresses, through the lost art of the comic strip, his general dismay at hearing rumors that President Bush might make budget cuts that prevents him from getting a raise (he's in the military).
While I can sympathise with Mr. Cali's plight as a fellow member of our nation's military strike force.....oh yea.....wait a second....I'm not in the military! I hate the military!
I forgot.
I hate soldiers too. All of them.
I hate them because my opposition to the war DEMANDS that I neither support our troops nor sympathise with their personal circumstances. My opposition to the war also means that I am part of a larger conspiracy (possibly perpetrated by the French or Canadian government) to undermine troop morale. Because as we all know, each one of my 190,000+ hits were from soldiers in the line of fire looking for stretegic and operational directives on their Hummer™ bulletproof laptops. The disappointment they must all feel when they discover I'm just another liberal, anti-American assbag with neither an engagement strategy NOR a "Support the Troops" bumper sticker must be traumatic, to be sure. The betrayal they must feel, I'm certain, is beyond words. The fact that I'm sharing ideas online instead of doing my job as a citizen of a free society and 'shutting my fucking mouth and buying the goddamn bumper sticker' is simply unforgivable.
Well, I'm sure that since Mr. Bush is such a devout Christian, he'll at LEAST be able to find forgiveness in his heart. He's already got the whole 'love thy neighbor' thing going for him. In fact, he's such a model for how a Christian is supposed to behave, I'd venture to say that he might, in fact, be the second coming of Christ himself! Who else could so casually declare the 'EVIL' of entire groups of people? Who else but Christ personified could lay waste to entire villages in the name of freedom and progress? Surely this man's wisdom is far beyond anything we mere mortals could ever comprehend! Surely, this man must be a GOD!
"He who is without sin", indeed!
Once again I've managed to stray so far off subject, I've forgotten my original intent of this post...
Oh yea...Military Pay.
Well, I hate to say it, but if there's no money, there's no money. As a nation, we're strapped. I would use the word "fucked", but "fucked" is what's gonna happen when we all suddenly realise the earth is warming up too fast and we are all going to be boiled alive in our own atmosphere because of policies (or lack thereof) by oil boys like Bush and his cronies who are more concerned about making a quick buck from their buddies in the special interest sector.
Boy, I bet that Hummer™ looks nice, now, don't it! Go on and buy one! You'll love yourself for it! Other people will love you too! It will fill the void in your life to own one as a status symbol. You NEED one, in fact! Just picture yourself in traffic surrounded by vehicles that are shorter in stature than YOUR vehicle! Just imagine how large that would make your cock appear to be to others! Imagine the feeling of power that will come from knowing that you are sitting higher than all the people around you in traffic, and from your perch you can peer down upon their lesser existence and wipe your hands clean of it, because you're a Hummer™ owner now! You are, in fact, THE MAN.
"Where is this going," you ask?
I haven't the slightest clue, Cali. Who knows from where these protracted, aimless rants come? They're kinda like those music boxes that, when wound up, will not stop until they're completely out of stored energy. You just have to tolerate that stupid song they play unless you're willing to smash it.
I know there's no room for idealists like me with all these 'BIG IDEAS' of peace and honesty and responsibility. I'll just stop the sanity and shut up. You go back to killin' people, I'll go back to taking tech support calls, and we'll both keep our mouths shut and play the game. How's that? That'll make everyone happy. No abrasion on a Wednesday morning, just innocuous conversation about the weather. So, how is the weather anyway?
NO! You don't say! THREE CATEGORY FIVES?! IN ONE SEASON!? What's that you say? Tornados? IN NOVEMBER!? Interesting.
Hmmmm, ok, so the weather's out.
How about let's talk about our jobs....surely there's nothing there we can't talk abo.....oh. You're in the military? Well that rules that out.
Ok, we can't talk about the weather. We can't talk about what we do for a living. What are a pair of casual internet acquaintances to do on a Wednesday morning?
I GOT IT!
We'll talk about this: http://www.lemonparty.org
That's safe by comparison.
User Reviews
Submitted by rad1101 (user info) at 2005-12-02 19:32:09 EST (#)
Ranking: 0
a vehicle would be nice too
Submitted by rad1101 (user info) at 2005-12-02 19:31:37 EST (#)
Ranking: 0
I going to buy a hummer
Submitted by JonnyX (user info) at 2005-12-02 19:11:51 EST (#)
Ranking: -1
I checked out that lemonparty thing, and I don't think those guys are in the military...maybe during the Spanish-American War, but prolly not
Submitted by indoninja (user info) at 2005-12-01 22:15:34 EST (#)
Ranking: 2
By the way do you know how newspapers work there? I know they did not stage any events to be videotaped, they paid money to get reporters to listen to their stories. You have to bribe people there to do anything, that is how shit gets done. Maybe it isn't pretty, maybe you or I don't think it is ethical (I am actually on the fence, I see some grey area, but it makes me uncomfortable), but that is how every business there is run.
Submitted by indoninja (user info) at 2005-12-01 22:12:24 EST (#)
Ranking: 0
Submitted by electrictoothsyndrome (user info) at 2005-12-01 15:41:47 (#)
Ranking: 0
Who the fuck said anything about France?
Funny, I heard on NPR this morning that the Pentagon, who is banned from planting stories in the US media, is paying Iraqi newssources to run US-friendly stories, knowing they will eventually hit the American press as well. This is the same sort of thing they do with stories planted in countries such as Britain and Australia as well.
I'm sick of debating this.
I still don't think Indo has given me a single American news source he considers more reliable than NPR. National Enquirer perhaps?
-------------------------------
My point was you can't look at one source alone. Although I do prefer to watch CNN international, or even CNN. No anchors crying, no "experts" with completely one sided views mixed in with the headlines.
The US isn't the only country planting stories there. And I have yet to see proof of any of their stories being outright lies (not saying it is right, or that it won't happen). Why does nobody care that france does it (and not just slanting the truth, outright lies).
Submitted by rad1101 (user info) at 2005-12-01 16:44:49 EST (#)
Ranking: 0
not kidding.
Submitted by rad1101 (user info) at 2005-12-01 16:44:29 EST (#)
Ranking: 0
fox and NPR are about as reliable as it gets.
Submitted by electrictoothsyndrome (user info) at 2005-12-01 15:41:47 EST (#)
Ranking: 0
Who the fuck said anything about France?
Funny, I heard on NPR this morning that the Pentagon, who is banned from planting stories in the US media, is paying Iraqi newssources to run US-friendly stories, knowing they will eventually hit the American press as well. This is the same sort of thing they do with stories planted in countries such as Britain and Australia as well.
I'm sick of debating this.
I still don't think Indo has given me a single American news source he considers more reliable than NPR. National Enquirer perhaps?
Submitted by indoninja (user info) at 2005-12-01 13:07:33 EST (#)
Ranking: 0
Submitted by indoninja (user info) at 2005-12-01 12:37:45 (#)
Ranking: 0
I just spent some time on FAIR. I could not find a single story that did not attack any idea or person who supported conservative ideas.
I couldn't find that NPR study either. But I have no faith in anything they report.
---------------------------
I mean FAIR, not NPR. I just take them with a grain of salt.
It was interesting how I read a number of stories bashing the US for providing stories to journalists in Iraq (they were real stories, just skewed) but absolutely no mention of other groups that do this. No mention of Frances national media (or heavily supported F2) giving towel heads cameras and money, and then reporting on just the pics that the cameramen "arrange". No mention of Al Dura. Fuck that pisses me off.
I don't think fox is right (i rarely watch it). I don't think America is perfect. But anyone who thinks other media isn't skewed or that France was opposed to going into Iraq for moral reasons is an idiot.
Submitted by Maddog (user info) at 2005-12-01 12:53:10 EST (#)
Ranking: 0
"I'll go back to taking tech support calls"
____________________________________________________________________________________________
This explained a lot to me.
