RationalWiki talk:What is going on in the world?/Archive13

This is an archive page, last updated 14 March 2013. Please do not make edits to this page.

Archives for this talk page:

<1>, <2>, <3>, <4>, <5>, <6>, <7>, <8>, <9>, <10>, <11>, <12>, <14>, <15>, <16>, <17>, <18>, <19>, <20>, <21>, <22>, <23>, <24>, <25>, <26>, <27>, <28>, <29>, <30>, <31>, <32>, <33>, <34>, <35>, <36>, <37>, <38>, <39>, <40>

, (new)(back)

Vote for Jesus!

Do you think people will actually do this...and whose vote will it split?

Furthermore, does voting for a candidate who is not a natural born United States citizen invalidate the entire ballot, or just that section (e.g., the vote counts as a vote, but not toward any legitimate candidate)? -- Seth Peck (talk) 16:46, 2 November 2012 (UTC)

That would depend on the state, though my guess is that it would only invalidate the vote for President. MDB ^{(the MD is for Maryland, the B is for Bear)} 16:48, 2 November 2012 (UTC)

Imagine the field day that neo-birthers would have if he got elected. Генгис^{RationalWiki GOLD member} 16:50, 2 November 2012 (UTC)

And the following disappointment that occurs when he doesn't show up on Inauguration Day for the swearing in, to take the oath of office over his own unofficial biography. -- Seth Peck (talk) 17:04, 2 November 2012 (UTC)

Oh, I'm sure they're look forward to someone like Michele Bachmann to swear the oath for him, and then pray every morning to find out what he's telling us to do for that day. --OverworldTheme (talk) 14:34, 4 November 2012 (UTC)

Would church donations be construed as campaign donations? -- Seth Peck (talk) 17:14, 2 November 2012 (UTC)

Which jesus can you vote for? Catholic jesus? Protsstan Jesus? or Jerry Springer Opera Jesus? AMassiveGay (talk) 19:59, 2 November 2012 (UTC)

When you fill out a ballot, no matter where in the US you are, each and every section is a separate issue. You can write "fuck off you commies", and your ballot is still valid, as long as your choices are clear. If you write in a name of Jesus, odds are you are right wing and would otherwise have voted for Romeny, so as an obama supporter, i say GO FOR IT. as an election offical i say "while you can do what you want, it isn't wise, cause most states use some form of scanner to read their ballots, and you never know when a missed mark will be read as a vote". --GodotCalibrated! let the voting begin! 20:38, 2 November 2012 (UTC)

Is this section about some story or something? It seems like its referring to....something I've never heard about. Theory of Practice Still tryin' to figure it all out. 21:24, 2 November 2012 (UTC)

It's on the WIGO:World. -- Seth Peck (talk) 21:26, 2 November 2012 (UTC)

What we need is for some nice Hispanic chap called Jesus (as I believe it is a not uncommon name in Latin America - good old "Hayzuss") to stand and pick up all these votes... DeltaStar_{Senior Sysop}^{Speciationspeed!} 22:03, 2 November 2012 (UTC)

Every year thousands of Floridians vote for Mickey Mouse. At least he was born in the US I guess. Ayzmo (talk) 19:18, 3 November 2012 (UTC)

The last of Todd Akin

Poll results

I looked at the poll about abortion at the bottom of the PuffHo article and was struck by the massive discrepancy between the votes from Puff readers compared with the more general poll. Генгис^{RationalWiki GOLD member} 09:32, 7 November 2012 (UTC)

The cream of the twitterati

I reckon that depressing shit should be moved to the Clogosphere Scherben 16:44, 7 November 2012 (UTC)

I'm inclined to agree. --PsyGremlin^Siarad! 16:46, 7 November 2012 (UTC)

A woman died in Ireland because she wasn't allowed an abortion.

Woman dies after abortion request 'refused' at Galway hospital
Women in Ireland who want an abortion can usually travel to Britain where abortion is easier to get. This was a wanted pregnancy but complications meant an abortion should have been done to save the mother's life. Apparently abortion would have been legal when the mother's life was in danger. Still finding out and enforcing your rights in a critical short time when your life is in danger isn't easy. Proxima Centauri (talk) 18:22, 14 November 2012 (UTC)

So are you going to WIGO it or is this just a random rant? I agree that it's an important issue and was going to mention it myself but please go ahead. Генгис^mutating 18:33, 14 November 2012 (UTC)

"Savages"

So someone who wants to see irrational, institutionalised murder fed through bullshit and propaganda can't be called a "savage" - solely because there's an unfortunate link between the word's history and the main racial demographic in Uganda. Got it. Polite Timesplitter ^{talk to me sugar, but best keep it on the}_down-low 15:49, 24 November 2012 (UTC)

Other words are available. Sophie^Wilder 17:39, 24 November 2012 (UTC)

It's official: Kentucky is defenseless [sic] without God.

Did anyone think to check the date on that article? 121.45.214.139 (talk) 11:59, 23 November 2012 (UTC)

Fiksed nao. --PsyGremlin^Snakk! 12:15, 23 November 2012 (UTC)

What's wrong with "defenseless"? -- Seth Peck (talk) 16:39, 26 November 2012 (UTC)

Mutiny against Norquist

I wish I could say this was encouraging, but the three politicos named in the article are all no shock. Lindsay Graham represents the easy senatorial collegiality that modern voters despise (GOPers prefer hyperpartisanship, and Democrats resent the quasi-aristocracy), Saxby Chambliss has no honor, so I'm not surprised he wants to back out the instant it gets hard to keep his promise. Peter King is a paranoiac, and probably wishes to raise taxes to increase funding for the Departments of Defense and Homeland Security -money is no object, when you're demanding Muslims give loyalty oaths. --TheLateGatsby (talk) 17:39, 26 November 2012 (UTC)

There are those in 'Merica who state, probably wisely, that when it comes to single issues, you take your allies where you can get them, even if you disagree on other fronts. A good example would be the common areas of agreement between, say, Jared Polis and Ron Paul, even though the reasoning behind the agreements are vastly different. I for one welcome anyone with brains enough to say, "hmm, maybe following the obstructionist philosophies being sold to us by lobbyists is not the way to get things done in government after all", even if I can't get them to dispose of their racism or penchant for Michael Vick-style dog-fighting. -- Seth Peck (talk) 17:50, 26 November 2012 (UTC)

Well, if it's realpolitik at play, then I'm just stating the obvious -its only a matter of time before the stab in the back. I predict Chambliss is angling for a bribe from Norquist, and is not serious about this. --TheLateGatsby (talk) 18:26, 26 November 2012 (UTC)

I believe in the theory that ceteris paribus, lower marginal tax rates promote economic activity. That being said, the tax burden for wage earners (i.e. income earned not from investing) is highest between $35,000 and $100,000 (depending on personal circumstances), due to the FICA tax and income tax credit phaseouts. Mr. Norquist's rule prevents fixing this inefficiency in our tax code, which is in my opinion, the prime reason we have stratification between the classes, and not that strong of a middle class. Considering income tax phaseouts, a person making $60,000 to $70,000 can have an effective tax rate of 75% if his or her student loan interest deduction is phased out.

