Slashdot Mirror


Just Where Is The Lincoln Memorial, Anyhow?

John3 writes "Searching Google Maps for the Lincoln Memorial is returning the location of the FDR Memorial instead. Conservative bloggers smell a conspiracy since Glenn Beck is holding his 'Restoring Honor' gathering at the Lincoln Memorial tomorrow (August 28). Notes for the map listing on Google state 'This place has unverified edits'; so, did someone claim the listing and edit the location?"

650 comments

  1. Re:Ed hardy handbags by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

    Holy fucking hell is that irritating.

  2. True patriots by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

    REAL AMERICANS don't need a map to tell them where their landmarks are located. Anyone that needs to use google maps to locate this rally is a communist or socialist anyways.

    1. Re:True patriots by ezbo · · Score: 4, Funny

      Or a visitor?

    2. Re:True patriots by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Socialists and communists are more likely to know where the Lincoln Memorial is anyway. Lincoln is pretty much their hero.

    3. Re:True patriots by Kenja · · Score: 4, Funny

      Real patriots would also buy my Lincoln memorial medallion. Made out of solid zinc, electroplated in the purest of copper. This handsom medallion will look stunning in your change bowl. Only five dollars each plus shipping.

      --

      "Have you ever thought about just turning off the TV, sitting down with your kids, and hitting them?"
    4. Re:True patriots by Wyatt+Earp · · Score: 1

      I've not been there since 1990, but I know where the Lincoln Memorial is. End of the National Mall, west of the Washington Monument.

      However I don't know where to park.

      And Google Maps is giving me FDR's memorial for a lincoln memorial search.

    5. Re:True patriots by Golddess · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Exchanging one Lincoln for another, I love it.

      --
      "I'm not sure I like the fugnutish tone you used in your post!" -RogL (608926)-
    6. Re:True patriots by bky1701 · · Score: 2, Funny

      Everybody knows you Europeans and Asians are communist spies. "Visitors" - ha! You want to steal our freedoms!!!!!!

      /s

    7. Re:True patriots by severoon · · Score: 5, Insightful

      REAL AMERICANS unfortunately have trouble finding the United States on a map, much less a famous landmark. Remember that famous botch job by the Miss America contestant? Because her answer was so stupid most people didn't notice that the question was: why can't 1 in 5 Americans find the US on the map? Yes, I'm an American. Yes, I'm embarrassed by that.

      --
      but have you considered the following argument: shut up.
    8. Re:True patriots by squirrl · · Score: 1, Informative

      It's out by the UFO. You get the lincon repeater there too.

    9. Re:True patriots by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Its ok, directions are available on the chalkboard, don't miss the rally!

    10. Re:True patriots by Abreu · · Score: 4, Insightful

      ...and pollute our precious bodily fluids

      --
      No sig for the moment.
    11. Re:True patriots by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It used to be right in the middle, where it belongs! Now I don't know where it is since they moved it.

    12. Re:True patriots by PackRat+Q.+Winnebago · · Score: 5, Funny

      End of the National Mall, west of the Washington Monument.

      As soon as a read this I realised I already knew it from somewhere, despite being having never set foot in the US.

      Turns out Fallout 3 is a more reliable source than Google Maps.

      --
      /sig
    13. Re:True patriots by Loadmaster · · Score: 4, Insightful

      That's nothing, 20% still believe the sun revolves around the earth and 25% believe we got our independence from a country other than Britain.

    14. Re:True patriots by shikaisi · · Score: 1

      Same thing

      --
      No left turn unstoned.
    15. Re:True patriots by ooshna · · Score: 5, Insightful

      and more than half don't believe in evolution. That makes me a sad panda. :(

    16. Re:True patriots by twistedsymphony · · Score: 1

      Have you ever been to DC? It's pretty much impossible to miss... you get off the Metro (the same stop for all of the famous memorials) walk toward the Washington Monument and the Lincoln Memorial is staring you in the face from the other side of the reflecting pool.

      There are maps showing the location of all the memorials and monuments on just about every street corner. Not to mention there's hardly any parking so you'll probably be arriving by Metro, bus, or taxi, all of which will take you do the right place if you ask them properly.

    17. Re:True patriots by TapeCutter · · Score: 5, Interesting

      Hah, that was actually a very sucessfull scam in the UK, IIRC in the 50's the scammer adverstised a copper medalion of the Queen mounted on walnut to commerorate her corrination, the mail order price was 10 pounds. What you got was a penny glued to a small piece of walnut. He sold thousands of them and was eventually taken to court where he won the case.

      --
      And did you exchange a walk on part in the war for a lead role in a cage? - Pink Floyd.
    18. Re:True patriots by Jstlook · · Score: 2, Informative

      I googled for Lincoln Memorial circle, the drive that the Lincoln Memorial is on. Apparently they haven't moved that. Looks like the Lincoln Memorial is still there. Good luck!

      --
      ---jstlook ---For that is the way of Elves, for they say both yes AND no, and mean every word of it. --- J.R.R.T.
    19. Re:True patriots by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      This is true (according to a poll), why is this rated Flamebait? I could dig up the source, but then, so could the mods.

    20. Re:True patriots by chimpo13 · · Score: 3, Funny

      At least you weren't evolved from a panda.

    21. Re:True patriots by phantomfive · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Please tell me you got that information from somewhere other than a Miss America contest, because according to National Geographic, the 94% can find it (look on page 26). I'm open to different surveys of different population segments giving different answers, but if your source of information is really a Miss America contest, that's sad.

      --
      Qxe4
    22. Re:True patriots by drej · · Score: 1

      Aw, c'mon...anyone can miss the US! All tucked away down there...

    23. Re:True patriots by ArundelCastle · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Turns out Fallout 3 is a more reliable source than Google Maps.

      Because major game developers go on field trips to actually see the place for themselves. They didn't use Google Earth... :)
      Though suddenly I really want to see Google Wasteland... any mashup artists in the house?

    24. Re:True patriots by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      However I don't know where to park.

      Just park on the lawn, but don't forget the cinder blocks.

    25. Re:True patriots by cloricus · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Are national geographic seriously saying that 6% of the US population can't point to their own country on a map? And, are you seriously linking to that like it's a good thing? Jeeze...

      --
      I ate your fish.
    26. Re:True patriots by Wyatt+Earp · · Score: 2, Funny

      And the President said the US had 58 states and he'd been to 57 of them when he was running for the office. So lets not get too judgmental.

    27. Re:True patriots by AlterEager · · Score: 1

      Have you ever been to DC? It's pretty much impossible to miss... you get off the Metro (the same stop for all of the famous memorials) walk toward the Washington Monument and the Lincoln Memorial is staring you in the face from the other side of the reflecting pool.

      "Get off the Metro"?

      What are you, some kind of socialest? Real Patriots drive pickups, they don't use so-called "public transport", paid for with cash torn from thier hands by MEN WITH GUNS (TM).

    28. Re:True patriots by interkin3tic · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Yes. 6% is acceptable. I mean, 100% would be nice, but that's just not going to happen. 6% of respondents may have not taken it seriously, been insane, provided an answer that was unintelligible, meant to say "The US" but accidentally said something else, left the question blank on accident, found the question insulting, been drunk or high, etc or some combination thereof.

      It also says at the top that "The margin of error for the total sample is +/- 4.4 percentage points at the 95% confidence level."

      How does that 6% compare to other countries? I'm guessing it's not that different from many others, and probably a lot higher than many countries with lower education.

    29. Re:True patriots by Tumbleweed · · Score: 1

      Real patriots would also buy my Lincoln memorial medallion. Made out of solid zinc, electroplated in the purest of copper. This handsom medallion will look stunning in your change bowl. Only five dollars each plus shipping.

      P.K. Winsome, is that you?

    30. Re:True patriots by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It's already been done for recent Bethesda open-world games. Capital Wasteland

    31. Re:True patriots by Heed00 · · Score: 1

      Aw, c'mon...anyone can miss the US! All tucked away down there...

      ...under the Great White North.

      --
      Thought thinks itself.
    32. Re:True patriots by gnasher719 · · Score: 1

      and more than half don't believe in evolution. That makes me a sad panda. :(

      So how many Europeans think there is no evolution in the USA?

    33. Re:True patriots by gethoht · · Score: 0, Offtopic

      Completely off-topic but your sig should read "Did you exchange a walk on part in The Wall for a lead role in a cage?". Look up the lyrics.

      --
      All things are subject to interpretation, whichever interpretation prevails at a given time is a function of power and n
    34. Re:True patriots by gilleain · · Score: 3, Funny

      End of the National Mall, west of the Washington Monument.

      As soon as a read this I realised I already knew it from somewhere, despite being having never set foot in the US. Turns out Fallout 3 is a more reliable source than Google Maps.

      True, but I remember that area as crawling with super mutants. I would recommend that anyone going to the Lincoln Memorial to take along at least a chinese assault rifle, or prefereably stop off at the Museum of American History to pick up Charon and give him a minigun.

    35. Re:True patriots by fritsd · · Score: 3, Interesting

      I'm a European, and I thought there was evolution in the USA when you lot elected Barack Obama.
      After Rupert Murdoch and your "Tea party" votes his party out in the midterm elections coming November, can you make sure he steps down and looks for employment here?
      We've got an economic crisis going, on and could do with a good prime-minister (in both countries I've lived in). Apparently we appreciate him more than you, so give him to us :-)

      --
      To be, or not to be: isn't that quite logical, Slashdot Beta?
    36. Re:True patriots by mikestew · · Score: 1

      A visitor from the US, who is the target audience for the rally? No, you should know from about ten years old: on one end of the mall. From the middle, or either end, one should be able to figure it out. I did the first time I visited.

    37. Re:True patriots by gilleain · · Score: 2, Informative

      Completely off-topic but your sig should read "Did you exchange a walk on part in The Wall for a lead role in a cage?". Look up the lyrics.

      No, it's definitely "war" not "The Wall". That wouldn't even make sense, anyway. Not that Pink Floyd always made sense...

    38. Re:True patriots by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Please tell me you got that information from somewhere other than a Miss America contest, because according to National Geographic, the 94% can find it [nationalgeographic.com] (look on page 26).

      I think when 6% of your population (between the ages of 18 and 24, anyway) can't find their own country on a map, that's still pretty sad.

    39. Re:True patriots by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

      What the holy sweet fuck is a mashup artist.

    40. Re:True patriots by GravityStar · · Score: 1

      Look. I'm not an American. I haven't ever been to America.

      I still know what the Lincoln Memorial looks like. And where it is in relation to the White House and a rather tall Obelisk Thingie.

      I'm totally unconvinced that a lot of people would really be confused about either recognizing the Lincoln Memorial or about its location.

    41. Re:True patriots by AlterEager · · Score: 2, Informative

      Wtf? Informative.

      The UFO is way north of the Lincoln memorial.

      You get the Lincoln repeater in the Museum of American History.

    42. Re:True patriots by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yes. 6% is acceptable. I mean, 100% would be nice, but that's just not going to happen.

      Keep putting republicans on school boards and you'll get there someday! :)

    43. Re:True patriots by reboot246 · · Score: 4, Insightful

      You can have him as soon as he finishes all of his vacations. :)

    44. Re:True patriots by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Why on earth would I want to see the Queen mounted on a walnut. Having trouble even picturing it... Oh, OK, got it. EWWWWWWWWWWWWW!!!

    45. Re:True patriots by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Or, you know, major game developers live in the area and decided to make the game in a familiar locale. ;-) (It's not called Bethesda Softworks for nothing. Interviews have stated this is part of the reason they set Fallout 3 in the D.C. area.)

    46. Re:True patriots by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Technically you are more closely related to a monkey than a panda.

    47. Re:True patriots by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      He can't come back yet. He's still out looking for G.W., who left three days after unfurling his "mission accomplished" banner and never came back from the ranch.

    48. Re:True patriots by phoenixwade · · Score: 0, Offtopic

      but they do believe in sexual harassment, especially if there is a paycheck in it for them and the lawyer....

      --
      A positive attitude may not solve all your problems, but it will annoy enough people to make it worth the effort.
    49. Re:True patriots by Isaac-1 · · Score: 1

      When you consider the percentage of the population with mental conditions, alzheimer's etc. where they can't remember how to tie their own shoes, this number sounds reasonable, at least in the ballpark.

    50. Re:True patriots by Lehk228 · · Score: 1

      it's a bullshit statistic.

      think about it, if some jackass came up to you and asked dumb questions, wouldn't you be tempted to give a mind numbingly stupid answer just to screw with him?

      the only way to get reliable information about level of knowledge is to be asking harder questions, or reward correct answers with something, like money or free food.

      --
      Snowden and Manning are heroes.
    51. Re:True patriots by LinuxGeek · · Score: 2, Funny

      You seem to have a Strange Love for your PBF.

      --

      Kindness is the language which the deaf can hear and the blind can see. - Mark Twain
    52. Re:True patriots by ricosalomar · · Score: 1

      Maybe it's 'walk on part of a wall,' he was talking about the part between the gate and the corner. An allusion to H. Dumpty.

    53. Re:True patriots by eXFeLoN · · Score: 0

      Back in my less than honest days, I sold a few dozen solar powered clothes dryers on eBay. I made $150 each off them. They were $1 clothes lines I bought a the local Dollar Store. Got me through a 2 semesters of college. And a few hundred bottles of beer.

      --
      My other sig is a knife wound.
    54. Re:True patriots by tverbeek · · Score: 1

      REAL AMERICANS don't need a map to tell them where their landmarks are located.

      As a matter of fact, for the specific case of the Lincoln Memorial and a few other landmarks in DC, I'd say that's true. They've been shown so many times in movies and on TV, that anyone who's been paying attention should be able to find them without a map. Look for the Washington Monument, which can be seen from anywhere in central Washington. If you can't find the Lincoln Memorial from there (hint: turn your head that way, across the long "pond").... well, you're probably going there for a Glenn Beck concert.

      --
      http://alternatives.rzero.com/
    55. Re:True patriots by AlexDaGreat · · Score: 1

      I've been to DC 20 or so times, mostly on business zipping in for a meeting and heading out but have done a decent amount of site seeing in DC as well. It's a great place for anyone to visit because there is so much to see and so many free world class museums. My wife had a conference outside of DC this summer and I took my 2 boys who are 10 and 7 into the city for day trips, armed with my GPS for the car, Google Maps on my BlackBerry Storm 2, a paper map, and a guide book. I found that beyond finding restaurants I didn’t need much of that at all because the memories from Fallout 3. Right after the trip I had to jump back in and play some more, the scale was off in the game, DC is much bigger but from a game design perspective it’s big enough to be impressed without the drudgery of spending 30 minutes to get from place to place. But the DC in Fallout 3 is amazingly accurate, anyone with lots hours in Fallout 3 will know the basics of how to get around DC – including where the Lincoln Memorial is. Although with all the road work around the Lincoln Memorial as of mid July good luck navigating there by anything but foot or bus, car routes were all messed in the area. It took me 5 approaches in the car to get to the parking area, if you miss you are immediately routed out of the area. BTW just hit the Lincoln Memorial in Google Maps and it was accurate.

    56. Re:True patriots by tompaulco · · Score: 1

      I think when 6% of your population (between the ages of 18 and 24, anyway) can't find their own country on a map, that's still pretty sad. Well, to be fair, it WAS a map of Europe.

      But seriously, it is not at all surprising to me. There are huge numbers of people who see no point in education, and resent every moment of it until eventually they are allowed to drop out. Some studies estimate dropout rates in the U.S. averaging 26-29%. It is not surprising that these people would have no idea where to find their country on a map. Frankly, I think we need to think of something different to do with these people, other than what we currently do, which is to spend a disproportionate amount of money to continue their lifestyle choice of doing as little as possible and raising another generation up in that fine tradition.

      --
      If you are not allowed to question your government then the government has answered your question.
    57. Re:True patriots by MokuMokuRyoushi · · Score: 1

      "Get off the Metro"? What are you, some kind of socialest? Real Patriots drive pickups, they don't use so-called "public transport", paid for with cash torn from thier hands by MEN WITH GUNS (TM).

      This, men, is a true American patriot. See those misspellings? No mistake here.

      --
      Humans are terrible replicators of Godly things.
    58. Re:True patriots by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Can't be, P.K. is busy with being the black guy at the 828 rally.

    59. Re:True patriots by TapeCutter · · Score: 1

      "Look up the lyrics."

      Don't need to, I've been a fan for 35yrs, the wall came about 5yrs after wish you were here. However just out of curiosity I did look it up, my version has 1,170,000 hits, yours has 91. :P

      To me WYWH is about my past married life and my ex's descent into alcoholisim, coincidently the quote roughly translates to your own sig phrased as a question. I don't know what it would mean if it was "the wall", Floyd's wall (the establishment) would qualify as a cage. Exchanging a walk in a cage for a lead role in a cage doesn't make any sense to me.

      --
      And did you exchange a walk on part in the war for a lead role in a cage? - Pink Floyd.
    60. Re:True patriots by gemtech · · Score: 1

      why would a visitor from another country be going to this rally???

      --
      Insanity: doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results. Albert Einstein
    61. Re:True patriots by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I assume you are describing the penny, The penny is not electroplated in copper, the copper coating you see is copper cladding. Cladding is a mechanical process while electroplating is a chemical process. From my reply, you can probably guess that I was a chemist in an electroplating shop.

    62. Re:True patriots by HypotenuseMan · · Score: 3, Informative

      They're quite good at making potatoes.

      --
      Doing the things a hypotenuse can.
    63. Re:True patriots by DamienRBlack · · Score: 1

      Do you have sources on those numbers?

    64. Re:True patriots by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      20% still believe the sun revolves around the earth

      It does, if you take the Earth as your reference point. It's all relative.

      and 25% believe we got our independence from a country other than Britain.

      That may be true, depending on where you live; e.g. Louisiana residents got their independence from France, Texans got their independence from Mexico, and Hawaiians got their independence from ... uh, sorry, lost their independence to the USA.

    65. Re:True patriots by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Petty shit like this is what will keep the human race from actually progressing.

      Forest for the trees? What's a forest?

    66. Re:True patriots by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Or a visitor?

      Or a visitor?

      From Mars?

    67. Re:True patriots by ooshna · · Score: 1

      Oh they can't have him after that he hasn't finished putting all of Bush's policies into action yet. So far renewing the Patriot Act, keeping don't ask don't tell, and not bringing charges up on the Bush administration are going to plan, but that pesky ACTA still needs some work.

    68. Re:True patriots by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Typical leftist tactics.

      Two sets of rules in the US - one for liberals, one for conservatives. One tea party blogger says there are bad parts of DC that should be avoided, and it's all over all the news networks. A liberals wishes for W, Rush, Beck, Culter, etc... to die, and there isn't a peep.

      Two sets of rules.

    69. Re:True patriots by tuxgeek · · Score: 1

      I disagree with your sig, off topic I know, but ..
      "War's Legitimate Object" is taking by force something that someone else has.
      Sometimes land, and more recently, energy resources ..

      --
      "Suppose you were an idiot...and suppose you were a member of Congress...but I repeat myself." Mark Twain
    70. Re:True patriots by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Thanks for that paper! Was a very interesting, but unfortunately scary reading.

    71. Re:True patriots by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I would recommend that anyone going to the Lincoln Memorial to take along at least a chinese assault rifle, or prefereably stop off at the Museum of American History to pick up Charon and give him a minigun. [emphasis mine]

      You must be working on behalf of the liberal/super mutant agenda, spreading misinformation like that.

      Charon's tag skills are small guns, sneak and explosives. If they want to survive the journey, they need to give him a hunting rifle or let him use his shotgun, and try to stay out of sight.

    72. Re:True patriots by Wyatt+Earp · · Score: 1

      In this case, war's legitimate object was to ensure another war didn't arise between the northern and southern factions in the United States.

      Also, the threat of war can keep a war from breaking out, look at the threat of nuclear war leading to a peace in Europe from 1945 to 1991, a peace in Western Europe that continues to this day.

      In the American Civil War Sherman's march to the sea and then up the Carolinas lead to the end of the war and enough material destruction that the South accepted the Union's terms and never revolted again.

    73. Re:True patriots by Knoman · · Score: 1

      Glen Beck at the Lincoln Memorial?!? WTF!!! I Cleared that area of Slavers already! Did Beck re-spawn???

      --
      "It's an imperfect world,screws fall out..."
    74. Re:True patriots by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      We can top that here. In 2008, when Obama was elected, there were a ton of commemorative crap on the TV. One was for a quarter with an inkjet type quality sticker of Obama glued to the front for $20 or so. They got a minor celebrity to do the commercial, included a certificate of authenticity, and sold quite a lot. The thing is, he couldn't keep up with the demand for them. People didn't get their, lawsuits were brought, but I don't know if it went anywhere.

    75. Re:True patriots by Fredde87 · · Score: 1

      If you read the actual survey you'll find that it was only taken on people aged between 18-24. Not many people with alzheimers etc in that age bracket...

    76. Re:True patriots by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      As someone who was born in DC, I have to say that Fallout 3's concept of the region is really, really bad.

    77. Re:True patriots by twidarkling · · Score: 3, Informative

      Your study only samples people 18-24, and also concludes that 50% can't find friggin' New York State on a map. That study doesn't exactly help your cause as much as you'd like to purport, especially when the detailed findings say:

      However, it is concerning that one in ten of those with up to a high school
      education cannot identify the U.S., and one in five cannot find the Pacific Ocean.

      Page 26.

      --
      Canada: The US's more awesome sibling.
    78. Re:True patriots by sumdumass · · Score: 1

      Dude, you forgot the SOFA agreement Bush implemented in 2008 that also happens to be Obama's pulling troops from Iraq as promised plan.

      I mean give him credit.

    79. Re:True patriots by sumdumass · · Score: 1

      It's kind of like the allegations of voter fraud when someone distributed leaflets in Cleavland Ohio claiming that democrats should vote on some day 2 days late for the election.

      Anyone intelligent enough that should have a legitimate interest will not fall for the tricks. Some people will and it gives more idiots a chance to complain. Of course there is always the Streisand effect and the possibility that the changes were made just to create or manufacture a controversy and promote then event. Chances are, it was some kid somewhere playing games and not even realizing how it would be taken in this context.

      Now, if someone was really attempting to confuse people, they wouldn't have moved the location to the same general area where mistakes will only cause delays. Instead, they would have changed the Lincoln memorial location to the Lincoln monument location where a mistake would cost the entire event.

    80. Re:True patriots by findoutmoretoday · · Score: 1

      Only thirteen British colonies where involved in the American Revolutionary War.  Sarah Palin for example could claim it was Russia,  where George Bush could refer to Mexico, etc.

    81. Re:True patriots by MichaelSmith · · Score: 1

      How does that 6% compare to other countries? I'm guessing it's not that different from many others, and probably a lot higher than many countries with lower education.

      Voting here in Australia is compulsory and I live next to a school (polling place) so every election day I get a close look at that lower 6%.

      A couple of years ago there was this guy who got his car stuck on a curb at the back of my house. There is a change of level and one driving wheel was partly off the ground. The resulting problem in 3D geometry was totally beyond him.

      Traffic outside polling places can get a bit heavy and last Saturday this guy left his car in the middle of the road and ran after some bloke and threatened to cut his head off or whatever. He had obviously been trolled and proceeded to try his best to get arrested within the bounds of a polling place.

      The phrase "shit for brains" comes to mind for a proportion of our population. I wish they could just stay home.

    82. Re:True patriots by The+Wild+Norseman · · Score: 1

      Remember that famous botch job by the Miss America contestant? Because her answer was so stupid most people didn't notice that the question was: why can't 1 in 5 Americans find the US on the map?

      Just think of Miss America contestants as I do. They're like toy poodles -- they're being bred for looks, not for brains.

      --
      "A government is a body of people usually -- notably -- ungoverned." -Shepherd Book
    83. Re:True patriots by interkin3tic · · Score: 1

      I'm not making a case here, aside from "6% of people not correctly identifying their country on a map" is not a shocking statistic.

      I'm certainly not claiming Americans are great at geography. Just that expecting 100% in a survey is unrealistic.

    84. Re:True patriots by CAIMLAS · · Score: 1

      You realize, don't you, that many people in America consider Lincoln's federal stance during the Civil War to be an extra-Constitutional act, right? It was about central, Federal control of the US and the financial strength of the South.

      The construction of the Lincoln Memorial was a giant federalist "fuck you" towards state rights and interests.

      --
      ~/ssh slashdot.org ssh: connect to host slashdot.org port 22: too many beers
    85. Re:True patriots by mldi · · Score: 1

      You can have him. He proved he's little more than the words he speaks.

      Grass is always greener on the other side of the fence, eh?

      --
      If you aren't suspicious of your government's actions, you aren't doing your job as a responsible citizen.
    86. Re:True patriots by DavidTC · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Or, alternately, you can trick the supermutants into attacking Beck. As long as you don't enter the actual area in front of the momument itself, Beck's people won't fire at you, but you can lure supermutants close enough to set up a firefight.

      Wait, I've confused the Glenn Beck people with slavers. Silly me...one of those groups aren't racist idiots trying to take advantage of the history of that site.

      --
      If corporations are people, aren't stockholders guilty of slavery?
    87. Re:True patriots by F34nor · · Score: 1
    88. Re:True patriots by squirrl · · Score: 1

      I think you are correct sir. I'm still stuck doing mora brown's survival guide.

    89. Re:True patriots by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
    90. Re:True patriots by mongoose(!no) · · Score: 1

      The politically correct term is "Tourists", and unfortunately we're not allowed to shoot them.

    91. Re:True patriots by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Did you even read your linked article? It doesn't paint a positive picture at all for the geographic literacy of the average American. Read page 6. They weren't asking for the names of capitol cities in obscure, tin-pot, African dictatorships (And if you have Mrs Palin's geographic knowledge Africa is a continent not a country). The questions were asking basic, general knowledge questions about countries and topics that featured prominently in the news at the time.

      If you're too lazy to follow your own link then here are some of the "highlights":

      * Six in ten (63%) cannot find Iraq on a map of the Middle East, despite near-constant news coverage since the U.S. invasion of March 2003.
      * Three-quarters cannot find Indonesia on a map even after images of the tsunami
      * Three-quarters (75%) do not know that a majority of Indonesia's population is Muslim, despite the prominence of this religion in global news today.
      * Three-quarters (74%) believe English is the most commonly spoken native language in the world, rather than Mandarin Chinese.
      * Half or fewer of young men and women 18-24 can identify the states of New York or Ohio on a map (50% and 43%, respectively).

    92. Re:True patriots by bobcote · · Score: 1

      That's nothing, 20% still believe the sun revolves around the earth and 25% believe we got our independence from a country other than Britain.....and more than half don't believe in evolution. That makes me a sad panda. :(

      Spouting ignorance and rumor as if the source is valid statistics? Doesn't that make you as bad as those you seek to demonize? Or at least as bad as the network news anchors?

    93. Re:True patriots by gfreeman · · Score: 1

      Spouting ignorance and rumor as if the source is valid statistics? Doesn't that make you as bad as those you seek to demonize? Or at least as bad as the network news anchors?

      Gallop is a recognised and respected polling/opinion gathering institution..

      They conducted a poll

      --
      Ceci n'est pas un sig.
    94. Re:True patriots by mcgrew · · Score: 1

      You're confusing "The Wall" with "Wish You Were Here". His sig is the correct quote.

    95. Re:True patriots by ooshna · · Score: 1
      Oops

      So I was wrong almost half don't believe in evolution I'm still a sad panda :(

  3. Politics aside, wtf is wrong with Google? by mykos · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Why the hell DOES it redirect to FDR memorial? http://www.google.com/search?q=lincoln+memorial

    1. Re:Politics aside, wtf is wrong with Google? by rfuilrez · · Score: 1

      And on top of that, if you click on the actual Lincoln Memorial, it shows a picture of the Washington Monument. Maybe its a view FROM the Lincoln Memorial, but I think it should be a picture of the LM itself.

    2. Re:Politics aside, wtf is wrong with Google? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It doesn't.

      The green arrow dead center points to "National Captial Parks Central."

      The "A" pointer is a customer review. Added by a customer. To review it.

    3. Re:Politics aside, wtf is wrong with Google? by LostCluster · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Google doesn't have that accurate a source of landmarks, so they've left them as Wiki-style editable. With such a politically charged event scheduled for tomorrow, it doesn't take that many Beck-dislikers to toy with navigation... anybody trying to find the rally with an iPhone will get the wrong directions if this is allowed to stand.

    4. Re:Politics aside, wtf is wrong with Google? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Informative

      You can still get there (google still knows where it is, and that it's still the Lincoln Memorial):
      http://maps.google.com/maps?q=Abraham+Lincoln+Statue,+Washington,+DC

    5. Re:Politics aside, wtf is wrong with Google? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

      Half of the vandals are probably Beck's own fans that don't want to be associated with that terrible president Lincoln and are hoping to get everyone to meet somewhere else.

    6. Re:Politics aside, wtf is wrong with Google? by jaygridley · · Score: 1

      Google doesn't have that accurate a source of landmarks, so they've left them as Wiki-style editable. With such a politically charged event scheduled for tomorrow, it doesn't take that many Beck-dislikers to toy with navigation... anybody trying to find the rally with an iPhone will get the wrong directions if this is allowed to stand.

      Really? Then why does the map have a little box on it with the words "Lincoln Memorial" that is not what the search returns? (Not to mention all the other various landmarks marked on the map..

    7. Re:Politics aside, wtf is wrong with Google? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      A better question is, why does this link work and yours doesn't?

      http://maps.google.com/maps?q=lincoln+memorial&hl=en&cd=2&ei=h5N4TO3sBaSWzgSv8OWMBQ&sig2=QpJ-PPLMS8lwmc9rrT5sxg&ie=UTF8&view=map&cid=9539386115279663617&iwloc=A&ved=0CIoBEKUG&sa=X

    8. Re:Politics aside, wtf is wrong with Google? by ShakaUVM · · Score: 1

      >>And on top of that, if you click on the actual Lincoln Memorial, it shows a picture of the Washington Monument.

      I noticed this, too.

      Since when did Google Maps become Wikipedia?

    9. Re:Politics aside, wtf is wrong with Google? by mykos · · Score: 1

      Click the "search maps" button on the link you've provided. See what happens?

    10. Re:Politics aside, wtf is wrong with Google? by darkmeridian · · Score: 1

      Glenn Beck has said many times how much he HATES FDR. Some wag is having some fun.

      --
      A NYC lawyer blogs. http://www.chuangblog.com/
    11. Re:Politics aside, wtf is wrong with Google? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Funny

      Beck followers don't use iPhones. The only people with iPhones were issued them upon voting for Obama, right?

      But in all seriousness, do you know a single person with an iPhone who doesn't vote democrat? Because I don't.

    12. Re:Politics aside, wtf is wrong with Google? by AnEducatedNegro · · Score: 2, Informative

      anybody trying to find the rally with an iPhone will get the wrong directions if this is allowed to stand

      uh no. dc resident here. you can see the lincoln memorial from the FDR memorial. while this google thing is odd, yes, if you can't find the lincoln memorial while you are standing around confused at the FDR memorial.. you have bigger problems to worry about.

      aEN

    13. Re:Politics aside, wtf is wrong with Google? by Tassach · · Score: 1, Funny

      Now if someone were really evil, they would have had it redirect to Trinidad (the neighborhood in DC, not the island).

      Turning a bunch of pasty white racists lose in one of the most violent black neighborhoods in the country could be ... interesting.

      --
      Why is it that the proponents of "one nation under God" are so eager to get rid of "liberty and justice for all"?
    14. Re:Politics aside, wtf is wrong with Google? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Hmm a true Beck-disliker would probably set the Lincoln memorial to the Potomac. Might lead to some ethnic cleansing that actually does good.

    15. Re:Politics aside, wtf is wrong with Google? by gsmalleus · · Score: 1

      anybody trying to find the rally with an iPhone will get the wrong directions if this is allowed to stand.

      Why does this have to be an iPhone issue, my Android phone also uses Google Maps for navigation.

    16. Re:Politics aside, wtf is wrong with Google? by Huge_UID · · Score: 5, Insightful

      I know lots of iPhone owners who vote Republican. You should get out more.

    17. Re:Politics aside, wtf is wrong with Google? by Nikkos · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Decided not to moderate and simply prove you wrong. One idiot making stupid comments doesn't mean the tea party are racists as a group no more than some leftist anarchist looting stores makes all liberals into whackjobs. Frankly, I call anyone who says otherwise a racist themselves.

      http://www.bvblackspin.com/2010/04/15/black-tea-party-member/
      http://www.theroot.com/views/black-tea-partiers-speak
      http://www.americanthinker.com/2009/09/black_tea_party_express_tour_t.html
      http://www.theroot.com/views/should-black-folks-give-tea-party-second-look?page=0,1&hpid=topnews
      http://www.theroot.com/views/who-you-callin-uncle-tom
      http://www.azcentral.com/community/phoenix/articles/2009/08/17/20090817obama-scene.html (this is the article that MSNBC cut apart to show gun-toting crazies at tea party rallies - except that it was a black man carrying that weapon freely and nobody thought he was a danger, kinda shoots your theory down doesn't it?)

      Certain groups are terrified of what the Tea Party stands for, and they've played the race card in order to try and stop it. The fact that you believe it and espouse this shit means you're just a mindless patsy that can't think for yourself.

    18. Re:Politics aside, wtf is wrong with Google? by im_thatoneguy · · Score: 2, Informative

      Interestingly enough since I started reading this story it seems to have been corrected. Then I searched for "FDR memorial" and it moved to bridge.

      I searched for "Franklin Delano Roosevelt Memorial" and it then found it. Now when I search for FDR Memorial it is also in the correct spot.

      Either Google search in the area is buggered or there is a war afoot. :D

    19. Re:Politics aside, wtf is wrong with Google? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Except that parking for the Lincoln Memorial is adjacent to the FDR memorial, so this could simply be an old, strange, trying-to-be-helpful location for the Lincoln Memorial. It could also be a ploy in the opposite direciton, because the MLK memorial will be located next to the FDR, and this is where the Sharpton-led MLK march will end.

    20. Re:Politics aside, wtf is wrong with Google? by jameskojiro · · Score: 5, Insightful

      From the people I have talked to at the one Tea Party I happened to walk by on lunch break I found out most of them are decent people who have some conservative leanings, but mostly have Libertarian or "Classical Liberal" Leanings. Sure there were some far right wing nut bags in the group but they were VASTLY out numbered by people who, if you put them on a political scale were far more libertarian than full on democrat or republican.

      Plus they didn't wreck the place and leave a mess after the rally unlike other groups whom I have seen leave a mess in their wake.

      Let these people protest, they aren't hurting anyone yet. To say they are evil and scum is wrong for now. Give them the benefit of the doubt and let's see what happens. I would have thought that a lot of the people who once decried their right to protest and assemble are the same people who are now looking to demonize these people are making themselves look like hypocrites they are. Judging the Tea Party people this way would be like instituting a "pre-crime" policy and arresting anyone in sight whom the police "think" might commit a crime. It is wrong.

      If the Tea Party Rallies were doing some of the same things that the Anarchists were doing at their rallies I could see the point of what the talking heads are talking about how "bad they are". So far from all of the B-roll footage I have seen on TV of all of the tea party events I have yet to see the police throwing tear gas and mass arrests of protesters. I have yet to see people being beaten up and people running away with bloodied brows. I have seen the occasional weird screwball sign, but last i heard we still have a the First Amendment as part of our bill of rights.

      I will be watching tomorrow on C-SPAN and see it for myself, I am not going to listen to the pundits on either MSNBC (who will make jokes about sexual acts between two consenting men) or Fox News (who will be inflating the number of people in attendance). I will reserve judgement because it is the correct thing to do. I am keeping my "jump to conclusions mat" in it's box.

      --
      Tsukasa: All I really want, is to be left alone...
    21. Re:Politics aside, wtf is wrong with Google? by toadlife · · Score: 1, Flamebait

      Frankly, I call anyone who says otherwise a racist themselves.

      You are generalizing about people who generalize.

      I only know three, but every "tea partier" I personally know is an older white person who harbors what I would call..."ethnic animosity".

      Certain groups are terrified of what the Tea Party stands for, and they've played the race card in order to try and stop it.

      The playing of the race card is nothing more than a misunderstanding of the core motivation of the Tea Party movement. The Tea Party is the John Birch society all over again. The primary motivation is not race, but economics. It's a bunch of people who see the shifting economic social climate as a threat to the status quo which has benefited them greatly. The issue of racism comes out of simple demographics. Most of the tea partiers are mostly older white people, and a higher percentage of older white people harbor racial animosity. Hell, even my Dad who is a dyed-in-the-wool progressive and participated in civil rights marches in the 1960's has expressed sentiments that can come across as "racist". It's doesn't mean he's racist. He's just an old white dude who suffers from the same fears as other older white people.

      --
      I don't always use unix-like operating systems; but when I do, I prefer FreeBSD.
    22. Re:Politics aside, wtf is wrong with Google? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      toadlife's experience mirrors my own, except I know a few more tea partiers then him (or her), and they are all high-income with a good deal of "ethnic animosity", quite seriously considerably past any desire of mine to continue associating with them, much less voting for any of their causes (almost all of which turns out to be based on provably false dogma).

    23. Re:Politics aside, wtf is wrong with Google? by Wyatt+Earp · · Score: 1

      Rush Limbaugh only uses Apple products, iPhone included.

      Hell, I'm a Republican and I have an iPhone, iPhones, Macbooks, iPads, Mac Pros aren't exclusive to liberals.

      Between work and home I've got a Mac Pro tower, Macbook Pro, iPad, iPhone, iMac, Macbook and an Asus G71

    24. Re:Politics aside, wtf is wrong with Google? by khallow · · Score: 1

      I only know three, but every "tea partier" I personally know is an older white person who harbors what I would call..."ethnic animosity".

      So you're willing to generalize to an entire group of people based on three data points? Isn't this far worse than so-called "ethnic animosity" which while just as misguided, is probably based on more than three data points?

    25. Re:Politics aside, wtf is wrong with Google? by khallow · · Score: 4, Insightful

      toadlife's experience mirrors my own, except I know a few more tea partiers then him (or her), and they are all high-income with a good deal of "ethnic animosity", quite seriously considerably past any desire of mine to continue associating with them, much less voting for any of their causes (almost all of which turns out to be based on provably false dogma).

      So how many people is that? Five? Ten? And you're willing to generalize to a large group, that you happen to disagree with from the start and know little about, based on this huge sample of people you claim to know? You know what this sounds like to me? Brazen hypocrisy. Now, don't get me wrong. I indulge in it every so often myself. But the "the whole group is racist because I know a couple of people" argument is ludicrously hypocritical. Maybe even a tad bit idiotic.

    26. Re:Politics aside, wtf is wrong with Google? by khallow · · Score: 3, Insightful

      My conjecture: Most of the tea party folks got involved because the president doesn't look like them. And that scared the hell out of them. Disprove that.

      Proof: you don't supply evidence to support your conjecture. Give the absence of evidence to distinguish between that hypothesis and the null hypothesis (that there is no measurable difference in racial attitudes between the tea party folks and the general population), one cannot rationally accept the conjecture.

    27. Re:Politics aside, wtf is wrong with Google? by Cyberllama · · Score: 2, Insightful

      It's the classic "No way are we racist, look, there's a black guy!"

      The fact of the matter is that racism is endemic within the Tea Party, and if it's not, then its clearly tolerated. The most vocal members of the movement frequently make blatantly racist statements. The majority of the protest signs carry racist sentiments. And shall we discuss the immigration views the tea party espouses? If you prefer, I might accept the argument that the tea party stance on immigration isn't racism, merely xenophobia -- but I think reasonable minds will agree its definitely some form of bigotry.

