It would have been funny if it weren’t so true. I suspect the main reason behind conservatives’ push to allow guns on college campuses, coupled with hideously broad stand – your – ground laws, is to enable wingnuts to intimidate faculty and fellow students, and perhaps even execute people on occasion for insulting Baby Jesus and fictional Founding Fathers by doing science or denouncing slavery or whatever.
David Marjanovićsays
There’s an alt-text!
“This is so wrong. I meant to say ‘guns'[,] not ‘gun’.”
There’s the old trope that guns don’t kill, people do. The problem is that gun culture seems to celebrate hair triggers. Not on the guns (well, maybe), but on the people with the guns.
A Masked Avengersays
I looked at this after reading the “recent” headlines on FTB, including Physioproffe’s recurring reference to all things (R) as “filth” and “scumfuckes,” so that definitely put a context on my reaction. I’ve mentioned before that I’m a recovered right-winger–so NOT a right-winger, and well aware of ways in which I think they’re wrong, but equally well aware that they are NOT “filth” or “scumfuckes” in general. They’re almost exactly half the population, based on election results and various opinion polls.
Yes, “nuance” is often a dirty word around here, and yes, there are valid uses for rhetorical extremism like, “half the country consists of scumfucke filthe with whom I’m heartily ashamed to be associated and who, though I don’t wish anyone actually dead, I do wish would stop consuming valuable oxygen best left to more productive uses.” But I do get kind of tired of it; if 50% of humanity really is a contemptible, racist, misogynist, mass-murder waiting to happen, then we’re good and fucked anyway, and we with progressive values are pure fools for even having these discussions when we should be hiding in the hills or giving up and joining monasteries.
Lots of people who vote conservative, do it because they agree with something or other in the conservative platform while disagreeing with plenty of other things, and they judge that, on balance, the conservatives represent them marginally better than the liberals. Exactly as we do when we vote “liberal”–where I put “liberal” in scare quotes because most of us voted for Obama, despite the fact that he’s substantively almost indistinguishable from Bush. We decided that, on balance, he might support some sort of useful gun legislation, that he would support social safety nets, etc., and most of us voted for him a second time despite knowing that he has proven to be every bit as much a mass-murderer as Bush was, and more. Are we mass-murdering scumfuckes? Obama is. And we support him. Therefore we are, right?
No, I don’t have a solution, and I get that rhetoric and even demagoguery have their uses, but ultimately demonizing half the population doesn’t seem like an effective strategy–and as a side effect, it feeds our hate for them. Overcoming hate with hate creates the usual paradox.
twas brillig (stevem)says
…despite knowing that [Obama] has proven to be every bit as much a mass-murderer as Bush was, and more
I’d like to see your figures behind that claim. I am overwhelmed by the wars that W started and killed so many that even if Obama was a killer, he wouldn’t come close to W’s numbers. But I’m just a The Daily Shower, never watching FoxNews for truth telling. Lost in Stewart’s satire so I don’t know real facts. Please share the facts I’m missing.
A Masked Avengersays
I’d like to see your figures behind that claim. I am overwhelmed by the wars that W started and killed so many that even if Obama was a killer, he wouldn’t come close to W’s numbers.
I haven’t checked the body counts; what actually motivates me to say that is that Obama has explicitly adopted the doctrine that the President has the authority to unilaterally declare anyone (including American citizens, if that matters) an “enemy combatant” and then order their death. That and the fact that Obama actually “stepped up” the use of drones, performs “signature” killings without even knowing who it is that he’s killing. And the fact that he started a war in Libya not only without a declaration of Congress, but in fact defying an explicit declaration of non-war from Congress.
David Marjanovićsays
And the fact that he started a war in Libya
What have you smoked, and can I get it legally in the Netherlands? NATO as a whole decided to enter an existing war.
antepreprosays
A Masked Avenger:
They’re almost exactly half the population, based on election results and various opinion polls.
And?
Yes, “nuance” is often a dirty word around here
Precious.
Speaking of nuance, happen to notice that PZ isn’t Comrade Physioproffe, or that the character depicted in this cartoon is in no ways implied to be representative of either all gun owners or all conservatives?
Nuance: For Dissent purposes only.
But I do get kind of tired of it; if 50% of humanity really is a contemptible, racist, misogynist, mass-murder waiting to happen, then we’re good and fucked anyway, and we with progressive values are pure fools for even having these discussions when we should be hiding in the hills or giving up and joining monasteries.
Not all racism is created equal.
Not all misogyny is created equal.
A mass-murder waiting to happen can be stopped.
NUANCE!
Lots of people who vote conservative, do it because they agree with something or other in the conservative platform while disagreeing with plenty of other things, and they judge that, on balance, the conservatives represent them marginally better than the liberals.
i.e. they are stupid, not evil.
Thanks for that stunning and original insight.
Exactly as we do when we vote “liberal”–where I put “liberal” in scare quotes because most of us voted for Obama, despite the fact that he’s substantively almost indistinguishable from Bush
Remind me again of when the Bush using government spending to stimulate the economy? Bush attempting to fix health care? Bush scaling down wars? Bush expanding gay rights? The Bush White House expressing concerns over sexual assault?
What you have wrong in your logic is that, where Obama is worst, he is just like Bush. Where he is better, he is better. Just because he is as bad as Bush in some respects does not make that so overall.
and as a side effect, it feeds our hate for them.
BAAAAAAW. If you don’t hate conservative politics, you are not paying attention.
Most of us voted for him a second time despite knowing that he has proven to be every bit as much a mass-murderer as Bush was, and more. Are we mass-murdering scumfuckes? Obama is. And we support him….I haven’t checked the body counts;
“He’s just as much of a mass-murderer!”
“Pshaw, no, I didn’t check the numbers, lol!”
Obama derangement syndrome works on both the left and right, it seems.
And the fact that he started a war in Libya not only without a declaration of Congress
Please, show your work. “Involved in Libya’s Civil War” =/= “Starting a War in Libya”.
laurentweppesays
What have you smoked, and can I get it legally in the Netherlands?
It’s called Fake Outrage and it’s legal everywhere
shadowspadesays
I particularly enjoyed how he is drawn in such a way that he could either be polishing his gun or masturbating. It seems appropriate.
caesarsays
Looks like a responsible gun owner to me. Cleaning out your gun is very important. Wouldn’t want the gun to jam, endangering the user and others in the area. Besides, high quality guns are expensive. It would be aufully stupid to not keep the gun in great shape.
ironchewsays
@ A Masked Avenger
I haven’t checked the body counts; what actually motivates me to say that is that Obama has explicitly adopted the doctrine that the President has the authority to unilaterally declare anyone (including American citizens, if that matters) an “enemy combatant” and then order their death. That and the fact that Obama actually “stepped up” the use of drones, performs “signature” killings without even knowing who it is that he’s killing. And the fact that he started a war in Libya not only without a declaration of Congress, but in fact defying an explicit declaration of non-war from Congress.
This, so much. The kill list, the drones, and the Obama administration’s widespread use of “state secrets” to shield the executive branch from any investigation by the judicial branch were the biggest reasons why I didn’t vote for Obama again in 2012. W may have started the two biggest conflicts we’ve been embroiled in recently, but they were/are Obama’s wars after 2009.
antepreprosays
Way to encourage killing sprees, caesar. Exactly what we would expect from you.
abusedbypenguinssays
“Happiness is a warm gun”, the Beatles.
antepreprosays
ironchew
W may have started the two biggest conflicts we’ve been embroiled in recently, but they were/are Obama’s wars after 2009.
