They spread misinformation and disease...

Both are blights on society and costly of insurance dollars / government aid.

Your comparison of the unvaccinated to those who practice unprotected sex is valid. Both, usually, are the result of ignorance and inconsideration. With no regard to how it affects others or themselves.

You're clever. Like Colbert's old character. Act like your supporting something, all the while giving examples damning that support.

Bob the satirist. Who knew?!

@StukaFox says

Buts its ok to be a gay and get aids or be 14 and get pregnant. Both are blights on society and costly of insurance dollars / government aid.


There are many risky behaviors that people choose.


I'm against the vaccine but realize that it was in my best interest to take it. ( 59, over weight, out of shape etc)


You either have free choice or you dont.

I think it's more like if they would stop redistributing the wealth to themselves from their workers.

If they would stop being greedy f'tards, then more people would have money to buy the things that move the economy and nobody would need government aid in the form of food stamps and welfare (save those who are honestly mentally or physically unable to work).If you want to build an economy the keyword is "build". You don't build a house by building the attic first magically floating there, then the foundation and walls to get up to it, you start with a foundation, then walls. If the people at the bottom have money to do more than barely survive, they buy things that actually move the economy, they buy things at retailers, who need to hire more people; those people buy things which results in transportation and warehouses hiring more people, those people buy things; manufacturing starts hiring (if the rich f'tard didn't send those jobs overseas, which the conservatives blame on the government rather than the rich guy who sent the job overseas for some reason, it's not like the price of that shirt went down when they sent it overseas, they just pocketed the extra wealth for themselves) and those people buy even more expensive things.

Our right wing economy favors investors and large business over the needs of the vast majority. It doesn't matter how much GM stock investors buy and trade, GM won't make more cars and hire more people until enough people can buy cars.

As we slide more and more money from the people who actually spend money in the economy and make it move, to people who just horde and invest, the economy will continue to spiral down. More and more people will require food stamps and welfare due to the actions of the rich, but the conservative right will blame the workers and former workers rather than pushing blame onto the people who are refusing to pay living wages, who push jobs overseas so they can personally pocket more wealth, and complain about the people they aren't giving living wages to and the people they laid off need government assistance, and the conservative voters go right along because the pulpit and Fox News has brainwashed them into believing that a party that disobey's everything their Jesus taught them is the Christian party.

The growing wealth and income gap is the biggest challenge facing our nation, and indeed much of the world. Of course most of the rest of the world does a better job of caring for the work force than the US does, paid maternity leave in all but 4 nations, paid vacation time in most of the world by law, paid sick time in most developed economies, minimum wages tied to inflation in much of those countries, a minimum level of health insurance for every man woman and child without having to buy from for-profit corporations (most actually use a single payer, which sort of ignores the fact that our individual mandate that we have now was invented by the Republican party, and is financed the same way they wanted to do it and the tax penalty for not participating is the same...the other nations that use individual mandates do so via not-for-profit insurance)... We do so much to protect the rich and investor class in this nation... sickening really.

...so they basically want them to stay at home, or under-employed and depending on government aid that they want to cut, because having 22% of American children going hungry tonight isn't enough... apparently that is what Jesus wants since that is the people that most Christians vote for believe, better to starve poor children than tax some rich guy an extra 3%... <long rant redacted>

>> ^lantern53:

Why do I always have to be the adult here?
In a large city like Anaheim you undoubtedly need a permit to march, which these people probably did not have, so therefore the demonstration is unlawful, and highly irritating to the people who work for a living and have to drive back and forth to work, the store, the childcare, the doctor, etc.
And the cops have to deal with people who are anarchists or just drones, and it's hard to tell them apart, especially when they hide behind anonymous avatars and say things like "KILL PIGS".


The revolution will not have a permit.

There is nothing more offensive or frightening to me than the idea that peaceful protesters should be required to get a permit. If a government is corrupt or unpopular enough to spawn widespread civil unrest and disobedience, why would that same government aid protesters in its own removal? It wouldn't. What it would do in a nominally 'free' democracy or republic is clamp down slowly yet inexorably on basic rights of the citizens. In America, our government has a big roadblock to that goal, however the Justice Dept. is proving to be nimble minded enough to figure out some very clever ways to conquer that problem.

So far, imho, their most creative solution to: "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances" is to assert that although the government might not have the right to "prohibit the freedom of speech" per se, they do have the right to tell the people when and where they can do it.

Almost always the acceptable time and place to protest is in a "Protest Zone" that the government sets up out of sight and sound of the media and reason for the protest in the first place, thus neutering the protest in toto.

