Did you seriously just say Obama's intellect is comparable to Palin's?!

Palin has a far better grasp on what it means to be an American than a bitter leftist who sat in a hate-Whitey church for 20-plus years. His Earness is endlessly promoted by His media lackeys, so a fair comparison is not possible.

SERIOUSLY?!?!?!? Look, gaffes aside, Obama graduated from Harvard Law School with a JD magna cum laude. Palin took six years to get a bachelor's degree in communications bouncing around from school to school to get it!

You might have had a point when Harvard wasn't a politically-correct degree mill. Speaking of kollij, we will never see Obama's kollij papers to know his genius even then. Community organizer? Do you even need higher education to become a rabble-rousing 'activist'?

Dude, if the conservative/libertarian ideology concluded the world is flat, would you spout that crap, too?! In fact, your beloved Ron Paul wouldn't tell Obama he's not smart enough to be president.

I don't need any labels to denounce His Earness. I merely observe the results of his incompetence (or genius, for those promoting the one-world illuminati worldview). His results are indefensible by any metric you care to name.

Just ridiculous. I get you don't like Obama, but that doesn't mean you should ignore basic fact. And I'm sorry, but she's simply not smart enough to be president. This has nothing to do with her ideology. Plenty of conservative politicians are out there who have the intellectual capacity to be president, but she's not one of them.

Due to an unfortunate media-created outbreak of Palin Derangement Syndrome, your observation cannot be quantified. Anyone here think Joe Biden is smart enough to operate a doorknob much less be President?

BONUS NO. 2 -- "Who are these people?" -- mid-90s Vice President and supergenius Al Gore, referring to the busts of Jefferson, Washington and Franklin during a tour of Monticello, home of Thomas Jefferson.

I was born in '67
the year of Sgt. Pepper
and Are You Experienced

Into a suburban heaven
yeah it should've been forever
it all seems to make so much sense

But after a while
you realize time flies
And the best thing that you can do
is take whatever comes to you
'Cuz time flies

She said luck is what you make it
you just reach out and take it
Now let's dance a while

She said nothing ever happens
if you don't make it happen
And if you can't laugh and smile

And laughing in the summer showers
that's still the way I see you now

How does time break down
with no marker, things slow down.
A conference of the strange
and your family is deranged

I could tell you what I'm thinking
while we sit here drinking
but Im not sure where to start

You see there's something wrong here
I'm sorry if I'm not clear
can you stop smoking your cigar

And the coat you wore to Alton Towers
Is still the way I see you now

As soon as I saw the email announcing the promote, I started cackling like a deranged person.

I knew it was you!

PERFECT!!!!!!! A Perfect Celebration!

In reply to this comment by eric3579:
Grats on the ruby. You're so gay!!

For RedSky:-"If this was purely a GOP deal, then to revert on it this far into a Democratic presidency seems entirely arbitrary."

Your statement infers that there is some fundamental difference in either party (a wholly critical and objective look at their workings reveals a common bond and lineage merging at the inception of The U.S.) All I have seen from studying the past 100 years of world affairs and living in almost half of those is one war after another as empires are shaped, with the arms to affect these being produced by the same families or now, corporations. This is a form of genocide if you will or perhaps eugenics would be better terminology to use to describe it.

for YOGI:-I'd venture to guess that if you were to suddenly know those who were working behind the scenes to affect sudden and sweeping population control measures or who have been slowly eliminating the mental capacities and health of billions of people through chemical and pharmaceutical manipulation, you just might need to purchase some explosives to carry out the task of killing, quite a few Wealthy Deranged People. (WDP's)

We are all being duped.
Try to wrap your heads around the idea that what you think you know, is all wrong.

Here's the good news-Everything is unfolding as it is and the universe has a long time to go before it collapses in on itself or falls into some black hole or whatever it's supposed to do. Smoke a bowl.

"Ding dong, Bin Laudanums' dead, ding dong, the fascist bitch is deeeeeeead!
Bring a piton for his head, ding dong, the Muslim witch is deeeeeeeeead!"

It happened on Obama's watch, "OOOOOOOOOhhh! Now those who will have to vote for the guy who killed Osamas' numbers will grow! NEWSFLASH!!!! SOME of them will be so-called republicans, other so-called democrats. ALLLLLL OF THEM WILL BE BEING SOLD A BILL OF GOODS to ensure a relatively tidy corporate takeover of the whole damn globe.

Keep watching your televisions- sorry, telescreens.

"Edgy?"

