Sick of all of this - A Rant

[tinselwolverine]

Still fun to listen to when discussing religion.

Penn Jillette is fun to listen to when discussing anything.

 

[byco42]

I don't know. But it's the numbers like those in that graph you posted that have pretty much killed any hope in my mind of living in the sort of world I'd like to live in at some point in my lifetime.

Picking 10,000 of our best and brightest, putting them into a deep sleep on a interstellar ship and heading for the nearest star system with a habitable rocky earth-like planet is the best hope for humanity. Maybe some day one of my kids can be on it.

...they'll get to tune in to communications from earth, see people bombing abortion clinics, getting brainwashed by religious cults, watching American Idol season 1,146, and listening to President George W. Bush the 85th arguing that we need to invade and kill all of Oceania because "they hate our Freedoms" and think... "MAN, are we ever glad we got off that rock! Pass me another daiquiri, and let's go watch another holographic Miles Davis & John Coltrane fusion concert by the pool."

Like those 10,000 won't merely repeat the same mistakes on Planet X the countless generations have on Earth? "People bombing abortion clinics," yet dismissing the abortions themselves though they are equally if not more barbaric.

As for "the world you'd like to live in" you seriously had hope that you would experience that? The world is not yours, or anyone's, to shape.

 

[KAWDUP]

this is a political forum, sorry that you get your jesus panties all wadded up if someone disagrees with you. the point is that it's a common question in GOP primary debates to question scientific fact

http://evolution.about.com/od/Overview/tp/2012-Gop-Presidential-Candidates-On-Evolution.htm

2012 candidates

bachman, wants to teach intelligent design in classes
gingrich, wants creationism taught in schools
huntsman, actually sane
paul, does not accept evolution
perry, evolution denier
Romney, when cornered, admitted that he believes in evolution, but he also believes that jesus traveled to the united states
santorum, anti evolution

just going to show how crazy this party is. it's comical that these questions are even part of the debate for president.

Jesus panties? That the best you got?

LOL - I am guessing you are the one with the twisted tights, because if this is a political forum, as you state, then disagreeing with the completely ignorant is an acceptable response.

Once again - cherry picked stupidity. If you are determining someone's craziness by their personal religious beliefs, I would say you are more likley to be considered the crazy one. You would certainly be in the minority. Is that what has you all worked up?

 

[Sbee]

Jesus panties? That the best you got?

LOL - I am guessing you are the one with the twisted tights, because if this is a political forum, as you state, then disagreeing with the completely ignorant is an acceptable response.

Once again - cherry picked stupidity. If you are determining someone's craziness by their personal religious beliefs, I would say you are more likley to be considered the crazy one. You would certainly be in the minority. Is that what has you all worked up?

Cherry picking? these were the best candidates the republican party could find for president. It's nearly impossible to have a logical conversation with someone who denies science in favor of magic. In the republican party, denying irrefutable facts is actually encouraged, hence why I call it the mental patient party.

 

[KAWDUP]

Cherry picking? these were the best candidates the republican party could find for president. It's nearly impossible to have a logical conversation with someone who denies science in favor of magic. In the republican party, denying irrefutable facts is actually encouraged, hence why I call it the mental patient party.

Deny science? When in heavens name did I ever do that?

. . . because I believe in God? That is a moronic thing to say - something I can see you are very well versed at.

I can see you never visited the link I posted. Good for you. It is nearly impossible to argue with someone as closed minded, and completely ignorant of the issues.

typical Sbee

 

[Sbee]

Deny science? When in heavens name did I ever do that?

. . . because I believe in God? That is a moronic thing to say - something I can see you are very well versed at.

I can see you never visited the link I posted. Good for you. It is nearly impossible to argue with someone as closed minded, and completely ignorant of the issues.

typical Sbee

I read your link, but you still consider evolution a theory instead of a proven fact. the fact that the leadership of your party denies overwhelming evidence to believe in hocus pocus theories is comical to me.

again, keep believing your fairy tale and think that we were placed here by god in our current form.

 

[KAWDUP]

I read your link, but you still consider evolution a theory instead of a proven fact. the fact that the leadership of your party denies overwhelming evidence to believe in hocus pocus theories is comical to me.

again, keep believing your fairy tale and think that we were placed here by god in our current form.

. . . and you should stop putting words into my mouth - you don't have a fucking clue what I believe.

I think you're pretty comical, in much the same way as you do with the Republican party.

. . . and as goes the usual stupidity in arguments with you, it becomes a "I must have the last word" discussion for you.

Have at it oh ignorant one - it is what you do.

 

[byco42]

Cherry picking? these were the best candidates the republican party could find for president. It's nearly impossible to have a logical conversation with someone who denies science in favor of magic. In the republican party, denying irrefutable facts is actually encouraged, hence why I call it the mental patient party.

Irrefutable facts get refuted by the same experts who called them irrefutable in the first place every day of the year.

Science is the science of discovering what was once believed to be true is not true after all.

 

[Michchamp]

. . . and you should stop putting words into my mouth - you don't have a fucking clue what I believe.

