Um, I think it's spelled wacko.

^ This was a brilliant joke. Brilliant, I tells ya!

Wackos everywhere, plague of madness.

It's not my list, (though it tends to be accurate) But that's exactly why I'm calling for more active moderation on this site. I'm sick of the logical fallacies. When it goes unchecked, you get people who fed up and fire back. So it cuts both ways. It stops QM from making his ad homs and it stops people from making ad homs against him. Win win.

I'm also sick of EVERY GODDAMNED THING being turned into a left v right shitfest. I consider myself to be a left leaning centrist and I think both parties are full of shit (sure I think one party is more full of shit than the other, but that's not really the point) but I think the founding fathers were right to not like parties and this two party system is killing this country.

Quite frankly though, if someone makes some quality posts, you don't earn the right to make some ad homs and otherwise make some shitty posts. if someone ad homs you, you don't get to ad hom them. It's not a tit for tat system.
>> ^Payback:

Oh, believe me, I know his "Kenyawaiian" schitck by heart. As "The Obamanation" isn't here as a participant, I guess I am just drawing too fine a line, but I have yet, in recent memory, to see QM attack someone personally for their views.
However... HE gets attacked, ad hominem, CONSTANTLY.
Also, the others on your list barely contribute BEYOND their political rhetoric. QM comes up with some brilliant, actual-lol-worthy AND NON-POLITICAL comments quite often. I guess that's his saving grace with me, his sense of humour.
>> ^VoodooV:
I'm sure I could probably find one if I looked hard enough, but it's not me that QM does his ad homs to. It's anything associated with the left or especially the man in your avatar pic. Or have you forgotten his favorite nickname for Obama? I have yet to see QM make a rational argument in regards to politics without resorting to a strawman or an ad hom or some form of logical fallacy
>> ^Payback:
>> ^VoodooV:
>> ^Payback:
>> ^vaire2ube:
BillO or Choggy
starring as Winstonfield_Pennypacker
as Bobknight33
Here on Psychos Of the Sift.
Don't worry kids, Quantum Mushroom is still in there as well, go figure!!

Please don't include QM with that list. Of all of them, QM doesn't argumentum ad hominem. He might be out to lunch, but it's a classy lunch.

where have you been? QM argues Ad homs all the time. It's his bread and butter.

Show me a post where he tries to deflect what you say by attacking you personally. That's what ad Hominem is. Attempting to discredit someone to win an argument, rather than debating their view.
VoodooV: I believe (place anti-rightwing-wacko argument here).
QuantumM: Your feet stink. Look everyone! VoodooV's feet stink!

Oh, believe me, I know his "Kenyawaiian" schitck by heart. As "The Obamanation" isn't here as a participant, I guess I am just drawing too fine a line, but I have yet, in recent memory, to see QM attack someone personally for their views.

However... HE gets attacked, ad hominem, CONSTANTLY.

Also, the others on your list barely contribute BEYOND their political rhetoric. QM comes up with some brilliant, actual-lol-worthy AND NON-POLITICAL comments quite often. I guess that's his saving grace with me, his sense of humour.

>> ^VoodooV:

I'm sure I could probably find one if I looked hard enough, but it's not me that QM does his ad homs to. It's anything associated with the left or especially the man in your avatar pic. Or have you forgotten his favorite nickname for Obama? I have yet to see QM make a rational argument in regards to politics without resorting to a strawman or an ad hom or some form of logical fallacy
>> ^Payback:
>> ^VoodooV:
>> ^Payback:
>> ^vaire2ube:
BillO or Choggy
starring as Winstonfield_Pennypacker
as Bobknight33
Here on Psychos Of the Sift.
Don't worry kids, Quantum Mushroom is still in there as well, go figure!!

Please don't include QM with that list. Of all of them, QM doesn't argumentum ad hominem. He might be out to lunch, but it's a classy lunch.

where have you been? QM argues Ad homs all the time. It's his bread and butter.

