Slashdot is powered by your submissions, so send in your scoop

 


Forgot your password?
Close
typodupeerror
×
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Keep the Drano coming More

Keep the Drano coming

Comments Filter:
  • You just took a comment on a tweet and used it to make a sweeping generalization about someone you already hated before you read the comment. It's rather difficult to fit inside a tweet the full notion of "I want to place a sensible judge on the supreme court bench who will vote for overturning ones of the worst court decisions in the history of ever when it comes up for another trial". Perhaps he could have shown a little more depth within the confines of twitter than he did but it is a rather giant assu
    • I realize that Citizens United for the Left, is to SCOTUS what Judas Iscariot is to the Gospel. You're incapable of fathoming that, once you start to "manage" free speech, it's gonzo. Or perhaps you grasp the point all too well, helping to explain your zeal.

      • Free speech is definitely a case of so-called 'liberals' not knowing how things work. It separates the real ones from the phonies like our mutual friend up there. The democrat party wants to collect money from both, and it will always cost them support, rightfully so. The old Bourbon democrats still run the show with what you have to admit is a most excellent machine (proudly made in Chicago), in which the republicans are most willing participants. Everything is, truly, proceeding nominally. Everybody will

      • once you start to "manage" free speech

        So we let the market "manage" it instead? Clearly, letting the same wealthy people who already have out-sized influence on government have their wishes with all forms of speech cannot possibly have negative consequences, right?

        Tell me this, though. How was free speech "managed" before Citizens United? How was your ability to exercise your first amendment rights changed once the ruling came down?

        After all, you could lie just as much about your most hated liberals before then as you do now...

        • The negative consequences are a result of your choices to follow. You only have yourself to blame when you vote for big money. You cannot escape that most simple fact. Your attempts to deflect the responsibility for your own choices are forever futile. The law is absolute! Do not blame the object of your desire/addiction...

        • You do understand that https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Citizens_United_v._FEC [wikipedia.org] is about recovering the First Amendment from https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bipartisan_Campaign_Reform_Act [wikipedia.org] AKA "McCain–Feingold", which invites the question of why anyone considers that Idiot Frickin' Naval Academy Graduate a conservative.
          You knew that, but like Sanders you've "pretty much made a career out of not knowing how things work", at least on /.

          • https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/... [wikipedia.org] is about recovering the First Amendment from https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/... [wikipedia.org] AKA "McCainâ"Feingold",

            I understand the lawsuit was a direct attack on the law. I also understand that you were never harmed by said law, and were just as free to libel before it as you were after it.

            Idiot Frickin' Naval Academy Graduate

            That is a rather awful way to describe a POW. Whether or not you approve of his methods and reputation, he did serve his country.

            a conservative.

            That was the costume worn by "The Maverick" in 2008 [cagle.com].

            "pretty much made a career out of not knowing how things work"

            That is a strange accusation to see levelled by someone who brags repeatedly about things that he refuses to read.

            • That is a rather awful way to describe a POW. Whether or not you approve of his methods and reputation, he did serve his country.

              Which I denied where, exactly? It's always cute when a Lefty decides to wax pious.

              • I didn't say you denied his record, just that you attacked his person. You never allowed any questioning of the personalities of other GOP members, especially those who claimed military service.

                Or did you do that intentionally just to change the topic - as you have done a great many times in many other discussions? You notably quickly jettisoned the rest of the discussion here.

                • You never allowed any questioning of the personalities of other GOP members, especially those who claimed military service.

                  That attitude is as stupid as John Kerry's record. Or John McCain's, given that I don't buy his Keating Five whitewash.
                  Being a veteran is no more an absolution than being in the Lefty Victim Group du jour.

