I'm not clueless to the use and function of profanity. Profanity serves a real purpose in our language (for instance I can't think of any other way to say "Fuck you" with the same effect). But I think you're the one who is misinterpreting the word usage not the other way around.

Profanity exists to give offense. In that context, who were you trying to offend?

Perhaps I misconstrued your sharp criticism as a tirade because you peppered it with profanity. In THAT context were the words 'performing their function' as you say?

In reply to this comment by westy:
>> ^JiggaJonson:
I hate it almost as much as idiotic tirades that rely on profanity to express a point. Get some real language like 'abhorrent' or 'vile' if you want to be nasty without being so crude.
^westy:
what an idiotic comparison , and fucking terrible editing.



Clearly not idoitic (or not necessarily idiotic) I belive the statment you have made is far more idoitic in its content than my "tirade" as you put it.

"get some real language" what a stupid thing to say. Its clear what I wrote to the point that you understood it and I'm sure others would , Although It might be more interesting for some people to use different words at times who Cares if the words used work and perform there function.

(also your suggested words would add no real benefit to what i said other than satisfying your subjective preferences to words used)

I don't see why "rude" words are necessarily crude or how any words are any more or less real language than any other words.

what should really annoy you are people that are clueless to the function of language and are obsessed with details that although can be beneficial and helpful to communication and some times make language more interesting and poetic are merely the icing on the cake and not the cake itself.

>> ^JiggaJonson:
I hate it almost as much as idiotic tirades that rely on profanity to express a point. Get some real language like 'abhorrent' or 'vile' if you want to be nasty without being so crude.
^westy:
what an idiotic comparison , and fucking terrible editing.



Clearly not idoitic (or not necessarily idiotic) I belive the statment you have made is far more idoitic in its content than my "tirade" as you put it.

"get some real language" what a stupid thing to say. Its clear what I wrote to the point that you understood it and I'm sure others would , Although It might be more interesting for some people to use different words at times who Cares if the words used work and perform there function.

(also your suggested words would add no real benefit to what i said other than satisfying your subjective preferences to words used)

I don't see why "rude" words are necessarily crude or how any words are any more or less real language than any other words.

what should really annoy you are people that are clueless to the function of language and are obsessed with details that although can be beneficial and helpful to communication and some times make language more interesting and poetic are merely the icing on the cake and not the cake itself.

I hate it almost as much as idiotic tirades that rely on profanity to express a point. Get some real language like 'abhorrent' or 'vile' if you want to be nasty without being so crude.

^westy:
what an idiotic comparison , and fucking terrible editing.

>> ^Abel_Prisc:
Yeah, it's not the jumping couch incident for me.
I never cared for the guy, but the day when I started to really hate him was when I heard his tirade against modern medicine. It makes me puke that he used his fame to spread such damaging and unhealthy misinformation, and I fear the thought of how many people took it to heart. This was before I found out about his religious views, of which sealed the deal. Now I won't go near any film he signs on.


Tom Cruise's devotion to Scientology never mattered to me, he's an amazing actor and a great person. There, I said it. He always approaches his roles with a degree of professionalism and precision that I always hope to replicate. It's sad really, because he truly believes he's doing a world of good with Scientology. Onstage I envy the man, his passion, his talent. But off stage...from the bottom of my heart I pity the man.

Yeah, it's not the jumping couch incident for me.
I never cared for the guy, but the day when I started to really hate him was when I heard his tirade against modern medicine. It makes me puke that he used his fame to spread such damaging and unhealthy misinformation, and I fear the thought of how many people took it to heart. This was before I found out about his religious views, of which sealed the deal. Now I won't go near any film he signs on.

hahahaha, the last two comments make it sound like nuke and coal plants don't enjoy government subsidies of any sort...

not to mention, all the government planning which encourages sprawl coupled with super-low gas taxes discourage energy efficiency.

Europeans jumped on energy efficiency since using power is way more expensive over there. But why talk about how to improve things when it's so much easier to criticize people and repeat tired old political tirades?

What more, he's actually bashing government money shuffle boondoggles in the vid itself - did you guys even watch it?

What are the Republicans ideas for providing health care to the uninsured?

Conservatives (not necessarily Republicans) want to reform health care by implementing tort reform and removing the government imposed barrier of across-state competition for insurance - thereby lowering costs. Major medical insurance is affordable by anyone who can work at even a part time job, so they do not need to be 'provided'. Everyone else already qualifies for Medicare or Medicaid. Any loose ends can be managed at the state, municipal, or individual level.

It is saying SPECIFICALLY that lives would be saved if they had health INSURANCE.

