Slashdot Mirror

Individuals might have gone out on a limb, but then individuals will believe almost anything.

How cute! You've cited one individual with a (seemingly) successful prediction to prove, that Climate Science is actually science, but are now dismissing multiple other individuals as "out on a limb", because their predictions have proved spectacularly wrong.

You can't have it both ways — cherry-picking some predictions as solidly scientific, dismissing others. The discipline's record remains in shambles and even its practitioners and adherents admit, it is "not always" falsifiable.

It is obvious, that Climate Science is not, so to speak. Perhaps, you need to argue from a more religious point of view, as these guys are doing (and as was predicted you'd do many years prior).

Brought to you by ThePeople's Cube:

• Growing disparity among planets raises moral questions
• Big Astronomy doesn't want you to know that big planets are getting bigger and small planets are getting smaller
• Class struggle in Solar System
• Pluto & Me: Michael Moore stands with the little guy
• Lack of federal funding leads to downsizing of Solar System
• Small planets helpless against competition
• Pluto decision sends shockwaves to neighboring solar systems
• Freezing temperatures, vacuum, darkness gave Pluto no chance
• Most "dwarfs" will not survive harsh winter
• Republicans deny aid to Pluto amidst growing concerns for the future of trans-Neptunian objects
• Observatory Director: Pluto's orbit "eccentric and absolutely unacceptable"
• Mothers: Our children will grow up with only 8 planets
• More causes for depression in middle-class families
• Poll: Most Americans think that black holes are discriminated against
• Experts blame Pluto fiasco on lack of tolerance, call for "more diversity"
• Pluto ruling angers dwarves, midgets
• Class action "dwarf tossing" lawsuit filed
• Insider: 'big-planetism' rampant at national observatories
• Whistleblower uncovers bias towards smaller, 'female' planets
• Minority planets routinely left out in the cold
• Republicans shrug off glass ceiling for dwarfs, asteroids
• Is astronomy racist? Scholars and activists debate
• Astronomer: US policies may have squandered Earth's gravitational pull
• Community leaders on sympathy orbit: 'we're all dwarfs now!'
• Sean Penn: We are 'hated' on other planets
• Little planet that could survived abuse by astronomers as a child
• ACLU: demotion of Pluto 'unconstitutional' and 'hate speech' towards size-challenged objects
• Earth-centric policies discriminate against possible non-carbon based life
• Cindy Sheehan mourns Pluto tragedy: "I want to meet with Chief Astronomer and look him in the eye"
• French author: Earth's claim to 'intelligent life' is Earth-centric, provincial
• Muslim protesters burn local planetarium "just in case"
• McCain to grant planetary status to asteroids if elected: "They take orbits that big planets won't take"
• Democrats: Pluto ousting 'a disgrace'
• Al Gore demands recount of Pluto's body mass
• NASA: Bush knew about Pluto's insufficient gravity
• Order to 'out' Pluto may have come from Rove
• Hugo Chavez pledges to send oil to Pluto
• Pluto demotion to a 'dwarf' leaves North Korean leader uncertain about own future
• Iran President defends Pluto, threatens to retaliate against Israel
• Hezbollah claims rockets can now reach Pluto
• Hamas leaders to appeal to UN as soon as they find out what Pluto is
• Astronomers angry at Times for disclosing plans to oust Pluto

it's in such slow motion compared to human time scales that you may not recognize that you've passed the tipping point

Yeah. So slow, there may be no motion at all... We've been through this, riverat1, you know, what you need to do to prove, your discipline is an actual science (contrary to what some of its own practitioners admit), rather than a religion as some of the cheering disciples accept, and the critics mock.

http://thepeoplescube.com/peop...

Obligatory...

Of course climate science is falsifiable.

Is it? Not according to this climate-scientist from Australia, nor according to this professor concurring with this blogger (both of them hilariously repeating in earnest this earlier satire).

It's those subtheories that you really need to falsify.