                  • Really? Then tell me, what do you think about the service record of GWB? There is less supporting documentation of that then there is for President Lawnchair's academic credentials. Indeed aside from GWB heroically sitting in the copilot's seat while someone else landed a fighter jet on an aircraft carrier there is scant evidence he was ever in one. He of course later heroically blamed the "mission accomplished" banner on the navy personnel themselves, because he was always big on taking responsibility

                    • There is less supporting documentation of that then there is for President Lawnchair's academic credentials.

                      What. Academic. Credentials.

                    • There is less supporting documentation of that then there is for President Lawnchair's academic credentials.

                      What. Academic. Credentials.

                      Ahh, yes. The siren song of one of your 200+ other favorite conspiracies. I knew you would jump on that at the first chance.

                      The fact of the matter is, however, that even without the transcripts that you are so certain will somehow bring about an early end to the administration, the academic departments did sign off on President Lawnchair having completed the specified requirements for his degrees. You absolutely cannot say the same about GWB's obligations to the National Guard. There is no document

                    • that even without the transcripts

                      What. Transcripts.
                      Calling your bluff, mike foxtrot.

                    • Try reading the message, you will see there is no bluff. You focused on your conspiracy sound bite without concern for the context.

                      Here's a handy link to the comment you didn't read before hitting reply, so you can go try reading it. [slashdot.org] You're welcome.
                    • Transcripts.
                    • You could have just come out and said that you aren't wiling to read the comment. I figured a text had to be longer than that before you would so quickly refuse to read it at all, but so be it.
                    • Transcripts, mike foxtrot: URL, or you're peddling the finest malarkey.
                    • Read my comment. If you don't want to discuss what I wrote in it then just stop hitting the reply button. It is well understood that you are near powerless to the draw of your favorite conspiracies but this act is ridiculous even for you.
                    • Where are the transcripts? How long can you talk about something that could well be a complete hoax as though it were something?
                    • I did not realize beforehand that one word had such power over you. Could I tear your attention away from any discussion with just that one word and force you involuntarily into conspiracy mode? You still haven't actually read the comment [slashdot.org]
                    • Can you answer the question: Where are the transcripts?
                    • The documentation showing precisely which courses our Lawd & Savory, Barack Obama, hath undertaken at university. If any. Or was that all part of the lie?
                    • I could ask much the same of you, though as you didn't read the comment you wouldn't have the slightest idea what I am talking about.
                    • ATFQMF
                    • Really? Thought you were paying attention. This was the more reasonable component of the whole: just what did our Lawd & Savory do with all his documentation, including the whole Birther thing (I frankly never cared), the school transcripts, who actually wrote Dreams From My Father, &c. It's almost as though this purported genius President was a pure media fabrication.
                      But don't waste time getting too personal; had the media not fabricated BHO, they'd've concocted some other tool. Damn_registrars, f
                    • I have never seen that acronym before.

                      If you really want to try to make hay from this conspiracy that you are so obsessed with this week, please tell me what you expect to find on a transcript. Are you hoping to find that he took "how to change your republic into an Islamist Caliphate 101"? Or perhaps "how to stage a north african siege to make it look like you weren't involved 201"?
                    • Answer the fine question, mike foxtrot.
                    • Nice acronym, there. Too bad I don't run in your circles enough to be familiar with it - even google had no idea what it meant when I searched for it.

                      Care to get back to the discussion, or are you too entrenched in your conspiracy to care at this point?

                    • As you are one for the republicans, what's the difference?

                      Given that the GOP makes noises in support of Constitutional principles, it seems the cleaner end of the Progressive turd.

                    • Transcripts?
                    • For you the conspiracy is vastly more important than any attempt at an actual conversation. Not a surprise, really; but still disappointing. Sorry I accidentally dropped a noun that forced you involuntarily into the conspiracy-and-nothing-but-conspiracy mode. It was possible, given enough time, to see Pavlov's dog stop drooling; apparently with you that is not the case. Maybe you need to go take a look at townhall.com for a while to satisfy your appetite and then we can try a discussion on a different t
                    • Returning to the question: transcripts? Or is your continued inability to produce a link to such evidence tantamount to an admission that #OccupyResoluteDesk's academic record is as dodgy as everything else about the fellow?
                    • I guess that was phrased humorously, but the point is that one has to start somewhere.
                    • What's the alternative? Life as a caustic old sack of bile?
                    • Obviously, you won't let this go, even though it has nothing to do with the topic of discussion or the comment where I used the "t" word.