Just like the recession was all Obama’s fault too. Because things are just so easy to change instantaneously!
caesarsays
@15:
Way to encourage killing sprees, caesar. Exactly what we would expect from you
Encouraging good gun maintenance = Encouraging killing sprees. Gotcha.
antepreprosays
Deliberately ignoring “because someone out there is wrong” in a comic about a gun, in order to cheekily talk about good maintenance, isn’t indicative of anything from someone who has previously shown to have absolutely no empathy for anyone. Gotcha.
Menyambalsays
A Masked Avenger, I don’t see that Physioproffe is claiming that ALL Republicans are evil filth, nor do I see that he speaks for anyone else. I do see you being passive-aggressive about nuance about everyone here.
ironchewsays
@ anteprepro
Just like the recession was all Obama’s fault too. Because things are just so easy to change instantaneously!
(I will preface this by saying I know the TARP bailout happened under George W. Bush and a Democratic-majority House and Senate, so no, I won’t say it’s all Obama’s fault.)
Insofar as the executive branch can share the blame for not properly enforcing the laws we had in place to jail bankers for pulling that shit, the Obama administration is at fault for its response to the financial crisis post-2009. Common-sense measures could have been taken like an executive order absolving debtors from their toxic mortgages, but we didn’t have that. The Obama administration could have pushed a Democratic-majority House and Senate to nationalize our banking systems and so prevent for-profits from screwing the nation over again. (The Republicans in the Senate would have filibustered, presumably, but Reid was able to change the filibuster rules at any time.) We didn’t have that. The Obama administration seemed far more concerned with the welfare of bank executives — the people who engineered this crisis in the first place. A lot of it was Congress’s fault, but the Obama administration shares some blame for kowtowing to Wall Street at every opportunity.
ironchew: Yes, because the economics of an entire nation is just completely common sense! It is so easy! So simple!
Do you understand that you are just backseat quarterbacking? The mirror image of right-wingers who think they actually have something worth saying just by thinking of the expenditures of an entire fucking country as if it were the same as a household budget?
(Much blame can be placed for Obama giving aid to the bankers instead of putting them in prison. That’s an issue separate to whether or not he is to blame for the recession that started due to Bush era deregulation and the economic costs of the wars that he started)
jessesays
@ironchew/ anteprepro
I can say this: giving $700 billion to the bankers was a bad idea. That money would have been better spent by even just buying every underwater home and leaving it at that. (That’s an indirect gift to bankers, but it keeps people in their homes and fees up a lot of money for ordinary folks to spend). Another good plan would have been — if they have to bail out someone — the auto makers, who employ more people directly and indirectly. The multiplier effect of service industries is always smaller than manufacturing, as any econ 101 student can tell you. Heck, even just handing out checks to all the laid-off workers would have been a huge economic boost comparatively speaking.
(If you don’t know the reason it’s simple: when I make a car, we have a car. That car can be used for economic activity, over and above all the parts I bought to build it. When I perform a service, like mowing a lawn, or running a hair salon, all I have is a nice hairdo or mowed lawn at the end. This is also a huge reason why extractive industries — oil, mining, etc. — are the most unprofitable businesses for the economy as a whole. See the concept of “value chain.”)
So no, I don’t think of it as a household budget. But I think Bush’s and later Obama’s continuation of the policy of seeking stability in finance at the expense of everything else was a bad idea.
Anyhoo. Yes, there’s room for nuance in the discussion. That said, what’s necessary then is for responsible sort-of-conservative folks to step up and say, “You know what? Second Amendment rights are all very well, but since guns are deadly we’ll withhold votes from people who think that little or no training at all is just dandy because they used a gun as a young teenager on the farm and therefore everyone is John McLane reincarnated.” It’s really that simple.
Ogvorbis: Still failing at being human.says
Saw a Jeep last night with a sticker in the window. The white outlines. The ones that people use to tell about their family. This one, though, instead of people, showed two military assault rifles (one larger, one smaller) and three handguns. Underneath read “This is MY family!”
Same general idea.
Doug Littlesays
I can say this: giving $700 billion to the bankers was a bad idea. That money would have been better spent by even just buying every underwater home and leaving it at that.
Well it was either that or have the whole financial system collapse which would have resulted in mass unemployment and bread lines.
Doug Littlesays
the recession that started due to Bush era deregulation and the economic costs of the wars that he started
I’d say it has more to do with poor regulation of wall street than anything else and not necessarily the sole fault of Bush as the banks have been lobbying for deregulation for decades before the GFC.
Doug Littlesays
As an interesting aside, sometimes regulation can have negative effects as well like Reg NMS giving HFT even more of an advantage compared to the rest of the market.
Looks like a responsible gun owner to me. Cleaning out your gun is very important. Wouldn’t want the gun to jam, endangering the user and others in the area. Besides, high quality guns are expensive. It would be aufully stupid to not keep the gun in great shape.
Are you trying to be humorous?
a_ray_in_dilbert_spacesays
I think there are some folks on here who need a civics lesson. The President does not control the purse strings. How many votes do you think a package to buy up all the underwater loans would have gotten? I can count maybe 5 in both houses. Obama has been a disappointment in many ways, but he did manage to navigate the biggest threat to the economy since the Great Depression. And he did it even though he had to work with a Congress that is 100% bought and paid for by the plutocracy.
If you want to really understand why things are fucked, ask yourself why the foreign policies of any 2nd term president so strongly resemble each other. Or don’t and keep wondering why nothing changes for the better.
A Masked Avengersays
David, #9:
What have you smoked, and can I get it legally in the Netherlands? NATO as a whole decided to enter an existing war.
Only the US President, as Commanding in Chief of the armed forces, can order US troops to invade Libya. NATO can’t. And he is only permitted to do so by the Constitution upon a declaration of war by the Congress. The President DID command the armed forces to attack Libya, but Congress DIDN’T declare war; in fact Congress explicitly voted NOT to authorize war.
Spin it all you like, but if this had been a Republican President they we would, quite rightly, scream for his head and accuse him of “shredding the Constitution.” I claim that Bush did shred the Constitution by lying us into Iraq, and using the generic “authorization of force” as if it were a declaration of war on whoever the fuck he wanted to bomb at the time–but ironically, Bush did try to cover himself with that slender fig leaf.
Spin all you want, but Obama’s conduct in Libya, not to mention is expansion of bombings in Yemen, Pakistan and Somalia, his increased use of drone killing, his use of “signature” killing, are all war crimes and crimes against humanity worthy of the Hague. When I broke completely with conservatism (shortly after the invasion of Iraq), and supported Obama on the strength of his promises to undo Bush’s criminal policies, I certainly didn’t bargain for a President who would continue and expand Bush’s policies, including vigorous defense of those policies in court through direct action and stonewalling with claims of privilege.
A Masked Avengersays
anteprepro, #10:
They’re almost exactly half the population, based on election results and various opinion polls.
And?
Uh, I SAID and what; are you reading challenged? If almost exactly half the population is as we paint often paint them, then we’re already fucked; game over; half the United States at least consists of hate-filled, sadistic, murderous cretins. Democracy should be abandoned, because such monsters should sure as fuck not have the vote. They should be disarmed, but also locked up. Attempts at persuasion, through blogs like this one, are a complete waste of time. We should be stirring up the other half of the populace to humanely capture those animals, spay or neuter them, and release them into the wild somewhere they can’t do any more harm.
Speaking of nuance, happen to notice that PZ isn’t Comrade Physioproffe…
Why, yes, now that you mention it! I should have said something to that effect in my comment. Oh, wait, fuckwit! I did: “I looked at this after reading the ‘recent’ headlines on FTB, including Physioproffe’s recurring reference to all things (R) as “filth” and “scumfuckes,” so that definitely put a context on my reaction [to your post].”