"Protest Zones" are a disgrace to our constitution.

>> ^Fletch:

>> ^Darkhand:
>> ^Fletch:
>> ^Darkhand:
I support this kind of legislation. Even if it's totally wrong at least it will shut up everyone who says that welfare recipients are drug addled losers.

I bet Florida welfare recipients would disagree that the effect you mention justifies the means. I just think if it wasn't drug testing, it would be some other hoop to jump through. This isn't about drug testing.

You may be right.
But eventually someone SOMEWHERE has to put this theory to test. I'm sorry it has to be anyone but at the very least the citizens of Florida will now be used as a perfect case to NOT implement this sort of legislation anywhere.

Why?! It's just so random a requirement. To accept it as necessary or reasonable, you first have to buy into the bullshit that needy people are on drugs. It's like requiring drug testing for all gay couples who seek a marriage license, or for all gun owners. It's just a barrier.
It shouldn't be a requirement in Florida or anywhere else, and to rationalize or justify it as some sort of case study that other states can point to is just ridiculous. Welfare recipients shouldn't be treated as guinea pigs just to benefit a few idiots looking to score points with their dipshit lemming constituents.


Well that's the problem Fletch, people ARE buying into the fact that welfare people are drug addled losers because that's what the conservative base is selling to them and their party members are just eating it up. Nobody wants to be giving their money away to someone and having them just sort of kick back and mooching when they could be working and making their own money.

It's not about making anyone into Guinea pigs the problem is EVENTUALLY this was going to become a law somewhere. If you keep repeating something, no matter how false it is, and you get other people to repeat it for you this is what happens.

Just be happy we didn't have a conservative president who made this some sort of crazy Federal law for all 50 states to obey.

Me Personally? I know of 2 people that are on some sort of government aid that all use that money to buy drugs and pay for their rent. So I'm sorry to say it DOES happen sometimes.

In an election year this was a mistake for the republicans and a victory for democrats. I try to take some solace in that.

The truth is that aid programs fail because of a totality of circumstances. Rich, white people crafted government aid. They set the bar to make sure that you could not work and recieve aid at the same time (Not even pro-rated.) So, if you get off the aid, by say, working, you starve to death. Easy choice, right? I wouldn't say that's "Encouraging people to stay dependent." What a fucking douche Stossel is to oversimplify this type of epidemic...

Then the government also crafted punishments that imprison people for their entire lives--and therefore smother their children under oppression too. Your black and you smoke weed? Well, get on some aid because your useless. Crack and coke laws? Blacks recieve way stiffer sentences.

Society fucks them even furth through sterotypes... What? You're black? Well, being black was your first chance, and getting caught in illegal activity was your second...

Not that I know from experience...but I would say that 95% (Actually, 2 out of 34 to be exact) of the juveniles in eduction classes in a prison are African Americans or Hispanics... Amazing huh?

But no one stops to ask themselves how this happened. QM would blame this on the race itself. But this shit doesn't happen through fucking magic nor does it happen from skin color. At one time the African American community, in the United States, was the strongest community in the world... Now? It makes me weep on the whole--not because of what it is, but what it once was and should be. It's like a battle was fought so fiercely that by the time it won, the victory didn't matter. (I am generalizing about the whole of the problem, not the whole of the race.)

>> ^flavioribeiro:

As for the top priority of the US Congress, I believe it should be balancing the budget. The national debt is the most pressing issue because especially over the last 4 years, US GDP growth has been fueled with borrowed money.

I say getting a solid economic recovery is job #1. A huge portion of the deficit right now is due to the recession itself -- it lowers our GDP (and therefore the tax revenues), and it means a lot more people going on government assistance because they're unemployed and can't find a job.

>> ^flavioribeiro:
Rolling over this debt will already cause a significant drop in the American standard of living, especially as inflation and interest rates start to rise.

"Rolling over" this debt? Why will it result in any drop in the standard in living? It seems to me that leaving the unemployment picture untouched is going to have a massively larger impact on our long-term prosperity than having a higher short- and medium-term national debt.

>> ^flavioribeiro:
To make things short, I refer you to Karl Denninger's blog (who I agree with). He posted short video about this today. To answer your question more precisely, the US Congress must 1) revise the tax code and 2) enact significant cuts to government programs. (1) is nearly impossible to pass because it effectively taxes everyone the same. We will at best see a weak version of (2), which will be insufficient and more painful in the long run.


I'll have to watch the video later, but the blog post probably gives me a clear enough picture. You know this guy is a founder of one of our dreaded Tea Party groups here, right?

