If Romney doesn't care about the Poor, why has he spent his money AND HIS PERSONAL TIME serving and helping them?

In reply to this comment by shinyblurry:
>> ^cosmovitelli:

Shiny and QM face facts: you're both too smart to stick with these evasive, ideologically motivated destroyers for much longer.
Sadly, the actual, mediocre, boring effort to do things as well as possible is all there is for us.. No amazing plan, no secret trick to simultaneously give & keep trillions, no 'wealth creators'..
Just a big pile of flawed people, some of whom are trying to make the world more relaxed, open and productive.
And some are solipsists who want OUT in any way they can imagine it might be possible - extreme wealth, private land, preferential treatment by the supernatural, sexual conquest, fame, power over others..
..or all of the above and then still desperately hurting defenseless hungry uncared-for children to acquire ANOTHER billion.. (and then trying to flee further from the anger and the pain they have unthinkingly perpetuated..)
Ryan and Romney are taking fuck you to the next level.


I'm not on board for the Romney/Ryan ticket. I'm not a republican because they don't care about the poor and a few other reasons. I'm not a democrat because it is the party of secular humanism. I cannot in good conscience vote for either candidate this election.

>> ^cosmovitelli:

Shiny and QM face facts: you're both too smart to stick with these evasive, ideologically motivated destroyers for much longer.
Sadly, the actual, mediocre, boring effort to do things as well as possible is all there is for us.. No amazing plan, no secret trick to simultaneously give & keep trillions, no 'wealth creators'..
Just a big pile of flawed people, some of whom are trying to make the world more relaxed, open and productive.
And some are solipsists who want OUT in any way they can imagine it might be possible - extreme wealth, private land, preferential treatment by the supernatural, sexual conquest, fame, power over others..
..or all of the above and then still desperately hurting defenseless hungry uncared-for children to acquire ANOTHER billion.. (and then trying to flee further from the anger and the pain they have unthinkingly perpetuated..)
Ryan and Romney are taking fuck you to the next level.


I'm not on board for the Romney/Ryan ticket. I'm not a republican because they don't care about the poor and a few other reasons. I'm not a democrat because it is the party of secular humanism. I cannot in good conscience vote for either candidate this election.

Shiny and QM face facts: you're both too smart to stick with these evasive, ideologically motivated destroyers for much longer.

Sadly, the actual, mediocre, boring effort to do things as well as possible is all there is for us.. No amazing plan, no secret trick to simultaneously give & keep trillions, no 'wealth creators'..

Just a big pile of flawed people, some of whom are trying to make the world more relaxed, open and productive.

And some are solipsists who want OUT in any way they can imagine it might be possible - extreme wealth, private land, preferential treatment by the supernatural, sexual conquest, fame, power over others..
..or all of the above and then still desperately hurting defenseless hungry uncared-for children to acquire ANOTHER billion.. (and then trying to flee further from the anger and the pain they have unthinkingly perpetuated..)

Ryan and Romney are taking fuck you to the next level.

Go popular vote with preferential voting! It's scientific!

Although I'm glad a brutal cop was finally charged, he's still getting preferential treatment.

From the HuffPo story:
"Unlike most inmates in Florida, a mug shot of Geraci was not made available."

I don't know who this is, so to me he's not a celebrity. Of course by those standards, not many celebrities would exist at all. But thank you for the sentiment.>> ^dystopianfuturetoday:

I'm sure every human on the planet experiences similarly primitive or regressive thought, but that doesn't mean we should revel in it. He gets preferential treatment because he is a minor celebrity and you are not. If it makes you feel any better, I prefer your externalization over this douchebag.
>> ^rottenseed:
so...is it bad that I externalize this kind of thought? I'm always made to feel bad about it, so I am of the thought that I'm odd in thinking like this.

I'm sure every human on the planet experiences similarly primitive or regressive thought, but that doesn't mean we should revel in it. He gets preferential treatment because he is a minor celebrity and you are not. If it makes you feel any better, I prefer your externalization over this douchebag.
>> ^rottenseed:

so...is it bad that I externalize this kind of thought? I'm always made to feel bad about it, so I am of the thought that I'm odd in thinking like this.

>> ^dannym3141:

>> ^Yogi:
By the way I wish he would've just walked away from the project if he was given this much trouble. These are the smart people and they're being pushed around like they're morons by asshole army guys. Fuck them, they want to unleash the power of the atom have them figure it out. Till then and I know this sounds very "Ayn Randish" but take your big brain and go elsewhere. Where people will be happy to see you instead of constantly viewing you with suspicion.