By the constraints of Mr. Norquist's pledge, this country is precluded from reforming our tax code to make it more efficient and mathematically friendly. President Obama's plan is not right for this country either (it does not attempt to balance the budget in a meaningful way, and it does not fix substantively major issues in our tax code, namely high middle class taxes and high business taxes.) FlamingModerate (talk) 05:21, 27 November 2012 (UTC)

Ban on women speakers

RE: http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/2012/12/04/bristol-university-christian-union-ban-women-speaking-meetings_n_2236586.html

I should note that shit like this is why Christian Unions aren't generally ratified student union (SU) societies. They're all centrally funded and ran by the Universities and Colleges Christian Fellowship (UCCF) and so, technically, independent of any university. Consider this quote for instance: "After a lot of time exploring this issue, seeking God’s wisdom on it and discussing it together as a committee, we made a decision about women teaching in a CU setting." This is actually what they do instead of holding democratic decision making processes. Usually SU societies require open voting for the people running the group, but the CUs tend to sit around and "pray" instead. Combine this with crazy evangelism and casual (though not widely publicised and not "officially" endorsed) homophobia and racism, and most students actually see the CU as more like a bunch of CU Next Thursdays. ^theist 17:25, 4 December 2012 (UTC)

Heh! used your words at 'em Armond: here Scream!! (talk) 18:08, 4 December 2012 (UTC)

In this case it appears they are SU-funded - the SU has been made very aware of the issue and has said they're taking it very seriously - David Gerard (talk) 22:36, 4 December 2012 (UTC)

RE First amendment upheld

I don't think they should allow either of the two plates. By that same logic, intelligent design should be taught in schools and there should be a white awareness month. Am I right? Or is my ADHD manifesting in really off kilter thoughts today?--P3A58NT86 21:44, 10 December 2012 (UTC)

"White Awareness" month is completely unrelated to the topic at hand. The issue was that NC had allowed a "Choose Life" plate to donate funds to a religious organization, which violates the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment. Saying that a pro-choice plate would be an equal violation is actually false; if those funds went to, say, Planned Parenthood, which is not a religious organization, they would have been met with a few petitions from pissed fundies, but such funding does NOT support an established religion.

Colorado has a "Respect Life" plate which has nothing to do with abortion (it has a Columbine on it...figure it out). --Seth Peck (talk) 22:37, 10 December 2012 (UTC)

The Atheist Experience

TAE mentioned us on this week's show (Matt Dillahunty recommended a called to check out the article on Ron Wyatt). Does Matt edit here? That'd be cool if he did, although I know he runs Iron Chariots too. --Sasayaki (talk) 11:19, 11 December 2012 (UTC)

Link? Humorless fascist^sociopath 14:22, 11 December 2012 (UTC)

Whoops, should have included that: http://www.ustream.tv/recorded/27617300 --Sasayaki (talk) 01:09, 12 December 2012 (UTC)

Udinese

Sorry. Nice story and everything, but I have to vote it down. For mentioning that fucking song. Toffeeman (talk) 18:30, 13 December 2012 (UTC)

Agree fully with toffeeman. Fuck the Kop twats. MUFC MUFC MUFC MUFC Scherben 13:58, 14 December 2012 (UTC)

Oh, a Man U fan. How's Surrey? Sophie^Wilder 18:29, 14 December 2012 (UTC)

Hahahahahahahahahahahaha; I only have so many ribs, Noel Coward; what a genuinely original wit you are. Manchester is Red, and I'm a Manc. Not that I have to justify my fucking support for United Scherben 18:54, 14 December 2012 (UTC)

Dragging who into the twenty first century?

A family who claims their authority comes directly from God brings in a decorative human brood mare to make sure their gene pool doesn't get too stale. She does her job and gets pregnant so she's immediately carted off to hospital - not the same kind of hospital as the plebs, mind - to ensure her precious little cargo of historical importance doesn't miscarry. And we're supposed to be impressed because said family and its sycophants among the most destructive government in living British memory are going to allow a possible girlchild the same right to perpetuate this offensive nonsense? Fuck off. London Grump (talk) 19:33, 4 December 2012 (UTC)

When I saw this on HP yesterday, all I could think was "I suppose we should spend the next nine months giving full attention and focus to two people who can do something very special...completely not unique to the vast majority of about 3 billion other people in the world." --Seth Peck (talk) 20:08, 4 December 2012 (UTC)

She was carted off to hospital for hyperemesis, which is not ordinary morning sickness but morning sickness so acute you can't keep water down - it is actually a medical emergency for which hospitalisation is appropriate. It's not a case of "too posh for morning sickness" - there was an actual hospital-worthy problem here - David Gerard (talk) 20:24, 4 December 2012 (UTC)

Well, it's not as if she's taking time off work - because she doesn't do any, she sponges off the rest of us. OK, it's hospital-worthy; if she wasn't carrying the spawn of space lizards, would it be newsworthy? London Grump (talk) 22:09, 4 December 2012 (UTC)

Oh, absolutely - I'm noting that if it were anyone else, they too would be in hospital for it and that that bit is in no way excessive - David Gerard (talk) 22:35, 4 December 2012 (UTC)

Fucking parasites grinning in feudal splendour, whilst the poor are slowly killed by these fuckers. FUCK 'EM Scherben 20:10, 6 December 2012 (UTC)

No no no, we're all in it together, didn't you follow the narrative on the Davey and Nicky show? They're Compassionate Conservatives now - reading you soothing stories about "aspirational culture" and "alarm clock Britain" whilst they kick you to the floor, loot your house then rape your grandmother. And they even scrapped top rate income tax for the Wealth Creators, what more could we possibly want from our Lords and Masters? God save them and all who sail to the Caymen Islands! --Llegar a las estrellas^¿Dígame? 09:41, 7 December 2012 (UTC)

Perhaps they could just abolish the monarchy wholesale and drag themselves into the late 18th century. — Unsigned, by: ORavenhurst / talk^{Do You Believe That?} 14:35, 7 December 2012 (UTC)

So, when did the queen mother piss in your cornflakes to make you hate the family so much? If you think some sort of presdental system will make things any better well, I got a bridge to France to sell you. --Revolverman (talk) 00:21, 16 December 2012 (UTC)

"Usurped"

Can we get rid of the "Columbine usurped" part of the Conn. school shooting WIGO? I know that's not what was intended, but it really makes it sound like we're running a contest. MDB ^{(the MD is for Maryland, the B is for Bear)} 18:19, 14 December 2012 (UTC)

"Surpassed"? ^sshole 18:22, 14 December 2012 (UTC)

I mean, I know it shouldn't be a competition, but if that count is accurate and goes higher than Columbine that's very notable. ^narchist 18:23, 14 December 2012 (UTC)

I put "nearly double." Osaka Sun (talk) 18:24, 14 December 2012 (UTC)

I'd rather not see a comparison to Columbine at all, but I'll acknowledge that's probably over-sensitive on my part. "Nearly double" works. MDB ^{(the MD is for Maryland, the B is for Bear)} 18:27, 14 December 2012 (UTC)

Two bullied high school kids killing other high schoolers and teachers, vs. an adult killing his mom, teachers and many children at an elementary school. I don't think ANY mention of Columbine is appropriate. --Seth Peck (talk) 22:08, 14 December 2012 (UTC)

From this side of the Atlantic, it's another senseless American school shooting. The connection is implicit in the word "another".London Grump (talk) 19:20, 15 December 2012 (UTC)

I live 30 miles away from the killing. Ask me about local culture.