In any case, I'll just respond to what I think he's got a valid point about.

First, he's right that medical care costs are essentially the entire problem with the long range debt picture. We've got to find a way to get health care cost inflation under control here. Other countries have done so with lots of government interventionism. We're still refusing to do that sort of thing, and the longer we put it off, the worse our deficits will get.

Second, while I think the "Fair" tax is a giant scam, I'm not opposed to the basic idea of replacing income taxes with consumption taxes.

Third, I like the idea of cutting back on the number of incentives baked into the tax code. But I don't oppose the very idea of them on principle, I just think we have a bunch that aren't doing any good for anyone, and a bunch that are actively doing harm (like oil & gas subsidies).

However, the vast majority of it is just lies and dogmatic ideology being presented as some sort of solution to a mundane budget issue. It's exactly what I was referring to when I said this:>> ^NetRunner:

The issue here [is] the millions of people who think the biggest problems in our country are that taxes are too high on businesses, government aid to the poor is too generous, and worker safety regulation is a tyrannical imposition on liberty.


It's also just one step shy from suggesting that we euthanize our elderly, process them into soylent green, and sell it to pay down our debt.

Out of sheer curiosity, what country are you from?

From Wikipedia: "A false dilemma (also called false dichotomy, the either-or fallacy, fallacy of false choice, black and white thinking or the fallacy of exhaustive hypotheses) is a type of logical fallacy that involves a situation in which only two alternatives are considered, when in fact there are additional options."

Thus, by definition "a choice between a moderate right-wing party and a hard-right nationalist party" is a false dichotomy. I agree that FPTP voting is the major reason for this in presidential elections, which creates a two party system on other other spheres of government. But without seeing the underlying false dichotomy, the general population will stay under the illusion that their votes represent a significant choice, and will keep playing red-vs-blue.

As for me being part of the problem, I respectfully disagree. I'm not an American citizen, and I'm not residing in the U.S. I maintain that the U.S. balance sheet looks ridiculous and current levels of government spending are not sustainable whether you like it or not.

>> ^NetRunner:

Did you even read the comment you're responding to?
The problem is that there's no left in this country's governance at all. It's not a false dichotomy between the parties, it's just a choice between a moderate right-wing party and a hard-right nationalist party. I feel pretty strongly about wanting to have the moderates over the fascists, even though I'm not particularly happy with the moderates.
Why aren't there more than two choices? Because that's just how first past the post voting works. More than that though, it's because there's a really big propaganda machine that constantly demonizes anyone who's even slightly left, and constantly pushes the idea that all suffering in the world is the fault of government, and it'll all get better if we just vote in people who mouth those same words while they cut taxes on businesses, slash government aid to the poor, and make worker safety laws a thing of the past...
Incidentally, you're part of the problem as a person who proclaims that deficit "spending" is the issue. The problem in this country isn't the government's balance sheet, it's high unemployment, and ridiculous concentration of wealth coupled with the growing formalization of the idea that our corporate rulers may commit any atrocity they please with impunity.

Did you even read the comment you're responding to?

The problem is that there's no left in this country's governance at all. It's not a false dichotomy between the parties, it's just a choice between a moderate right-wing party and a hard-right nationalist party. I feel pretty strongly about wanting to have the moderates over the fascists, even though I'm not particularly happy with the moderates.

Why aren't there more than two choices? Because that's just how first past the post voting works. More than that though, it's because there's a really big propaganda machine that constantly demonizes anyone who's even slightly left, and constantly pushes the idea that all suffering in the world is the fault of government, and it'll all get better if we just vote in people who mouth those same words while they cut taxes on businesses, slash government aid to the poor, and make worker safety laws a thing of the past...

Incidentally, you're part of the problem as a person who proclaims that deficit "spending" is the issue. The problem in this country isn't the government's balance sheet, it's high unemployment, and ridiculous concentration of wealth coupled with the growing formalization of the idea that our corporate rulers may commit any atrocity they please with impunity.
>> ^flavioribeiro:

I think the first step is to eliminate the Democrat/Republican false dichotomy. I'm not American, and almost every time I criticize the Obama administration, I hear "yeah, but the Republicans...". First of all, who said anything about the Republicans? And second, it's not as if they have a fundamentally different way of running the country.
Also, given the current levels of deficit spending, it's irrelevant whether you call yourself a Democrat, Republican or Libertarian. The U.S. has a very grim long-term outlook, and the budget cuts proposed by the Congress are insufficient. And to see why actual budget cuts aren't enacted, you only need to follow the money. Things will never change as long as the population thinks the "other party" represents the opposition.