Submitted by indoninja (user info) at 2005-12-01 12:37:45 EST (#)
Ranking: 0
I just spent some time on FAIR. I could not find a single story that did not attack any idea or person who supported conservative ideas.
I couldn't find that NPR study either. But I have no faith in anything they report.
Submitted by indoninja (user info) at 2005-12-01 12:11:48 EST (#)
Ranking: 0
Submitted by wookie (user info) at 2005-12-01 08:53:57 (#)
Ranking: 2
A study by Fairness & Accuracy in Reporting (FAIR), which examined NPR's broadcasting, found that:
Among partisan sources, Republicans outnumbered Democrats by 61% to 38%. (In 1993, these numbers were 57% to 42%.)
Individual Republicans were NPR's most popular sources overall, taking the top seven spots in frequency of appearance.
Representatives of right-leaning think tanks outnumbered those from left-leaning think tanks by more than 4 to 1.
Spokespersons for organized labor were almost invisible, numbering just 0.3% of the total.
Women were unlikely to appear on NPR in stories as experts — only 15% of all professionals, and 18% of sources in political stories, were women.
------------------------------
When was the most recent study of FAIR? And how are they defining partisan sources? A group directly linked to politics? All of the companies or stores or groups even that I hear about sponsoring NPR, seem to be "green". Stuff like organic food business, hand tools (not power tools) shit like that.
As far as women experts, that has little relevance on which way they lean politically. I would imagine there would be more males though for two reasons. One there are more professional males in most fields, two they are is a lot of airplay about the middle east where there are even fewer women experts.
Submitted by Pelvis_Man (user info) at 2005-12-01 11:22:51 EST (#)
Ranking: 2
No Comment
Submitted by wookie (user info) at 2005-12-01 08:53:57 EST (#)
Ranking: 2
A study by Fairness & Accuracy in Reporting (FAIR), which examined NPR's broadcasting, found that:
Among partisan sources, Republicans outnumbered Democrats by 61% to 38%. (In 1993, these numbers were 57% to 42%.)
Individual Republicans were NPR's most popular sources overall, taking the top seven spots in frequency of appearance.
Representatives of right-leaning think tanks outnumbered those from left-leaning think tanks by more than 4 to 1.
Spokespersons for organized labor were almost invisible, numbering just 0.3% of the total.
Women were unlikely to appear on NPR in stories as experts — only 15% of all professionals, and 18% of sources in political stories, were women.
Submitted by indoninja (user info) at 2005-12-01 07:16:40 EST (#)
Ranking: 2
Electro, Like i said I only listen on my way to and from work, so I always get the same programs then. On the weekends it varies, but maybe the weekend shows are different.
I think you should re-examine you explination below. That in no way makes NPR less biased. FOX, CNN, NBC, etc. are all motivated by ratings (and not being too contriversial as to scare away advertisers) NPR is directly funded by sponsors. I remember hearing how a segment was brought to me by some whole foods company. For the sake of argument if they started reporting that whole foods are terrible for you that a whole foods corp would advertise there? People with a certain political lean and lifestyle are a lot more likely to listen to NPR, companies that do business with those people support NPR, if their stories alientated those people, or companies they would lose money. That isn't very different then FOX.
We may not agree on anything else here, but you have to see that the people that fund NPR have an agenda, or lacking that they have customers who have left tendencies and NPR didn't cater to it, then the companies would not support them.
Submitted by electrictoothsyndrome (user info) at 2005-12-01 01:20:39 EST (#)
Ranking: 0
INDO: Judging by some of the things you say, particularly that last paragraph in your previous review, I don't think you have a very informed opinion of NPR. Please don't take that wrong. Don't take it as a smack down or a verbal jibe, cause it's not. I just seriously don't think you've critically listened to enough of it and seriously tried to compare what's there to other American news organizations. If you did, you'd find, as I have, that they are probably the most balanced and arbitrary there is.
When I say the stations are publicly funded, that means that local businesses contribute, and the station purchases the license to air certain syndicated programming like 'All Things Considered' for instance. Let's say 'All Things Considered' started to, in the perceptions of the general public in one area, put too much of a slant on their programming...no one would support the station from the area anymore. The station would die. Either that or they would have to drop 'All Things Considered' from its rotation, and the program would lose about $90,000 in revenue for the year.
That's what I mean when I say that it's about as close as you can get to arbitrary, because one false move could destroy listener perceptions and support would wane on one side or the other. It's really in the show's financial interest to keep things as balanced and transparent as possible. See what I mean? That's how it differs from the corporate ad run news sources, in my view.
Submitted by indoninja (user info) at 2005-11-30 19:12:59 EST (#)
Ranking: 0
You ask if I think that NPR would put on someone sympathizing with abortion clinic torchers...yes, I think they definitely would as long as it was not openly advocating the violence. You'll probably find if you listen back to the segment you heard earlier that the commentator wasn't advocating Muslim violence either, but instead offering a possible interpretation of their actions so they can be better understood. There is a big difference there, one that I don't think you're really trying to see. All you see is the fact that they have a Muslim on who, at first glance, appears to be offering up excuses for Muslim violence just like a lot of the bullshit artists like Jesse Jackson do for the blacks when they go out and shoot each other. The difference here is, people like Jesse Jackson have made a living exploiting the problems of their own people by pretending to offer solutions but making the problems worse.
------------------------------------
No they wouldn't, not in a million years. I am not saying this guy advocated what they did, he was offering what he thought was their reasoning, when he puts that against the backdrop of the mean streets he grew up on, he is making excuses. I never said he was advocating, Idon't think the guy was a lunatic. The author seemed pretty close to Jesse Jackson.
Furthermore, you said they didn't ever say where his facts and opinions came from. What's that supposed to mean? If you mean 'did they tell a little bit about the person making the commentary and his background', I'm sure if you listen back, you'll find they most likely did. NPR is usually pretty good about giving the listener an idea of where their commentators are coming from - what's their ethnic and social background? What is their occupation? What is their relevance to the story? You'll usually find all the questions are satisfied by the NPR host before the commentator ever begins his oratory.
------------------------------------
Ok maybe I didn't make my point clear enough. They did say he was a black Muslim author, that was it. In a talk show, that is fine. I have a problem when it was proceeded with real factual news.
As for O'Reilly... You said before that 'everyone knows that The O'Reilly Factor is not a serious news program and you allude that 'everyone knows that'. You're sorely mistaken if you think that program is not a blatant ploy for the hard right viewer ratings. And yes, just as some people might consider 'The Daily Show with John Stewart' serious news, people do consider 'The O'Reilly Factor' hard news. Their slogan is 'Fair and Balanced' for god sake! If that's not saying, "we think this is a serious news program, and you should too," I don't know what is.
------------------------------------
Here is the problem. I know O'Reilly has a point of view, a very conservative one most people do. He uses that, the show is named after him, of course it is going to be his opinion. The segment, or show I was listening to on NPR wasn't named after a person who had a particular slant. It was presented as news.
The bottom line is this: you and I could sit down on a couch and watch The O'Reilly Factor and I guarantee I could point out 100 times more questionable partisan content than you could in a full day's worth of NPR programming.
And yes, that is a challenge.
------------------------------------
Tell me a night to record O'Reilly factor. Come up with 100 questionable partisan things he says, and then wait until I have a day off. You will lose this one. I am not saying that O'Reilly isn't more skewed then NPR (he is) but NPR taken as a whole does not differentiate well between fact and peoples opinion. When in a news report on Fox (a real we are going to cover all of todays top stories show) have you heard an anchor cry? had blantantly biased opinions?
You will never hear an NPR host say something like, "they're a bunch of idiots." O'Reilly, on the other hand...different story. He's a sensationalist just like Nancy fucking Grace. I can't stand watching that bitch. Both of them are just selling the sensational story - trying to jack it up and embellish it, adding their own opinions in like they are the 'questions on everyone at home's mind' or something. It's marketing. They are dependant on sponsors to fuel their salaries, and sponsors are dependant upon ratings to get their products out to as many eyes and ears as possible.
