You're not/quite/ right, but you illustrate the point that people with extreme attitudes will turn around and say "but these people are extremists too, just in the opposite way!" as if that excuses them from thinking, because clearly the answer is/always/ somewhere in the middle.
They want to shrink the government down far enough to fit into your bedroom.
Ask a teabagger what they'd like the government to do, and they want it smaller. But only where it suits them; some want big military, others big morality, others to get big unelected and unaccountable (except by the Free Market (pbui)) business. Nobody except for the hardcore Paulites truly want small government, and they're frankly nuts.
I think you're just lumping all the right wing concepts into one pot and calling it the Tea Party
While it's true that the TP organizers emphasize that they're all about/fiscal/ conservatism, if you'll look at who makes up the movement and who said movement has collectively elected to represent them, it's pretty socially conservative as well, and hawkish, i.e. conservative Republicans.
a true conservative republican wouldn't approve at all of the Patriot Act
Nicely dancing around my point, but -1 for being too obvious about it. As I suspect you're aware but ignoring, I'm talking about the constant drizzle of namecalling and screaming. Look at the commenters in chrissandvick's link above for what I mean.
Apparently, you don't read enough news sources outside your narrow, bigoted interests.
Thanks for illustrating my point, and also for linking to that site; the commenters prove my point as well.
I doubt you'll see it, though. Seems like conservatives constitutionally love that sort of name-calling; fits in with the politics-as-a-team-sport motif.
OWS has to do these things to get attention because (unlike the teabaggers) they're not a creation of Fox News and the commentariat, so they don't have built-in hype.
I agree. I've taken to deblocking ads on sites I frequent and then only re-blocking if there's a really annoying ad, like sometimes comes up on Wikia with those full-screen slideovers.
At least that damned Evony ad campaign with the scantily-clad women advertising a completely unrelated game is over.
On another site, one poster observed that a *really effective* fundraising campaign for Wikipedia would be one wherein they threaten to perma-delete 100 random pointless SF nerd/weeabo articles each day unless their fundraising needs were met.
You say that Russia doesn't like Iran any more than the rest of the world. Are you saying that Russia keeps taking Iran's side WRT nuclear energy and other things for geopolitical reasons, or is it for money, or is there some other reason I'm not seeing?
Slashdot Mirror
This? This is vanilla ice cream compared to that stuff I /am/ complaining about.
Don't play the victim card, chum.
You're not /quite/ right, but you illustrate the point that people with extreme attitudes will turn around and say "but these people are extremists too, just in the opposite way!" as if that excuses them from thinking, because clearly the answer is /always/ somewhere in the middle.
Wrong. It's called "resultant set of policies".
That doesn't matter. What matters is that you can have your followers point to one person and say HIS FAULT. See also: Goldstein, Nancy Pelosi, et al.
They're actually not irritating all the truckers. See:
http://cleanandsafeports.org/blog/2011/12/12/an-open-letter-from-america%E2%80%99s-port-truck-drivers-on-occupy-the-ports/
http://www.alternet.org/economy/153393/how_goldman_sachs_and_other_companies_exploit_port_truck_drivers_%E2%80%94_occupy_protesters_plan_to_shut_down_west_coast_ports_in_protest/?page=entire
They want to shrink the government down far enough to fit into your bedroom.
Ask a teabagger what they'd like the government to do, and they want it smaller. But only where it suits them; some want big military, others big morality, others to get big unelected and unaccountable (except by the Free Market (pbui)) business. Nobody except for the hardcore Paulites truly want small government, and they're frankly nuts.
I think you're just lumping all the right wing concepts into one pot and calling it the Tea Party
While it's true that the TP organizers emphasize that they're all about /fiscal/ conservatism, if you'll look at who makes up the movement and who said movement has collectively elected to represent them, it's pretty socially conservative as well, and hawkish, i.e. conservative Republicans.
a true conservative republican wouldn't approve at all of the Patriot Act
No true Scotsman.
Nicely dancing around my point, but -1 for being too obvious about it. As I suspect you're aware but ignoring, I'm talking about the constant drizzle of namecalling and screaming. Look at the commenters in chrissandvick's link above for what I mean.
Apparently, you don't read enough news sources outside your narrow, bigoted interests.
Thanks for illustrating my point, and also for linking to that site; the commenters prove my point as well.
I doubt you'll see it, though. Seems like conservatives constitutionally love that sort of name-calling; fits in with the politics-as-a-team-sport motif.
...and driving down the tone of political discourse everywhere they show up. And by bringing assault rifles to public political gatherings.
Apparently you mostly pay attention to Fox News.
OWS has to do these things to get attention because (unlike the teabaggers) they're not a creation of Fox News and the commentariat, so they don't have built-in hype.
It's *interesting* that people I know who sympathize with teabaggers think that OWS protesters should quit whining and accept what they've got.
No, wait, that's self-serving hypocrisy.
They're talking about /protestors/, not astroturf.
Cite?
some poor vagrants out in Nigeria may have to pack up their dirty rags and hike a few miles inland
Just because you're retarded and unable to read doesn't mean I'm racist.
Seriously. HAY GUISE LETS TALK ABOUT ME.
Or is he a Putin supporter?
You have to pay for something to put out entitlement vibes like that, yes.
Let me summarize your argument: "fuck those dirty brown people, they're not my people".
Him and the twat who modded you down, yes.
Why on earth do you think websites /have/ ads? It's to defray bandwidth and other costs.
I, for one, don't want the web to go the path of paywalls and micropayments, and would rather have some ads that are relatively easy to ignore.
Then find another program to block your ads, Mr. Entitled, or switch to ELinks.
I agree. I've taken to deblocking ads on sites I frequent and then only re-blocking if there's a really annoying ad, like sometimes comes up on Wikia with those full-screen slideovers.
At least that damned Evony ad campaign with the scantily-clad women advertising a completely unrelated game is over.
You're certainly free to stop using this software that you're not even paying for.
It's certainly full of SF stuff, isn't it?
On another site, one poster observed that a *really effective* fundraising campaign for Wikipedia would be one wherein they threaten to perma-delete 100 random pointless SF nerd/weeabo articles each day unless their fundraising needs were met.
You say that Russia doesn't like Iran any more than the rest of the world. Are you saying that Russia keeps taking Iran's side WRT nuclear energy and other things for geopolitical reasons, or is it for money, or is there some other reason I'm not seeing?