      Meanwhile, Sarah Palin expects people to "refudiate" people who want to build a mosque as a symbol of national unity, but does the Tea Party ever call out their racist members? Do they ever hold them to account for their words? Of course not. It's a racist movement. Are there a few black people? Sure, but only a *few*. Not unexpected from a group that attracts oddballs.

      And lastly, you're kidding yourself if you think anybody is "afraid" of what the Tea Party stands for, other than the rise of domestic terrorism it portends (we've already seen too much of this, sadly). From a political standpoint, it's the best gift liberals ever got. A schism right down the middle of the conservative backbone of America. It's amazing! Republican politicians are in an impossible situation.

      If they don't pick a side, they risk losing both sides, and yet in most parts of the country they need the votes from BOTH sides to win their elections. For every Republican that'll only vote for you if you pay lip service to the Tea Party, there's one that doesn't want to vote for an extremist that does. Liberals are absolutely loving it. It's a trainwreck.

    28. Re:Politics aside, wtf is wrong with Google? by interkin3tic · · Score: 4, Funny

      if you can't find the lincoln memorial while you are standing around confused at the FDR memorial.. you have bigger problems to worry about.

      Such as being 100% certain that the president was born in Kenya?

      (ZING!)

    29. Re:Politics aside, wtf is wrong with Google? by compro01 · · Score: 1
      --
      upon the advice of my lawyer, i have no sig at this time
    30. Re:Politics aside, wtf is wrong with Google? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The primary motivation is not race, but economics. It's a bunch of people who see the shifting economic social climate as a threat to the status quo which has benefited them greatly.

      That's an interesting idea.
      <incoherent_rant>
      My own hypothesis (I'm not even American so don't take my opinion too seriously) is that conservatives in many countries are feeling under threat because disruptive discoveries and developments in the 21st century (we're now at the flat top of Peak Oil, for example, but Technology Assessment is only a fledgling branch of Sociology, and replacing your expensive naphtha cracker by a bunch of e.g. biodiesel refineries is neither cheap nor fast, and the 6800 million of us *really* don't want to start melting the swampy Siberian permafrost and boiling the ocean clathrates, because we love our descendants, right?) are severe enough that they are threatening to upset the status quo, and they (the conservatives) don't feel inclined or equipped to modify their lives to live comfortably in this 21st century.
      Also, remember that one of the side effects of economic depression is that people can get mentally depressed, which reduces their problem-solving skills (i.e. it becomes more difficult to see the way forward).
      It's sad.
      On a more positive note, some people react differently, eg. see this photo: Migrant Mother: at least three of her daughters lived.
      </incoherent_rant>

    31. Re:Politics aside, wtf is wrong with Google? by khallow · · Score: 1, Insightful

      The fact of the matter is that racism is endemic within the Tea Party, and if it's not, then its clearly tolerated. The most vocal members of the movement frequently make blatantly racist statements. The majority of the protest signs carry racist sentiments. And shall we discuss the immigration views the tea party espouses? If you prefer, I might accept the argument that the tea party stance on immigration isn't racism, merely xenophobia -- but I think reasonable minds will agree its definitely some form of bigotry.

      Citation please for the actions of significant tea party racism (beyond that of US norm) or for that matter significant tolerance of racism (again beyond that of US norm). Surely you can vomit a half dozen links on command like those other guys. Until then, reasonable minds are going to have to assume that you're full of shit.

      Is it just me or do other people find it bizarre that we seem to have a full blown talking points war going on here? I wonder if there's ever been a slashdot thread where the only posters have been shills pushing their respective propaganda in some sort of perverted simulation of real debate. If there have been, I imagine it'd look eerily like this thread.

      My view is that the racism accusation is unfounded. First, any group of large enough size will have racists and other sorts of bigots in it. For example, a couple of slashdotters exhibit it (here and here) when they characterize an entire movement as racist based on a few people that they "know". Where's the evidence that the tea party groups are unusually racist compared to any other political group?

      Second, the only concrete accusation you made is that tea party people are anti-immigration (well aside from the accusation that Sarah Palin is a tea partier, a very serious charge indeed). Here's my take on how to determine whether someone is for or against open immigration. Does open immigration benefit them directly or a political group that they identify with? If yes, then they're for immigration. If no, then they aren't. Since immigrants tend to be of particular ethnicities rather than no ethnicity, then we have the ingredients for a groundless charge of racism.

      Let's talk Sarah Palin since this is turning into a very serious thread.

      Meanwhile, Sarah Palin expects people to "refudiate" people who want to build a mosque as a symbol of national unity

      Uh huh. While I don't care if someone wants to sink a lot of money into a propaganda tool such as the infamous "ground zero mosque" (the building probably transfers resources from authoritarian Middle East powers and transfers it to the US economy, something I see as a net benefit), I can't help but view statements as the above with a cynical humor. If these people were really interested in "national unity", they probably wouldn't have put that building with the role it has there. They probably just want to get their narrative into the 9/11 myth and a nice building is classier than billboards.

      And Sarah the Refudiator doesn't seem any worse than the crop of presidents we've had over the past few decades. Not that I'd vote for her. Her bizarre behavior since the 2008 election means she's very unpredictable. Frankly, I want someone that both has views parsimonious with mine, decent integrity, and an even keel. At a glance, a Palin presidency would be wasting most of its time putting out fires that it started itself. Maybe that's better than when a presidency is doing something "constructive", but I really don't appreciate being deeply humiliated by my presidents.

      If they don't pick a side, they risk losing both sides, and yet in most parts of the country they need the votes from BOTH sides to win their elections. For every Republican that'll only vote for you if you pay lip service to the Te

    32. Re:Politics aside, wtf is wrong with Google? by nedwidek · · Score: 1

      If you get to the Washington or FDR memorial and can't see the numerous signs to the Lincoln memorial or even see the memorial itself, not much is going to help you. They're all within walking distance of each other.

      If someone really wanted to get them lost they should have moved the marker to the entrance at the CIA Headquarters. Putting it less than 1/2 a mile from the actual monument wouldn't even get a Beck fan lost.

      --
      Post anonymously - For when your opinion embarrasses even you!
    33. Re:Politics aside, wtf is wrong with Google? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "I am keeping my "jump to conclusions mat" in it's box."

      That's reasonable.

      And very unlike Mr. Beck.

      Me, I'm very curious what he'll be publicly not denying at this event, especially those things that he's been asked about but not specifically denied previously, over and over again.

      [lawl]

    34. Re:Politics aside, wtf is wrong with Google? by drinkypoo · · Score: 2, Funny

      I know lots of iPhone owners who vote Republican. You should get out more.

      If going out means running into more iPhone owners, who are also Republicans, I'm staying home.

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
    35. Re:Politics aside, wtf is wrong with Google? by Ginger+Unicorn · · Score: 1

      From what i've read about Beck, it's not completely paranoid to entertain the notion that he did it himself to draw attention to his event.

      --
      (1.21 gigawatts) / (88 miles per hour) = 30 757 874 newtons
    36. Re:Politics aside, wtf is wrong with Google? by davev2.0 · · Score: 1

      Well, you just made a racist comment and provided fodder for all the black-hating racists and called black people racist all in one comment.

      Congratulations.

      And, tell me, how do you know those making racist comments aren't agents provocateur.

    37. Re:Politics aside, wtf is wrong with Google? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I will reserve judgement because it is the correct thing to do. I am keeping my "jump to conclusions mat" in it's box.

      Fair enough, but rallies and news media aside, I've read enough of their letters to the local paper, that I will not be supporting the ones here. That may be somewhat unfair of me, with only the idiots being the ones writing the letters, but at the least, they could distance themselves from the fuggheads.

      And as for their signs, while Freedom of Speech does allow it, it doesn't mean I can't judge them on the contents of those as well.

    38. Re:Politics aside, wtf is wrong with Google? by berryjw · · Score: 1

      Late to the game, this is what I was thinking when I read the original post. I've walked between *all* the mall memorials, on more occasions than I remember. The very notion that someone could get to FDR, and not be able to find *anything* else on the mall, is quite frightening. If you can't be bothered to look beyond the electronic gadget in your hand, stay home and watch everything from a stream, you're not needed in DC congestion.

    39. Re:Politics aside, wtf is wrong with Google? by hpycmprok · · Score: 1

      Anarchists rallies?

      Right - C'mon Anarchists lets get organized!! Meeting at 2:00pm Today! Bring your calendars and a copy of Robert's Rules... first order of business, elect a parlamentarian and draft some by-laws.

      Because we Anarchists believe in.... wait just a minute... oh yeah.

    40. Re:Politics aside, wtf is wrong with Google? by hpycmprok · · Score: 1

      Let's talk Sarah Palin since this is turning into a very serious thread.

      Actually, doesn't that mean it isn't a serious thread?

    41. Re:Politics aside, wtf is wrong with Google? by khallow · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Reading through the comments, I'm surprised by some of the people who use the pejorative, "teabagger". For example, I gather here that you favor the "liberal" libertarian yet despise the very similar "tea party" libertarian because they have a slightly different (what you term "opposite") belief priority.

    42. Re:Politics aside, wtf is wrong with Google? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "But in all seriousness, do you know a single person with an iPhone who doesn't vote democrat? Because I don't."

      If it were true, which it isn't, it could be because the people who tend to vote republican remember when pop-up toasters, color TV's and Airplanes were new technology. They can't be faulted, though, as most of them have been Republicans since the Republican party stood for something other than how much they can fleece from the populace (not that the Dems are any better in these regards).

      Republicans are old... (Where's my dead horse?) and old people and tech tend not to go hand-in-hand.

    43. Re:Politics aside, wtf is wrong with Google? by khallow · · Score: 1

      Actually, doesn't that mean it isn't a serious thread?

      Nonsense. There are certain people who automatically make a thread serious, just by invoking their names. Sarah Palin is one. Adolf Hitler is another.

    44. Re:Politics aside, wtf is wrong with Google? by j0nb0y · · Score: 2, Insightful

      teabaggers

      Name calling is not a form of argument. It only makes you look like an idiot.

      if you consider Palin to be the start

      Not even close. I watch CNBC. I clearly remember seeing the birth of the tea party movement, live.

      http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zp-Jw-5Kx8k

      Palin didn't sign on until well after the fact, when all Republican politicians were signing onto the movement because it became popular.

      --
      If you had super powers, would you use them for good, or for awesome?
    45. Re:Politics aside, wtf is wrong with Google? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I know lots of iPhone owners who vote Republican. You should get out more.

      They vote Log Cabin Republican of course! : )

      Posted anon to avoid getting mod bombed by the slashdot gay mafia.

    46. Re:Politics aside, wtf is wrong with Google? by 99BottlesOfBeerInMyF · · Score: 5, Insightful

      While I can understand how you got that impression from his comments, I don't think Tea Party activists in general are the same as libertarians. It's more than an ordering of priorities from what I've seen. The libertarian party is about personal freedoms for everyone even people they didn't like. They wanted to reduce government size to maximize personal freedom.

      While saying a group that wants to reduce government size is the same thing with different priorities... I haven't seen the personal freedom part of the Tea Bagger movement. Sure, they talk about freedom, but when questioned they always seem to be interested in their own freedom while opposing freedom for others. Many oppose simple freedom of religion, for example, not to mention individual freedom based on sex and sometimes even race. Where are the freedom loving tea Party activists that want to legalize gay marriage, polygamous marriage, and any other kind of marriage to get the government out of making religious choices for people? I've seen more of them express the opinion that the government should be making interracial marriage illegal than gay marriage legal. That's bigger government, not smaller.

      Actually, from what I've seen the Tea Party seems to be a corporate sponsored movement designed to appeal to people's fear and prejudice and to the previously built "us versus them" political mentality, with the goal of preventing the government from effectively regulating and stopping the worst practices of big businesses, whether that is to poison our land and people for profit, or leverage wealth disparity to bleed the poor and middle class using capital as leverage. I sympathize with some people who associate themselves with the Tea Party. I don't like either of the major parties either... but I just don't think the movement itself is sane or cohesive and I think it is directed by advertising agencies with ulterior motives. I mean seriously, they're supposedly a movement that is about overcoming the two party system and breaking free of it, yet they only ever support candidates who were republican and they have never even mentioned (to my knowledge) electoral reform to actually do something about opening things up to non-republican and non-democratic candidates. That's a lot more than a reordering of priorities. That's fundamentally different philosophy.

    47. Re:Politics aside, wtf is wrong with Google? by Nikkos · · Score: 2, Insightful
      Looks like you caught on to the point of my post, though you seem to see less malice in the characterization of the Tea Party as racist. I disagree regarding that.

      I only know three, but every "tea partier" I personally know is an older white person who harbors what I would call..."ethnic animosity".

      I don't think you're going to find an older person - white OR black - that doesn't harbor racial animosity on some level. In fact it has been said by many different people that we all harbor at least some prejudice against those that are different from us. The point is that just because there's a large group of predominately white people, it doesn't mean that group is racist.

      Hell, even my Dad who is a dyed-in-the-wool progressive and participated in civil rights marches in the 1960's has expressed sentiments that can come across as "racist". It's doesn't mean he's racist. He's just an old white dude who suffers from the same fears as other older white people.

      Absolutely. Another factor is experience and empathy - My father grew up and has lived in a 99% non-black area near the Canadian border in the midwest. His experience is different so he can't relate. I cringe when I hear some of the stuff he says, but its ignorance and he'll likely never be able to understand some things about white privilege. (But he can tell you all about the silly arguments and problems between the German, Swede, Finnish, and Norwegian cultures he grew up around)

      But again, a group of mostly white people is not racist because it's a group of mostly white people, and though you call it a generalization, I stand by my first statement that people who claim otherwise are racist themselves.

    48. Re:Politics aside, wtf is wrong with Google? by 99BottlesOfBeerInMyF · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Uh huh. While I don't care if someone wants to sink a lot of money into a propaganda tool such as the infamous "ground zero mosque" (the building probably transfers resources from authoritarian Middle East powers and transfers it to the US economy, something I see as a net benefit), I can't help but view statements as the above with a cynical humor. If these people were really interested in "national unity", they probably wouldn't have put that building with the role it has there. They probably just want to get their narrative into the 9/11 myth and a nice building is classier than billboards.

      I don't think you have even though for a moment about the perspective of muslims in the US. Imagine your religion was being branded as extremist and violent despite 99.999% of the followers never acting out of violence. It's like branding christians as violent extremists because of what has happened in northern Ireland. How would you take a stand and show the people that your religion itself and most followers aren't violent and dangerous, but peaceful and very willing to work with others of other religions to help society?

      Sure they started building a community center near the site of the 9/11 attacks, as a way to foster unity and help educate people and show people that the muslim religion can be a force for good things in a community. It's not like they expected it to be a major political issue because there are already dozens of them in the area, just as close.

      Rather, this has become a propaganda war by fear mongers who want to brand the entire religion as evil, and want to go so far as to overthrow basic freedoms of our society in order to have a boogey man. If you oppose their right to put a mosque or anything else there, you are opposing the foundation of our country, personal freedom, political freedom, and religious freedom. Anyone who has read the works of the founding fathers and hasn't just read bits out of context and ignored the rest, has to acknowledge that truth.

      And as for transferring money out of the middle east from "authoritarian middle east powers" clearly you must only be getting your news exclusively from Fox, the only station that hasn't covered the source of the funding is primarily the Kingdom Foundation run by Prince Al-Waleed bin Talal, who is also the second biggest Shareholder in News Corp (Fox). He's not particularly an authoritarian, but rather has acted fairly middle of the road, as a business man and donating to charities that help bridge cultural gaps between the east and west.

      The only people I see objecting to the community center are people who also seem to be in favor of expelling all muslims fro the US and who are so scared they think it's a good idea to abolish religious freedom in the US... while being ignorant or completely without perspective on the ramifications such an action would have.

    49. Re:Politics aside, wtf is wrong with Google? by SomeKDEUser · · Score: 1

      No, but look at the facts: this movement was basically born of a black president being elected. And nothing else. Libertarians? Pah! They would have hated Bush more. Afraid of the consequence of the economic crisis? The movement would have been born when Bush was still president. Tax haters? Maybe. Though it seems like a crazy big movement seeing as you Americans basically pay next to nothing in taxes. And Obama has not raised taxes...

      Look at the rhetoric "America was stolen from us", "reclaiming our country". This assumes that the you, tea-partier had a country which was stolen. Now since it was not stolen by some foreign force, it was stolen by some group of other citizens. Add to that that the ideal America is that of the 50s [1](look at the state of rights of various groups then), then I think one can safely conclude that the tea party is basically a bunch of bigoted racists. Not in the sense that they think the Blacks/Hispanics/Asians are inferior races, just that they happened to be exploited and it was perfectly acceptable; unacceptable would be if they became more equal. And a Black Americain president is a stark reminder that equality might well eventually happen [2].

      [1] Some crazily deformed America from the 50s, with much History rewriting...
      [2] It is a sad fact that most humans are perfectly content with a miserable life, provided their neighbours are even more miserable.

    50. Re:Politics aside, wtf is wrong with Google? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

      ... I have yet to see the police throwing tear gas and mass arrests of protesters. I have yet to see people being beaten up and people running away with bloodied brows. I have seen the occasional weird screwball sign, but last i heard we still have a the First Amendment as part of our bill of rights.

      A fair point, but here's another one. It always seems that when conservative or right-wing groups show up for a rally, police don't seem to have massed armed troops in riot gear, warehouses converted into temporary prisons, or infiltrators inserted into the organizing groups well in advance of said events. It's almost like those in authority seem to take sides in things, but this is America and that couldn't possibly happen here---right?

    51. Re:Politics aside, wtf is wrong with Google? by DesScorp · · Score: 1

      uh no. dc resident here. you can see the lincoln memorial from the FDR memorial. while this google thing is odd, yes, if you can't find the lincoln memorial while you are standing around confused at the FDR memorial.. you have bigger problems to worry about.

      Which is why, ultimately, the litter temper tantrum by the Beck haters on Google is futile. People will simply ask for directions if they're unsure. If the intent was truly to disrupt the assembly at the memorial, then not only will it be ineffectual, it won't speak very well of those critics on the web.

      --
      Life is hard, and the world is cruel
    52. Re:Politics aside, wtf is wrong with Google? by DesScorp · · Score: 1

      "The fact of the matter is that racism is endemic within the Tea Party, and if it's not, then its clearly tolerated."

      The fact of the matter is that you haven't proven any facts... just made an assertion of your opinion being gospel, and you've failed to back it up with anything other than more opinion.

      This is reminiscent of the whole "they called John Lewis a nigger!" accusation, and after months of pouring over video and audio of the rally where it supposedly happened, not one shred of evidence has been found. Even the New York Times finally published a correction stating that no evidence of the accusation has been found.

      --
      Life is hard, and the world is cruel
    53. Re:Politics aside, wtf is wrong with Google? by khallow · · Score: 1

      Imagine your religion was being branded as extremist and violent despite 99.999% of the followers never acting out of violence.

      Not even in the US do we get five 9's of non-violence for Muslims. And there are several examples of wars in living memory in the Middle East involving unprovoked attacks by 5% of all Muslims or more (eg, the invasions of Israel and some of the Pakistani wars).

      Sure they started building a community center near the site of the 9/11 attacks, as a way to foster unity and help educate people and show people that the muslim religion can be a force for good things in a community. It's not like they expected it to be a major political issue because there are already dozens of them in the area, just as close.

      Right. If there are "dozens" within two blocks of "ground zero", especially of the scale and visibility of this building, then you should be able to name one. Here, http://maps.google.com/maps?hl=en&q=Mosque+NYC+&um=1&ie=UTF-8&ei=nGppTNmKL83Pngfl8ZXBBQ&sa=X&oi=mode_link&ct=mode&ved=0CAwQ_AU">let me help. If I were building such a thing, I'd expect it to be a political issue and I imagine that the people who are responsible probably did as well.

      And as for transferring money out of the middle east from "authoritarian middle east powers" clearly you must only be getting your news exclusively from Fox, the only station that hasn't covered the source of the funding is primarily the Kingdom Foundation run by Prince Al-Waleed bin Talal, who is also the second biggest Shareholder in News Corp (Fox). He's not particularly an authoritarian, but rather has acted fairly middle of the road, as a business man and donating to charities that help bridge cultural gaps between the east and west.

      I sense you were trying to make some sort of argument and failed. I don't watch Fox News and I don't recommend the channel for anyone. Second, your argument is completely incoherent. Third, this Prince is exactly the poster child for the sort of propaganda I spoke of. He might have been a wealthy person anyway, but his connections to the Saudi Arabia government allow him access to wealth that he wouldn't otherwise have. So his money is based on authoritarian means even if you chose to claim otherwise.

      The only people I see objecting to the community center are people who also seem to be in favor of expelling all muslims fro the US and who are so scared they think it's a good idea to abolish religious freedom in the US... while being ignorant or completely without perspective on the ramifications such an action would have.

      This may be so. Certainly, there's a lot of hysteria surrounding the project. My take is that it'll blow over. The First Amendment ultimately dominates this issue and merely having a lot of people opposed, doesn't mean much in itself.

    54. Re:Politics aside, wtf is wrong with Google? by XorNand · · Score: 1

      No. The start of the "Tea Party" occurred during the grassroots movement to get Ron Paul the '08 Republican nomination for president. It grew out of the series of "money bombs" that were organized for his campaign. Fox News then hijacked the concept after the election because it was an existing vehicle of disaffected voters. Nowadays, the "Tea Party" has no coherent platform, it's just a bunch of soundbites used to whip the throng of useful idiots into a froth. And it has no actual leadership because everyone is too busy knifing each other in the back, trying to make themselves relevant in the current power vacuum of the Republican party.

      --
      Entrepreneur : (noun), French for "unemployed"
    55. Re:Politics aside, wtf is wrong with Google? by Scrameustache · · Score: 1

      The majority of the protest signs carry racist sentiments.

      Look, I think they're a bunch of retarded bigots roped into a quasi-fascist astroturf by media elites, but the "majority" of the signs? I think not. You may want to consider sample bias.

      --

      You can't take the sky from me...

    56. Re:Politics aside, wtf is wrong with Google? by khallow · · Score: 1

      Actually, from what I've seen the Tea Party seems to be a corporate sponsored movement designed to appeal to people's fear and prejudice and to the previously built "us versus them" political mentality, with the goal of preventing the government from effectively regulating and stopping the worst practices of big businesses, whether that is to poison our land and people for profit, or leverage wealth disparity to bleed the poor and middle class using capital as leverage. I sympathize with some people who associate themselves with the Tea Party. I don't like either of the major parties either... but I just don't think the movement itself is sane or cohesive and I think it is directed by advertising agencies with ulterior motives. I mean seriously, they're supposedly a movement that is about overcoming the two party system and breaking free of it, yet they only ever support candidates who were republican and they have never even mentioned (to my knowledge) electoral reform to actually do something about opening things up to non-republican and non-democratic candidates. That's a lot more than a reordering of priorities. That's fundamentally different philosophy.

      Say no more. This strawman argument means we don't need to explore this any further. When your perception more closely matches reality, then we might have something to discuss. The last third party to get anywhere in national level politics was the Republicans, 150 years ago. IMHO, anyone who tries from the starting gate to bust the two party oligopoly is destined to failure.

      Also, I don't see a reason for the democrats to enjoy support from the tea party people in this election cycle. They're just on the other side. That might change in 2012 when there's a lot fewer democrat incumbents around and Obama either is on his way out or moderated to the point he is electable again.

      And "sane", "cohesive"? What do you expect here from a just born political movement? Either it's a movement engineered by Madison Avenue, in which it's sane and cohesive even if it doesn't look it. Or it's an impromptu movement in which case it shouldn't be sane and cohesive until there's been some time for the people to deal with real world politics and well, reality, picking up some experience and pragmatism in the process.

    57. Re:Politics aside, wtf is wrong with Google? by MokuMokuRyoushi · · Score: 1

      There's one easy test to settle this.

      How fast can he run?

      --
      Humans are terrible replicators of Godly things.
    58. Re:Politics aside, wtf is wrong with Google? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "...I have yet to see the police throwing tear gas and mass arrests of protesters. I have yet to see people being beaten up and people running away with bloodied brows..."

      This is because the police are conservative. There's not much incentive to get ugly with people you may agree with.

        "...I have seen the occasional weird screwball sign, but last i heard we still have a the First Amendment as part of our bill of rights..."

      Do you think that the Tea Party would have a better chance at protesting a WTO meeting? Somehow I don't think so...

    59. Re:Politics aside, wtf is wrong with Google? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It's not the Lincoln Memorial; it's the Lincoln Monument. That may be why Google Maps can't find it.

    60. Re:Politics aside, wtf is wrong with Google? by mercurywoodrose · · Score: 1

      Have you considered that maybe google ISNT being manipulated... by humans, that is... I for one welcome the Providers, and would like to place a side bet of 12 quatloos that the natives will defeat the invaders. now where is my green skinned alien babe? or at least my Angelique Pettyjohn clone?

      --
      You hear about the person who didn't rely on anecdotal evidence to support his belief system?
    61. Re:Politics aside, wtf is wrong with Google? by khallow · · Score: 1

      No, but look at the facts: this movement was basically born of a black president being elected. And nothing else.

      That "nothing else" includes a) deficits of enormous size (while US public debt went from 58% to 70% of US GDP in the GWB period of 2000-2008, it will go up to an estimated 98% by the end of this fiscal year in September), b) terrible legislation of ridiculous size, complexity, and cost, c) a major recession that is being greatly aggravated by recent government policy and regulation, and d) a president of unique mendacity and brazenness (he is not just "black"). There are particularly idiotic features of the current administration policy that bear mention 1) attempts to make it so a minority of US citizens pay net taxes, 2) there are certain groups which actually experience negative net incentive under the new tax and benefit programs from earning greater wages, and 3) health insurance coverage in the US is on track to go down when the health insurance "reform", which was claimed to have the opposite intent, takes full effect.

      Though it seems like a crazy big movement seeing as you Americans basically pay next to nothing in taxes.

      Non-native idiot who has no clue what problems the US is experiencing? Check. Just because we are paying "next to nothing" (which can be above 50% for some places in the US like New York City), doesn't mean we'll continue to pay next to nothing. That debt has to be paid off sooner or later. As do the many considerable future obligations such as Social Security and Medicare.

      I have no problem exporting our parasites to your fine lands so that you can show us, as you slowly go bankrupt, how to pay for all these marvelous services that we should be paying for, but won't or can't.

    62. Re:Politics aside, wtf is wrong with Google? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I know lots of iPhone owners who vote Republican. You should get out more.

      If going out means running into more iPhone owners, who are also Republicans, I'm staying home.

      As someone who is a Republican (well, what used to be known as Republican ... not what passes for it now) I have to agree with you on the iPhone bit.

    63. Re:Politics aside, wtf is wrong with Google? by khallow · · Score: 1

      How would you take a stand and show the people that your religion itself and most followers aren't violent and dangerous, but peaceful and very willing to work with others of other religions to help society? I'd start by picking the beams out of my eye. Charity even of the self-serving PR sort has a fine tradition in both the Muslim and Western worlds, but at some point, you really need to walk the walk and oppose those who oppress and commit acts of violence.

    64. Re:Politics aside, wtf is wrong with Google? by ScrewMaster · · Score: 1

      Rush Limbaugh only uses Apple products, iPhone included.

      Hell, I'm a Republican and I have an iPhone, iPhones, Macbooks, iPads, Mac Pros aren't exclusive to liberals.

      Between work and home I've got a Mac Pro tower, Macbook Pro, iPad, iPhone, iMac, Macbook and an Asus G71

      I'm Republican too, but I'd never have admitted to that in a public forum. Kinda like advertising that you have herpes to a live television audience.

      --
      The higher the technology, the sharper that two-edged sword.
    65. Re:Politics aside, wtf is wrong with Google? by 99BottlesOfBeerInMyF · · Score: 1

      Say no more. This strawman argument means we don't need to explore this any further.

      Do you even know what a strawman argument is? What argument did I make on behalf of Tea Partier's?

      ...anyone who tries from the starting gate to bust the two party oligopoly is destined to failure.

      In the US no one has successfully challenged it on a wide scale since it became entrenched. In other countries similar situations have been resolved by grassroots movements. And on the local level Libertarians have certainly taken over some areas, if only in a few states. But how does it hurt people who oppose the two party system to actually oppose it politically as well?

      Also, I don't see a reason for the democrats to enjoy support from the tea party people in this election cycle. They're just on the other side.

      Um, yeah, all democrats are opposed to smaller government and don't fit with the supposed ideals of the Tea Party as well as Republicans? If the Tea Party wasn't just an extremist splinter of the Republican party and was actually working towards something novel it might be worthwhile, but it isn't. It's just the worst losers of the last election cycle, not anything else... as you seem to be demonstrating.

      And "sane", "cohesive"? What do you expect here from a just born political movement?

      Generally movements form around concrete ideals. That is, when they aren't dreamed up by PR firms and used to rally disparate people with disparate views around vague and unfocused goals. You don't see that it's aberrant for a people to join a political movement first, then for the movement to try to define what it is they're all coming out to support second?

      Either it's a movement engineered by Madison Avenue, in which it's sane and cohesive even if it doesn't look it.

      It's "sane" in that it is a useful tool for manipulating people via propaganda. That doesn't mean it actually has any substance or useful ideals or goals that make it a real movement.

      Or it's an impromptu movement in which case it shouldn't be sane and cohesive until there's been some time for the people to deal with real world politics and well, reality, picking up some experience and pragmatism in the process.

      I don't know of any other movement that gains momentum and followers without having a clear message and goal first. People generally join movements because they agree with the goal, then it builds. In this case, people have built a movement without defined goals, now it is being used to push politics in all sorts of ways... most of which don't seem to be benefiting the people very much at all.

    66. Re:Politics aside, wtf is wrong with Google? by bendodge · · Score: 1

      It's a racist movement. Are there a few black people? Sure, but only a *few*. Not unexpected from a group that attracts oddballs.

      So you're saying blacks are attracted to oddballs? Racist. ;)

      Now, the percentage of blacks in Tea Party rallies is roughly the same as in the greater population (7-11% IIRC). That means that it is a mainstream movement, not a racist one.

      --
      The government can't save you.
    67. Re:Politics aside, wtf is wrong with Google? by bill_mcgonigle · · Score: 1

      Most days, if the dial lands on The Rush Limbaugh Program, he's having an iPhone love-in of some sort going on. There must be multitudes.

      --
      My God, it's Full of Source!
      OUTSIDE_IP=$(dig +short my.ip @outsideip.net)
    68. Re:Politics aside, wtf is wrong with Google? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Or it could just be a joke. You may not find the joke funny, but that doesn't mean anyone really thinks someone will get lost going to the rally. Unless everyone going camped in New Jersey and is planning on hiking to the event and absolutely refuse to hail and cab and say, "Lincoln Memorial" then I doubt this is some sort of terrorist plot.

    69. Re:Politics aside, wtf is wrong with Google? by Hartree · · Score: 1

      "Republicans are old... (Where's my dead horse?)"

      Depends on where you live. There are lots of young Republicans in areas where the party is the leading one. Example, the small midwest town I'm in. The Democrats tend to be older here as they're often university workers (or university retirees) who commute in about 20 miles to the nearby University of Illinois. They tend to come from a different demographic than the rest of the town.

      There's an awful lot of sample bias going on in these replies. It's the old "How can that guy have won the election? None of the people I know voted for him." The answer: There are far more voters you don't know than those you do.

      "and old people and tech tend not to go hand-in-hand."

      Rotten kid. Come closer so I can whack your Droid phone with my cane!

      I'd rephrase that to "Old people and NEW tech tend not to go hand-in-hand". There are lots of old techies, but the tech they were so hot for isn't the current fashion. This is why ham radio, for example, tends now to be a hobby for the older set. I'd say that the hams were in general more clued in to how their tech toys worked than the average iPhone user is today.

    70. Re:Politics aside, wtf is wrong with Google? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "The majority of the protest signs carry racist sentiments."

      The majority of liberals are pedophiles.

      Wow, making stuff up is really easy!

    71. Re:Politics aside, wtf is wrong with Google? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      So how many people is that? Five? Ten? And you're willing to generalize to a large group, that you happen to disagree with from the start and know little about, based on this huge sample of people you claim to know? You know what this sounds like to me? Brazen hypocrisy. Now, don't get me wrong. I indulge in it every so often myself. But the "the whole group is racist because I know a couple of people" argument is ludicrously hypocritical. Maybe even a tad bit idiotic.

      Wow, you tricked mods into modding you up for that... nice trick!

      100% of his encounters were with people fitting a specific stereotype. From the AC's message, it is apparent he has had encounters with various people -- a number large enough, coupled with the consistency of the AC's findings, for the AC to feel representative of the group.

      Now if the same were to happen to me (everyone of a certain group falls into a certain stereotype, with consistency and in sufficiently* many samplings), I'd also extrapolate the individual's stereotype to the group.

      * this is of course a highly subjective notion -- but there's a difference between sufficient for statistical findings and sufficient for a social context. Perhaps you just happened to meet the wrong people, X times in a row. Could be. But you know what, at one point, I've done enough. If all you find is dirt, then perhaps there's no gold buried, perhaps there is just dirt.

      On a different note: to paraphrase Groucho Marx: I wouldn't want to be a member of any club that would have them as a member.

    72. Re:Politics aside, wtf is wrong with Google? by khallow · · Score: 1

      Do you even know what a strawman argument is? What argument did I make on behalf of Tea Partier's?

      A strawman is a rhetorical trick where one debates and defeats an exaggerated and false representation of an opposing viewpoint. Because it is a caricature of the real argument, it is far easier to debate than the real thing. Here, you stated they were a "corporate sponsored movement designed to appeal to people's fear and prejudice" (with a bunch more negative stuff following), you claimed they weren't "sane" or "cohesive". This is the caricature that you debate, the "strawman". I merely point out the flaw in this sort of thinking.

      Um, yeah, all democrats are opposed to smaller government and don't fit with the supposed ideals of the Tea Party as well as Republicans? If the Tea Party wasn't just an extremist splinter of the Republican party and was actually working towards something novel it might be worthwhile, but it isn't. It's just the worst losers of the last election cycle, not anything else... as you seem to be demonstrating.

      Where are these alleged small government democrats? And why aren't they running for office? And what's the emphasis on "novel"? My take is that whether your ideology is conservative or not, sometimes old school approaches are needed. For example, living within a budget is very old school and very necessary in today's climate.

      Generally movements form around concrete ideals. That is, when they aren't dreamed up by PR firms and used to rally disparate people with disparate views around vague and unfocused goals. You don't see that it's aberrant for a people to join a political movement first, then for the movement to try to define what it is they're all coming out to support second?

      Not happening in this case: concern over higher spending, taxation, and government power.

      I don't know of any other movement that gains momentum and followers without having a clear message and goal first. People generally join movements because they agree with the goal, then it builds. In this case, people have built a movement without defined goals, now it is being used to push politics in all sorts of ways... most of which don't seem to be benefiting the people very much at all.

      Welcome to the real world. Now you do know of an example.

    73. Re:Politics aside, wtf is wrong with Google? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yes over generalizing a group that told people to cut a member of congress' gas lines and then having a member do it is really wrong. Or maybe bringing a loaded weapon to a rally is the part you think is smart with Obama in cross hairs? I know it was done under Bush by lefties but those were actual fringe elements not big enough to actually have voting power and it still wasn't right back then. Our president is our president, it's never cool to incite violence against or cheer on when he may have a shoe thrown at him(besides what the hell took the secret service so long to protect Bush during the shoe thrower conference). I also really don't understand why they are protesting, Obama is far from "liberal" He hasn't stopped torture, has expanded war, been supremely pro business and has caved every time the right has complained even to the point of making his entire "healthcare" package based on the Republican plan given to Clinton. It sickens me to see how brainlessly subservient we have become to a single party in name only. There are only a few "liberals" left in congress and only 2 left in the Senate. The rest are all right of Reagan.

    74. Re:Politics aside, wtf is wrong with Google? by superdude72 · · Score: 1, Insightful

      They called themselves teabaggers, at first. After a couple of days of tee-heeing on the Internet, they changed it to tea partiers. If you are cultivating a snarky, contemptuous tone then it's perfectly suitable to continue calling them teabaggers. Not all discourse needs to be civil.

    75. Re:Politics aside, wtf is wrong with Google? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      CNN is a Communist plot!

      Happy now?

    76. Re:Politics aside, wtf is wrong with Google? by Wyatt+Earp · · Score: 1

      I said Republican, not Teabagger or Ron Paulite.

    77. Re:Politics aside, wtf is wrong with Google? by greyhueofdoubt · · Score: 1

      This whole story reminds me of a dirty campaign trick from a few years back- I'm not going to figure out which campaign or which election, since that's not important to this example.

      Basically what happened was that someone went around stapling up fliers all over poor/wrong color/undesirable neighborhoods exhorting them to vote- but the date on the flier was the day after the real election. When I read about this, the events in question were recent enough to make me pretty angry, and I brought it up at the break table one day. Someone said, "If a person can't figure out what day the election is on, do you really want them voting?"

      Someone had the humorous idea of redirecting visitors to a violent DC neighborhood. Probably thinking, "If someone can't figure out the difference between a violent neighborhood and the lincoln memorial, do you want them rallying?" I think in Beck's case the answer would be YES, YES that is exactly who we want, so I can see this being turned into a HUGE national news story as FOX uses this for free advertising and for the sympathy angle. The other networks will pick it up as 'Beck accuses liberals of trying to trick his fans' and that the pure-as-the-driven-snow liberals are shocked- SHOCKED- that anyone would accuse them of underhanded tactics (at least tactics that aren't embarrassingly obvious and transparent from the beginning).

      This situation is breaking right as I plan a vacation to europe, and that process is beginning to take on a somewhat frantic flavor...

      -b

      --
      No offense, but I've stopped responding to AC's.
    78. Re:Politics aside, wtf is wrong with Google? by SomeKDEUser · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Deficit went up during Bush years and no Tea Party movement: check. Legislation deemed terrible based purely on page numbers (costs are if anything going to be positively affected, but hey, we won't know for sure until 2020) vs terrible legislation based on what it says: check. Calling Obama "brazen" after Bush is comical (and no Tea Party during Bush). Basically you are (by association) a bigot.

      As for the taxes. Has it occurred to you that it is sometimes socially useful that individuals have a net disincentive to increase their wages? For example, the salaries (and boni are just disguised salaries) of Wall street bankers are disproportionate to their social utility, which would be fine if such salaries were not an elicitation to pursue careers in finance despite inclinations towards medicine or engineering or fundamental science, for which there is a lack of qualified workers.

      Some citizen paying net taxes, in fact a minority of citizen paying net taxes, is a necessary result for a society which is increasingly unequal: given a minimum standard of living rising with inflation and average income levels, more and more people will find themselves under the line as a vanishingly small minority syphons off all the income of the country. This cannot be fixed unless taxes are redistributive, or there are no taxes. Now you may think of no taxes as a good idea, but...

      That is why, mechanically, your argument about taxes makes no sense: it just happens that way, automatically, unless there are no taxes. But morally? it is not a question of people having earned their money: at some point, objectively, they haven't. If the share of the income of the richest grows, and the absolute income of those under is stagnating or receding (as is the case) what you are witnessing is robbery on a grand scale.

      But does it matter? Well, if all a significant part of the goods and services only go to a small minority of the potential customers (only they can afford these) then your economy swings with the mood of a small number of people. This means repeated booms and bust, great instability, even more inequality, and eventually a descent into societies looking like these of Latin America. And let's face it being rich in America is nicer than being rich in Brazil precisely because the people around you are rich enough that they don't want to kill you for your wallet.

    79. Re:Politics aside, wtf is wrong with Google? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

      there are several examples of wars in living memory in the Middle East involving unprovoked attacks by 5% of all Muslims or more

      I'd be thrilled to hear an example of 80 million Muslims mounting an unprovoked attack.