Especially politics. EddieMonah (talk) 19:47, 14 December 2012 (UTC)

So. What about the local culture? How are the politics there? Theory of Practice "Now we stand outcast and starving 'mid the wonders we have made." 20:04, 14 December 2012 (UTC)

Very affluent, white, and swing-statey, to start. Osaka Sun (talk) 20:14, 14 December 2012 (UTC)

Because Merkins won't introduce gun control they will continue to reap what they have sown. Obama: "The majority of those who died today were children - beautiful little kids between the ages of 5 and 10 years old. They had their entire lives ahead of them - birthdays, graduations, weddings, kids of their own... And we're going to have to come together and take meaningful action to prevent more tragedies like this, regardless of the politics." Meaningful action short of gun control... Empty rhetoric from the lame-duck president of the incarceration capital of the world. 80.3.69.176 (talk) 22:00, 14 December 2012 (UTC)

Connecticut hasn't been a swing state since 1888. Also, the word lame duck doesn't mean what you think it means, BoN.--Seth Peck (talk) 22:11, 14 December 2012 (UTC)

You need to learn that Wikipedia is not the fount of all knowledge. 80.3.69.176 (talk) 22:20, 14 December 2012 (UTC)

You need to learn some humility. Occasionaluse (talk) 22:28, 14 December 2012 (UTC)

Pot, kettle, black. I wasn't the one wading in here attempting to intellectually brow-beat and shout down anyone else. You need to learn to mind your own fucking business, perhaps? 80.3.69.176 (talk) 22:32, 14 December 2012 (UTC)

I'm just saying, what a douche response, especially when you're wrong. A lame duck doesn't think what you (or the guardian) think it means. Maybe it means something different in the UK. Maybe you're just a fucking asshole. I don't care to distinguish anymore... Occasionaluse (talk) 22:35, 14 December 2012 (UTC)

I'm blinded by your rational and logical response. I bow to your vast intellectual superiority. But I can't help sensing that maybe you're just a twat. 80.3.69.176 (talk) 22:49, 14 December 2012 (UTC)

I meant in the district. Osaka Sun (talk) 22:11, 14 December 2012 (UTC)

Bon, you're wrong. Obama is not a lame duck President. He's the Sitting President and President-Elect. Lame Duck implies that his time in office is coming to an end and he's essentially powerless, as his replacement has already been elected..... But you know that. Or maybe you didn't. Perhaps you're ignorant as well as belligerent. SirChuckB^{DMorris for new Jinx!} 22:40, 14 December 2012 (UTC)

Belligerent? You obviously chose to ignore my very non-belligerent first post and mistook the belligerent responses for mine. Unless this is some sort of circle-jerking club in which case I apologise, I didn't mean to interrupt your mutual ego-masturbation. 80.3.69.176 (talk) 22:49, 14 December 2012 (UTC)

Oh FFS, we're fighting over a phrase. I think we're in general agreeance here that Obama can't won't do shit anyway. Osaka Sun (talk) 00:00, 15 December 2012 (UTC)

I think you're making an ass out of yourself and the rest of us, OS. --Seth Peck (talk) 00:09, 15 December 2012 (UTC)

So pessimism that any gun control and/or mental health legislation won't pass a wingnut House = "making an ass out yourself." Thanks. We're exactly at the aftermath of Aurora... and nothing happened. It makes me wonder how Reagan was able to easily pass everything he did under a Democratic Congress. Osaka Sun (talk) 19:44, 15 December 2012 (UTC)

You ASSUMEd (make an ASS out of U and ME) that "we're in general agreeance [sic] here that Obama can't won't do shit anyway". --Seth Peck (talk) 23:54, 17 December 2012 (UTC)

Well. I'm not sure about the above discussion, but I also happen to live about 30 miles from Newtown (though I reside in Chicago for college, I came home for winter break the same day the massacre occurred). It's true that CT is a deep blue state - with an all-Democratic Congressional delegation and an all-Democratic state government - and that it has a few swing districts (like the 4th, where I live, represented by Jim Himes). So far as I've heard, Governor Malloy has not talked about any new legislation, but it's only been a day, and CT has some of the toughest gun laws in the country. Blue (is useful) 20:04, 15 December 2012 (UTC)

I grew up in the next town over from Newtown. My family still lives there. I would characterize the area as affluent, very white, very socially liberal but fiscally moderate. "Friendly faces everywhere, humble folks without temptation" and so forth. Apokalyps2547 (talk) 22:12, 17 December 2012 (UTC) ^{— Unsigned, by: Pibot / talk / contribs} 06:30, 17 January 2013 (UTC)

Piers Morgan

For fuck's sake America, we don't want him back (yes, he did have a 'stopped clock' moment). Scherben 21:22, 24 December 2012 (UTC)

His actions in opposing the more odious fundies in the US has been a particularly bitter pill to swallow for those who know just how much of a nasty, bullying, little shit he was back in blighty, especially since he seems to be just ripping off Jeremy Paxman half the time Judge Holden^{The Judge Smiles} 13:23, 25 December 2012 (UTC)

We, the British people, petition & beg the Obama Administration to NOT send British Citizen Piers Morgan back to Britain - I joined up as an unAmerican to sign, you can too - David Gerard (talk) 13:56, 25 December 2012 (UTC)

How long does it usually take for the pres to actually respond to this stuff? I'll admit the Westboro one and certainly this one are in early days, but I would have expected him to address the knee-jerk secession ones. At least with a "you so mad". Polite Timesplitter ^{talk to me sugar, but best keep it on the}_down-low 14:02, 25 December 2012 (UTC)

Gerry Anderson

Some great shows Fireball XL5m Stingray, Captain Scarlet, Supercar(?) and the Thunderbirds. Hamster (talk) 02:22, 27 December 2012 (UTC)

I only saw a few of the Thunderbirds, but I loved Captain Scarlet. Humorless fascist^sociopath 02:29, 27 December 2012 (UTC)

I also remember Anderson's first ones in B&W , Twizzle, Torchy and Four Feather Falls. One of my school friend's father was a scriptwriter and wrote several of the TB episodes; he even included one of my ideas - the Crab Logger - in one. Генгис^{Is the Pope a Catholic?} 19:51, 27 December 2012 (UTC)

I'm showing my age but having an idea used in a Thunderbirds script - that's cooler than having a Blue Peter badge! I'm green with envy. Innocent Bystander (talk) 22:23, 27 December 2012 (UTC)

Stop fucking shooting people

At the time of this post it's 27 up, 27 down. I don't think I've seen such a divided WIGO. Генгис^marauding 18:38, 26 December 2012 (UTC)