… or that the character depicted in this cartoon is in no ways implied to be representative of either all gun owners or all conservatives?
Disingenuous bullshit. Quote any reference to “gun fondlers,” anywhere in this blog, that suggests that a minority of gun owners are being singled out as the problem. Most of us, including PZ, support more or less complete elimination of firearms, or at least handguns, in civilian hands. Dialogue is impossible if you disrespect your interlocutors so much that you’re willing to say flat-out dishonest things.
What you have wrong in your logic is that, where Obama is worst, he is just like Bush. Where he is better, he is better. Just because he is as bad as Bush in some respects does not make that so overall.
Most of your comments fall under this heading: trying to justify mass murder by Obama on the grounds that (1) it’s not as bad as Bush’s mass murder, and (2) that he had no choice, because Bush painted him into a mass murdering corner.
If someone can be a mass murderer and still allowed a place at the table to make policy and guide the (heaven help us) most powerful nation on earth, then I don’t see why we’re whining about the likes of Shermer. After all, (1) the rapes he reportedly committed are not as severe as those committed by the Son of Sam, and (2) he didn’t create the misogynistic rape culture that forms his environment. He’s merely a product of his environment, and much less bad than some others who are worse.
*spits*
antepreprosays
A Masked Avenger:
Only the US President, as Commanding in Chief of the armed forces, can order US troops to invade Libya. NATO can’t.
Yes. The U.S. participating in a NATO operation, in an existing war, is “invading”. Is “starting a war”.
NUANCE!
, not to mention is expansion of bombings in Yemen, Pakistan and Somalia, his increased use of drone killing, his use of “signature” killing,
I’m sending redundancy in your complaints. You are one of the select few who talks about “drone killing” as if it is an inherent evil, right? Because somehow that is magically ethically distinct from regular ol’ bombings?
I agree with the meat of your points, honestly, but you’ve got to fucking tone it down because the sheer force of your otherwise justified righteous indignation is pushing you further from reality. Breathe and come back down for a little bit. And stop being a such a fucking hypocrite, accusing of being extremists and lacking nuance when immediately launching into hyperbolic tirades.
Doug Littlesays
@31,
Wot?
“And he is only permitted to do so by the Constitution upon a declaration of war by the Congress”
Nope. The War Powers Resolution of 1973 (50 U.S.C. 1541-1548)
Well it was either that or have the whole financial system collapse which would have resulted in mass unemployment and bread lines.
At least, that’s what the bankers said in their testimony. Other people disagreed with them, even at the time, but what do they know? They’re not bankers.
This thread is an excellent example of why I have come to distrust Democratic apologists so thoroughly — since Obama is absolutely indefensible on military funding, drone bombing, “signature” killing, executive branch assassination of absolutely anyone at will, immigration, state secrets, his continued defense of the NSA’s spying, his prosecution of whistleblowers, his embrace of the misleadingly-named “clean” coal industry and the Keystone pipeline, the fact that he (deliberately, according to people involved in the process) screwed up the healthcare “reform”… since he can’t possibly be defended on those issues at all, they wait for someone to mention the economics and then change the discussion into “but it all started with Bush, surely you must be wrong about Obama because he couldn’t have stopped the initial problems”. Which is both dishonest on its face and also conveniently ignores the fact that Obama’s economic actions have not been an improvement on those of Bush. He surrounded himself with bankers, has refused to prosecute almost anyone for malfeasance (number of banker C-level personnel going to jail for dishonest dealing: 1 — and he has been sentenced to fewer months than Chelsea Manning was sentenced to years), was happy to pass a “stimulus” which was mostly tax breaks to the wealthy and then claimed it as a victory when the wealthy absorbed more than 100% of the actual benefit to the economy, stocked his Deficit Commission with people who were known to embrace Austerity for social programs and gave speeches telling us how important it was to cut spending to balance the budget (a pity he couldn’t have given some speeches in favor of Single Payer or the Public Option in the healthcare “reform” — of course, he was trying to choke those two things off, so that’s not really a surprise).
Seriously, you Obama defenders? You obviously live under a rock or something, because otherwise you couldn’t possibly be defending him. Please go back to wherever it is that you live which is so obviously not connected to the Internet and stop telling us how great he is, okay?
antepreprosays
Masked Avenger:
Uh, I SAID and what; are you reading challenged? If almost exactly half the population is as we paint often paint them, then we’re already fucked; game over;
And I already refuted that inane nihilistic little crap. Congrats on keeping up the hypocrisy trend though. “Reading challenged”. By god, I love that now the “read for comprehension” meme that was once used against trolls is now being used unironically by trolls, right out of the gates.
“I looked at this after reading the ‘recent’ headlines on FTB, including Physioproffe’s recurring reference to all things (R) as “filth” and “scumfuckes,” so that definitely put a context on my reaction [to your post].”
Great, that changes nothing. You are still criticizing PZ for things he didn’t say. You’re still imaging PZ saying something and than trying your damndest to refute your imagination.
Quote any reference to “gun fondlers,” anywhere in this blog, that suggests that a minority of gun owners are being singled out as the problem.
Quote any reference to gun fondlers that suggests that all conservatives and/or all gun owners are gun fondlers. Please. You are the one who made the claim. It is not on me to prove the negative. Be a good lil skeptic now. Give me your Nuance.
Most of your comments fall under this heading: trying to justify mass murder by Obama on the grounds that (1) it’s not as bad as Bush’s mass murder, and (2) that he had no choice, because Bush painted him into a mass murdering corner.
Most of your comments fall under the heading of pretending to be oh so righteous and then being deliberately obtuse about the nature of the wars that Obama inherited. Because MASS MURDER OMG!!!!
But NUANCE.
Go fuck yourself, you disingenuous assclown.
antepreprosays
Vicar
ince Obama is absolutely indefensible on military funding, drone bombing, “signature” killing, executive branch assassination of absolutely anyone at will, immigration, state secrets, his continued defense of the NSA’s spying, his prosecution of whistleblowers, his embrace of the misleadingly-named “clean” coal industry and the Keystone pipeline, the fact that he (deliberately, according to people involved in the process) screwed up the healthcare “reform”… since he can’t possibly be defended on those issues at all, they wait for someone to mention the economics and then change the discussion into “but it all started with Bush, surely you must be wrong about Obama because he couldn’t have stopped the initial problems”.
So your complaints then are budgets for bombing, bombing, bombing, bombing, immigration, secrets, wiretaps, secrets and wiretaps, support of coal and oil, and Obamacare. Oh…kay. For one, nice to see that both of the rabid Obama detractors managed to somehow forget about the fact that the Obama administration is still supporting torture and is still keeping Gitmo open. Strange. And fantastic that you drag Obamacare into this because that is a fantastic case of how Obama’s policies aren’t really his own. Did you notice the opposition to Obamacare? The behavior of Congress? How long it took to pass the thing and implement? The number of changes the policies had to go through? No, of course not. You are as mindless of an ideologue as any right-winger. Just because you are a no-winger doesn’t make you an independent thinker. Just a pro tip, for future consideration.
Doug Littlesays
@35,
The bankers would be the experts on the financial industry now wouldn’t they. Who disagreed with them and what was their solution to the problem?
Doug Littlesays
@35,
I’m not really feeling the love for Obama that you perceive exists here on this thread.
Nick Gottssays
Speaking of nuance, happen to notice that PZ isn’t Comrade Physioproffe – anteprepro@10
I wonder how many people here ever read Comrade Physioproffe? I can’t stand him myself – quite apart from the “lack of nuance”, the silly misspelling affectations are enough to keep me away from his blog.
Nick Gottssays
A Masked Avenger@10,
If almost exactly half the population is as we paint often paint them,
Who is this “we” you apparently speak for?
then we’re already fucked; game over; half the United States at least consists of hate-filled, sadistic, murderous cretins.