No, I don't. As I explained to you before, the burden of proof is not on me, but on those, who want to compel me — on pain of higher taxes, loss of freedoms, and even actual criminal prosecutions — to change my way of life.

You put in a link that made it looked like you had a citation for how they admit that

It is quite obvious, I simply screwed up the link. This is, what I meant to include, separately from the link explaining, what falsifiability is, and why it is a requirement for real science:

1. Methods aren’t always necessarily falsifiable

Falsifiability is the idea that an assertion can be shown to be false by an experiment or an observation, and is critical to distinctions between “true science” and “pseudoscience”.

Climate models are important and complex tools for understanding the climate system. Are climate models falsifiable? Are they science? A test of falsifiability requires a model test or climate observation that shows global warming caused by increased human-produced greenhouse gases is untrue. It is difficult to propose a test of climate models in advance that is falsifiable. [emphasis mine]

And she is not alone in admitting, there is no — and there can not be — any proof. Interestingly, you chose to completely ignore the other link, which I did cite correctly, where a a DailyKos article admits to treating the question of Global Warming's existence as that of a deity. And Huffington Post concurs. (Hilariously, this entire approach was predicted by a satirist years earlier).

Interesting that you have to resort to a deceptive style of arguing: ignoring the inconvenient arguments completely, while pouncing on technicalities.

If for example the IPCC's pridictions of what was to happen in the future did not come to pass, that would be some falsifying evidence

Our whole argument in this thread is that, by the purported scientists' own admission — now properly cited — their very discipline is not falsifiable. Your babbling about IPCC is not much different from the Bible-thumpers' predictions about His wrath.

Damn those BSD hippies for stealing the vote from the most-qualified desktop in history!!

I repeatedly have to remind a select group of friends when they send me sensationalist stories from The Onion that those stories are satire and not real.

What's even scarier is when a seemingly professional "fact-checker" decides to "debunk" satirical articles.

I repeatedly have to remind a select group of friends when they send me sensationalist stories from The Onion that those stories are satire and not real.

What's even scarier is when a seemingly professional "fact-checker" decides to "debunk" satirical articles.

smart, educated citizens that actually understand

But smart and educated electorate are a hindrance! Wouldn't an obedient and worshiping populace be easier to both maintain and lead — without having to spend too much effort explaining things to them?

they need to listen to actual scientists about the validity of scientific results and not to politicians

Didn't you just say, actual scientists have no time for such explanations? Who are we to listen to then? Our media is full of climate-related articles, most of them very alarming. Unfortunately, very few (if any) are penned by the scientists — the vast majority is by professional journalists, politicians, and popularizers. None of them apparently have a Ph.D., which you claimed is required to even understand the arguments — forget about verifying them. Even they talk to the actual scientists first hand — and I doubt, Al Gore ever had, for example — they are no more than first tier.

The rest of us are the second tier, if you will. We are expected to trust these people, who themselves can only take it on faith. No wonder, both proponents and detractors view the public debate on climate as more Religious than Scientific.

or that country is doomed

Could you offer some examples of such calamities from the past? Or are our times unique?

But it was all Trump's fault, because he invited the Russians to hack it. (After it was already hacked.)

Putin is the kind of guy, who would've never done anything so unwholesome without an invitation, of course.

Free Pluto! Equal gravity for all!!!

Tell you what, why don't you start working on the Constitutional amendment to make that type of government happen and we can talk about it. Of course you would probably have to move to the US, and maybe become a citizen, so that's not happening, is it? Just as well.

The US has always been divided, right from the very start. That isn't a particularly bad thing unless you want to throw a parade to celebrate a "People's democracy" and cure weak liberalism. The US unifies when given sufficient cause, otherwise people go about their business.

In some important ways the Democratic and Republican parties are becoming more different, and agreement on some basic issues is beginning to fall apart. The Left has never really like the US, and it is going to tear the US apart.

only enough power to carry 2 tons of weight, including a single passenger, at a top speed of just 43 miles per hour

May as well go back to sail ships... Maybe, not as fast, but certainly much more capable.