----------------------------------
No you won't but see the argument above, I never said he wasn't sensationalist, or has a slant on things. Take fox as a whole, and they don't mix real news with one sided stories like NPR does.
NPR is different. It's listener supported...not corporate funded through advertisements. NPR receives money from lots of various organizations and private donors, as well as government grants. That's a completely different ballgame they're playing. It's really not even the same league of journalism. You're crazy if you think that any 'spin' NPR is putting into their stories is even comparable to the corporate entities out there - Fox, CNN, CBS, NBC - you're crazy.
-----------------------------------
None of those organizations have agendas? I never hear this segement brought to you by "so and so". The companies that give money (and yes they do) are looking for a paticular crowd.
If NPR isn't trying to sensationalize things why have I never heard a debate on there, why are their experts always on the same side. Maybe I miss it because I never listen at work, maybe they have a show when that happens, but I listen to NPR more then I watch any news channel, and I have never seen that.
Submitted by apollo88 (user info) at 2005-11-30 18:52:15 EST (#)
Ranking: 0
support the mcdonalds workers!
same thing.
stupid people in crappy jobs.
where's the mcdonalds ribbon huh?
Submitted by electrictoothsyndrome (user info) at 2005-11-30 18:36:37 EST (#)
Ranking: 0
Submitted by indoninja (user info) at 2005-11-30 17:57:27 (#)
Ranking: 2
Back to the NRA, if you are still at work, I just heard this on the way back from the gym, but they had an author come in and talk about the burning of that liquor store. They did preface it with saying he was a Black Muslim and an author, but did not say where his "facts" or opinions were from. He then went on to describe how muslims from other countries can justify selling alcohol becaus ethey see America as a land of contradictions (of course it couldn't be because they might not be strict muslims). He described how poor black men who come from lifes of crim can only see purity in Islam so they would feel right in trashing a liquor store. The half hour before this was all real news, facts, current events. There was no clear distinction between that and what this chump said.
If it was a christian right group that torched an abortion clinic (and nobody was hurt) do you think NPR would have a radical christian spokesman on sympathizing with the arsonist? Those are identical comparisons. Please don't think that NPR isn't as skewed as Fox news.
I don't know anybody who listens to O'Rielly for their news.
-----------------------------
Jesus, you just will not give up will you?
NPR has people on all the time who express their opinions about current events from all walks of life. They tend to pick people for these segments who they feel have some viewpoint to share that is not your mainstream middle class, middle-American world view. Obviously, one of the goals here is to keep the listening audience exposed to the viewpoints of people who might not have much of a voice in the mainstream media on television and elsewhere. Of course, this is not always true, but it is the basic trend they keep.
You ask if I think that NPR would put on someone sympathizing with abortion clinic torchers...yes, I think they definitely would as long as it was not openly advocating the violence. You'll probably find if you listen back to the segment you heard earlier that the commentator wasn't advocating Muslim violence either, but instead offering a possible interpretation of their actions so they can be better understood. There is a big difference there, one that I don't think you're really trying to see. All you see is the fact that they have a Muslim on who, at first glance, appears to be offering up excuses for Muslim violence just like a lot of the bullshit artists like Jesse Jackson do for the blacks when they go out and shoot each other. The difference here is, people like Jesse Jackson have made a living exploiting the problems of their own people by pretending to offer solutions but making the problems worse.
Furthermore, you said they didn't ever say where his facts and opinions came from. What's that supposed to mean? If you mean 'did they tell a little bit about the person making the commentary and his background', I'm sure if you listen back, you'll find they most likely did. NPR is usually pretty good about giving the listener an idea of where their commentators are coming from - what's their ethnic and social background? What is their occupation? What is their relevance to the story? You'll usually find all the questions are satisfied by the NPR host before the commentator ever begins his oratory.
As for O'Reilly... You said before that 'everyone knows that The O'Reilly Factor is not a serious news program and you allude that 'everyone knows that'. You're sorely mistaken if you think that program is not a blatant ploy for the hard right viewer ratings. And yes, just as some people might consider 'The Daily Show with John Stewart' serious news, people do consider 'The O'Reilly Factor' hard news. Their slogan is 'Fair and Balanced' for god sake! If that's not saying, "we think this is a serious news program, and you should too," I don't know what is.
The bottom line is this: you and I could sit down on a couch and watch The O'Reilly Factor and I guarantee I could point out 100 times more questionable partisan content than you could in a full day's worth of NPR programming.
And yes, that is a challenge.
You will never hear an NPR host say something like, "they're a bunch of idiots." O'Reilly, on the other hand...different story. He's a sensationalist just like Nancy fucking Grace. I can't stand watching that bitch. Both of them are just selling the sensational story - trying to jack it up and embellish it, adding their own opinions in like they are the 'questions on everyone at home's mind' or something. It's marketing. They are dependant on sponsors to fuel their salaries, and sponsors are dependant upon ratings to get their products out to as many eyes and ears as possible.
NPR is different. It's listener supported...not corporate funded through advertisements. NPR receives money from lots of various organizations and private donors, as well as government grants. That's a completely different ballgame they're playing. It's really not even the same league of journalism. You're crazy if you think that any 'spin' NPR is putting into their stories is even comparable to the corporate entities out there - Fox, CNN, CBS, NBC - you're crazy.
Submitted by indoninja (user info) at 2005-11-30 17:57:27 EST (#)
Ranking: 2
Submitted by electrictoothsyndrome (user info) at 2005-11-30 17:00:03 (#)
Ranking: 0
What the hell makes you think we didn't try and Saddam just didn't cooperate? There is more to it than just that. If we became 'chummy chummy' with Iraq as you put it, you have to think of the other countries that would have disowned us from their oil supply, or became more hostile toward us in their cooperation. I don't think Kuwait would have been too happy with that arrangement. I don't think Saudi Arabia would have either. Israel might not have been too happy.
There is a lot more to think about. This is the middle east. It's like a game of chess. You move one piece to defend your king, and you open up something else to attack.
It all holds water, dude. I don't think you'll ever really see it, because, judging from your comments on virtually ALL my posts, you're a Conservative and I'm obviously far from it.
I don't have the patience for it.
----------------------------------
I don't think we will agree on anything political, but when you present me with a simplified argument, like bush wanted to take the oil, I will resort with an equally simple counter argument.
Back to the NRA, if you are still at work, I just heard this on the way back from the gym, but they had an author come in and talk about the burning of that liquor store. They did preface it with saying he was a Black Muslim and an author, but did not say where his "facts" or opinions were from. He then went on to describe how muslims from other countries can justify selling alcohol becaus ethey see America as a land of contradictions (of course it couldn't be because they might not be strict muslims). He described how poor black men who come from lifes of crim can only see purity in Islam so they would feel right in trashing a liquor store. The half hour before this was all real news, facts, current events. There was no clear distinction between that and what this chump said.
If it was a christian right group that torched an abortion clinic (and nobody was hurt) do you think NPR would have a radical christian spokesman on sympathizing with the arsonist? Those are identical comparisons. Please don't think that NPR isn't as skewed as Fox news.
I don't know anybody who listens to O'Rielly for their news.
Submitted by electrictoothsyndrome (user info) at 2005-11-30 17:00:03 EST (#)
Ranking: 0
Submitted by indoninja (user info) at 2005-11-30 16:27:40 (#)
Ranking: 0
and then he would have thrown them out. Bush set a deadline, he didn't meet it.
as far as the bring the oil home comment, wouldn't we be getting more oil now if we became buddy buddy with Iraq like france and germany were? we could have become chummy and then gotten the sanctions lifted. If oil was our only concern would we be allowing many pro iranian politicians to run? That argument doesn't hold water.