For your clever representation of Christianity you select the mentally-deranged vermin of a "church" already universally despised and condemned by an overwhelming majority of Christians.

Why that's like making child rapist roman polanski the poster boy for all H-wood directors!

Yes, the Holy Bible endorses slavery, but it was Christian abolitionists in America and England leading the fight to end that evil institution.

Castigating the Catholic Church (bold, courageous target!--that's never been done!) for "teaming up" with Hitler?

It's so easy and Hollywoodically-correct to bash Christianity.

A book about pedophile zombie mohammed: that's balls. Maybe I'll write that one.

Your argument seems confused to me sir. Access to guns = Killings at school?
You are right though, same 'pattern' can be observed here. http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2008/sep/23/finland.schoolsworldwide .
IMO only certain trained professionals (+psych eval) absolutely require, and therefore, should have access to non-sporting guns, thats it. If you want to have access to guns designed to kill people (alot, quickly, efficiently), and defend your fellow countryman, become a trained professional. >> ^Buck:

"In 2007, a deranged student killed 32 people at Virginia Tech -- 30 of them in a very short period of time in one building. He didn't need high-capacity magazines because he had two guns and reloaded.
There was no one to stop him.
School shootings that have been halted were almost always stopped by the happenstance of an armed citizen on school property.
In 2002, an immigrant in Virginia started shooting his classmates at the Appalachian Law School in Grundy. Two of his classmates retrieved guns from their cars, forcing the killer to drop his weapon and allowing a third classmate to tackle him.
Thrre dead.
In Santee, Calif., in 2001, when a student began shooting his classmates, the school activated its "safe school plan" -- as the principal later told CNN -- by sending a "trained campus supervisor" to stop the killer.
Possibly not realizing that he was in a gun-free zone, the killer responded by shooting the trained campus supervisor three times. Fortunately, an armed off-duty San Diego policeman happened to be bringing his daughter to school that day. With a gun, he stopped the killer and held him at bay until more police could arrive.
Two dead.
In 1997, a student at Pearl High School in Pearl, Miss., had already shot several people at his high school and was headed for the junior high school when assistant principal Joel Myrick retrieved a .45 pistol from his car and pointed it at the gunman's head, ending the slaughter.
Two dead.
In 1998, a student attending a junior high school dance at a restaurant in Edinboro, Pa., started shooting, whereupon the restaurant owner pulled out his shotgun, chased the gunman from the restaurant and captured him for the police.
One dead.
See the pattern?"
---------------------
"Letter writer Barry Ruhl is concerned about a new gun law being proposed in Florida. The changes would bring Florida's laws in line with Utah's. Both require a permit to carry a concealed handgun, but in Utah open-carry is also allowed. It would also allow non-felons to carry in all public places including schools. Ruhl fears that this will degrade public safety.
I would like to point out that Utah's murder rate is just 1.3 per 100,000 and it has never had a school shooting. When Utah enacted its handgun carry laws in 1995, its murder rate was 3.9, three times higher than it is today. Canada's murder rate is 1.8.
In each and every state that has passed a handgun carry law, all rates of crime have dropped immediately and significantly."

"In 2007, a deranged student killed 32 people at Virginia Tech -- 30 of them in a very short period of time in one building. He didn't need high-capacity magazines because he had two guns and reloaded.
There was no one to stop him.
School shootings that have been halted were almost always stopped by the happenstance of an armed citizen on school property.
In 2002, an immigrant in Virginia started shooting his classmates at the Appalachian Law School in Grundy. Two of his classmates retrieved guns from their cars, forcing the killer to drop his weapon and allowing a third classmate to tackle him.
Thrre dead.
In Santee, Calif., in 2001, when a student began shooting his classmates, the school activated its "safe school plan" -- as the principal later told CNN -- by sending a "trained campus supervisor" to stop the killer.
Possibly not realizing that he was in a gun-free zone, the killer responded by shooting the trained campus supervisor three times. Fortunately, an armed off-duty San Diego policeman happened to be bringing his daughter to school that day. With a gun, he stopped the killer and held him at bay until more police could arrive.
Two dead.
In 1997, a student at Pearl High School in Pearl, Miss., had already shot several people at his high school and was headed for the junior high school when assistant principal Joel Myrick retrieved a .45 pistol from his car and pointed it at the gunman's head, ending the slaughter.
Two dead.
In 1998, a student attending a junior high school dance at a restaurant in Edinboro, Pa., started shooting, whereupon the restaurant owner pulled out his shotgun, chased the gunman from the restaurant and captured him for the police.
One dead.

