My favourite ever Daily Show clip. But it has to be a dupe - I think it was the first Daily Show clip I ever saw.
>> ^DerHasisttot:

>> ^kymbos:
Did anyone else pick up the subtle sexual undertone of that piece? I've got a fantastic 'gay radar' or 'homometer', so I noticed it.

Definitely.

>> ^kymbos:

Did anyone else pick up the subtle sexual undertone of that piece? I've got a fantastic 'gay radar' or 'homometer', so I noticed it.



Definitely.

RoPaul is a pipe dream without a pipe. Here's the deal, coming from someone (me) who agrees with Paul on most things.

The average American has been rendered ignorant of history and economics. 60 years of union-run government schools will do that to you.

Ron Paul sez, "Get rid of the Fed." No one even knows what the Fed is or why it is, and they don't care to learn. How are you going to free people from shackles they can't even see?

Ron Paul sez, "Let's return all our military to the homeland..." The unfinished part of that sentence is "...so Red China can build their own bases where we were."

But let's assume Paul actually makes it to the White House. How is one man going to tell Congress, a bunch of petty, grasping, emotionally-insecure motherfkers, however useless they are to you and me, to voluntarily give up 90% of their power and strip them of the ability to buy votes from their districts with federal pork. And that's just them, excluding the powers behind their thrones, the lobbies, the corporatists, etc.

So the people behind Paul's election (you and me) are going to save us, you say?

Historically speaking, whatever the Cause, a third of the people are For, a third Against, and a third doesn't give a sh1t either way. The people who depend on Congress for handouts--corporations and "public" unions both--aren't going to go quietly to projects they have to pay for upfront, or lower-paying (aka non-taxpayer-funded) jobs based on merit and market demand. Remember Wisconsin?


Do you understand that the media is still 95% leftist (statist)? That FOX has barely been around and is inconsequential? All the horseshit and calamity and LIES the left manufactures ("Uh, there's a Recovery going on!") will be turned against Paul like a magnifying glass against ants. The leftmedia isn't going to patiently explain what libertarianism is to the masses. I can't even begin to imagine the level of hysteria.

THE LIBERTARIANS ARE GOING TO TAKE AWAY YOUR SOCIAL SECURITY! NO MORE MEDICARE, THEY'LL STACK THE DYING ELDERLY IN THE GUTTERS! CAMPS! THEY WANT LEGALIZED DRUGS SO THE FIENDS CAN RUN WILD IN THE STREETS! THEY ARE ANARCHISTS!

I hate saying all this sh1t, because most of Paul's Constitutional rollback is what we really need. But it just ain't gonna happen. Right now the oxen (the people) are STILL dumb and comfortable, even with 5-dollar gas, rising food costs and 22% unemployment. Ron Paul would be assassinated right after the unlikely event that he was even nominated.

rEVOLution without bloodshed? Not on the scale Paul, you and I want. Even if we do nothing, it's going to go to guns, maybe not next year but in the next ten for sure. NOT reelecting the kenyan asshole would help, but for the kind of change that's needed, a state or states will have to say, "Enough tyranny, DC" and secede, which they have every right to do.

But if we're right, and we can stop this thing...Lenny...

you will have saved the lives of millions of registered voters.>> ^ponceleon:

MASS HYSTERIA!

MASS HYSTERIA!

Me too!!! I almost posted that link!

In reply to this comment by Shepppard:
reminded me of this

it's fake, but still funny.

>> ^blankfist:

>> ^NetRunner:
>> ^blankfist:
And their stock suggestions have worked out well for me. But that's mainly because I think it's a good idea to bet against the US dollar, especially now, and their stock suggestions are basically mostly that.

So be specific, how are they saying to bet against the dollar? Buy gold and silver? Buy foreign currency or foreign stocks & bonds?
Which of those have paid off big (you mentioned tripling your 401k)?

I didn't say they said "bet against the dollar". I said that. They don't sell gold or silver, either. They review companies that do though. And as far as I can tell they're not selling anything.
They have a number of stocks they think will do well as the currency inflates, and so far they've been spot on. Mainly mining companies and the occasional agriculture company. Read on.
http://inflation.us/stocks.html


Intro paragraph at that link:

One of our missions at the National Inflation Association is to discover and profile companies that we believe will prosper in an inflationary environment. Typically we will bring to you producing, profitable, Gold and Silver companies with strong balance sheets. We believe these stocks have a chance of becoming some of the best performers of the next decade.

That said, those look like decent enough picks, even if the much ballyhooed hyperinflation never actually arrives. They've got oil, gas, food, tech stocks, even some potash (very trendy) in there, which are mostly bets that global warming is real, the oil is running out, and the developing economies will rapidly increase their demand for food & oil over the next decade. All safe bets!

Though the bulk of it is stock in precious metal traders and miners, and I'm not sure that quite counts as "betting against the dollar" so much as betting that the hysteria about inflation will lead to a boom for gold traders. At least inflation.us knows which side their bread is buttered on.

Assuming these companies themselves aren't scams, they're not setting you up to lose your shirt if Paul Krugman continues to be right, and Peter Schiff continues to be wrong. You might take a hit if/when a Republican reclaims the White House, and all the talk of inflation disappears though.

I'll have to check that out. Come to think of it, I have noticed that conservatives do sometimes tend to take obvious sarcasm, metaphor or irony literally. I hadn't noticed that as a trend before. Weird.

In reply to this comment by peggedbea:
i just watched waiting for armageddon.......

1. i now understand where the sudden hysteria about nazi's came from .... the aryans persecuted the jews like multiculturalism, feminism, and atheism are persecuting the white christian male.... therefore "progressivism" is a total assault on white men because it seeks to include people of other races, genders, and creeds ... if we give pell grants and scholarships for hispanic women to go to college, there will be less room for white men.....

