(Yeah, it's definitely time to break out a couple of cool frosty Sam Adams
right now :)
As for that slut Sandra Fluke ... pretty much everyone has been played here.
Fluke is described by the media as a "third year law student" but she's also a full time activist. She is 30 years old, not 23. And she is also the past president of "Law Students for Reproductive Justice."
So yeah, I think Rush screwed up. Not because he took a common sense position but because he got suckered into arguing a debate that was carefully engineered by provacateurs to be unwinnable as long as it was played on their terms.
Why is it that nearly everyone involved in big politics right now is either evil or stupid?
As for that slut Sandra Fluke ... pretty much everyone has been played here.
Fluke is described by the media as a "third year law student" but she's also a full time activist. She is 30 years old, not 23. And she is also the past president of "Law Students for Reproductive Justice."
So yeah, I think Rush screwed up. Not because he took a common sense position but because he got suckered into arguing a debate that was carefully engineered by provacateurs to be unwinnable as long as it was played on their terms.
Why is it that nearly everyone involved in big politics right now is either evil or stupid?
600 stations and 15 million listeners. The man isn't stupid, and is laughing
all the way to the bank.
Idiots will pay to listen to slightly less stupid idiots. They're DESPERATE to climb one rung up the totem pole.
Pretty soon, Rush will be as desperate for attention as Imus was here:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FbI2BuoN2iw
Rush isn't an idiot.... He's part pundit, part comedian. Now, I personally
don't care for Rush, I'd rather he play it straight. But I wouldn't underestimate
him at all.
Again, however -- by continuing to pay attention to Sandra Slut Fluke and
other "social issues" debacles being loudly touted by the axis press, we are
falling victim to their plan to keep people talking about anything other than
Obama's failed economic policies.
Rush should know better than to give airtime to any of this.
Rush should know better than to give airtime to any of this.
anything other than Obama's failed economic policies.
show me someone on the right who isn't going around acting like a loon thumping books written by Hayek as if it's the King James Edition, and then the right might have some credibility on economics with me. Nothing further to the right than Mankiw's compromise[1] makes any sense whatsoever...
On that note, Mankiw is one of Romney's economics advisors, and Romney seems to be busy ignoring the advice of his economists.
[1] as expressed in paragraphs 1-2 of http://gregmankiw.blogspot.com/2011/12/draghi-deal.html
http://www.moneynews.com/StreetTalk/Harvard-Mankiw-Gasoline-Taxes/2012/01/24/id/4
25277
Mankiw doesn't know what he's talking about.
Cheap energy drives our economy. Period.
25277
Mankiw doesn't know what he's talking about.
Cheap energy drives our economy. Period.
Mankiw doesn't know what he's talking about.
I absolutely, don't agree with everything he ever wrote, but the link I cite is sensible.
I got an invitation to a conference today, which on the invitation it states
they will no longer be giving out conference bags (or swag bags as we all
call them) due to their work towards a sustainable planet.
Bullshit. It saves you a few bucks - while claiming to be good stewards of the earth. Fuck you, assholes.
Bullshit. It saves you a few bucks - while claiming to be good stewards of the earth. Fuck you, assholes.
Mar 7 2012 12:51pm from Ragnar Danneskjold @uncnsrd
I got an invitation to a conference today, which on the invitation it
states they will no longer be giving out conference bags (or swag bags
as we all call them) due to their work towards a sustainable planet.
Bullshit. It saves you a few bucks - while claiming to be good
stewards of the earth. Fuck you, assholes.
They're not assholes, they're just stupid. (Like Rush, but I digress.)
Hanlon's Razor applies here. It's very typical for conference organizers to give out a lot of bags... and then notice discarded ones all over the hallways. Ceasing to give out the bags is a rational response, but a better response is to require those who want one to pre-register for it. I've seen this used to good effect.
Incompetence.
Again, it's about the money, not about the planet. I hate people who act
magnanimous, yet they have completely different goals.
They're just trying to put a nice spin on things... but the fact remains that the vast majority of tote bags are typically discarded by conference attendees. (I know what I'm talking about here -- I worked for a company that organized two conferences every year.)
That's waste. And when you notice waste, you decide to save yourself some money. Being nice to the planet happens to be a happy side effect. Is the effect not the same?
As for economics, if you look at Smith, Keynes, Hayek, Marx and Friedman I
think you'd agree that as far as predictions, Hayek probably has the best
track record.
I think you made my point. It's spin.
I think you made my point. It's spin.
Not really... your point is unmakeable. Who the fuck cares if they're greendroids who want to save the planet AND save themselves a buck, or Randroids who want to save themselves a buck AND save the planet?
On that note, Mankiw is one of Romney's economics advisors, and Romney
seems to be busy ignoring the advice of his economists.
Romney who? All I said was that Obama's economic policies have failed. I don't know the economic policies of this "Romney" of whom you speak, but it's a fair assessment that if the current occupant of the White House has spent the last three years adding trillions of dollars of debt to an already bankrupt nation, that should be the first and foremost thing being discussed.