----------------------------------
What the hell makes you think we didn't try and Saddam just didn't cooperate? There is more to it than just that. If we became 'chummy chummy' with Iraq as you put it, you have to think of the other countries that would have disowned us from their oil supply, or became more hostile toward us in their cooperation. I don't think Kuwait would have been too happy with that arrangement. I don't think Saudi Arabia would have either. Israel might not have been too happy.
There is a lot more to think about. This is the middle east. It's like a game of chess. You move one piece to defend your king, and you open up something else to attack.
It all holds water, dude. I don't think you'll ever really see it, because, judging from your comments on virtually ALL my posts, you're a Conservative and I'm obviously far from it.
I don't have the patience for it.
Submitted by Dead_0hi0_Sky (user info) at 2005-11-30 16:42:25 EST (#)
Ranking: 0
agreed.
war should be best kept in the videogames.
if our nation's stopped the fighting, maybe we could all pull together and become one big gay nation! yay!
then, all the world's scientists could get together, and invent a woman with two vaginas. man, that'd be a hoot & a holler!
Submitted by indoninja (user info) at 2005-11-30 16:27:40 EST (#)
Ranking: 0
Submitted by electrictoothsyndrome (user info) at 2005-11-30 16:21:22 (#)
Ranking: 0
As for Saddam not letting inspectors in, my theory is he wasn't letting anyone in because he's a proud man. He's a dictator, not an order taker. Think of how weak that must have made him appear to the people around him that the UN could just come in and tell him what he could and could not do.
It's just like if you walked up to a jock at a bar and called him a little bitch in front of all his friends. You think he's gonna let that slide?
In fact, when war was finally threatened, Saddam DID agree to let the inspectors back in, but by then Bush's stubborn steamroller was in full swing.
"Nuh uh! You said NO first! You said NO first! AHHHH AHHHHH! MOOOOOOOON, he said noooo fiiiirrrrst."
*Little Georgie crosses his arms and pooches his widdle lip*
"Now, honey," says momma Georgie. "What have I told you!?"
Little Georgie looks up with his big bleary eyes: "Kill first, ask questions later?"
"That's right. Now get out there and bring that oil home where it belongs....away from the stupid brown people."
----------------------------
and then he would have thrown them out. Bush set a deadline, he didn't meet it.
as far as the bring the oil home comment, wouldn't we be getting more oil now if we became buddy buddy with Iraq like france and germany were? we could have become chummy and then gotten the sanctions lifted. If oil was our only concern would we be allowing many pro iranian politicians to run? That argument doesn't hold water.
Submitted by indoninja (user info) at 2005-11-30 16:23:12 EST (#)
Ranking: 2
Submitted by electrictoothsyndrome (user info) at 2005-11-30 15:51:43 (#)
Ranking: 0
INDO: I have never heard of that Palestinian story. I'm not saying NPR is perfect. No one is. I don't know enough about that story in particular to argue with you, but I do know that any time they introduce an expert interviewee, they give their name and their credentials, they ask questions that a devil's advocate might raise, not just softball suggestions that lead the interviewee in a certain direction.
Plus, anytime they are relaying a story, they use the key journalistic phrases: "According to", "he claims", "she says", "but opponents maintain", "many disagree". They cite sources. They give more than one source to substantiate their stories. They bring in experts or proponents of both sides of an issue and give them each equal footing with an unbiased, objective arbitrator. It's not just some shark attack free-for-all like you see on many Fox programs, particularly The O'Reilly Factor. I could go on with more specific examples, but that would require me to remember things about specifics, which I'm not apt to do.
---------------------------------------------
Anything O'Rielly says is opinion, I thought that is very clear, he is not a reporter. I have never heard a reporter on Fox cry (although I don't watch it), on NPR I have heard emotional reporters that immediately skews the story.
As far as devils advocate? In any of the indepth probing stories I have heard the questions have been leading and supportive. Which is fine if it is a show like Orielly, it is even fine on shows that don't claim to be all news, the problem is, at least to me, that NPR doesn't do a good job of defining that line. I could be wrong here but a few weeks ago they were talking about Iraq on my drive home and they were quoting civilian casualties to be near 100,000 by best estimates. I have yet to find a reputable source with numbers that high, even including anti-aircraft artillery that the air defense in Baghdad shot straight into the air (it comes back down).
Submitted by electrictoothsyndrome (user info) at 2005-11-30 16:21:22 EST (#)
Ranking: 0
As for Saddam not letting inspectors in, my theory is he wasn't letting anyone in because he's a proud man. He's a dictator, not an order taker. Think of how weak that must have made him appear to the people around him that the UN could just come in and tell him what he could and could not do.
It's just like if you walked up to a jock at a bar and called him a little bitch in front of all his friends. You think he's gonna let that slide?
In fact, when war was finally threatened, Saddam DID agree to let the inspectors back in, but by then Bush's stubborn steamroller was in full swing.
"Nuh uh! You said NO first! You said NO first! AHHHH AHHHHH! MOOOOOOOON, he said noooo fiiiirrrrst."
*Little Georgie crosses his arms and pooches his widdle lip*
"Now, honey," says momma Georgie. "What have I told you!?"
Little Georgie looks up with his big bleary eyes: "Kill first, ask questions later?"
"That's right. Now get out there and bring that oil home where it belongs....away from the stupid brown people."
Submitted by electrictoothsyndrome (user info) at 2005-11-30 15:57:32 EST (#)
Ranking: 0
"But if the evidence was so doctored, why were democrats in congress, who had access to everything the president did, in favor of going to war?"
------------------------
Your assumtpion here is that Congress had access to the same intel, but they didn't. Just read the article. I can't think of the name of the article at the moment, but I'll post it here when I get home. It's a very interesting read.
I am half tempted to post the whole thing here so everyone can have the opportunity to read it. It's pretty fucking sickening, dude.
I might just take pictures of the pages and put them in a zip file. Check back here a little later tonight and maybe I will have put it up here.
Submitted by electrictoothsyndrome (user info) at 2005-11-30 15:51:43 EST (#)
Ranking: 0
INDO: I have never heard of that Palestinian story. I'm not saying NPR is perfect. No one is. I don't know enough about that story in particular to argue with you, but I do know that any time they introduce an expert interviewee, they give their name and their credentials, they ask questions that a devil's advocate might raise, not just softball suggestions that lead the interviewee in a certain direction.
Plus, anytime they are relaying a story, they use the key journalistic phrases: "According to", "he claims", "she says", "but opponents maintain", "many disagree". They cite sources. They give more than one source to substantiate their stories. They bring in experts or proponents of both sides of an issue and give them each equal footing with an unbiased, objective arbitrator. It's not just some shark attack free-for-all like you see on many Fox programs, particularly The O'Reilly Factor. I could go on with more specific examples, but that would require me to remember things about specifics, which I'm not apt to do.
Submitted by indoninja (user info) at 2005-11-30 15:35:24 EST (#)
Ranking: 2
I think it's hilarious watching the news now. I laugh my ass off everytime I hear some new piece of damning evidence to support the claim that intel was doctored before the war. Anyone who thinks it wasn't, you should read the article in the December issues of Rolling Stone. It lays it out for you in great detail. Have fun with that. And when you want to say, "Oh, but it's Rolling Stone! That's a liberal rag! Of course they're going to say that!" all I can ask is that you at least READ the article first and check its sources for yourself. Then you'll know.
-----------------------------------
I will try and check it out if it is online. But if the evidence was so doctored, why were democrats in congress, who had access to everything the president did, in favor of going to war? If proof really conclusively pointed to no WMD in Iraq (the fact remains that french missiles with chemical warhead capabilities were found, among other things that he was not supposed to have, not enought o warrant war in my opinion, but he never completely disarmed like he was supposed to) whay wouldn't he allow inspectors in?
