Jump to content

One fix for seattle needed


glassgowkiss

Recommended Posts

Can't speak for what Lenin did to Poland. On the other hand some modern russians seem to have bigger issues with Vladimir Putin riding around shirtless.

[img:center]http://i.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2013/07/16/article-2366037-016A1126000004B0-364_306x482.jpg[/img]

 

At least based on the Pussy Riot interview on the Colbert Report

 

:pagetop:

 

http://www.colbertnation.com/the-colbert-report-videos/432806/february-04-2014/pussy-riot-pt--1

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 210
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

 

Yes, Lenin was a murderous, syphilitic, megalomaniacal sociopath. The presence of that statue in Fremont says nothing to the contrary - explicitly or implicitly.

 

There is more than one way to interpret that statue in that location in 2014

I am sure neo-nazis could argue the same way, that a statue of Hitler could be interpreted the same way, so let's put it up as well.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Better stick with the glove slap - bronze is some solid shit.

 

I was hoping for Saddam's St. Francis of Assisi pose for my hood, but Chubcheeks here blows him right out of the Tigris.

 

Hitler would rock it pretty hard. Endless source of dress-up material there, starting with the Goering Collection - taken in a bit. Dog lover, vegetarian, cafe aficionado - stick him in a Prius and it would probably be a year before anyone even noticed his arrival.

 

I always thought a big ole bronze o Robert E. Lee On Horseback plopped smack dab in the middle of the Sculpture Park might freshen things up a bit.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The whole Hitler thing has kind of lost its cache here, given the current wave of 'The Fall' reduxz, Springtime for Hitler, you name it. That very same irreverence was rampant during WWII - it's nothing new. Irreverence and humor strips these buffoons, and their present day wannabes, of their power. Over-sensitivity to their presence or mention hands that power back to them. Censorship, in any form, is exactly the kind of world they were gunnin' for. Fuck you NSA, fuck you B of A, fuck you AMA, and, what the hell, fuck you AAA.

 

In a free society, any and every form of expression goes, even if, and especially if, it insults part of the populace. That's how myths, especially 'cherished' ones, get their long overdue shitcanning.

 

Clearly, the way we're doing things right now is a dead end in a bunch of ways, and a larger and larger part of the populace is realizing just how fucked our thinking has been for long time.

 

Welcome to the age of myth-killin.

Edited by tvashtarkatena
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The whole Hitler thing has kind of lost its cache here, given the current wave of 'The Fall' reduxz, Springtime for Hitler, you name it. That very same irreverence was rampant during WWII - it's nothing new. Irreverence and humor strips these buffoons, and their present day wannabes, of their power. Over-sensitivity to their presence or mention hands that power back to them. Censorship, in any form, is exactly the kind of world they were gunnin' for. Fuck you NSA, fuck you B of A, fuck you AMA, and, what the hell, fuck you AAA.

 

In a free society, any and every form of expression goes, even if, and especially if, it insults part of the populace. That's how myths, especially 'cherished' ones, get their long overdue shitcanning.

 

Clearly, the way we're doing things right now is a dead end in a bunch of ways, and a larger and larger part of the populace is realizing just how fucked our thinking has been for long time.

 

Welcome to the age of myth-killin.

 

Maybe, but a healthy fear of slippery slopes (left and right) provides a useful tension. As for the drones and phones and NSA and all the other bullshit, I think anything less than a constitutional amendment is leaving free a door that swings wide with each new administration. Especially since recent execs (GW and BO) have grown fond of signing statements and other bizarre interpretations of Congressional legislation.

Edited by Fairweather
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The whole Hitler thing has kind of lost its cache here, given the current wave of 'The Fall' reduxz, Springtime for Hitler, you name it. That very same irreverence was rampant during WWII - it's nothing new. Irreverence and humor strips these buffoons, and their present day wannabes, of their power. Over-sensitivity to their presence or mention hands that power back to them. Censorship, in any form, is exactly the kind of world they were gunnin' for. Fuck you NSA, fuck you B of A, fuck you AMA, and, what the hell, fuck you AAA.

 

In a free society, any and every form of expression goes, even if, and especially if, it insults part of the populace. That's how myths, especially 'cherished' ones, get their long overdue shitcanning.

 

Clearly, the way we're doing things right now is a dead end in a bunch of ways, and a larger and larger part of the populace is realizing just how fucked our thinking has been for long time.

 

Welcome to the age of myth-killin.

 

Maybe, but a healthy fear of slippery slopes (left and right) provides a useful tension. As for the drones and phones and NSA and all the other bullshit, I think anything less than a constitutional amendment is leaving free a door that swings wide with each new administration. Especially since recent execs (GW and BO) have grown fond of signing statements and other bizarre interpretations of Congressional legislation.

 

Constitutional amendment? We've got the 4th Amendment already.

 

I'm leading a team to lobby for the govt. drone regulation bill in Olympia tomorrow:

 

HB 1771 and SB 6172 do not ban drones—they simply

ensure that the policy debate around them happens

before the drones are actually deployed, and set

reasonable, common sense limits on their most invasive

uses. The bill requires local or state government

approval before an agency acquires drones. Law

enforcement can use drones during emergencies, and for

missions that don’t involve collecting personal information

or routine regulatory enforcement, but otherwise would

need a warrant. Exemptions included in the bill would

allow useful operations such as exercises over military

bases, fire control, search and rescue, or research

operations, among others. Drones cannot carry weapons,

and personal data would be deleted unless criminal activity

is shown. Agencies would report how and for what

purpose their drones are being used. At its heart, the bill

seeks to prohibit suspicionless fishing expeditions by

government agencies that use drones to conduct

generalized surveillance with no suspicion of wrongdoing.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Major opponent is Boeing, maker of drones.

 

In separate discussions, the ACLU seeks to convince Boeing that regulating drones, and thus making the public comfortable with their use (they are useful, after all), is good business. Their sales will suffer if drones are banned or their use severely regulated after they are inevitably misused in a regulatory vacuum.

 

It's all about the love, ya know?

 

 

Edited by tvashtarkatena
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.




×
×
  • Create New...