      Aside from your figures being bull I'd also like to point out that a country going to war with another country does in no way mean that all of it's inhabitants are violent extremists. At least I'd like to believe that we are not.

    80. Re:Politics aside, wtf is wrong with Google? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      So you're saying blacks are attracted to oddballs? Racist. ;)

      Now, the percentage of blacks in Tea Party rallies is roughly the same as in the greater population (7-11% IIRC). That means that it is a mainstream movement, not a racist one.

      Racism is a funny thing, especially with a group ostensibly lacking central organization as the Tea Party types are represented to me.

      Now me, I've seen plenty of Racism coming from the Tea Party. If there are groups that aren't racist, that are less bigoted than the ones I've seen...ok, but please don't try to lie to me and tell me that the Tea Party isn't full of racist types, or that they don't have a racist agenda as much as anything else.

      I wouldn't buy it from the KKK, the Nazi Party, or even the post-Southern Strategy Republicans.

    81. Re:Politics aside, wtf is wrong with Google? by Nethead · · Score: 1

      OMG! I friended a Republican?

      Living in Western Washington State where the majority are Democrats I find that the few Republicans that do get elected turn out to be fairly decent people and capable administrators. Some I've voted for over and over becasue they actually know how to do the job.

      I'm sure that the opposite holds true in red states.

      I hate it when good people get voted out just because of party fervor. My criteria for a candidate is the ability to think independently and do what is right for his or her constituents as opposed to the greater transient aims of the party.

      --
      -- I have a private email server in my basement.
    82. Re:Politics aside, wtf is wrong with Google? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      A strawman is a rhetorical trick where one debates and defeats an exaggerated and false representation of an opposing viewpoint

      Correct.

      Because it is a caricature of the real argument, it is far easier to debate than the real thing. Here, you stated they were a "corporate sponsored movement designed to appeal to people's fear and prejudice" (with a bunch more negative stuff following), you claimed they weren't "sane" or "cohesive". This is the caricature that you debate, the "strawman". I merely point out the flaw in this sort of thinking.

      Except it's not a Strawman argument. A strawman would be presenting something as the arguement of the Tea Party and then knocking it down. What you're talking about is something else.

      What the Prior Poster said was closer to an ad homineum attack than a strawman, though I'm not entirely comfortable with that term...still, I'd go with that over claiming it's a strawman.

    83. Re:Politics aside, wtf is wrong with Google? by sjames · · Score: 1

      Part of it is because people have been convinced somehow that political leanings can be entirely measured on a single dimension where clearly at least 2 are needed to even approximate a proper measurement.

      Many are surprised that there is such a creature as a left-libertarian because of that 1 dimensional analysis.

      Then somehow, we decided to conflate Right with conservative and left with liberal. Some people read 1984 and doubt that Newspeak could possibly be that effective. I'd say it's working just fine.

    84. Re:Politics aside, wtf is wrong with Google? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      A google search for "tea party racism study" turns up a survey which found a measurable difference in racial attitudes between the tea party folks and the general population, as the very first result. And criticizing someone for not doing research is not a proof or disproof of anything; what matters is the evidence that *exists*, not the evidence that was provided. And while you shouldn't accept conjectures without evidence for them, you shouldn't *reject* conjectures without evidence against them, either.

      The rules of reasoning and evidence are not as obvious as most people think, and most people, including you and me, get at least a few of them wrong. (It is especially hard to think clearly about politics). I recommend reading the Less Wrong sequences for guidance on how to evaluate hypotheses.

    85. Re:Politics aside, wtf is wrong with Google? by Huge_UID · · Score: 1

      I'd mod you up if I could...

    86. Re:Politics aside, wtf is wrong with Google? by toadlife · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Absolutely. Another factor is experience and empathy - My father grew up and has lived in a 99% non-black area near the Canadian border in the midwest. His experience is different so he can't relate.

      Exactly. My wife is half Mexican (the dark variety) and half Italian. She has the experience of being rejected by both groups when she was young, i.e., to the Mexicans she was white and to the whites she was Mexican.

      Being whitey McWhiterson myself, this is a phenomenon I was completely unaware of until I met and got to know her.

      The experience of being placed in a box her entire life shaped her world view.

      But again, a group of mostly white people is not racist because it's a group of mostly white people, and though you call it a generalization, I stand by my first statement that people who claim otherwise are racist themselves.

      People are not labeling the tea party racist because it's made of 98% white people. They are labeling it racist because of the overtly racist signs and comments captured in the media coverage of the tea party events. This may be not be fair representation of the group, but that's the way it is.

      My wife views the tea party as racist. We disagree, but the idea that that makes her a racist is laughable to me.

      --
      I don't always use unix-like operating systems; but when I do, I prefer FreeBSD.
    87. Re:Politics aside, wtf is wrong with Google? by toadlife · · Score: 1

      So you're willing to generalize to an entire group of people based on three data points?

      I think you need re-read my post. I just said that I DON'T view the tea party's motivation as being race, even though every tea partier I know is in fact racist.

      --
      I don't always use unix-like operating systems; but when I do, I prefer FreeBSD.
    88. Re:Politics aside, wtf is wrong with Google? by AK+Marc · · Score: 1

      Name calling is not a form of argument.

      For one, the teabaggers have called themselves teabaggers. After being informed of the implications, there were some changes, but I'm happy to call them what they once called themselves. For another, the Democratic Party objects to its members being called Democrats and prefers the long name Democratic Party member, like the teabaggers like Tea Party member or whatever. I don't see anyone honoring the Democratic Party wishes, so why are you defending one when the same happens to at least one other?

      Oh, and as for the statement that it is not a form of argument, you are obviously not familiar with forms of argument. They even have a name for what you assert, called "ad hominiem." Since there is obviously a well established term for that form of argument, not only is your presumption wrong (that I was name calling), but your logic and conclusions are wrong as well. Name calling is one of the oldest and most established forms of argument. Perhaps you wanted to insert an "in my opinion" at the beginning and "valid" somewhere in the middle. That would turn your 100% false statement into one that's then true, but worthless. If I cared what your opinion was, I'd ask, and notice - I didn't.

    89. Re:Politics aside, wtf is wrong with Google? by AK+Marc · · Score: 1

      I use "teabagger" because it exemplifies their connection to modern culture. They called themselves teabaggers first, before I ever got around to it. They were to ignorant to know what it meant, too lazy to look it up, and branded themselves with it. Continuing to use the name they gave themselves just seems fitting, even if they've later changed their minds (and, as far as I can tell, tried to change history to claim that no party members ever used it when I've seen the signs like "teabagger and proud" that looked very professionally printed used at gatherings).

      I'm a libertarian (note the lower l). I fear the neocons. The teabaggers look to be a group of neocons that think the Libertarians are too liberal. As someone else hinted in a response, they should be the Puritanical Party. They aren't for small government and freedom for all. They are for an oppressive government that enforces the freedoms they like and squashes all others. I honestly can't understand any party claiming to be for personal rights who wants to prevent gay marriage in order to preserve the definition of a word, marriage, over the rights of the people. But then, from what I can tell, they haven't made an official statement on gay marriage. It's just that the majority of people who describe themselves as members are against it. So in cases like that, they aren't just libertarian with different priorities, but they are put to crush personal rights because they don't like the people who might use those rights, and do so stealthfully because they won't just come out of the closet with a firm stance.

    90. Re:Politics aside, wtf is wrong with Google? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The Tea party isn't full of racist types. They don't have a racist agenda as much as anything else.

      You assert that the Tea Party is full of racist types. Provide some proof. You assert the Tea Party has a racist agenda. Provide some proof.

      I will concede the fact that it may be possible to find an amount of racism in the Tea Party that is proportional to that found in the general population, and that you'd find in any gathering of people. Let's see racist pictures and racist speech in video from people that have not been later shown to be of liberal persuasion. If there is as much racism in the party as you claim, there should be ample video or photographic evidence. I have not seen any.

    91. Re:Politics aside, wtf is wrong with Google? by Wyatt+Earp · · Score: 1

      Yea, my experience with democratic candidates and office holders in "Red States" is that they are decent, capable people.

      I've met Sen Daschle, Johnson, Thune and Hatfield, all were good nice guys who answered questions and concerns I had, didn't matter if they were D or R.

      I grew up on a Reservation where the people coming out of the party in power where there is no viable alternative are the jackhole corrupt politicians. Pretty much the same system kicked out the Portland City Council members.

    92. Re:Politics aside, wtf is wrong with Google? by tompaulco · · Score: 1

      All of the leadership at my Church use Mac products and they are almost certainly all Republicans. I, on the other hand, have nothing whatsoever with a Mac brand on it, and am also a Republican.

      --
      If you are not allowed to question your government then the government has answered your question.
    93. Re:Politics aside, wtf is wrong with Google? by Cyberllama · · Score: 1

      Citation please for the actions of significant tea party racism (beyond that of US norm) or for that matter significant tolerance of racism (again beyond that of US norm). Surely you can vomit a half dozen links on command like those other guys. Until then, reasonable minds are going to have to assume that you're full of shit.

      The basis for my claim is simple. I don't need to link it to you cause you've already seen it:

      Pictures of tea party protests with a significant percentage of the signs being blatantly racist. I could link them to you, but I know you've seen them. Now *maybe* these signs don't represent the views of the majority, HOWEVER, I'd challenge you to find me a single example of a prominent Tea Party member decrying these signs or chastising the people holding them. If you can't, then that pretty much proves my point that, at minimum, racism is *tolerated* by the Tea Party.

      Other groups, as you say, may well have racists -- but you can bet they don't feel comfortable speaking those views OPENLY and if they do, they're quickly shouted down and condemned. That's the simple difference.

      [quote]If these people were really interested in "national unity", they probably wouldn't have put that building with the role it has there. They probably just want to get their narrative into the 9/11 myth and a nice building is classier than billboards.[/quote]

      This whole situation is a train wreck. I regret mentioning it. In fact, I regret making my post. Not that I was wrong, just that I don't need to let myself sink into a silly flame war.

      At any rate, let me summarize this situation and why it's so sad:

      1) Group wants to build mosque. Because it'll be close to ground zero (though, for the record, no closer than the nearest strip club), they want to have a special area dedicated to promoting peace and understanding between religions.

      2) Some people react badly to this. They naturally (to them it's natural) assume malicious intent, and see it as "rubbing salt on an open wound". This assumption of malice only occurs because they have prejudices against Muslims. Some of them are aware of their bigotry, many are not. If they didn't naturally assume that muslims were out to get them, they'd have no problems.

      3) The group wishing to build the mosque is saddened, but vows they will not be deterred by bigotry, which they recognize as the source of the opposition.

      4) The protesters take the refusal to back-down in #3 as *proof* that they have malicious intent. If they really wanted it to be about peace and unity, they would just build somewhere else, right? This after-the-fact rationalization allows them to continue to remain blind to their own prejudices -- despite the fact that the logic is a bit circular. This doesn't matter, the brain makes it work -- and even supplements it by digging up out of context quotes and such. Rationalization, after all, is the brains best weapon against self-realization. Cognitive Dissonance is how we preserve our sense of self. If we see ourselves as non-bigots, our brain will do whatever it takes to preserve that illusion.

      And, yeah . . . like I said, it's a train wreck. From the outside, it's obvious to see both perspectives and you can see the inherent tragedy. Neither side believes they are wrong. Both sides believe they are only trying to do what's right, and are convinced the other side is wrong, and furthermore that they know they are wrong.

      The people who want to build the mosque for the sake of unity, are causing exactly the opposite -- but only because they've riled up some bigots. They refuse to give in to bigotry, so they continue to cause discord instead of unity.

    94. Re:Politics aside, wtf is wrong with Google? by Nethead · · Score: 1

      I understand the rez part as I'm living on the Tulalip Tribes land. The last time I lived in PDX Bud Clark was mayor.

      --
      -- I have a private email server in my basement.
    95. Re:Politics aside, wtf is wrong with Google? by tompaulco · · Score: 1

      I only know three, but every "tea partier" I personally know is an older white person who harbors what I would call..."ethnic animosity".
      Well, I know a lot more than three, and I don't consider them old, but maybe that is because I am getting old. They are between 35 and 55.
      As far as ethnic animosity, I suppose one could argue that it appears there is some of that, but I think the more common stereotype that republicans only care about money is the real culprit. It is not so much prejudice against the Mexicans, as it is against the illegal immigrants which are hitting them in the wallet. It is not so much the blacks, as the cycle of welfare abuse which hits them in the wallet. If it was white folks illegally crossing the border illegally, I think the republicans would be just as against it. I know I would. Off the subject, my wife is an immigrant. She came here on a valid visa, and she has become a United States citizen.

      --
      If you are not allowed to question your government then the government has answered your question.
    96. Re:Politics aside, wtf is wrong with Google? by Walkingshark · · Score: 1

      Tea bagger is actually the name they originally picked for themselves.

      --
      The world you experience is only a close approximation of reality.
    97. Re:Politics aside, wtf is wrong with Google? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If they wanted to reach out to the community "to foster unity" why is their goal to piss off a majority of the people that say it is not appropriate to build it there? That reasoning is bunk because if they did want unity they would not be as determined to build right there as they are.

    98. Re:Politics aside, wtf is wrong with Google? by Wyatt+Earp · · Score: 1

      I was on Cheyenne River Sioux Reservation for 20 years, but I'm not a CRST tribal member, it was different.

      I left Portland in January 2009, the mayor and council are always democrats, nothing big gets done, they get bogged down in minutiae. Anchorage has some diversity in political parties so they fight and unite to piss off the mayor who vetos stuff and then they overturn it. Way more interesting.

      I googled portland city council to see what they were up to and it's glorious fun

      http://www.katu.com/news/101722028.html

    99. Re:Politics aside, wtf is wrong with Google? by khallow · · Score: 1

      I'd be thrilled to hear an example of 80 million Muslims mounting an unprovoked attack.

      Three examples: the Yom Kippur war, the Bangladesh genocide, and the East Timor genocide.

    100. Re:Politics aside, wtf is wrong with Google? by khallow · · Score: 1

      Deficit went up during Bush years and no Tea Party movement: check. Legislation deemed terrible based purely on page numbers (costs are if anything going to be positively affected, but hey, we won't know for sure until 2020) vs terrible legislation based on what it says: check. Calling Obama "brazen" after Bush is comical (and no Tea Party during Bush). Basically you are (by association) a bigot.

      So it took the tea party people a while to get on board. Better late than never. So what? And bigot "by association"? What a worthless label. I talk to you so obviously I'm a bigot by association anyway. I couldn't give a damn.

      in fact a minority of citizen paying net taxes, is necessary to have a society which is increasingly unequal

      Fixed it for you. Equality also means sharing the tax burden.

      That is why, mechanically, your argument about taxes makes no sense: it just happens that way, automatically, unless there are no taxes. But morally? it is not a question of people having earned their money: at some point, objectively, they haven't. If the share of the income of the richest grows, and the absolute income of those under is stagnating or receding (as is the case) what you are witnessing is robbery on a grand scale.

      "Robbery" by who? The rich people? Or the government that is creating and exploiting the situation? I think the latter is much more dangerous and something we should fix right now.

    101. Re:Politics aside, wtf is wrong with Google? by khallow · · Score: 1

      As for the taxes. Has it occurred to you that it is sometimes socially useful that individuals have a net disincentive to increase their wages? For example, the salaries (and boni are just disguised salaries) of Wall street bankers are disproportionate to their social utility, which would be fine if such salaries were not an elicitation to pursue careers in finance despite inclinations towards medicine or engineering or fundamental science, for which there is a lack of qualified workers.

      No. And it still hasn't occurred to me, even after reading your envious tripe here. It's a little known fact apparently, but the reason there's so much money in trade (such as finance) is because there's so much value created in trade.

    102. Re:Politics aside, wtf is wrong with Google? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That is the most comprehensive and insightful summation of the Tea Party movement I have ever seen. I applaud you.
      The Tea Party is about groups like Fox News taking power from the people using fear of those "different" as their primary tactic. While 'W' was in power, expanding government and limiting freedoms, there was no Tea Party. The big business organizers liked his policies.
      The sad thing is that I think most of the Tea Party rank and file don't realize that they are supporting liberty for the big corporations and justice for the wealthy. All you need is a hot button term like socialism. Shout socialism and you'll get a thousand Tea Party faithful screaming about the evils of socialism and how you damn well better not mess with their Medicare.

    103. Re:Politics aside, wtf is wrong with Google? by khallow · · Score: 1

      Tea bagger is actually the name they originally picked for themselves.

      And they unpicked it when they figured out why everyone was snickering.

    104. Re:Politics aside, wtf is wrong with Google? by khallow · · Score: 1

      100% of his encounters were with people fitting a specific stereotype. From the AC's message, it is apparent he has had encounters with various people -- a number large enough, coupled with the consistency of the AC's findings, for the AC to feel representative of the group.

      Nonsense. Two words: "observer bias". He saw what he wanted to see.

    105. Re:Politics aside, wtf is wrong with Google? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I was there. I was a guy with an iPhone. He also had on an Infowars hat on, so points off for that.

    106. Re:Politics aside, wtf is wrong with Google? by khallow · · Score: 1

      A google search for "tea party racism study" turns up a survey which found a measurable difference in racial attitudes between the tea party folks and the general population, as the very first result. And criticizing someone for not doing research is not a proof or disproof of anything; what matters is the evidence that *exists*, not the evidence that was provided. And while you shouldn't accept conjectures without evidence for them, you shouldn't *reject* conjectures without evidence against them, either.

      The rules of reasoning and evidence are not as obvious as most people think, and most people, including you and me, get at least a few of them wrong. (It is especially hard to think clearly about politics). I recommend reading the Less Wrong sequences [lesswrong.com] for guidance on how to evaluate hypotheses.

      Let's not get hasty here. Before you bark about rules of reasoning and evidence, you need to keep in mind that you've just presented one study of dubious provenance and dubious conclusions. I asked for evidence that racism was more prevalent in the "tea party" group than general society. The study merely indicates that there is a difference in racial attitudes, which is far from the same thing. Given that we would expect different ethnicities to collectively have somewhat different stakes in political measures, I don't see this as significant in itself. Second, the study indicates some questionable racial attitudes among the study researchers as well. For example, in the blurb (by the school that sponsored the study researcher), we have:

      Many believed that the election of Barack Obama brought to a close the long, painful, and ugly history of race and racism in the United States. But as the incident with Henry Louis Gates last summer, and the more recent outbursts of the Tea Party activists suggest, racial divisions remain.

      The only notable bigotry I see is some degree of homophobia (which is something shared with a number of other groups, for example, the ethnic groups, Latinos and Blacks). Again, that doesn't seem significant though compared to the general population.

    107. Re:Politics aside, wtf is wrong with Google? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Only 58% of Americans are sure Obama was born in the US: http://thecaucus.blogs.nytimes.com/2010/04/21/obama-and-the-birthers-in-the-latest-poll/

      Who was the last white president that this happened to?

    108. Re:Politics aside, wtf is wrong with Google? by khallow · · Score: 1

      Pictures of tea party protests with a significant percentage of the signs being blatantly racist. I could link them to you, but I know you've seen them. Now *maybe* these signs don't represent the views of the majority, HOWEVER, I'd challenge you to find me a single example of a prominent Tea Party member decrying these signs or chastising the people holding them. If you can't, then that pretty much proves my point that, at minimum, racism is *tolerated* by the Tea Party.

      Citation please. You made an accusation. Now back it up.

      I know a little pop psych too. It's called "projection". How many of these alleged psychological problems are really with the tea party people and how many are your own flaws which you attempt to "project" onto a group you don't like?

    109. Re:Politics aside, wtf is wrong with Google? by khallow · · Score: 1

      Except it's not a Strawman argument. A strawman would be presenting something as the arguement of the Tea Party and then knocking it down. What you're talking about is something else.

      Oh right. Ad hominem attack. My bad.

    110. Re:Politics aside, wtf is wrong with Google? by khallow · · Score: 1
      My bad. I just saw the lame first paragraph and blew off the rest. Too bad I went back and looked at it.

      The primary motivation is not race, but economics. It's a bunch of people who see the shifting economic social climate as a threat to the status quo which has benefited them greatly.

      Two questions here. What's the problem with people defending their economic status? Why are some people required to sacrifice their economic well being when other people are not?

      Second, the shifting economic "social" climate has resulted in a national debt that is almost the size of annual GDP (98% forecast by the end of this fiscal year) and growing much faster than GDP (a classic symptom of states that are failing economically). It has resulted in a screwed up tax and benefits system to the point where some people see negative incentives to increasing their income. It has resulted in a health care "reform" that is likely to make health insurance coverage even less complete and fails in a number of other ways to reform health care. It has resulted in a system with huge liabilities and little effort to fix those problems. The status quo at least has the charm of not destroying the US's future as fast.

    111. Re:Politics aside, wtf is wrong with Google? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      that why I got an Android phone

    112. Re:Politics aside, wtf is wrong with Google? by khallow · · Score: 1

      Only 58% of Americans are sure Obama was born in the US: http://thecaucus.blogs.nytimes.com/2010/04/21/obama-and-the-birthers-in-the-latest-poll/

      Who was the last white president that this happened to?

      Who's the last president, this could have happened to and have it matter? As I see it, nobody is sure where Obama was born, but Hawaii says he was born there, so legally he was born in Hawaii.

    113. Re:Politics aside, wtf is wrong with Google? by khallow · · Score: 1

      Aside from your figures being bull I'd also like to point out that a country going to war with another country does in no way mean that all of it's inhabitants are violent extremists. At least I'd like to believe that we are not.

      I don't make that distinction. We are responsible for what our governments do.

    114. Re:Politics aside, wtf is wrong with Google? by sumdumass · · Score: 1

      Yawn.. Rush Limbaugh.

      Rush is an avid Apple Fanboy who frequently sings the praises of anything apply on his program. In fact, of you "friend him" on his face book account, you are signed up for some ipad or something giveaway contest Rush is hosting.

      I don't think he votes democrat.

    115. Re:Politics aside, wtf is wrong with Google? by sumdumass · · Score: 1

      This whole story reminds me of a dirty campaign trick from a few years back- I'm not going to figure out which campaign or which election, since that's not important to this example.

      Cleavland or Toledo Ohio area- 2004 or 2006 or 2008 elections. I forget which, but there was several controversies like this within the last couple major elections in that area. Some used the controversies to claim Bush Stole the election from Kerry, in other situations it was used to rally certain supporters. I'm not sure if the fliers or the rhetoric resulting form them were connected to the later by intend as the areas impacted seemed to be low income, high violence-crime areas where you wouldn't expect voting or civic duty as being a high priority.

      I don't think they ever figures out who issued the flyers but as soon as one is seen, all the local news is running stories about it having the wrong dates and correcting them now.

    116. Re:Politics aside, wtf is wrong with Google? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      As I see it, nobody is sure where Obama was born ...

      So a birth certificate, newspaper announcements and statements by his family aren't enough for you ... what would be required for you to be 'sure'?

    117. Re:Politics aside, wtf is wrong with Google? by khallow · · Score: 1

      So a birth certificate, newspaper announcements and statements by his family aren't enough for you ... what would be required for you to be 'sure'?

      A birth certificate from Hawaii. Funny how that works.

    118. Re:Politics aside, wtf is wrong with Google? by SomeKDEUser · · Score: 1

      "it took a while to get on board" hint: this movement was fabricated. It surfs on all manners of vile instincts latent in humans for political gain.

      "sharing the tax burden". Yes, it means that if you earn a lot, you got out a lot from society, so you give back a lot. If you think you could have gotten rich without the infrastructure, the rule of law, and the education level of your citizens (thanks in great part to the government), you are deluded. You probably also were lucky. It is not desirable that life be a vast lottery, so everyone contributes back as a function of what he got. If you were unlucky, society takes care of you, and if you were lucky, you take care of your fellow humans. Think of taxes as a sort of self-sustaining charity. Which makes life in society possible in the first place.

      Every item we use was created, produced transported through the countless contributions of an enormous amount of individuals, each with fairly unique skills. The rich guy who gets the larger cut of the profit could never have even started dreaming of the beginning of the notion of whatever widget was sold without a complete civilisation which made it possible. So yes, he should pay large taxes. He'll still be rich. He'll even still be richer. But not by such a margin that it makes a mockery of reality.

      The government runs a deficit (which is normal, BTW, it is a not for profit organisation which can emit infinite amount of debt, over time -- and never go bust), the rich people get richer. Clearly the rich people are doing the robbing :)

    119. Re:Politics aside, wtf is wrong with Google? by Nikkos · · Score: 1

      People are not labeling the tea party racist because it's made of 98% white people. They are labeling it racist because of the overtly racist signs and comments captured in the media coverage of the tea party events. This may be not be fair representation of the group, but that's the way it is. My wife views the tea party as racist. We disagree, but the idea that that makes her a racist is laughable to me.

      I think you're getting the order mixed up. (or maybe I am) But I saw/heard the label before I saw the media start looking for examples (IE, the gun-toting racist hicks comments while the black man carrying the weapon was edited out of the photos) Their very involvement against the health-care bill was called racist, they were called racist because of their supposed anti black-man-for-president attitude before Obama was even elected.

      With all due respect to your wife (and I mean that), if she's never been to a rally herself, then her assumption that the tea-party is racist is based on one or two things (or both,): that it's racist because it's primarily white, and/or that it's racist because friends/media told her so and gave carefully chosen examples/pictures to prove it. Her assumptions are based on the same type of racist myth-perpetuation that makes all Italians into mobsters and all Mexicans into violent cartel members. I can only hope she researches more into it.

      Don't get me wrong, I'm not a huge tea-party supporter - I'm pro gay-rights, non-christian, and pro-choice. But I do support some of what they stand for (just as I support things the Ds and Rs stand for) I also defend these parties from unfair characterizations and I think that this is one of those instances - and a particularly evil and malicious one at that.

    120. Re:Politics aside, wtf is wrong with Google? by DavidTC · · Score: 1

      If you get to the Washington or FDR memorial and can't see the numerous signs to the Lincoln memorial or even see the memorial itself, not much is going to help you. They're all within walking distance of each other.

      At actual important rallies and whatnot, it doesn't matter, because, duh, you can see the huge crowd. If at a large rally, you could figure out how to get the FDR without going past the Mall and seeing the huge crowd of people, my hat's off to you.

      The only logical assumption is that the crowd here was much smaller.

      --
      If corporations are people, aren't stockholders guilty of slavery?
    121. Re:Politics aside, wtf is wrong with Google? by DavidTC · · Score: 1

      While I can understand how you got that impression from his comments, I don't think Tea Party activists in general are the same as libertarians. It's more than an ordering of priorities from what I've seen. The libertarian party is about personal freedoms for everyone even people they didn't like. They wanted to reduce government size to maximize personal freedom.

      I think libertarians are selfish fools, but even I will admit they're at least politically consistent and an actual political philosophy. They're classified right next to communists in my book as 'stupid political philosophy', but at least they're in the damn book.

      The Tea Party doesn't even reach that level. They're just repeating gibberish sprouted by Beck and Palin.

      Actually, from what I've seen the Tea Party seems to be a corporate sponsored movement designed to appeal to people's fear and prejudice and to the previously built "us versus them" political mentality, with the goal of preventing the government from effectively regulating and stopping the worst practices of big businesses, whether that is to poison our land and people for profit, or leverage wealth disparity to bleed the poor and middle class using capital as leverage.

      This.

      I'm sorry, folks, I gave the Tea Party people as much slack and excuses as I could, but they're totally incoherent and nonsensical, complaining about stuff that doesn't exist or about, um, taxes, while at the same time pretending to be against the deficit. But pro-war, don't forget that.

      The Tea Party isn't a movement, it's a label corporations have slapped on the Republican base and distributed nonsense to. There's no consistency at all except, possibly, xenophobia and absurd beliefs in objectively wrong facts.

      The Republicans spent way too much time pandering to their base, building it stronger and stronger and less and less in touch with reality, and Fox News walked in and stole it to pump up ratings, pulling some publicity seeking Republicans along with it. It's somewhat hilarious.

      And, pissing me off personally, they've tried to steal the American revolution, was about a government denying civil rights, not about taxes.

      Oh, and now the assholes have tried to steal MLK Jr. You know, anti-war anti-poverty MLK Jr. Somehow, they've managed to successfully pretend he was all about stopping racism. I wish I had time to show up at the rally with some MLK Jr quotes on signs...I think 'A nation that continues year after year to spend more money on military defense than on programs of social uplift is approaching spiritual death.' would be perfect.

      --
      If corporations are people, aren't stockholders guilty of slavery?
    122. Re:Politics aside, wtf is wrong with Google? by DavidTC · · Score: 1

      And lastly, you're kidding yourself if you think anybody is "afraid" of what the Tea Party stands for, other than the rise of domestic terrorism it portends (we've already seen too much of this, sadly). From a political standpoint, it's the best gift liberals ever got. A schism right down the middle of the conservative backbone of America. It's amazing! Republican politicians are in an impossible situation.

      It's actually rather hilarious that Republicans think the Democrats keep talking about the Tea Party because us on the left are scared of it.

      Guys? GOP? Newsflash: You don't keep talking about movement you're scared of. You totally ignore them. You know, like the right did with the anti-war movement. Made that almost entirely disappear. (The Democrats elected to stop the war, OTOH, did the more clever move of making the war itself disappear.)

      Yeah, the left is talking about it because it makes some Republicans look insane, and it makes other Republicans either side with the insane ones, and risk the votes of the sane, or vis versa.

      Fox News, OTOH, is talking about it because it invented it, for ratings. Fox News is, at this point, quite possibly the worse enemy of the Republican party. They're the loyal prime minster of the Republicans who just launched a coup, and not even a coup to end up in charge, but a coup to sell everything in Republidonia and retire to the Bahamas.

      Also, the left is talking about it because it's really really funny.

      --
      If corporations are people, aren't stockholders guilty of slavery?
    123. Re:Politics aside, wtf is wrong with Google? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      A birth certificate from Hawaii.

      You're kidding, right? It takes about .5 seconds to find that online. Here's one site that posted it, there are many others: http://fightthesmears.com/images/28.jpg

      If that's not enough, then about half the US population isn't going to meet your criteria ...

    124. Re:Politics aside, wtf is wrong with Google? by sumdumass · · Score: 1

      Why would simply the name of someone make a thread serious or not serious?

      It would seem that the content and the context is more important to the distinction of serious or not. Perhaps I'm missing something, could you let me in on it?

    125. Re:Politics aside, wtf is wrong with Google? by Walkingshark · · Score: 1

      They should have spent five minutes on the internet (or just run it by one of their halo playing thirteen year old children) before naming their movement. Calling them teabaggers isn't funny because of the meaning of the word, it's funny because it so quickly, clearly, and easily illustrates the ignorance that forms the core of their movement.

      --
      The world you experience is only a close approximation of reality.
    126. Re:Politics aside, wtf is wrong with Google? by khallow · · Score: 1

      A birth certificate from Hawaii.

      You're kidding, right?

      Here's what I posted a few back:

      As I see it, nobody is sure where Obama was born, but Hawaii says he was born there, so legally he was born in Hawaii.

      So... am I kidding?

    127. Re:Politics aside, wtf is wrong with Google? by khallow · · Score: 1

      hint: this movement was fabricated. It surfs on all manners of vile instincts latent in humans for political gain.

      A movement doesn't work without followers. Where are they coming from? Why are they there? Of course the movement is going to get exploited for political gain. That's no different than any other political movement.

      "sharing the tax burden". Yes, it means that if you earn a lot, you got out a lot from society, so you give back a lot. If you think you could have gotten rich without the infrastructure, the rule of law, and the education level of your citizens (thanks in great part to the government), you are deluded. You probably also were lucky. It is not desirable that life be a vast lottery, so everyone contributes back as a function of what he got. If you were unlucky, society takes care of you, and if you were lucky, you take care of your fellow humans. Think of taxes as a sort of self-sustaining charity. Which makes life in society possible in the first place.

      This is completely missing the point. The problem here is that when you have a majority of voters not paying taxes, then they're going to resort to their, as you put it, "vile instincts" and take from the people who are paying taxes. It's basic game theory. Rather than set up the system for long term failure, I recommend having most voters pay taxes. We insure that most voters have their interests aligned with some degree of fiscal responsibility. It also helps deal with the fallacy that government money is free money.

      Every item we use was created, produced transported through the countless contributions of an enormous amount of individuals, each with fairly unique skills. The rich guy who gets the larger cut of the profit could never have even started dreaming of the beginning of the notion of whatever widget was sold without a complete civilisation which made it possible. So yes, he should pay large taxes. He'll still be rich. He'll even still be richer. But not by such a margin that it makes a mockery of reality.

      As taxes increase, this rich guy will hire less people and invest less in his or other peoples' businesses. That's the flip side of higher taxes. And it ignores the issue of what that money gets spent on. Money gets spent on making society run? That's good. Money that gets spent buying services for everyone that most people don't need? Not so good. Money spent creating rich parasites who then bribe government to get even more public funds? That's bad.

      Further, at some point the rich guy is just going to move his wealth some place else. Moral rationalizations for higher taxes won't keep him around.

      The government runs a deficit (which is normal, BTW, it is a not for profit organisation which can emit infinite amount of debt, over time -- and never go bust), the rich people get richer. Clearly the rich people are doing the robbing :)

      Uh huh. So what you're saying is that any money I have, I got by robbing someone. That's pathological thinking. Certainly not a good argument for letting you have any of my pennies.

      Here's how I see it. You give a bunch of rationalizations about how rich people owe more to society and that they probably robbed someone else to get their money in the first place. My fundamental issue, aside from the erroneous claim that rich equals robber, is that there's no balance. There's no threshold past which you'll say, "This is an adequate level of taxation to support society". Similarly, if a minority of voters end up paying taxes versus a majority who gets to spend it, then the same dynamic takes place. There's no limit other than what's there to take. Just steal all their money and be done with the rationalizations.

    128. Re:Politics aside, wtf is wrong with Google? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Well, my question was what it would take for you to be 'sure' (your word), not 'legally'. So I have no idea what you are trying to say.

      My read is that you want to have it both ways. If the opportunity comes up, you cast doubt on Obama's eligibility to be president. When you run into evidence, you pull a Cavuto ("I was just asking ...") or this passive-aggressive stuff.

      My other read is that you reach your political opinions, and then try to find logic to justify them. That's not a great crime - many people do. The crime is that you've convinced yourself that you are above the sheeple, and that you've reached your position logically and rationally. Reality is, you are just like everybody else.

    129. Re:Politics aside, wtf is wrong with Google? by khallow · · Score: 1

      They should have spent five minutes on the internet (or just run it by one of their halo playing thirteen year old children) before naming their movement. Calling them teabaggers isn't funny because of the meaning of the word, it's funny because it so quickly, clearly, and easily illustrates the ignorance that forms the core of their movement.

      But that's not the only sort of ignorance out there. For example, the US has a current "off budget" deficit (that is, treating Social Security taxes as if they were general revenue) of somewhere over a trillion dollars and a public debt that is projected to finish this fiscal year just shy of this year's GDP. I believe the US government is projected to have a similar trillion dollar deficit next year. Those facts help drive the tea party movement (here, manifesting as a push to lower government spending) yet some people claim the movement is only driven by racism.

      That sort of deficit means some combination of three choices: 1) lower spending, 2) increase taxes, or 3) increase inflation (which in my view is roughly equivalent to a tax on cash and fixed income assets). For some reason, choice 1) is racist according to some comments in this story. However, what do they think will happen if we chose either 2) or 3)? Let's suppose that nobody wants to inflate our way out since hyperinflation is an ugly thing and we raise taxes to the point that we no longer have a significant deficit. What keeps Congress from spending more and maintaining the US's troublesome deficit?

      It boggles me that some people focus on the tea party's ignorance of "teabagger" yet seem ignorant of basic political cause and effect. If we give the politicians more money, they spend more money. If we don't work to reduce deficits, then the politicians won't either. Presumably, they think the tea party movement will lead to a worse future. Why?

    130. Re:Politics aside, wtf is wrong with Google? by SomeKDEUser · · Score: 1

      As for the robbing: yes. Think BP: clearly, the value they added to society is very much inferior to what they got from it -- and I'm not talking about the latest incident: the Anglo-Persian oil company has a long and bloody history. Think about the telcos. Small or medium business owners are not "rich", they are "well-off". They might or might not pay fair amount of taxes (odds are, in the US, not quite) But the very rich? They owe society more than TARP and the stimulus bill together.

      You think rich people invest their money? This is only part of the story: first, you'll invest in your business, which is good. Then in your house/car/leisure, which is cool. Then you will have plenty of money left, and you'll still want to invest it. Now you will not invest it in schools, because the return is nil, nor will you in roads, of trains, or utilities. You personally might, but this is not something which happens significantly.

      The main reason is that indeed the returns are not good, or too long term, or the upfront costs too large. You you'll put your money in a fund to do the investing for you. Now if the taxes are really low and the society very unequal not many people having too much money not invested in the society's future try to get maximum returns. And never mind the details: you end up with a crisis like the one we just had.

      You have to force people to invest in society. Not because they are bad, not because they would not want to, but because they don't in general, and cannot be trusted to, not when it's most needed. Not in the efficient coordinated way that the Government can. Because for all its flaws, for all the pork, the special interests, etc. it still represents the people, and its job is still to make society possible. And it's the the only business in town which does that.

      About robbing: think of all the things which are provided to you, which are possible because of the government, try to be honest, and then ask yourself how much that costs, and compare that to the amounts you pay in taxes. And don't forget to add the cost of the education of all your employees... And if you are paying for all that, well done sir, you are paying your fair share. Basically, if you society is stably unequal, you have an adequate level of taxation. If it tends to become more equal than humans are, beware, you tax too much, and general poverty may lie this way. But if it becomes more unequal, you are undertaxing, and down that road lies blood. This is not rationalisation, sadly, this is how the score is played around the world.

    131. Re:Politics aside, wtf is wrong with Google? by StopKoolaidPoliticsT · · Score: 1

      I'm sorry, folks, I gave the Tea Party people as much slack and excuses as I could, but they're totally incoherent and nonsensical, complaining about stuff that doesn't exist or about, um, taxes, while at the same time pretending to be against the deficit. But pro-war, don't forget that.

      The Tea Party isn't a movement, it's a label corporations have slapped on the Republican base and distributed nonsense to. There's no consistency at all except, possibly, xenophobia and absurd beliefs in objectively wrong facts.

      That's because the Tea Party isn't a political party, it's a series of local movements. There is no national leader, though some people or groups try to pretend they're the leader(s). The tea parties I've helped to organize were put together by a dozen or so local people of all different stripes (libertarians, social conservatives, fiscal conservatives and even a former member of MoveOn, and there were males and females (about 50/50), whites, blacks and browns) and we funded it completely out of our own pockets, passing a hat around the table.

      At the core of our tea parties, is economic freedom and freedom from government encroachment on our liberty. We've agreed to unite on the things we agree upon rather than be divided by the wedge issues politicians love to get us to disagree on. So, we make no endorsement of or condemnation of homosexuality and/or gay marriage. If anything, most of us believe government should get out of the business of marriage entirely.

      Don't assume that Beck speaks for the Tea Party Movement - he has absolutely nothing to do with the TPM and while his Beckbots, er, We Surround Them project may have some commonalities with the TPM, locally, the Beckbots have chosen to do their own thing and don't want anything to do with public advocacy anymore. Likewise, Palin doesn't speak for us, Ron Paul doesn't speak for us, the Tea Party Express, Tea Party Patriots or whatever "national" group doesn't speak for us.

      So, if the Tea Party Movement seems disjointed to you, it's because it is... precisely because it's a real grassroots movement and not some sham astroturf like the "Coffee Party" groups. We're entirely bottom up, not top down, despite the consternation of those that want to call themselves leaders... only the left hasn't quite seemed to figure that out yet since they're too busy listening to people spouting sexual innuendo, cropping pictures of black people holding guns accusing them of being white, etc.

