Journal damn_registrars's Journal: And Hilarity Ensues... 23
Special thanks to our mock-conservative railgunner for bringing up the latest rounds of conservative noise and talking points. Three hilarious journal entries in a row, I'm waiting to see if he can wrap it up with one that blames something on Bill Clinton.
Railgunner: I get your joke now. I used to think you actually believed the stuff you post, but clearly you are posting this for amusement. And it gets funnier with each iteration. I thank you for the low-hanging fruit that you provide us. Nobody smart enough to write on slashdot would be able to read the material you provide and believe it to be credible for the talking points that you provide for it.
I thank you, you have made my Friday more enjoyable. Please keep it up.
And your latest move for restricting responses to your entries - keeping only a short list of people who can reply, instead of a growing list of people who cannot - is classic. Feel free to come here to be showered with praise for a job well done.
Highlights:
Railgunner: I get your joke now. I used to think you actually believed the stuff you post, but clearly you are posting this for amusement. And it gets funnier with each iteration. I thank you for the low-hanging fruit that you provide us. Nobody smart enough to write on slashdot would be able to read the material you provide and believe it to be credible for the talking points that you provide for it.
I thank you, you have made my Friday more enjoyable. Please keep it up.
And your latest move for restricting responses to your entries - keeping only a short list of people who can reply, instead of a growing list of people who cannot - is classic. Feel free to come here to be showered with praise for a job well done.
Highlights:
- First entry - global warming is a lie - links to a blog entry about a published article that admits climate change is happening.
- Second entry - censorship - is actually leading towards a discussion of libel in how the concept of "government health care" is actually misleading at best.
- Third entry - approval ratings - this one is the capstone of the triad. Start by mentioning that the current POTUS has seen his approval "slip" to only 15- 20 points better than his predecessor. Then continue to say that you want the next POTUS to be someone with even less political experience than the current POTUS - who was himself often criticized for lack of experience prior to the election.
Second entry (Score:2)
The Chicago Tribune is running a piece [chicagotribune.com] on it today, pretty much proving the neocons dead wrong.
Re: (Score:1)
Nice try in trying to trivialize RG by trying to mock him. You're obviously paying attention to your Alinsky book.
Re: (Score:2)
ObamaCare
First of all, there is no such thing. There is no proposal for universal health care, as much as I would love to see one. The congress-sheeple are too spineless to propose such a thing, in spite of its potential to solve many of our current problems.
the fact that the Dems are censoring the GOP on their mailings
That statement is factually questionable at best.
The GOP mailings are crying out that the sky is falling, over a proposal that does not exist. Repeat after me: there is no such thing as ObamaCare. You can apply all the cute names you want to it, but you
Re: (Score:1)
Which of the three versions of the bill are you citing to come up with that conclusion?
Oh, you're just pulling things out of your ass again?
This is censorship, and I'm not surprised at all that you're OK with it. If the Parties were reversed, I'm sure you'd be squealing louder then you do when your boyfriend Red takes you from behind, you worthless troll.
Re: (Score:1)
ciao,
Jameth
Re: (Score:1, Informative)
Re: (Score:2)
What, no "dumbass" anywhere in your response? WTF?
Re: (Score:2)
Which of the three versions of the bill are you citing to come up with that conclusion?
Can you point to a version of the bill that actually contains universal health care, or your dreaded "ObamaCare"?
No, of course you cannot. No bill proposed yet has any such provision. Don't go around accusing people of pulling things out of their ass when you are the one making things up.
you worthless troll
Hmmm. You have me on your foes list, you post uncited, unfactual statements in my journal entries, and you call me a troll? I'd advise you look in the mirror.
But you are always welcomed to come back anytime you ha
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:1)
No.
Or his gay lover
No.
, there's hints they're separate people
Because we are.
but the end result is the same.
Thanks for the compliment. Can I get 800 journal entries denouncing me like you guys do for Pudge and RailGunner?
Re: (Score:2)
Can I get 800 journal entries denouncing me like you guys do for Pudge and RailGunner?