See the pattern?"

---------------------

"Letter writer Barry Ruhl is concerned about a new gun law being proposed in Florida. The changes would bring Florida's laws in line with Utah's. Both require a permit to carry a concealed handgun, but in Utah open-carry is also allowed. It would also allow non-felons to carry in all public places including schools. Ruhl fears that this will degrade public safety.

I would like to point out that Utah's murder rate is just 1.3 per 100,000 and it has never had a school shooting. When Utah enacted its handgun carry laws in 1995, its murder rate was 3.9, three times higher than it is today. Canada's murder rate is 1.8.

In each and every state that has passed a handgun carry law, all rates of crime have dropped immediately and significantly."

there is an adorable old man who lives a few houses down from me. on the top of his mini van, he's rocking an enormous sign that reads "www.gayprideorSHAME.com" ... he had always set my gaydar a buzzin.

after a few days of seeing this, i got curious... is he advocating being proud, instead of ashamed, of your sexuality? because that would be awesome!! it's possible that i am in love this adorable old gay man!!

so i checked out his website.

he, of course, wasn't advocating the abandonment of shame and embracing sexuality. he was doing exactly the opposite. pure nonsense and drivel.

i am still torn between the parts of me that have a tendency to commit witty acts of vandalism all over bullshit hateful signs in my community. and the parts of me that have a tendency to adore deranged old people and just want to play dominoes with them and make sure they eat hot meals and take their medication on time.

The left is shocked---SHOCKED I TELLS YA----about any suggestions of media-promoted VIOLENCE!

To wit:


A new low in Bush-hatred

by Jeff Jacoby
The Boston Globe
September 10, 2006

SIX YEARS into the Bush administration, are there any new depths to which the Bush-haters can sink?

George W. Bush has been smeared by the left with every insult imaginable. He has been called a segregationist who yearns to revive Jim Crow and compared ad nauseam to Adolf Hitler. His detractors have accused him of being financially entwined with Osama bin Laden. Of presiding over an American gulag. Of being a latter-day Mussolini. Howard Dean has proffered the "interesting theory" that the Saudis tipped off Bush in advance about 9/11. One US senator (Ted Kennedy) has called the war in Iraq a "fraud" that Bush "cooked up in Texas" for political gain; another (Vermont independent James Jeffords) has charged him with planning a war in Iran as a strategy to put his brother in the White House. Cindy Sheehan has called him a "lying bastard," a "filth spewer," an "evil maniac," a "fuehrer," and a "terrorist" guilty of "blatant genocide" -- and been rewarded for her invective with oceans of media attention.

What's left for them to say about Bush? That they want him killed?

They already say it.

On Air America Radio, talk show host Randi Rhodes recommended doing to Bush what Michael Corleone, in "The Godfather, Part II," does to his brother. "Like Fredo," she said, "somebody ought to take him out fishing and phuw!" -- then she imitated the sound of a gunshot. In the Guardian, a leading British daily, columnist Charlie Brooker issued a plea: "John Wilkes Booth, Lee Harvey Oswald, John Hinckley Jr. -- where are you now that we need you?"

For the more literary Bush-hater, there is "Checkpoint," a novel by Nicholson Baker in which two characters discuss the wisdom of shooting the 43rd president. "I'm going to kill that bastard," one character fumes. Some Bush-hatred masquerades as art: At Chicago's Columbia College, a curated exhibit included a sheet of mock postage stamps bearing the words "Patriot Act" and depicting President Bush with a gun to his head. There are even Bush-assassination fashion statements, such as the "KILL BUSH" T-shirts that were on offer last year at CafePress, an online retailer.

Lurid political libels have a long history in American life. The lies told about John Adams in the campaign of 1800 were vile enough, his wife Abigail lamented, "to ruin and corrupt the minds and morals of the best people in the world." But has there ever been a president so hated by his enemies that they lusted openly for his death? Or tried to gratify that lust with such political pornography?

As with other kinds of porn, even the most graphic expressions of Bush-hatred tend to jade those who gorge on it, so that they crave ever more explicit material to achieve the same effect.

Which brings us to "Death of a President," a new movie about the assassination of George W. Bush.