Well, you give up if you want, I don’t think your contributions will be much missed. Me, I’ll keep trying.
Democracy should be abandoned
Well maybe it should be tried first.
antepreprosays
Doug Little: That was my reaction too. Vicar must have concluded that any defense against anti Obama hyperbole must be because we are attempting to prove that Obama is the greatest thing Abe Lincoln and the greatest president since sliced bread. No, pretty much no one here thinks that. And they both know this. Yet they pretend otherwise any way. Because that’s how nuance works I guess.
Ichthyicsays
Well, you give up if you want, I don’t think your contributions will be much missed. Me, I’ll keep trying.
what, exactly, are you trying Nick?
Ichthyicsays
Uh, I SAID and what; are you reading challenged? If almost exactly half the population is as we paint often paint them, then we’re already fucked; game over; half the United States at least consists of hate-filled, sadistic, murderous cretins. Democracy should be abandoned, because such monsters should sure as fuck not have the vote. They should be disarmed, but also locked up. Attempts at persuasion, through blogs like this one, are a complete waste of time. We should be stirring up the other half of the populace to humanely capture those animals, spay or neuter them, and release them into the wild somewhere they can’t do any more harm.
Dad: “I’m afraid it’s FEMA camps for the lot of ya.”
kids: “Awwwwww.”
Ichthyicsays
he had no choice, because Bush painted him into a mass murdering corner.
I’m having some very odd images of what that would look like popping into my head.
something tending towards the end scene in “Scarface” where Al Pacino is the only one of his crew left and the rest of the cartel is closing in for the kill.
…except it’s Obama, and instead of a machine gun, he’s holding the remote control joystick for a drone.
I can say this: giving $700 billion to the bankers was a bad idea. That money would have been better spent by even just buying every underwater home and leaving it at that.
Well it was either that or have the whole financial system collapse which would have resulted in mass unemployment and bread lines.
Well, that would have only been around 2,333 dollar per person, if they just gave every one an equal share. If they had handed it out to just mortgage owners… not sure. But, if you then added in the cost of a couple of stupid assed wars, it would be more like $10,000 per person, just for Iraq. Imagine if we had had a financial crisis, but no war, and they had just bought off the people, instead of the banks, using the same amount of money as that one war cost…
That said.. I am kind of two minds about this. Yeah, the last time we didn’t bail out banks, we had a vastly worse recession. But, there ***should have been*** real costs/punishments doled out to the people responsible, not the whole slap on the wrist, then argue for months, until everyone forgot about how nearly disastrous it was, over what, if anything at all, needed to be done to either prosecute anyone, or stop it happening again, which did happen instead.
Obama was, and I very much blame him for this, in his, “Gosh! Golly, if I just kiss enough ass, maybe they will like me and work with me on stuff!”, phase at that time. It wouldn’t have mattered what the hell he really wanted, because he hadn’t yet gotten the message that there wasn’t anything at all that certain people would, even then, let him do, suggest, pass, etc. It took him practically his whole first term to work that one out, and by then, he had lost any chance at all of getting anyone on the opposition to take him seriously, and most of the support from the rest. The only reason, I suspect, most people, who where not totally deluding themselves, voted for him a second time is that they saw the clown car coming, from the other side, and decided, “Better the idiot we have, then the cast of Killer Klowns From the Tea Party.
A Masked Avengersays
The “nuance” here, anteprepro, is that you have twice now classified me with the conservative trolls that wander through, AND continue to blame Bush for Obama’s continuation AND EXPANSION of his policies–and I haven’t mentioned his bailouts for billionaires, his out-of-control war on whistleblowers, his continuation of the torture regime, or his vote for telecom immunity or his complicity in the all-pervasive NSA surveillance state.
You DID mention my failure to mention Gitmo, insinuating that I’m a supporter of the torture regime, though. I didn’t mention it because I picked mass murder as my focus, not his crimes more generally. You also referred to obsessional hatred of Obama, although I already included Bush in my indictment. I didn’t mention Clintin lying us into war in Bosnia, or Bush Sr. green-lighting the invasion of Kuwait before in turn invading Iraq, etc., because those are less topical and smaller in scale than Bush and Obama’s crimes, but you had ample evidence that it’s nothing specific to Obama. Nuance.
You’ve done a good job illustrating that your anger and hate are blunt instruments, which was my original point: you quickly turn on friends, allies or well wishers, accusing them of being right wing trolls (or at least pro-torture obsessive Obama-hating trolls). And you resort to paper-thin justifications of ongoing mass murder (of dark-skinned foreigners far away, of course) to dispel your cognitive dissonance at opposing mass murder while supporting a mass murderer; you do nothing to oppose the mass-murder culture in general, or any mass murderer in particular that agrees with you on other matters.
Don’t worry, I’ve seen this before. Remember, I’m a deconverted fundie. Schismatics, who don’t know who their friends are, who resort to extreme contortions to avoid cognitive dissonance–check, check, and check. You are pretty much everyone I’ve ever known before I deconverted.
caesar @13:
You clearly don’t understand the comic. Try again with your reading comprehension goggles on you libertarian-like fuckwit.
Doug Littlesays
Kagehi @47,
But, there ***should have been*** real costs/punishments doled out to the people responsible, not the whole slap on the wrist, then argue for months, until everyone forgot about how nearly disastrous it was, over what, if anything at all, needed to be done to either prosecute anyone, or stop it happening again, which did happen instead.
Yep completely agree but it would have been hard to prosecute anybody as the individuals really didn’t do anything legally wrong, morally wrong yeah sure but you can’t prosecute that and morally wrong pretty much sums up the whole MO of wall street anyway. Dodd Frank was an attempt to stop it happening again, unfortunately it had to pass through congress and we all know what happens to legislation there.
antepreprosays
Okay, A Masked Avenger. Since I need to spoon feed you.
1. I am not claiming that I have nuance, I am mocking you for hypocritically lacking it.
2. I classified you as the mirror image to a conservative troll, due to your over-the-top histrionics. Your arguments are obviously not right-wing.
3. You continue to lack nuance on the topic of reviling Obama merely for continuing the things that Bush started.’
4. I did not insinuate that you support torture, I was insinuating that you have set outrage talking points.
5. Your characterization of Obama as a “mass murderer” continues to also lack nuance. Every war and every police action is mass murder.
6. Contrary to your claim, I have absolutely no evidence that your rabid opposition to Obama is anything but specific to Obama. Even now, you handwave away Bush and Clinton.
7. Great job on using mind-reading abilities regarding hate and anger. You aren’t new to Pharyngula. I have no reason to believe but you are doing but being deliberately dishonest.
8. See points 2, 4, and 7 for evidence for this conclusion: You are being paranoid.
9. Your clear insinuation that I am racist is noted.
10. You vastly over estimate how much I actually support Obama.
11. You claim that I don’t oppose “mass murder culture” based on absolutely no evidence at all. Admitting that virtually anyone who becomes commander in chief in America, especially in the middle of Bush’s wars, will become a “mass murderer” does not mean I don’t oppose it.
You are either stupid, a liar, or both. Make your choice.
Ichthyicsays
I can say this: giving $700 billion to the bankers was a bad idea. That money would have been better spent by even just buying every underwater home and leaving it at that.
actually, it was a time tested response to mitigate severe recession historically, that governments would feed the central banks cash, which were then supposed to invest it in small businesses and infrastructure.