It's quite simple, down voters: shooting people is wrong, you fucktards; unless you think it's ok for me to shoot you? Scherben 18:42, 26 December 2012 (UTC)

I know the reason I voted it down is because I disagreed with the way it was phrased. I'm an American, yet I don't shoot people and I don't personally know anyone else that shoots people; not only that but the person who was shot was an American also. To me the headline implies that all Americans shoot people which I find both wrong and offensive. I don't like gun violence and I think that the shooting was a terrible thing to have happened, but "Could you fucking well stop shooting people, America?" is probably one of the shittieist possible ways of putting it. Protoman (talk) 19:36, 27 December 2012 (UTC)

I downvoted it because I just don't give a fuck about this type of violence/terrorism. Why bitch and moan about these people as opposed to people who are killed before their time by falling out of bed or auto-erotic asphyxiation? Tragedies more prevalent and preventable than terror shootings. Occasionaluse (talk) 20:00, 27 December 2012 (UTC)

I bet you'd give a fuck if it happened to you or someone you care about (sociopaths can disregard the latter). Maybe we should base all morality on statistics? Scherben 21:04, 27 December 2012 (UTC)

I bet your panties would be just as bunched if your kid was killed in school with a gun vs a drunk behind the wheel. I don't see people like you demanding breathalyzers in ever car, five point restraints and DOT approved helmets that would save more innocent lives in a year than decades of terror shootings. Your moral outrage here is a fiction. Occasionaluse (talk) 15:03, 28 December 2012 (UTC)

People fall out of bed, but we accept that accidents happen -- we also do politics if accidents happen a lot to try to make sure they happen less; that's why you have seatbelts in your car and can be reasonably sure your steak tonight is probably reasonably free of pathogens. Auto-erotic deaths happen, but, hey, they knew the risks associated with crazy behavior, and guess what, we've done politics that make it easier for people to get the treatment they need if they want to or have to stop doing life-threatening activities that they feel strong compulsions to do. So why bitch and moan about these people? They didn't willingly take on the risk to get shot, their getting shot was not an accident, and everything about why they got shot -- from the mental conditions of the shooters to the guns they used -- is a political issue. As for the guy who didn't like the phrasing; tough shit. It's an offensive situation and offensive situations call for offensive words. As of Christmas Eve, American, well, American men, for the most part, have killed 160 Americans since the Newtown shootings. I wish they would stop doing that. Theory of Practice "Now we stand outcast and starving 'mid the wonders we have made." 23:31, 27 December 2012 (UTC)

Good post that. Scream!! (talk) 00:19, 28 December 2012 (UTC)

Since the Newtown shooting 242 shot in the USA! Considerably more than died falling out of bed or through autoasphyxiation I'll warrant. (Oh, and fuck off Occasionaluse - don't be a twat just to seem clever) Scream!! (talk) 01:21, 28 December 2012 (UTC)

I just think you're such a bunch of faggots. You take your life into your hands every time you walk outside. I'll make you a deal, you give me all your freedoms and I'll make sure you bitches stay completely safe from the big, bad world. Occasionaluse (talk) 15:05, 28 December 2012 (UTC)

I know you like to engage in good-natured low-level trolling, but I would have thought that deploying some hipster/ironic homophobia would have been below you. Theory of Practice "Now we stand outcast and starving 'mid the wonders we have made." 15:09, 28 December 2012 (UTC)

The word faggot has no homophobic connotations on the internet. Or at least it shouldn't. And I'm being serious. I don't care how kids die. What you guys are doing smacks of the illogic behind hate crime legislation. You complain about how the kids died, not so much the fact that kids are dead. My 'outrage' doesn't change if they killed themselves because they were bullied, were hit by a drunk or were shot by a nutcase. None of them deserved death more than the others. None of their deaths are more important than the others. Killstreaks only count in video games and in your mind. Occasionaluse (talk) 15:11, 28 December 2012 (UTC)

This attitude honestly pisses me off. You can't re-purpose a slur if it remains a negative term. Taking no stance on the above discussion, this smacks of being an asshole for the sake of being an asshole. How about you try and adopt an attitude that isn't cribbed from South Park? — Unsigned, by: ORavenhurst / talk^{Do You Believe That?} 15:27, 28 December 2012 (UTC)

It was on South Park, and it is impossible for people to independently come to the same conclusions about a concept, so you're right about that. I'd be happy to argue about the word faggot elsewhere. Occasionaluse (talk) 15:30, 28 December 2012 (UTC)

I thought you'd fucked off, you sad cunt? These kids wouldn't have died but for the guns, you dismal twat Scherben 17:02, 28 December 2012 (UTC)

No shit. I hadn't said anything about gun contorl. Just that we shouldn't make a bigger deal of these deaths than all the others. Occasionaluse (talk) 17:06, 28 December 2012 (UTC)

What a heartless and thoughtless turd you are.  Lily ^{Inspirate me.} 18:07, 28 December 2012 (UTC)

What an irrational piece of shit you are. Sorry I don't value one dead kid over another like the pious assholes you guys are. Occasionaluse (talk) 19:24, 28 December 2012 (UTC)

┌────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┘ I really thought you were smart. I also did not realize that you might be so insensitive that you may actually be suffering from psycopathy or sociopathy. Can you not understand that different deaths have different moral and political stakes? Let's say, for example, that 20 first graders die from leukemia or something. That's tragic, and in the medium to long term, we can decide that it's an unbearable tragedy that we cannot bear to see happen again, so we decide to divert more money into cancer treatment and research. But it's also a fact of life that out of a population of X, Y people will never, ever, no matter what we do, live to see their Z birthday. That's life. It sucks, but there's no morality to it, and no political solution to it. Now lets say that in a country that fails to fund mental health to an adequate level, that has a macho culture immersed in violence and individualism, and where firearms are readily available, a guy who is mentally ill, loves violence, lacks empathy and has a gun shoots up a room full of first graders. Can you really not see that those deaths, while equally tragic to the leukemia deaths for the near and the dear of the people involved and for society as a whole, have a moral and political weight that deaths from illness do not? To put it another way -- do you understand why some deaths are treated under the category of "murder" (because someone is responsible for them), while others are not? Or are they all the same to you? Theory of Practice "Now we stand outcast and starving 'mid the wonders we have made." 19:35, 28 December 2012 (UTC)

If only you fucks treated the cancer kids with as much reverence, maybe we could actually do something about it. The moral panic from tragedies like school shootings is disproportionate. I don't understand how don't see this. Watching you idiots drop everything to panic about this makes me sick. Occasionaluse (talk) 19:39, 28 December 2012 (UTC)

Why don't you compare, statistics on say, under-age 12 deaths from cancer in America from 50 years ago with some from last year before shooting your mouth off about how little we do about it, dummy. Theory of Practice "Now we stand outcast and starving 'mid the wonders we have made." 19:42, 28 December 2012 (UTC)

Yeah, because this school shooting thing is a brand new business. Maybe you should look into that, first. This isn't a new concept, nor is it any more of a threat than it ever was. You guys remind me of Schlafly. Worst earthquake in a century in the headlines? OH SHIT EARTHQUAKES!!!! Occasionaluse (talk) 19:47, 28 December 2012 (UTC)

