Beta
×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

This is kind of like the madness I deal with here on /.

smitty_one_each (243267) writes | about 8 months ago

User Journal 36

So Rachel Maddow’s entire segment was one big lie. Her central premise, that the Florida welfare statute was an initiative of the Koch brothers, was false, and she knew it. She made the whole thing up to fool the low-IQ viewers who form MSNBC’s base. But the story gets even worse.

So Rachel Maddowâ(TM)s entire segment was one big lie. Her central premise, that the Florida welfare statute was an initiative of the Koch brothers, was false, and she knew it. She made the whole thing up to fool the low-IQ viewers who form MSNBCâ(TM)s base. But the story gets even worse.

Somebody once explained to me that liberalism was about rationality; about being able to argue the fair aspects of disparate viewpoints, and come to a moderate synthesis of views; about weighing theoretical and empirical data and dispassionately pursuing the optimal solution.
These days is seems to be all about snorting Drano.

cancel ×

36 comments

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

Yep (1)

gmhowell (26755) | about 8 months ago | (#45885473)

Sounds about right. It's BS like this that led me to stop watching MSNBC. At least Olbermann was entertaining with his bloviating truthiness. Maddow is just a snarky nag, a few years too mature for her hipster affectations. And the little dweeb before her is closer in age for that sort of thing, but it just underlines his lack of intellectual heft or experience.

Re:Yep (1)

Marxist Hacker 42 (638312) | about 8 months ago | (#45887235)

Why is it that all the older liberal women I know, don't seem to be able to understand human sexuality?

Re:Yep (1)

fustakrakich (1673220) | about 8 months ago | (#45893357)

Number 1 - Paid actor (actress)

Number 2 - Anybody that takes her, or O'Reilly, or any of the other loons you want to bring up seriously need more sex.

Number 3 - Girls just want to have fun, including posting this stuff for the reaction shot.

Re:Yep (1)

smitty_one_each (243267) | about 8 months ago | (#45895979)

Was there ever a thing called 'journalism', or was that a mere a illusion?

Re:Yep (1)

fustakrakich (1673220) | about 8 months ago | (#45903861)

The entire universe is a hallucination of the living.

Re:Yep (1)

smitty_one_each (243267) | about 8 months ago | (#45905237)

Did you have anything other than solipsism to offer?

Re:Yep (1)

fustakrakich (1673220) | about 8 months ago | (#45907215)

I offer everything but false hopes.

Re:Yep (1)

smitty_one_each (243267) | about 8 months ago | (#45912075)

No, your nihilistic hope that life is meaningless is wholly untrue.

Re:Yep (1)

fustakrakich (1673220) | about 8 months ago | (#45913291)

Prove it.

Re:Yep (1)

smitty_one_each (243267) | about 8 months ago | (#45915029)

Disprove it.

Re:Yep (1)

fustakrakich (1673220) | about 8 months ago | (#45916409)

You're soaking in it. You are the one fabricating the deity, and its 'purpose'. I cannot disprove an hallucination. I can't disprove it anymore than I can disprove the existence of pink elephants. If you think you saw them, then you saw them. But, when you exhibit bigotry and deny the rights of the non-believers and force your culture down their throats, there's going to be trouble. You are the one obligated to back up the FUD with actual, physical evidence.

Re:Yep (1)

smitty_one_each (243267) | about 8 months ago | (#45922735)

The evidence is published. It is the most popular document in human history. I'm here to encourage, not force.

Re:Yep (1)

fustakrakich (1673220) | about 8 months ago | (#45923609)

Harry Potter is pretty popular too, as are many works of fiction. Does it show evidence of magic? You claim to not use force, but you encourage those who will.

Re:Yep (1)

smitty_one_each (243267) | about 8 months ago | (#45925393)

You claim to not use force, but you encourage those who will.

Are you recommending that I use force to restrain the forceful from applying Newtons to objects outside themselves?

Re:Yep (1)

Marxist Hacker 42 (638312) | about 8 months ago | (#45898973)

The trouble is Number 4: I keep running into this same messed up attitude about sex from women over the age of 50 in real life, outside of the media.

Re:Yep (1)

fustakrakich (1673220) | about 8 months ago | (#45900065)

Well, maybe the men shouldn't be harassing them and trying to control them so much. Repression has been proven to produce undesired results.

Re:Yep (1)

Marxist Hacker 42 (638312) | about 8 months ago | (#45901929)

So has a lack of repression. Sexually transmitted diseases are caused by a lack of repression, for instance (not to mention the social effects).
[sarcasm on]
But hey, don't listen to history- it was written by authoritarians who actually lived through the bad stuff and tried to tell us how to avoid it, but we can't listen to them because they're authoritarians right?[/sarcasm off]
 
Bigotry always goes both ways.

Re:Yep (1)

fustakrakich (1673220) | about 8 months ago | (#45903853)

Bigotry always goes both ways.

Damn! You got me, man. I have to admit I can't stand despots and their -isms.

Re:Yep (1)

Marxist Hacker 42 (638312) | about 8 months ago | (#45906537)

And thus, what data are you ignoring because of that bigotry against "-isms"?