It worked for well over 100 years.
but THIS time, when the central banks were fed money, their investors all told the directors of those banks they would make more money on it in the bonds market.
oops.
things would have been a LOT better if people in general weren’t so fucking selfish and stupid, and had just followed the established game plan.
nobody in any major government ever thought there NEEDED to be regulation of what banks did with reserve money given to them for this purpose. I guess the reasoning was that nobody would be that stupid to ignore the long term economic gains for short term profits.
now, because of that short term profit grab, the global economy will suffer for another 40-50 years (most estimates I have heard).
people who think capitalism is just greed and self interest are just fucking stupid, and should NOT be allowed to be investors, period.
The bankers would be the experts on the financial industry now wouldn’t they
I don’t really see where that follows, actually. Given that they’re the ones who ran it into the ground in the first place, they’re about the last people I’d go to for solutions.
. Who disagreed with them and what was their solution to the problem?
Loads of people, with widely varying solutions proposed. My preference would have been to charge the lot of them with under RICO, (that is to say the CEOs and financial officers of pretty much every major bank, and a lot of people under them as well), nationalize the banks, forgive about 90% of the mortgages of everyone who had a loan from those banks, use the payments to help out morgage holders who were with other institutions, and sell empty homes cheap on rent-to-own schemes to low-income people (and specifically to black people, who’ve been systematically shut out of home ownership for generations, and it’s about damn time there was some redress). Then they should’ve broken the banks assets up and set up credit unions among the former customers of the banks. It would’ve helped immensely, and would’ve had the side effect of making housing cheaper generally, which would’ve helped counteract the ridiculous housing rates from the bubble.
That’s just to start, mind; there’s a lot more they could and should have done, but that’s another post.
cksays
Ichthyic wrote:
people who think capitalism is just greed and self interest are just fucking stupid, and should NOT be allowed to be investors, period.
I’m not sure how pure capitalism isn’t exactly that. That’s more or less why most nations adopted hybrid economies, using capitalism where it could be beneficial, and using state-owned industries where they would work better.
That said, what’s necessary then is for responsible sort-of-conservative folks to step up and say, “You know what? Second Amendment rights are all very well, but since guns are deadly we’ll withhold votes from people who think that little or no training at all is just dandy because they used a gun as a young teenager on the farm and therefore everyone is John McLane reincarnated.” It’s really that simple.
What you’ve overlooked is that all such people left the Republican Party long ago; they’ve been voting Democratic for 10 to 40 years.
Except Schwarzenegger, who believes he’s a Republican because he’d fit pretty well into Austria’s conservative party – as would Obama, Kerry and both Clintons.
Only the US President, as Commanding in Chief of the armed forces, can order US troops to invade Libya. NATO can’t. And he is only permitted to do so by the Constitution upon a declaration of war by the Congress. The President DID command the armed forces to attack Libya, but Congress DIDN’T declare war; in fact Congress explicitly voted NOT to authorize war.
OK, I didn’t know that Congress voted not to authorize war; I thought there wasn’t a vote in the first place.
Still, joining an existing war isn’t starting a war. I’m really talking about that word you used.
I also don’t quite see why you single Obama out for a joint NATO decision.
…and finally, since I’m already vaguely applying to international law here, there should be a UN-level obligation to intervene militarily when a government kills a lot of civilians; not just when Gaddafi did it, but also when Assad started doing it (I almost wish there were more oil in Syria!), and when good old Saddam started doing it in 1988. (Invading in 2003 was just stupid.) But as long as each and every dictator has buddies among the permanent members of the Security Council, that isn’t gonna happen.
For the record, I’m decidedly not happy with the drones and the rest of the judge-jury-and-executioner thing, or even with shooting bin Laden first and asking questions later. But you didn’t bring any of that up.
Ichthyicsays
I’m not sure how pure capitalism isn’t exactly that.
have you even looked at the definition of the word “capitalism”?
maybe just start yourself with the wiki.
Nick Gottssays
Dalillama, Schmott Guy@53,
Wad are you, sum kinda cummunist?
.
.
.
.
Good suggestions!
Seriously, I can’t laugh.
[Bye, Abdul. –pzm]
It would have been funny if it weren’t so true. I suspect the main reason behind conservatives’ push to allow guns on college campuses, coupled with hideously broad stand – your – ground laws, is to enable wingnuts to intimidate faculty and fellow students, and perhaps even execute people on occasion for insulting Baby Jesus and fictional Founding Fathers by doing science or denouncing slavery or whatever.
There’s an alt-text!
“This is so wrong. I meant to say ‘guns'[,] not ‘gun’.”
There’s the old trope that guns don’t kill, people do. The problem is that gun culture seems to celebrate hair triggers. Not on the guns (well, maybe), but on the people with the guns.
I looked at this after reading the “recent” headlines on FTB, including Physioproffe’s recurring reference to all things (R) as “filth” and “scumfuckes,” so that definitely put a context on my reaction. I’ve mentioned before that I’m a recovered right-winger–so NOT a right-winger, and well aware of ways in which I think they’re wrong, but equally well aware that they are NOT “filth” or “scumfuckes” in general. They’re almost exactly half the population, based on election results and various opinion polls.
Yes, “nuance” is often a dirty word around here, and yes, there are valid uses for rhetorical extremism like, “half the country consists of scumfucke filthe with whom I’m heartily ashamed to be associated and who, though I don’t wish anyone actually dead, I do wish would stop consuming valuable oxygen best left to more productive uses.” But I do get kind of tired of it; if 50% of humanity really is a contemptible, racist, misogynist, mass-murder waiting to happen, then we’re good and fucked anyway, and we with progressive values are pure fools for even having these discussions when we should be hiding in the hills or giving up and joining monasteries.
Lots of people who vote conservative, do it because they agree with something or other in the conservative platform while disagreeing with plenty of other things, and they judge that, on balance, the conservatives represent them marginally better than the liberals. Exactly as we do when we vote “liberal”–where I put “liberal” in scare quotes because most of us voted for Obama, despite the fact that he’s substantively almost indistinguishable from Bush. We decided that, on balance, he might support some sort of useful gun legislation, that he would support social safety nets, etc., and most of us voted for him a second time despite knowing that he has proven to be every bit as much a mass-murderer as Bush was, and more. Are we mass-murdering scumfuckes? Obama is. And we support him. Therefore we are, right?
No, I don’t have a solution, and I get that rhetoric and even demagoguery have their uses, but ultimately demonizing half the population doesn’t seem like an effective strategy–and as a side effect, it feeds our hate for them. Overcoming hate with hate creates the usual paradox.
I’d like to see your figures behind that claim. I am overwhelmed by the wars that W started and killed so many that even if Obama was a killer, he wouldn’t come close to W’s numbers. But I’m just a The Daily Shower, never watching FoxNews for truth telling. Lost in Stewart’s satire so I don’t know real facts. Please share the facts I’m missing.
I haven’t checked the body counts; what actually motivates me to say that is that Obama has explicitly adopted the doctrine that the President has the authority to unilaterally declare anyone (including American citizens, if that matters) an “enemy combatant” and then order their death. That and the fact that Obama actually “stepped up” the use of drones, performs “signature” killings without even knowing who it is that he’s killing. And the fact that he started a war in Libya not only without a declaration of Congress, but in fact defying an explicit declaration of non-war from Congress.
What have you smoked, and can I get it legally in the Netherlands? NATO as a whole decided to enter an existing war.
A Masked Avenger:
And?
Precious.
Speaking of nuance, happen to notice that PZ isn’t Comrade Physioproffe, or that the character depicted in this cartoon is in no ways implied to be representative of either all gun owners or all conservatives?
Nuance: For Dissent purposes only.
Not all racism is created equal.
Not all misogyny is created equal.
A mass-murder waiting to happen can be stopped.
NUANCE!
i.e. they are stupid, not evil.