I've never wanted to be North Korean, until now. I will gladly welcome our nuclear-armed North Korean overlords if they can get rid of the decadent capitalist imperialist degeneracies of Facebook and Twitter. We'll keep Youtube, it's too good at distributing cultural Marxist Political Correctness - and the proletariat don't even realize it !

Happy Revolutionary April Day, comrades.

Oh, and we'll replace Facebook and Twitting with The People's Cube
http://thepeoplescube.com/
Pobeda !

sounds like you might need to use Twitter with #DemDebate

That would require me to open a Twitter account, and I will not do that. Having a /. one is bad enough.

That is, if you want an actual answer instead of just trolling Slashdot.

I've formed my opinion of Senator Sanders long ago — in my ex-USSR mind anybody, who willingly takes up the "Socialist" label (whether or not they are actually Socialist) belongs on a lamp-post (for Secret Service — I have no intention of physically harming anybody, much less a US Senator).

Whether they are National Socialists or International ones, does not matter — Collectivism destroys both individual rights and the country's wealth and must not be allowed to win yet again.

I'm using /. to — quite successfully, as you see — tie Socialists to Hugo Chavez to reduce the danger of Leftism making further inroads in this country.

First of all, there is nothing "dumbed down" about dictionary. It provides a definition. Looking at examples may help get a better feeling for the term, but the definition remains. Italian example, Spanish example, German example — what's relevant and what is not?

Hitler was a vegetarian — are vegetarians fascists? No. Mussolini was a journalist — are journalists all crypto-fascists? No.

Hitler, Mussolini, Franco all valued the State (the Collective, the Community) above the Individual — are all such Collectivists Fascists? Yes, actually — so long as they also favor forcible suppression of opposition and long for a dictatorial leader. Not because I hate them and use "fascist" as simply a dirty word, but by definition.

Has Trump indicated a preference for any such Collectivism? Apparently, not — despite bombastic accusations, the actual quotes are yet to appear.

Fair question

Notably, the answer remains missing in your response...

only are prejudicial against religions, then you're really no better

Not true. Prejudice against in-born traits, such as skin color, is one thing — it is something a person can not change and it has no discernible effect on their intellect, fitness, or demeanor. Prejudice against things cultural — acquired from society — is completely different, for it is changeable and does affect their outlook.

It is common for the weaker minds to not see the difference, but you would notice, that UNESCO has never hosted a Cannibal Month, for example — the very idea is a jest.. Because some cultures really are better — and worse — than others.

Is it the television programs, which constantly portray Hispanics and Blacks as stupid? Which ones? Books pushing the same view? Which ones? Public schools teaching our kids that? Advertising materials? Where? What?

The Government and various do-gooders. Affirmative action or other programs that automatically assume that they and women aren't going to do as well and lower the standards for getting accepted into college, getting hired, etc. Why can't we just stop patronising people and just measure everyone on the same standards?

Please, explain, how a "racist cop" manage to distinguish between Black immigrant and Black native born.

That's easy once they start speaking. Their English will be better than the cop's and have a British or French accent.

It's a very common assumption in America today that blacks and hispanics are stupid and prone to joining gangs, and that Asians are smart and successful.

And where would this assumption you claim exists — without any citations, BTW — have come from?

Is it the television programs, which constantly portray Hispanics and Blacks as stupid? Which ones? Books pushing the same view? Which ones? Public schools teaching our kids that? Advertising materials? Where? What?

The woeful underperformance of AAs is because of historical inertia and ongoing racism

Until you can explain, why the same "historical inertia and ongoing racism" — whether they actually even exist or not — do not cause Asians (neither the "narrow-eyed" nor the "curry-smelling" brown-skined ones) to similarly underperform, you argument shall remain null and void.