Dodge and weave. Dodge and weave. Don't address the points anyone brings up, just throw more shit out there. How many mass shootings in public places occurred in the US in the 50s? The 60s? The 70s? The 80s? The 90s? The 00s? The last two years? Has there been some sort of trend over the last thirty years? Theory of Practice "Now we stand outcast and starving 'mid the wonders we have made." 19:54, 28 December 2012 (UTC)

It doesn't look like the incidence of school shootings has changed much, but it does seem like the kill counts are being pumped up by the availability of larger magazines. Sure, that availability could be a problem in and of itself, but I don't see how school shootings are a proportionally larger issue in the scheme of things. Do you think the American response to terrorism (e.g. TSA, patriot act) was proportionate to the risk it poses to you? Occasionaluse (talk) 19:59, 28 December 2012 (UTC)

The incidence of school shootings has been climbing since the 1960s. No, I don't think the TSA/Patriot Act was a reasonable response to the single terrorist attack on American soil. And if there had been exactly one mass public shooting on American soil since World War II, you might have a point there. But the fact is there have been many, many of the things. Theory of Practice "Now we stand outcast and starving 'mid the wonders we have made." 20:05, 28 December 2012 (UTC)

It looks more like a function of the availability of weapons that could be used in mass shootings along with a steady increase in the school population, save for the two outlying years. Again, the incidence is not really increasing, just the death toll. Occasionaluse (talk) 20:17, 28 December 2012 (UTC)

┌────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┘ Well, no problem then. Lets make those weapons unavailable so we can get the death toll down. Which is pretty much what most people have been saying, and what you seem to think is completely unreasonable. Theory of Practice "Now we stand outcast and starving 'mid the wonders we have made." 20:22, 28 December 2012 (UTC)

Gun control is another discussion. I haven't been commenting on gun control. I'd be pleased to discuss that with you and I think you'd be surprised that we are in general agreement. What I'm commenting on is the disproportionate panic. Occasionaluse (talk) 20:24, 28 December 2012 (UTC)

You this morning: "I'll make you a deal, you give me all your freedoms and I'll make sure you bitches stay completely safe from the big, bad world." You now: "I agree with you on gun control." I'm a little puzzled there. Theory of Practice "Now we stand outcast and starving 'mid the wonders we have made." 02:38, 29 December 2012 (UTC)

Apologies for being late, but if you think the word "faggot" has "no homophobic connotations on the internet" you shouldn't have a problem with being called a complete asshole. Get it? Because I am implying that you are equivalent to one of the body's messier orifices. Whereas you are using a slur to imply other people are gay, and as you're using it as an insult, ergo you're working on the basis that gay people are worth less than "normal" people. P.S. fuck you Polite Timesplitter ^{come shout at me for being thick} 09:53, 29 December 2012 (UTC)

India Rape

I hope the dirty shithouse bastards get all they deserve Scherben 02:07, 29 December 2012 (UTC)

Does that include the death penalty? --Revolverman (talk) 02:13, 29 December 2012 (UTC)

Funnily enough, whilst an angry outburst might demand that, no. Let the bastards serve a lengthy prison sentence Scherben 02:36, 29 December 2012 (UTC)

Train Track Victim

Yeah, I could have worded the WIGO better to make it clear that nobody deserved to be thrown in front of the train. My attempt was to point out that blind hate inflicted damage on a completely unrelated party. Ravenhull (talk) 01:43, 31 December 2012 (UTC)

They would be an unrelated party still, had they been Muslim. AMassiveGay (talk) 14:35, 31 December 2012 (UTC)

Commenting out world6436

So I commented out world6436 - about a Saudi cleric promoting the gang-rape of Syrian women. My reason is that the up/down voting has become utterly ambiguous. The original story was obviously important and deserved up-votes - it was +20 with only two down-votes when I commented it out - but with the update that the story was false it's impossible to see what a "+" vote means.

Obviously, feel free to revert but I thought this was sensitive enough to take action straight away. rpeh •T•C•E• 22:20, 3 January 2013 (UTC)

Perhaps it would have been better to 'close' the vote? Peter ^{Subsisting on honey} 22:26, 3 January 2013 (UTC)

It doesn't really matter what the voting means. The story (i.e. the fact that the original story was fabricated) is of interest & shouldn't be hidden. Wèàšèìòìď^{Methinks it is a Weasel} 22:36, 3 January 2013 (UTC)

I've re-inserted. I may not have found out about the original story being BS unless I was curious about what had been commented out and went through the history. It's worth keeping visible. Theory of Practice "Now we stand outcast and starving 'mid the wonders we have made." 01:39, 4 January 2013 (UTC)

Kim Jong-Un's speech...

about arming for peace. What's the difference between that shite, and the bullshit we get from Western politicians and military fuckwits? Strong deterrent etc Scherben 12:20, 1 January 2013 (UTC)

You beat me to it. Kim Jung Un, Obama, Cameron, same shit, different faces.London Grump - don't talk to me about the fucking olympics (talk) 14:01, 1 January 2013 (UTC)

Si vis pacem... Oh, and did you just equate a "people's republic" with two representative democracies?--ZooGuard (talk) 15:55, 1 January 2013 (UTC)

Meaning what? Bullshit from the ruling elites is still bullshit. Also, wikipedia pages don't make something more true... Scherben 16:18, 1 January 2013 (UTC)

The Wikipedia link: I wanted to point out that the sentiment is an old one and not limited to Un/Obama/Camreon.

The "bullshit": while this claim may or may not be bullshit (I think that it depends on the exact formulation and circumstances), saying "Kim Jung Un, Obama, Cameron, same shit, different faces" is at the very least poor writing. People who seriously think that "there's no difference between the US and the DPRK" deserve to be forcefully extradited from whatever Western liberal democracy they live in and forced to live in the DPRK.--ZooGuard (talk) 16:34, 1 January 2013 (UTC)

In four years time neither Obama nor Cameron (most probably) will be in power in their respective countries, but I expect that Kim Jung Un will. Генгис^{Our ignorance is God; what we know is science.} 16:40, 1 January 2013 (UTC)

Four? He's only 28. He could be there in 40 years' time. Theory of Practice "Now we stand outcast and starving 'mid the wonders we have made." 16:49, 1 January 2013 (UTC)

I'm certain LOndon Grump was referring to the 'holier than thou' attitude of the West, whilst spouting the same shit. Can nations that load up with nuclear weapons be considered responsible? They kill millions of people Scherben 18:04, 1 January 2013 (UTC)

Thank you Scher. I find it amusing that a misreading of my original post should stimulate such way off the mark comments. Poor writing my arse, ZooG was filtering my comment through his own political bias.

To make it clear: am I equating the US and its political systems with North Korea and its political systems? Duh, no. Am I equating the way Kim Jong Un talks peace and acts war with the way Obama talks peace while the US maintains a military presence in dozens of countries around the world, uses drones to kill people daily and spends obscene amounts on "defense" every day? Hell, yes.

Let me know if any of you still do not get my point.