Show me a post where he tries to deflect what you say by attacking you personally. That's what ad Hominem is. Attempting to discredit someone to win an argument, rather than debating their view.
VoodooV: I believe (place anti-rightwing-wacko argument here).
QuantumM: Your feet stink. Look everyone! VoodooV's feet stink!

I'm sure I could probably find one if I looked hard enough, but it's not me that QM does his ad homs to. It's anything associated with the left or especially the man in your avatar pic. Or have you forgotten his favorite nickname for Obama? I have yet to see QM make a rational argument in regards to politics without resorting to a strawman or an ad hom or some form of logical fallacy
>> ^Payback:

>> ^VoodooV:
>> ^Payback:
>> ^vaire2ube:
BillO or Choggy
starring as Winstonfield_Pennypacker
as Bobknight33
Here on Psychos Of the Sift.
Don't worry kids, Quantum Mushroom is still in there as well, go figure!!

Please don't include QM with that list. Of all of them, QM doesn't argumentum ad hominem. He might be out to lunch, but it's a classy lunch.

where have you been? QM argues Ad homs all the time. It's his bread and butter.

Show me a post where he tries to deflect what you say by attacking you personally. That's what ad Hominem is. Attempting to discredit someone to win an argument, rather than debating their view.
VoodooV: I believe (place anti-rightwing-wacko argument here).
QuantumM: Your feet stink. Look everyone! VoodooV's feet stink!

>> ^VoodooV:

>> ^Payback:
>> ^vaire2ube:
BillO or Choggy
starring as Winstonfield_Pennypacker
as Bobknight33
Here on Psychos Of the Sift.
Don't worry kids, Quantum Mushroom is still in there as well, go figure!!

Please don't include QM with that list. Of all of them, QM doesn't argumentum ad hominem. He might be out to lunch, but it's a classy lunch.

where have you been? QM argues Ad homs all the time. It's his bread and butter.


Show me a post where he tries to deflect what you say by attacking you personally. That's what ad Hominem is. Attempting to discredit someone to win an argument, rather than debating their view.

VoodooV: I believe (place anti-rightwing-wacko argument here).
QuantumM: Your feet stink. Look everyone! VoodooV's feet stink!

>> ^Stormsinger:

How about wacko?
You really think it's a difficult or meaningful question to ask, "How could they conduct key hijacking events simultaneously all within 10 minutes?" See, we have these cute little gadgets called clocks...you can even get small ones to wear on your wrist. They tell the time, so you can agree on when to do things.
Get a grip man. Or at least a clue.


So what happens when your plane gets delayed?

Coordinated attacks require coordination. How did the hijackers know what time their planes would be entering radar gaps?

How about *wacko?

You really think it's a difficult or meaningful question to ask, "How could they conduct key hijacking events simultaneously all within 10 minutes?" See, we have these cute little gadgets called clocks...you can even get small ones to wear on your wrist. They tell the time, so you can agree on when to do things.

Get a grip man. Or at least a clue.

>> ^Ornthoron:

no matter how much some California hippies bleat about "natural".
health and nutrition wackos to garner votes
west coast hippies
Of course, I'm not here to judge those who choose to drink raw milk for some reason.


Of course not.

>> ^Ornthoron:

On a larger scale though, I find it alarming that Ron Paul has to pay lip service to the health and nutrition wackos to garner votes. What will be next? The same type of west coast hippies also campaign actively against childhood vaccination. Will he, if he is elected president, abandon childhood vaccination programs in the name of freedom, when we know for a fact that the disappearance of group immunity in some areas of California has resulted in deadly outbreaks of measles and whooping cough?


He gives lip service to liberty and freedom of choice. I'm not one of those "west coast hippies" that avoids vaccines or drinks raw milk, but I'd never want to stop them from doing so. Unlike you and others, I don't sit on a high throne and sneer down at those who choose to do so. Even if there's zero health benefit over pasteurized or even if raw milk can be (but not always is) dangerous to ingest.