      Suddenly, dissent went from the highest form of patriotism to "paid astroturf" if it is something the former protestors disagree with.

      And, pissing me off personally, they've tried to steal the American revolution, was about a government denying civil rights, not about taxes.

      Read the Declaration of Independence... you don't see any parallels in there to today?

      He has refused his Assent to Laws, the most wholesome and necessary for the public good - Presidents, governors, Congressmen, police, etc don't consider themselves above the law?

      He has refused to pass other Laws for the accommodation of large districts of people, unless those people would relinquish the right of Representation in the Legislature, a right inestimable to them and formidable to tyrants only. - The federal government issues mandates outside its jurisdiction, like drinking laws, seat belt laws, schooling issues, etc... and unless those jurisdictions surrender their control, the federal government denies them funding and access.

      He has erected a multitude of New Offices, and sent hither swarms of Officers to harrass our people, and eat out their substance. - 16,000 new IRS agents in the Health Care bill alone... not to mention dozens of new bureaucracies to support it... and that's just ONE law from one recent President. How about the TSA and everything that happened under Bush too?

      He has kept among us, in times of peace, Standing Armies without the Conse

      --
      Stop Koolaid Politics
    132. Re:Politics aside, wtf is wrong with Google? by HanClinto · · Score: 1

      I wish I had time to show up at the rally with some MLK Jr quotes on signs...I think 'A nation that continues year after year to spend more money on military defense than on programs of social uplift is approaching spiritual death.' would be perfect.

      If you don't have time to do that, perhaps you maybe might have time to educate yourself as to how much we actually spend on defense vs. social uplift?

      For one -- we spend more on Social Security alone than we do on the entire Department of Defense -- not counting other social uplift programs such as welfare, foreign aid, national parks, environmental services, or whatever.

      I guess I'm not sure I understand what you're railing against. Which countries in particular are you saying are approaching spiritual death?

      You sound angry and ignorant.

    133. Re:Politics aside, wtf is wrong with Google? by DavidTC · · Score: 1

      Hey, dumbass, Social Security isn't 'social uplift', it's a damn insurance program. That's right, folks, on the right 'social uplift' is getting paid back the money you paid the government.

      So when you loan someone five dollars, and they pay it back, the person who paid it back just donated to charity. Or if you make an a health insurance claim because you got cancer, your insurance company just 'helped out cancer sufferers'. They 'uplifted' you.

      In non crazy-world, of course, social uplift is when you actively try to make the poor non-poor, not when you pay out on insurance.

      We don't functionally spend any money on social uplift at least not at the national level. Possibly the HOPE grant and the FHA to some extent and some other things like that, but it's very small.

      This is because the right insists on making all social programs exist solely in the form of insurance. You have to pay into Social Security to get any out, you have to pay into unemployment to get any back, you have to pay into Medicare to get any out (Except a tiny part which you can get anyway.) None of those actually help the very poor, who haven't 'banked' any benefits to start with.

      Most of the stuff aimed at the very poor is simply to keep them alive. It's stuff like free food in the form of food stamps and free school lunches. (Which, um, we just cut.) And Medicaid, which is funded by the Federal government.

      There is no national 'uplift' program designed to get people out of total poverty. At all.

      Secondly, we do spend more on the DoD than Social Security. We like to keep adding to the DoD budget during the year, whereas we don't add to Social Security. The original 2010 budget had $678 billion for social security and $664 billion for the DoD. But then, tada, a war supplemental provided another $37 billion, although 'only' about $33 billion of that is for the DoD.

      Look at that. The DoD 'wins'. And that happens every year.

      --
      If corporations are people, aren't stockholders guilty of slavery?
    134. Re:Politics aside, wtf is wrong with Google? by DavidTC · · Score: 1

      If anything, most of us believe government should get out of the business of marriage entirely.

      Please point to any tea party event where anyone said that.

      And I'll bet you money that most tea party people do not think 'government should get out of the business of marriage'.

      But 'get out of the business of marriage' is a nonsensical claim, (Often pushed by libertarians, which you're claiming the tea party is.), as it's unlikely to every happen and never gets polled. Support for homosexual marriage is 20% lower among the Tea Party than the nation at large.

      But, hey, let's check something that does get polled...should the government be deciding that gay couples can't adopt?

      80% of white people who oppose the tea party think gay people should be allowed to adopt. 36% of white people who support the tea party think they should be barred from doing so.

      See, the libertarians, while jerks, actually don't have anything against gay people, and I, while I loathe them, don't appreciate you Tea Partiers attempting to assert you're actually them.

      So, if the Tea Party Movement seems disjointed to you, it's because it is... precisely because it's a real grassroots movement and not some sham astroturf like the "Coffee Party" groups. We're entirely bottom up, not top down, despite the consternation of those that want to call themselves leaders... only the left hasn't quite seemed to figure that out yet since they're too busy listening to people spouting sexual innuendo, cropping pictures of black people holding guns accusing them of being white, etc.

      No, it seems disjointed because the Republican base is shattered into pieces and has been for more than two decades.

      It's certainly not because it's 'really' grassroots, being funded by FreedomWorks and create by Americans for Prosperity.

      At the core of our tea parties, is economic freedom and freedom from government encroachment on our liberty.

      I need a macro on my keyboard to type this:

      Just saying things does not make them true.

      He has refused his Assent to Laws, the most wholesome and necessary for the public good - Presidents, governors, Congressmen, police, etc don't consider themselves above the law?

      Ah, yes, the magical vague 'they consider themselves above the law' which has suddenly started happening, which you provide no evidence for.

      He has refused to pass other Laws for the accommodation of large districts of people, unless those people would relinquish the right of Representation in the Legislature, a right inestimable to them and formidable to tyrants only. - The federal government issues mandates outside its jurisdiction, like drinking laws, seat belt laws, schooling issues, etc... and unless those jurisdictions surrender their control, the federal government denies them funding and access.

      Yes, all that spat of seat belt and drinking and schooling laws the government just passed in the 1980s pisses me off too.

      He has erected a multitude of New Offices, and sent hither swarms of Officers to harrass our people, and eat out their substance. - 16,000 new IRS agents in the Health Care bill alone... not to mention dozens of new bureaucracies to support it... and that's just ONE law from one recent President. How about the TSA and everything that happened under Bush too?

      16,000 new IRS agents: Here's where we start getting into the 'absurd beliefs in objectively wrong facts'.

      As the IRS pointed out, the way it works is that your insurance company sends you a form. You send it in with your taxes, just like your W2. It doesn't require any new IRS agents, as the IRS isn't in charge of what plans are okay anyway. The 16,000 was literally just made up on the spot.

      Made up on the spot. You know, like half the 'facts' the tea party sprouts.

      He has kept among us, in times of peace, Standing Armies without the Consent of our legislatures. - While they aren't quarte

      --
      If corporations are people, aren't stockholders guilty of slavery?
    135. Re:Politics aside, wtf is wrong with Google? by jahudabudy · · Score: 1

      I'm honored to debate someone like you, sir. I wasn't even aware anyone alive remembered pre-civil war America.

      This. I can't understand why I'm expected to believe the Tea Party is just a spontaneous group of people that suddenly realized the way the country has been run the last 150 years or so. I remember hearing people just a few weeks after Obama was elected crying about how they "just wanted to take their country back". And when you ask "Back from whom, what do you mean by your country?", they began to stammer about exactly what the Tea Party now pretends is their political concerns. OF COURSE they didn't mean they (white people) wanted it "back" from all those non-white people as represented by the non-white President. The Tea Party strikes me as exactly the same people, just slightly more sophisticated in their pretense.

      --
      ...sometimes, in order to hurt someone very badly, you have to tell that person terrible lies. - PA
    136. Re:Politics aside, wtf is wrong with Google? by jahudabudy · · Score: 1

      Presumably, they think the tea party movement will lead to a worse future. Why?

      B/c I simply don't believe that the Tea Party movement's stated aims are their actual aims. This many people did not suddenly wake up and realize what has been going on in this country since WWII and get riled up enough to form a political movement. Nope, something else is motivating these people. Based on the timing and apparent source of this movement, I suspect those motivations aren't ones I think will lead to a healthier country.

      --
      ...sometimes, in order to hurt someone very badly, you have to tell that person terrible lies. - PA
    137. Re:Politics aside, wtf is wrong with Google? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "Certain groups are terrified of what the Tea Party stands for"

      And rightly so. The Tea Party stands for billionaire astroturf of the same sort that finances global warming denial.
      And those billionaires are self-proclaimed radical libertarians.

      Covert Operations - The billionaire brothers who are waging a war against Obama
      http://www.newyorker.com/reporting/2010/08/30/100830fa_fact_mayer?currentPage=all

      The Billionaires Bankrolling the Tea Party
      http://www.nytimes.com/2010/08/29/opinion/29rich.html?_r=1&hp

      MSNBC - Billionaire Koch Bankrolls & Propagandizes Climate Denial
      http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4ZBps7wfuwc

    138. Re:Politics aside, wtf is wrong with Google? by mcgrew · · Score: 1

      So how many people is that? Five? Ten? And you're willing to generalize to a large group, that you happen to disagree with from the start and know little about, based on this huge sample of people you claim to know?

      If all ten people he knows in the tea party are racist, it's only logical for him to assume that the majority of the rest of them are. Sure, his sample size is limited, but it's the only meaningful sample size he has. His entire dataset says racism, and you think that's illogical?

      "Birds of a feather flock together."

    139. Re:Politics aside, wtf is wrong with Google? by khallow · · Score: 1

      B/c I simply don't believe that the Tea Party movement's stated aims are their actual aims. This many people did not suddenly wake up and realize what has been going on in this country since WWII and get riled up enough to form a political movement. Nope, something else is motivating these people. Based on the timing and apparent source of this movement, I suspect those motivations aren't ones I think will lead to a healthier country.

      You have a lot of suspicions for someone who doesn't seem to have a better idea. Just because there are powerful people with ulterior motives doesn't mean that we have to abandon relatively sound ideas.

    140. Re:Politics aside, wtf is wrong with Google? by toadlife · · Score: 1

      . I just saw the lame first paragraph and blew off the rest.

      Fuck you too.

      What's the problem with people defending their economic status?

      It's not a problem per se, but people tend not to take the long view when it comes to economic policy.

      Why are some people required to sacrifice their economic well being when other people are not?

      See: progressive taxation. McCain's "hero", Teddy Roosevelt was one of the early proponents of progressive taxation in the U.S. We had a stable middle class and wages until 1981 when Reagan decimated the top tax brackets.

      national debt that is almost the size of annual GDP

      That debt and deficit problem we face now has been 30 years in the making. It was started by Reagan's tax cuts on the wealth in 1981. You'll have to excuse me if I dismiss your sudden concern as feigned.

      Where the fuck were you deficit chicken-hawks during Reagan, Bush, and Bush II were in office?

      --
      I don't always use unix-like operating systems; but when I do, I prefer FreeBSD.
    141. Re:Politics aside, wtf is wrong with Google? by jahudabudy · · Score: 1

      I have no problem with the stated ideas of the Tea Party. Perfectly reasonable, even laudable goals. The fact that I suspect powerful people with ulterior motives to be behind the whole thing, however, means I don't trust them to implement their stated goals, the goals I would support. I suspect they would in fact implement other goals, goals I don't believe I would support. That is why I believe the Tea Party movement, if supported, will lead to a worse future.

      Just because there are powerful people with ulterior motives doesn't mean that we have to abandon relatively sound ideas.

      And just b/c powerful people with hidden agendas say they stand for one thing, supporting them does not mean you are in reality supporting what they claim to stand for.

      --
      ...sometimes, in order to hurt someone very badly, you have to tell that person terrible lies. - PA
    142. Re:Politics aside, wtf is wrong with Google? by khallow · · Score: 1

      I think this talk of "investing in society" is utter nonsense. Sure, there are roles where government is probably the only accepted authority either due to conflicts of interest ruling out everyone else or the need for deep pockets. I certainly can't bail out the world with my resources, if there's a global scale disaster.

      But I see two obvious things lacking in your remarks. First, you make the foolish and unfounded assumption that no one but government can invest in society. We effectively do that every time we buy something (encouraging someone else to provide that good or service) and we certainly do it every time we make something durable or invest our money somewhere. In the US, government made the roads, but they didn't make the commerce that uses those roads. Both are investments in society.

      Second, how much "investing in society" do we need to make at the government level and who gets to make those decisions? Here's where my concern about a majority not paying taxes comes in. In that situation, it is simple for the majority to simply take from the minority. It would, of course, be labeled "an investment in society", but it'd be straight out theft since no investment actually occurred (just a movement of money from one party to another under duress). As I see it, paying taxes is a crucial duty of every citizen, not just the rich ones. When you allow a large group of citizens to evade this, you enable all sorts of destructive behaviors (particularly that the electorate no longer has an interest in a fiscally sound government).

      We also have the problem of government power. Even in a democratic republic such as the US, it is much less accountable than a private business would be. The former enjoys significant immunity from lawsuit and similar liabilities. It also routinely makes rules that government either doesn't have to follow or which can be waived by government when desired. You might like the government in power now and trust it with the power granted by the "investments in society", but will you trust a future one with radically different objectives than your own? Almost certainly not.

      And this discussion ignores that no rational investor would take the US's approach to "investment in society" seriously. Sure, a small part is doing something pretty valuable. The rest is at best greatly unperforming, sometimes even actively harmful (that is, it is destroying investment in society rather than creating it, for example "Cash for Clunkers" and many environmental projects that do more harm to the environment and society than they prevent, recycling generally falls into that category). And any private agent would be jailed for the accounting magic that goes on in the federal government.

    143. Re:Politics aside, wtf is wrong with Google? by khallow · · Score: 1

      See: progressive taxation. McCain's "hero", Teddy Roosevelt was one of the early proponents of progressive taxation in the U.S. We had a stable middle class and wages until 1981 when Reagan decimated the top tax brackets.

      We had a stable middle class, until they started competing globally with the developed world for the same labor but at greater cost. You got the effect right, but you missed the cause. And even after Reagan's tax cuts, the tax brackets remained heavily progressive. Not that the high end rich ever paid those rates even before Reagan.

      Where the fuck were you deficit chicken-hawks during Reagan, Bush, and Bush II were in office?

      Sucking milk in the school cafeteria for Reagan. And I didn't vote for either Bush. I also didn't vote for Obama, precisely because he demonstrated prior to the election that he was going to continue to be part of the problem. I have not been disappointed in that respect. As far as tax cuts go, you might remember that we transitioned from stagflation to a growing economy during Reagan's time in office which continued through to the end of Clinton's second term (aside from the 90-91 recession).

    144. Re:Politics aside, wtf is wrong with Google? by SomeKDEUser · · Score: 1

      Thank you for calling me foolish.

      I see you deeply believe that the market can regulate itself. This is cute, but very obviously wrong. The market corrects itself, provided enough time and if a very restrictive set of conditions are met (in general, they are not). For example any technology which can give rise to the formation of a monopoly will: and by definition, a monopoly is not a free market. Thus, you need oversight, lest some parts of society hold others at ransom, with no accountability.

      The arbiter needs to be the government, because it is the only institution where every citizen has (at least nominally) an equal power, which does not depend on wealth or luck. Of course, this never happens quite like that, but is still infinitely more fair than if things were entirely run for commercial purposes. Lawsuits clearly are much less effective than legislation to curb pollution. Because a business has no interest, no in fact a straight disincentive to do the right thing if it is allowed to.

      Because that would hurt the bottom line. And because the competition does not chain itself... You should read on negative externalities, some day.

      As for the duty of paying taxes... What if I'm a hobo? what if I just went bankrupt? What if I would pay less than the cost of processing my forms? I know where this beliefs that everyone would pay comes from: it is for the same reason people are against free public transport, despite the fact that the (subsidised) tickets bring in less than the salary of the controllers: a belief that if things are free, they will be abused. Sometimes this is the case, sometimes not. Usually, people have strong opinions on that without caring about facts.

      About your hypothetical investor which would not do what the US does: yes, this is precisely the point. No investor would be stupid enough to fund fundamental research: the odds are way too long. No investor would pay for schools and universities at a loss, and yet is is extremely valuable for the US as a whole. No investor would pay for a legislative body to legislate on everything: this is too vague, and too risky. No investor would pay for an army which would not be used for the most part. And investor would never pay for building highways, hoping for hypothetical rise in interstate commerce. No investor would pay for a Justice system which spends most of its time treating petty crime at a loss. No investor would pay for agencies responsible for checking for the safety of food, and water and medicine: he has no stake in that.

      This is not the question of having a nanny state. It is a question of making sure that the markets run undistorted. And that implies quite a bit of oversight, most of it intended to make certain practises less efficient. Sad, but necessary.

    145. Re:Politics aside, wtf is wrong with Google? by DavidTC · · Score: 1

      Indeed.

      I've said it before and I'll say it again: The libertarians are selfish, mildly-dishonest or somewhat duped wealth people who don't actually understand what it means to be poor...

      ...but they've got an actual honest-to-God political philosophy.

      And every time Democrats end up in power, half the Republican base 'becomes' libertarians, or sorta-half (economic, not social) libertarians, and it's really disgusting to see the libertarians dragged through the mud. It's a blatant attempt to just complain about whatever the Democrats do.

      Although this guy sounds like he cribbed the entire libertarian philosophy and assigned it to the tea party, aka, the Republican base, even stuff that the 'half-way libertarians' they become don't believe in.

      No one is at the tea parties protesting the war. No one is at the tea parties protesting how Obama is handling terrorism. No one is at the tea parties demanding the government get out of marriage. The tea parties are the republican base, not some magical new group.

      And I'm getting sick and fucking tired of 'tea party supporters' being able to claim the tea party is whatever the hell they want it to be, because it 'has no leader'. Well, no, it has no leader because it has no political aims other than to stir up anger. Actual political movements have political goals, and, hence, leadership to guide the people to that goal. Different groups in the movement have slightly different goals and different leaders, but they should stand together and actually make some sort of joint statement of joint goals.

      The lack of 'leadership' and very vague 'goals' should be a really strong sign something is wrong. A sign that no one actually wants anything done...they just want anger at the Democrats to win elections and to pump up ratings.

      Now, maybe this guy is honest and he's started his own tea party and they actually think that, and are indeed a mix of liberals and conservatives and whatnot. Well, then, he's started a libertarian group with the wrong name.

      --
      If corporations are people, aren't stockholders guilty of slavery?
    146. Re:Politics aside, wtf is wrong with Google? by khallow · · Score: 1

      Thank you for calling me foolish.

      I see you deeply believe that the market can regulate itself. This is cute, but very obviously wrong. The market corrects itself, provided enough time and if a very restrictive set of conditions are met (in general, they are not). For example any technology which can give rise to the formation of a monopoly will: and by definition, a monopoly is not a free market. Thus, you need oversight, lest some parts of society hold others at ransom, with no accountability.

      I see vague talk of a "monopoly" as being the reason that markets can't regulate themselves. Let's give an example of where you're right. A government is the ultimate monopoly in this day and age. And I agree the "market" of governments isn't sufficiently self-regulating to keep them under control. So there are mostly unregulated markets that are troublesome.

      So some regulation or oversight is probably a good idea. But how much? And when does it help rather than hinder. For example, the regulation of the stock market is embarrassing. It's more to comfort the small investor rather than protect him. An unwary investor still finds they can lose fingers and toes to things like fraud, insider trading, collusion, and other such things. The culprits just have to be slightly more clever than before in order to comply with the law. Similarly, economic periods of irrational exuberance and pessimism still happen, regulation could mitigate these boom and bust effects, but government rarely try to do so. Instead it's far more likely that the government is working to exaggerate the effects of the boom/bust cycle by indiscriminately pumping money in the economy during bust phases while deregulating anything that gets in the way of the boom part of the cycle.

      The point is that government routinely fails to regulate the market.

      Then we move on to the complaint you had. I do believe that markets are self-regulating. Technology based monopolies are short-lived in a free market. Other companies develop the technology as well and the monopoly goes away. Keep in mind that intellectual property is a government granted monopoly. A company like Microsoft wouldn't be able to maintain its relatively near-monopoly dominance at all, if other companies could reverse engineer or even just take its software.

    147. Re:Politics aside, wtf is wrong with Google? by SomeKDEUser · · Score: 1

      The difference between you and me is that you believe many things, whereas I read recent academic literature. Markets don't work unless you force them to.

      It is desirable to have working markets, which work for the benefit of the greater number. Thus some external force needs to be applied in that direction. The one institutional entity which represents the will of the people is the government. [1]

      The fact that it fails in its duty is not proof that it is not its duty, just that it should try harder/better/with more intelligence. You don't fire a doctor each time a patient dies... You investigate and make sure it does not happen again in the same way.

      About technologies and monopoly: you will tell me how on a single track of rails more than one company can efficiently run a service. Or how individual consumers can effectively decide which utility will provide their water?

      [1] The great failure of communism comes from the belief that the value of things is the sum of the work put into them, and trying to distribute goods based on such a pricing scheme. This is wrong: things have the value buyers and sellers attribute to them, and this value is neither fixed nor unique. For the exact same reason, markets fail if this information is not available to buyer and seller: negotiation cannot happen, and commerce is impossible. Transparency must be enforced. Terms must be enforced. Externalities must be offset at a societal level.

    148. Re:Politics aside, wtf is wrong with Google? by khallow · · Score: 1

      whereas I read recent academic literature.

      If you're going to claim that as an authority, then you need to demonstrate your case by citing relevant articles. I think we'll find that using these articles as an authority has serious problems, either blatant political biases by the authors that neuter the value of the research or reach conclusions other than what you think they reach.

      The fact that it fails in its duty is not proof that it is not its duty, just that it should try harder/better/with more intelligence. You don't fire a doctor each time a patient dies... You investigate and make sure it does not happen again in the same way.

      You don't fire a doctor when a patient dies, but you should fire them when they exhibit a pattern of negligence and irresponsibility. Also, it's worth noting here that hospitals often have a culture of unaccountability. Some hospitals have successfully hidden bad doctors for decades (for example, the notorious medical serial killers, some who are thought to have killed hundreds of patients).

      Further, it's worth noting that most activities of the US government aren't important, sometimes even actively harmful. Things like farm subsidies, Amtrak (and most other public corporations that are run by government appointees), Social Security, building mostly useless technology and weapons systems to keep the relevant contractor supply chains funded, etc. We need to keep in mind that the really important stuff, the stuff that you'd compare to a doctor keeping a patient alive, are often ignored by government in favor of sexier or popular, but more useless projects. By trimming the scope of activities of government, we make it easier for government to focus on the truly important stuff. That way, we don't have to worry as much that someone will compromise the well-being of the US merely to support the price of peanuts or to hand a juicy military contract to a contributor.

      [1] The great failure of communism comes from the belief that the value of things is the sum of the work put into them, and trying to distribute goods based on such a pricing scheme. This is wrong: things have the value buyers and sellers attribute to them, and this value is neither fixed nor unique. For the exact same reason, markets fail if this information is not available to buyer and seller: negotiation cannot happen, and commerce is impossible. Transparency must be enforced. Terms must be enforced. Externalities must be offset at a societal level.

      Fine, you do know a little about markets. Yes, these problems are well known. The key rebuttal is that the market helps solve them (part of the whole "self-regulating" thing). For example, if you have a market, then you have some degree of information available (through prices listed on the market) to buyer and seller coming from the market itself. If you think lack of knowledge parity is bad with a market, then imagine how much worse it'd be without one.

      Further terms and contracts can be settled without requiring government intervention directly. For example, I favor government as the supreme mediator for contract disputes, but not the routine mediator of contract disputes. A market has a simple means to insure related contracts are followed, namely that you lose access to the market, if you fail to meet terms. You might also forfeit assets entrusted to an escrow agent or other enforceable penalties that don't require government.

      Externalities are not the be all of government-oriented economics. The subjects of an externality have options beyond just government intervention. They can in turn either bribe the generator of the externality or inflict their own externalities in retaliation. For example, my parents live in a gated community that recently has been subject to attempts at extortion by a neighbor who owns property near the entrance. Apparently, the neighbor has tried to g

    149. Re:Politics aside, wtf is wrong with Google? by SomeKDEUser · · Score: 1

      shorter: "I am a libertarian, and nothing will convince me"

      The dead giveaway is thinking social security and amtrak are harmful. No point in having a discussion there, I guess -- letting people die is better than giving them money, and presumably roads are ok, but not rail, based on some warped notion that in one case you get to pick the colour of your vehicle.

      Then of course giving examples which show the importance of contract law (government established and enforced), Justice system (Judiciary is an equal branch of government), And then a bizarre dispute between neighbours where apparently having a bunch of private owners cut utilities to another is deemed acceptable behaviour (hint: it's not -- if you cannot imagine cases of abuse, you sorely lack imagination). I will not even comment on the last example.

      But for the markets... The point is that an imperfect market does not self correct. It will tend to monopolies, it will boom and bust, it will create externalities. In general, it is perfectly capable of mis-attributing resource as badly as Stalin's administration. All your beliefs lie on the assumption market self-correct, despite all the evidence to the contrary.

      Think about this: if markets self-correct, all actions that the government takes have no effect, because they are automatically compensated by the market. Hence, you must believe fiscal policy has no effect, nor monetary policy. Therefore, your original argument about taxes is bunk, because it is (based on the perfect market assumption) just some pure externality which will be compensated for by the magical self-correcting market.

      For example: taxes are a cost imposed on your income. Now, based on that you can in a magical self-correcting market issue a bond indexed on the expected increase of your income which will compensate for the increase of taxes. This bond can then be traded as a liquidity (because your believe in a magical self-correcting market) And thus you have no taxes: some numeral became debt, your nominal income never grew. However, because of the magical market, your purchasing power increased.

      Shorter: you are wrong in the same way people believing in pink flying unicorns are wrong.

    150. Re:Politics aside, wtf is wrong with Google? by khallow · · Score: 1

      shorter: "I am a libertarian, and nothing will convince me"

      You have yet to try. And I'm not just referring to you personally. About three quarters of the argument against the Tea Party movement in the comments were that it is "racist". That's a bankrupt notion especially when the arguer blatantly displays bigotry as well.

      Let me summarize the reasons markets are self-regulating: 1) markets reward value creators and those with knowledge or good models, 2) markets alleviate disparities in knowledge through pricing, 3) markets reduce the ability of one party to parasite another (competing parasites means the host gets a better deal), and 4) every trader in a market enters into transactions by choice, that is, all trades are mutually beneficial to transaction participants (you can still have externalities).

      The dead giveaway is thinking social security and amtrak are harmful. No point in having a discussion there, I guess -- letting people die is better than giving them money, and presumably roads are ok, but not rail, based on some warped notion that in one case you get to pick the colour of your vehicle.

      "Letting people die"? Social Security isn't about helping people with disabilities or keeping Grannie from eating catfood. If it were, it'd be at least an order of magnitude smaller since those needs aren't very big. It's about Congress having a bunch more money to spend each year for the past few decades. And if Amtrak were a private business, it'd have died in the 70s (private passenger rail got killed off by US government subsidized road systems and Amtrak has been grossly unprofitable since). That means to me that yes, public rail is not ok.

      And if it really were about the "colour of your vehicle", we wouldn't have Amtrak or heavily subsidization of the road system so as to encourage multiple private passenger rail services (and other transportation system) to compete. One government service is not a serious extension of choice.

      And then a bizarre dispute between neighbours where apparently having a bunch of private owners cut utilities to another is deemed acceptable behaviour (hint: it's not -- if you cannot imagine cases of abuse, you sorely lack imagination). I will not even comment on the last example.

      Then you've missed the point. Again, it was demonstrate by example that there are other ways to deal with the problems you associate with markets than just government involvement.

      But for the markets... The point is that an imperfect market does not self correct. It will tend to monopolies, it will boom and bust, it will create externalities. In general, it is perfectly capable of mis-attributing resource as badly as Stalin's administration. All your beliefs lie on the assumption market self-correct, despite all the evidence to the contrary.

      Ok, let's address this accusation directly. Where's your evidence for this assertion that markets don't self correct? You claim the existence of natural monopolies. Yes, but those aren't all markets and generally a person can move from one natural monopoly to another (even with the special case of governments, the ultimate natural monopoly). So there is something of competition even in the natural monopoly. So what markets do tend to monopoly that aren't already natural monopolies? Nothing as far as I can see.

      Moving on, boom and bust cycles are fundamentally the result of erroneous expectations. Markets reduce the degree of erroneous assumption, they don't eliminate it. My view is that even a perfectly rational but imperfect knowledge society would have some degree of business cycle precisely because there is uncertainty and hence, error in expectations.

      Government action can reduce the effect of business cycles. For example, requiring a certain degree of leverage in a bank or investment firm does reduce the uncertainty both for that business and for the general market (by reducing

    151. Re:Politics aside, wtf is wrong with Google? by toadlife · · Score: 1

      As far as tax cuts go, you might remember that we transitioned from stagflation to a growing economy during Reagan's time in office which continued through to the end of Clinton's second term (aside from the 90-91 recession).

      Where do you get your history? Conservapedia? The Reagan tax cuts (or more aptly, tax-burden shift) had nothing to do with ending stagflation.

      Fed chairman Paul Volcker ended stagflation by raising interest rates sharply, and sparking the terrible recession (deemed necessary) that happened a year into Reagan's first term.

      Reagan's tax cut and subsequent tax increases (to keep the country from going broke due to his initial tax cut) did nothing but shift a portion of the tax burden from the wealthy to the middle class and explode the debt which had been shrinking steadily every year since the end of WWII.

      --
      I don't always use unix-like operating systems; but when I do, I prefer FreeBSD.
    152. Re:Politics aside, wtf is wrong with Google? by SomeKDEUser · · Score: 1

      1) Is an assumption not verified by fact: high frequency trading as example.
      2) No. Pricing is also the result of the disparities of knowledge. For example, insurance companies are profitable. Despite your potentially superior knowledge of statistics, you still cannot beat them... See also casinos.
      3) Is clearly wrong: competing parasites are not a good thing for the host as there is twice as much intelligence devoted to exploitation. Think also of repeated prisoner's dilemma, and the natural tendencies of cartels to form.
      4) Externalities can perfectly be larger than the gains of all participants in a transaction. Also there is no reason the believe all transactions are "free": You may have to take this job or die of hunger, even if this job will consume all your time and ability to eventually get a better one.

      The tea party is a bunch of bigots. Maybe the polite way of saying that is "religious and socially conservative". To me this is equivalent to bigotry. But this is not why they are wrong... They are wrong because like you, after I just demonstrated (and you agreed) that with a perfect market taxes are irrelevant, you still believe simultaneously that markets are perfect and taxes are wrong. I have only observed this kind of suspension of logic when discussing with fundamentalist Christians and Muslims. Now I have met a free-market fundamentalist, and I am glad of this experience.

    153. Re:Politics aside, wtf is wrong with Google? by khallow · · Score: 1

      1) Is an assumption not verified by fact: high frequency trading as example.

      No, I'd have to disagree, high frequency trading is not a counterexample to the claim "markets reward value creators and those with knowledge or good models". Among other things, you lose money extremely fast, if you do high frequency trading without good models and real time knowledge.

      2) No. Pricing is also the result of the disparities of knowledge. For example, insurance companies are profitable. Despite your potentially superior knowledge of statistics, you still cannot beat them... See also casinos.

      Sure you can beat insurance companies, by making a better, more profitable insurance company. If you don't actually use the knowledge to compete, then you can't "beat" anyone. It's also worth noting that trade isn't about "beating" someone, but about getting stuff that benefits you. Life insurance benefits you because it gets around the problem of your limited resources. If something bad and expensive happens, insurance allows you to protect your wealth. Second, casinos play a rigged game and virtually everyone knows that. People gamble for reasons other than to make a monetary profit (even if they claim otherwise). Casinos are adept at servicing those other needs.

      3) Is clearly wrong: competing parasites are not a good thing for the host as there is twice as much intelligence devoted to exploitation. Think also of repeated prisoner's dilemma, and the natural tendencies of cartels to form.

      And two people can get through a door twice as fast as one person. The supply of hosts hasn't changed, but the demand has increased. That's going to result in a better deal for the host. A good historical example of this was the increase in the value of labor and subsequent improvements in human liberty following the Great Death in Europe.

      4) Externalities can perfectly be larger than the gains of all participants in a transaction. Also there is no reason the believe all transactions are "free": You may have to take this job or die of hunger, even if this job will consume all your time and ability to eventually get a better one.

      And externalities can be very small or even a positive gain for a nonparticipant. It's not a useful observation especially when you consider that government action routinely has externalities as well (taxation being the most common form). Your counterexample of "take the job or die of hunger" is wrong for two reasons. First, not dying of hunger is beneficial and hence, the rule still holds, the choice is beneficial for both the worker and employer. Second, the worker has a choice of where to work. So they can choose in a way that betters their benefit.

      The tea party is a bunch of bigots. Maybe the polite way of saying that is "religious and socially conservative". To me this is equivalent to bigotry. But this is not why they are wrong... They are wrong because like you, after I just demonstrated (and you agreed) that with a perfect market taxes are irrelevant, you still believe simultaneously that markets are perfect and taxes are wrong. I have only observed this kind of suspension of logic when discussing with fundamentalist Christians and Muslims. Now I have met a free-market fundamentalist, and I am glad of this experience.

      Another example of my original complaint. First, the hypocritical bigotry, "tea party is a bunch of bigots" and just saying rival belief systems are "equivalent to bigotry" with no justification whatsoever. Second, the fallacies. I have not claimed that markets are perfect, taxes are wrong, or that in a perfect market taxes are irrelevant. Let's look at the relevant section:

      The rebuttal is that government action is not market-driven and market compensation is not immediate in effect. Hence, there is a limit to how much a market can compensate for continued government action. Further, this c

    154. Re:Politics aside, wtf is wrong with Google? by Cyberllama · · Score: 1

      FFS.

      If you spent 5 seconds with Google you'd find dozens of examples. I don't see why I have to do it for you.

      Here: It took me literally seconds to find *dozens* of examples:
      http://www.naacp.org/news/entry/naacp-delegates-vote-to-repudiate-racist-elements-within-the-tea-pary/ (6 or 7 pictures at this one)
      http://i2.cdn.turner.com/cnn/2009/POLITICS/09/17/obama.witchdoctor.teaparty/art.obama.protest.sign.cnn.jpg
      http://cache.gawker.com/assets/images/2008/10/custom_1223838327176_racistbf5.png
      http://littlegreenfootballs.com/weblog/pictures/20090916TeaParty01.jpg

      Man, here's an idea, just go to images.google.com and type in tea party and look through the signs. There's quite a few examples of blatant racism. Now my question to you is, where are the tea party leaders condemning this? If you can't find that, then that seems pretty much like de-facto proof that it is tolerated.

      I know a little pop psych too. It's called "projection". How many of these alleged psychological problems are really with the tea party people and how many are your own flaws which you attempt to "project" onto a group you don't like?

      There was nothing even vaguely resembling pop psychology what I posted.

      And seriously, I realize this is an internet-argument and therefore blah blah blah, but seriously, could you get any less classy?

  4. Hypothesis: an SEO-related bug by InMSWeAntitrust · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Looking at specific searches, searching for the Lincoln Memorial gets you the FDR Memorial, but searching for the Lincoln Monument gets you the Lincoln Memorial.
    I would imagine that it's simply a matter of the word memorial being attributed to FDR more than Lincoln, for some reason.

    1. Re:Hypothesis: an SEO-related bug by mykos · · Score: 4, Informative

      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lincoln_monument It redirects to Lincoln Memorial. While wikipedia is not the arbiter of all proper names, Lincoln Memorial is the preferred term there too.

    2. Re:Hypothesis: an SEO-related bug by JimWise · · Score: 5, Informative

      You are correct, Wikipedia is not the arbiter of names, but in this case I would have to say that the US National Parks Service, which runs and maintains all of the federal memorials, is the one who would set the official name. According to the US National Parks Service it is indeed the "Lincoln Memorial".

    3. Re:Hypothesis: an SEO-related bug by ArundelCastle · · Score: 2, Interesting

      I would imagine that it's simply a matter of the word memorial being attributed to FDR more than Lincoln, for some reason.

      FDR is SEO. Lincoln gets spamdexed. Also, most recent results at the top. ;) Date bias.

  5. Re:You need directions? by Serenissima · · Score: 1

    Maybe this'll teach Glenn Beck to not piss off Google? :D

    --
    Give a man a fire and he'll be warm for a day. But light a man on fire and he'll be warm for the rest of his life.
  6. Coincidences by causality · · Score: 0, Redundant

    Conservative bloggers smell a conspiracy since Glen Beck is holding his 'Restoring Honor' gathering at the Lincoln Memorial tomorrow (August 28). Notes for the map listing on Google state 'This place has unverified edits'; so, did someone claim the listing and edit the location?

    Conspiracy or no, it sure is funny the way some things in politics tend to work out. Oddly these sorts of mishaps don't seem to happen when media figures who are more embraced by the mainstream want to hold an event.

    --
    It is a miracle that curiosity survives formal education. - Einstein
    1. Re:Coincidences by clarkkent09 · · Score: 0, Troll

      Would you consider Wolf Blitzer or Chris Matthews to be mainstream? Well this is how they compare: http://tvbythenumbers.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/01/2010.01.31-5pm-P2+-590x455.png For the record Beck is a clown and even I as a libertarian find his antics painful to watch but you can't dispute his numbers. So you might as well start weeping for your countrymen.

      --
      Negative moral value of force outweighs the positive value of good intentions.
    2. Re:Coincidences by Beelzebud · · Score: 1

      Entertainers worry themselves with ratings. The fact that Fox News spends a chunk of their time bragging about their own ratings, says everything.

    3. Re:Coincidences by im_thatoneguy · · Score: 1

      No neither Wolf Blitzer nor Chris Matthews are "mainstream" news.

      NBC Nightly News would be considered "mainstream" and it receives 10m viewers (3x as many).

      I would say the "Mainstream Media" is:

      NBC Nightly News, NPR, BBC World Service, US News and World Report, Newsweek and The New York Times.

    4. Re:Coincidences by Wyatt+Earp · · Score: 1

      You are comparing apples to oranges there.

      The NBC nightly news is one half hour while Fox News, CNN, MSNBC do a three hour block.

      For the week of August 2nd, “ABC World News with Diane Sawyer” averaged 6.85 million Total Viewers and a 1.5/7 among Adults 25-54, according to Nielsen Media Research. “World News” topped “NBC Nightly News” by 90,000 Total Viewers on Friday, August 6. The total viewing gap between “World News” and “NBC Nightly News” shrank to the smallest margin of the season, and the demo gap was the smallest since the week of May 31.

      So the NBC Nightly News got 6.76 million viewers over a half hour.

      The cable channels get in prime time on a weeknight in the summer
      FNC – 2,095,000 viewers
      CNN – 568,000 viewers
      MSNBC –832,000 viewers
      CNBC – 181,000 viewers
      HLN – 457,000 viewers

      The mainstream TV media in the US I would say NBC/ABC(w/ESPN)/CBS/FOX/MSNBC/CNN. PBS and BBC are secondary and in the case of the BBC for American audiences very niche.

      For radio media, NBC/CBS/ABC/ESPN for all things sports/NPR

      For print, Time/Newsweek/US News, NYT, Washington Post, Wall Street Journal - NYT, WaPo, WSJ are your three "newspapers of record" in the US. In five years, Time/Newsweek/US News on dead tree will be gone.

    5. Re:Coincidences by Charliemopps · · Score: 1

      Glen Beck (Who I agree has gone kinda crazy over the past couple of years... he was much more subdued when he was on CNN) IS part of the mainstream. He's got one of the highest ratings on television right now. He may not be popular in the /. community but he certainly is mainstream in large parts of the country. It really is too bad though, the Tea Party movement was a good thing until establishment republicans got involved. Watch the "Bullshit" episode on taxes to see what they were like before republicans hijacked the movement.