Submitted by indoninja (user info) at 2005-11-30 15:30:53 EST (#)
Ranking: 0
Electro-
Furthermore, one thing you'll NEVER hear on NPR are the journalists or hosts themselves giving their opinions without stating that those are just their opinions. And you'll never hear one of those 'experts' being interviewed that don't come with a disclaimer that it's there to show you a perspective on the story.
-----------------------------
when yassir Arafat died the reporter covering it was crying. That is crossing the line of Journalism. I hear atrocity every day on NPR without hearing numbers or facts. I have never heard an expert introduced with a disclaimer on their findings. I listen for a few minutes in the afternoon/morning, and about 6 hours total on road trips at least every other weekend.
I heard a story the other day on NPR about global warming that cut off right after some opponent had given his view that mankind isn't contributing to it in any way, and I was pissed! If they're so skewed toward the liberal side, as you seem to indicate, they wouldn't have done that.
-------------------------
They don't have control over their format. They might have had to go because of time, or because they were switching from national to local. I am not saying everything they say is BS, I am just arguing that it is skewed like fox. I am sure if you looked hard enough at fox (i don't watch it enough to know) you would find a time they ended with a democrat pooint of view.
Every news organization is in a constant battle internally to bring transparent news or bring news with their particular political slant. Some news organizations accept and print stories that have been planted by independant, hired organizations to conduct psychological and perception warfare in the public opinions (as we have seen in the days leading up to Iraq, for example).
I don't see how NPR really fits into that category. They seem to relay the news as it is. The fact that much of that news is NOT in the favor of Republicans and the Bush administration right now is less a fault of NPR or an indicator of their political affiliations, and more a product of the incompetance in the party and the administration I, and many like me, have known was there all along. Hell, even Fox news can't escape it now. They couldn't maintain their integrity to decieve people in the future if they didn't.
----------------------
Really NPR doesn't doctor news? They don't take news from France-2? The agency staged that videotape of the palestinian boy and his "father" under fire from Israelis, and then when they were shot by Palestinians they blamed israeli's. Even after the "reporter" on the story (who was never there) admitted it was fake, admitted that other atrocities were fake?
Submitted by electrictoothsyndrome (user info) at 2005-11-30 15:07:30 EST (#)
Ranking: 0
Bob, you're such a feminist.
Submitted by BLITZKREIG_BOB (user info) at 2005-11-30 14:54:14 EST (#)
Ranking: 2
That last comment of mine was designed to get you an extra 500 hits and onto the lower echelon of most heated.
Submitted by BLITZKREIG_BOB (user info) at 2005-11-30 14:52:13 EST (#)
Ranking: 2
The bigest difference between NPR and Fox:
Npr: (ugly)
http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=2100593
http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=2100929
Fox: (smokin')
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,1228,00.html
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,19796,00.html
Conclusion: NPR is for whiny, ugly nerds. Similar trends are apparent with music. Look at most womenfolk that are modern day country signers compared to other genres of music. I know that I'd take the country chick with her broken down pickup truck before I'd take some starving artist type with green hair, seventeen tattoos, and a face that looks like it was forced into a tackle box.
Submitted by loki (user info) at 2005-11-30 14:36:28 EST (#)
Ranking: 2
Chaney's wife was on Diane Rheem today. Maybe that's why the Republicans were jamming my radio reception. I don't think they let their women speak unless there is a male family member present.
I may be confusing that with some other fringe group, but it's something like that.
Submitted by scourge (user info) at 2005-11-30 14:35:26 EST (#)
Ranking: 2
indoninja- I actually agree with your commentary on NPR. It's just that the slant from the Fox-Righty-Bush crowd makes my skin crawl more, so it's harder for me to overlook. I can read between the lines and see where bias flavors reporting. Fact is, NPRs reporting just annoys me less.
Submitted by electrictoothsyndrome (user info) at 2005-11-30 14:32:49 EST (#)
Ranking: 0
INDO: I think NPR does a pretty good job trying to show all sides of an issue. The fact that you have to simply face is that sometimes no matter which way you might look at something, it's just not going to be responsible reporting to take the side of some people.
Furthermore, one thing you'll NEVER hear on NPR are the journalists or hosts themselves giving their opinions without stating that those are just their opinions. And you'll never hear one of those 'experts' being interviewed that don't come with a disclaimer that it's there to show you a perspective on the story.
To compare NPR with the likes of Fox is a mistake. I think you need to take a closer look.
I heard a story the other day on NPR about global warming that cut off right after some opponent had given his view that mankind isn't contributing to it in any way, and I was pissed! If they're so skewed toward the liberal side, as you seem to indicate, they wouldn't have done that.
Every news organization is in a constant battle internally to bring transparent news or bring news with their particular political slant. Some news organizations accept and print stories that have been planted by independant, hired organizations to conduct psychological and perception warfare in the public opinions (as we have seen in the days leading up to Iraq, for example).
I don't see how NPR really fits into that category. They seem to relay the news as it is. The fact that much of that news is NOT in the favor of Republicans and the Bush administration right now is less a fault of NPR or an indicator of their political affiliations, and more a product of the incompetance in the party and the administration I, and many like me, have known was there all along. Hell, even Fox news can't escape it now. They couldn't maintain their integrity to decieve people in the future if they didn't.
I think it's hilarious watching the news now. I laugh my ass off everytime I hear some new piece of damning evidence to support the claim that intel was doctored before the war. Anyone who thinks it wasn't, you should read the article in the December issues of Rolling Stone. It lays it out for you in great detail. Have fun with that. And when you want to say, "Oh, but it's Rolling Stone! That's a liberal rag! Of course they're going to say that!" all I can ask is that you at least READ the article first and check its sources for yourself. Then you'll know.
The truth will set you free.
I was watching the O'Reilley Factor the other evening, and he actually said some things that I agreed with wholeheartedly. I can't quite remember what they were now, but I remember being surprised by how much sense he was making. Then he went and fucked it all up by flatly stating that internet blogs (such as this one) were full of people whose opinions didn't matter because they didn't know what they were talking about. See what I mean? How can I possibly agree with that? It's a no fucking brainer.
Submitted by electrictoothsyndrome (user info) at 2005-11-30 14:24:07 EST (#)
Ranking: 0
Submitted by BLITZKREIG_BOB (user info) at 2005-11-30 14:08:41 (#)
Ranking: 2
Mission accomplished.
-------------------------
So, I guess that mean in a couple years I should expect some real results? ;)
Had to go there.
Submitted by electrictoothsyndrome (user info) at 2005-11-30 14:23:16 EST (#)
Ranking: 0
Submitted by FilthyAssistant (user info) at 2005-11-30 14:17:32 (#)
Ranking: 2
By the way, I've finished writing your next post - want me to email it over?
-----------------------------
Ok, but no more of these political posts...
...they're fucking up my rating.
Submitted by FilthyAssistant (user info) at 2005-11-30 14:17:32 EST (#)
Ranking: 2
Submitted by electrictoothsyndrome (user info) at 2005-11-30 14:05:56 (#)
Ranking: 0
My thoughts might not always be the most coherent. They might not always be right. But, by god, they're fucking mine! You insinuating ANYONE does my thinking for me is about the worst insult you could ever say to me.
===
Yeah, you tell 'em!
By the way, I've finished writing your next post - want me to email it over?
Submitted by BLITZKREIG_BOB (user info) at 2005-11-30 14:08:41 EST (#)
Ranking: 2
Mission accomplished.
Submitted by electrictoothsyndrome (user info) at 2005-11-30 14:05:56 EST (#)
Ranking: 0
By the way, Bob, if insulting me with that statement was your goal, you did a real good job. I'm insulted.
My thoughts might not always be the most coherent. They might not always be right. But, by god, they're fucking mine! You insinuating ANYONE does my thinking for me is about the worst insult you could ever say to me. Great, now I'm fucking pissed.
