>> ^deathcow:

I think people should blindly trust pharmaceutical companies. All the modern products you see on TV every night are really improving the lives of insurance company executives. For profit health care systems are looking out for you.


and never would the government be in bed with them by creating a scare over an epidemic that can averted by regular washing of hands, just so the government is "forced" to buy a whole bunch of vaccinations... nope, never... i means there's other ways to finance campaigns to stay in office, so you can spend 30-70% of your time meeting with the lobbies who paid your way into power

>> ^blankfist:

>> ^Drachen_Jager:
Yeah, everyone knows his position is that less regulation is better for everyone, somehow that would avert things like the BP oil spill. His positions on these things are demonstrably false, but his supporters are too stupid to recognise them for what they are and I generally try to avoid arguing with stupid people. There's simply no point.
Over and out.

Riiiight. Good stance. I take it you are against all of his positions us dumb people believe in? Things like being anti-war, anti-torture, anti-imprisonment without trial (a'la Brad Manning), and so on.
You're right. There's simply no point.


Didn't you know he's the quintessential expert on everything from Government to 9/11? And a closet Physicist too! And if you disagree with his opinion then you're just stupid and not worth talking to.

>> ^dystopianfuturetoday:

^Us per usual, JesusFreak is clueless. Had safety valve regulations been in place - as is the case in many other countries - the BP oil disaster would have been averted.
Enlighten yourself here: http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748704423504575212031
417936798.html
"U.S. regulators don't mandate use of the remote-control device on offshore rigs, and the Deepwater Horizon, hired by oil giant BP PLC, didn't have one. With the remote control, a crew can attempt to trigger an underwater valve that shuts down the well even if the oil rig itself is damaged or evacuated."
Pro tip: If you accuse others of stupidity, you should be careful to not pair the charge with obviously stupid commentary of your own.


You mean the regulatory body in charge of regulating it wasn't regulating it well enough? How is that any different? If only government could solve problems with hindsight, we would be set! Pro tip, if you make a point, actually make one.


PS. Are those laws even in place yet? Also, "PAGE UNAVAILABLE". I will have to take your word on the government being inept.

^Us per usual, JesusFreak is clueless. Had safety valve regulations been in place - as is the case in many other countries - the BP oil disaster would have been averted.

Enlighten yourself here: http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748704423504575212031417936798.html

"U.S. regulators don't mandate use of the remote-control device on offshore rigs, and the Deepwater Horizon, hired by oil giant BP PLC, didn't have one. With the remote control, a crew can attempt to trigger an underwater valve that shuts down the well even if the oil rig itself is damaged or evacuated."

Pro tip: If you wish to accuse others of stupidity, you should be careful to not pair the charge with obviously stupid commentary of your own.

>> ^Drachen_Jager:

Yeah, everyone knows his position is that less regulation is better for everyone, somehow that would avert things like the BP oil spill. His positions on these things are demonstrably false, but his supporters are too stupid to recognise them for what they are and I generally try to avoid arguing with stupid people. There's simply no point.
Over and out.


Because regulations DID prevent the oil spill...after all. Durp!

Edit: O right, and helped keep gays from getting married for x number of years. And started the drug war, durp durp.

>> ^Drachen_Jager:

Yeah, everyone knows his position is that less regulation is better for everyone, somehow that would avert things like the BP oil spill. His positions on these things are demonstrably false, but his supporters are too stupid to recognise them for what they are and I generally try to avoid arguing with stupid people. There's simply no point.
Over and out.


Riiiight. Good stance. I take it you are against all of his positions us dumb people believe in? Things like being anti-war, anti-torture, anti-imprisonment without trial (a'la Brad Manning), and so on.

You're right. There's simply no point.

Yeah, everyone knows his position is that less regulation is better for everyone, somehow that would avert things like the BP oil spill. His positions on these things are demonstrably false, but his supporters are too stupid to recognise them for what they are and I generally try to avoid arguing with stupid people. There's simply no point.

Over and out.

Comment hidden because you are ignoring dag. (show it anyway)

Such bullshit - blame it on the manager. I'm sure Gaga saw how bad the publicity would be and reversed her decision. Lackeys are willing scapegoats.>> ^xxovercastxx:

http://www.npr.org/
blogs/allsongs/2011/04/20/135582519/crisis-averted-lady-gaga-approves-weird-al-yankovic-parody-after-all
Man, good thing we didn't defund NPR.

http://www.npr.org/blogs/allsongs/2011/04/20/135582519/crisis-averted-lady-gaga-approves-weird-al-yankovic-parody-after-all

Man, good thing we didn't defund NPR.

>> ^blankfist:

>> ^dystopianfuturetoday:
The Libyans are attempting to liberate themselves. By taking air combat out of the equation, the UN is evening the odds. The French gave us assistance in our own American revolution. Why do you oppose liberty in Egypt? Is liberty just for white people? >> ^blankfist:
We pick and choose which civilians we "liberate" these days, and somehow the UN apologists are okay with that.


Because we pick and choose who we "liberate". The comment was rather clear, I thought. I don't oppose liberty anywhere. You're trying to justify your party's warlust. Why did you oppose liberty in Iraq when apparently we were liberating the Iraqis? See how stupid that sounds? This is warmongering and more neocon/Democratic interventionism, dystopianBUSHtoday.
"Is liberty just for white people?"
Yes, liberty is only for Aryan Neo-Nazis in the South. Sigh. Come on, you're smarter and bigger than a comment like that.


Yes, we DO pick and choose who we "liberate". You are right about that. I must say I find it strange you are OPPOSED to the idea of liberating people from living under a dictator that had publicly declared his intent to commit genocide against his own people.

Yes there are plenty of other places in terrible shape that we aren't helping out. Yes, nations are choosing to help in Libya for selfish reasons. Mostly concerns over caring for refugees though, oil is a secondary concern to that cost. It remains that actions in Libya are averting a dictator from committing a genocide he had publicly declared he was going to commit, and was hours from regaining the control needed to get it under way.

Do all you people really oppose stopping a genocide and helping a people oppose a vicious dictator all because those helping are in it for themselves?

I hope the crisis stays averted. I remain skeptical. If it happens here it could happen just about anywhere.

http://videosift.com/search?q=\crtc

It's been interesting to watch the growth of interest for the internet the government has shown in recent years.

http://videosift.com/video/Canadian-government-expresses-enthusiasm-for-Internet

It seems the crisis is averted:
http://www.theprovince.com/news/Harper+Conservatives+quash+CRTC+decision+killing+unlimited+Internet/4214166/story.html

For now.

This video is a perfect metaphor for the recent financial crisis.

1. Everyone clamoring to the front
2. Shit goes crazy...everyone freaks out
3. People almost lose it lots of fear/screaming
4. Things calm down...immediate crisis averted
5. Everyone resumes business as usual, even though many of them realize what could've happened.

Dumbledore IS a poof. Crisis averted.

>> ^Darkhand:

I'd listen to her just enough to be able to bury my face in her cleavage.

aren't you afraid that it could be contagious?