    6. Re:Coincidences by Lehk228 · · Score: 1

      king of the cable news market? that's like being the biggest fish in a bucket.

      --
      Snowden and Manning are heroes.
    7. Re:Coincidences by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      They toot their own horn because they can. If the ratings were inverted, you can bet CNN or MSNBC would spend a chunk of time bragging about it too.

    8. Re:Coincidences by Omnifarious · · Score: 1

      That's an interesting observation, but I suspect that if anything like that did happen with something more mainstream that it wouldn't be nearly as notable and nobody would be spinning conspiracy theories about it.

    9. Re:Coincidences by causality · · Score: 1

      That's an interesting observation, but I suspect that if anything like that did happen with something more mainstream that it wouldn't be nearly as notable and nobody would be spinning conspiracy theories about it.

      Right or wrong, the reason for that is easy to sum up: since when did anyone firmly within the mainstream with a very large national audience ever advocate anything like a small-government libertarian (lower-case 'l') position?

      Instead you find people like Hannity who talk a big game about freedom but have a million passionate excuses for abdicating it anytime there's talk about a terrorist threat.

      --
      It is a miracle that curiosity survives formal education. - Einstein
    10. Re:Coincidences by causality · · Score: 1

      I had to re-read your last sentence to make sure you weren't saying that Glenn Beck is embraced by the mainstream. Because if you were (and if, somehow, that were true) I would weep for my countrymen. And then I'd slap the shit outta 'em.

      It's trendy to hate on people like Glenn Beck precisely because they are a bit more genuine. Beck is more likely to tell his audience what he really believes. The fact that people like you so strongly dislike him and look down your nose at him is proof that he's not altering his message to be as agreeable as possible and please as many people as possible. That's a good thing. No one should bow down and kiss your ass like that and anyone who does that is a phony, not that you'd care because the illusion is that they are serving you by so doing.

      The average news anchor is more likely to tell his audience whatever is written on the teleprompter. Whatever that is comes from an organization and is based on what is good for that organization. It might be based on polls, market research, an undisclosed agenda, or a political desire to emphasize some things and deemphasize others. It is not an individual's honest perspective.

      I for one can get over my disagreements with Beck's politics and appreciate this difference. It wouldn't matter if I disagreed with every position he has ever taken. I'd still want to see more figures in media who do things this way.

      --
      It is a miracle that curiosity survives formal education. - Einstein
    11. Re:Coincidences by FrameRotBlues · · Score: 1

      Does not follow.

      There are lots of individuals out there with lots of poorly researched conspiracy theories. (The earth is flat, faked moon landings, etc.) They tell their audiences what they really believe, regardless of trying to please as many people as possible. Some even offer "proof" and "independent research." Is that still a good thing? Sure, it's freedom of speech; and sure, people have the right to buy into it if they choose. Some do, because it's easier to just accept it and follow the rest of the sheep than it is to do the research for yourself. If more and more Americans bought into a flat-earth theory because it was explained in a way that made sense to them using a white board and lots of gesticulating, do I still get to weep for my countrymen? I should hope so.

      I choose to get the occasional political commentary from Rachel Maddow and Jon Stewart, the twice a month I care to look for it.

      By the way, I should be thanking you for posting so late in the game; because of your comment I happened to see my "-1 troll" mod, the first time I think I've ever received that distinguished honor.

    12. Re:Coincidences by Omnifarious · · Score: 1

      Are you talking Sean Hannity? *shudder* I just watched when he interviewed Jesse Ventura, and it was kind of funny.

      Jesse was the best thing to happen to MN for a long time. He isn't much of a fan of government, but he's also a big believer in pragmatism and using the tool that's there. Minneapolis has a fantastically successful light rail line because of Jesse. One it needed for years, but nobody had the gumption to put in.

      I'm reluctant to call myself a small 'l' libertarian anymore. I do think government needs to be vastly smaller. But I also think it needs to be much more effective at its job. I think the free market can frequently fail because large companies wield so much power. And I also think it can fall into local minima and need a kick in the pants in order to jump out and find even more efficient solutions, for example reliance on non-renewable energy sources. And I think the environment is an unrealized externality in so much of our economic activity and that needs to change in a big way.

      I would like a government that's much smaller, and regulates by tweaking free market forces into pushing companies towards desired behavior instead of trying to forbid or regulate it directly.

  7. GASP! Google maps is wrong! by thefear · · Score: 2, Insightful

    The memorial is about half a km north west of what google maps highlights. Google maps has been far more wrong before...

    --
    :(
    1. Re:GASP! Google maps is wrong! by kaiser423 · · Score: 2, Interesting

      No kidding, I was trying to go to Bed Bath & Beyond today, and google maps kept putting it in a Google building here in Mountain View.....I kept thinking about walking up and knocking on the door, and giving them a WTF.

      It was really on the other side of the highway, and Google didn't handle the road-discontinuity correctly...you'd figure that they'd have the area around their campus pretty well mapped out.

    2. Re:GASP! Google maps is wrong! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

      What in the world is a kilometer? This is America, sir.

    3. Re:GASP! Google maps is wrong! by herojig · · Score: 1

      One kilometer is approximately 0.62137119 miles. That America you speak of no longer exists.

      --
      I think therefore I can't be ~TTNH
    4. Re:GASP! Google maps is wrong! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      *looks around*

      I'm pretty sure I do still exist, but I am a biased observer.

    5. Re:GASP! Google maps is wrong! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Also, Google Maps is showing a picture of the Washington Monument (the obelisk) as the Lincoln Memorial.
      The attribution is to qype.com and uses the URL: http://maps.google.com/local_url?q=http://www.qype.com/place/866083-National-Mall-Washington/photos/1033651&dq=lincoln+memorial&cid=9539386115279663617&cd=1&ei=3g55TIWCKqK-yQXvwL3VAw&dtab=0&ved=0CJwBEIYF&sa=X&provider=XML:qype&geocode=FSZnUQId6k5o-w&s=ANYYN7keN30sZ-G5gs7RJlnecaw6XBs4zQ

      This is indeed very strange. The National Park Service URL for the Lincoln Memorial with directions is: http://www.nps.gov/linc/

    6. Re:GASP! Google maps is wrong! by mcgrew · · Score: 1

      I've found, at least here, that they're wrong at least as often as they are right. It was two years after they changed the Wabash Curve before they fixed it. Right now if you're looking for D'Arcy's Pint you'll wind up at the Dublin Pub where D'Arcy's was two years ago. And the Dublin Pub isn't NEARLY as good. They show the Elf Shelf a good half a block west of where it really is. Etc.

    7. Re:GASP! Google maps is wrong! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      What in the world is a kilometer? This is America, sir.

      It's a click, motherfucker, now drop and give me fifty you maggot.

  8. Re:You need directions? by phantomfive · · Score: 4, Insightful

    I have a relative that lives several miles from the Grand Canyon, and told me the story of a local who one day ran into a lost tourist, looking for that gorge. He gave the tourist directions, and the tourist asked, "how is it?" The local had to reply, "I don't know I've never been there. I've been planning to go one of these days....."

    They talked for a bit and soon found out the tourist was from New York. The local said, "Oh, I've been there. I visited the statue of liberty." The New Yorker said, "Oh, yeah. I've been planning to go there one of these days....."

    --
    Qxe4
  9. Re:Really? by jaymzter · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Don't be a toolbox. Red State makes no mention of a conspiracy, and WTH is "Moonbats" anyway? A real leading conservative blog there. Beck is an entertainer, not a serious voice, yet so many on the left and right moon over him. The summary is just a another smear of conservatives, and since that fits your world view filled with hatred you consider it valid.

    --
    If thou see a fair woman pay court to her, for thus thou wilt obtain love
  10. Beck's Sheep Can't Find the Lincoln Memorial? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Funny

    Really, if a self-proclaimed conservative—a jingoistic, flag-lapel-pin-wearing, Go-America!-shouting patriot—a dyed-in-the-wool, red-blooded American doesn't know where the Lincoln Memorial is and can't remember a penny long enough to figure out what it looks like while in Washington, DC, he or she might as well give up right there and then, thrown down his or her misspelled, Obama-Iz-An-Atheest-Moslim-Commie-Crony-Of-Wall-Street-Not-Main-Street signs, exchange his or her copy of Going Rogue for a Socialist party membership card, and get in line to be shipped off to the FEMA internment camps, because some re-education is patently and sorely needed.

    1. Re:Beck's Sheep Can't Find the Lincoln Memorial? by RobinEggs · · Score: 2, Funny

      Oh my god...you've done it...you've set the all time slashdot record for trolls/character used in a single posting.

      I bow humbly before your prowess, oh mighty one.

      Also, you tied for Most Unnecessarily Hyphenated Words Intended Solely to Make You Look Smart.

    2. Re:Beck's Sheep Can't Find the Lincoln Memorial? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yes, but is it the fault of the sheep or the shepherd that leads them?

    3. Re:Beck's Sheep Can't Find the Lincoln Memorial? by jonadab · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Glenn Beck is not an actual conservative. He's a standard-issue frothing-at-the-mouth "let's get all riled up and behave like lunatics just because we've got nothing better to do" entertainer who happens to use the _word_ "conservative". Most of the people who listen to him don't even know what the word means. You can safely ignore the lot of them.

      --
      Cut that out, or I will ship you to Norilsk in a box.
    4. Re:Beck's Sheep Can't Find the Lincoln Memorial? by s0litaire · · Score: 1

      Who is more foolish? the fool who leads or the fools who follows...

      --
      Laters Sol "Have you found the secrets of the universe? Asked Zebade "I'm sure I left them here somewhere"
    5. Re:Beck's Sheep Can't Find the Lincoln Memorial? by tobiah · · Score: 1

      Does it matter?

      --
      "The ability to delude yourself may be an important survival tool" - Jane Wagner -
    6. Re:Beck's Sheep Can't Find the Lincoln Memorial? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Most of the people who listen to him believe in the core tenet of Burkian conservatism, that's quite good enough.

    7. Re:Beck's Sheep Can't Find the Lincoln Memorial? by dbIII · · Score: 1

      Hard to be more foolish than a DJ that destroyed his brain on cocaine.
      It's ironic that conservatives made the "this is your brain on drugs" advertisements and now many of them are led by a living example of a brain on drugs.

    8. Re:Beck's Sheep Can't Find the Lincoln Memorial? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Dont cry RobinEggs. You'll see your hero tomorrow. Beck will show what real honour is by performing ad hominem attacks, telling blatant lies, and speaking misleading innuendo soon enough.

      You'll be able to "take back" your America from the thoughtful, open minded, and educated people who stole all your freedoms.

    9. Re:Beck's Sheep Can't Find the Lincoln Memorial? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
    10. Re:Beck's Sheep Can't Find the Lincoln Memorial? by guyminuslife · · Score: 1

      You're using the wrong metaphor. The correct one involves a stampede.

      --
      I don't believe in time. It's a grand conspiracy designed to sell watches.
    11. Re:Beck's Sheep Can't Find the Lincoln Memorial? by AlterEager · · Score: 1, Flamebait

      Most of the people who listen to him believe in the core tenet of Burkian conservatism, that's quite good enough.

      Wat core tenet? That your money is only safe in the hands of the rich?

    12. Re:Beck's Sheep Can't Find the Lincoln Memorial? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Well, it damned sure isn't safe in the hands of the poor!

    13. Re:Beck's Sheep Can't Find the Lincoln Memorial? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "...a dyed-in-the-wool, red-blooded American doesn't know where the Lincoln Memorial is and can't remember a penny long enough to figure out what it looks like while in Washington, DC..."

      Hmmm... I never thought of that. A penny. Clearly, the previous efforts to abolish the penny are a thinly-veiled effort to prevent people from getting to this event.

    14. Re:Beck's Sheep Can't Find the Lincoln Memorial? by zippthorne · · Score: 1

      That's the progressive core tenet, which is pretty conservative these days, being the established, main party for the past half century or so.

      The conservative tenet is that government's only power is to take away freedom, so it should do so only sparingly, and preferably at the local level when it can be changed more quickly if people don't feel they're getting sufficient return on the lost liberty.

      Although, that's a pretty liberal idea these days...

      Beck is a clown who figured out how to issue some maudlin rants to get people riled up and paying attention to his advertisers. This Lincoln Memorial thing is a stunt to boost his brand and eventually line his pockets. He's a little like Bill O'Reilly, except O'Reilly's underlying progressive bent sometimes leaks through his "angry conservative" performance.

      --
      Can you be Even More Awesome?!
    15. Re:Beck's Sheep Can't Find the Lincoln Memorial? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yep. That's what the Left really wants: to ship all the Conservatives off to camps. Gonna take the fillings out of our teeth while you're at it?

      Just try it you filthy fascist orwellian doublethinking piece of pigshit. Try and round us up and ship us off to camps and see what happens to you.

    16. Re:Beck's Sheep Can't Find the Lincoln Memorial? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      When we come and round you up, I'll be sure to wave bye-bye.

      You're not truly stupid enough to believe what you wrote, are you?

    17. Re:Beck's Sheep Can't Find the Lincoln Memorial? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

      Eventually line his pockets? The fine print at the bottom of his 828 webpage specifically states that all money made from this goes to pay for the event/people and what's left goes to SOWF. That is, we get paid first, and the charity that we're supposed to be restoring honor for and getting money for gets paid last (if at all).

      "The purchase of Restoring Honor Rally merchandise is not a donation to SOWF, but all net proceeds from the sale of Restoring Honor Rally merchandise is being donated to the Special Operations Warrior Foundation. All contributions made to the Special Operations Warrior Foundation (SOWF) will first be applied to the costs of the Restoring Honor Rally taking place on August 28, 2010. All contributions in excess of these costs will then be retained by the SOWF."

      Stephen Colbert restored my honor than this rally will. At least when he did the "Wrist Strong" campaign for the Yellow Ribbon Fund he gave 100% of proceeds not what ever is left when I take my huge share.

    18. Re:Beck's Sheep Can't Find the Lincoln Memorial? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      When we come and round you up, I'll be sure to wave bye-bye.

      You're not truly stupid enough to believe what you wrote, are you?

      You're the kind of person who would be foaming at the mouth if somebody made *exactly* the same comments about rounding up illegal aliens, muslims, african americans or any other minority group. But ha ha it's just a funny joke when we're talking about rounding up conservatives, right?

      You are a bigot. You have an irrational, blind, sick hatred of Conservatives. Sure you have reasons, but you find the reasons to support the belief. You prejudge. Like most libs, you "don't need to actually read or listen to that conservative garbage" on Fox News, or on talk radio. You are so sure of your moral and intellectual superiority that you don't actually need to listen to the arguments from the other side.

      Your bigotry has exactly the same motive and comes from exactly the same emotional place as the disgusting bigotry of Southern racists who hated blacks for reasons like "they're just dirty people." Your hatred informs your intellect. Your emotions are running the show and they are ugly and sick.

      Yes I believe that, no I don't think it's funny at all to talk about rounding people up, and yes, I sincerely do think that Liberals *really do* want to just exterminate the Right. They don't want to negotiate, do they? They don't want to debate, do they? They don't want to "convert" the people on the right to their side. When is the last time you saw somebody get converted by a person who was openly insulting them to their face? Doesn't happen. Liberals don't want to "educate" or "reform" or "convert" us "ignorant, nascar watching redneck racist teabaggers". You just want us GONE.

      You're not truly stupid enough not to realize that what you really, *truly* want is a "Final Solution" for the conservatives in North America, are you?

      Tell me I'm wrong, you slimy bigot. Tell me what you *really* want is for us to live in peace, to find common ground, to compromise.

      You know, YOU'RE RIGHT. We're ignorant, we're nasty bad people. We don't have your sophisticated intellect, we're just dumbasses and we hold grudges and fear strangers and outsiders. We're clinging to our guns and our religion. And we vote. And we're NOT GOING TO SHUT UP. WE'RE NOT GOING TO BOW TO YOUR THOUGHT POLICE BULLSHIT.

      WHAT ARE YOU GOING TO DO ABOUT IT? WHINE AND CALL US MORE NAMES?

    19. Re:Beck's Sheep Can't Find the Lincoln Memorial? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Most of the people who listen to him don't even know what the word means. You can safely ignore the lot of them.

      Sadly, they have votes, and will likely vote in the way he tells them to. And there are a lot of them.

      This means that they cannot safely be ignored; if you disagree with them (and it's hard to see how anyone with a brain could agree with the hate-filled lies that pour from the mouth of Glenn Beck) then it is your patriotic duty to use your First Amendment rights to ensure that the national debate is not dominated by one extremist's racist political agenda.

    20. Re:Beck's Sheep Can't Find the Lincoln Memorial? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Beck will show what real honour is

      What?

      what real honour is

      real honour

      honour

      Tory asshole.

      We beat you and kicked your sorry, red-coated stormtroopers out of North America in 1776. And we kicked you out of Canada, too, in 1812. What do you think your'e doing now, egging on Joe Sixpack to the violent overthrow of the U S of A government? Loyal Americans aren't going to allow Beck and Palin to act out their conservative fantasies and return this hallowed ground to the King of England. Unlike the English, we believe in (1) the rewards of private property and the freedom not to have health care, (b) the right to carry guns to bars and liquor stores and ex-girlfriends' houses, and (3) the God of the Old Testament and the book of Mormon, whose abominated by gays and queers and crustaceans and women's lib and Islamic Europe's anarcho-fascist communism. So enjoy your haggis and snails, while we take back our country's honor.

  11. Re:You need directions? by Aardpig · · Score: 0, Troll

    And for the Glenn Beck followers: 5. I have two hands and I need directions to my ass.

    --
    Tubal-Cain smokes the white owl.
  12. If you cant tell the difference.... by voss · · Score: 1

    between the Lincoln memorial and the FDR memorial you have no business going to Washington DC.

    However if you decide to go anyway, they do have still pre-printed maps checked for accuracy
    that sell at any gas station or book store.

    1. Re:If you cant tell the difference.... by zippthorne · · Score: 4, Funny

      And if those maps come out to 99c, you'll get a free picture of it with your change!

      --
      Can you be Even More Awesome?!
    2. Re:If you cant tell the difference.... by moosesocks · · Score: 2, Funny

      Oh, the Lincoln Memorial? It's on J St.

      --
      -- If you try to fail and succeed, which have you done? - Uli's moose
    3. Re:If you cant tell the difference.... by craw · · Score: 1

      Oh, the Lincoln Memorial? It's on J St.

      To many people, your comment will go whoooosh!

      But it I love it!

    4. Re:If you cant tell the difference.... by Mark_in_Brazil · · Score: 1

      [If you can't tell the difference] between the Lincoln memorial and the FDR memorial you have no business going to Washington DC.

      It sounds like the PP is saying that anyone who doesn't know enough about DC shouldn't go to DC and learn about it. That strikes me as weird.

      However if you decide to go anyway, they do have still pre-printed maps checked for accuracy that sell at any gas station or book store.

      Bingo. Yet another hissy-fit over nothing. Nobody is going to miss the Beck anti-Democrat rally. The two sites are less than half a mile apart. Glenn Beck fans and other people in DC speak the same language, so they could, y'know, ask for directions. Additionally, as the PP noted, it's not hard to find maps.

      However, "teh Googlz iz in on teh conspiracy" is a convenient excuse if the turnout doesn't meet their expectations.

      It doesn't help that Glenn Beck has his fans terrified, convinced that Obama and Democrats are enemies of the US and that Obama is just like Hitler. Conspiracy theories like "Google Maps doesn't want us to find the Lincoln Memorial and save America because Obama and Pelosi are controlling Google" are easier to believe when somebody on a channel called FOX News has been trying to convince them for years that Obama is destroying the USA and is about to put the white man down because he's an angry black radical, impose Sharia law because he's a Muslim, send people to Gulags and turn the USA into the Soviet Union because he's just like Stalin, or maybe he'll just turn into a genocidal expansionist dictator because he's just like Hitler.

      On Tuesday, I checked maps.google.com.br to find the names of the streets that meet at the corner where I wanted a friend to meet me near the Berrini station of the São Paulo metropolitan train. Google Maps showed the station out in the middle of the Pinheiros River. I wonder if Obama and Pelosi were trying to drown me or poison me with the pollution in the Pinheiros...

      --
      "It is nice to know that the computer understands the problem. But I would like to understand it too." --Eugene Wigner
    5. Re:If you cant tell the difference.... by DesScorp · · Score: 1

      between the Lincoln memorial and the FDR memorial you have no business going to Washington DC.

      However if you decide to go anyway, they do have still pre-printed maps checked for accuracy
      that sell at any gas station or book store.

      "Telling the difference" isn't the problem. Finding it is if you've never been there before. And I imagine that many of the people going have never even been to DC before.

      --
      Life is hard, and the world is cruel
    6. Re:If you cant tell the difference.... by kevinNCSU · · Score: 1

      LOL, I love it.

      I feel bad for those not from around here so forgive me for explaining it. East-West streets in DC are labeled with a single letter of the alphabet and North-South streets are labeled with numbers which makes it 'easy' to navigate around. The letter J was omitted though in order to avoid confusion between the letters J and I, so there is no J Street (except for GWU's food court!)

  13. Re:You need directions? by ArsonSmith · · Score: 1

    1. I don't live in Seattle and I need directions to the Pike Place market
    2. I don't live in Orlando and I need directions to the Disney World Resort
    3. I don't live in Arizona and I need directions to the Grand Canyon

    FTFY

    --
    Paying taxes to buy civilization is like paying a hooker to buy love.
  14. A recent thing by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Ironically I did a search a few months ago after I read an article about the crumbling retaining wall. The old pilings didn't go deep enough so there's a retrofit going on to keep it from sinking into the bay. Sounds like recent tampering since my search went straight to it.

  15. The answer? Simple by bsDaemon · · Score: 3, Informative

    Get off the Metro at Smithsonian. You're probably facing the Capital. Turn the fuck around and go straight.

    1. Re:The answer? Simple by mlc · · Score: 4, Funny

      The Metro is a communist conspiracy. Real Americans drive everywhere and don't notice that the road are government-funded as well.

    2. Re:The answer? Simple by bsDaemon · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Real Americans know the public parking garage under the city buildings on North Highland Street, about 2 blocks from the Clarendon metro stop are free on on weekends, and then its only like 4 or 5 stops on the orange line till you're at Smithsonian. Parking in D.C. is impossible, you're likely to get a ticket for being 30 seconds past a meter, and they have a tendency to tow you onto the side walk. People who don't know that they do that then think you're a dick and got the ticket for parking on the sidewalk and then you get stared down while trying to get back onto the road.

    3. Re:The answer? Simple by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      And the cars they drive build a government owned company.

    4. Re:The answer? Simple by langelgjm · · Score: 1

      Facing the Capital? No, you're in the capital. You're facing the Capitol, aka, the giant boob. In any case, 300,000 conservatives standing on the left of the escalator will ensure I'm staying out of the District tomorrow.

      --
      "Anyone who [rips a CD] is probably engaging in copyright infringement." - David O. Carson
    5. Re:The answer? Simple by bsDaemon · · Score: 1

      Yeah, I caught the typo too late. I moved far and away, back to Real Virginia from Alexandria about the time I quit giving a shit about politics and got back into IT. No plans to go, but by dad is going. Apparently so is my uncle, who is coming out from Chicago... even though I was pretty sure he's a Dem. I dunno. Fuck it.

    6. Re:The answer? Simple by langelgjm · · Score: 1, Troll

      NOVA vs. ROVA, right? I had a perverse thought about going down to the mall wearing my fake keffiyeh and reading a copy of the Qur'an, but I figured the $4 metro fare and the possibility of being assaulted make it not worthwhile.

      --
      "Anyone who [rips a CD] is probably engaging in copyright infringement." - David O. Carson
    7. Re:The answer? Simple by bsDaemon · · Score: 1

      Basically... Real Virginia stops at Fredericksburg and Occupied Territory begins in Manassas, with Spotsylvania County serving as a DMZ. Of course, Hampton Roads isn't that much more pleasant, but I couldn't find work in Richmond that would pay enough.

    8. Re:The answer? Simple by TheTyrannyOfForcedRe · · Score: 2, Insightful

      The Metro is a communist conspiracy. Real Americans drive everywhere and don't notice that the road are government-funded as well.

      Government funded roads are a communist conspiracy.

      --
      "Liechtenstein is the world's largest producer of sausage casings, potassium storage units, and false teeth."
    9. Re:The answer? Simple by beadfulthings · · Score: 2, Funny

      They can't get off the Metro at Smithsonian. They've been specifically warned (by some expert patriots from Maine) not to take the Orange Line or the Blue Line except in the safer areas of Northern Virginia. (I've read so many articles about this that I can't give you a cite--might have been Huffington Post...). The best they're going to be able to manage is the Red Line (authorized as safe) to either Metro Center or Farragut North. They're supposed to be safe on the Red line. They're to avoid the Green Line entirely. I can't remember what was said about the Yellow Line, but I think it's been marginalized. This is supposed to keep them safe, but it's gonna be a long old schlep down from Farragut North...

      --
      "Here's what's happening. You're starting to drive like your Dad..." - Red Green
    10. Re:The answer? Simple by Alsee · · Score: 2, Funny

      Turn the fuck around and go straight.

      It seems a lot of them are always trying so hard (and failing so hard) at that.

      -

      --
      - - You can't take something off the Internet! That's like trying to take pee out of a swimming pool.
    11. Re:The answer? Simple by kainosnous · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Government funded roads are a communist conspiracy.

      Specifically, they are part of plank 6 of the 10 point program of Communism in the Communist Manifesto. Although, it also states "These measures will of course be different in different countries.", and without assuming the reasons why we make these decisions, you must agree that we are on a road of which Marx would have approved.

      --
      There are 10 commandments: 01)Thou shalt love the Lord Thy God 10)Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself.Matt22:34-40
    12. Re:The answer? Simple by im_thatoneguy · · Score: 1

      Just watch out for the Super Mutants. They like to hang out in that area. And be careful in the metro. Raiders are abundant.

    13. Re:The answer? Simple by narcc · · Score: 1

      Brilliant!

    14. Re:The answer? Simple by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Actually, no. Real Americans realize that the road as well as the Metro are not "government-funded." They are taxpayer funded.

    15. Re:The answer? Simple by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Only way to get assaulted is to mess with Sharpton's guys, idiot. They'll be marching and looking for cameras to make trouble in front of.

    16. Re:The answer? Simple by guyminuslife · · Score: 1

      This. I can find my way around the DC mall entirely because of Fallout 3.

      --
      I don't believe in time. It's a grand conspiracy designed to sell watches.
    17. Re:The answer? Simple by njahnke · · Score: 1

      it sounds like someone is speaking from experience. :)

    18. Re:The answer? Simple by Jeff+DeMaagd · · Score: 1

      Or the Nazis? Eisenhower took the idea of the interstate highway system from the Nazi's Autobahn. Hitler must approve.

      Crazy how crazy people can't decide whether were going to the far right or the far left. Mr. Beck seems to be bipolar in that respect.

    19. Re:The answer? Simple by langelgjm · · Score: 1

      Here's an idea - WMATA should charge a $1 "special event" surcharge to all paper ticket holders entering/exiting at specified locations and times on days like today. That way the loads of angry tourists can personally contribute to fixing the budget of the "socialized" public transit system they are riding to get to the protest.

      Too bad the gates probably need an upgrade to do that.

      --
      "Anyone who [rips a CD] is probably engaging in copyright infringement." - David O. Carson
    20. Re:The answer? Simple by blackraven14250 · · Score: 1

      As if the teabaggers aren't going around looking for cameras to make their ignorance known to the world.

    21. Re:The answer? Simple by dreamchaser · · Score: 1

      Real Americans know that their taxes paid for the roads, not some magical wellspring of wealth spewing from Government coffers.

    22. Re:The answer? Simple by DesScorp · · Score: 1

      The Metro is a communist conspiracy. Real Americans drive everywhere and don't notice that the road are government-funded as well.

      Real Americans think your "Real Americans" joke isn't a Communist conspiracy, but is worn out nearly as badly as "in Soviet Russia" or "Netcraft confirms it". If you're going to insult said Real Americans, at least try to come up with something interesting in the future.

      --
      Life is hard, and the world is cruel
    23. Re:The answer? Simple by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yes, it's very important that Teabaggers avoid the terrors of the Metro.

      Why, just the other day I was on the Green Line and I would swear -- seriously, this is true -- I would swear I actually saw a Muslim!

    24. Re:The answer? Simple by Phroggy · · Score: 1

      There are 10 commandments: 01)Thou shalt love the Lord Thy God 10)Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself.Matt22:34-40

      That, Sir, is the nerdiest Scripture reference I have seen to date. Well done.

      --
      $x='S24;r)>63/* h@<5+oZ)32"5cz';$me='phroggy'x$];
      $x=~y+ -xz+\0-Tx+;print$_^chop$me for split'',$x;
    25. Re:The answer? Simple by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      OMG. Just read the ten points on that list and I agree with most of them. Does that make me a communist?

    26. Re:The answer? Simple by sumdumass · · Score: 1

      Actually, Eisenhower was already looking for a solution to an existing problem before he noticed the autobahn. It could take up to 6 months to transfer troops from one side of the country to the other which severely hampered our war effort in WWII. Eisenhower actually had issues which this before WWII and noted it in his Journal.

      This also isn't a question of far right or far left as it's a constitutional right or privilege or duty for the federal government to establish and maintain roads. This ability/obligation existed long before left and right sides or even communism seemed to be prevalent let alone invented.

    27. Re:The answer? Simple by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      ... you must agree that we are on a road of which Marx would have approved.

      The Road to Serfdom?

  16. Not a problem by istartedi · · Score: 0, Troll

    If you can't find the Lincoln Memorial without a map, you are too stupid to remember to breathe. Therefore, anybody for whom this would be a problem will pass out before they get there. Hopefully they won't be behind the wheel when it happens.

    I'm not just saying this because I'm from that area. It's big. The land around it is flat. There are nice views of it from everywhere.

    --
    For all intensive purposes, "whom" is no longer a word. That begs the question, "who cares"?
    1. Re:Not a problem by 93+Escort+Wagon · · Score: 1

      If you can't find the Lincoln Memorial without a map,
      you are too stupid to remember to breathe. Therefore, anybody
      for whom this would be a problem will pass out before they
      get there. Hopefully they won't be behind the wheel when it happens.

      I'm not just saying this because I'm from that area. It's big.
      The land around it is flat. There are nice views of it from everywhere.

      Give me a break. Let's say a person is coming from San Francisco, and they've never been in DC before - are you seriously suggesting the intelligent thing for them to do is drive randomly around DC and hope to catch a glimpse of the Lincoln Memorial?

      Have you ever heard the phrase that begins with "people who live in glass houses..."?

      --
      #DeleteChrome
    2. Re:Not a problem by blueg3 · · Score: 1

      With the way DC is designed, if you drive around randomly, you'll probably run right in to the National Mall. The Lincoln Memorial is that big building pictured on the penny. It's across a reflecting pond from the building that looks like the Washington Monument. Sort of in the vicinity of the capitol building, the White House, all of the tourists, and a bunch of Glenn Beck fans.

      I might add that on the Google map that comes up when you search for "Lincoln Memorial" and get the wrong answer, there's a dot a short distance away labeled "Lincoln Memorial". It's that one.

    3. Re:Not a problem by istartedi · · Score: 1

      I was going for Funny there.

      --
      For all intensive purposes, "whom" is no longer a word. That begs the question, "who cares"?
    4. Re:Not a problem by Jeremy+Erwin · · Score: 3, Funny

      If you drive around randomly, you'll probably end up in a random traffic jam.

    5. Re:Not a problem by clarkkent09 · · Score: 1

      Let's say a person is coming from San Francisco...

      Come on now, it's pretty unlikely that any communist homosexuals would be coming to a Glenn Beck rally.

      --
      Negative moral value of force outweighs the positive value of good intentions.
    6. Re:Not a problem by Moldiver · · Score: 0

      There's only one big problem: What the heck *is* Lincoln Memorial? And where is it supposed to be? Not the whole world is made out of us-americans...

    7. Re:Not a problem by welshsocialist · · Score: 1

      The Lincoln Memorial is that big building pictured on the penny.

      Since 2008 Lincoln Memorial is no longer on the penny. It was replaced last year with four designs that commemorated Lincoln's life. This year the design changed again, showing the depiction of a shield. For details, see the US Mint.

      --
      Support the Chagossians
  17. This is bad by onyxruby · · Score: 1, Insightful

    Politics aside (Glen Beck is an idiot), this reeks of a dirty political trick. Without doubt many people here would be screaming bloody murder if the situation was reversed and it was a democratic party rally.

    1. Re:This is bad by bsDaemon · · Score: 2, Interesting

      I'd suspect that this sort of thing would work /better/ on Democrats than Republicans, being how Democrats are younger, hipper, and more apt to use Google where as most Republicans probably have a paper map of DC around somewhere. It's a capstone monument on the national mall. All roads lead to Independence and Constitution. It's only a few blocks from the friggin' FDR memorial anyway -- and its not even real blocks. You can see one from the other.

      This is just incompetence magnified by douche-baggery and wordpress.

    2. Re:This is bad by Beelzebud · · Score: 4, Insightful

      A dirty trick would be putting billboards up giving the wrong date for an election, or bugging your own office and blaming it on a competitor. Someone editing a google map entry, is pretty weak on the 'dirty trick' scale.

    3. Re:This is bad by Jeremy+Erwin · · Score: 2, Funny

      It's only a few blocks from the friggin' FDR memorial anyway -- and its not even real blocks.

      A real block? You mean a New York city block? That's about 80 meters by 270 meters-- it varies.

      It's about 770 meters from the FDR memorial to the Lincoln memorial.

    4. Re:This is bad by korean.ian · · Score: 3, Funny

      meters? commie! true AMERICANS use yards or feet. you know. It takes 50 feet to cross my yard.

    5. Re:This is bad by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It's an intelligence test! If you can't find the Lincoln Memorial from the FDR Memorial you're too stupid to attend even this rally.

      AC to preserve mods.

    6. Re:This is bad by Sir_Lewk · · Score: 1

      And both groups of people screaming bloody murder would be humourless dicks who can't take a joke.

      Seriously though, who actually needs to use google maps to find the Lincoln Memorial? It's probably the easiest thing in a city to find in any city in the US. Last time I went to DC I was twelve and I'm confident I could still do it...

      --
      "linux is just DOS with a UNIX like syntax" -- Galactic Dominator (944134)
    7. Re:This is bad by Xyrus · · Score: 1

      No it isn't. It's because the average American has the IQ of a sack of potatoes and doesn't know the names of our own national monuments.

      It is the LINCOLN MEMORIAL. There is no such place as the LINCOLN MONUMENT. The LINCOLN MEMORIAL has a LINCOLN MONUMENT, but there is no PLACE called LINCOLN MONUMENT. Google maps isn't always the most accurate and it's searching doesn't always give you what you'd expect. For example, try putting in WASHINGTON MEMORIAL instead of MONUMENT and see what you get.

      I'm not privy to the inner details of how Google's search engine works, but it appears it is keying off "monument". No conspiracy or tricks needed. If you actually put in what it is called, the LINCOLN MEMORIAL, then it gives you the right location.

      Besides, how on Earth could the Democratic party get this to happen? They can barely agree on a general direction for their party, let alone pull off a stunt like this.

      --
      ~X~
    8. Re:This is bad by EnvyRAM · · Score: 1

      I think if it was a trick they would have tried to stick them all across the river in Anacostia somewhere. Now THAT I would have gone to see.

    9. Re:This is bad by DavidTC · · Score: 1

      You can see one from the other.

      And you could hopefully see the crowd from FDR, or it was a pretty shitty turnout.

      --
      If corporations are people, aren't stockholders guilty of slavery?
  18. Maybe Google is just honoring Beck by antifoidulus · · Score: 0, Flamebait

    Google is just honoring him by being as disconnected from reality as Glenn Beck is!

  19. Typo by adamdoyle · · Score: 3, Informative

    It's actually "Glenn"... not "Glen."

    1. Re:Typo by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Funny

      Wrong, his name is actually spelt "Fuckwit"

    2. Re:Typo by H0p313ss · · Score: 3, Funny

      Wrong, his name is actually spelt "Fuckwit"

      A common mistake, it's spelled Glenn but pronounced Fuckwit.

      --
      XML is a known as a key material required to create SMD: Software of Mass Destruction
    3. Re:Typo by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Obviously someone is trying to trick people to go to a Glen Beck event instead of the larger Glenn Beck event.

    4. Re:Typo by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It's also Berk not Beck

    5. Re:Typo by LihTox · · Score: 1

      It's actually "Glenn"... not "Glen."

      "And leave off the last N for Nutjob!"

  20. What's the benefit to vandalizing the map? by RobinEggs · · Score: 2, Interesting

    To the few people here who apparently believe paranoid conservative conspiracy theorists vandalized Google to obscure the location of this rally: are you completely insane?

    I mean, follow the bouncing ball: you're so paranoid that you'd like to hide the location of a giant rally by desecrating Google maps, but you've scheduled said rally at a landmark so famous tens of millions could find it with no maps at all? And how are fellow paranoid conservatives supposed to find said rally? Does Glenn Beck's web page include coded directions, decipherable only by clues so small you'd never notice them if you hadn't read Ronald Reagan's autobiography twelve times?

    You may think Glenn Beck listeners somewhat clinically paranoid and/or politically foolish, but you don't look any smarter, more rational, or less paranoid in believing them both smart enough and rationally motivated to vandalize the map but otherwise too stupid to tie their own shoes.

    1. Re:What's the benefit to vandalizing the map? by hedwards · · Score: 1

      It's definitely a conspiracy. Not to keep people away, but rather a conspiracy by employees of the Smithsonian to figure out if Glenn Beck's followers are capable of reading a book long enough to find the information they need. But then again, these are the same people that go to a person with no education and no knowledge of investing for investment advice. So I'm not sure that they could be described as particularly astute individuals.

    2. Re:What's the benefit to vandalizing the map? by Pichu0102 · · Score: 1

      I think the implication is that anti-conservatives are vandalizing Google maps in an attempt to cause people wishing to attend the rally to instead become lost, should they rely on Google maps.

    3. Re:What's the benefit to vandalizing the map? by im_thatoneguy · · Score: 2, Informative

      There isn't a conspiracy here. People ARE vandalizing the Google posting. And they've also vandalized the FDR Memorial posting as well (Who knew FDR's memorial was a bridge?) :D

      Before the night is out I'm sure the Lincoln Memorial will be in Washington State and the White House will be in Manhattan.

  21. You mean this? by MrLint · · Score: 1

    http://goo.gl/maps/MpJ6

    Right on gmaps?

    1. Re:You mean this? by themacks · · Score: 2, Informative

      Yes, now click the button marked 'Search Maps' and see what all of the fuss is about.


      Hint: You will now be looking at 'Franklin Delano Roosevelt Memorial'

      --
      i read about it in a blog once
    2. Re:You mean this? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Interestingly, if you keep clicking 'Search Maps' you occasionally get directed to a car park next to the Jefferson Memorial.

  22. I smell a slashdot conspiracy by Fractal+Dice · · Score: 2, Funny

    I smell a conspiracy to attempt to bring the US media's favorite vacuous ratings-boosting political flamewar to slashdot by dressing it up in a thin veil of tech.