>> ^NetRunner:

It'd be more possible if people everywhere realized that right-wing/conservative/libertarian ideology is entirely about consolidating the dominion of the rich and powerful over the rest of us, and adopted a generally left-wing view of the world.
Once that happens, yes, people would notice that Democrats aren't really left-wing, but this is something the left says all the time.
The issue here isn't that an insufficient number of liberals will talk smack about Obama, it's the millions of people who think the biggest problems in our country are that taxes are too high on businesses, government aid to the poor is too generous, and worker safety regulation is a tyrannical imposition on liberty.


I think the first step is to eliminate the Democrat/Republican false dichotomy. I'm not American, and almost every time I criticize the Obama administration, I hear "yeah, but the Republicans...". First of all, who said anything about the Republicans? And second, it's not as if they have a fundamentally different way of running the country.

Also, given the current levels of deficit spending, it's irrelevant whether you call yourself a Democrat, Republican or Libertarian. The U.S. has a very grim long-term outlook, and the budget cuts proposed by the Congress are insufficient. And to see why actual budget cuts aren't enacted, you only need to follow the money. Things will never change as long as the population thinks the "other party" represents the opposition.

>> ^shagen454:

It'd be more possible for class war if they didn't already have our nuts twisted up in the palm of their hand. It'd be more possible if working class people would wake up and see that Obama is a joke just as much as the Bush Administration was and that the two party system in general is just a fucking corporate scam.


It'd be more possible if people everywhere realized that right-wing/conservative/libertarian ideology is entirely about consolidating the dominion of the rich and powerful over the rest of us, and adopted a generally left-wing view of the world.

Once that happens, yes, people would notice that Democrats aren't really left-wing, but this is something the left says all the time.

The issue here isn't that an insufficient number of liberals will talk smack about Obama, it's the millions of people who think the biggest problems in our country are that taxes are too high on businesses, government aid to the poor is too generous, and worker safety regulation is a tyrannical imposition on liberty.

I believe you are wrong on this.

1) At the heart of every corporation is is a moral compass lead by the likes of the Boss/ CEO or board of directors. They decide moral direction. My company just got the Obama health care waiver. This is a company that ranks as being with in the top 15 largest corporations in the world. Is this is morally wrong? They also paid $0 dollars in taxes last year. Not to mention the near 1/2 trillion in government aid in the last 2 years. Finally they openly promote diversity along with domestic partner insurance. These are are all moral issues.

2)I agree that the Al Gore Flordia election was messed up. Due to the time lines involved the U.S. Supreme Court had to make the decision. Hanging chad or not he lost. From you link Bush and Gore both got 49% in Florida. The total outcome from you link shows that Gore won by 0.51%. Life is not fair and it not supposed to be fair.


>> ^GenjiKilpatrick:

Your argument is faulty by your own standard of morality and voting

1.
Capitalism is neither moral or immoral.
It's a self interested venture with the sole intent of maximizing profit. full stop.
It's amoral.

b : lacking moral sensibility

2.
Voting doesn't mean shit.
In 2000, Al Gore won the popular for President.

>> ^dystopianfuturetoday:
I find the tension and conflict of this video interesting, but I don't think there is any justification for making the old guy a hero or internet celebrity. He clearly has issues and seemed to be just as interested in violence as his counterpart.
I think peggedbea is right, that interjecting race into the title and tags is creepy, and issykitty makes a good point as to how appealing this has become to the racists of youtube. It doesn't mean that everyone who voted for this is a raging, lynching klansman, but it may be indicative of the subtler prejudices that all of us harbor deep inside our subconscious. Either way, it's worthy of discussion.
If this hot, viral video were framed as two crazy idiots fighting on a bus, I wouldn't see much problem with it, but that's not how it's been framed. Instead, it's young black thug vs. elderly white marine. Or even worse Ignorant, illiterate black gangbanger vs bearded Nordic God.
In America, intercity blacks are feared. They are portrayed in the media as either criminal thugs or lazy bums who live off of government aid. The only positives you ever hear are about the occasional football or basketball player who gets a scholarship and escapes. Black neighborhoods are avoided by white people, who describe these places with words like 'scary' 'sketchy' or 'rough', but if you actually take the time to explore these areas, you find regular people. People who work. People who love their children. People who mow their lawns. As a white person, I've felt no overt prejudice against me in these places. I've felt no danger or threat upon my personal safety. It's just not the warzone it's made out to be in the media.
For some, this video will not only confirm false media stereotypes, but also goes the extra mile to punish that stereotype with violence. Don't get me wrong, the black guy in this video seems like a creep, and goes to great lengths to live up to the most negative of negative black stereotypes, right down to his inability to pronounce a very common word, but for many, this one single man's behavior will serve as a confirmation and justification for irrational, subconscious racial fears.
I'm not judging nomino, or anyone. I voted this thing up, myself, before bea and issy gave me some pause, so I'm not claiming to be better or wiser than anyone else here. Race is a really tough subject for Americans, complicated by history, tradition, media, politics and economics. I think it's OK to find this conflict on a bus compelling, and to also admit that there might be more going on in our subconscious minds than we'd like. dark fear
Since I'm in the confessional, I might as well mention that I wish I could take my vote back from another video, featuring a European man slapping a woman, causing her to cry. Lots of subconscious shit going on there too.