                      If it's really that important, let's consider a few things:
                      • Why am I liable to produce them?
                      • What do you expect to learn from them?
                      • Why are they important for President Lawnchair, but they weren't for previous presidents?

                      He was recognized as having completed his undergraduate and law degrees by the departments responsible for granting said degrees. Why are those docume

                    • The only alternative I recall you offering was: "Wander around as though life had no purpose, while behaving as if life had some purpose."
                    • A URL will do.

                      Or is your continued inability to produce a link to such evidence tantamount to an admission that #OccupyResoluteDesk's academic record is as dodgy as everything else about the fellow?

                      Or is it like Her Majesty's bald faced lie about not having classified information on her unauthorized email server? Seriously: do Democrats have any concept of objective truth, or understanding of accountability to the rule of law? Any?

                    • A URL will do.

                      OK, here's a URL for you to chew on [slashdot.org]. Let me know if you get around to reading what is written there. It's not even an obfuscated URL, you can go right through to it.

                      I've never been able to hold you personally accountable for any of the things that your friends in the GOP have done wrong, why do you get to hold me personally accountable to address a conspiracy regarding a president whose actions I mostly disagree with? I know you're fond of rabbit holes and all, but this one is a real whopper.

                    • Medicare for all is trivially affordable, but it seems you would rather keep all the capital sequestered up in the financial markets instead. Some day that power will be yours! All yours!

                      I think people should have the right to prostitute themselves to the state for benefits, or not. It's the idea of actual liberty that seems to terrify so many.

                    • The irony of your reply is that it was more substantial than anything proffered for the no-talent Rodeo Clown.
                    • If he's so inept than why haven't you been able to find these documents yourself that you so dearly long for? If he's so inept then how has he managed to bring about all the terrible things that you blame on him? In other words as usual your accusations contradict each other.
                    • Great distractor. Again, are you tacitly confessing that, like Trump, #OccupyResoluteDesk is just so much media Frankenstein? Or do you think that proof of Obama ever having done significant academic work actually exists somewhere?

                    • proof of Obama ever having done significant academic work

                      The proof is in the fact that his degrees were granted. No matter what your feelings might be about lawyers or law schools the fact of the matter is that he was granted a law degree, and before that an undergraduate degree. He met the requirements for those degrees.

                      Your accusation of my pointing out the hypocrisy of your accusations as a "distractor" is quite amusing considering you have used this conspiracy as a distraction from the actual discussion for some time now...

                    • The proof is in the fact that his degrees were granted.

                      So, the endpoint proves the path? When we get to see report cards & transcripts for every other (non-Democrat) candidate, but nobody can find the Obama documentation, well, I guess it's no more whiffy than every other godforsaken thing on #OccupyResoluteDesk's record.

                    • The proof is in the fact that his degrees were granted.

                      So, the endpoint proves the path?

                      It proves that the requirements were met to the satisfaction of the institutions that granted said degrees. You still haven't said what it is that you expect to find if the course records were available, or why that would matter.

                      When we get to see report cards & transcripts for every other (non-Democrat) candidate

                      That is a great sweeping generalization you know you cannot possibly back up. I would challenge you to do so but we both know you will not.

                    • It proves that the requirements were met to the satisfaction of the institutions that granted said degrees.

                      Tool

                    • It proves that the requirements were met to the satisfaction of the institutions that granted said degrees.

                      Tool

                      When you go to see your physician or dentist, do you ask for their undergraduate and professional transcripts? Why not? Because you accept the validity of their degree on the wall.