Oh, and if I want to read news about how nasty or unpredictable or irrational or dangerous or childish or funny the Other is, I know where to find the Daily Mail and Fox News.London Grump - don't talk to me about the fucking olympics (talk) 19:09, 1 January 2013 (UTC)

• snicker* Talk about seeing things though one's own political lens...--ZooGuard (talk) 10:36, 4 January 2013 (UTC)

Aurora Colorado

I'm amused by the media. aurora, colorado is poverty stricken, gang ridden area cept the one new development that the theatre shootigs were in. Mulitple shootings have been going on there for years, decades and it's never been covered. course, the people dying were all brown skinned of some tone or another...Godot She was a venus demilo in her sister's jeans 19:19, 5 January 2013 (UTC)

I remember there was an explosive device that went off at the mall a few years back. But being that I live so close to Aurora (and go there routinely for dinner or shopping or whatnot) I've never felt like I was in danger anywhere I went. I've even driven through the more run-down parts of Aurora and never felt like I was in "the ghetto". Then you drive a few blocks away from that area and suddenly there are established communities with nice houses and tall trees. I don't get it. --Seth Peck (talk) 16:35, 8 January 2013 (UTC)

The parts we go, are very new. all 100% like every other part of Denver suburbs. ;-) but if you want good food, you go to teh "bad parts". some amazing ethnic, local foods.Godot She was a venus demilo in her sister's jeans 16:48, 8 January 2013 (UTC)

Don't eat the ethnic food! It is well-known that pho contains high amounts of low-grade opiates, forcing you to come back week after week to sate your addiction to noodles and broth. --Seth Peck (talk) 16:55, 8 January 2013 (UTC)

Alex Jones the oddball

His rant should be on the clogosphere? Comes over as a bit of a twat doesn't he? Scherben 11:38, 8 January 2013 (UTC)

I've always been against the clog WIGO. I won't post stuff there, sorry, it makes no sense. But yes, I think Morgan did a fine job on him - by simply letting him speak. Guiding him towards a good mouth foaming was a brilliant move, though he didn't exactly need any encouragement, did he? Jones clearly needs medication though. DogP (talk) 15:36, 8 January 2013 (UTC)

Texan student

Wingnut reasoning, but tracking people? For Fuck's Sake, fuck off, you nosey cunts Scherben 16:06, 9 January 2013 (UTC)

100% agreement. But then kids will find a way to beat it, if its as simple as a ball peen hammer, or if one smart one finds a way to really fuck with them. --Revolverman (talk) 21:05, 9 January 2013 (UTC)

I really hope they do Scherben 22:34, 9 January 2013 (UTC)

Tracking is stupid, but the argument was utter bullshit. 'It's a THING I need to CARRY?! MARK OF THE BEAST!' Imagine the legal precedent that would set.

You can't make me carry a driver's licence, because I believe it's the MARK OF THE BEAST!

You can't make me wear a uniform on the job, because I believe it's the MARK OF THE BEAST! Apokalyps2547 (talk) 06:57, 11 January 2013 (UTC)

Pants in the office? MARK OF THE BEAST - David Gerard (talk) 17:03, 11 January 2013 (UTC)

Password for RW? MARK OF THE BEAST Scherben (talk) 17:23, 11 January 2013 (UTC)

What next?

RE: http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=169112968

When it says in the second paragraph "...as the White House explores cultural factors that may contribute to violent behavior" it makes perfect sense. The article also talks about the MPAA getting involved. The gun issue in the US isn't just about the firearms themselves but the surrounding pop culture; and with violence being blamed on this culture, you need to involve it in your discussions and decision making. To not do this would be grossly irresponsible. ^postate 15:36, 11 January 2013 (UTC)

Every time I make this argument--it's not about banning videogames because they cause violence, but about looking at what cultural expressions say about our relationship to violence--a bunch of gamers pop their heads up from their Mom's basement to tell me I'm full of shit and threaten me with their swords and magic helmets (1000 internets if you get that reference, kids) for wanting to take their games away. We can have reasonable discussions about what rape culture tells us about our relationship to women and sexuality without anyone assuming that looking at a sexy ad will turn boys into rapists; we should be able to have that conversation about a culture of violence. Theory of Practice "Now we stand outcast and starving 'mid the wonders we have made." 15:47, 11 January 2013 (UTC)

*throws dice at ToP* Nobody^{don't bother} 16:12, 11 January 2013 (UTC)

Actually, if you refer to the Player's Manual, page 47, on the top sidebar, it clearly states that the correct equipment to use is a spear and magic helmet. Ochotonaprinceps^{not a pokémon} 00:07, 13 January 2013 (UTC)

Much the same as gun ownership. There's nothing wrong with owning a gun and there's nothing necessarily wrong with blowing a hooker's head off in GTA, either. But there is something wrong with people doing it because "WHOA!! COOL!! BANG BANG!!! THIS IS SO AWESOME!!!!" I was hanging around with a bunch of kids a few years back who were complaining about a war film because the kills weren't "good enough". That disturbed me a little. There's a massive detachment from the real world going on, and zero appreciation of what actually shooting something in reality is actually like. It's not a good reason. ^moral 00:27, 13 January 2013 (UTC)

Universes's largest known structure

Expect that to be quote mined by cranks and wing nuts Scherben (talk) 21:20, 13 January 2013 (UTC)

Would you support restricting free speech on websites?

After all web sites are not people, and thus as some believe, are somehow not afforded the protections of the Bill of Rights. FlamingModerate (talk) 08:41, 14 January 2013 (UTC)

Have you asked HITLER? - David Gerard (talk) 10:25, 14 January 2013 (UTC)

Godwin's Law! Godwin's Law! I win! I win! FlamingModerate (talk) 11:01, 14 January 2013 (UTC)

What is this "Bill of Rights" of which you speak? Surely you cannot mean that American law should apply everywhere on the WORLD-wide web? Theory of Practice "Now we stand outcast and starving 'mid the wonders we have made." 14:42, 14 January 2013 (UTC)

"I'll believe corporations are people when Texas executes one"

...Or when California lets one ride shotgun on the highway, apparently. I don't mind the existence of corporations, they are necessary legal fictions (Think it's hard suing a big-ass conglomerate? Imagine suing every member of the board of directors.) What angers me is that some wish to treat them as people (only when it's convenient for those who run the corporation) while actual people are treated as commodities. --TheLateGatsby (talk) 14:25, 14 January 2013 (UTC)

The carpool lane thing is just a stunt, and the guy knows it ("corporate personhood" isn't what people seem to think it is). I'm not sure if it's raising awareness through absurdity or just perpetuating a myth. ^narchist 14:53, 14 January 2013 (UTC)

I'd go with the former. It's guerrilla legal theatre. Theory of Practice "Now we stand outcast and starving 'mid the wonders we have made." 15:01, 14 January 2013 (UTC)

If corporations are people then they should pay income tax rather than corporate tax. Генгис^{RationalWiki GOLD member} 09:23, 15 January 2013 (UTC)

Sterilising transgender people

My first reaction was "Fuck me, that's barbaric and it's still happening as a matter of public policy in Europe!".