Thanks for that stunning and original insight.
Remind me again of when the Bush using government spending to stimulate the economy? Bush attempting to fix health care? Bush scaling down wars? Bush expanding gay rights? The Bush White House expressing concerns over sexual assault?
What you have wrong in your logic is that, where Obama is worst, he is just like Bush. Where he is better, he is better. Just because he is as bad as Bush in some respects does not make that so overall.
BAAAAAAW. If you don’t hate conservative politics, you are not paying attention.
“He’s just as much of a mass-murderer!”
“Pshaw, no, I didn’t check the numbers, lol!”
Obama derangement syndrome works on both the left and right, it seems.
Please, show your work. “Involved in Libya’s Civil War” =/= “Starting a War in Libya”.
It’s called Fake Outrage and it’s legal everywhere
I particularly enjoyed how he is drawn in such a way that he could either be polishing his gun or masturbating. It seems appropriate.
Looks like a responsible gun owner to me. Cleaning out your gun is very important. Wouldn’t want the gun to jam, endangering the user and others in the area. Besides, high quality guns are expensive. It would be aufully stupid to not keep the gun in great shape.
@ A Masked Avenger
This, so much. The kill list, the drones, and the Obama administration’s widespread use of “state secrets” to shield the executive branch from any investigation by the judicial branch were the biggest reasons why I didn’t vote for Obama again in 2012. W may have started the two biggest conflicts we’ve been embroiled in recently, but they were/are Obama’s wars after 2009.
Way to encourage killing sprees, caesar. Exactly what we would expect from you.
“Happiness is a warm gun”, the Beatles.
ironchew
Just like the recession was all Obama’s fault too. Because things are just so easy to change instantaneously!
@15:
Encouraging good gun maintenance = Encouraging killing sprees. Gotcha.
Deliberately ignoring “because someone out there is wrong” in a comic about a gun, in order to cheekily talk about good maintenance, isn’t indicative of anything from someone who has previously shown to have absolutely no empathy for anyone. Gotcha.
A Masked Avenger, I don’t see that Physioproffe is claiming that ALL Republicans are evil filth, nor do I see that he speaks for anyone else. I do see you being passive-aggressive about nuance about everyone here.
@ anteprepro
(I will preface this by saying I know the TARP bailout happened under George W. Bush and a Democratic-majority House and Senate, so no, I won’t say it’s all Obama’s fault.)
Insofar as the executive branch can share the blame for not properly enforcing the laws we had in place to jail bankers for pulling that shit, the Obama administration is at fault for its response to the financial crisis post-2009. Common-sense measures could have been taken like an executive order absolving debtors from their toxic mortgages, but we didn’t have that. The Obama administration could have pushed a Democratic-majority House and Senate to nationalize our banking systems and so prevent for-profits from screwing the nation over again. (The Republicans in the Senate would have filibustered, presumably, but Reid was able to change the filibuster rules at any time.) We didn’t have that. The Obama administration seemed far more concerned with the welfare of bank executives — the people who engineered this crisis in the first place. A lot of it was Congress’s fault, but the Obama administration shares some blame for kowtowing to Wall Street at every opportunity.
http://xkcd.com/386/ is the original, for anyone who’s interested.
ironchew: Yes, because the economics of an entire nation is just completely common sense! It is so easy! So simple!
Do you understand that you are just backseat quarterbacking? The mirror image of right-wingers who think they actually have something worth saying just by thinking of the expenditures of an entire fucking country as if it were the same as a household budget?
(Much blame can be placed for Obama giving aid to the bankers instead of putting them in prison. That’s an issue separate to whether or not he is to blame for the recession that started due to Bush era deregulation and the economic costs of the wars that he started)
@ironchew/ anteprepro
I can say this: giving $700 billion to the bankers was a bad idea. That money would have been better spent by even just buying every underwater home and leaving it at that. (That’s an indirect gift to bankers, but it keeps people in their homes and fees up a lot of money for ordinary folks to spend). Another good plan would have been — if they have to bail out someone — the auto makers, who employ more people directly and indirectly. The multiplier effect of service industries is always smaller than manufacturing, as any econ 101 student can tell you. Heck, even just handing out checks to all the laid-off workers would have been a huge economic boost comparatively speaking.
(If you don’t know the reason it’s simple: when I make a car, we have a car. That car can be used for economic activity, over and above all the parts I bought to build it. When I perform a service, like mowing a lawn, or running a hair salon, all I have is a nice hairdo or mowed lawn at the end. This is also a huge reason why extractive industries — oil, mining, etc. — are the most unprofitable businesses for the economy as a whole. See the concept of “value chain.”)
So no, I don’t think of it as a household budget. But I think Bush’s and later Obama’s continuation of the policy of seeking stability in finance at the expense of everything else was a bad idea.
Anyhoo. Yes, there’s room for nuance in the discussion. That said, what’s necessary then is for responsible sort-of-conservative folks to step up and say, “You know what? Second Amendment rights are all very well, but since guns are deadly we’ll withhold votes from people who think that little or no training at all is just dandy because they used a gun as a young teenager on the farm and therefore everyone is John McLane reincarnated.” It’s really that simple.
Saw a Jeep last night with a sticker in the window. The white outlines. The ones that people use to tell about their family. This one, though, instead of people, showed two military assault rifles (one larger, one smaller) and three handguns. Underneath read “This is MY family!”
Same general idea.
Well it was either that or have the whole financial system collapse which would have resulted in mass unemployment and bread lines.
I’d say it has more to do with poor regulation of wall street than anything else and not necessarily the sole fault of Bush as the banks have been lobbying for deregulation for decades before the GFC.
As an interesting aside, sometimes regulation can have negative effects as well like Reg NMS giving HFT even more of an advantage compared to the rest of the market.
@13
caesar
Are you trying to be humorous?
I think there are some folks on here who need a civics lesson. The President does not control the purse strings. How many votes do you think a package to buy up all the underwater loans would have gotten? I can count maybe 5 in both houses. Obama has been a disappointment in many ways, but he did manage to navigate the biggest threat to the economy since the Great Depression. And he did it even though he had to work with a Congress that is 100% bought and paid for by the plutocracy.
If you want to really understand why things are fucked, ask yourself why the foreign policies of any 2nd term president so strongly resemble each other. Or don’t and keep wondering why nothing changes for the better.
David, #9:
Only the US President, as Commanding in Chief of the armed forces, can order US troops to invade Libya. NATO can’t. And he is only permitted to do so by the Constitution upon a declaration of war by the Congress. The President DID command the armed forces to attack Libya, but Congress DIDN’T declare war; in fact Congress explicitly voted NOT to authorize war.
Spin it all you like, but if this had been a Republican President they we would, quite rightly, scream for his head and accuse him of “shredding the Constitution.” I claim that Bush did shred the Constitution by lying us into Iraq, and using the generic “authorization of force” as if it were a declaration of war on whoever the fuck he wanted to bomb at the time–but ironically, Bush did try to cover himself with that slender fig leaf.
Spin all you want, but Obama’s conduct in Libya, not to mention is expansion of bombings in Yemen, Pakistan and Somalia, his increased use of drone killing, his use of “signature” killing, are all war crimes and crimes against humanity worthy of the Hague. When I broke completely with conservatism (shortly after the invasion of Iraq), and supported Obama on the strength of his promises to undo Bush’s criminal policies, I certainly didn’t bargain for a President who would continue and expand Bush’s policies, including vigorous defense of those policies in court through direct action and stonewalling with claims of privilege.
anteprepro, #10:
Uh, I SAID and what; are you reading challenged? If almost exactly half the population is as we paint often paint them, then we’re already fucked; game over; half the United States at least consists of hate-filled, sadistic, murderous cretins. Democracy should be abandoned, because such monsters should sure as fuck not have the vote. They should be disarmed, but also locked up. Attempts at persuasion, through blogs like this one, are a complete waste of time. We should be stirring up the other half of the populace to humanely capture those animals, spay or neuter them, and release them into the wild somewhere they can’t do any more harm.