I know what you're saying and i agree in sentiment, but uh... where? It's not like there's a john galt to build a secret country for the intelligent and fair of the world.
I imagine a man like feynman wouldn't expect preferential treatment anyway, why would being intelligent entitle you to being exempt to rules designed for the safety of potentially thousands?
I mean, Feynman had an amazing brain; he could have been good at anything, but his interest lay in physics and he was great at it. Now take another guy with an amazing brain, but his interest lies in writing. Movie stars get paid millions and millions and millions. How many brilliant writers do you know with mansions vs. how many movie stars that can't act but were merely born 'more attractive' than others but have mansions and plaudits?
The world just doesn't work like that even if it should. If you want money and special treatment then you don't want to be going into physics, trust me on that one.
Edit:
Hell, how many of the world's businessmen would join Galt's "strike" in OUR world? They'd strike for money but they'd never strike for honesty and fairness.


Well I'd go back to a university or just go work somewhere else. I'm not saying STOP working on physics...I'm saying stop working for the army if they're going to treat you like crap. They treat you right or you move on, you're not in the army, you have expertise they value.

>> ^Yogi:

By the way I wish he would've just walked away from the project if he was given this much trouble. These are the smart people and they're being pushed around like they're morons by asshole army guys. Fuck them, they want to unleash the power of the atom have them figure it out. Till then and I know this sounds very "Ayn Randish" but take your big brain and go elsewhere. Where people will be happy to see you instead of constantly viewing you with suspicion.


I know what you're saying and i agree in sentiment, but uh... where? It's not like there's a john galt to build a secret country for the intelligent and fair of the world.

I imagine a man like feynman wouldn't expect preferential treatment anyway, why would being intelligent entitle you to being exempt to rules designed for the safety of potentially thousands?

I mean, Feynman had an amazing brain; he could have been good at anything, but his interest lay in physics and he was great at it. Now take another guy with an amazing brain, but his interest lies in writing. Movie stars get paid millions and millions and millions. How many brilliant writers do you know with mansions vs. how many movie stars that can't act but were merely born 'more attractive' than others but have mansions and plaudits?

The world just doesn't work like that even if it should. If you want money and special treatment then you don't want to be going into physics, trust me on that one.

Edit:
Hell, how many of the world's businessmen would join Galt's "strike" in OUR world? They'd strike for money but they'd never strike for honesty and fairness.

Once again because of shitty media, I can't take any sides. The interview was just noise. Neither side makes their case well. The only argument I can make is that once again, there is this ridiculous notion that this supposed bombshell was just missed during the 2008 election and just magically is discovered coincidentally before another election. It just reeks of desperation. In addition it's nothing that dramatically bad. There is no smoking gun. When push comes to shove, the argument is "Obama will give preferential treatment to blacks" not exactly a bombshell.

You can tell a man by the company he keeps. If the left is going to brand Ron Paul a "racist" for things he didn't write in newsletters bearing his name 30 years ago, then King Obama introducing another kook to the podium is more than fair game.

I also find it funny. Conservatives get so angry when the left "plays the race card" but its ok when Conservatives play it?

It's not racist to shine the light of truth on Obama's well-hidden-by-the-non-FOX-media history.

I don't see the point anyway. As if conservatives need any sort of evidence or logic. They're going to hate Obama regardless of what he does.

Here's where we kind of agree, at least as far as there being no need to excessively castigate Obama on his shady history when we have his nearly 4 year RECORD OF FAILURE staring us in the face. If the fakeservatives lose it will be for this reason.

once again because of shitty media, I can't take any sides. The interview was just noise. Neither side makes their case well. The only argument I can make is that once again, there is this ridiculous notion that this supposed bombshell was just missed during the 2008 election and just magically is discovered coincidentally before another election. It just reeks of desperation. In addition it's nothing that dramatically bad. There is no smoking gun. When push comes to shove, the argument is "Obama will give preferential treatment to blacks" not exactly a bombshell.

I also find it funny. Conservatives get so angry when the left "plays the race card" but its ok when Conservatives play it?

I don't see the point anyway. As if conservatives need any sort of evidence or logic. They're going to hate Obama regardless of what he does.

The movie Armageddon could be real and Obama could be Harry Stamper and save the entire world and they'd still find a way to hate him.

Well, this seems to have turned into a public forum....

I, too, miss the QUALITY contributions of blankfist, @RhesusMonk. The QUALITY contributions have been stellar. Some of the funniest things on the Sift came from his observations. Funny and smart. What's not to like?

Let me tell you.

It wasn't just the obvious trolling.

I don't miss the personal attacks, and the thin-skinned whining that followed when blankie was told off by fellow Sifters and then ultimately dag. Talk about being able to dish it out but not being able to take it!