That was already understood. Mr. Dufus is saying No Insurance = No medical treatement = Death. Bull. Everyone in the US receives medical care - insured or not. It is very likely that the vast majority (if not every single person) he references in his conveniently non-detailed 400K was being treated by any number of doctors for unspecified periods of time despite being 'uninsured'.

The truth behind Rep Grayson's statement is that ignoring this problem that is causing people to die preventable deaths is like wanting them to die.

What Mr. Dufus is doing here is taking shameful advantage of statistics. People die. It cannot be stopped. All he did is say that every uninsured person that died in "X" period of time died because of 'Republicans'. He's saying, "correlation equals causation" and you agree with him. He's an idiot and denies logic, reason, and simple statistical facts.

Correlation does not equal causation. If I totalled up the number of INSURED people who died in the same time frame, simple statistics would prove incontrovertably that far more insured people died than uninsured people. Using his moron logic, we must therefore conclude that being insured KILLS you. Therefore, Obama's plan to insure more people will result in more deaths. Therefore Democrats want people to die. You really should know better than this. I'm doing my best to put it simply, but I can't help you if you stubbornly refuse to accept common sense and facts.

You are just another manipulated Republican.

Your tirade is a miscast spear, because I'm not a Republican. I'm unaffiliated. I vote for people who will decrease goverment, lower taxes, cut programs, reduce spending, balance the budget, and in all respects decrease the size & scope of government. Sadly, that leaves me with very few people to vote for.

Why do you support a political party that does nothing but harm - both financially and socially - and believe there is some virtue in it?

I believe that question is more appropriately posited to you yourself.

>> ^thepinky:
^What are you talking about, "hollow invective?" That tirade was full of content. And cliches, yes.


Well miss pinky, I just so conveniently happened to have posted the knowledge you seek in the self-same comment that you responded to. Here is an encore (Now with 500% more bullet points for added clarity!!!).

-Timothy McVeigh?
-Flavore-Aide?
-Socialized Medicine?
-Self-delusional group-think?
-Neo-Libs?

^What are you talking about, "hollow invective?" That tirade was full of content. And cliches, yes.

Hm - I'd say WP's tirade here is an excellent example of the self-righteous, suspicious attitude of fear and negativism that dominates the typical neo-con mental landscape.

WP (and neo-cons like him) seems to be unaware of the basic dynamics of human interaction. He doesn't see human beings when he interacts with others. He sees the 'groups' and then makes judgements and cast aspersions on the motivations of others according to the 'groups' he sees.

WP doesn't see an innocent group of college students hanging out in small groups of friends and classmates... He sees people who are being "brainwashed" by "neolib" college professors at "elitist" universities who will all grow up to cast-off his type of neo-con fear mongering, and see life for what it really is. These kids will inevitably--through their "liberal" education--be against things like invading countries for no reason, stripping away our constitutional rights, draining our treasure and giving it to the richest one-percent, denying healthcare for those who truly need it, and they certainly won't fall victim to the false sense of "upward mobility" that neo-cons like WP have been trying to shove down our throats for far too long.

His comments say more about his own fear, prejudice, and racism than anyone else's. It also says a lot about how small, petty, selfish, and insecure he is with himself. It's kind of sad really to think that there are people out there who are so unhappy with life and so prejudiced and mistaken about their fellow citizens.



ps: WP - Ending your diatribe with the word "men" speaks volumes.

Hm - I'd say her tirade here is an excellent example of the self-righteous, suspicious attitude of fear and negativism that dominates the typical neolib's mental landscape.

Michelle seems to be unaware of the basic dynamics of human interaction. Humans don't move about as lone individuals, treating all other individuals with perfect equality. If you enter a group of 100 people and have only 3 minutes do you spend 1.8 seconds individually greeting each person? What if there are 1,000 people? How do you sit 'equally' with 100 people without making anyone feel 'snubbed' when you sit or stand by someone else? How about eye focus? Listening? Humans move in small groups because it is just how the human system is DESIGNED.

But Michelle Obama (and neolibs like her) don't see human beings when they interact with others. They see the 'groups' and they then make judgements and cast aspersions on the motivations of others according to the 'groups' they see. Michelle didn't see an innocent group of college students hanging out in small groups of friends and classmates... She saw people who were (to her warped brain) fearfully excluding 'X' people or 'Y' people because they were mean, or racist, or whatever.

Her comments say more about her own fear, prejudice, and racism than anyone else's. It also says a lot about how small, petty, selfish, and insecure she is with herself. It's kind of sad really to think that there are people out there who are so unhappy with life and so prejudiced and mistaken about their fellow men.

Wait, where in my video does Olbermann appear? Where does Jimmy Carter say everyone opposing Obama is racist?

