netrunner says ron paul's a hypocrite b/c he opposes the senate bill in general.

i think he might be a wacko libertarian, but a hypocrite?

What they did was NOT ok. I really don't give a shit what the camera operator might have done wrong. They cannot enter a property without a warrant, and a bench warrant does NOT give them the right to forgo a specific warrant for that property. It is the Fourth Amendment to the US Constitution, and it is damned important!

I am not a right wing wacko by any stretch of the imagination, but when I see somebody flagrantly violating the Constitution, I get pissed. And you should too.

I hope these assholes lose their jobs and face serious sanctions. The police are meant to uphold the law, not ignore it.

"Telephone call? Telephone call? That's communication with the outside world. Doctor's *discretion*. Nuh-uh. Look, hey - all of these nuts could just make phone calls, they could spread insanity, oozing through telephone cables, oozing into the ears of all these poor sane people, infecting them. Wackos everywhere, plague of madness."

>> ^marinara:

fuck maddow. we need to stop dividing this country. If that means letting american domestic terrorists rally and get on the news, then so be it.


Yes, Rachel Maddow is the problem here. Not the wacko's who threaten to murder children.

>> ^Krupo:
A wacko like Ron Paul. Nice.
Pretty classic vid here.


I got an email from him today that was just full of Republican Talking points and it bothered me that I once gave money to his campaign.

A wacko like Ron Paul. Nice.

Pretty classic vid here.

I had a little free time and a desire to get my mind off work--- where the disputes are louder and even less consequential.

>> ^imstellar28:
This is absolutely hilarious. The liberals/socialists are chiming in that being a victim of theft is morally wrong? While their whole political platform depends on stealing from other people? Makes sense I guess (within that perspective) but whew talk about a fucked up moral compass.
Riding a shitty bike with soapy handlebars and direct-drive isn't illegal. Neither is leaving a bike against a building so this discussion is so mind boggling retarded I can't believe it generated so many responses.
I can understand the wacko socialists having their moral compass on backwards, but longde you are a pretty reasonable guy, why the defense of this?

This is absolutely hilarious. The liberals/socialists are chiming in that being a victim of theft is morally wrong? While their whole political platform depends on stealing from other people? Makes sense I guess (within that perspective) but whew talk about a fucked up moral compass.

Riding a shitty bike with soapy handlebars and direct-drive isn't illegal. Neither is leaving a bike against a building so this discussion is so mind boggling retarded I can't believe it generated so many responses.

I can understand the wacko socialists having their moral compass on backwards, but longde you are a pretty reasonable guy, why the defense of this?

What makes him a wacko? Is it the fact that he wears goggles, but not over his eyes?
>> ^Payback:
Wow, remarkably well spoken for a wacko.

A wacko that's likely to be financially ruined when they catch him (which should be pretty easy if he's running around in tights and a cape).

Wow, remarkably well spoken for a wacko.

>> ^Haldaug:
>> : I think the self-victimization of Christians boils down to fatwa envy. Many Christians are jealous that Muslims get to make death threats to stop people from making fun of their faith while they are (largely) unable to do such a thing.
But, as gwiz pointed out, the real news story here is the total stupidity of trusting prayer to stop a political reform.


Wow, Christian's are jealous that they cannot make death threats?!?! I agree there are some really strange people out there that may think this, but the majority of Christians (the ones that aren't wackos) have NO such wish. I can't believe someone who probably consider themselves an ordinary bloke would think this.

The "forcing" thing is from Ms. Maddows. This video is simple prayer between a religious group and a couple senators who share the same religion. She feels it necessary to bash them. Why? They are simply executing their faith? I don't see ANYONE being forced. NO ONE is shouting out in disgust. So this is a freedom of expression. So the question here is why does Ms. Maddows devote such a lengthy news segment to something trivial, then represent that it represents the right-side of the debate, and finally imply that mixing any political person in religion is wrong (even though the setting isn't official government business). The whole event is a big, "who cares", yet she insists on elevating it to something more. That's journalism worthy of FOX news.

>> ^qualm:
@gwizz: I'm guessing you don't know anything about the wacko John Birch Society. Or...wait a minute. Aren't you that really creepy stalker guy?


No, I don't know the John Birch Society, to be honest. It doesn't really matter, because what is said in this video makes sense. It's also cute how you can only hit back by a personal attack. You owe me an apology, good sir, both for bringing up the topic and your conduct in it at the time. Until that happens, I'd rather not interact with someone like you.

@gwizz: I'm guessing you don't know anything about the wacko John Birch Society. Or...wait a minute. Aren't you that really creepy stalker guy?

Winstonfield claims he's seen all the data on global warming. Yeah.....sure....

To have seen ALL the data on global and climate knowledge, would take up 57 years of straight reading (assuming no one writes another book from this moment onward). In addition, that Winstonfield observed personally, EVERY, lecture given. Both with those recorded, and was their personally when they were not. If anyone is getting the idea, that Winstonfield's arguement is just alittle exaggerated...you might be correct.

Scientists look at data differently then do lay-persons would of data. Its to look at the data, and then try to give the best explainition for the data AT PRESENT. Winstonfield would do well to get a scientific education, before opening his mouth, and gush gibberish of flimsy thought.

There's more then enough data that points out, what scientists are explaining. Unfortunately, scientists, are not often good at explaining stuff to non-scientists. Sort of like how not many thought Michael Jackson was a genius of a musician, but instead, a wacko.

If you think climate change is not taking place, then the burden of evidence is up to you, to prove. For the moment, the evidence seems to point that there is a direct link between man's usage of things, and the climate worsening.

I find that Winstonfield is simply a conservative Republican lap dog. Saying and doing anything his masters wish, with total obedience and unwavering fanatic behavior. If they told him, the sky will be yellow zig zaps, purple poka-dots, and red curvy lines, three weeks from now. He would be on here, saying so, without an ounce of evidence or proof. In fact, he would show websites devoted to this concept, which in turn, are hardly non-bias. Remember that, when you read his stuff.