I agree both the guys would have been wiser to defuse the situation. It's an expensive risk to absorb that anyone you meet like that might be carrying a knife or a gun. The stakes in life are high, and all it takes is one bout of bad luck...

I can understand it sucks for the younger guy... he can't complain since he certainly carries some amount over 50% of the responsibility for what happened, but his brain made him think it was a good idea, and now he just feels more victimized by life than he did before he got the tables turned on him.


"He clearly has issues and seemed to be just as interested in violence as his counterpart."

I think it's certainly a good instinct to be understanding of both sides... it's a higher human impulse... but it seems like this can also go so far as creating a false symmetry. The younger guy (1) did force the older guy to the other side of the bus, (2) did then go after him and throw the first punch, and (3) did legally commit assault (touching someone who doesn't want to be touched, particularly while threatening violence). For all the old guy knew, the next punch could have had a knife with it.


describe these places with words like 'scary' 'sketchy' or 'rough', but if you actually take the time to explore these areas, you find regular people ... confirm false media stereotypes... this one single man's behavior will serve as a confirmation and justification for irrational, subconscious racial fears... there might be more going on in our subconscious minds than we'd like. dark fear."

Yeah, it's good to not excessively vilify high crime areas... but I feel like some of this goes so far as to imply that statistics are irrational. On another note, this video would be just as appealing to many people if it featured an Aussie thug (a small minority of Aussies) and an Indian-Australian.


That being said, I think you're right... it'd be better to not inject race into the title, and most people who live in statistically risky areas are good people, same as everywhere.

I find the tension and conflict of this video interesting, but I don't think there is any justification for making the old guy a hero or internet celebrity. He clearly has issues and seemed to be just as interested in violence as his counterpart.

I think peggedbea is right, that interjecting race into the title and tags is creepy, and issykitty makes a good point as to how appealing this has become to the racists of youtube. It doesn't mean that everyone who voted for this is a raging, lynching klansman, but it *may* be indicative of the subtler prejudices that all of us harbor deep inside our subconscious. Either way, it's worthy of discussion.

If this hot, viral video were framed as two crazy idiots fighting on a bus, I wouldn't see much problem with it, but that's not how it's been framed. Instead, it's young black thug vs. elderly white marine. Or even worse Ignorant, illiterate black gangbanger vs bearded Nordic God.

In America, intercity blacks are feared. They are portrayed in the media as either criminal thugs or lazy bums who live off of government aid. The only positives you ever hear are about the occasional football or basketball player who gets a scholarship and escapes. Black neighborhoods are avoided by white people, who describe these places with words like 'scary' 'sketchy' or 'rough', but if you actually take the time to explore these areas, you find regular people. People who work. People who love their children. People who mow their lawns. As a white person, I've felt no overt prejudice against me in these places. I've felt no danger or threat upon my personal safety. It's just not the warzone it's made out to be in the media.

For some, this video will not only confirm false media stereotypes, but also goes the extra mile to punish that stereotype with violence. Don't get me wrong, the black guy in this video seems like a creep, and goes to great lengths to live up to the most negative of negative black stereotypes, right down to his inability to pronounce a very common word, but for many, this one single man's behavior will serve as a confirmation and justification for irrational, subconscious racial fears.

I'm not judging nomino, or anyone. I voted this thing up, myself, before bea and issy gave me some pause, so I'm not claiming to be better or wiser than anyone else here. Race is a really tough subject for Americans, complicated by history, tradition, media, politics and economics. I think it's OK to find this conflict on a bus compelling, and to also admit that there might be more going on in our subconscious minds than we'd like. *dark *fear

Since I'm in the confessional, I might as well mention that I wish I could take my vote back from another video, featuring a European man slapping a woman, causing her to cry. Lots of subconscious shit going on there too.