  23. INTARWEB BATTEL! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Edit history:

    Changed 33 secs agoThis edit is a suggestionGeometry: Location moved

    Changed 1 mins 28 secs agoThis edit is a suggestionGeometry: Location moved

    Changed 16 mins 52 secs ago by kbfGeometry: Location moved Business hours: Deleted Mon-Sun 8.00am-11.59pm

    Changed 39 mins 28 secs ago by DennisName: Lincoln Memorial (English, type: Preferred) Franklin Delano Roosevelt Memorial (English, type: Preferred) Geometry: Location moved Address: Western Terminus of the 20242, National Mall, Washington, District of Columbia, District of Columbia, United States, 20597 1850, West Basin Dr SW, Washington, District of Columbia, District of Columbia, United States, 20242

    Changed 2 hours 12 mins agoThis edit is a suggestionGeometry: Location moved

    Changed 2 hours 39 mins ago by MikeThis edit is a suggestionGeometry: Location moved

    Changed 3 hours 43 mins agoThis edit is a suggestionGeometry: Location moved

    Changed 3 hours 46 mins agoGeometry: Location moved Address: Independence Ave SW, Washington, District of Columbia, District of Columbia, United States 1850, West Basin Dr SW, Washington, District of Columbia, District of Columbia, United States, 20242

    Changed 3 hours 48 mins agoName: Lincoln Memorial (English, type: Preferred) Franklin Delano Roosevelt Memorial (English, type: Preferred) Geometry: Location moved Address: Independence Ave SW, Washington, District of Columbia, District of Columbia, United States 1850, West Basin Dr SW, Washington, District of Columbia, District of Columbia, United States, 20242

    Changed 4 hours 4 mins agoThis edit is a suggestionGeometry: Location moved

    1. Re:INTARWEB BATTEL! by aix+tom · · Score: 1

      Nah, they just put them on trailers to have some sort of memorial-parade or something driving them 'round the country.

  24. They must have it in for Jefferson too by istartedi · · Score: 4, Informative

    If you look for the Jefferson Memorial, the same thing happens. The Washington Monument and the White House work fine though.

    --
    For all intensive purposes, "whom" is no longer a word. That begs the question, "who cares"?
    1. Re:They must have it in for Jefferson too by Beelzebud · · Score: 2, Funny

      It's a nefarious conspiracy, I tell you!

    2. Re:They must have it in for Jefferson too by spitzak · · Score: 1

      It also goes there for "any memorial, washington".

      Obviously those evil liberals realized that Glen Beck said "I'm going to rally at any memorial in Washington!" and Google made sure they were sent to the wrong one!

    3. Re:They must have it in for Jefferson too by istartedi · · Score: 1

      It also goes there for "any memorial, washington"

      Well, there you have it. Somebody at Google pressed the "any" key. Nobody else could ever find it; but everybody at Google is a genius so they must know where it is.

      --
      For all intensive purposes, "whom" is no longer a word. That begs the question, "who cares"?
    4. Re:They must have it in for Jefferson too by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That's to confuse the libertarians.

    5. Re:They must have it in for Jefferson too by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Google maps doesn't have a clue where Mount Vernon is either.

    6. Re:They must have it in for Jefferson too by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Interestingly enough, Jefferson Memorial maps fine, but Jefferson Memorial, Washington dc. doesn't.

  25. Re:Really? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

    Oh shit they're on to us. Come on guys, like we said at the last meeting of the Evil Liberals Who Hate Freedom League, you got to be more careful. Today it's the bloggers, tomorrow it'll appear in forwarded e-mails in 80 point comic sans font, then we're really screwed. Before you know it, they'll break out the ALL CAPS, which as we all know everything is absolutely and unquestionably true if it appears in ALL CAPS.

    Also remember: we're forcing people to get gay married and buy health insurance, not hide the Lincoln Memorial. Stay on message guys.

  26. It's a plot to silence Glenn Beck by Beelzebud · · Score: 0, Troll

    I mean, if google has scrubbed the Lincoln memorial from their maps, how else will Beck faithful be able to find it? If only there was a media outlet that hyped this event for the entire summer. Oh wait...

  27. Re:Really? by Beelzebud · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Good thing we have the voice of reason here! I mean you only suggested the OP should be shot for a comment! That's very reasonable. Why would anyone want to stereotype conservatives?

    You bring up another great point too. Why on a site that is "News for Nerds" would people mock creationists? It's just not fair! Teach the controversy!

  28. People playing pranks by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    click on the edits and you'll see some one is playing a joke.

  29. Re:Really? by Wyatt+Earp · · Score: 1

    Moonbat is a far left crazy, they've been using the term for about 10-12 years.

  30. Glenn Beck's Idiots are a Problem by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    If you can't find the Lincoln Memorial without a map, you are too stupid to remember to breathe.

    ... which explains why you are listening to Glenn Beck in the first place.

    Glenn Beck is the retarded hitler to his retarded racist brown shirts.

    You know the saying - "In the land of total retardation, the half retarded man is king."

    1. Re:Glenn Beck's Idiots are a Problem by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Unlike the Panthers of Philly who intimidate voters, unlike the protesters at G-8 who smash and break things. You are a moron. I thought the Tea Parties were a bunch of red neck hicks until I actually attended one. You know what I found out, sure there were red neck hicks there, but probably less than 5% of the crowd were Hicks, but the rest were what you would consider hard working middle class folks. They left the rally or Tea Party in almost the same shape or cleaner that it was before they held it there, the people picked up the trash. I have been to rallies where a bunch people mostly of the liberal persuasion who left the place a complete and utter mess. Yeah, why don't you do a search on how many people get arrested at a Tea Party compared to any protest event held by people on the far left. Gee, The lawbreaking scum that are the Anarachists are pissed about the tea party because they make them look bad and expose them as the miserable human beings they are. That is why there is so much animosity against them.

    2. Re:Glenn Beck's Idiots are a Problem by Datamonstar · · Score: 1

      How could you tell? Oh, that's right. They don't wear the white hoods during the daytime.

      --
      The eternal struggle of good vs. evil begins within one's self.
    3. Re:Glenn Beck's Idiots are a Problem by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Shh.. Calling everyone racist makes him feel good, don't disabuse him. When you can point around at all the "racists", it means you yourself are not only not a racist, but a racism-fighter. An honorable person standing up against injustice.

      Why interrupt someone when they're using a psychological device to prop up their ego? Does it hurt you that he does it, I mean really? Let him alone.

  31. Re:You need directions? by Wyatt+Earp · · Score: 2, Informative

    If you live in the US and/or have ever seen a picture of the National Mall, reflecting pool, Lincoln Memorial, Washington Monument or a map of DC, you'd know where the hell the Lincoln Memorial is.

  32. Google maps by jav1231 · · Score: 1

    It's not surprising. Google Louisville, KY and you'll find the city but you won't see it labeled.

    1. Re:Google maps by penguinchris · · Score: 1

      Indeed, there's a lot of weird stuff like this.

      Last time I was in NYC I searched google maps on my nexus one for the Metropolitan Art Museum... a huge landmark in Central Park (I did already know where it was). Google Maps doesn't know it exists, apparently.

    2. Re:Google maps by Beelzebud · · Score: 1

      It's almost as if trying to catalog every location on the planet is a big job. ;)

    3. Re:Google maps by vux984 · · Score: 1


      It's almost as if trying to catalog every location on the planet is a big job. ;)

      Indeed. But even so, when google can't find some residential cul-de-sac with 2 homes on it in some hick town with 50 people... we would shrug it off. When it can't find a world famous art gallery in new york city its a bit more jarring.

  33. There's an FDR memorial? / mind=blown by SheeEttin · · Score: 1

    I went to DC on a school trip in 8th grade, and I didn't even know there was an FDR memorial. (Of course, this was a tightly structured and scheduled trip, so that'd probably be why.)

    That aside, there's one little feature of Street View that blew my mind just now.
    While you're around the Tidal Basin, drag the little Street View man out of his home on the little toolbar. You'll notice that there are a lot of single spots around the area. These are user-contributed images--and, since several are in the Tidal Basin itself, probably user-positioned as well.
    Anyway, drag the little man to the southernmost spot wholly in the Tidal Basin. You'll see it's not actually a picture from the Tidal Basin, it's a picture of the Jefferson Memorial from the west side, across the water. Now, here's the cool part.
    See that dot on the Memorial you get when you mouse over? Click it.
    It warps you to another image of the Memorial from a similar angle. From this point, you can warp to four images.
    It might just be because it's late, but it sure blew my mind. (Especially if it's computer-generated linking.)

    1. Re:There's an FDR memorial? / mind=blown by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      When did you go? The FDR Memorial wasn't dedicated until May 2,1997.

    2. Re:There's an FDR memorial? / mind=blown by the_other_chewey · · Score: 1

      It warps you to another image of the Memorial from a similar angle. From this point, you can warp to four images. It might just be because it's late, but it sure blew my mind. (Especially if it's computer-generated linking.)

      It is. They are doing this with user-supplied photographs worldwide.
      Google must have an incredible amount of spare processing power.

      My mind has recovered from being blown when first discovering this
      a couple of months ago, but I'm still fairly impressed.

    3. Re:There's an FDR memorial? / mind=blown by damn_registrars · · Score: 1

      I went to DC on a school trip in 8th grade, and I didn't even know there was an FDR memorial. (Of course, this was a tightly structured and scheduled trip, so that'd probably be why.)

      I don't know how recently you were in 8th grade, but the FDR memorial was only dedicated in 1997. So the current memorial might not have been installed when you were there...

      --
      Damn_registrars has no butt-hole. Damn_registrars has no use for a butt-hole.
  34. Re:You need directions? by LostCluster · · Score: 2, Informative

    Glenn Beck is a national talk show host, trying to encourage out-of-towners to go to his rally this weekend. That's why this Google flaw is relevant to geeks nationally... it's showing how a political event can be disrupted by those who disagree with the event's sponsor with a simple misinformation attack on Google Maps.

  35. Same location as in Fallout 3 by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Redundant

    There might be more or fewer Super Mutants there in the real world, depending on your political views.

    Really, a tech site like this and nobody has pointed that out yet?

  36. Really True patriots by RingDev · · Score: 1

    Know that it is the Washington MONUMENT. And that if you search google maps for the Washington Monument, it points right at it.

    The Washington Monument was started while Washington was still alive, thus, it is a monument, NOT a memorial.

    -Rick

    --
    "Most people in the U.S. wouldn't know they live in a tyrannical state if it walked up and grabbed their junk." - MyFirs
    1. Re:Really True patriots by wkcole · · Score: 2, Informative

      The Washington Monument was started while Washington was still alive, thus, it is a monument, NOT a memorial.

      THAT IS AN ABSURDLY MULTIFACETED FALSEHOOD

      The semantic difference between 'monument' and 'memorial' is wrong and work on the Washington Monument (which is a National Memorial) did not start until long after Washington's death in 1799.

      While a nearby location (now the location of the Jefferson Pier) was specified for a monument featuring Washington in L'Enfant's 1791 city plan, that monument (an equestrian statue) was never built. A different plan for a monument (in the Capital itself) was authorized in 1799, but that one was also never actually started. The monument that actually exists today was the result of a quasi-private project that started in 1832 and spent 26 years in corrupt clusterfuckery. That fiasco got the obelisk part of their design 1/3-built between 1848 and 1858 before running out of money and credible public figures to sully by association. It sat untouched as an eyesore for 18 years, and the work done 1854-58 was such crap that it had to be dismantled before completion of the monument (with a slightly different color of stone and a simpler overall design) could continue.

  37. DC Traffic by Sean_Inconsequential · · Score: 2, Funny

    Even If they have the best directions in the world they still wouldn't make it to the rally in time. That Beltway traffic is ridiculous. It is a conspiracy perpetrated by the road workers.

    1. Re:DC Traffic by Chris+Burke · · Score: 1

      That Beltway traffic is ridiculous. It is a conspiracy perpetrated by the road workers.

      Yeah, the Road Workers for Cthulhu Union. Gazing upon His Eldritch Tentacleness is less likely to cause insanity than driving on the beltway.

      --

      The enemies of Democracy are
  38. Doh, I read gud by RingDev · · Score: 1

    Heh, late night posting. I totally missread that as the Washington, not Lincoln. Oddly enough though, searching for the Lincoln Monument points to the correct place, even though it is a memorial.

    Weird. And Sorry for my missreading ;)

    -Rick

    --
    "Most people in the U.S. wouldn't know they live in a tyrannical state if it walked up and grabbed their junk." - MyFirs
  39. Directions for Beck fans by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    It's a short walk from the Washington monument. It's best to walk it, just head east for about a mile or two. The ground gets damp but keep walking and you'll get there eventually. If you make it to Europe you've gone too far.

  40. Re:You need directions? by LostCluster · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Google tries to stay out of politics. Glenn Beck is getting the message not to piss off those who contribute to Wikis.

  41. You can see the Linconln Memorial on the same map! by spitzak · · Score: 1

    If you go to the map, at least for me, the marker seems to point at nothing, but right above it is the lincoln memorial, clearly marked! So is the Jefferson Memorial.

    I think it is a conservative conspiracy, they wanted people to walk past the Korean War monument (which is also clearly on the map). We kicked those commie's asses in that one! Hell Yeah!

  42. There are old fashioned ways to find it. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    There is this old fashioned thing called a paper map that is generally available for example on the National Park service web site:
    http://www.nps.gov/mall/planyourvisit/maps.htm
    Its a pdf and not subject to random edits. There are many places around Washington that sell both guidebooks and maps.
    Trusting google is not needed, there are other ways to find out. I suspect that few who attend the rally would use google, preferring
    the tried and true method. Of course once you find the mall. (Look for the Capitol, and go there, then walk west)

  43. Re:You need directions? by TheKidWho · · Score: 1

    It took me 18 years of living in NYC before I finally went to visit the Statue of Liberty.

  44. Re:Really? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    You'd think the nerds in question could stop confusing conservatives with creationists, for starters. One is a political bent, the other is a sub-category of the overly-religious. Creationists are not strictly conservatives, either.

  45. Re:Really? by Beelzebud · · Score: 1

    Tell it to the parent! I'm not the one that lumped the two together as I whined about being treated unfairly.

  46. Fallout 3 by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Is that me or when street viewing around the monuments especially the Jefferson memorial reminds me of Fallout 3 gameplay ? :)

  47. Patriotism Is the Last Refuge of a Scoundrel by Doc+Ruby · · Score: 1, Redundant

    The .fortune at the bottom of the page showing this story say:

    It seems like the less a statesman amounts to, the more he loves the flag.

    Slashdot has achieved artificial intelligence. Or it's another part of the same conspiracy hiding the Lincoln Memorial from Beck's zombie army. Or both, since "reality has a well-known liberal bias" (- Stephen Colbert).

    --

    --
    make install -not war

    1. Re:Patriotism Is the Last Refuge of a Scoundrel by UnCivil+Liberty · · Score: 2, Insightful

      The .fortune at the bottom of the page showing this story say:

      It seems like the less a statesman amounts to, the more he loves the flag.

      Slashdot has achieved artificial intelligence. Or it's another part of the same conspiracy hiding the Lincoln Memorial from Beck's zombie army. Or both, since "reality has a well-known liberal bias" (- Stephen Colbert).

      My .fortune offers a retort: "Power, like a desolating pestilence, Pollutes whate'er it touches... -- Percy Bysshe Shelley"

      --
      Distributed proteome folding @ WorldCommunityGrid.org
      Team Slashdot - Members:#1 Run Time:#1 Points:#1 Results:#1
    2. Re:Patriotism Is the Last Refuge of a Scoundrel by davev2.0 · · Score: 1

      The quote you use as you title is not a general indictment of patriotism but rather is directed at a specific scoundrel.

      A nation without patriots soon is not a nation, but the vassal state of a nation.

      Now, how about you explain what is wrong with patriotism.

    3. Re:Patriotism Is the Last Refuge of a Scoundrel by Doc+Ruby · · Score: 1

      Now mine says

      Where the system is concerned, you're not allowed to ask "Why?".

      It's clearly mocking us.

      --

      --
      make install -not war

    4. Re:Patriotism Is the Last Refuge of a Scoundrel by cduffy · · Score: 1

      What's wrong with patriotism is that it's oft confused with nationalism -- forgetting the second part of this phrase:

      "My country, right or wrong; when right, to be kept right, when wrong to be put right"

      ...and believing in a duty to defend a country's actions rather than its principals.

    5. Re:Patriotism Is the Last Refuge of a Scoundrel by davev2.0 · · Score: 1

      Ah, guilt by (false) association always makes my skin crawl. If people like you would stop confusing patriotism with nationalism, this would not be a problem.

    6. Re:Patriotism Is the Last Refuge of a Scoundrel by cduffy · · Score: 1

      "Guilt by association"? Much to the contrary; the post to which you reply defended patriotism by indicating that the only thing "wrong" with it is a misapprehension on the part of those who object (assisted by similar misapprehension on the part of those they find objectionable).

    7. Re:Patriotism Is the Last Refuge of a Scoundrel by davev2.0 · · Score: 1
      Do you remember this:

      What's wrong with patriotism is that it's oft confused with nationalism

      You stated your opinion straight out.

    8. Re:Patriotism Is the Last Refuge of a Scoundrel by cduffy · · Score: 1

      You stated your opinion straight out.

      You read much too literally.

    9. Re:Patriotism Is the Last Refuge of a Scoundrel by davev2.0 · · Score: 1
      I asked:

      Now, how about you explain what is wrong with patriotism.

      You answered:

      What's wrong with patriotism is that it's oft confused with nationalism

      Your stated opinion is that patriotism is wrong because it is often confused with nationalism. Those are your words. If you mean something, do say it. If you do not mean something, do not say it. Do not say something and then try to dance around claiming what you said is not what you meant.

    10. Re:Patriotism Is the Last Refuge of a Scoundrel by cduffy · · Score: 1

      So noted -- explicit scare quotes it'll be next time, as in:

      What's "wrong" with patriotism[...]

      ...to ensure that even folks who are making an effort towards finding fault rather than taking the most reasonable interpretation manage to grok intent. Or maybe not; fault isn't so very hard to find, if one gets one's kicks in looking for it.

  48. What are you, some foreigner? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    This is America, we measure in "yards", or "football fields", and by football, I mean American football, not that wussy European round ball game.

  49. Re:You need directions? by ooshna · · Score: 0, Offtopic

    Lol like it tries to do no evil? "we will not censor you got that China?" "are the reporters gone? *whisper* ok we will censor what you want"

  50. Re:Let me get this straight... by Beelzebud · · Score: 1

    Only Libertarian keyboard commandos believe in rights, amirite?

  51. just a slight touch-up here on the sig by CrankinOut · · Score: 1

    Er, the phrase is "for all intents and purposes,..."

    1. Re:just a slight touch-up here on the sig by derfy · · Score: 1

      Whoosh.

    2. Re:just a slight touch-up here on the sig by donscarletti · · Score: 1

      Another expression is: "woosh!"

      --
      When Argumentum ad Hominem falls short, try Argumentum ad Matrem
    3. Re:just a slight touch-up here on the sig by ChrisCampbell47 · · Score: 1

      Yeah, there's like four jokes in that one sig. Well done, sir :)

  52. Re:Really? by RobinEggs · · Score: 1, Offtopic

    And there's that again. Not one single time in a decade on forums have I ever pointed out that people are assholes to conservatives and creationists without everyone instantly assuming I was one and merely pissed off about being personally attacked. I am not either, sir, I'm just tired of the stupid, preening self-righteousness that slashdot has in abundance. And your cute sarcastic response is, at very best, the pot calling the kettle black.

  53. Re:Really? by Beelzebud · · Score: 0, Offtopic

    Creationists don't deserve an ounce of respect, or time. Period. Maybe people wouldn't mistake you for one, if you'd stop trying to defend them...

  54. Use the Google? by xs650 · · Score: 1, Funny

    Since when would a Beck fan know how to use the Google?

  55. Add Abraham by falken0905 · · Score: 0, Troll

    If you search on 'Abraham Lincoln memorial' it gets you the the right spot. It's the one with the big statue of Abraham Lincoln sitting in a very large chair and a large crowd of brainless idiot sheep gathering early Saturday morning.

    1. Re:Add Abraham by masmullin · · Score: 1

      Being as these are Glenn Beck followers... what do you get when you type "linkin memoral" ?

  56. Re:You need directions? by TapeCutter · · Score: 3, Funny

    "it's showing how a political event can be disrupted by those who disagree with the event's sponsor with a simple misinformation"

    Glenn Beck fans cannot be fooled by simple misinformation, they have no need for geographical facts, their gut instincts will lead them directly to the rally.

    --
    And did you exchange a walk on part in the war for a lead role in a cage? - Pink Floyd.
  57. Re:Really? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

    They aren't nearly as bad as Linux users though, All of those guys are a bunch of nutters. Unix forever!

  58. Re:Really? by frist · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Wow. Put a label on someone and then you can treat them as sub-human. You're well on your way.

  59. Re:You need directions? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

    There's still a big difference between knowing where somewhere is on a map and actually getting to that location when you're on the ground in a possibly unfamiliar area.

  60. Re:You need directions? by Fnkmaster · · Score: 5, Insightful

    The Statue of Liberty trip is practically an in-joke among New Yorkers. Many (most?) New Yorkers have never been to it, though everybody can see it when you're driving around the bottom of the FDR or West Side Highway. I actually have a beautiful view of it from my living room (I live right on the Hudson River), and have never actually taken the ferry to the Statue of Liberty proper, though I once took a ferry trip to Ellis Island, and that boat took us around the Statue for a fairly close look.

    The lines to take the ferry to Liberty Island are ridiculously long on weekends (like 3-4 hours), I walk by them every weekend on my morning walks through Battery Park, so unless you have a weekday off in the city, it actually takes as long to go to the Statue of Liberty as it does to drive to Boston.

    Same reason I've never been to the top of the Empire State Building - ridiculous lines.

  61. Re:Ed hardy handbags by Profane+MuthaFucka · · Score: 3, Funny

    Make sure you buy your $699 Ed Hardy handbag, you coc...

    --
    Fascism trolls keeping me up every night. When I starts a preachin', he HITS ME WITH HIS REICH!
  62. Similar to Prior Problem by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Something similar used to happen for searches on "Nationals Park." The location was marked correctly on the map, but searches returned a location closer to RFK stadium, where the Nationals used to play, but even that location was misplaced by 8-10 blocks. About a month ago, I reported the problem, and it has since been fixed. I suspect the Lincoln Memorial issue has more to do with an imperfect algorithm for assigning search terms than it does with any conspiracies.

    Disclaimer: My political views are somewhere slightly right of middle.

  63. Glenn Beck did it by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    He's tremendously wealthy and powerful and he loves pulling histrionic stunts like this. In case you haven't figured it out, he's having the rally on the same day and location as the MLK speech because it creates an opportunity to claim the race card is being played against him. He loves stuff like that. Whaaaa! They won't accept that it's just a coincidence! Whaaaaa! Anything to play the victim, get racists all worked up into a lather, and blab on and on about some conspiracy theory.

    1. Re:Glenn Beck did it by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Ummm, I guess you didn't know that MLK's niece is giving a speech at the rally....... But I guess John Stewart or Stephen Colbert left that little detail out didn't they.

  64. Considering Google's background by ub3r+n3u7r4l1st · · Score: 0, Flamebait

    I wouldn't surprise if they did this.

  65. It doesn't have a street address by LSD-25 · · Score: 1

    My theory is that the search feature relies on street addresses. The Lincoln Memorial doesn't have one, but the FDR Memorial does. The US Capitol doesn't have a street address either. If you search for it, the first hit is the nearby visitor's center. The second hit is on the building itself, but the title is in Chinese for some reason.

  66. I Call Straw Man by kainosnous · · Score: 1, Insightful

    This seems to me as a straw man argument to imply that "conservatives are paranoid". There are two links listed. As far as I can tell, the one doesn't say anything about a conspiracy. The other link seems to be the craziest anti-leftest they could find, so he at least is depicted correctly. However, to say that Glenn Beck supporters are all conservative or that conservatives are paranoid is a bit of a stretch. I don't think many Beck supporters will even notice the Google map, as they probably all have a paper map somewhere.

    Many of Beck's supporters wouldn't vote for a conservative or a Republican to save their lives. If you recall, before Fox picked him up, he was on CNN's Headline News which could in no way be thought of as conservative. The liberal station loved him then while he was bashing George Bush and Republicans. Now, the liberals are in power and he's countering environmentalism and socialism. This time, it's Fox who likes him and CNN that hates him, but his basic message is the same.

    His detractors use ad-hominem attacks and straw man arguments to refute him. They say things like "He cries on TV!" and "His supporters are rednecks!", but very rarely have I heard any arguments against his message. I think that many people have trouble agreeing on what part of his message they don't like. For instance if they say they don't like him because he didn't support Bush or McCain, their friend might have liked that, but dislike that he doesn't support global warming legislation. It's so much easier to just attack the man and people who like him.

    --
    There are 10 commandments: 01)Thou shalt love the Lord Thy God 10)Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself.Matt22:34-40
    1. Re:I Call Straw Man by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You sly dog... I knew you were a phony beck sycophant as soon as you said he was consistent. Nice try tho. You remind me of the guy who tried to convince others that Harper's magazine was a rightwing rag.

    2. Re:I Call Straw Man by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

      Now, the liberals are in power and he's countering environmentalism and socialism. This time, it's Fox who likes him and CNN that hates him, but his basic message is the same.

      Before he switched networks, he thought the U.S. medical system was a failure. When reform was proposed and he worked for FOX, it was suddenly the best system in the world.

      It's easy to attack the man, because he's a contrarian buffoon.

    3. Re:I Call Straw Man by Allnighte · · Score: 4, Informative

      Allow me to respond to your inquiry with youtube links!

      Glenn Beck on 9/11 victims:
      http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ruzvmqbTpPI

      That pretty much sums up the ridiculousness of his message. Also may I point you to the Daily Show link which basically rips the "WHO IS FUNDING THIS TERRORIST MOSQUE!?!?" to shreds:
      http://www.thedailyshow.com/watch/mon-august-23-2010/the-parent-company-trap

      And here's a few more of The Young Turks on Glenn Beck:
      http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_bbgsYV9DXk
      http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=g-aBUoO7aSA

      TYT frequently rips open arguments with facts - and they do it to "both sides" [sorry if the links I posted don't have a lot of fact checking in them. I've been very critical of TYT but past clips do have plenty of facts to back up their claims]. Though lately it has been a lot of Fox News and republican bashing (can't really say there isn't a good reason for it lately).

    4. Re:I Call Straw Man by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      This seems to me as a straw man argument to imply that "conservatives are paranoid".

      ...QED. ;)

    5. Re:I Call Straw Man by darth+dickinson · · Score: 1

      But the federal government is not reforming the health care system...they are reforming the health insurance system. A subtle, yet critical distinction.

    6. Re:I Call Straw Man by watermark · · Score: 1

      ...but very rarely have I heard any arguments against his message.

      Have you watched John Stewart lately?

  67. Re:Really? by Beelzebud · · Score: 1

    Unix users are the crazy ones! Plan9 Forever!

  68. Who says video games aren't educational? by Anubis+IV · · Score: 1

    The Lincoln Memorial is practically within eyesight of Rivet City. Err, wait, that's the Jefferson Memorial. The Lincoln one is where you clear those Slavers, remember? It's on The Mall, but watch out for Super Mutants and Feral Ghouls in the area since they might be a nuisance if you're low level.

  69. Re:Really? by masmullin · · Score: 1

    Put a label on someone and then you can treat them as sub-human

    Really? Is that one of the new rules?

    Thats awesome, Im totally going to walk around with a bunch of those "Hello My Name is ..." labels. When I find someone who I think should be treated as sub-human I'll just stick one of those on their foreheads.

  70. It IS a conspiracy! by 517714 · · Score: 1

    The Republicans found that Google Maps was incorrect and scheduled the rally there to allow them to charge Google with conspiracy

    --
    The US government have made it clear that we have no inalienable rights; any we do not defend vigorously will be taken.
  71. Glenn's been hot to get his honor back ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    ... Ever since I took his innocence anally a few months ago.

    Yes -- he cried.

  72. GPS Tracking & Beck by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    When Slashdot people asked, "Why does nobody care about the police using GPS tracking without a warrant?", keep in mind that Beck cared and opposed it on his show last Wednesday. Just an FYI.

  73. Re:Restoring Horror by agnosticnixie · · Score: 1

    The 60s as in "well after the southern strategy started" - besides, it's not what party they're from, it's what ideology they espouse.

  74. Re:Really? by agnosticnixie · · Score: 0

    Most creationists are quite experts in the putting labels and treating others as subhuman department.

    I also don't believe in the moral high ground.

  75. Re:Really? by khallow · · Score: 1

    Good thing we have the voice of reason here! I mean you only suggested the OP should be shot for a comment!

    No. A comment rating. That's serious business. Just think of how much better the world would be, if we put bullets in everyone who modded my trolls, "troll -1".

  76. Re:You need directions? by Cyberllama · · Score: 2, Informative

    You do realize that they aren't censoring Chinese search results, right?

    They were originally, like everyone else, but currently they are not. Google.cn just links you back to Google.hk for searches, and Google.hk is unfiltered. You still have to contend with with the Great Firewall, of course, so having uncensored results doesn't mean you can access censored material -- but at least you know what you aren't being allowed to see.

  77. How is he an idiot? No, really. by Quiet_Desperation · · Score: 4, Insightful

    He sells lots of books, gets a lot of money for a TV show and has many, many minions. Wait, how is he an idiot again?

    Look, I have no use for the guy, but he's accomplishing more than you or me. We may not agree with what he's accomplishing, but that's irrelevant. I wish I had thought of it. *I* want minions, dammit! I need to find an underserviced fringe of my own to cater to.

    You really think he believes half the shit he says? He's playing to the hyper-right niche. Same with Ann Coulter, or Michael Moore for a lefty example. They have targeted an audience and feed them what they want to hear. If Sarah Palin has any brain at all she'll just play the lecture circuit for the rest of her days and put out more books.

    Oh, and people like him *LOVE* people like you. Your dislike and insults just play to his cause and give him legitimacy in the eyes of his target market.

    1. Re:How is he an idiot? No, really. by jwhitener · · Score: 1

      I don't hear any left/liberal talk show hosts calling him an idiot. Tom Hartman, Randy Rhodes (sp?), acknowledge he's a smart guy. But they also, of course, state that he certainly isn't using that intelligence honestly, or in a way that serves the public interest.

      I'm pretty sure you'd have to have some sort of mental problem to espouse such hate, and blatantly lie constantly, possibly knowing full well that you are hurting your country. Sociopath maybe?

      Now if he really believes what he says.... well he wouldn't be an idiot. He still has intelligence. But he'd certainly be suffering from some mental conditions due to http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cognitive_dissonance

    2. Re:How is he an idiot? No, really. by jwhitener · · Score: 1

      Darn it, I forgot my last sentence.

      It was going to be, "You can be an idiot and make tons of money, the two aren't exclusive. Models, pornstars, people only really good at 1 odd specialty, people brilliant in 1 way yet profoundly retarded in others, etc...".

  78. Re:You need directions? by ooshna · · Score: 1

    Your correct the article that said they started censoring was later updated my bad

  79. Fuck yea! Those Brittish skanks can suck it down! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    That man is my hero. I remember when the first such kinds of scams began when Thomas Jefferson and Bejamin thought-up a style of Union known as The United States of America to be used to extinguish The 48 united States of America. It died in a fire around 1812, but nonetheless it was copycat as trademark onto all the coins and banknotes to this day forth.

  80. Re:You need directions? by treeves · · Score: 1

    Which happens to be located in New Jersey.
    I finally went to Crater Lake this year after living in Oregon for 14 years. Admittedly, it is a five-hour-plus drive.

    --
    ...the future crusty old bastards are already drinking the Kool-Aid.
  81. And something you tend to find with geography by Sycraft-fu · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Is that MOST people suck at it. Europeans like to laugh at Americans because they generally know the correct locations of more countries... Forgetting that America is bigger than Europe and knowing the correct locations of some states would be the same relative amount of knowledge. Their geography outside of that area is usually fairly limited. Most know where the US is since it is large and in the news a lot, but often little more.

    For example I guy I chat with online from the UK had visited Brazil and was thinking of visiting the US. He wanted to know where various people he knew lived so he could decide if he was going to try and visit. I knew there was a good chance he didn't know where Arizona was since it doesn't make the news a lot (the new anti-immigration bill non-withstanding). So I told him it was "Just east of California, and just north of Mexico." He said that didn't help. I though he meant he didn't know where California was so I clarified. No, he didn't know where MEXICO was. He thought it was in Central America, near Brazil.

    Thing is, geography is just kinda boring. It is route memorization, and not all that necessary to most people. This is even more true now, what with maps online and so easily accessible. If you need to know where something is, from a countries down to a street, it is easy to locate.

    I also get a little tired of geography snobs because it is exceedingly rare that someone can properly locate all the countries in the world. Never mind the amount of time spent, most people lack a memory that accurate. So when people get snobby about parts of geography but can't do other parts, to me that is just saying "What I know is important, what everyone else knows isn't."

    1. Re:And something you tend to find with geography by gilleain · · Score: 3, Insightful

      This is all very true of course. As a UK native, I don't know where many of the states are relative to each other. There's an episode of Friends (yeah, yeah, we all watch it sometimes...) where Ross gets increasingly annoyed because he can't even list all the states.

      I've been to Belize, for example, but when telling someone about it forgot that it was in Central America, not South. I think geographical knowledge grows slowly as you get older - and visit more countries.

      However, there is sometimes the impression that US citizens know more about the geography of their own country than of others around the world. I suspect that Europeans who know where all the countries of the EU are (and yet miss many states) also know where, say, Korea is. Or Saudi Arabia. The attitude of "what I know is important" is annoying - but surely there is a middle ground between listing ALL countries and having a balanced knowledge of the whole world.

      Frankly, many foreigners will not know where states are because - as you say - they "don't make the news a lot" :) They aren't individually important in the world, unlike the US as a whole.

    2. Re:And something you tend to find with geography by nogginthenog · · Score: 2, Informative

      Europe is bigger than the USA. The European Union is smaller than the US.

    3. Re:And something you tend to find with geography by Dhalka226 · · Score: 1

      However, there is sometimes the impression that US citizens know more about the geography of their own country than of others around the world

      Why shouldn't we?

      Geography simply is not very important. It's something that pretty much never comes up in real life except as some trivia question or when somebody finds it a good candidate to try to declare you ignorant. To whatever nearly nonexistent degree it has any value to the average person at all, the value increases based on proximity. Knowing what states border mine is significantly more important than knowing where a random state is, is significantly more important than knowing where a random country is -- none of which are terribly important at all.

      The attitude of "what I know is important" is annoying - but surely there is a middle ground between listing ALL countries and having a balanced knowledge of the whole world.

      Does the average person anywhere really have a balanced knowledge of the whole world, or is it just a semantic argument that, as the grandparent said, tries to make what you know more important than what somebody else knows?

      Europeans know where North Korea is and Americans don't? Okay, swell -- but that's not "a balanced knowledge of the whole world." How many know anything about Africa? How many know anything about Central America? South America? These places make up a vast portion of the landmass of the world, but I doubt most people know anything about their geography. Why? Because as self-absorbed as it may be, they're just not that important--on average--to us. Knowing where countries within these landmasses are is even less important, even when a country happens to pop up on our radar. You've simply chosen some different metric for how important a country must be to care about. And in fact one might be able to make a distance argument there as well.

      Geography can be important to some people. It's important to an in-depth understanding of a lot of historical (and present-day) conflicts. It's important to a lot of very practical matters like building projects, trade issues, etc. To those people it's vital; to everybody else, who really gives a damn?

      As a bit of an aside, I can tell you as an American that we absolutely studied world geography in my classes growing up. Some of that information is still with me; more than is probably with the average person. Much of it is not. Why? Because knowledge that doesn't get used tends to fade away. I also took French in junior high and high school, but I've forgotten most of that as well. Congratulations to those who have the memory to store all sorts of information they never use, but for everybody else it's hardly worth looking down one's nose about.

    4. Re:And something you tend to find with geography by FuckingNickName · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Well, I stopped taking any geography when I was 13, such choice being a luxury of a non-National-Curriculum school. Some of what came under geography, e.g. resource mining and the worker issues surrounding it, was very interesting to me. But labelling of countries was not stimulating. I remember doing the British equivalent of memorising all the English counties etc. one evening, but today I have to, "Where's that?" for most of them. My brain just doesn't care what or where Northumbria (Northumberland?) and Wessex are. Perhaps it's related that I also hate jargon for its own sake - there seems to be so much of it now computing has become "cool". In both cases, it's all political/marketing.

      However, I don't think people mock the US citizens simply because they are ignorant about the world. The frustration arises because US citizens are ignorant about the world while its elected government exerts tremendous influence on the world. If your democracy is at war, something is very wrong if a lot of citizens don't know where most of the troops are deployed (I would say "which country you're fighting against" but we're having one of those 1984 style wars against no-one and everyone). If your representatives think that Iran is a menace and potentially a good target for war, it should be because you (as a group) generally think the same. If you know nothing about Iran except that women don't get to wear bikinis and that Ahmadinejad hates Israel, something is broken.

    5. Re:And something you tend to find with geography by PRMan · · Score: 1

      Really? It sure doesn't look that way:

      http://goeurope.about.com/od/europeanmaps/l/bl-country-size-comparison-map.htm

      And this map doesn't even include Alaska...which is almost half the size of the US mainland.

      Regardless, Europe (the continent) and USA (the country) are both approximately 3.8 million miles, or roughly the same.

      --
      Peter predicted that you would "deliberately forget" creation 2000 years ago...
    6. Re:And something you tend to find with geography by Svenne · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Well, and that map didn't include eastern Europe. Not a very good comparison.

      --

      Slagborr
    7. Re:And something you tend to find with geography by blackraven14250 · · Score: 1

      If you know nothing about Iran except that women don't get to wear bikinis and that Ahmadinejad hates Israel, something is broken.

      That's 90% of what Amedinejad himself says in press conferences and other speeches.

    8. Re:And something you tend to find with geography by tverbeek · · Score: 2, Interesting

      In my travel around Europe (back when I had the freedom to do that), I found few Europeans who knew much about North American geography. That includes the semester I spent at university in Scotland. OK, they knew Canada, US, Mexico, bunch-of-little-countries, but litte more detail. New York, Florida, and California seemed to be the only states most people knew (or visited). I'm from Michigan and when that name drew blank reactions, I tried explaining that it was the one in the middle of the Great Lakes, figuring: they're visible from the moon, they form an eye-catching section on the nation's north border, etc. Still no recognition. Eventually my stock answer to polite queries of "where in the US are you from?" was a deadpan "Michigan. It's next to Canada." That seemed to satisfy most people. Once when someone asked "Is it near Detroit?" that actually made my day.

      --
      http://alternatives.rzero.com/
    9. Re:And something you tend to find with geography by S.O.B. · · Score: 2, Informative

      And this map doesn't even include Alaska...which is almost half the size of the US mainland.

      The contiguous US is 770 million hectares and Alaska is 150 million hectares. That makes Alaska less than 20% the size of the contiguous US which is hardly "almost half the size".

      --
      Some of what I say is fact, some is conjecture, the rest I'm just blowing out my ass...you guess.
    10. Re:And something you tend to find with geography by tverbeek · · Score: 2, Informative

      And this map doesn't even include Alaska...which is almost half the size of the US mainland.

      Your comparison of total area is correct (continental Europe and the US are of similar size), but you really need to start looking at better maps. Alaska is under 670K square miles. The contiguous 48 states (aside: Alaska is part of the mainland) are over 3100K square miles, about 4.7 times the size of Alaska. Maybe you've been looking at too many Mercator-projection maps, which exaggerate the size of northern areas? Also, the map you link to doesn't include eastern Europe, which not only includes all of those er... eastern-European countries you hear about all the time, but also a chunk of Russia.

      --
      http://alternatives.rzero.com/
    11. Re:And something you tend to find with geography by Scrameustache · · Score: 1

      Thing is, geography is just kinda boring. It is route memorization, and not all that necessary to most people. This is even more true now, what with maps online and so easily accessible. If you need to know where something is, from a countries down to a street, it is easy to locate.

      That's depressing. It's like intellectual laziness was somehow ok :(

      --

      You can't take the sky from me...