I...

not really fair to keep saying that. you're attacking his personal beliefs - which presumably differ from yours - but you keep insisting that yours are somehow beyond comprehension.

so... maybe you're not a superstitious country bumpkin who believes god put dinosaur bones in the earth to test our faith, and fashioned man from a lump of mud... but you'll sure as hell go to your grave defending those who do!

you're attacking him for his criticism of the fact that all the Republican Party's presidential candidates, or at least the Top 5-6 vote getters from Romney down to Herman Cain openly endorsed Creationism, and didn't unequivocally endorse the theory of Evolution as a theory and an observable fact (which it is).

it's not fair to claim that's not an official GOP plank when it's so widely endorsed and spoken of during the primary campaign. What is then? talk about cherry-picking...

the candidates know that (at least) 60% of their base is a bunch of credulous moops who really believe this stuff and couldn't reason their way out of a grocery bag, so they have readily adopted it into their platform. I doubt they'd want creationism taught to their kids at Exeter, St. Pauls, or Cranbrook, but then again, their kids are practically citizens of a different country from the teeming masses of voters they're pandering too. not like we need them to understand science...

 

[KAWDUP]

nor is it fair to claim that's not an official GOP plank when it's so widely endorsed and spoken of during the primary campaign.

Ummm . . . yes it is most certainly fair. That is the point.

I don't control what they do with their religious beliefs, and I will and do vote, in every local election they let me, trying to stop what I consider legislating religion. Don't you?

But, of course, I'm sure you buy into and identify with every stupid thing the Democratic party says in a campaign too, right? Not many of those running around right?

 

[Michchamp]

And I get it... the democrats tell all their base that they plan to maintain social spending, education, health, etc. and sane foreign policy, yet do the exact opposite.

their voters may be duped too, but at least they're getting duped for reasons that are not totally retarded, I guess.

 

[KAWDUP]

And I get it... the democrats tell all their base that they plan to maintain social spending, education, health, etc. and sane foreign policy, yet do the exact opposite.

their voters may be duped too, but at least they're getting duped for reasons that are not totally retarded, I guess.

LOL, OK I see it now, as long as I am getting duped for reasons that aren't retarded, everything is AOK. Good value to live up to.

 

[redandguilty]

the candidates know that (at least) 60% of their base is a bunch of credulous moops

I'm sorry bubble boy, the card says 'Moops'.

 

[KAWDUP]

I'm sorry bubble boy, the card says 'Moops'.

Great Seinfeld reference - I did literally laugh out loud. Man you are quick.

 

[Sbee]

And I get it... the democrats tell all their base that they plan to maintain social spending, education, health, etc. and sane foreign policy, yet do the exact opposite.

their voters may be duped too, but at least they're getting duped for reasons that are not totally retarded, I guess.

yep, that's why we need a second party. we need someone to oppose the democrats with some kind of coherency.

 

[redandguilty]

yep, that's why we need a second party. we need someone to oppose the democrats with some kind of coherency.

We need moderate liberals to participate in republican primaries.

 

[Michchamp]

yep, that's why we need a second party. we need someone to oppose the democrats with some kind of coherency.

We had Ralph Nader in 2000, and look how they handled that. As soon as it became apparent that his campaign had momentum, the media totally shunned him (much as they did with Ron Paul during the primary season in 2012). Nader was excluded from the debates, and threatened with arrest if he attempted to attend them. They didn't go that far with Ron Paul, but the few debates I watched, you could almost feel the moderators start to sweat whenever Paul opened his mouth.

if we want that second party, we're really going to have to fight for it. the establishment is not going to simply permit it to exist and win elections.

 

[Sbee]

We need moderate liberals to participate in republican primaries.

I assume this is a joke. McCain and Romney were moderate but you can't be moderate and get the nomination. McCain voted against the bush tax cuts, saying that we couldn't afford them and then campaigns on deeper tax cuts. we were really close to having Santorum as a nominee too, he really won Iowa but it wasn't reported until a week later which halted momentum.

 

[Sbee]

We had Ralph Nader in 2000, and look how they handled that. As soon as it became apparent that his campaign had momentum, the media totally shunned him (much as they did with Ron Paul during the primary season in 2012). Nader was excluded from the debates, and threatened with arrest if he attempted to attend them. They didn't go that far with Ron Paul, but the few debates I watched, you could almost feel the moderators start to sweat whenever Paul opened his mouth.

if we want that second party, we're really going to have to fight for it. the establishment is not going to simply permit it to exist and win elections.

the only hope is for a GOP split I think. take the values voters and gun rights types and then the country club types and create separate parties. of course you'd lose a bunch of elections before you gain momentum.

 

[redandguilty]

I assume this is a joke. McCain and Romney were moderate but you can't be moderate and get the nomination. McCain voted against the bush tax cuts, saying that we couldn't afford them and then campaigns on deeper tax cuts. we were really close to having Santorum as a nominee too, he really won Iowa but it wasn't reported until a week later which halted momentum.

I said it ambiguously. We need moderate liberals to vote in republican primaries.