African immigrants don't have the same historical problems that AAs have; they leapfrog over those problems.

Please, explain, how a "racist cop" manage to distinguish between Black immigrant and Black native born.

Your response rehashes the same arguments I already addressed — and calls me "stupid". Well, I'm willing to repeat the same rebuttals once — for I am not especially biased against the slow. But I will not repeat them again. Until you can offer coherent answers to the above questions, I will not continue this conversation with you.

So providing education for poor people and recognising gay marriage lead inevitably to the Khmer Rouge?

First of all, corrections:

• Not "providing education for poor people", but "forcing taxpayers to provide education for poor people". Tax-collection happens at gun-point — using thus-collected monies for benevolence is tyranny — and decidedly against the intent of Constitution-framers.
• Not "recognizing gay marriage", but "forcing people to consider gay unions equivalent to married couples".

And now, yes, the above are made possible by the Collectivist sentiment — that the Individual's interests and desires are inferior to those of the Collective. Once that sentiment is adopted, there is no longer a legal barrier to prevent some future Khmer Rouge from killing millions. All they have to be able to claim is, it is done for "General Welfare".

If millions of victims is too stunning for you to be believable, try to think, how is Lynching somebody not a manifestation of "the will of the people"?

"COMMON GOOD BEFORE INDIVIDUAL GOOD" — sounds familiar? Godwin's Law my tail — you aren't the first Collectivist in history...

ultra right wing paranoid stupid

Please, don't hate.

Equality before Equations!!:

WASHINGTON, DC - President Obama announced in a Rose Garden press conference today that in light of the recent Amtrak accident he is calling on the Congress for bipartisan action on Physical Law Reform, and if they don’t act, he will.

Mr. Obama stated that if the Congress refuses to act on this reform of the laws of physics, he will sign an executive order repealing them outright and implement reform on his own. “Reforming these so-called ‘Laws of Nature’ is the right thing to do, and it will help working families and keep them safe.”

Said Mr. Obama: “The deadly Amtrak accident is just the latest example of how the GOP’s refusal to act has put many in danger with deadly consequences”.

“This reform will have immediate benefits from instantly efficient electric cars that no longer need to obey the ‘laws of thermodynamics and energy density’ to the being able to drive around a curve at high speed without needing so-called ‘Centripetal force’ to keep you on the tracks.”

Obama continued “So if the Congress refuses to act, I will issue an executive order repealing these so-called ‘laws of physics’, We cannot continue living in the past having to follow ‘Laws’ handed down from Sir Issac Newton over 300 hundred years ago, this is not who we are”.

“It’s time to put equality before equations, people instead of physics and fairness over formulas,” the president said.

Obama dismissed the simplistic Newton’s laws of motion as a holdovers from a bygone era of racism where the ‘majority’ felt they could impose their vision of the physical world on everyone else with their so-called ‘classical mechanics’.

In a related development, Supreme Court Chief Justice John Roberts issued a statement that President Obama's Physical Law Reform does not violate the Constitutional separation of powers because the Founding Fathers didn’t foresee that people of the future would be so stupid as to fall for this kind of malarkey.

I bet, the school will have gender-neutral restrooms...

The 19th century French poet Charles Baudelaire once said, "The greatest trick the devil ever pulled was convincing the world he doesn't exist." That is, indeed, a great trick, but hardly the greatest. The devil's even greater and, therefore, less known trick, was to convince the world that God is just as much of an evil, corrupt, and conniving trickster as he is, if not worse. The acceptance that both sides are morally equal has allowed the devil to stop living incognito, get out into the big wide world, start a legitimate business, print out business cards with his real name and contact information, put his face on a billboard, and make a good living by consulting the Russian government.

• What do we want?
• Equal gravity!!
• When do we want it?
• Now!!!!

The Big Astronomy does not want you to know, that big planets are getting bigger, while the small ones are getting smaller.

• What do we want?
• Equal gravity!!
• When do we want it?
• Now!!!!