My second was "Hang on..." Surely the hormonal realignment means transgender people are effectively sterile. Which, I suppose, makes the forced sterilisation even worse.

Can anyone tell me if my assumption is correct? London Grump - don't talk to me about the fucking olympics (talk) 09:17, 15 January 2013 (UTC)

Your assumption is pretty much correct, as is reacting "fuck me, that's barbaric" - decent people in Sweden have long despaired over this one - David Gerard (talk) 10:17, 15 January 2013 (UTC)

More or less. Verility / fertility will decrease, and broadly speaking so will sex drive and ability to experience physical effects of arousal (the strength of the effect varies from person to person, needless to say). And to think that only a year ago the Swedish parliament upheld the law. Shows what someone putting their neck out on a court case can do. I wonder though, perhaps it wouldn't have been upheld if more people knew it existed. Polite Timesplitter ^{come shout at me for being thick} 10:52, 15 January 2013 (UTC)

And the opposition to the repeal are the Christian Democrats. I completely despair Scherben (talk) 12:58, 15 January 2013 (UTC)

412 year olds

...is what it looks like, at least in my browser. Peter ^{Subsisting on honey} 02:21, 16 January 2013 (UTC)

And mine, looks silly! Scream!! (talk) 02:38, 16 January 2013 (UTC)

Newtown 'Truthers'

Scum, complete scum Scherben (talk) 17:41, 15 January 2013 (UTC)

That's insulting... to scum. MDB ^{(the MD is for Maryland, the B is for Bear)} 17:51, 15 January 2013 (UTC)

..... the fuck?! so a guy tries to help scared traumatised kids and he gets threatened and bullied for not fitting into some "Truther" bullshit!? as a matter of fact who the hell are these "Truthers" and what the fuck do they think actually happened!? Judge Holden^{The Judge Smiles} 17:56, 15 January 2013 (UTC)

Most of them think it was entirely staged and made up just so Obama can take their guns. Seriously, that's it. That's all. The kids are fake, the parents are "crisis actors". Fuck the lot of them. ^bomination 17:57, 15 January 2013 (UTC)

To all forms of scum everywhere, I apologise unreservedly. As to what they think happened, this wingnut has asked us to engage our critical thinking http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RL4pREERbcA Scherben (talk) 18:00, 15 January 2013 (UTC)

It's stories like this that draw me back to this photo, just to remind me that humanity doesn't consist entirely of pieces of shit. (Okay, the elderly man in the story also reminds me that there's hope for humanity yet.) MDB ^{(the MD is for Maryland, the B is for Bear)} 18:02, 15 January 2013 (UTC)

Times like this that remind me why tradgedy-chasing conspiracy theorists make me so fucking sick. They are so obsessed with their pathetic, pretentious, self righteous dogma that the moment something happens that casts a shred of doubt upon it, they throw a tantrum and claim it is all "an evil conspiracy" and those "responsible" (i.e. the grieving parents, family members, and friends, and people like the guy in the article) must be made to suffer for perpetuating it, because anyone who dares "question" their delusions by witnessing nightmares like this must be punished. I hope these selfish fucking cunts die screaming Judge Holden^{The Judge Smiles} 18:30, 15 January 2013 (UTC)

I was about to say that the above was a bit harsh, then I saw the video. Just remember that they are the minority and that (luckily) no one in any position of power takes them seriously. Fucking morons who can't relax with their calm sheltered world. L'homme de la Perspective ^Discusez? 22:47, 15 January 2013 (UTC)

Sandy hook hoax webshite. DON'T read the"about" page. Scream!! (talk) 23:37, 15 January 2013 (UTC)

Again. I fucking pray these narcissistic little prags die in screaming agony. Thats pretty much all I have to say about this. And if you think I may be getting a wee bit irritable about this then just think. They have already started tormenting the "peripheral characters" (and I use their meaning of that term here) its no leap of imagination to assume they have either started targeting the mourning families or are soon going to start in earnest.

And Unlike run of the mill trolls these freaks would see no problem in taking the abuse to a more "direct" level to try and satisfy their narcissistic delusions of conspiracy and need for attention. And by Direct I mean anything from terror/intimidation campaigns against the families to try and make them "confess" to grave desecration to "prove" no kids died. These shits want attention, and they are stupid enough to do most anything. Hell at least the fcking Westboro Baptist Church will mostly stop at simply bragging and threatening to scream abuse well out of earshot. Judge Holden^{The Judge Smiles} 23:50, 15 January 2013 (UTC)

I think the "about" page is quite illuminating. --TheLateGatsby (talk) 19:42, 16 January 2013 (UTC)

I wonder if would be a good idea, or if can be done, to sue these people for libel/slander.--Cms13ca (talk) 00:17, 16 January 2013 (UTC)

Even with quotes around "truthers", I hate calling them that. Better to call them LIARS. That's what they are. Deliberately promoting misunderstanding, distrust, and hatred where it isn't warranted is dishonest to the core. Apokalyps2547 (talk) 07:25, 16 January 2013 (UTC)

I could get behind that enforced re-branding. ^bomination 01:01, 17 January 2013 (UTC)

Vaccine denier David Kirby

Why the fuck isn't this in CLOGS? Генгис^{RationalWiki GOLD member} 12:10, 16 January 2013 (UTC)

It's an utter clog, I've moved it to clogs - commented out here, copied to there. I kept the poll ID so votes would be preserved - David Gerard (talk) 12:17, 16 January 2013 (UTC)

I think Psygremlin is losing it. He barely signs any of his posts nowadays. Генгис^{You have the right to be offended; and I have the right to offend you.} 13:52, 16 January 2013 (UTC)

I blame too much tequila over the holiday period! --PsyGremlin^Tal! 14:04, 16 January 2013 (UTC)

Giglio and WBC

First, my apologies for the malformatting on the last thing I posted today. I was going to edit but firefox decided it would be utterly hilarious to crash. But I digress.

Just so I'm clear on the whole Gigliogate thing, am I right in saying that A: he voluntarily stepped down after the speech emerged and B: Obama actually has little say in who delivers the prayer, it's a committee that chooses without his knowledge, right? I don't want to believe Obama picked another anti-gay asshole like last time.

Secondly, with regards to WBC, have Sandy Hook funerals been and gone yet, and if so, did they attend with human shield or decline like they did with Swartz's funeral after Anonymous threatened them?

Finally, has the admin responded to the WBC hate group petition yet? I'd like to imagine that, if they DO turn up at his inauguration, he'll have them registered as one while then and there. And then an electric guitar drops from the top of the stage and he rocks out while jizzing a rainbow. Okay, maybe not all of that. Still, it would be funny, though unlikely. Obviously, there will be people with concerns for his safety if the WBC show up as they believe him to be the Antichrist, but remember, they don't see it as their duty, more that Godwilldoit and their theology also encompasses Romans 13:1-5. Polite Timesplitter ^{come shout at me for being thick} 12:20, 16 January 2013 (UTC)

Does the US government even go about declaring an organization a "hate group"? It's the Southern Poverty Law Center that seems to be the leader in that field.