If anyone has received preferential treatment, it has been blankie. Blankie has been responsible for driving many folks away from the sift, but because he did make QUALITY contributions, he was allowed to come back again and again.

Besides, I think this is a perfect way to flameout on the Sift, and is an absolutely PERFECT final troll on the Sift. A mere 90 or so vids away from Galaxy, and to walk away from that glory? That is classy, funny, in-your-face proud and defiant. Listed on the Top Ten with the Circle Line logo as a Galaxy symbol, as @Fusionaut noted?

The Perfect Troll. Absolutely Perfect Troll.

Yes--the feminists will complain in some small way. That's not the problem--but it is.

What he is saying is that most feminists won't jump on the podium and do what's right. They will burn their bras on a march, they will call out small injustices when it's a guy versus a woman everyday of their lives, but they will give this five minutes and then move on without a care in the world.

This is equal to Dan Savage and why he hates moderate Christians who don't scream about the far right who bash gays. Those that don't stand up more than just "Oh, it's wrong."

I don't hate feminists, but these ARE feminists. They just happen to be the far RIGHT feminists that don't belong. Just like the far RIGHT Christians... But then, I have been around true feminists like these women...

And hp, so you have changed your mind? Are far right Christians now not of the religious, but are mere dicks because they don't represent the movement? I doubt it... Just something to think on my friend. A bit of food for ye mind.

>> ^hpqp:

Those cackling hags are NOT feminists, they're stupid dicks. That being said, this loudmouth needs to get some perspective and not decide what feminism is based on a few singular situations.
For every story of a woman being treated preferentially (NOT what feminism is about btw), there are a million and one cases of misogynous abuse, lack of equal rights, rape perps and wife-killers walking free, "honour" killings, etc etc etc.
Most feminists will be the first to call out the hateful ignorance of situations like the one above, because it goes completely against what feminism is about, i.e. equal treatment. The way I see it, those dimwits (and anyone else who found this story funny instead of tragic) had something of an "Osama's death" moment, rejoicing over something unethical out of a sense of revenge for past (and present) misdeeds. Instead of using this situation to talk about the other side of what equality means - i.e. that women can be criminal/crazy/violent too - they took the low road of laughing at someone's mutilation. Shame on them, not on feminism.

I upvoted your comment, because I agree with the sentiment. But I think the angry atheist still has a point, too. His claim to fame is being a loudmouth, which doesn't serve him very well when he tries to make a point on a sensitive issue that not many people are good at considering.

We've had more and more of these kerfluffles lately and I expect they will become even more frequent. Another example is the Dawkins vs Watson nonsense that happened not too long ago.

And if interaction between feminists and non-feminists weren't complex enough, even feminism itself is splintering as new generations of women are entering the fold and the old guard is becoming irrelevant. Such dynamics are extremely complex, especially when people aren't able to objectively look at the world and their role in it.

So, I upvoted both your comment and the video. I think they are both right, to a point, and also wrong, to a point.

>> ^hpqp:

Those cackling hags are NOT feminists, they're stupid dicks. That being said, this loudmouth needs to get some perspective and not decide what feminism is based on a few singular situations.
For every story of a woman being treated preferentially (NOT what feminism is about btw), there are a million and one cases of misogynous abuse, lack of equal rights, rape perps and wife-killers walking free, "honour" killings, etc etc etc.
Most feminists will be the first to call out the hateful ignorance of situations like the one above, because it goes completely against what feminism is about, i.e. equal treatment. The way I see it, those dimwits (and anyone else who found this story funny instead of tragic) had something of an "Osama's death" moment, rejoicing over something unethical out of a sense of revenge for past (and present) misdeeds. Instead of using this situation to talk about the other side of what equality means - i.e. that women can be criminal/crazy/violent too - they took the low road of laughing at someone's mutilation. Shame on them, not on feminism.

I wish I could have upvoted this comment 5 times.

>> ^hpqp:

Those cackling hags are NOT feminists, they're stupid dicks. That being said, this loudmouth needs to get some perspective and not decide what feminism is based on a few singular situations.
For every story of a woman being treated preferentially (NOT what feminism is about btw), there are a million and one cases of misogynous abuse, lack of equal rights, rape perps and wife-killers walking free, "honour" killings, etc etc etc.
Most feminists will be the first to call out the hateful ignorance of situations like the one above, because it goes completely against what feminism is about, i.e. equal treatment. The way I see it, those dimwits (and anyone else who found this story funny instead of tragic) had something of an "Osama's death" moment, rejoicing over something unethical out of a sense of revenge for past (and present) misdeeds. Instead of using this situation to talk about the other side of what equality means - i.e. that women can be criminal/crazy/violent too - they took the low road of laughing at someone's mutilation. Shame on them, not on feminism.