Submitted by indoninja (user info) at 2005-11-30 14:01:10 EST (#)
Ranking: 2
My last reply had nothing to do with the post.
ETS I was ready for my auto -2 ETS political post, but you wrapped it up in the end with a good laugh.
Meant to rate this before but after reading the reviews I had to throw in my two cents about NPR.
Submitted by Confuzitron (user info) at 2005-11-30 13:57:50 EST (#)
Ranking: 2
Here is the key to my city. Take the one to my house too while you're at it
Submitted by indoninja (user info) at 2005-11-30 13:57:25 EST (#)
Ranking: 0
Submitted by scourge (user info) at 2005-11-30 12:49:28 (#)
Ranking: 2
I think I'm in trouble. My brain and ETS' seem to have things in common. The Republicans..THE REPUBLICANS. NPR is one of the only places I even go to for news anmymore.
---------------------------------
NPR is just as bad if not worse then Fox for news. DOn't get me wrong, I listen to it, but just because I like to see things skewed both ways. I remember listening to a piece on Black crime in America. It was for about an hour.
They spoke a little on black victims of black on black crime.
They spoke at length on how the perpetrators of these crimes were really victims themselves, that they were forced into crime, and then were victims of the judicial system.
They spoke at length on white on black crime (the white perpetrators in this case were never victims of society or the judicial system).
Not once was black on white crime mentioned. I realize it is a touchy subject whenever race and crime are discussed, but to never address this factor of crime? Just sweep it under the rug? And whenever black crime is mentioned, make excuses and lament how bad the judicial system treats them?
When it comes to little snippets or headlines, I take NPR at face value, they get most of their stories from APR or BBC, adn are usually facts. But whenever they examine a subject at length with one of their "experts" it invariablly a horrible distortion of the truth.
Submitted by electrictoothsyndrome (user info) at 2005-11-30 13:55:50 EST (#)
Ranking: 0
Submitted by BLITZKREIG_BOB (user info) at 2005-11-30 13:39:58 (#)
Ranking: 0
I'm glad that MTV does your thinking for you.
----------------------
I hope you're not being serious.
I haven't watched MTV since they stopped playing videos...about 10 years ago.
I'll make you a deal though...I'll stop letting them 'do my thinking for me' if you stop letting your mindless military fraternity do yours for you.
Submitted by Spam (user info) at 2005-11-30 13:53:09 EST (#)
Ranking: 2
No Comment
Submitted by BLITZKREIG_BOB (user info) at 2005-11-30 13:39:58 EST (#)
Ranking: 0
I'm glad that MTV does your thinking for you.
Submitted by Boondock (user info) at 2005-11-30 13:30:17 EST (#)
Ranking: -2
Submitted by The_Screg (user info) at 2005-11-30 11:46:53 (#)
Ranking: 2
Submitted by Boondock (user info) at 2005-11-30 11:43:39 (#)
Ranking: -2
Eat shit and die.
------------------------------------------------------------------
Erg, I hate guys like this. It makes all people who disagree with liberals look like idiots. Im giving a +2 just to balance out this ass hat.
------------------------------------------------------------------
Ass hat. Nice. Not thrilling, but nice. I'm giving a -2 just to balance out this ass goblin. You are the one who is the ball licker.
Submitted by boomslang (user info) at 2005-11-30 13:29:56 EST (#)
Ranking: -2
this post was quite gay indeed
Submitted by clit_commander (user info) at 2005-11-30 13:11:03 EST (#)
Ranking: -2
Whatever, you hippie scum. Go hug a tree.
Submitted by scourge (user info) at 2005-11-30 12:49:28 EST (#)
Ranking: 2
I think I'm in trouble. My brain and ETS' seem to have things in common. The Republicans..THE REPUBLICANS. NPR is one of the only places I even go to for news anmymore.
My first experience with the mysterious hummer happened when I was fifteen. I had just gotten done bringing her to a euphoric place with the manipulations of Mr. Tongue. I enjoyed doing this, a lot, so I didn't really mind that she had never reciprocated. This time, however, she just got a nice dreamy look in her eyes and started to maneuver down towards....
What? OH! That Hummer. Sorry.
Well. I was riding my bike to work and this woman in one of the original ones, the big Army 6 mile/gallon version, was crowding up on me. As she got next to me she rolled down the window and screamed, "Get out of the road you piece of shit."
I was a little shocked, so all I could manage to retort with was a feebly yelled, "CUNT" at the swiftly disappearing behemoth.
My experiences since then seem to indicate that most owners of these vehicles behave in much the same manner.
Submitted by Wrightcopy (user info) at 2005-11-30 12:29:43 EST (#)
Ranking: 2
Submitted by Siren (user info) at 2005-11-30 11:31:36 (#)
Ranking: 2
I love you. You make the sense.
Story:
I was eating at a diner in Baltimore (because I live there) and some Ravens (professional American football players, although sucky this year) were eating there. They had some gigantor *bling* and were loud and rowdy, and causing a general scene. Autographs were given, pictures were taken... then as they left, I saw them walk outside to their Hummer, and noticed that it was parked in a handicap space. NO NO NO... not A handicap space... it was so large that it took up TWO, YES TWO motherfucking handicap spaces. I fucking hate Hummers and all that they represent, especially their owners. They. Are. All. Assholes.
-------------------------------
One time I was in Boston with my family and parked next to the Long Wharf Marriott was a Hummer limo painted like the American flag. It was ginormous. I wanted to throw up when I saw it.
Submitted by electrictoothsyndrome (user info) at 2005-11-30 12:12:21 EST (#)
Ranking: 0
Submitted by loki (user info) at 2005-11-30 11:54:52 (#)
Ranking: 2
I think the Republicans are jamming my radio. NPR keeps going in an out today.
-------------------
NPR is my life blood.
If NPR goes, I'll only have one reliable source of news left: ubersite. Let's not get to that sad state of affairs any time soon.
Submitted by electrictoothsyndrome (user info) at 2005-11-30 12:03:09 EST (#)
Ranking: 0
Submitted by Boondock (user info) at 2005-11-30 11:43:39 (#)
Ranking: -2
Eat shit and die.
---------------------
I've eaten so much shit in my time, I've become immune. If there were a shit eating contest, I'd win.
Did you know that if you ate enough shit, you'd become immortal! Seriously! You should try it.
Submitted by loki (user info) at 2005-11-30 11:54:52 EST (#)
Ranking: 2
I think the Republicans are jamming my radio. NPR keeps going in an out today.
Submitted by badassmofo (user info) at 2005-11-30 11:47:58 EST (#)
Ranking: 0
Oh and ETS, thanks for this http://www.ubersite.com/m/79711#1716735
Submitted by The_Screg (user info) at 2005-11-30 11:46:53 EST (#)
Ranking: 2
Submitted by Boondock (user info) at 2005-11-30 11:43:39 (#)
Ranking: -2
Eat shit and die.
------------------------------------------------------------------
Erg, I hate guys like this. It makes all people who disagree with liberals look like idiots. Im giving a +2 just to balance out this ass hat.
Submitted by Boondock (user info) at 2005-11-30 11:43:39 EST (#)
Ranking: -2
Eat shit and die.
Submitted by electrictoothsyndrome (user info) at 2005-11-30 11:37:52 EST (#)
Ranking: 0
Submitted by scourge (user info) at 2005-11-30 11:34:21 (#)
Ranking: 2
HAHAHAHAHAHAHA
I can just imagine you hunched over the keyboard, drooling and shaking your head. Punching at the keys with two fingers. Intermittently pushing your hands through your hair. Muttering about those bastards. DON'T THEY UNDERSTAND WHAT THEY ARE DOING. The outrage. THE OUTRAGE. BASTARDS.
You're a good man ETS, don't let whitey keep you down. Rock the boat, and all that.....