The Big Astronomy does not want you to know, that big planets are getting bigger, while the small ones are getting smaller.

But poor countries face a potential hurdle when it comes to clean-energy technologies—most of the relevant intellectual property is held in the rich world

Whenever you want something that others own, you "face a potential hurdle". It matters little, whether it is tangible item like bicycle, or something, that's harder to design than to manufacture (like intellectual property).

Fortunately, these particular things — unlike, say, medicines — the poor can really do without. Because the science of "climate change" — and thus the very need for "climate mitigation", that TFA asserts — is so far from "settled", that the most ardent alarmists resort to "Pascal Wager" style of argument (as they was predicted to attempt years ago).

Anybody attempting to make a retort here, is politely requested to cite (include links to) at least two past global-warming predictions, that have actually materialized...

The denialists do not understand science, but they damn well do understand money and lawyers.

You betcha we understand. Being a "climate scientist" is also a great sort of job. One gets paid by the government, which has deep pockets, and does — unlike real scientists — does not need to come up with anything useful.

What "climate scientist" could possibly challenge the doctrine, that pays for his bread and butter? The conflict of interest these people are facing is stupendous. You would not accept a tank-manufacturer's argument, we need more tanks without a giant dollop of the proverbial salt — why do you take a climate-scientist's argument, the humanity is danger unless we continue paying him for more "research", at face value?

it's time to see you in court, denialists, not to prove or disprove the science

Is it because the scientific debate has been lost already? Whatever this particular paper may have said, you have no proof, alarmists. Your best argument is Pascal's Wager, for crying out loud — as was predicted by your laughing opponents a years earlier.

It *is* nonviolent.

Sure. It is also "quiet" and "stealthy" — and a bunch of other things. Which is the best term to use in this context? That depends on the subtle connotations of each one, does not it? I am willing to believe, TFA's use was an honest mistake — the article makes no (other) suggestions, bank-robbing (violent or otherwise) may be a just thing. But...

Are the Somali pirates just that — pirates — or are they hard-working folks laboring in a harsh environment, risking their lives directing foreign aid to their impoverished country and the people, who need it most?

See also "Hezbollization".

Shit like this [Chile coup, Pinochet -mi]

Chile's Pinochet, upon stepping down (show me one Left-dictator to have done that!), has left his country as the top Latin American economy. And their homicide-rate today is 3.7 per 100K people — compare that to Venezuela's 67!

And how would you propose to disallow the radical left from running a country, when that country is a democracy and the people vote for it?

By not voting for the assholes — and by persecuting them wherever they appear with the same vigor as the other brand of collectivists is being persecuted already.

By "true costs", he means the cost of the environmental impact and total externalities.

... which are impossible to measure accurately, and what estimates there are, depend heavily on one's belief in global warming. That is, if you fear the GW, you'll feel the "true costs" to be higher... But, as I said, only a fool would still sincerely have this fear today. And only someone, whose real goal is the diminishing of (KKKapitalist) Western society, would continue to attempt to spread such a fear — without himself believing in it.

herd immunity

What a perfect term... One of the attractions of American way of life, in my opinion, is our tendency to value the Individual (however unreasonable) above the Herd (also known as Collective, however glorious).

Yes, some times this approach fails — as seems to be the case now. But I'd rather we continued to err on the Individual's side — because the (glorious) Collective and The Greater Good cause much bigger problems of their own...

Have you ever heard of the Pascal wager?

I certainly have! And it sure seems, the opportunity to destroy KKKapitalism helps sway the aforementioned Statists to the wrong side of the bet.

I doubt there's a person on this earth that's ever achieved their political goals without at some point having to sacrifice their principles to at least some degree.

Golden words. And it is especially true about Communists, who nowadays masquerade as "environmentalists". Like watermelons, they are green on the outside, but red inside.