Why, yes, now that you mention it! I should have said something to that effect in my comment. Oh, wait, fuckwit! I did: “I looked at this after reading the ‘recent’ headlines on FTB, including Physioproffe’s recurring reference to all things (R) as “filth” and “scumfuckes,” so that definitely put a context on my reaction [to your post].”
Disingenuous bullshit. Quote any reference to “gun fondlers,” anywhere in this blog, that suggests that a minority of gun owners are being singled out as the problem. Most of us, including PZ, support more or less complete elimination of firearms, or at least handguns, in civilian hands. Dialogue is impossible if you disrespect your interlocutors so much that you’re willing to say flat-out dishonest things.
Most of your comments fall under this heading: trying to justify mass murder by Obama on the grounds that (1) it’s not as bad as Bush’s mass murder, and (2) that he had no choice, because Bush painted him into a mass murdering corner.
If someone can be a mass murderer and still allowed a place at the table to make policy and guide the (heaven help us) most powerful nation on earth, then I don’t see why we’re whining about the likes of Shermer. After all, (1) the rapes he reportedly committed are not as severe as those committed by the Son of Sam, and (2) he didn’t create the misogynistic rape culture that forms his environment. He’s merely a product of his environment, and much less bad than some others who are worse.
*spits*
A Masked Avenger:
Yes. The U.S. participating in a NATO operation, in an existing war, is “invading”. Is “starting a war”.
NUANCE!
I’m sending redundancy in your complaints. You are one of the select few who talks about “drone killing” as if it is an inherent evil, right? Because somehow that is magically ethically distinct from regular ol’ bombings?
I agree with the meat of your points, honestly, but you’ve got to fucking tone it down because the sheer force of your otherwise justified righteous indignation is pushing you further from reality. Breathe and come back down for a little bit. And stop being a such a fucking hypocrite, accusing of being extremists and lacking nuance when immediately launching into hyperbolic tirades.
@31,
Wot?
“And he is only permitted to do so by the Constitution upon a declaration of war by the Congress”
Nope. The War Powers Resolution of 1973 (50 U.S.C. 1541-1548)
@Doug Little:
At least, that’s what the bankers said in their testimony. Other people disagreed with them, even at the time, but what do they know? They’re not bankers.
This thread is an excellent example of why I have come to distrust Democratic apologists so thoroughly — since Obama is absolutely indefensible on military funding, drone bombing, “signature” killing, executive branch assassination of absolutely anyone at will, immigration, state secrets, his continued defense of the NSA’s spying, his prosecution of whistleblowers, his embrace of the misleadingly-named “clean” coal industry and the Keystone pipeline, the fact that he (deliberately, according to people involved in the process) screwed up the healthcare “reform”… since he can’t possibly be defended on those issues at all, they wait for someone to mention the economics and then change the discussion into “but it all started with Bush, surely you must be wrong about Obama because he couldn’t have stopped the initial problems”. Which is both dishonest on its face and also conveniently ignores the fact that Obama’s economic actions have not been an improvement on those of Bush. He surrounded himself with bankers, has refused to prosecute almost anyone for malfeasance (number of banker C-level personnel going to jail for dishonest dealing: 1 — and he has been sentenced to fewer months than Chelsea Manning was sentenced to years), was happy to pass a “stimulus” which was mostly tax breaks to the wealthy and then claimed it as a victory when the wealthy absorbed more than 100% of the actual benefit to the economy, stocked his Deficit Commission with people who were known to embrace Austerity for social programs and gave speeches telling us how important it was to cut spending to balance the budget (a pity he couldn’t have given some speeches in favor of Single Payer or the Public Option in the healthcare “reform” — of course, he was trying to choke those two things off, so that’s not really a surprise).
Seriously, you Obama defenders? You obviously live under a rock or something, because otherwise you couldn’t possibly be defending him. Please go back to wherever it is that you live which is so obviously not connected to the Internet and stop telling us how great he is, okay?
Masked Avenger:
And I already refuted that inane nihilistic little crap. Congrats on keeping up the hypocrisy trend though. “Reading challenged”. By god, I love that now the “read for comprehension” meme that was once used against trolls is now being used unironically by trolls, right out of the gates.
Great, that changes nothing. You are still criticizing PZ for things he didn’t say. You’re still imaging PZ saying something and than trying your damndest to refute your imagination.
Quote any reference to gun fondlers that suggests that all conservatives and/or all gun owners are gun fondlers. Please. You are the one who made the claim. It is not on me to prove the negative. Be a good lil skeptic now. Give me your Nuance.
Most of your comments fall under the heading of pretending to be oh so righteous and then being deliberately obtuse about the nature of the wars that Obama inherited. Because MASS MURDER OMG!!!!
But NUANCE.
Go fuck yourself, you disingenuous assclown.
Vicar
So your complaints then are budgets for bombing, bombing, bombing, bombing, immigration, secrets, wiretaps, secrets and wiretaps, support of coal and oil, and Obamacare. Oh…kay. For one, nice to see that both of the rabid Obama detractors managed to somehow forget about the fact that the Obama administration is still supporting torture and is still keeping Gitmo open. Strange. And fantastic that you drag Obamacare into this because that is a fantastic case of how Obama’s policies aren’t really his own. Did you notice the opposition to Obamacare? The behavior of Congress? How long it took to pass the thing and implement? The number of changes the policies had to go through? No, of course not. You are as mindless of an ideologue as any right-winger. Just because you are a no-winger doesn’t make you an independent thinker. Just a pro tip, for future consideration.
@35,
The bankers would be the experts on the financial industry now wouldn’t they. Who disagreed with them and what was their solution to the problem?
@35,
I’m not really feeling the love for Obama that you perceive exists here on this thread.
I wonder how many people here ever read Comrade Physioproffe? I can’t stand him myself – quite apart from the “lack of nuance”, the silly misspelling affectations are enough to keep me away from his blog.
A Masked Avenger@10,
Who is this “we” you apparently speak for?
Well, you give up if you want, I don’t think your contributions will be much missed. Me, I’ll keep trying.
Well maybe it should be tried first.
Doug Little: That was my reaction too. Vicar must have concluded that any defense against anti Obama hyperbole must be because we are attempting to prove that Obama is the greatest thing Abe Lincoln and the greatest president since sliced bread. No, pretty much no one here thinks that. And they both know this. Yet they pretend otherwise any way. Because that’s how nuance works I guess.
what, exactly, are you trying Nick?
Dad: “I’m afraid it’s FEMA camps for the lot of ya.”
kids: “Awwwwww.”
I’m having some very odd images of what that would look like popping into my head.
something tending towards the end scene in “Scarface” where Al Pacino is the only one of his crew left and the rest of the cartel is closing in for the kill.
…except it’s Obama, and instead of a machine gun, he’s holding the remote control joystick for a drone.
“Say hello to my little friend!”
All your Nuance are belong to us.
Well, that would have only been around 2,333 dollar per person, if they just gave every one an equal share. If they had handed it out to just mortgage owners… not sure. But, if you then added in the cost of a couple of stupid assed wars, it would be more like $10,000 per person, just for Iraq. Imagine if we had had a financial crisis, but no war, and they had just bought off the people, instead of the banks, using the same amount of money as that one war cost…
That said.. I am kind of two minds about this. Yeah, the last time we didn’t bail out banks, we had a vastly worse recession. But, there ***should have been*** real costs/punishments doled out to the people responsible, not the whole slap on the wrist, then argue for months, until everyone forgot about how nearly disastrous it was, over what, if anything at all, needed to be done to either prosecute anyone, or stop it happening again, which did happen instead.