----------------------
Yea, you get it. :D
Submitted by The_Screg (user info) at 2005-11-30 11:37:11 EST (#)
Ranking: 0
Ok, sarcasm. Your human culture still confuses my kind. As I said, I was operating under the assumption that you were serious. And we all know what they say about assumptions, so I wont repeat it.
As for the oil thing. Perhaps its because of my ignorance on the subject, but I havent gotten all that worried about it. That doesnt mean that I wish to drive a gas guzziling vehicle, as I enjoy saving money. Ill stick with my Toyota Echo for now (35 to 40 mpg). And I plan on purchasing a hybrid vehicle in the future. And if some scientist creates some new technology for automobiles, then awesome. But, I dont want them to invent this stuff because Im concerned about the environment or the oil supply, I want them to create better technology because the sooner that happens, the sooner all my little nerd dreams come true.
Submitted by el_em_en_oh (user info) at 2005-11-30 11:34:22 EST (#)
Ranking: 2
Needs more baby seal clubbing
*Applauds*
Submitted by scourge (user info) at 2005-11-30 11:34:21 EST (#)
Ranking: 2
HAHAHAHAHAHAHA
I can just imagine you hunched over the keyboard, drooling and shaking your head. Punching at the keys with two fingers. Intermittently pushing your hands through your hair. Muttering about those bastards. DON'T THEY UNDERSTAND WHAT THEY ARE DOING. The outrage. THE OUTRAGE. BASTARDS.
You're a good man ETS, don't let whitey keep you down. Rock the boat, and all that.....
Submitted by Siren (user info) at 2005-11-30 11:31:36 EST (#)
Ranking: 2
I love you. You make the sense.
Story:
I was eating at a diner in Baltimore (because I live there) and some Ravens (professional American football players, although sucky this year) were eating there. They had some gigantor *bling* and were loud and rowdy, and causing a general scene. Autographs were given, pictures were taken... then as they left, I saw them walk outside to their Hummer, and noticed that it was parked in a handicap space. NO NO NO... not A handicap space... it was so large that it took up TWO, YES TWO motherfucking handicap spaces. I fucking hate Hummers and all that they represent, especially their owners. They. Are. All. Assholes.
Submitted by electrictoothsyndrome (user info) at 2005-11-30 11:22:39 EST (#)
Ranking: 0
Submitted by The_Screg (user info) at 2005-11-30 11:09:12 (#)
Ranking: 0
DISAGREE!?!?!?!
How COULD you!?
Explain yourself. With what do you disagree exactly?
-------------------------------------------------------
Well, you never really made any solid point with me to disagree with, so I had to assume that I knew what you were talking about, which then creates a large possibility that I am incorrect. But, for the sake of writting, I will go on the assumption that I am correct.
1. You hate soldiers, you hate the war.- Im not going to get into a whole discussion about it, but I am pro-war (for the most part) and I support our soldiers. And I dont have a bumper sticker.
2. If you wanna buy a Hummer, go for it. You wont get any criticism from me. Its not my vehicle of choice, but I wont assume that you have some sort of deep seeded insecurity problems because you drive a really big automobile.
3. Ive looked into this whole global warming thing, Ive seen evidence that says it is happing. Ive seen evidence that says its not happening. Ive read studies that said its happening because of man, and then studies that said its happening because of nature. I side with the "its happening because of nature" crowd, BUT I am no enviro-scientist and havent fully studied up on the subject past casual reading.
Really, I disliked the tone of your post. Esspecially the dislike of our soldiers, that didnt sit well with me.
---------------------------
Jesus Christ....
*breaths deeply*
Ok, you're a noob, so I'm gonna let you slide for now.
First, you need to look up the meaning of the word "sarcasm" and internalise it.
Second, I don't know what studies your reading if you can possibly think that mankind is having no effect on the environment, but I suspect they were fully endorsed and funded by either Halliburton, OPEC, Exxon, or some combination. At this point, no serious scientist who's not in it for a payday from big oil will tell you with a straight face that mankind is not warming the earth at an alarming rate. But that's ok, we've got another 30 years to sit around and debate about it. No big deal. I'm sure if we really HAVE to do something about it, our children will take care of it. Them young whippersnappers are smart these days! Surely they'll figure somethin' out!
Surely.
(HINT: You won't get point #2 unless you've first gotten point #1.)
Submitted by electrictoothsyndrome (user info) at 2005-11-30 11:14:18 EST (#)
Ranking: 0
Loki: I haven't washed my vehicle in about 4 years. Why waste my time when my car looks like this: http://www.ubersite.com/m/65608
At this point in its life, the dirt is less unsightly than the car itself, I reckon. The more the merrier!
Submitted by The_Screg (user info) at 2005-11-30 11:09:12 EST (#)
Ranking: 0
DISAGREE!?!?!?!
How COULD you!?
Explain yourself. With what do you disagree exactly?
-------------------------------------------------------
Well, you never really made any solid point with me to disagree with, so I had to assume that I knew what you were talking about, which then creates a large possibility that I am incorrect. But, for the sake of writting, I will go on the assumption that I am correct.
1. You hate soldiers, you hate the war.- Im not going to get into a whole discussion about it, but I am pro-war (for the most part) and I support our soldiers. And I dont have a bumper sticker.
2. If you wanna buy a Hummer, go for it. You wont get any criticism from me. Its not my vehicle of choice, but I wont assume that you have some sort of deep seeded insecurity problems because you drive a really big automobile.
3. Ive looked into this whole global warming thing, Ive seen evidence that says it is happing. Ive seen evidence that says its not happening. Ive read studies that said its happening because of man, and then studies that said its happening because of nature. I side with the "its happening because of nature" crowd, BUT I am no enviro-scientist and havent fully studied up on the subject past casual reading.
Really, I disliked the tone of your post. Esspecially the dislike of our soldiers, that didnt sit well with me.
Submitted by loki (user info) at 2005-11-30 11:06:15 EST (#)
Ranking: 2
The last time I got lazy and ran the Jeep through the Auto Bell carwash, there was a guy with a Hummer there too. I was astonished at how damn big those things are up close. I'm surprised it fit in the carwash.
people can tell when you Auto Bell by the way
Submitted by electrictoothsyndrome (user info) at 2005-11-30 11:02:27 EST (#)
Ranking: 0
Submitted by c1ndy (user info) at 2005-11-30 10:55:51 (#)
Ranking: 2
I don't think I've ever seen a Hummer in real life. Do people really drive them or are they an invention of TV, films and the Internet?
---------------------------
No, they're for real. And these idiots keep buying them. At around 8 Miles Per Gallon in the city, they'll spend more money on gas in one year than I do in three years. But...they can afford it! Because they're ELITE! After all, they own a Hummer, baby! They got no worries. The world is their oyster! Sure, that oyster is increasingly toxic due to pollution and the bacterial diseases contained therein have significantly increased due to rising global temperatures, but HEYYYYY, who the fuck is countin'? NOT ME!
What???
What iceburg?
I didn't feel nuthin'.
Submitted by leilani (user info) at 2005-11-30 10:58:13 EST (#)
Ranking: 2
Submitted by c1ndy (user info) at 2005-11-30 10:55:51 (#)
Ranking: 2
I don't think I've ever seen a Hummer in real life. Do people really drive them or are they an invention of TV, films and the Internet?
_________
YES they not only drive them, they also cut you off in traffic with them and take up two parking spaces at the supermarket with them.
Most of the people I see driving them are fiftysomething bottle blonde female yuppies who have no need for such a vehicle. but then again who does?
Submitted by SilvrWolf (user info) at 2005-11-30 10:56:39 EST (#)
Ranking: 2
Hell, send me as many as your front clip can stand. However, I will not accept delivery of any carcasses with bits of broken signal lights in them. I learned my lesson last time. Headlight shards are acceptable and I'll pay extra if you can imprint the Toyota insignia in one of the quarters.