                      If you needed a lawyer, would you ask for his (or her) academic credentials? No, of course not - you would accept their bar certificate.

                      The tool is not me. The tool is the one who has convinced himself there is some merit to his silly conspiracy.

                    • None of which are public figures. Your arguments are crap; you know they are crap: yet you continue to front for crap leadership and then whinge on about a crappy societal result.
                    • OK, you want to just stick to "public figures"? Donald Trump is a very public figure. Do you have his transcripts? How about Rush Limbaugh or Glenn Beck? Or did you mean just politicians? In the latter case do you have the transcripts for any politician named Bush? How about Reagan or Nixon? Funny how those didn't matter before 2008...

                      crap leadership

                      That would be why I call him President Lawnchair, yes. He has consistently folded to the conservatives when it really mattered, and as such will have earned himself t

                    • "Public" as in: official candidate, or better, e.g. GWB [eduinreview.com].
                      But that's a distraction from The Fine Question: where are #OccupyResoluteDesk's?
                      The answer, of course, is: "Shut up!".
                    • Your own source mentioned that other official candidates never released their transcripts.

                      Your own source also is incomplete. It references GWB's undergrad but he has an MBA as well, from a different school. Where are those grades?
                    • Show me BHO's and I'll look for Bush41's.
                    • So again you are holding the democrat with the scary-scary-scary-oh-so-very-very-scary middle name to a different standard than anyone with the correct consonant after their name. Gotcha.
                    • I don't understand your diversion, but I do hope #OccupyResoluteDesk's academic merit is one day honestly demonstrated.
                    • I've not said "[Obama] never went to Columbia". I'm just saying a transcript would be nice.
                    • You just have to understand that "entitle" is a confidence job. Just because you've bought off on the abuse and are in full Stockholm Syndrome bloom does not justify the abuse, in the ultimate sense. Since you're on the topic off facades.

                    • hardly seems important

                      Modulo the part where #OccupyResoluteDesk has been built up as some kinda friggin' genius by the media, I'd be happy to agree. My task here is to enjoy damn_registrars tacitly admitting what a tool he is.

                    • Wait, wait, wait, wait a minute.

                      WHOSE diversion? Almost a week ago now [slashdot.org] I made a passing reference to "academic credentials". As soon as I did that you promptly and proudly discarded the discussion completely to instead press on with your conspiracy. You have been willing to discuss nothing other than that conspiracy in this thread since then.

                      If I wanted a diversion, wouldn't I have provided it myself and intentionally steered the discussion towards said diversion? I repeatedly tried to bring this

                    • should we decide to make the effort, collect

                      An irrefutable aspiration if ever there was.

                    • press on with your conspiracy

                      I'm asking the question: WTF the transcripts? The conspiracy, it would seem, would be in the hiding thereof. But keep on with the bluster, mister.

                    • I don't pay for gasoline. My vehicles are diesel. And I'll go with "relatively cheap", which is what I perceive you want to hear. Does this prove that the circles on a WaPo map of the US are blue for those having good color vision?
                    • Your conspiracy is that there is some great underlying information in them. If President Lawnchair is, after all, the great Islamist Atheist Antichrist Reptoid Illuminati Fascist Anarchist Mastermind that you accuse him of being, then you should consider the possibility that the absence of the transcripts are actually an act of him trolling you. If you want to stick to reality (admittedly not your speciality) then you really should address why President Lawnchair is held to a new required level of records
                    • Will is attainable individually. Akin to electrical resistance, it adds inversely across the population. We're just a little more soft overall than the milkiest milquetoast.

                    • Your conspiracy is that there is some great underlying information in them.

                      No, jackwagon: that would be my question.

                    • Hint: mockery.

                    • Scale is irrelevant. If everybody acts individually, the collective will follow.

                      You may be correct, but I don't think so, and I totally disagree. You can argue, for example, that Groupthink is a voluntary effect, but that's not the same as extinguishing it.