Obama was, and I very much blame him for this, in his, “Gosh! Golly, if I just kiss enough ass, maybe they will like me and work with me on stuff!”, phase at that time. It wouldn’t have mattered what the hell he really wanted, because he hadn’t yet gotten the message that there wasn’t anything at all that certain people would, even then, let him do, suggest, pass, etc. It took him practically his whole first term to work that one out, and by then, he had lost any chance at all of getting anyone on the opposition to take him seriously, and most of the support from the rest. The only reason, I suspect, most people, who where not totally deluding themselves, voted for him a second time is that they saw the clown car coming, from the other side, and decided, “Better the idiot we have, then the cast of Killer Klowns From the Tea Party.
The “nuance” here, anteprepro, is that you have twice now classified me with the conservative trolls that wander through, AND continue to blame Bush for Obama’s continuation AND EXPANSION of his policies–and I haven’t mentioned his bailouts for billionaires, his out-of-control war on whistleblowers, his continuation of the torture regime, or his vote for telecom immunity or his complicity in the all-pervasive NSA surveillance state.
You DID mention my failure to mention Gitmo, insinuating that I’m a supporter of the torture regime, though. I didn’t mention it because I picked mass murder as my focus, not his crimes more generally. You also referred to obsessional hatred of Obama, although I already included Bush in my indictment. I didn’t mention Clintin lying us into war in Bosnia, or Bush Sr. green-lighting the invasion of Kuwait before in turn invading Iraq, etc., because those are less topical and smaller in scale than Bush and Obama’s crimes, but you had ample evidence that it’s nothing specific to Obama. Nuance.
You’ve done a good job illustrating that your anger and hate are blunt instruments, which was my original point: you quickly turn on friends, allies or well wishers, accusing them of being right wing trolls (or at least pro-torture obsessive Obama-hating trolls). And you resort to paper-thin justifications of ongoing mass murder (of dark-skinned foreigners far away, of course) to dispel your cognitive dissonance at opposing mass murder while supporting a mass murderer; you do nothing to oppose the mass-murder culture in general, or any mass murderer in particular that agrees with you on other matters.
Don’t worry, I’ve seen this before. Remember, I’m a deconverted fundie. Schismatics, who don’t know who their friends are, who resort to extreme contortions to avoid cognitive dissonance–check, check, and check. You are pretty much everyone I’ve ever known before I deconverted.
caesar @13:
You clearly don’t understand the comic. Try again with your reading comprehension goggles on you libertarian-like fuckwit.
Kagehi @47,
Yep completely agree but it would have been hard to prosecute anybody as the individuals really didn’t do anything legally wrong, morally wrong yeah sure but you can’t prosecute that and morally wrong pretty much sums up the whole MO of wall street anyway. Dodd Frank was an attempt to stop it happening again, unfortunately it had to pass through congress and we all know what happens to legislation there.
Okay, A Masked Avenger. Since I need to spoon feed you.
1. I am not claiming that I have nuance, I am mocking you for hypocritically lacking it.
2. I classified you as the mirror image to a conservative troll, due to your over-the-top histrionics. Your arguments are obviously not right-wing.
3. You continue to lack nuance on the topic of reviling Obama merely for continuing the things that Bush started.’
4. I did not insinuate that you support torture, I was insinuating that you have set outrage talking points.
5. Your characterization of Obama as a “mass murderer” continues to also lack nuance. Every war and every police action is mass murder.
6. Contrary to your claim, I have absolutely no evidence that your rabid opposition to Obama is anything but specific to Obama. Even now, you handwave away Bush and Clinton.
7. Great job on using mind-reading abilities regarding hate and anger. You aren’t new to Pharyngula. I have no reason to believe but you are doing but being deliberately dishonest.
8. See points 2, 4, and 7 for evidence for this conclusion: You are being paranoid.
9. Your clear insinuation that I am racist is noted.
10. You vastly over estimate how much I actually support Obama.
11. You claim that I don’t oppose “mass murder culture” based on absolutely no evidence at all. Admitting that virtually anyone who becomes commander in chief in America, especially in the middle of Bush’s wars, will become a “mass murderer” does not mean I don’t oppose it.
You are either stupid, a liar, or both. Make your choice.
actually, it was a time tested response to mitigate severe recession historically, that governments would feed the central banks cash, which were then supposed to invest it in small businesses and infrastructure.
It worked for well over 100 years.
but THIS time, when the central banks were fed money, their investors all told the directors of those banks they would make more money on it in the bonds market.
oops.
things would have been a LOT better if people in general weren’t so fucking selfish and stupid, and had just followed the established game plan.
nobody in any major government ever thought there NEEDED to be regulation of what banks did with reserve money given to them for this purpose. I guess the reasoning was that nobody would be that stupid to ignore the long term economic gains for short term profits.
now, because of that short term profit grab, the global economy will suffer for another 40-50 years (most estimates I have heard).
people who think capitalism is just greed and self interest are just fucking stupid, and should NOT be allowed to be investors, period.
Doug Little#35
I don’t really see where that follows, actually. Given that they’re the ones who ran it into the ground in the first place, they’re about the last people I’d go to for solutions.
Loads of people, with widely varying solutions proposed. My preference would have been to charge the lot of them with under RICO, (that is to say the CEOs and financial officers of pretty much every major bank, and a lot of people under them as well), nationalize the banks, forgive about 90% of the mortgages of everyone who had a loan from those banks, use the payments to help out morgage holders who were with other institutions, and sell empty homes cheap on rent-to-own schemes to low-income people (and specifically to black people, who’ve been systematically shut out of home ownership for generations, and it’s about damn time there was some redress). Then they should’ve broken the banks assets up and set up credit unions among the former customers of the banks. It would’ve helped immensely, and would’ve had the side effect of making housing cheaper generally, which would’ve helped counteract the ridiculous housing rates from the bubble.
That’s just to start, mind; there’s a lot more they could and should have done, but that’s another post.
Ichthyic wrote:
I’m not sure how pure capitalism isn’t exactly that. That’s more or less why most nations adopted hybrid economies, using capitalism where it could be beneficial, and using state-owned industries where they would work better.
I think we all know that :-)
What you’ve overlooked is that all such people left the Republican Party long ago; they’ve been voting Democratic for 10 to 40 years.
Except Schwarzenegger, who believes he’s a Republican because he’d fit pretty well into Austria’s conservative party – as would Obama, Kerry and both Clintons.
OK, I didn’t know that Congress voted not to authorize war; I thought there wasn’t a vote in the first place.
Still, joining an existing war isn’t starting a war. I’m really talking about that word you used.
I also don’t quite see why you single Obama out for a joint NATO decision.
…and finally, since I’m already vaguely applying to international law here, there should be a UN-level obligation to intervene militarily when a government kills a lot of civilians; not just when Gaddafi did it, but also when Assad started doing it (I almost wish there were more oil in Syria!), and when good old Saddam started doing it in 1988. (Invading in 2003 was just stupid.) But as long as each and every dictator has buddies among the permanent members of the Security Council, that isn’t gonna happen.
For the record, I’m decidedly not happy with the drones and the rest of the judge-jury-and-executioner thing, or even with shooting bin Laden first and asking questions later. But you didn’t bring any of that up.
have you even looked at the definition of the word “capitalism”?
maybe just start yourself with the wiki.
Dalillama, Schmott Guy@53,
Wad are you, sum kinda cummunist?
.
.
.
.
Good suggestions!