    12. Re:And something you tend to find with geography by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I knew there was a good chance he didn't know where Arizona was since it doesn't make the news a lot (the new anti-immigration bill non-withstanding).

      Not to detract from the rest of your post here, but I've read the bill and missed the part where it's anti-immigration.

      I'm not intending to start a discussion on the bill, but so long as the US doesn't allow everyone on the planet to be a citizen just by stepping foot on US soil, there's a difference between "legal immigration" and "illegal immigration".

    13. Re:And something you tend to find with geography by greenbird · · Score: 1

      I suspect that Europeans who know where all the countries of the EU are (and yet miss many states) also know where, say, Korea is. Or Saudi Arabia.

      That's cause you guys on the right side of the pond thought you owned all those places at one time or another. Us Americans here on the left side pretty much stuck to thinking we owned the all places on this continent.

      --
      Who is John Galt?
    14. Re:And something you tend to find with geography by Convector · · Score: 1

      In 10th grade (public school), we had to learn the locations of every nation in the world, their capitals, and the correct spelling. If you misspelled it, it was wrong. The "correct" spelling was that in the official class atlas (can't remember what it was). Alternate spellings, even commonly used ones, were wrong. (The capital of the UAE was Abu Zaby, not Abu Dhabi, though I've never seen the former spelling anywhere else.) This was shortly after the Soviet Union and Yugoslavia broke up, so that was even more fun. Also, I think Eritrea split off from Ethiopia during the year. I've surely forgotten much since then, but a lot of it stuck with me. I'll mix up Benin and Togo for example, and can't remember the capital of either, but I'm unlikely to mis-locate anything badly.

    15. Re:And something you tend to find with geography by SQLGuru · · Score: 1

      Not all of geography is boring.....political geography is the memorization of places, but physical geography can explain why the weather pattern in my area are better than other areas within a few miles of me (there's an escarpment that drives the weather away from my house and towards those other areas).

    16. Re:And something you tend to find with geography by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I understand that people are bored by geography in school, probably because studying maps gets tied to grades and failure. but what i dont understand is how someone could find MAPS boring. they are some of the most beautiful, intriguing things ever created by humans. and the idea of a miniaturized representation of where one is, thats too cool. maybe if we get google earth in classrooms, and one day get real time displays of landscapes with superimposed layers of various data fields: population density, resources, names, etc. maybe that would all help. but come on, maps are so fucking cool, its just horrifying that kids are turned off of them.

    17. Re:And something you tend to find with geography by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Try telling someone you are from Kalamazoo.

    18. Re:And something you tend to find with geography by phantomfive · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Maybe that's why you are frustrated, or your friends, but I've met a lot of Europeans who are quite proud of their knowledge of geography, over Americans. They like to brag that Americans don't know that Yugoslavia broke up as a country, and stuff like that. At first it annoyed me, then I started making references in passing to El Salvador (since I lived there), and when they didn't know where it was, I would say, "Yeah, Europeans aren't very good at geography." That really annoys them and makes me laugh.

      It may be an issue only of Europeans that visit America, because I haven't seen the same thing when I talked to Europeans in Europe, but I'm willing to bet that Europeans are also similarly ignorant of politics. How many know the details of the treaty of Lisbon? What percentage typically vote? While you and your friends might, I'll bet most people don't.

      --
      Qxe4
    19. Re:And something you tend to find with geography by Mr.+Slippery · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Knowing what states border mine is significantly more important than knowing where a random state is, is significantly more important than knowing where a random country is -- none of which are terribly important at all.

      Right. Knowing what nations border Afghanistan, Pakistan, Iraq, Iran -- completely unimportant.

      The fact that more than 6 out of ten American young adults (18 to 24) can't find Iraq on a map of the middle East, that 20% of them think Sudan is in Asia, and that almost half think that the majority population in India is Muslim, doesn't have any deleterious foreign policy.

      And I've got a bridge for sale. (Don't be bothered by the fact that it's no where near any river, valley, or other geographical feature that the requires bridging...)

      --
      Tom Swiss | the infamous tms | my blog
      You cannot wash away blood with blood
    20. Re:And something you tend to find with geography by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      ". If your democracy is at war, something is very wrong if a lot of citizens don't know where most of the troops are deployed "

      That's a roving target, and interestingly you put the question forward, but don't answer yourself. To me, I'd say in the US itself, with most police, prison workers, national guard, and military bases still in the US, and with a massive police state.

      If you mean foreign, I'd probably say Germany or Japan, most likely Germany.

      If you mean in "enemy" territory, I'd say Iraq or Afghanistan, now Afghanistan is the lead.

      What's your answer? For someone complaining they can't find info on geography, troop deployment is even a more boring ass topic, considering that the US provides a security blanket for most NATO members, is part of the UN, etc. Worse that it changed a few years ago, and worse that the President seems to change his mind too. Even African countries don't reborder that often.

      Me, I care where we're fighting. Where troops and people are dying. To me, that concern is in the US, Iraq, and Afghanistan. Brigades training or not fighting Germany, is not high on the list.

      "If your representatives think that Iran is a menace and potentially a good target for war, it should be because you (as a group) generally think the same. If you know nothing about Iran except that women don't get to wear bikinis and that Ahmadinejad hates Israel, something is broken."

      Dude, you haven't shown yourself to being even remotely competent, informed, or rational in your own stupid, anti-whatever that doesn't suit you post.

      Same as you thinking most of your fellow citizens or citizens of another country are stupid. Or that Ahmad baby didn't threaten Israel, deny the holocaust, and has centrifuges running uranium concentrations well beyond that needed for reactor startup.

      But hey, India and Pakistan get along so well now that they both have the bomb. In any case, one thing I can assure you, your and mine representatives are more informed and thoughtful than you are and will ever be.

    21. Re:And something you tend to find with geography by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Well, I stopped taking any geography when I was 13, such choice being a luxury of a non-National-Curriculum school. Some of what came under geography, e.g. resource mining and the worker issues surrounding it, was very interesting to me. But labelling of countries was not stimulating. I remember doing the British equivalent of memorising all the English counties etc. one evening, but today I have to, "Where's that?" for most of them. My brain just doesn't care what or where Northumbria (Northumberland?) and Wessex are. Perhaps it's related that I also hate jargon for its own sake - there seems to be so much of it now computing has become "cool". In both cases, it's all political/marketing.

      However, I don't think people mock the US citizens simply because they are ignorant about the world. The frustration arises because US citizens are ignorant about the world while its elected government exerts tremendous influence on the world. If your democracy is at war, something is very wrong if a lot of citizens don't know where most of the troops are deployed (I would say "which country you're fighting against" but we're having one of those 1984 style wars against no-one and everyone). If your representatives think that Iran is a menace and potentially a good target for war, it should be because you (as a group) generally think the same. If you know nothing about Iran except that women don't get to wear bikinis and that Ahmadinejad hates Israel, something is broken.

      Where are the Malvinas? You Brits fought there.

    22. Re:And something you tend to find with geography by greyhueofdoubt · · Score: 1

      I have found the ideal way to learn geography (besides going to war*):

      At work we have a sealant mixing table where you'll have a captive set of eyes for at least five minutes while the machine does its thing. Someone decided to put up a 3x4 world map directly in front of the worker's station.

      So now, for five minutes, 3 or 4 times a day, I get to stare at the world. You start kind of centered in front of Cape Goodenough, from which point you can sort of wander north and east looking for interesting names. At some point we'll have to shift the map to the right a bit, since the neck can get sore from staring towards the americas.

      *Oh and I feel I should point out, despite chagrin, that a few of my brothers-in-arms couldn't find themselves on a map when they're deployed. I work with one guy who- in the same breath- talked about deploying to Curaçao where he drank, yes, Curaçao (but pronounced curakow). He couldn't make the connection that the country he was in was spelled the same way as the drink he was ordering. And no one had corrected him in ~10 years.

      -b

      --
      No offense, but I've stopped responding to AC's.
    23. Re:And something you tend to find with geography by FuckingNickName · · Score: 1

      As a half-Spaniard, I wholeheartedly apologise to myself for the need of the other half of me to cling on to the last vestiges of our dead Empire.

      OK, no, Argentina's not Spain either. So I also apologise for the other other half's initial incursion and legacy to the extent that it is not wanted.

      I'm too young to have consciously objected to either at the time, but I want to know about it because I don't want the behaviour repeated.

    24. Re:And something you tend to find with geography by FuckingNickName · · Score: 1

      Dude, you haven't shown yourself to being even remotely competent, informed, or rational in your own stupid, anti-whatever that doesn't suit you post.

      Your post seems to be a combination of good points and random aggressive swipes. You remind me of a PTSD sufferer repeatedly encountering a trigger.

      I wasn't anti-anything except democratically elected representatives doing other than representing a knowledgeable electorate. Do you think that representatives should be acting in their own interests?

    25. Re:And something you tend to find with geography by Knoman · · Score: 1
      --
      "It's an imperfect world,screws fall out..."
    26. Re:And something you tend to find with geography by Chris+Burke · · Score: 1

      I like how half your rant is the result of you not understanding the difference between "stationed" and "deployed". I especially liked the part where you actually specified the distinction, not realizing it had already been made. Classic.

      --

      The enemies of Democracy are
    27. Re:And something you tend to find with geography by Blakey+Rat · · Score: 1, Troll

      However, there is sometimes the impression that US citizens know more about the geography of their own country than of others around the world.

      At the risk of using an American-ism... duh?

      I mean, what are you expecting here? I bet Chinese citizens know more about the geography of China than they do about, for example, Guatemala. Isn't that to be expected?

    28. Re:And something you tend to find with geography by Spugglefink · · Score: 1

      ...had visited Brazil and was thinking of visiting the US. He wanted to know where various people he knew lived so he could decide if he was going to try and visit.

      Yeah, that's always funny. I had a British friend visiting the US a bit ago who figured he could just jot down and see me while he was in the country. Well, sure, if you don't mind driving six hours. Or flying for 10 hours, I think it turned out. It was a lot slower to fly, since you had to get from here to there by way of a hub a thousand miles away, and change flights six times.

      Trains? The last passenger train stopped in this town back in the '70s. Maybe you'd like to take the 12-hour bus ride instead?

      This is part of the reason why we all have to have cars. Unless you live in one of a handful of huge metropolitan areas, you just can't get around in this country unless you drive.

    29. Re:And something you tend to find with geography by swillden · · Score: 1

      then I started making references in passing to El Salvador (since I lived there), and when they didn't know where it was, I would say, "Yeah, Europeans aren't very good at geography." That really annoys them and makes me laugh.

      That would be a more compelling counterexample, except that hardly any Americans know where El Salvador is, either, other than "In South America somewhere, like Mexico". In spite of the fact that neither El Salvador nor Mexico are in South America.

      --
      Note to ACs: I usually delete AC replies without reading them. If you want to talk to me, log in.
    30. Re:And something you tend to find with geography by phantomfive · · Score: 1

      The point of the example was merely to show that Europeans I've met have been arrogant about geography, despite not knowing where some (important to me) countries are. You are right though, most Americans don't know where El Salvador is either.

      --
      Qxe4
    31. Re:And something you tend to find with geography by mldi · · Score: 1

      Question: do 6 out of 10 American young adults need to find Iraq on a map, or Sudan? Do they need to know what religion the majority of the population of India practice?

      Honestly, the other 4 out of 10 young American adults is a bigger number than those that really need to know this information.

      I'd say knowing our relationship with these countries, and their relationships with some other countries (most likely just who is in conflict) are much more important pieces of information than the actual location of said countries. A few reasons why, also. Knowing the actual geography of those locations may help in the understanding of why things are they way they are, but it certainly isn't necessary unless they deal with it in some way directly.

      People don't expect you to understand how a nuclear bomb works. That's not nearly as useful as simply knowing that it's crazy destructive and that they shouldn't be used. The only people that SHOULD care about those details are the engineers who work on them, or the people trying to figure out how to defend against them. Anyone else that knows about them is just simply interested.

      Knowing a few mostly unimportant details doesn't mean you understand the situation more than everyone else. It doesn't make everyone who doesn't know those few details ignorant either.

      --
      If you aren't suspicious of your government's actions, you aren't doing your job as a responsible citizen.
    32. Re:And something you tend to find with geography by mldi · · Score: 1

      No, Europe is slightly bigger than the U.S... barely.

      But hell, we're comparing an entire continent to a country. Needless to say, the original point is still sustained. Considering there's roughly the same number of countries in Europe (depending on who/when you ask) as there are states in the U.S., Europeans calling us ignorant because we can't name all their countries or place them on a map is just as ludicrous as Americans calling Europeans ignorant because they can't name and place all 50 states (not even including extra districts and territories).

      --
      If you aren't suspicious of your government's actions, you aren't doing your job as a responsible citizen.
    33. Re:And something you tend to find with geography by BooRolla · · Score: 1

      Frankly, many foreigners will not know where states are because - as you say - they "don't make the news a lot" :) They aren't individually important in the world, unlike the US as a whole.

      But in fairness, there's a number of Americans feel this same way about individual countries versus the EU as a whole. That position sounds reasonable given that is a bi-directional relationship of relative ignorance.

      (Not saying one shouldn't have a better understanding of US or EU, but I can see the argument).

    34. Re:And something you tend to find with geography by Lemming+Mark · · Score: 1

      I agree that a detailed "residents-level" knowledge of the US states involves quite a large volume of geographic knowledge, partly because it's a big country. But I think it is worth noting that European countries are more densely populated than much of the US, so the "residents-level" knowledge is not proportionally lower by area. A European state a tenth the size of the USA has more than a tenth of the number of regions (with different terrain, climate and culture) that citizens would typically be expected to remember by heart.

      But, to be honest, we're not great at Geography, I'm awful at it personally both within my country and across the world. I suspect that a big part of the problem with US "geographical knowledge" is less a question of actually knowing where places are (I'm bad at that myself, most people probably are) and more a question of general awareness of the large number of other countries in the world - and I think that comes from the mainstream American media, which I understand is typically rather inward-looking. We probably don't have as strong / balanced international coverage as we should have in the UK either but I understand that it's still significantly more outward-looking. Mind you, the main reason that Western countries having poor international coverage is a major problem is that they do tend to be very active internationally - not just militarily but diplomatically, industrially, financially.

    35. Re:And something you tend to find with geography by SvnLyrBrto · · Score: 1

      I disagree.

      I think being knowledgable and conversant on a wide variety of topics is an important part of being a well-rounded, educated, and functional member of society. We don't need savants, we need people who can think critically and apply their knowledge to fields outside their speciality.

      To take your own example: While I agree that it's not necessary to know all of the exact details and maths; a working knowledge of nuclear bomb design gives insight into why our own government wiggs out so much when Iran... a nation which has publicly threatened to wipe another nation in the region off the map (or to wipe them out of history depending on how, exactly, you translate)... starts enriching uranium; especially when if generation of nuclear energy strictly for peaceful uses were really the goal, the CANDU reactor design operates on natural unenriched uranium.

      Or, to work geography into the picture, geographic knowledge combined with knowledge of the chemistry of rechargeable batteries would lead one to understand why Bolivia is set to become a fairly major economic layer in the future. (Lithium salts in high-elevation dry lake beds.)

      --
      Imagine all the people...
    36. Re:And something you tend to find with geography by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You misspelled Falklands, wanker. Just because some random pack of tossers in argentina got it in their heads that their peckers were lager than they really were and threw a hissy fit doesn't change the fact.

      The Falklands have been British since before argentina existed as a nation, by the way. That sorry little attempt at a land-grab was not about historical sovereignty or self-determination, it was an attempt by their government to distract the people from the piss-poor way they were running things by giving them an external enemy (war is peace, and all that).

    37. Re:And something you tend to find with geography by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Gah!

      Stupid video skipped Singapore. Yeesh... we get no respect here.

    38. Re:And something you tend to find with geography by Mr.+Slippery · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Question: do 6 out of 10 American young adults need to find Iraq on a map, or Sudan? Do they need to know what religion the majority of the population of India practice?

      Every American of voting age needs to have enough knowledge of the world to know that India -- the world's largest democracy -- is a majority Hindu nation, that the Sudan -- the nation containing the Darfur region, which you might have heard about in the news the past few years -- is in Africa, and at least be able to say "Iraq is in the middle East, somewhere around here, and borders Iran and Turkey."

      If they point to Iran or some other near-by country when asked to find Iraq on an unlabeled map, ok, I'd say that's within tolerance. (If the map has the Tigris and Euphrates rivers clearly marked, though, and you can't identify Iraq, you fail it.) But you've got people pointing to Australia when asked to find Iran. (Yes, it's a satire show, but it's illustrative.)

      Anyone who doesn't know these basic facts about the geopolitical situation, or doesn't know why it's important to know them, please refrain from voting in any national elections; such ignorance disqualifies you from being able to make an intelligent choice.

      I'd say knowing our relationship with these countries, and their relationships with some other countries (most likely just who is in conflict) are much more important pieces of information than the actual location of said countries.

      But political relationships between nations are highly influenced by geographical factors, indeed perhaps more by geography than anything else.

      People don't expect you to understand how a nuclear bomb works. That's not nearly as useful as simply knowing that it's crazy destructive and that they shouldn't be used.

      No, actually, if all someone knows about how a nuclear bomb works is that it's "crazy destructive", they are too ignorant to contribute to the democratic process. "What's all this fuss about nuclear reactors in Iran and North Korea? I don't care about that, so long as they don't get The Bomb! Because that'd be the end of the world!"

      --
      Tom Swiss | the infamous tms | my blog
      You cannot wash away blood with blood
    39. Re:And something you tend to find with geography by CptNerd · · Score: 2, Insightful

      A true Michgander will tell you where they're from by pointing to somewhere on the palm of their right hand. Or the back of their left. I was born down near the base of the thumb.

      --
      By the taping of my glasses, something geeky this way passes
    40. Re:And something you tend to find with geography by dave420 · · Score: 1

      Europe is larger than the USA by over 130,000 square miles, by the way. Your one guy not knowing where Mexico is doesn't change the poll results. It's not "snobbery" but "education" - just as you would look twice at someone who can't count to 4, people who learned world geography at an early age will have a rather quizzical expression on their face when presented with someone who can't find their own country on a map, let alone the Pacific ocean.

    41. Re:And something you tend to find with geography by dave420 · · Score: 1

      Apart from the fact that the European countries are actual countries, as opposed to merely states, each with their own armed forces, some with their own currencies, and with many different languages and cultures. There's a damn-sight more importance and difference between France and Germany than Arizona and New Mexico.

    42. Re:And something you tend to find with geography by dave420 · · Score: 1

      Yeah - the former is practically impossible, and the latter is barely possible. Ooooh scary brown folks stealin' our monies and rapin' our wimmins! You'll get over it, hotshot.

    43. Re:And something you tend to find with geography by mldi · · Score: 1

      I think you missed the point. There's more of an important difference to Europeans than to Americans because European countries are so close together geographically. If you took the same people in America, same country, same mentality, and squeezed everything into the size of a European country (biggest one?), and surrounded them with all these other countries that make a decent impact on you, your defense, and your economy, many of whom actually share the same currency, you can bet your ass they'd know the same information.

      You can't compare, because it's not the same. Americans know all 50 states because that's what impacts them. It's easier to remember. And the U.S. is literally surrounded by a total of two countries. Furthermore, reaching other countries takes more than a hop, skip, and jump so experiencing other countries and their cultures isn't so easily done. You can bet kids are taught world maps, but it's tough to keep in mind something that doesn't have as direct an impact on you, especially when everything is so damned far away.

      --
      If you aren't suspicious of your government's actions, you aren't doing your job as a responsible citizen.
    44. Re:And something you tend to find with geography by SleazyRidr · · Score: 1

      The Chaser did a skit where the went 'on the streets' and talked to Americans. First they asked which country America should go to war with next. Many people said either Iran or North Korea, so they pulled out a map and said, 'can you locate Iran/North Korea on this map?' The map they used actually had Australia labelled as Iran or North Korea, so the Americans pointed at Australia. As an Australian, I just hope whoever is in charge of your military has a real map...

    45. Re:And something you tend to find with geography by mcgrew · · Score: 1

      Iran is between Iraq and a hard place.

    46. Re:And something you tend to find with geography by dave420 · · Score: 1

      An average person is capable of learning more geography than just the US or Europe. It's perfectly common for people to know about both, even when they are not from either. Not perfect knowledge of, but a decent grasp. Just knowing about the US, and knowing nothing of Europe, is a terrible cop-out. It smacks of wilful ignorance. That you seem to think that what goes on in France or Germany doesn't have a direct impact on the US, and its citizens within, is also rather strange.

      Case in point (presented here for anecdotal reasons only): An old manager in the US asked me if England was near the UK. Wow. He's a manager, and he doesn't know that? He went to university. He's supposed to be educated.

    47. Re:And something you tend to find with geography by asecure · · Score: 1

      same could be said about if you knew where Hokkaido prefecture, Hubei province, Brittany region or Bremen bundeslander are in their respective countries. we're talking about countries rather than administrative regions/states/etc in a country.

    48. Re:And something you tend to find with geography by Painted · · Score: 1

      It is very common in Canada to have visiting Europeans mention that on a visit to Toronto, they would like to take a quick trip to the Rocky Mountains... It's only an hour or two away, right?

      --
      http://marsandmore.com - Posters of space, spacecraft, and astronomy.
    49. Re:And something you tend to find with geography by dcw3 · · Score: 1

      A true Michgander will tell you where they're from by pointing to somewhere on the palm of their right hand. Or the back of their left. I was born down near the base of the thumb.

      A true Michigander wouldn't be so biased as to forget the UP. ;-)

      I spent many years living in Europe and Asia, and when asked where I was from (born in Detroit), there was nearly always immediate recognition, most likely because of the auto industry. When I lived in Germany, I could hop in the car and be in England, Spain, or Italy in a days drive. And with so many cultures located so close, it becomes more important to know and understand your neighbors. Traveling a similar distance here, is more likely to only change your free (as in) beer from Coors, to Strohs, to PBR.

      --
      Just another day in Paradise
    50. Re:And something you tend to find with geography by mldi · · Score: 1

      Just knowing about the US, and knowing nothing of Europe, is a terrible cop-out. It smacks of wilful ignorance.

      I would agree. But is the current situation in the U.S. just knowing nothing of Europe or just knowing some about their geography?

      That you seem to think that what goes on in France or Germany doesn't have a direct impact on the US, and its citizens within, is also rather strange.

      Depends how you define "direct impact". Close geographical ties tend to have a greater significance in perspective. "Close to home" if you will. In no way did I mean that foreign countries don't have a significant impact on the U.S. as if the U.S. is special in some way. My point was purely geographical and the perceptions of the general population based on geographical locations of certain events.

      An old manager in the US asked me if England was near the UK. Wow. He's a manager, and he doesn't know that? He went to university. He's supposed to be educated.

      OK, granted, I'm a bit surprised at that, but to play the devil's advocate here.... did his higher education cover international geography? Probably not. I don't remember any geography classes at my university. All that stuff I remember being taught in grade school and junior high school. Did his job require that he knew where these two countries were geographically to each other? Since he had to ask, probably not.

      I'll reiterate what I said before. I didn't excuse not knowing what's going on in other countries, I more stressed the importance of knowing the actual geography of those countries (which is obviously not as high as knowing what's going on). You can have the complete international geography perfectly memorized, but if you don't know what's going on, that's far more ignorant than not being able to pick out a few countries on the other side of the planet.

      --
      If you aren't suspicious of your government's actions, you aren't doing your job as a responsible citizen.
  82. Re:You need directions? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I thought Liberty Island is/was closed for tours after 9/11*. Has it opened again?
    The few days I've been to NY I just peeked into the Empire State Building when I came by and on one evening the lines were quite short.

    * the symbolism of that is also quite something.

  83. Re:Really? by n0nsensical · · Score: 1

    Chill man, smoke some bud. You wanna shoot a bad mod? That's what m2 is for, try doing some if you want to contribute. Otherwise there's little need for further self-righteous judgment.

  84. 1 in 5 Americans think Obama is Muslim by Nicolas+MONNET · · Score: 0, Flamebait

    Must be the same.

    And since they're quite obviously the type(*) who would want to attend Insane Glenn's meeting ...

    (*) morons

  85. If Lincoln were alive today by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    He'd be a Democrat.

  86. Jefferson Memorial by ildon · · Score: 1

    I got the same result searching for Jefferson Memorial. Maybe someone just really likes FDR and is trying to trick people into going there in general.

    1. Re:Jefferson Memorial by ildon · · Score: 1

      Oh shit just noticed I got beat by 5 hrs by this guy.

  87. He's not an idiot by Nicolas+MONNET · · Score: 1

    He's completely insane. He fucking cries on TV for nothing. And he's obviously the type of people who would have supported Hitler or any kind of authoritarian leader.

    1. Re:He's not an idiot by astar · · Score: 1

      And he's obviously the type of people who would have supported Hitler

      In the US, and in the UK, pretty much all the talking heads of the time supported Hitler. Hmm, among the Brits, a King of England. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Edward_VIII_of_the_United_Kingdom
      In the US, Henry Ford, even post Pearl Harbor, is worth looking at. But the attempted military coup against FDR seems relevant. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Business_Plot. So I think that complaint about Beck, if true, is pretty weak. There are just too many people who are of that type to give your complaint a real zing.

      Now "Hope, Faith, and Charity" might be fun to analyze, but it is not going to be quite as immediately and obviously as nasty as "Blood and Soil". And for the last, we need to keep up our vigilance against opera fans :-)

    2. Re:He's not an idiot by Quiet_Desperation · · Score: 1

      He's completely insane.

      An assessment based on having met him personally, I"m sure, and not from watching a constructed persona on a television screen.

      He fucking cries on TV for nothing.

      No, he cries on TV because it makes him money from his target demographic.

      Wow, you really can't see what is going on? I've watched his show once and had it figured out. It's pretty transparent.

      And he's obviously the type of people who would have supported Hitler or any kind of authoritarian leader.

      Absolutely LOL! Beck owns you, my friend. He owns your mind.

  88. He's a racist religous nutjob with a show on Fox N by Nicolas+MONNET · · Score: 2, Informative

    That's the current definition of "concervative" in the US. Most of his viewers probably define themselves this way.

  89. Re:Really? by mqduck · · Score: 1

    Um, people *are* going to be forced to buy health insurance, per the Democrats' gift-to-the-private-health-care-industry-in-the-guise-of-health-care-reform plan.

    --
    Property is theft.
  90. Memorial Right by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Its in the right place now. Crisis over. Move along.

  91. Lost in the Wilderness by FurryOne · · Score: 1

    Let's face it - The "Big Picture" is that anyone that regularly follows Glenn Beck is already lost to Reality. What difference would a few miles make?

  92. Here you go: by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Mr. Beck's message is a potage of lies, distortions and half-truths, probably intended to enrich him, with much damage to America carelessly created as a side-effect of his wealth-seeking behavior.

    He is an anti-intellectual buffoon who can't spell, can't make logical deductions, can't understand complexity, and knows nothing about science (including the scientific method, which underlies every step forward humankind has ever made). This ignorance and lack of ability doesn't keep him from doing a great job of selling his opinions, regardless of their lack of relevance to the actual facts.

    He fits into Fx News perfectly, since his boss Rupert just had News Corp donate a million bucks to the Republican Party.

  93. Re:Really? by Goody · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Before healthcare reform conservatives/right wingers were bitching and moaning about "poor/cheap/unemployed/lazy" uninsured people bringing down the system and raising costs for insured citizens because they can always get healthcare, insured or not. This bill forces them to get insurance. If complaining right wingers really want to fix the problem, they should propose a law banning all healthcare for uninsured citizens who can't pay out of pocket. See how well that goes over.

    --
    Tired of being "punished" by the Slashdot $rtbl since 2002. I'm now over at http://soylentnews.org/ .
  94. Glenn Beck by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    He has started the first national beat whitey day.

  95. Re:Really? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Just a question, not trying to start anything, but in your mind, is a creationist one who believes in a 6,000 to 10,000 year old earth or anyone who believes (a) God created life?

  96. Re:You need directions? by b1t+r0t · · Score: 1

    Lived in San Antonio for 21 years, went to the Alamo once. Lived in Austin for 10 more years, went to the Alamo once more when some relatives came from California to visit my mom. The Riverwalk, and the mall two blocks away from the Alamo, are much more visited by the locals. I've even eaten in the restaurant at the top of Hemisfair Tower three times. On the other hand, I've driven past the Alamo plenty of times, since it's along a downtown street that you take to leave the mall, which you can't exactly do with the Statue of Liberty.

    --

    --
    "Open source is good." - Steve Jobs
    "Open source is evil." - Microsoft
  97. Would it be dismissed so easily? by davev2.0 · · Score: 0, Flamebait

    Would so many on slashdot dismiss it so easily if it were a gathering of Democrats, liberals, and progressives?

  98. ok by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    tea party = phoney left /right wing paradigm

    - anonymous man against the new world order

  99. Re:Really? by davev2.0 · · Score: 0, Offtopic

    Creationists deserve mocking, especially on a website dedicated to technology and other fruits of science.

    Do not forget that creationists feel empowered not only to judge others but to suppress and oppress others and science. Stop being a hypocrite and either stop using the fruits of science or stop pushing your belief in an imaginary all-powerful being that can't even keep its church from being infiltrated by evil people who rape children and then cover it up.

  100. Re:You need directions? by AlgoRhythm · · Score: 1

    You should stop by the ESB on a week day evening sometime, especially on a clear though not particularly warm autumn night, and the lines will be almost non-existent. I avoided it for years until finally having a friend talk me into going up and we were up there in minutes. It's a bit chilly, but I wouldn't want to hang up there very long anyways. The views are stunning.

  101. Re:Restoring Horror by Doc+Ruby · · Score: 1, Troll

    The Democrats of the 60s who wanted to beat Martin Luther King into a pulp became Republicans. They and the ones who joined them are the Republicans of today. Just as the Republicans of the 1860s who abolished slavery are ancient history.

    Aveda King is there to explain to Beck's zombie army that abortion is murder, even though it isn't, and is instead a protected civil right.

    You Republicans even hate Jews, otherwise why mention John Stewart's non stage name. Some things evidently don't change.

    --

    --
    make install -not war

  102. Re:Restoring Horror by Doc+Ruby · · Score: 1, Troll

    More details on how Alveda King says gay marriage is genocide, and other insane Christian Taliban talk that Martin Luther King would denounce. The woman is obviously a fraud, scamming along on her famous uncle without any merit of her own - the ultimate bigot:

    Alveda is dismissive of her aunt [MLK's Civil Rights partner, Coretta Scott King] who died in 2006, saying, "I've got his DNA. She doesn't, she didn't ... Therefore I know something about him. I'm made out of the same stuff."

    The niece is clearly riding more "the color of her skin" than "the content of her character", spitting on her uncle's legacy.

    David Garrow, a civil rights movement historian at the University of Cambridge, said that Martin Luther King Jr. was unambiguously progressive.

    "King was not only not a Republican, he was well to the left of the Democratic Party of the 1960s," he said. "One could make a very strong case that King thought of himself as a democratic socialist. It's also well-documented that Dr. King was a strong supporter of Planned Parenthood, and it's well-documented that one of his five or six closest advisers, Bayard Rustin, was gay."

    There's also details on how Beck scammed a nonprofit into paying for this travesty event, while Beck keeps all the profits. You Republicans are such suckers, the only surprise is that you have any money left after you sank it all into a decade of Bush/Cheney like a bonfire.

    --

    --
    make install -not war

  103. And the Finns, and all around the world! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I was looking at the Google map of Helsinki not too long ago, and they'd labeled the Parliament as the Cathedral.
    Seems fixed now though, but looking at pretty much any major city it seems there's a good number of labels that are off.

  104. You GOTTA be joking! by sstamps · · Score: 1

    That, or you read/watch nothing else.

    There are TONS of "arguments against his message" all OVER the place. Start off with "arguments against Glenn Beck" in Google, and go from there.

    I would simply say that Glenn Beck is a grandstanding pseudoreligious douchebag, but the man is a frickin' GENIUS the way he has so completely suckered the gullible masses of the conservative right with his so-called "message".

    I bet you bought his book, too!

    --
    -SS "Teach the ignorant, care for the dumb, and punish the stupid."
  105. Re:You need directions? by dfm3 · · Score: 1

    The statue crown was closed after 9/11, and IIRC was just reopened this year. They only allow 240 visitors a day, and tickets sell out early in the morning. The pedestal was closed from 9/11 to 2004. Liberty Island itself only closed for a few months at the end of 2001, but it definitely is open to tourists now (I've seen the lines myself).

  106. Re:Really? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    "This bill forces them to get insurance."

    No it doesn't. Those who do not file tax returns or earn below a certain amount do not have to buy anything.

  107. Moved again by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Just double checked it's moved again it's at the4 vietnam memorial - I'm not sure where that is - I have not been to Washington in a couple of decades

  108. Re:Really? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    So, you're saying /. is off the hook?

  109. The "poor" aren't the issue by DesScorp · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Before healthcare reform conservatives/right wingers were bitching and moaning about "poor/cheap/unemployed/lazy" uninsured people bringing down the system and raising costs for insured citizens because they can always get healthcare, insured or not. This bill forces them to get insurance.

    This bill forces everyone to buy insurance whether they want to or not, and worse, forces them to buy it from a private third party under penalty of law. Not even the most extreme reading of the Commerce Clause justifies that, and I look forward to your excuses when SCOTUS throws the mandate out as unconstitutional.

    If complaining right wingers really want to fix the problem, they should propose a law banning all healthcare for uninsured citizens who can't pay out of pocket. See how well that goes over.

    If we really want to fix the problem... to the extent that it can be fixed... then we'll propose what we've proposed for years... for Congress to use the Commerce Clause in what is actually a productive, Constitutional manner and ban states from restricting interstate health insurance competition, which most of them do. This is one of the few issues where the states are wrong about the 10th Amendment. The states don't have a right to tell me I can't buy from a company in another state, and opening up a national market would mean national risk pools. Health insurance would then become more like car insurance. If car insurance were restricted by the states in the way that health insurance is, then no one could afford to drive either. There's a real market for auto insurance, though.

    As for your concern about the poor, I might be moved more if I didn't suspect that your solution was probably "let the government handle it". You can help the poor without screwing the rights of everyone else, which this "reform" bill did. Further, this isn't an issue of "the poor", and never was. The poor have had access to paid healthcare for years. That's what Medicaid is, after all. In addition to that, most states have a program for uninsured children if you don't meet the poverty criteria but still have limited income. In Alabama it's called AlKids. The real issue is affordable health insurance for the not poor-and yet-not rich. Which *gasp!* a real market would go a long way towards helping.

    --
    Life is hard, and the world is cruel
    1. Re:The "poor" aren't the issue by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      This bill forces everyone to buy insurance whether they want to or not

      No, it does not.

      Have you actually read the bill, or are you just repeating what someone told you?

      Hint: I have no intention of purchasing healthcare, and will be doing it completely legally. Why dont you spend some time and learn how that's possible. Hire an attorney if you are incapable of figuring it out yourself.

      Dont get me wrong, I love being able to tell when someone obviously has no independent thought, or clue, about what they are talking about.

    2. Re:The "poor" aren't the issue by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "This bill forces everyone to buy insurance whether they want to or not"

      Just like currently we are all forced to buy houses with mortgages. Except we aren't, there is just a tax break if we do. And quite recently a giant tax credit to the tune of 8k. The healthcare bill just sets a new tax on every american plus a matching tax credit for every american who has healthcare.

      you could argue that setting domestic policy through the income tax code is wrong (child credit, disabilities, earned income, education credits, home ownership, etc.), but you can't honestly say it is anything new.

    3. Re:The "poor" aren't the issue by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Allowing interstate health insurance would also be a race to the bottom in terms of benefits, as companies moved to the states with the least amount of regulation and consumer rights.

    4. Re:The "poor" aren't the issue by jwhitener · · Score: 1

      The bill does not require you to have insurance. It doesn't force anyone to buy it.

      What the bill does is create an incentive by taxing you if you do not have insurance. If you choose to buy insurance, you receive a tax deduction. (at least that was what the bill said the last time I checked).

      At the same time, it provides subsidies to help you buy it (depending on income).

      I agree with you that competition between health insurance companies would, generally, be a good thing. However, if you've ever worked in health care, you know how complex state health laws and regulations are, and how difficult it would be for a single company to master all 50 states. Possible yes, but that is a ton of overhead cost to maintain. And on the flip side, medical billing is extremely complex. It would place a massive burden on doctor offices and hospitals for them to have to deal with billing 100's or 1000's of insurance companies.

      There is so little standardization between insurance companies, and so few standardized ways to look up information, it would cause many problems. For instance, you come in to a hospital with pneumonia. Most insurance companies cover treatments x,y,z and a stay of up to D days. The doctor orders treatment x, and you are well enough to go home in D days. Come to find out, your particular insurance covered only treatment y and D-1 days. Now you're stuck with a huge bill. It might be possible to to get all insurance companies in a huge standardized database, for easier lookups, but who maintains it? Is a doctor required to look up your insurance? Would the patient be expected to know all his coverage and tell the doctor, "no, I want treatment y, and I want to leave 1 day earlier than you say I should...".

      But competition does not solve the fundamental problem: profit for insurance companies is not a valid driving force for better health outcomes for the patient. Health insurance companies make their money by providing as little care as possible. Market forces (consumers choosing the best bang for the buck insurance plan) would slightly regulate that, but not by much. In the end, larger health insurance companies would buy up smaller ones, choice would diminish, and in order to increase profits, health insurance companies would lower payments, or lower the covered procedures.

      If we didn't have any health insurance companies at all, and patients shopped for the best hospital services, then market forces would work wonderfully. But because complicated emergency medical procedures will likely always be beyond the budget of an average American, insurance is necessary.

  110. A Quick supposition by Reginald2 · · Score: 1

    Isn't the anti-tea-party-at-the-Lincoln-Memorial kind of a tongue in cheek tit for the mosque-at-ground-zero tat?

    This level of irony can't be coincidence.

    *fade to dramatic fanfare*

  111. Re:You need directions? by DesScorp · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Google tries to stay out of politics.

    As another poster pointed out with the China angle, your statement is laughable, sir. It would be more accurate to say that Google tries to downplay politics, but the company is neck-deep in politics every day.

     

    Glenn Beck is getting the message not to piss off those who contribute to Wikis.

    We're all getting the message that some Wiki contributors are throwing a temper tantrum because Glenn Beck is, horror of horrors, holding an assembly in front of the Lincoln Memorial. You know, like other people have been doing for years. What a crime, eh?

    --
    Life is hard, and the world is cruel
  112. Re:You need directions? by DesScorp · · Score: 1

    Glenn Beck fans cannot be fooled by simple misinformation, they have no need for geographical facts, their gut instincts will lead them directly to the rally.

    I imagine they'll simply have enough sense to ask for directions.

    --
    Life is hard, and the world is cruel
  113. It's a trap!! by wadeal · · Score: 1

    This is actually to root out communists, as any real American will not need a map, anyone who visits the FDR Memorial is clearly a commie.

  114. "Disprove That" by DesScorp · · Score: 0, Flamebait

    My conjecture: Most of the tea party folks got involved because the president doesn't look like them. And that scared the hell out of them.

    Disprove that.

    So you accuse your opponents of racism, and then put the burden of proof on them... all while posting AC.

    You're anonymous, but you're also truly a coward. Disprove that.

    --
    Life is hard, and the world is cruel
    1. Re:"Disprove That" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I was mostly accusing the GP of misuse of the word 'prove', and giving a counterexample.
      You, I'll accuse of an ad hominem attack - is a point really less valid if posted anonymously?

  115. Google maps is just wonky lately... by grahamd0 · · Score: 1

    I was trying to get directions to my friend's house the other day and Google maps kept giving me directions to the Milwaukee Public Museum. The address was right, and it would consistently give me the same, incorrect destination.