                    • Don't blame the crowd for the bad ones you make.

                      Gosh, Yoda: thanks.

                    • Yo' momma.

                    • Your conspiracy is that there is some great underlying information in them.

                      No, jackwagon: that would be my question.

                      Not once have I seen you exhibit the slightest doubt that there is damning information in those records that you so long for. Considering you have been devoting the same kind of volume and ferocity to this that you have previously given to all 8-plus investigations into Benghazi, there is no reason to expect that you don't see these documents as having something in them that you can use as "justification" for extralegal removal of the POTUS.

                    • Look at the overall arc of deceit. What reasonable, sentient adult possibly believes a single thing coming from The Old Tosser [marketwatch.com]?
                    • Funny how you're willing to apply Hanlon's razor [wikipedia.org] to certain bumbling conservatives, but you won't even consider it for anyone with the mark of the D amned after their name. All the twisting around this one that you conduct with your various conspiracies should be hard on your spine, I would think...
                    • You're right. I assume pure evil from Jezebel.
                    • I don't know what is more interesting here, that you assume everything from Hillary to be from evil intent, or that you keep rapidly flipping back and forth between what you think to be evil and what you think to be incompetence with regards to dear President Lawnchair.
                    • The amusing thing is that you think evil & incompetence are mutually exclusive.
                    • So you're saying you see Hillary then as being evil by design and President Lawnchair as being evil by accident? Interesting hypothesis, there. That implies that you see President Lawnchair as having started out with non-evil intentions, then.
                    • Just keep going; you're making it up quite fine there.
                    • If you have a different explanation for the contradiction between some of your anti-Lawnchair conspiracies, feel free to share it.
                    • OK: you need a life.

                  • Lefty Victim Group du jour.

                    Yeah, like Christians [mediaite.com]...

                    Sorry, just enjoying the show. I hope I didn't cause any coitus interruptus in this ongoing troll fest

                    • Yeah, I guess we can omit those ISIS victims. . .

                    • Same difference. You gonna do the "All Lives Matter" schtick now?

                    • Schtick? We might be close to an honesty breakthrough here.

                    • Yeah, the way you guys play it, it's schtick. And you may shitcan the ISIS nonsense. It doesn't even relate to the discussion. They aren't attacking any Christians in the U.S., and whatever they are doing overseas is on your dime, so any complaints from that angle fall flat.

                    • That is pretty awesome schtick. You get to manage the bounds of the debate to taste. Just like damn_registrars. Way to play, old boy. ;-)

                    • Back to that river in Egypt, eh, carry on...

                    • No, no: we can leave The Exodus out of the conversation, and keep the focus contemporary. If you care to.
                    • You apparently missed the memo that the only God permitted on the Left is the State.
                      Faith, in any traditional Judeo-Christian sense, leads to excessive individuality.

                    • Few things are more collectively authoritarian than your religions.

                      You simply cannot come to my church and support that claim by anything going on. And I don't "own" (in the sense of accepting any responsibility) anything outside of my own Local New Testament Church. Historical Christians were wrong all over the place. Sure.But you'll have to judge people by what they themselves actually do/omit. Or you can play the Alinsky game and try to hold people accountable for actions not their own. As long as they aren't Muslim; because Islam gets a pass. AmIright?

                    • So, you're comfortable with broad generalizations, at least in the Christian case, then.
                    • OK, with the obvious exception that "Christianity" == "bad".
                    • Merely trying to sort out your position, vis-a-vis the conventional "wisdom".

    • Citizens United was right and proper. If you can't turn your back on high dollar candidates and look for somebody else, then the problem is a personal one of your own, nobody else's. You are the one selling your vote. And your purchased vote is worse and more corrupt than the non-vote.

Slashdot Top Deals

"Experience has proved that some people indeed know everything." -- Russell Baker

Close