Scratch a "green" activist, and you'll find a Che Guevara T-shirt underneath. Whether global warming is really happening (and it is already accepted, that we are living through a "pause" in it), if it helps sabotage Capitalism, it is a worthy cause.

And you'll notice, that these types — who also appear on every "anti-war" demonstration — would call themselves peaceful, non-violent, and opposed to "hatred". But, should they ever be allowed to perform their "revolution" (because Capitalism can't be reformed, you see), they'll all recall Che Guevara's

A revolutionary must become a cold killing machine motivated by pure hate.

Gain control? For what purpose?

For the same reason politicians become politicians (and policemen become pigs) — the feeling of control over fellow human beings gives them a high...

The way I see it, if this all bogus, we end up with cleaner air, less pollution and a better place to live.

Not obviously, actually. Tesla's wonderful batteries, for example, are a hell to make and aren't particularly easy to dispose of either. The early "green" toilets don't use enough water to do the job quite often — requiring multiple flushes, where an old one would've done with one. The mandatory recycling of this and that requires additional trucks on the road to haul the "special" refuse without clear benefits to the environment — in fact, often enough the stuff ends up in general refuse anyway after incurring all of the costs (financial and environmental) of the separate handling. The certified "green" buildings (sometimes?) use more energy, than regular structures...

You win either way.

Yeah. There is this line of thinking — Blaise Pascal, in his time, put forth the same idea on whether or not God exists.

Good to see, you aren't (any longer?) claiming it is the science, that drives your thinking about global warming... You aren't alone.

The debate as to whether Pluto is a planet or a dwarf planet rumbles

What's with this "dwarf" nonsense — and big planetarism? We demand equal gravity for all planets!

Well, Tesla is coming, and your days are numbered - traitors.

What about those, who repent — and denounce their (ex-)fellow RethugliKKKunts to the local people's commissars?

Are their days just as numbered, or will they be allowed to survive on rations of beets, potatoes, and vodka?

no socialism [...] that was fascism with a tiny bit of communism-appearence thrown in.

Hair-splitting... Both are Collectivist ideologies valuing the Collective over the Individual. Eastern Europe — under Soviet domination — simply went (was taken rather) further down that road banning all private ownership of the means of production, whereas the countries you listed retained some measure of private enterprises.

Oh for fuck's sake, what does liberal have to do with communism?

Modern American Illiberals advocate bigger government role in the citizenry's every day lives. The bigger government needs higher taxes to support it, so, of course, taxes go up and up. Socialism/Communism aren't a binary (yes or no), they are gradual and can be measured — the measure is the percentage of GDP, that comes from spending by the government. Between Federal, State, and local governments nation-wide today, our percentage already exceeds 50%. Which means, the fate of over half of the monies spent by Americans is decided not by themselves, but by the politicians they elect.

That is Socialism creeping up, which I refer to as Communism-lite and its proponents, who defile the proud name of Liberals by their invalid claims to the name — commies-lite. But the differences between Socialism and Communism are slight — indeed, per Karl Marx himself, the former leads to the latter — they are both Collectivist regimes, emphasizing the (Glorious) Collective over a (greedy) Individual. "It takes a village" — right?

Are you trying to convince anyone that Stalin was a liberal?

Oh, it all changes, once the "liberal" gets to actual power. As Lenin was explaining in his writing, for example, "we use bourgeois's freedom of press to further our cause, but, once we prevail, the freedom should be curtailed". Look at Obama — NSA's roles expanding, TSA ever more obnoxious, IRS is used to suppress opposition, while Capitalism is being sabotaged by regulations and politically-motivated prosecutions. That he is not using the outright violence of Stalin, is because his country — and its traditions — aren't Russia-like...

But let's not get hung-up on Stalin, who (along with Hitler — another Collectivist), got so much negative press, that speaking fondly of them arouses nothing by (well-deserved) ridicule. How about Fidel Castro or Hugo Chavez? Both are idols to American Illiberals — even though they turned their respective countries into shitholes. And Che Guevara — every Illiberal has a T-shirt with his likeness in their closet.