    Just a little anecdote. I can't disprove a conspiracy, but there may be a simpler explanation.

  116. Re:You need directions? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I live next the Empire State Building and I assure you the lines are not that bad. If you go during the lunch hours right before sunset you can almost walk right up!!!
    I've also been to the Statue of Liberty, TWICE and the last time was the year before 911 and i regret it because I got lazy and decided not to walk to the top that time.

    Your dead right on the Statue of Liberty however, It'll take up an entire day never mind waiting months to get tickets to go to the top and it's really not worth it, just jump on the Staten Island Ferry it's a better view anyway, but you gotta go to the Empire State Building!!!

    Besides it is New York nothing here stays for ever, gotta get out and see!!

  117. Metro to the Mall by AlpineR · · Score: 1

    The actual instructions for Tea Partiers says to avoid the Blue and Orange lines past Eastern Market. They can get to Smithsonian Station just fine. But if they're on the Red Line to begin with, then Farragut North is the better station to exit from anyway - no time wasted transferring and it avoids the cramped conditions (and innumerable clueless tourists) at Smithsonian. The only downside is they'll have to walk past a small park with a few scary, possibly ethnic homeless people. On the plus side, and quite ironically, a block later they'll pass near the White House.

    P.S. The closest Metro station to the Lincoln Memorial is actually Foggy Bottom on the Blue/Orange Lines. But that means walking through seven city blocks (full of unpatriotic city folk) rather than a scenic walk down the Mall.

  118. Its on the other end of Obamas swimming by dropkick_the_puppy · · Score: 1

    pool, in his front yard, You know that Big White House! the reflecting pool in his front yard, then the Lincoln memorial.. duh

  119. Glenn Beck Is a Conspiracy by b4upoo · · Score: 1

    Everyone has to make a living including those spouting poisonous and false doctrines. But Beck is simply a less talented version of Rush Limbaugh. Rush is dangerous but at least he is funnier at times. Now if they can just dumb down the school kids a bit more the next generation might actually believe these monkeys.

    1. Re:Glenn Beck Is a Conspiracy by kevinNCSU · · Score: 1

      So I've watched the live feed on cnn for the last couple minutes cause after reading here I figured the spewing of nonsense would be entertaining. So far I've seen a black woman preaching about DR. King's vision, a replay of Dr. King's speech, A relative of Dr. King talking about unity and building each other up rather than tearing people down, the power of love to change the world, and some black choir singing, and some reading of scripture and more talk about transcending race and that we're one human family. I had to check several times to make sure I was watching the Glen Beck Lincoln Memorial feed and not the Al Sharpton one, but there's the Lincoln memorial right in the background and Glen Beck introducing the speakers. I guess I'm confused why this event is getting billed as so nefarious, racist, and dangerous here on Slashdot.

  120. There is no conspiracy--Google Maps is F/U'd by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    There is no intent to stir FUD by Google Maps.

    I actually live at the Grand Canyon and most of the lodges, the National Park Service's Visitor Center, their HQ, and other points of interest are incorrect. Unless you know what you are looking at from a satellite image, you might get it rong.

    Its as simple as that.

  121. Re:He's a racist religous nutjob with a show on Fo by DesScorp · · Score: 2, Insightful

    That's the current definition of "concervative" in the US. Most of his viewers probably define themselves this way.

    OK, prove your assertion. Specifically what makes Beck... or conservatives for that matter... racist? What makes him a nutjob? Be specific. You're making the accusations. The onus is on you to prove them.

    If you don't agree with conservatism or don't like Beck, fine. But if you're going to accuse them of these things, man up and prove it. I see you've been modded informative when the only thing you've informed us is that you've made a bunch of accusations... some of them serious...without any citations.

    --
    Life is hard, and the world is cruel
  122. Re:You need directions? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    You might as well go. Take a book, or a friend, and the wait won't be so long, or purely wasted time. If you can take a day off during the week, that'd be even better.

  123. Re:Really? by tompaulco · · Score: 2, Insightful

    This bill forces them to get insurance.
    Yes, and us right-wingers will still complain about healthcare reform, because forcing people to buy insurance doesn't reform the healthcare industry, it gives money to the insurance companies. For a lot of people, the cost of healthcare insurance is so high, that it is crippling. Before I cancelled my policy at work, I was paying $800 a month for insurance. Of course, with copayments and coinsurance, if we went to the doctor, we would still owe another hundred dollars or more still. So we cancelled the insurance, and just pay for the doctor out of pocket. When you look at the cost of paying out of pocket versus paying the premiums and the coinsurances and copayments, it is cheaper to pay out of pocket. Unless you are a genuinely unhealthy person who has a lot of doctors bills, of course. But that is not what insurance is for. Insurance is for "what if", not the unfortunate reality of a health condition.

    --
    If you are not allowed to question your government then the government has answered your question.
  124. There is the "report a problem" link, y'know. by Kaz+Kylheku · · Score: 2, Informative

    You know, you can submit map bug reports to Google, and they respond. I've fixed two already, and they've replied about a third.

    But I suppose submitting a Slashdot non-story is more fun.

    1. Re:There is the "report a problem" link, y'know. by John3 · · Score: 1

      C'mon, why would I submit a problem report when I could start a political thread on Slashdot instead? :)

      --
      "We make our world significant by the courage of our questions and by the depth of our answers." Carl Sagan
  125. Lincoln who? by nurb432 · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Oh, ya, that guy with clinical depression with a touch of megalomania.

    --
    ---- Booth was a patriot ----
  126. Location is correct now. Photo is wrong by Technician · · Score: 1

    The location is now correct for the Lincoln Memorial. The photo is still of what you see from the monument, not the monument itself.

    --
    The truth shall set you free!
  127. Union Shield by AlpineR · · Score: 1

    Not anymore. The current penny has a Union shield instead of the Lincoln memorial.

  128. Bethesda by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    It also helps that Bethsoft is located in Maryland.

  129. Re:You need directions? by sponga · · Score: 1

    Not only that but I think you have to put in reservations for a spot to the crown on the Statue of Liberty many months ahead.

    I was there a couple days after they reopened it around 4th of July and asked the park ranger about it, he laughed and said the waiting period is many months(8+) and growing. So you have to put in for a spot to get up there, but there is another lower platform spot below her that is accessable and I think that is the one they only give 240 tickets per day.

    Mehhh thats what its like at any national park or famous monument from having to get a spot for Half Dome 8 months ahead to the Washington Monument having to get on the waiting list; the only thing that irks me is that foreigners get just as equal access as Americans.
    I think Americans should get first pickings at spots and than foreign tourist can go second, that was the one thing that pissed me off when I got there with my family is the huge Chinese tour groups who have representatives who buy up all the reserved spots.

  130. Beck fans do use Google... by John3 · · Score: 1

    Beck's fans use Google Chalkboard rather than Google Maps.

    --
    "We make our world significant by the courage of our questions and by the depth of our answers." Carl Sagan
  131. Re:Really? by unr3a1 · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Before healthcare reform conservatives/right wingers were bitching and moaning about "poor/cheap/unemployed/lazy" uninsured people bringing down the system and raising costs for insured citizens because they can always get healthcare, insured or not. This bill forces them to get insurance.

    If complaining right wingers really want to fix the problem, they should propose a law banning all healthcare for uninsured citizens who can't pay out of pocket. See how well that goes over.

    Well that's why conservatives don't like it, because whether you are "poor/cheap/unemployed/lazy" or not doesn't mean the government should be forcing you to buy a product or service. Which is what they are doing. We are a FREE nation and we have the right of freedom of choice.

    If the decisions an individual makes over the course of their lives leads them to a state where they are poor, unemployed and without health insurance, that's THEIR OWN DAMN FAULT and it's not my job or my responsibility to provide for them. If I choose to do so on my own, then that is my decision. But I should have the choice.

  132. Re:You need directions? by wkcole · · Score: 1

    I thought Liberty Island is/was closed for tours after 9/11*. Has it opened again?

    Yes. Old news. Is it really so hard to enter 'http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Statue_of_Liberty' into a browser?

  133. Re:You need directions? by HungWeiLo · · Score: 1

    I've lived in Seattle for almost 20 years and just recently visited the Space Needle. But that was only because a friend's wedding was there.

    --
    There are a huge number of yeast infections in this county. Probably because we're downriver from the bread factory.
  134. Re:You need directions? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    so you hate the free market?

  135. Re:Really? by relikx · · Score: 2, Insightful

    A moonbat refers to the followers of Reverend Sun Myung Moon, the guy who supported Nixon during Watergate, went to prison for filing false taxes, has presided over mass weddings of his followers and fittingly enough founded the Washington Times. I lean conservative so don't take this as a "smear" but if you don't know the history of this guy you should stop worrying about scary liberals and realize any time people blindly follow people, whether it's Beck or Obama or whoever, they put themselves in a position to be manipulated.

  136. Re:You need directions? by Nethead · · Score: 1

    It's still open? I haven't been up for over a decade.

    --
    -- I have a private email server in my basement.
  137. Re:Really? by Thakandar2 · · Score: 1

    Forcing them to get insurance? That's a great idea. Take it a step further but invert the idea. Ban all health insurance period. Then, when the insurance companies disappear and aren't paying the current high costs (which they currently negotiate down in private agreements due to their collective bargaining power), and the people setting the costs receive no business since no one can afford the current prices, the providers will HAVE to lower prices across the board to have a hope of attracting any business that has a realistic expectation of paying.

    Net result? Prices come down and the same thing happens: most people will be able to afford health care and a segment of the population still won't be able to afford it. The percentages will change some, but probably not too drastically. If people can't afford $100 a month a prescription, they won't be able to afford $100 a month for insurance that reduces the copay of a prescription to $10. I base the dollar amounts on the rates I paid at previous jobs.

  138. Re:You need directions? by moortak · · Score: 1

    Not when it is across a reflecting pool from a giant white spike surrounded by open land.

    --
    Xavier Rabourdin for president 2012
  139. 1982? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Just make sure you don't send them any old, copper pennies by mistake, or you'll be vulnerable to false advertising!

    IIRC, the switchover was in 1982, and there were some of each minted that year.

  140. Re:You need directions? by tompaulco · · Score: 1

    Same problem with the Sears Tower. I took my kids up there, on a weekday. The line was out the door and out onto the sidewalk. We waited in line for about 45 minutes before getting to the front and the elevator took us down to line number two, the line to get tickets. That was another 45 minutes. The ticket prices were outrageous, too. Then after that line, there was about a 45 minute line to wait for the elevator to take us up to the top. By the time we actually got up there, the kids were in no mood to look around and I don't blame them. I had to force them to spend about 15 minutes up there looking around.
    We had planned to spend the day in Chicago visiting multiple sites like Navy Pier, Water Tower Place, and other stuff, but instead we spent 3 hours waiting in line at the Sears Tower, ate a late lunch, and went home.

    --
    If you are not allowed to question your government then the government has answered your question.
  141. Wherever it is ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I bet it is unexpectedly flooded by vast quantities of slightly saline clear fluid

    Captcha is 'cuckoos' - how appropriate

  142. Re:Really? by Arccot · · Score: 1

    Um, people *are* going to be forced to buy health insurance, per the Democrats' gift-to-the-private-health-care-industry-in-the-guise-of-health-care-reform plan.

    Jeeze, the Dems can't win, can they? They're damned for trying to offer a public option for insurance as commie socialist freedom haters, and when the Republicans block it, they're damned for the only compromise they can get through, mandated private health insurance, as corporate whoring freedom haters.

  143. Re:Really? by Goody · · Score: 1

    That's the kicker. You are providing for them already with higher healthcare costs to subsidize those who can't pay.

    --
    Tired of being "punished" by the Slashdot $rtbl since 2002. I'm now over at http://soylentnews.org/ .
  144. Re:Really? by Goody · · Score: 1

    That all sounds great on paper until you get some devastating and expensive to treat disease like cancer or have a car accident that puts you in a wheelchair for the rest of your life. Most people don't have $100K-$1M lying around. The end result: only the wealthy will survive bad illnesses or be rehabilitated after accidents. Instead of showing your insurance card when going to the hospital, you can bring your bank statements and credit report.

    --
    Tired of being "punished" by the Slashdot $rtbl since 2002. I'm now over at http://soylentnews.org/ .
  145. Re:Really? by Goody · · Score: 1

    The reality of insurance is that you have to have a pool of healthy people to support it. Naturally, if it's all sick people, the model will fail. All people, even those who are perfectly healthy right now, get sick sooner or later and need care. You're a liability to the system because you cancelled your health insurance. Now if you get a severe illness, hospitals have to treat you. If you don't pay out of pocket, people like me who pay for health insurance have to subsidize your care.

    --
    Tired of being "punished" by the Slashdot $rtbl since 2002. I'm now over at http://soylentnews.org/ .
  146. Also absent from Google maps by Snufu · · Score: 1

    Can anyone send me directions to the Nixon monument? I can't find it on Google maps, and I've been searching around the national mall for hours.

  147. BTW, it's fix'd now by stevegee58 · · Score: 1

    In case you didn't notice.

  148. Re:Really? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    You're going to pay for the people who can't pay for their own health care whether you like it or not unless you're willing to deny health care to people who can't afford to pay for it. I don't think I want to live in a society that would do that.

    It's pretty idealistic to think everyone is going be able to make the same insightful decisions about their lives as you may be able to. I imagine most /.ers are above average in intelligence but remember, half the population is below average. It isn't always someones own fault that they're poor or unemployed. Someone has to work those $20K a year jobs. What would happen to you if you were T-boned by a drunk tonight and became a quadriplegic? Could you handle $100,000 a year in medical bills on your own?

    I understand and sympathize with your belief that everyone should be responsible for themselves but it's an unachievable ideal that will never happen in the real world. If I'm going to pay one way or another I prefer not to pay it through Emergency Room visits, about the most expensive way you can do it. Most ER patients who aren't victims of some physical trauma could be better handled and probably avoid most ER visits if they had a regular doctor.

    So, for me the choice is a pragmatic one. The evidence from around the world is that health care would cost us at least 1/3 less as a nation than it does now if we had a single payer system. I think that would be a good thing.

    Again, the only way the system you envision could be cheaper than what we're doing now is if we deny medical care to those who can't pay for it. I'm not willing to go there.

    riverat posting AC to preserve mods (and I don't mod comments I respond to).

  149. Interesting by d_54321 · · Score: 1

    Lots of Interesting, Insightful and Funny comments here. Not a lot of Informative.

  150. Postal Address....? by Footsienabackyard · · Score: 1

    So, what is the Postal Address for the Lincoln Memorial anyway?

    Does it have it's own zip-code+4?

    --
    Don't you think...? Or don't you?
  151. Re:Really? by mqduck · · Score: 1

    The Democrats are still damned by the Republicans for their "compromise", which is so pathetic, so serving of the industry it's supposed to be reforming, that I doubt a Republican administration could have got away with passing it. Only a Democratic administration could have convinced Democrats to hallucinate victory in the face of such defeat.

    The Democrats are "corporate whoring freedom haters", as you put it, so I hardly care if they can't catch a break.

    --
    Property is theft.
  152. Fundamentals by dfuess · · Score: 1

    The email leader said:

    "Just Where Is The Lincoln Memorial, Anyhow?
            from the those-naughty-republicans dept.
            posted by timothy on Friday August 27, @23:28 (Google)"

    For those who are unaware, Glenn Beck is an Independent NOT a Republican and his Honor rally was NOT political.

    The thing that people fail to understand in general about Glenn Beck is that he dislikes the Republicans as much as the Democrats. He provides historical context for the fundamental ideas on which the US was founded. Then he goes on to report on how our leaders measure up against those ideals. And for those who just discovered him, he did the same to Bush.

  153. Christians are Extremists! by woolio · · Score: 1

    It's like branding christians as violent extremists because of what has happened in northern Ireland.

    Aside from Ireland, Christians ARE violent extremists. (I suspect that is why they are so critical of Muslims.)

    Let's see:
    - Spanish Inquisition (ahem!)
    - Holy Wars (WTF!)
    - Forced modern-day conversion during 'chairity' work.
    - Forced religious conversion by the sword (Constantine)
    - Repression of women, even in religious services (Catholics)
    - Intertanglement with political government. I have heard many Christian priests dictate to their congregation that particular political propositions be supported or rejected...
    - Belief that their organizational leader is completely infallible. [Hence the above must have been sanctioned by God]

    I generally support religious freedom. But if we decide to get rid of it, I hope all of Christianity and Islam are banned together.

    As an aside, people think Scientologists are crazy, but are Christians any better? Look critically at the stories from the Bible. Look critically at what is believed to happen during consecreation (during mass)... Hey, if everyone believes it then everyone else must be insane!

    As for me, i was raised Christian and executed in Christian schools...

    1. Re:Christians are Extremists! by sumdumass · · Score: 1

      critically,

      I don't think that word means what you think it means. Otherwise you would have seen a few distinct differences between what you wrote and the current day Muslim issue. Instead, you are masquerading some unwarranted attempt to bash Christians or something and faking intelligence by claiming critical thinking.

      You see, you listed people who claimed to be doing something in their own right of Christianity, however, they cease to exist because when people started looking at the scriptures, they realized they were full of crap. In the muslim religion, most of the violence and hatred is actually supported in their bible if strict literal interpretations are taken. This isn't the case in the christian bible unless you totally misconstrue the entire point of it and take it out of the christian context. This is probably because of your tendency to rebel and rejection of the christian teachings in the Christian schools you claimed to have been raised in.

  154. Re:Really? by geminidomino · · Score: 1

    This bill forces them to get insurance

    And yet, does nothing to ensure insurance is available to them. Get a "pre-existing" condition in there and poof. No insurance for you.

    The Insurance Company Revitalization Act won't accomplish a damned thing.

  155. Re:Really? by geminidomino · · Score: 1

    Considering that the "compromise" pretty much inverted the stated intention of the bill, damning them for it is entirely warranted. They needed to appease their stupid cheerleaders, so they adopted the flawed "doing something is better than doing nothing" philosophy, even though they were wrong. Doing nothing would have been better than what they did.

  156. Proof he's nuts? by Nicolas+MONNET · · Score: 1

    He cries on TV while drawing absurd diagrams on a blackboard.

    If he's not nuts, he plays one on TV pretty convincingly.

    He once called a woman on his radio show to harass her by making fun of her for having had a miscarriage. Among other things. He's nuts, he's evil, he's religious. The word for it is spelled c-o-n-s-e-r-v-a-t-i-v-e.

  157. Re:Really? by Thakandar2 · · Score: 1

    There's somewhere between 34-45 million people of 300+ million people without health insurance now, according to the census data website. Even with health insurance, treatments for conditions like Cancer and/or rehabilitation goes way over the $250k per sickness/per year that most people have. If the health insurance was abolished, most people, barring the 5-10% of truly rich, wouldn't be able to pay today's listed prices. Costs would HAVE to come down for the medical providers to not lose out on that other 75% of their business.

    Would there be this horrible period of price adjustment? Oh, sure. It'd be painful (literally) for a while. But for businesses not to fail, prices several steps up the cost chain, such as R&D, marketing, distribution, personnel wages, cost of student loans for doctors, etc. would all have to adjust to meet the reality that without insurance, a majority of people wouldn't be able to pay at all. It'd be mass deflation across several industries, which is never popular because people feel that their worth is decreasing, when in fact the unit of measurement is changing. As of now, insurance has a (correlative so far, causation being hard to prove) inflationary effect on costs since it was popularized in the past 60 years.

  158. Re:Really? by DavidTC · · Score: 1

    If the decisions an individual makes over the course of their lives leads them to a state where they are poor, unemployed and without health insurance

    Yeah, us crazy people with congenital heart defects, who cannot buy insurance on the market at all, should have to find some company that provides health insurance (Assuming any of those still exist) and work for them the rest of our lives.

    --
    If corporations are people, aren't stockholders guilty of slavery?
  159. Re:Restoring Horror by DavidTC · · Score: 1

    David Garrow, a civil rights movement historian at the University of Cambridge, said that Martin Luther King Jr. was unambiguously progressive.

    I wanted to show up at Beck's rally holding a big banner saying: A nation that continues year after year to spend more money on military defense than on programs of social uplift is approaching spiritual death.

    I'd leave it unattributed, although I'd suspect they'd guess. I want to see what the tea party would make of that quote.

    "King was not only not a Republican, he was well to the left of the Democratic Party of the 1960s," he said. "One could make a very strong case that King thought of himself as a democratic socialist. It's also well-documented that Dr. King was a strong supporter of Planned Parenthood, and it's well-documented that one of his five or six closest advisers, Bayard Rustin, was gay."

    The worst thing the right has managed to do over the last four decade is make King's message entirely about race. He was also incredibly anti-poverty and incredibly anti-war. (Hence the quote above.)

    We've made a lot of progress on race over the decades. We've made almost no progress on not having pointless wars, and we've gone backwards on poverty.

    --
    If corporations are people, aren't stockholders guilty of slavery?
  160. Re:Restoring Horror by Doc+Ruby · · Score: 1

    King increased his message's scope beyond just Black people to include all poor people (as it always had, though Black people had always been his focus, for obvious rhetorical and practical reasons). By 1968, he was organizing far beyond just Black people and others sympathetic to them. His movement was snowballing, including more and more White people and spawning other movements (like "Brown Power" Latinos and the American Indian Movement) that themselves were naturally social justice movements more than racial ones. The power of King's message was that it did actually move past racism by transcending race. Because race is just a tool of class, which is a tool of political economy. America's political economy has been distorted since perhaps the beginning, born in war, but increasingly so since the Founders themselves died, funding a standing army constantly deployed first to conquer the US continent, then to keep it, and immediately to protect access by the US and its global trade/finance partners to cheap resources and labor. King raised consciousness across the board about all that, from general truth telling to specifically railing against the Vietnam War.

    Which is why they killed him in 1968. Whether James Earl Ray was just the first murderer among a seething backlash of Establishment White people to succeed, or whether Ray was either organized by mafia/CIA or just allowed to succeed even though King should have been protected by a legitimate government, it was King's increasing threat to the military industrial complex that caused people from FBI's Hoover to Ray to say he was "Communist", and to want him dead. And dead he was.

    Though as a martyr he only returned more powerful than they could possibly imagine. Yet not powerful enough, yet, to lead us truly out of the injustice that underlies all our problems.

    --

    --
    make install -not war

  161. Re:Really? by unr3a1 · · Score: 1

    Yeah, us crazy people with congenital heart defects, who cannot buy insurance on the market at all, should have to find some company that provides health insurance (Assuming any of those still exist) and work for them the rest of our lives.

    Pretty much any reputable company provides some level of health insurance. I am 26-years old making 15 an hour. How the hell would I afford health insurance if the company I worked for didn't cover a vast majority of the cost? Plain and simple: I wouldn't.

    We all do what we have to do in order to survive. I am sorry that you have a heart condition, I really am. But perhaps instead of using it as a crutch or an excuse to get other people to take care of you, you should use it as motivation to better yourself and your situation. Would show that you have a strong character and self-motivation.

    No offense, but right now you sound like someone who expects the world to take care of you because of something neither them nor you can control.

  162. Re:Really? by DavidTC · · Score: 1

    Pretty much any reputable company provides some level of health insurance.

    Did you just call 40% of all companies in this country disreputable?

    Here, at last, we see the right's actual face. They have essentially told me I can never start a small business, I can't work as a contractor, I can never even work for a small business. I must find some large company offering some sort of health insurance, and stay there until I can get on medicare, because if I don't I'll lose my insurance, and the magical free market won't sell to me. (And I mean won't sell, not 'won't sell at a price I like'. I am uninsurable.)

    Pro-small business my ass. They want us to be goddamn wage slaves our entire life for the fewer and fewer corporations that are large enough to actually negotiate a reasonable rate with insurance companies.

    But perhaps instead of using it as a crutch or an excuse to get other people to take care of you, you should use it as motivation to better yourself and your situation.

    I'm not using it as 'crutch', I'm paying for my health care costs just fine. (And I'm paying five times as much as the health insurance companies are, so I'm subsidizing you.)

    ...at least, until I get hit by a car or get cancer or something, at which point I'll be unable to pay for things and die.

    --
    If corporations are people, aren't stockholders guilty of slavery?
  163. Re:Restoring Horror by DavidTC · · Score: 1

    Hey, I thought I was supposed to disagree with you.

    Yes, King figured out that racism, in this country, as just a way for the lower class to be pitted against each other.

    Which is why they killed him in 1968.

    Speaking of assassinations, I'm still of the opinion that the most plausible Kennedy assassination theory is that James Jesus Angleton had him killed because of Golitsyn crazed lies about the KGB. I think Angleton thought Kennedy was a Soviet mole.

    --
    If corporations are people, aren't stockholders guilty of slavery?
  164. Re:Restoring Horror by Doc+Ruby · · Score: 1

    Moderation 0
        50% Troll
        50% Insightful

    Looks like the Teabagger zombie army is back from Beckistan, long enough to trollmod my post explaining with citations that Alveda King is a travesty who Martin Luther King would have abhorred for lying in his name.

    --

    --
    make install -not war

  165. Re:Restoring Horror by Doc+Ruby · · Score: 1

    I don't know why you're supposed to disagree with me :).

    I think Kennedy was killed by Elvis in jealousy over Marilyn Monroe. Even though everyone knows the joint operations of the CIA/mafia killed him for getting in the way of their joint crime wave in guns, drugs and general mayhem that the Republican Party was busy embracing in Nixon/Bush/Reagan.

    --

    --
    make install -not war

  166. Re:Really? by unr3a1 · · Score: 1

    A few things.

    First, I most certainly do not represent an entire political party. So to imply as such is just silly.

    Second, I never once made any distinction between small or large business being "reputable". I absolutely support small businesses.

    It is also foolish and naive to assume that no small business is able to provide health care for their employees. There most certainly are small businesses that can; and quite a large number of them.

    Finally, I never said anything about "wage slaves". Everyone's situation is different and they each require their own unique steps to get a solution.

    P.S.

    None of us are able to control the unexpected things in life. Again, it comes to the strength of character and motivation of the individual to weather difficult times.

    My sister was diagnosed with cervical and uterine cancer at 29. She had to have a hysterectomy and had to do 4 months of chemotherapy. This happened while she was studying to get her Masters Degree in psychology.

    The university offered her everything they could to put her mind at ease about focusing solely on her treatment. She would obviously not get her Masters until a later date, but they wouldn't penalize her in anyway. She stuck with it, and successfully defended her Masters on time and is continuing on to her PhD.

    One final thought, everyone dies at one point or another. No one knows when that day will be or how it will happen, nor can we control it. Be happy for what you have and the life you have lived. A lot of people never even make it to my age.

  167. Whoever mark this flamebait nust be kosher... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    must be shot to avoid further damage to the human race.

  168. Re:Really? by DavidTC · · Score: 1

    It is also foolish and naive to assume that no small business is able to provide health care for their employees. There most certainly are small businesses that can; and quite a large number of them.

    If by 'quite a large number', you mean 'about a third', sure.

    Of course, they're paying 15% more or so for said insurance compared to large companies.

    My sister was diagnosed with cervical and uterine cancer at 29. She had to have a hysterectomy and had to do 4 months of chemotherapy. This happened while she was studying to get her Masters Degree in psychology.

    So let's break this down. Did she have insurance at the time?

    Was it employee based, or did she have her own insurance.

    Or was she uninsurable because of some heart defect?

    You've apparently mistaken my statement I can't get insurance for some sort of sob story, and thus think you should top it with some other sob story. I am not asking for sympathy, or a handout, I'm POINTING OUT I CAN'T GET INSURANCE.

    I am a web designer. There is no such thing as a 'large' web design company anywhere around me, and none of them offer insurance. To find an job in my actual career that offered health insurance, I'd have to move, and take a job with a large corporation, and constantly stay on my toes to make sure I was employed until I was 65 and can get medicare.

    No startups for me. No saving up money and striking out on my own. The only way I'll ever have insurance is if I find some company that will have me, and then do whatever they say for the rest of my life, or hope I can find another company before COBRA runs out.

    This is the 'pro-small business' perspective of the Republicans. Americans must innovate...at least, if they're rich enough to cover ever possible medical expense. Everyone else, fuck off. Or, better yet, work without health insurance...don't worry, I'm sure money will magical appear if you get sick.

    Or, at least, that was the story. Luckily, now, in 2014, I'll be able to buy insurance myself, thanks to the mostly teethless 'reform' that was just passed.

    --
    If corporations are people, aren't stockholders guilty of slavery?
  169. Re:You need directions? by gfreeman · · Score: 1

    Which happens to be located in New Jersey.

    The island it's on (Liberty Island) is part of New York state, though surrounded by New Jersey waters. That said, while Liberty Island (and therefore the Statue of Liberty as well) is in New York, all the land is owned by the Federal Government.

    --
    Ceci n'est pas un sig.
  170. Geography by mr_java66 · · Score: 0

    If you drive, you HAVE to have some working knowledge of some geography. Most Americans drive, so most have sufficient working knowledge of geography. At least local knowledge. Also, I'll point of that to get a pilot's certificate, you only need to answer 70% of the questions right. There is always going to be some random/oops type errors in multiple answer questions. A result of 96% correct, could mean that EVERYONE can do it. Obviously not possible since >0% of people are blind/impared/what-ever. But a nice result.

  171. Re:You can see the Linconln Memorial on the same m by mcgrew · · Score: 1

    From Heartbreak Ridge:

    "One dark and gloomy night he said 'you're oh one and one.' No wins, one tie, one loss."

    Korea was a tie. We didn't win.

  172. Re:Really? by mcgrew · · Score: 1

    WTH is "Moonbats" anyway?

    You've never seen This Modern World?

  173. Re:Really? by unr3a1 · · Score: 1

    If by 'quite a large number', you mean 'about a third', sure.

    Of course, they're paying 15% more or so for said insurance compared to large companies.

    My point is that they are out there.

    So let's break this down. Did she have insurance at the time?

    Was it employee based, or did she have her own insurance.

    Or was she uninsurable because of some heart defect?

    She had insurance, but it wouldn't cover the cost. The cancer institute only deferred it until she was done with treatment. She is more difficult to insure because she has lupus.

    You've apparently mistaken my statement I can't get insurance for some sort of sob story, and thus think you should top it with some other sob story. I am not asking for sympathy, or a handout, I'm POINTING OUT I CAN'T GET INSURANCE.

    Or, at least, that was the story. Luckily, now, in 2014, I'll be able to buy insurance myself, thanks to the mostly teethless 'reform' that was just passed

    Yet you are giving a sob story. I understand you can't get insurance, but now in 2014 you will, but at what cost?

    You say, "I'll be able to buy insurance myself" as if you will have a choice. You will be forced to buy healthcare whether you can afford it or not.

    If you still can't afford it and don't buy it, you will be fined.

    So you are willing to sacrifice the freedom of choice for yourself and for the rest of the country so you can "guarantee" yourself to get healthcare; when you don't really know whether or not you will be able to afford it come 2014. Prices haven't been announced.

    Playing devil's advocate, say come 2014 you can't afford to get insurance? Would you just say, "well, it was worth a shot supporting this."? Or would you feel regret?

    Or, let's now say that it works. Flawlessly. Great, right? Still don't have a choice in it. Which you may not care about. Certainly doesn't seem like you do. But you think it will stop at the health insurance? No.

    What will happen is everybody will have all this faith and belief in the government again. They don't have to worry about healthcare. But wait, we still have terrorism, global warming, the war, crime, the economy. And they have convinced us that these are "national security" risks.

    What will happen is the people will easily turn over the solution to the government on those issues as well. And what we'll get is the end of net neutrality and anonymity online. If you don't do anything bad online thats a small price to pay, right? But what comes from that loss of privacy? Justification to abolish warrants.

    Justification to ignore the 1st amendment by shutting down anti-liberal and anti-global warming blogs. Which, btw, the Obama administration has already tried but failed. But not if they can get you afraid of it enough to abolish the 1st amendment.

    What will happen is we will get to a point not that different from the imagining of 1984.

    Times are scary. Who wouldn't be scared? War, terror, disease. There are a myriad of problems, but they are being conspired to corrupt our reason and rob us of our common sense. Fear is getting the best of us, and in our panic we are turning to our federal government. They are promising us security, they are promising us peace, and and all they demand in return is our silent, obedient consent.

    "Those who would give up essential liberties for a little temporary security deserve neither liberty nor security" - Benjamin Franklin

  174. Re:Really? by DavidTC · · Score: 1

    You will be forced to buy healthcare whether you can afford it or not.

    FORCED: Noun, compelled by necessity or force.

    Yup. I'm forced to buy healthcare. Right now I am, and I will still be later. It is a necessity.

    Good job pointing that out, but I think we all understood that heathcare was a necessity. it's like food. People must have it, or they die.

    Playing devil's advocate, say come 2014 you can't afford to get insurance?

    Then I will use the subsidies that the new health care law provides. Um, duh.

    Do you not know about this? Have you been listening only to Fox News?

    Or, let's now say that it works. Flawlessly. Great, right? Still don't have a choice in it. Which you may not care about. Certainly doesn't seem like you do.

    No one has a choice in healthcare. It's not an either/or option. You can't live without it.

    What will happen is everybody will have all this faith and belief in the government again. They don't have to worry about healthcare.

    Yes, instead of the government succeeds, the government should fail and people should die. That'll show people who think the government can solve problems!

    You America-hating conservative, get the hell away from me and go live in Somalia.

    But wait, we still have terrorism, global warming, the war, crime, the economy. And they have convinced us that these are "national security" risks.

    What will happen is the people will easily turn over the solution to the government on those issues as well.

    I'd like you to explain how exactly terrorism and the war have non-government solutions. In fact,I'd like to you explain what sort of non-government options exist with the war at all. Or crime, for that matter.

    Oh, wait, all your rants just got mixed together and you sounded even dumber than you meant. 'My god, the government is trying to run the war! Oh noes!'

    But, basically, pretending you were just really stupid, it basically comes down to two kinds of people. The people who believe that America can solve problems, and the people who don't.

    The people who don't think America can solve problems as well as, say, France, don't even have any sort of solution to the health care problem.

    I want people to read this guy's posts carefully, and see what he actually says I should do. His 'solution' to the problem is that everyone should work at jobs that provide health insurance, which is a) in stark contrast to the 'small business' encouragement the right is claiming, and b) clinically insane, as only about 70% of businesses offer such insurance, meaning he just functionally created an unemployment rate of higher than 50% as, presumable, jobs without health insurance aren't 'real' jobs. There's nowhere near enough jobs with insurance to actually get everyone coverage.

    Oh, oh. All the uninsurable people can work at jobs that come with insurance, and all the insurable people can work at jobs that don't, and buy their own. I'm sure insurance companies won't start raising rates when that happens, and I'm sure all the moderately-healthy people with those benefits will quit so us uninsurable people can get in.

    Let me guess. In your universe, everyone has whatever job they want. And when Republicans say that unemployment benefits are encouraging people not to work, what they actually mean is that people can just magically find not only a job, but one with benefits?

    --
    If corporations are people, aren't stockholders guilty of slavery?
  175. Re:Really? by unr3a1 · · Score: 1

    Nice how you ignored a whole other section to what I said.

    Also, I never aligned myself with the left or the right and I am certainly not anti-american. I am anti-socialism.

    So basically you made all too known that you don't mind if the government forces you to buy healthcare or not cause it's "essential". Granted, it may be, but that still does NOT justify it being forced down our throats.

    You clearly only watch CNN, which btw is just as unreliable a news source as Fox News. The two are identical to each other except for the obvious fact that they stand on either side of the two-party spectrum.

    If we continue to grant the federal government more power, the closer we will get to a totalitarian state. Sad to see that someone who appears to be so intelligent could be so easily fooled and brainwashed into believing the rhetoric simply because it satisfies your needs.

    You also imply that you support American ideals, well, forcing your citizens to do something against their will is not an American ideal. So congratulations you are your own contradiction.

    Both parties need to go away. Neither the Republicans or the Democrats are doing anything to truly help us. They both are only giving the illusion of trying to help. The sooner more people get over themselves and realize this, the better chance we have to remain free.

    You should really read more rather than blinding believing what your TV tells you.

    "Those who would give up essential liberties for a little temporary security deserve neither liberty nor security" - Benjamin Franklin

  176. Re:Really? by DavidTC · · Score: 1

    Nice how you ignored a whole other section to what I said.

    You mean your stupid fantasy about how the government providing for the citizenry will result in facism.

    Yeah, here's a shock for you: No one but you believes that, and it's just your damn opinion, and not very well supported by facts.

    You're living in your own little universe where government is the problem, and you know what? Fuck that. This is America, we are very smart, and we can solve problems, using the government as a tool.

    Also, I never aligned myself with the left or the right

    Yeah, idiots on the far right always say that.

    and I am certainly not anti-american.

    Yes, you are. You think our system of government cannot function if it provides slightly more services. You have no faith in our system of government, you have no faith in our people, you have no faith in America. You are anti-American.

    I am anti-socialism.

    In other words, you don't know what socialism is.

    Hint: Socialism is the government operating the means of production of goods. It is not the government providing services. Socialism is the government making goods, and selling them. (And communism is giving them away.)

    The government is supposed to operate services. That is the point of the government. To provide services for our safety and happiness, within the restrictions we've laid out for it in the constitution.

    So basically you made all too known that you don't mind if the government forces you to buy healthcare or not cause it's "essential". Granted, it may be, but that still does NOT justify it being forced down our throats.

    A much better plan would have been for the government to just pay for health care, but your side, and, yes, you're on the far right even if you refuse to admit it, your side refused to even allow them to come forward. (With the, I will admit, complicity of Democrats.)

    You clearly only watch CNN, which btw is just as unreliable a news source as Fox News. The two are identical to each other except for the obvious fact that they stand on either side of the two-party spectrum.

    Yes, because I have no health insurance and can't purchase it, I clearly watch CNN. Of course, I don't watch CNN, as I just have basic cable, but whatever.

    If we continue to grant the federal government more power, the closer we will get to a totalitarian state. Sad to see that someone who appears to be so intelligent could be so easily fooled and brainwashed into believing the rhetoric simply because it satisfies your needs.

    That is not how totalitarian states work, and that's not how 'government power' works either.

    The idea that the government can pass laws requiring people to 'do things' is not some slippery slope to totalitarianism, because totalitarianism does not lay in that direction. The direction of totalitarianism is silencing voices, it is creating larger barriers to dissent, it is removing rights from people, not requiring them to wake up each morning and dance a jig.

    You cannot get to totalitarianism via 'rules' because people won't go along with it, and will instead elect dissents. Asserting 'new taxes' leads to totalitarianism is akin to asserting that carrying a microwave around in your trunk leads to your car overheating. A does not lead to B! That is not why cars overheat!

    It is not some slippery slope to overheating, even if you imagine we'll start carrying elephants around. Yes, that would cause overheating, but that is not actually the way overheating happens in the actual world people live in.

    You also imply that you support American ideals, well, forcing your citizens to do something against their will is not an American ideal. So congratulations you are your own contradiction.

    Sure it is an American ideal. 'He has forbidden his Governors to pass Laws of immediate and pressing importance, unles

    --
    If corporations are people, aren't stockholders guilty of slavery?
  177. Re:Really? by unr3a1 · · Score: 1

    Well I am sorry you see it that way. You are only fooling yourself. Your concept of America is NOT how it was set up to be. The federal government was never meant to have as much power as it does. Your willingness to just accept it for what it is shows your complete lack of education of the principles and set of checks and balances our government was founded on.

    I pity your ignorance.

  178. Re:You need directions? by Triv · · Score: 1

    Protip: if visiting friends in NYC, don't ask them to take you to the World Trade Center site. If you feel the need to go hang out at a giant pit in the ground, find it yourself; if you DO manage to get your friend to take you downtown, don't insist they take your picture in front of the fence.

    And don't call it "Ground Zero," either. Just...don't. :/