ivan

you are only partly right - actually i wish to portray everyone on every side of me as ignorant (i've no doubt that a disturbing # of self-proclaimed democrats don't know the history of their party as being pro-slavery either) i'll gladly add that i'm full aware of my own limitations - that i'm a half-wit is obvious to more folks than just you still, is it really that controversial that fucking raytards tend towards conservatism? not trying to be a dick, but conservatism is well aimed at the dim-witted and ill-informed - it has no subtleties, no gray zones, no self-doubt, no oh-my-god-i'm-actually-part-of-the-problem-existential-crises to overcome and jesus-fuck, fox news is sure easier to understand than an editorial in the economist, no? of course there are plenty of smart republicans (they're just more inclined to be evil to the core! smart democrats, on the otherhand, harness their intellect to help the helpless, if for no other reason than to score sloppy bj's from their true-believers )

bloomberg? shiiiiiiit, fucking peanuts! mitt got the endorsement he most needed today! [video:youtube]

"he who would pun would pick a pocket"

debunk this! obama used the government's top-secret weather-control machine to exact this miracle

©oc(k)tober surprise?

who's we? i might be interested if it ain't gonna be too wet to climb.

BIAS ALERT!!!

man, thread hijack! shall we return to gay power questions now?

hard to see pot tourists as anything other than a boon, unlike say, meth n' heroin tourists. i imagine seattle will have no hard time making hendrix n' nirvana inspired attractions if, dog willing, 502 does pass, might be good to remind all the climbers 'round the campfire though that rainer, olympic n' n cascade naty parks won't be inclined to change their enforcement plans

wilson was of course a democrat (and virginian, no less) and thus not suprisingly of a mindset that would justify both the south's actions in the civil war and autonomy for folks in the balkans as to the last, i'm a teacher, so thus used to being rather unemotional in my disagreements, see?

the historical irony of the party of lincoln now championing the supremacy of individual states is...uh...uh...well over the head of most republicans? The Confederacy was not an "individual state". the confederate states said the supremacy of state rights over federal rights allowed them to secede (and having divorced their first wife, now being free to remarry whoever they want) - that if their state right to set internal policies was being abused by the feds, that they had the right to leave the country. republicans, of course, at that time said that was bullshit, that states were subordinate to the federal governmetn (it's there in article 6 n' everything) and that south carolina and her little bitch friends couldn't just take their ball and go home.

Can you cite a source for this? I did a search for "romney campaign hacking facebook" and found plenty of independent sources disputing such an idea. (http://www.motherjones.com/mojo/2012/10/mitt-romney-fraudulent-facebook-likes) *like!*

the historical irony of the party of lincoln now championing the supremacy of individual states is...uh...uh...well over the head of most republicans?

it's hard to imagine the feds sitting on their hands when legal washington weed starts showing up in idaho and oregon?

rumors? [video:youtube]

http://usnews.nbcnews.com/_news/2012/11/01/14854036-sandy-power-outages-for-hundreds-of-thousands-into-next-week-as-new-storm-builds?lite seems like comparing the power distribution system of a city and a sub-urb/rural community is distinctly apples n' oranges.

you're doing the lord's work sir, keep it up that said, it's gonna take a big set of nuts to actually set up the first state-sanctioned stores, given that the feds will be itching to seize the whole shooting match in the name of sneering at the will of the people...reckon obama *might* be better in that respect, given that he won't have to run for re-election w/ the cloud of "soft on crime" hanging over his head?

for a defense of weed, sure sounds like it was writ by a coke-head

yes, but in a republic/democracy, where every person is, at least in theory, a part of the government, all social interactions carry much larger implications. my expectations of the two-toof beyotch ringing up my groceries at my local safeway ain't too much different from the 3-piece suit wearing mother-fuckers working in the capitol building in me n' my neighbors' names: do your job, recognize i exist, don't fucking jerk me around (same as every other relationship i'm a part of) government in a republic is just the aggregate of all these smaller relationships.

That's how you define it, not how I do. what relationship doesn't have its politics? confucius' whole construction of the best government/society boiled down to every member of it accepting certain rules of behavior, based on the relationship, be it father-son, subject-emperor, safeway clerk-shopper, etc.

sounds shockingly pro-human... BIAS ALERT!!!

hitler had no idea how to debunker, poor guy

the trouble of course is "politics" is roughly defined as the way human-beings interact w/ each other, and thus the only way to not politicize anything is to Go Big, like lao tzu, and simply hike off into the boonies to be alone for a good long while any natural disaster offers a perfectly valid occasion to compare n' contrast one party's approach to the others - it doesn't seem that big a deal, so long as the distracted ones ain't firefighters n' doctors, right?

you musta eaten yer weedies this morning

if you're posting in spray, it's a positive bet you're already an expert in bullshit