Submitted by electrictoothsyndrome (user info) at 2005-11-30 10:55:59 EST (#)
Ranking: 0
Submitted by The_Screg (user info) at 2005-11-30 10:53:46 (#)
Ranking: -2
I am going to start my Ubersite carrer off badly by giving you a -2. But please know that while I may disagree with you, unlike some people, I dont think you should be censored.
--------------------------
DISAGREE!?!?!?!
How COULD you!?
Explain yourself. With what do you disagree exactly?
Submitted by c1ndy (user info) at 2005-11-30 10:55:51 EST (#)
Ranking: 2
I don't think I've ever seen a Hummer in real life. Do people really drive them or are they an invention of TV, films and the Internet?
Submitted by electrictoothsyndrome (user info) at 2005-11-30 10:54:47 EST (#)
Ranking: 0
Submitted by leilani (user info) at 2005-11-30 10:49:22 (#)
Ranking: 2
Submitted by Caulaincourt (user info) at 2005-11-30 10:48:32 (#)
Ranking: 2
being american seems like a burden
________
being a canadian seems.... well.... cold.
maybe this global warming thing isn't so bad after all.
kidding, of course.
------------------------
Hey, I've said it before and I'll say it again. In 30 years' time, property on the Hudson Bay is going to BOOM! Look out Arctic Ocean! We're goin' surfin'! Cause everybody's gone surfin'....surfin' C.A.N.A.D.A.
Submitted by The_Screg (user info) at 2005-11-30 10:53:46 EST (#)
Ranking: -2
I am going to start my Ubersite carrer off badly by giving you a -2. But please know that while I may disagree with you, unlike some people, I dont think you should be censored.
Submitted by electrictoothsyndrome (user info) at 2005-11-30 10:52:13 EST (#)
Ranking: 0
Submitted by SilvrWolf (user info) at 2005-11-30 10:47:45 (#)
Ranking: 2
Written like a man who drives a Toyota Camry with a peculiar magnetic quality to deer. Say, I haven't killed anything this hunting season; could you tenderize a nice doe for me? I'll pay the postage.
I can't rag on your car, really. I drive an S-10 Blazer with cancer of the fenders and a Honda "P.O.S." Accord.
----------------------
HAHAHA
Nice to see you 'round, dude.
I'll get right on that deer killing. How many you want? 2? 3?
You just let me know and one day when you least expect it, you'll receive your freshly dressed deer in the mail, complete with my patented Toyota seasoning. But be sure to remove the driver side mirror from its flesh before you cook it. It's for preservation purposes only.
Submitted by badassmofo (user info) at 2005-11-30 10:50:18 EST (#)
Ranking: 0
Submitted by electrictoothsyndrome (user info) at 2005-11-30 10:43:05 (#)
Ranking: 0
Submitted by badassmofo (user info) at 2005-11-30 10:39:30 (#)
Ranking: 0
you really didn't have to write all this you could have just linked to us to a random scattering of your reviews over the last few months and that would have served the same purpose.
------------------------
My reviews are priceless bits of universal wisdom. one day, I'll collect them all into a single volume and give them away in airports.
-----------------------
Hari Chrishna hari hari chrishna!!!
(man I wish I could remember a line from Airplane that the chrishnas said in the airport...too much THC I suppose)
Submitted by leilani (user info) at 2005-11-30 10:49:22 EST (#)
Ranking: 2
Submitted by Caulaincourt (user info) at 2005-11-30 10:48:32 (#)
Ranking: 2
being american seems like a burden
________
being a canadian seems.... well.... cold.
maybe this global warming thing isn't so bad after all.
kidding, of course.
Submitted by Caulaincourt (user info) at 2005-11-30 10:48:32 EST (#)
Ranking: 2
being american seems like a burden
Submitted by electrictoothsyndrome (user info) at 2005-11-30 10:48:00 EST (#)
Ranking: 0
Submitted by proofofpurchase (user info) at 2005-11-30 10:46:30 (#)
Ranking: -1
Your point?
--------------------
Just looking for a point tells me you've sorely missed it.
Submitted by SilvrWolf (user info) at 2005-11-30 10:47:45 EST (#)
Ranking: 2
"Boy, I bet that Hummer™ looks nice, now, don't it! Go on and buy one! You'll love yourself for it! Other people will love you too! It will fill the void in your life to own one as a status symbol. You NEED one, in fact! Just picture yourself in traffic surrounded by vehicles that are shorter in stature than YOUR vehicle! Just imagine how large that would make your cock appear to be to others! Imagine the feeling of power that will come from knowing that you are sitting higher than all the people around you in traffic, and from your perch you can peer down upon their lesser existence and wipe your hands clean of it, because you're a Hummer™ owner now! You are, in fact, THE MAN."
Written like a man who drives a Toyota Camry with a peculiar magnetic quality to deer. Say, I haven't killed anything this hunting season; could you tenderize a nice doe for me? I'll pay the postage.
I can't rag on your car, really. I drive an S-10 Blazer with cancer of the fenders and a Honda "P.O.S." Accord.
Submitted by proofofpurchase (user info) at 2005-11-30 10:46:30 EST (#)
Ranking: -1
Your point?
Submitted by electrictoothsyndrome (user info) at 2005-11-30 10:43:05 EST (#)
Ranking: 0
Submitted by badassmofo (user info) at 2005-11-30 10:39:30 (#)
Ranking: 0
you really didn't have to write all this you could have just linked to us to a random scattering of your reviews over the last few months and that would have served the same purpose.
------------------------
My reviews are priceless bits of universal wisdom. one day, I'll collect them all into a single volume and give them away in airports.
Submitted by CaptainThorns (user info) at 2005-11-30 10:42:44 EST (#)
Ranking: 2
I so love you.
Submitted by electrictoothsyndrome (user info) at 2005-11-30 10:41:53 EST (#)
Ranking: 0
Submitted by loki (user info) at 2005-11-30 10:37:46 (#)
Ranking: 2
If you were a good American, you would boycott all the stores that don't specifically mention "Christmas" in their sale ads.
and you would max out your credit cards at the stores who do
I'm just sayin'
--------------------------
I've got an idea, Loki! How about we ALL just max out our credit cards with the new dose of 'CONSUMER CONFIDENCE' taht comes from knowing the gas prices are juuuuust under $2 per gallon!?!?
THEN, when the first of the year rolls around, after Christmas, we can all watch as the gasoline prices go back up, and we're stuck with credit card bills that are more and more difficult to pay!
Won't THAT be something!
Submitted by badassmofo (user info) at 2005-11-30 10:39:30 EST (#)
Ranking: 0
you really didn't have to write all this you could have just linked to us to a random scattering of your reviews over the last few months and that would have served the same purpose.
Submitted by wookie (user info) at 2005-11-30 10:38:28 EST (#)
Ranking: 2
No Comment
Submitted by loki (user info) at 2005-11-30 10:37:46 EST (#)
Ranking: 2
If you were a good American, you would boycott all the stores that don't specifically mention "Christmas" in their sale ads.
and you would max out your credit cards at the stores who do
I'm just sayin'
Submitted by leilani (user info) at 2005-11-30 10:34:39 EST (#)
Ranking: 2
Boy, I bet that Hummer™ looks nice, now, don't it! Go on and buy one! You'll love yourself for it! Other people will love you too! It will fill the void in your life to own one as a status symbol. You NEED one, in fact! Just picture yourself in traffic surrounded by vehicles that are shorter in stature than YOUR vehicle! Just imagine how large that would make your cock appear to be to others! Imagine the feeling of power that will come from knowing that you are sitting higher than all the people around you in traffic, and from your perch you can peer down upon their lesser existence and wipe your hands clean of it, because you're a Hummer™ owner now! You are, in fact, THE MAN.
loved THAT