Why does this topic irk you so? And would you be against letting free adults choose to put things in their body even if they know the risks?

I hope you're not as uncritical when looking for libertarian literature as you are when looking for health information. That page is written by a HuffPo grade misinformer. Unpasteurized milk has no nutritional benefits over pasteurized milk, no matter how much some California hippies bleat about "natural".

Of course, I'm not here to judge those who choose to drink raw milk for some reason. I come after all from a country where half-rotten fish is considered haute cuisine (Although properly made rakfisk has no infectuous risks. And is delicious! And is a great excuse to drink lots of aquavit! Errm, I digress.). If you absolutely want some dysentery with your milk, that's your problem. I just want to warn people that we pasteurize milk for a very good reason.

On a larger scale though, I find it alarming that Ron Paul has to pay lip service to the health and nutrition wackos to garner votes. What will be next? The same type of west coast hippies also campaign actively against childhood vaccination. Will he, if he is elected president, abandon childhood vaccination programs in the name of freedom, when we know for a fact that the disappearance of group immunity in some areas of California has resulted in deadly outbreaks of measles and whooping cough?

>> ^blankfist:

>> ^Ornthoron:
Having a food and drugs administration that makes sure foodstuffs on sale do not cause serious infectuous diseases is hardly impinging on anyone's freedom.

It does if it keeps those things from being offered or used. I'm curious what you think freedom means, because I hear a lot of people make arguments similar to the one you just made. How is restricting people's ability to ingest raw milk - which some claim is healthier than pasteurized milk - a testament to freedom?

I don't think spanking in general is "wrong" in all situations. Parents need to have freedom to decide what they think works best with their children in terms of rewards, punishments, and other systems of encouraging or discouraging specific behaviors.

I'd wager that anyone from the baby boomer generation or older probably grew up experiencing some corporal punishment / spanking along the lines of what the book author was describing. I think that is pretty much the far end of acceptable severity for today, and well beyond what I would do myself, but considering that so many people were exposed to that in previous generations it would be illogical to suggest that it is unacceptable or too extreme.

But like @rottenseed said, I don't think it is reasonable to blame that guy's book. These bastards beat their kids for hours. They beat them not to cause momentary pain, but to cause injury. The willingness to commit that sort of act doesn't come from reading a book and saying "hey, that sounds like a good idea"; there has to be some sort of screwup in their mental wiring. A screwup that is exacerbated by wacko fundamentalist bullshit, sure. But I think they are just wacko enough in general that they'd probably have been doing the exact same disgusting stuff whether they ever read that guy's book (or hell, even the 'spare the rod' tripe in the Bible) or not.

So the good news is that they can rot in jail. Far outweighed by the bad news that it took far to long to toss them in there, and a child died as a result. Disgusting.

Religious wackos scare me and make me laugh at the same time.

I could see how you could tell them that the cameras were just the alarm sensors and, "That's how we do it in America." I wonder if this was an isolated pervert or some type of business endeavor. Based on the the fact lusury_pie can't find them on google I'll assume it's not on the internet and therefore was an isolated wacko. Also, you'd think professionals would have taken the time to run the cables correctly, not just tape them to the door frame.

>> ^TheGenk:

I like how she starts to describe the Tea Party/Fox News combo @1:33.


Exactly! I think that's what is happening in American politics right now. The nutjobs are isolating themselves from rational people, become more insular and surrounding themselves with echo chambers. Their loudness and passion (and media support) are pulling more people into the cliques, and it's becoming a vicious cycle.

It's just not healthy to be surrounded by people who all think like you do.

That's probably also what happened with the Westboro wackos.

I think there is one flaw with his logic.

The ultra-fundamentalist Christians aren't going to listen to other Christians, just like they aren't going to listen to the GLBT community, aetheists or in fact anyone who doesn't subscribe to their particular form of nutjob doctrine. Liberal Christians might (and probably do) call the wackos out on their bile spewing rants, but the sum effect is virtually nil.