2. postmodernism is apparently the biggest threat to liberty... because the "postmodernist" doesn't take words literally, but rather digs for symbolism... so postmodern christians are more liberal and symbolic with their interpretation of the word of god, and literalism is dying out... these people aren't really christians... and when words lose their meaning, people die... postmodernism is killing people


all the women in this documentary seemed absolutely terrified. all the men seemed to have erections. my heart is screaming and shrinking and swelling and bleeding and leaking in the juxtaposition of all that fear and sadness and death and joy and repressed inappropriate arousal.

Forty years of darkness! Earthquakes, volcanoes...
The dead rising from the grave!
Human sacrifice, dolphins and cats living together... mass hysteria!

Please someone call the Ghostbusters

i just watched waiting for armageddon.......

1. i now understand where the sudden hysteria about nazi's came from .... the aryans persecuted the jews like multiculturalism, feminism, and atheism are persecuting the white christian male.... therefore "progressivism" is a total assault on white men because it seeks to include people of other races, genders, and creeds ... if we give pell grants and scholarships for hispanic women to go to college, there will be less room for white men.....

2. postmodernism is apparently the biggest threat to liberty... because the "postmodernist" doesn't take words literally, but rather digs for symbolism... so postmodern christians are more liberal and symbolic with their interpretation of the word of god, and literalism is dying out... these people aren't really christians... and when words lose their meaning, people die... postmodernism is killing people


all the women in this documentary seemed absolutely terrified. all the men seemed to have erections. my heart is screaming and shrinking and swelling and bleeding and leaking in the juxtaposition of all that fear and sadness and death and joy and repressed inappropriate arousal.

She's a satirist first, no doubt, and the target this time was hysteria generated by the drive-by media over threats--both real and imagined--posed by radiation.


>> ^longde:

QM, there is a division of physics, called "health physics" that deals with using different types of radiation to treat disease, and the effects of different types of radiation on the human body.
So, technically speaking, what Ann is saying is true. Exposure to radiation can be helpful as well as harmful.
The flaw in her reasoning (and I don't for a second think she is making a sincere argument) is that "radiation" can be a million different things, across the EM spectrum, and also the emissions of ions and atoms. "Helpful" radiation only describes very specific types, used at very specific intensity, used for very specific durations, etc.
Bill O's geriatric, uneducated audience can't grasp that nuance, and will undoubtedly think that standing in front of Chernobyl will get rid of arthritis.

>> ^quantumushroom:
From the actual column: "Although it is hardly a settled scientific fact that excess radiation is a health benefit, there's certainly evidence that it decreases the risk of some cancers -- and there are plenty of scientists willing to say so."
Not exactly announcing THE DEBATE IS OVER like the hoaxers pushing man-made global warming hysteria.

But standing in front of Chernobyl WOULD cure arthritis, along with all other pain... forever and ever and ever. >> ^longde:

QM, there is a division of physics, called "health physics" that deals with using different types of radiation to treat disease, and the effects of different types of radiation on the human body.
So, technically speaking, what Ann is saying is true. Exposure to radiation can be helpful as well as harmful.
The flaw in her reasoning (and I don't for a second think she is making a sincere argument) is that "radiation" can be a million different things, across the EM spectrum, and also the emissions of ions and atoms. "Helpful" radiation only describes very specific types, used at very specific intensity, used for very specific durations, etc.
Bill O's geriatric, uneducated audience can't grasp that nuance, and will undoubtedly think that standing in front of Chernobyl will get rid of arthritis.

>> ^quantumushroom:
From the actual column: "Although it is hardly a settled scientific fact that excess radiation is a health benefit, there's certainly evidence that it decreases the risk of some cancers -- and there are plenty of scientists willing to say so."
Not exactly announcing THE DEBATE IS OVER like the hoaxers pushing man-made global warming hysteria.

QM, there is a division of physics, called "health physics" that deals with using different types of radiation to treat disease, and the effects of different types of radiation on the human body.

So, technically speaking, what Ann is saying is true. Exposure to radiation can be helpful as well as harmful.

The flaw in her reasoning (and I don't for a second think she is making a sincere argument) is that "radiation" can be a million different things, across the EM spectrum, and also the emissions of ions and atoms. "Helpful" radiation only describes very specific types, used at very specific intensity, used for very specific durations, etc.

Bill O's geriatric, uneducated audience can't grasp that nuance, and will undoubtedly think that standing in front of Chernobyl will get rid of arthritis.


>> ^quantumushroom:

From the actual column: "Although it is hardly a settled scientific fact that excess radiation is a health benefit, there's certainly evidence that it decreases the risk of some cancers -- and there are plenty of scientists willing to say so."
Not exactly announcing THE DEBATE IS OVER like the hoaxers pushing man-made global warming hysteria.

From the actual column: "Although it is hardly a settled scientific fact that excess radiation is a health benefit, there's certainly evidence that it decreases the risk of some cancers -- and there are plenty of scientists willing to say so."

Not exactly announcing THE DEBATE IS OVER like the hoaxers pushing man-made global warming hysteria.

You should know that not everyone has the perfect control over their emotions that Vulcans and (apparently) you do, they lose their shit in situations like this. She was probably sure they dog would die then and there, who would have thought the trainer knew doggie CPR?

>> ^visionep:
You are right that most people, including myself, really love their animals and that some people potentially would have a hard time containing their grief or fear when the animal is in a bad situation, that's not what I was commenting on. When the dog started recovering the lady kept up her hysteria and really showed that she doesn't understand or care how dogs think which in my mind shows that she was putting her own feelings before the dogs well being.