It would be a far more useful campaign to try to get WBC's tax exempt status revoked. I have read that they filled in a swimming pool when their claim it was a "baptismal font" was questioned. MDB ^{(the MD is for Maryland, the B is for Bear)} 13:05, 16 January 2013 (UTC)

NZ Wingnut

Are they the same 'basic morals and values' that have been so beneficial to the Maori population? Scherben (talk) 16:13, 20 January 2013 (UTC)

Dunno if I would go there, the issue of the problems of Maori in NZ is a very complicated issue. Garth McVicar is a tosser of the highest order. He is the leader of a group that lobbies for tougher sentences, largely by marketing and making stars out of the victims. He also likes to go around protesting the release of prisoners who have served their sentences ensuring that they can't integrate into the community. I wasn't actually aware that he was a religious nutter as well, but I guess it is not all that surprising. In NZ, extreme right wing politics do not usually go with Christianity. Damo^Hi 23:30, 20 January 2013 (UTC)

Videogames

Eh kids, shooting kids on games is bad mkay. Get a real gun instead, so you can do it in real life... Scherben (talk) 18:14, 22 January 2013 (UTC)

That's a misleading WIGo. Nader said that game companies are child molesters, not game players. Wẽãšẽĩõĩď^{Methinks it is a Weasel} 18:34, 22 January 2013 (UTC)

Does it fucking matter really? It seems like "Child molester" is becoming the new Vouge Godwin. --108.180.91.182 (talk) 21:26, 23 January 2013 (UTC)

Bali's good name

Pity they didn't think of that when Indonesia was conducting genocide against East Timor (with the full co-opertaion of the UK arms dealers) Scherben (talk) 19:57, 23 January 2013 (UTC)

As an Australian, I don't even think Bali has a good name in the first place. With the memories of the bombies still locked away in everyone's mind, as well as the Bali drug boy set up/not a set up thing. Also, I doubt killing someone in your judicial system is just going to put people off more. Maybe life would have sent a message and people would have been able to deal with it, but killing someone? L'homme de la Perspective ^Discusez? 21:19, 23 January 2013 (UTC)

Rape abortion -> Tampering with evidence

I've tried to write a sensible response to this bullshit but keep getting overtaken by pure anger. Having calmed down a little, my reply to people who want to classify aborting a rape baby as "tampering with evidence" is therefore as follows: you've yet to earn the oxygen you've consumed during your worthless life. I can't believe anyone could say such a thing with a straight face, let alone try to get it passed into law. rpeh •T•C•E• 21:31, 24 January 2013 (UTC)

Classic Backdooring. Walk 1000 miles just to get around Roe V Wade. --108.180.91.182 (talk) 21:35, 24 January 2013 (UTC)

Yeah I know. Doesn't piss me off any less though. rpeh •T•C•E• 21:44, 24 January 2013 (UTC)

"Walking around it" doesn't do it justice. It's freaking OBVIOUS that it doesn't need to be born to constitute evidence. With reasoning as stupid as supplied in the proposal this is more like tiptoeing 1,000 miles to circumvent Roe v Wade...while wearing clown boots with bells and squeaking dog toys attached. Polite Timesplitter ^{come shout at me for being thick} 22:47, 24 January 2013 (UTC)

"Encouraged" by public outcry, she walked it back into the shadows. Game not yet over, though: Now it is the doctor who is on the hook for "tampering with evidence." Keep your wrath alight, but keep the tines of the pitchfork away from the flames; hot steel loses its temper. Sprocket J Cogswell (talk) 22:11, 28 January 2013 (UTC)

Splitting Hairs

Just can't help but say that "Quel Suprise" should be "Quelle Suprise" as une surprise is a feminine noun. L'homme de la Perspective ^Discusez? 09:33, 29 January 2013 (UTC)

You ar quit corrct. Fixd - David Grard (talk) 10:42, 29 January 2013 (UTC)

Since it was my mistake, I can only apologise and say "Mercy buckets". DogP (talk) 18:40, 29 January 2013 (UTC)

Steve Jobs and imitators of his diet

Were/are still much better off than some of the workers at Apple's sweatshops, eh? Still, the man was a "techno-Jesus" Scherben (talk) 21:32, 29 January 2013 (UTC)

Some tips for Campfield

If Campfield is serious about decreasing poverty and increasing educational standards, I'd suggest him to keep creationism out of the classroom, improve sex-ed and legalize drugs and increase access to birth control and abortion.-212.123.158.42 (talk) 23:14, 29 January 2013 (UTC)

Jackson and Bingham

Should definitely consider twinning Scherben (talk) 19:35, 31 January 2013 (UTC)

What, like Dull and Boring? Sophie^Wilder 21:41, 31 January 2013 (UTC)

I can take a hint :( Scherben (talk) 17:20, 1 February 2013 (UTC)

Atheism Super Bowl Ad

Uh, I don't think this actually aired during the Super Bowl. No hits on Google. No blogs or news articles. Blue (pester) 10:53, 4 February 2013 (UTC)

Guess it's a trolling experiment by CultofDusty then, and I fell for it. Time for the walk of shame. Polite Timesplitter ^{come shout at me for being thick} 12:05, 4 February 2013 (UTC)

twats in space

Apart from the fact he's bullshitting, I'm quite happy for him (Ahmadinejad) to be sent into space: hopefully one way (and could he take Binny with him?) Scherben (talk) 20:12, 4 February 2013 (UTC)

Israel's birth control

Isn't Binny a cute militaristic racist cunto? Scherben (talk) 21:44, 3 February 2013 (UTC)

Look what I just found! Also, yes. Yes he is. Sophie^Wilder 21:51, 3 February 2013 (UTC)

Has anyone actually linked the birth control incident to Netanyahu's office? Theory of Practice "...and we do love you madly." 21:54, 3 February 2013 (UTC)

No, but he's a cunt anyway. Sophie^Wilder 22:01, 3 February 2013 (UTC)

No link to Nitty's office, but what a charming comment about Africans, eh? The bomb happy twathead shit stain Scherben (talk) 00:14, 4 February 2013 (UTC)

Look at that. People, what have we learned about jumping to conclusions? --Revolverman (talk) 07:08, 5 February 2013 (UTC)

I jumped to my conclusions about Netenyahu about twenty years ago, Revolverman. Sophie^Wilder 11:27, 5 February 2013 (UTC)

What nobody's realised is that Binny still holds all Arabs responsible for his brother's death at Entebbe. With a chip that size on his shoulder is it any wonder he's such a cunt? --PsyGremlin^Sprich! 11:38, 5 February 2013 (UTC)

What's his issue with Africans and Persians? Scherben (talk) 15:55, 5 February 2013 (UTC)

The box office shrugged, Part II

RE: http://www.altfg.com/blog/movie/atlas-shrugged-part-2-movie-cast-dagny-taggart/

They made a second one? Last I heard it was in development hell after the bomb awaiting someone dumb enough to fund it. ^narchist 11:23, 11 February 2013 (UTC)

Well obviously they found him. --Revolverman (talk) 12:20, 11 February 2013 (UTC)

I like this section title. Ŵêâŝêîôîď^{Methinks it is a Weasel} 13:42, 11 February 2013 (UTC)