For that matter, was what Olbermann said literally "everyone who opposes Obama is a racist", or was it more along the lines of "might the excessive vehemence of the opposition be partially fueled by racial animosity?"

Are we no longer allowed to ask the question "what role does race play in this"? Or is it now that people have to turn a blind eye to all racially charged subtexts out of fear of being accused of "playing the race card"?

Fuck that. For all the years I've heard people bitch about how "Political Correctness" is some sort of restraint on their speech, is it any different if the politics we're being correct about become "thou shalt not ever accuse anyone of racism"? There's a good reason to be "PC" -- it's about treating other people with respect. There's no good reason to launch into tirades at everyone who ever suggests that someone's actions may have been racially tinged.

Joe Wilson probably doesn't deserve the label "racist". Do I think there's a reason to suspect race played a role in why he's so worried about illegal immigrants benefiting from reform, and that Obama's race might have lowered his inhibitions a bit when it came to treating him with disrespect? Hell yes.

Do I think the sea of older, white, southern people who refuse to accept Obama as being born in the US are all racists? No. Do I think race plays a role for some of them either consciously or subconsciously? Yes.

Do I think Kanye West interrupted Taylor Swift because he's a racist? No. Do I think he was bringing racial animosity to the event, and casting undeserved aspersions on the judges? Yes.

I get why this issue is a sensitive one, but people seriously have to stop acting as though the accuser is always the one who deserves scorn.

>> ^Winstonfield_Pennypacker:
then you should be in favor of the US enforcing its own border laws, should you not?

Since I have no interest in starving to death while the agricultural production of California rots in the fields, no, that would be a stupid idea. They subsidize our economy, not the other way around. If we did not need them so badly your argument might make sense, but reality intrudes on your little tirade.

You're wrong when you say you can't afford insurance. You are paying for car insurance right now. Therefore you can also buy catastrophic medical care coverage. It's cheap - less than $60 a month. Anyone can afford that.

So I could pay $720 a year, and have a deductible of what $20k? Sorry that's more than my entire monetizable net worth. I can't reach the deductible, so the insurance will never kick in, so its just throwing money away, and we are, of course, assuming that they would actually cover me if anything happened, which is a dubious proposition in itself.

Your (and everyone else's) problem is you mentally treat medical insurance in a completely different way than you treat any other kind of insurance. Life insurance, car insurance - you don't expect them to pay for routine, day-to-day crap.

I expect them to pay what they claim to cover, health insurance routinely does not. My GFs cousins was hired to deny coverage claims, she sits at home, gets folders full of medical records, and without seeing the patient or their physician comes up with an excuse for the company not to pay. That's not how I expect car insurance to work, I have legally mandated coverage, not some company bureaucrat sneaking loophole after loophole into an "insurance" contract which can deny just about any claim.

You accept that those insurance policies kick in only for extreme emergency situations. But for some bizarre reason you don't think that way with medical insurance.

You pulled that right out of your ass. I have no problem with the idea of emergency only coverage, I have a problem with the fact that they don't actually provide it...and then they want to charge more than getting actual service costs in countries with full service universal.

Well it is time you grew up and stopped treating medical insurance like it is some sort of special exception to the insurance biz.

Why not car insurance is? I am required to carry it, and the gov makes sure it actually covers something, that seems pretty reasonable, especially compared with the scam that is the US medical system.

It is an emergency plan to be used only in dire need. Basic day to day medical expenses should be paid out of your own pocket.

That is one option, an option which is more expensive, and less effective.

Face facts, it is simply pragmatically stupid to pay more money for worse product, and that's what the health insurance companies offer. You are free to be a fool and buy it, but don't try and keep others from buying the superior, cheaper product just because you have an ideological issue with the government actually doing something useful.

Meanwhile, at Fox, the headline will read, "Angry Socialist Tirade Lacks Cartoony Graphs."

I'm sorry, but I can't upvote this drivel. The spin on this is ridiculous.

http://www.nytimes.com/aponline/2009/07/20/us/AP-US-Harvard-Scholar-Disorderly.html

"By the time police arrived, Gates was already inside. Police say he refused to come outside to speak with an officer, who told him he was investigating a report of a break-in.

''Why, because I'm a black man in America?'' Gates said"

Gates sounds like the racist here. Refusing to show his ID, and then later producing a Harvard University ID card? Really? "Here white boy, look how educated I am. >:["

And then he follows the officer outside to continue his racially-motivated tirade? The police were doing their job, trying to PROTECT THIS MAN'S HOME AND SAFETY, and he has the audacity to be a fucking holier-than-thou prick about it, spouting racial bullshit? Come on, honestly!

I feel bad for the police department that has to take this bad press because some guy has a chip on his shoulder.