Written and directed by British filmmaker Gabriel Range, the movie premieres this week at the Toronto Film Festival and will air next month on Britain's Channel 4. Shot in the style of a documentary, it opens with what looks like actual footage of Bush being gunned down by a sniper as he leaves a Chicago hotel in October 2007. Through the use of digital special effects, the film superimposes the president's face onto the body of the actor playing him, so that the mortally wounded man collapsing on the screen will seem, all too vividly, to be Bush himself.

This is Bush-hatred as a snuff film. The fantasies it feeds are grotesque and obscene; to pander to such fantasies is to rip at boundary-markers that are indispensable to civilized society. That such a movie could not only be made but lionized at an international film festival is a mark not of sophistication, but of a sickness in modern life that should alarm conservatives and liberals alike.

Naturally that's not how the film's promoters see it. Noah Cowan, one of the Toronto festival's co-directors, high-mindedly describes "Death of a President" as "a classic cautionary tale." Well, yes, he says, Bush's assassination is "harrowing," but what the film is really about is "how the Patriot Act, especially, and how Bush's divisive partisanship and race-baiting has forever altered America."

I can't help wondering, though, whether some of those who see this film will take away rather a different message. John Hinckley, in his derangement, had the idea that shooting the president was the way to impress a movie star. After seeing "Death of a President," the next Hinckley may be taken with a more grandiose idea: that shooting the president is the way to become a movie star.

Well there's no doubt he's deranged, but when someone rants about about currency, government control and seems obsessed about constitutionality I find it difficult to see where else he got his views from.

Automatically anything that someone else says that you individually disagree with?

For some people - yes. I like to believe that most people are more sensible than that. But when you say something in public, it reaches not just that majority of sensible people. It also reaches the INsensible minority. And sadly that noisy, nasty minority is the group that all too often has the megaphone. Case in point with this rather amusing op-ed by one Micheal Shear...

http://thecaucus.blogs.nytimes.com/2011/01/13/obama-and-palin-a-tale-of-two-speeches/?ref=politics

Palin is "bubbling anger and resentment", and Obama is "soft & restrained". No bias there, eh? I saw both speeches, and this guy is full of it. He interprets Palin so as to be what she "really is" in his mind. They hate Palin, so it is 'truth' to say she is hateful, spiteful, angry, or responsible for the violence (directly or indirectly).

Two polls recently performed show that the VAST majority of the American public completely disagree with the left-wing punditry's wishful interpretation. They don't blame Palin, conservatives, Limbaugh, or anyone else except for the one deranged young man behind the trigger. But the SENSIBLE people don't have the megaphone. Instead, a tiny minority of the biased and spiteful are screaming their opinions in the hope that people will agree with them. Thankfully, that is not happening.

If I do something, like say, type "hate speech" into google, do you think I will find a more narrow definition? Is that google engaging in "hate speech"?

Normal people probably are more inclined to define hate speech as language that directly calls for or encourages acts of physical violence towards individuals or groups. They may find other forms of speech to be distasteful, insulting, or vile - but would not necessarily classify it as 'hate speech'.

Further, is hate speech some use of speech that is morally reprehensible? Should it be condemned? Or is condemnation of hate speech...also hate speech?

Calls for violence are morally reprehensible. I take your intent here to mean stuff like, "I hate minority group X" or "Group Y people are all stupid" and "gender Z should do what I say..." and that sort of thing. I.E. Words that offend people.

I believe in freedom. That means I believe in freedom of speech, even when I don't like it. My opinion is that political correctness, and other speech 'codes' are a form of soft censorship. I disagree with it, and reject it.

I believe that the nation is strengthened - not weakened - when opposing ideas collide in the marketplace of the national discourse. That means there is even room for people who believe things I find morally repugnant. I think any effort to stifle free speech - particularly one that seeks to specifically stifle only 'one side' - is misguided and destructive.

Should 'offensive speech' be condemned? Sure - by anyone and everyone who wants to condemn it. But regulated? Heck no, because what is deemed offensive or reprehensible is often a matter of personal opinion.

nach0s is right. This guy was simply deranged. But don't deny if this guy had put Glenn Beck as a source of inspiration for his "rampage" he'd be branded a Tea Partier Icon.


>> ^nach0s:

Um, let's see. HE (WAS) FUCKING CRAZY.

Upvote - for pure deranged song and the dedication for which she sings with ! (or something like that!)

Ha ha, I thought that rant was brilliantly deranged.

>> ^dag:

Very agile is the kitty ... And yet ... Done in by a single rubbish bin.


No thanks to some deranged woman who the kitty thought was friendly, any animal (within reason) could easily be suckered into the same fate if it were as trusting