That is a fascinating take on the matter.
The reason why I write journal entries showing the problems in the statements of those two is because they intentionally exclude people with opposing viewpoints from posting in the journal entries where they post them.
However, I am now much more convinced that rg is not the conservative that he wants us to believe him to be. I do not believe that anyone smart enough to write on slashdot would actually believe the nonsense that he posts; I suspect that indeed rg
Re: (Score:1)
Afraid to address the substantial questions? You still haven't responded to dr's question.
Can you point to a version of the bill that actually contains universal health care, or your dreaded "ObamaCare"?
Your trolling behavior doesn't surprise me, but your concern being shamed by addressing real questions seems to indicate that you're actually not the fearless devil-may-care troll you're attempting to portray.
Re: (Score:1, Redundant)
If you develop a habit of challenging conservatives, people may accuse you of being me.
Re: (Score:1)
If you develop a habit of challenging conservatives, people may accuse you of being me.
Trolls do what trolls do.
Re: (Score:2)
Thanks for the compliment.
ROFL! I just called you less original than Railgunner, and you think that's a compliment?
Can I get 800 journal entries denouncing me like you guys do for Pudge and RailGunner?
Ah, I see now. You get jack shit because you're lazy. Such delusion!
Re: (Score:1)
The GOP is intentionally spreading outright, bald-faced lies.
Yeah? So what? That's our problem, not theirs. As if the DNC is any different. If you don't want your politicians to lie, then stop voting for lying politicians.
And it doesn't look like the dems have any real censorship authority. Since when is a congressman prohibited from communicating with their constituents as they personally see fit?.. Oh I see.. They want to use free postal service. Let them use e-mail. This isn't "censorship". It's typical
Re: (Score:1)
Whatever it is, it's not censorship. The use by congress of government services for free seem to have some form of regulation that congress has approved of. If the GOP doesn't like it, then it's up to them to win back their majority and change the rules as they see fit. For now let them eat cake. Or more accurately, fuck 'em all. And yes, this issue is quite trivial, but the weather is kinda dull today.
One peer-reviewed paper (Score:2)
I must say say to the ACC-deniers: Well done! You now actually have a peer reviewed paper to back up your idea. Unfortunately for you, it seems to be taking a beating already. Nonetheless I look forward to seeing how this plays out.
Re: (Score:2)
I must say say to the ACC-deniers: Well done! You now actually have a peer reviewed paper to back up your idea.
Actually, they don't.
The paper actually agrees that climate change is happening, it just questions what is causing it. So those who outright deny that climate change is occurring need to look elsewhere for support.
Unfortunately for you, it seems to be taking a beating already.
Next time I am on a campus that subscribes to that journal I will download it and read what they actually did to come to their conclusions. At this point I am withholding judgment until I can actually see the full text of the paper. However even the abstract admits that climate change is in
Re: (Score:2)
ACC = Anthropogenic Climate Change
The paper supports CC while denying ACC.
>Next time I am on a campus that subscribes to that journal I will download it and read what they actually did to come to their conclusions.
>At this point I am withholding judgment until I can actually see the full text of the paper.
So far I have just read the abstract and some rebuttals from scientist's blogs. I would like to read the full paper, and any arguments against it against it that may show up in more formal settings t
Re: (Score:2)
ACC = Anthropogenic Climate Change
My bad. I searched google for [ACC] and found no useful acronym for climate change, then searched [ACC "climate change"] and found something referring to "abrupt climate change". Indeed, the paper in question does doubt a human component to climate change.
However, the journal entry from the mock-conservative is attempting to employ the paper to debunk climate change entirely; which of course has hilarious outcomes.
I would like to read the full paper
Not sure where you live, but if you live anywhere near a university with a respectable g
Re: (Score:2)
>I searched google for [ACC] and found no useful acronym for climate change
Sorry, I should have specified in the first place.
>live anywhere near a university with a respectable geology or environmental sciences department
Yeah, I am sure I can read it at the U of WA, if I just get off my butt and get over there.