Here is a quiz for you — can your recognize the person behind each quote?

I recommend this site for raising awareness, starting the healing, and organizing revolutions.

In any case, the US and UK are in consultation with the UNSC, so the obligations of the US/UK to Ukraine under the agreement are fully met.

Seriously? For real? Engaging in consultations constitutes full meeting of obligations, as far as you are concerned?

Well, in that case, how could anyone be seriously concerned for their security — the US will always enter into "consultations" for them...

This must be the 21st century — Obama's — America...

We'll pay a bargain price, bear a reasonable burden, inconvenience ourselves a little bit, argue with friends, apologize to foes, in order to facilitate preconditions for the success of compliance.

The People's Cube

It's no mystery. (From The People's Cube)

Contrary to the write-up, civilization has not been using oil (nor gas) very much for centuries. Man has sailed with, well, sails for thousands of years.

However, when the opportunity arose, using Sun's concentrated energy proved rather attractive to all. And so it will remain until we find a way to stuff the comparable amounts of energy per unit of volume as the "fossil fuels" contain.

Imagine a solar-powered aircraft carrier... Yes, you can!

Thank you for the heads up. I've preemptively added your website http://thepeoplescube.com/ to our companies web filters for serving malware via your ad broker. One more victory for our 15k employees, only a few million more to go.

An earlier edition of the "Social Studies Extended Response" stated the following (emphasis mine):

Thus, poor countries are often home to terrorist groups that are free to plan and carry out attacks on the rich, industrialized nations, without fear of being stopped. This is in fact what happened on 9/11 when terrorists from Afghanistan hijacked planes and carried out attacks on the United States.

That's the Obama logo. Really. There is no doubt about it. And used like this, as part of a positive word, it is not some cynical or sarcastic statement but an expression of support.

It's easy to use the logo negatively. Here are some nice examples:

http://www.thepeoplescube.com/images/Obama_Logo_MickeyMouse.gif

http://i1.cpcache.com/product/563346833/anti_obama_logo_stickers_car_magnet_20_x_12.jpg?color=White&height=960&width=960&quality=100

http://rlv.zcache.com/obama_logo_lol_bumper_stickers-r97e12aee351b473b816cc69f9c229272_v9wht_8byvr_512.jpg

http://www.moonbattery.com/Obama-666-Logo.jpg

http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-bGtgc__mPxQ/USMla_G2tFI/AAAAAAABSZk/WIfzercMvKM/s320/Obama's+Israel+visit+logo.PNG

http://thepeoplescube.com/images/Obama_Logo_Mafia.gif

http://www.therightplanet.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/05/obama-logo-bendover.png

That's the Obama logo. Really. There is no doubt about it. And used like this, as part of a positive word, it is not some cynical or sarcastic statement but an expression of support.

It's easy to use the logo negatively. Here are some nice examples:

http://www.thepeoplescube.com/images/Obama_Logo_MickeyMouse.gif

http://i1.cpcache.com/product/563346833/anti_obama_logo_stickers_car_magnet_20_x_12.jpg?color=White&height=960&width=960&quality=100

http://rlv.zcache.com/obama_logo_lol_bumper_stickers-r97e12aee351b473b816cc69f9c229272_v9wht_8byvr_512.jpg

http://www.moonbattery.com/Obama-666-Logo.jpg

http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-bGtgc__mPxQ/USMla_G2tFI/AAAAAAABSZk/WIfzercMvKM/s320/Obama's+Israel+visit+logo.PNG

http://thepeoplescube.com/images/Obama_Logo_Mafia.gif

http://www.therightplanet.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/05/obama-logo-bendover.png

What does liberal-pacifist-reformist-cretinism "civil disobedience" have to do with workers revolution? You are ignorant, go study Lenin and Trotsky.

Great! You'll be showing up for the march then?

April 1st is International Workers Fools Day