Re:Yep (1)

fustakrakich (1673220) | about 8 months ago | (#45907191)

The beautiful oratory, all for naught, because of the act. They only show how meaningless words can be.

Re:Yep (1)

Marxist Hacker 42 (638312) | about 8 months ago | (#45908379)

The same could be said for homosexual exceptionalism- which is of course your own ism.

Re:Yep (1)

fustakrakich (1673220) | about 8 months ago | (#45908747)

Say whaaa? Where did that come from?? I never expected you to start making stuff up. I just see people demanding the same rights as anybody else. You all are showing signs of panic..

Re:Yep (1)

Marxist Hacker 42 (638312) | about 8 months ago | (#45909351)

If they were demanding the *same* rights as everybody else, they'd be demanding the right to be heterosexual. They are specifically demanding *different* rights from everybody else, or there would be no point.

Thus the meaning of the word "same".

Re:Yep (1)

fustakrakich (1673220) | about 8 months ago | (#45909831)

They are demanding the right to be themselves, without molestation. You're just saying "...inside every gook there is an American trying to get out".

Re:Yep (1)

Marxist Hacker 42 (638312) | about 8 months ago | (#45909993)

"They are demanding the right to be themselves, without molestation. "

No they aren't, because sexual orientation has nothing to do with identity.

" You're just saying "...inside every gook there is an American trying to get out"."

No, I'm saying "If you're going to live in a culture, you need to assimilate to that culture".

Re:Yep (1)

fustakrakich (1673220) | about 8 months ago | (#45910351)

I guess we can chatter all we want about it. As far as I'm concerned they are acting in self defense. Here's hoping they can push the bigotry over a cliff, for good this time. I see your privileged status as a monkey trap. It is evolutionary stagnant with the conscience forever chained to and die with its physical host, worshiping its own hallucinations.

Re:Yep (1)

Marxist Hacker 42 (638312) | about 8 months ago | (#45910949)

If they were acting in self defense, then the obvious solution would be to form intentional communities and leave everybody else alone.

All pushing bigotry off a cliff does is create more bigotry.

And no, that's you. My conscience will live on in my son. And long after all of you are dead of AIDS, his children will still be here.

Re:Yep (1)

fustakrakich (1673220) | about 8 months ago | (#45911415)

If they were acting in self defense, then the obvious solution would be to form intentional communities and leave everybody else alone.

Nope, they were born here and every right to live as they see fit. You have no right to interfere as you are doing.

My conscience will live on in my son.

Your DNA will live on. The conscience is his, not yours. And I certainly hope you respect whatever choices he makes in the future.

And long after all of you are dead of AIDS...

:-) Heh, it doesn't quite work that way no matter how much you want it to. The percentages have been pretty stable for millennia, and will most probably remain so for the foreseeable future. Like it or not, nobody's going anywhere. You seem to exhibit a certain amount of naivete in your predilection.

Re:Yep (1)

Marxist Hacker 42 (638312) | about 8 months ago | (#45912545)

The minority never has the right to dictate to the majority.

There's a lot more than just DNA that gets replicated- IF a parent does his job correctly.

The percentage of homosexuals has gone up in my lifetime.

Re:Yep (1)

smitty_one_each (243267) | about 8 months ago | (#45912993)

The minority never has the right to dictate to the majority.

I can buy off on your statement due to the choice of "dictate". Attempting to legislate morality is foolish. But I will never quit advocating for Truth, for all the majority chooses falsehood so regularly.

Re:Yep (1)

gmhowell (26755) | about 8 months ago | (#45893483)

Why is it that all the older liberal women I know, don't seem to be able to understand human sexuality?

In Rachel's case, I'm thinking that the lesbianism may queer (lol!) her thinking on the subject a bit as well.

Re:Yep (1)

fustakrakich (1673220) | about 8 months ago | (#45896897)

Haven't you noticed? The 'gaystapo' (as our host likes to call it) has commandeered mass media to push their 'agenda' to destroy families and turn us all into queers. We're only one step away from homo reeducation camps. Watch out! They're comin' for your balloon knot!!

Re:Yep (1)

smitty_one_each (243267) | about 8 months ago | (#45903207)

Admit it: you've been craving an opportunity to use 'gaystapo'. You're welcome.

Re:Yep (1)

Austrian Anarchy (3010653) | about 8 months ago | (#45911933)

Why is it that all the older liberal women I know, don't seem to be able to understand human sexuality?

Are all of them grumpy, ugly old bags who got into the liberalism thing for attention? That is a top reason, but there are many others.

Re:Yep (1)

Austrian Anarchy (3010653) | about 8 months ago | (#45911907)

I just discovered [blogspot.com] Olbermann is back in the sports announcing business. The rest of the Comedians in Cars Drinking Coffee episode was much more fulfilling.

This is kind of like the madness... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 8 months ago | (#45896201)

Yes, it is. The madness you visit.

You willingly seek to bring such madness into your purview. I'm not sure why you are so fascinated by it, but you return to it again and again and again. I think you are over-analyzing such people and giving them more power over you than they deserve.

Once you realize that they are unbalanced and unhealthy and are comfortable with that assessment, wallowing repeatedly in the minutiae and particulars of their idiocy du jour becomes unhealthy in my experience.

Check for New Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>