Random Politics & Religion #00

Maybe if we let the term "atheiots" slide too, but either way we're in the territory of lame insults that rival "Bill O'Lie-ly".

As long as it isn't direct. It fits.

Indirect insults are legit? Oh good, I was looking forward to an era of terms being used in here like "Democraps" and "Republitards". Time to get creative.

atheiots doesn't have a good sound to it need a better one

Don't get all creative with thinking that insulting others is ok. Insinuations are easy to figure out and can be construed as direct if too easy.

Don't mind me, I'm just being snarky.


Yeah, I'll have to work on that. I gotta see if I can fit another stereotype into the word, like athe-lonelyfedorawearingsociallyawkwardRedditor-ists.

Because you've been indoctrinated by the fascist ideology.

...Or for lulz.

ftfy

You quoted Hillary's people, Dipshit. Exactly my point. We are now on the honor system and have to take the word of Hillary Clinton that all emails get turned over. Who takes the word of a Clinton seriously? I read this article and several others. I posted this one in particular a) because NY Times broke the original story and 2) it gave the most favorable defense of Hillary so her defenders cannot just dismiss the source.

"I hate quotations tell me what you know" Emerson

Yes I used a quote to say I hate quotes.

Speaking of civility. Any of you freedom fighters actually watch the Ben Netanyahu speech.

Say it isn't so:

http://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2015/03/what-if-hillary-clinton-drops-out-115715.html?hp=t4_r#.VPcewuGLVQI

TLDR: Hillary might do something!

Until now, Hillary Clinton’s run for the presidency has been viewed as pretty much a sure thing. But lately the road to near-certain nomination has taken a couple of rough turns, especially with the revelation that Clinton may have broken federal rules as secretary of state by communicating only on her private email account. Which makes us wonder: What if The Unthinkable did happen and she actually dropped out? What would be the Democrats’ response?

“Panic,” says Democratic consultant Chris Lapetina. Indeed, the biggest problem is that the Democratic establishment is apparently so terrified of the idea of a Hillary-less race—and the vicious primary that might result—it’s not even considering contingency plans. Political professionals, like military generals and crisis management experts, know that the way to avoid being blindsided is to prepare for every scenario. But while the Democratic National Committee has to officially remain neutral, much of the extraparty infrastructure has been moving ahead on the presumption of a Hillary campaign.

Priorities USA Action has brought together Obama and Clinton campaign veterans to share the latest innovations in micro-targeting techniques (and, perhaps raise $500 million). American Bridge 21st Century’s Correct The Record project already offers a steady stream of talking points helping Hillary defenders parry the latest attacks. EMILY’s List, the PAC dedicated to raising money on behalf of Democratic women, plans to shift into overdrive with Hillary at the top of the ticket.

When they were asked what they would do with their resources if Hillary takes a pass—line up behind another primary candidate to help clear the field, or stay on the sidelines until the general election—very few of the establishment party operatives I contacted would entertain the question, even off the record.

This Hillary-or-bust attitude bespeaks a certain complacency: Democrats have been getting a little too used to “being the organized party” for once and rallying around a single candidate, while Republicans struggle with an unwieldy double-digit field. So it makes sense for someone to entertain what would happen if disaster struck. It might as well be me.

***

Last June, conservative columnist Ross Douthat suggested that Obama presides over an “Austro-Hungarian empire of presidential majorities: a sprawling, ramshackle and heterogeneous arrangement, one major crisis away from dissolution.” Hillary Clinton is the party’s “Franz Josef,” the dual monarchist who kept the empire together until his death and the Great War. “Without her,” warned Douthat, “the deluge.”

If true, Democrats would face a debacle after a Hillary bow-out, no matter whom the Republicans nominate. With only a single unifying figure, without a united philosophy, strategy and agenda, it’s very difficult to govern, much less get elected.

If Douthat is right, and Hillary’s rock-star status is masking deep divisions within her party, then who would donors flock to? As of now, says Lapetina, “there really isn’t any enthusiasm” for the non-Hillary Democrats already flirting with a run—Vice President Joe Biden, Sen. Bernie Sanders, former Maryland Gov. Martin O’Malley and former Virginia Sen. Jim Webb—meaning no one would instantly lay claim to the Clintons’ vast network of donors.

Still, the Democratic bench is hardly shallow. Among other possible candidates who might suddenly find a fire in their belly: Gov. Andrew Cuomo, former Gov. Deval Patrick, former Gov. Brian Schweitzer and Sens. Sanders, Mark Warner and Kirsten Gillibrand. Lapetina believes pressure would build for a few really big names to enter, such as Al Gore.

And then there’s Elizabeth.

If the Democratic establishment doesn’t have a contingency plan drawn up, progressive activists certainly do, and it amounts to the drafting of the reluctant Elizabeth Warren. Would a Warren candidacy spark a pitched battle between the populists and centrists in the party? Not necessarily. MoveOn.org Executive Director Ilya Sheyman, one of the leaders of the Draft Warren movement, believes that rather than “all-out war,” the party would see just a “vigorous, contested primary,” with Warren in the catbird seat. And many big Democratic donors are ideological true believers who would give to Warren in a heartbeat.

The P&R thread probably isn't the right place to tackle these pressing psychological issues... /sit cross legged and gets his notebook...

but would you like to show us on the doll where you were touched?



also I reported you for insulting the mentally handicapped.

I hope we can still be friends.

Reported.

I stopped caring about 10 years ago it was a good decision.

I feel just like Obama in 2016 !

I was backreading and found this quite hilarious, coming from an antivax dude. Should just say antiscience at this point I guess.

Evil overlords don't have "friends". They have "future tactical diversionary acquaintances".

What about side kicks my limited knowledge of evil doers is they have a right hand man.

Keeping evil apprentices is always tricky.

Basically you're taking someone you think is worthy and plenty resourceful and naturally inclined toward supervillainy and putting them a mere knife in your back away from all of your power and resources. It's basically the evil version of the need to procreate, and I strongly suggest pushing down that impulse. It never ends well.

P&R:

It's been about three posts since a Hitler reference so here you go:

Painfully true.

Note from my Atheists friends:

This really works in a lot of ways.

There's a lot of "believe what I believe or you're wrong" going around about things no one can prove.

I think it's safe to say that a majority of atheists wouldn't say peep if we weren't constantly assailed by God/Jesus/Allah/whatever references at every turn, including by the vast majority of our government representatives.

It isn't a matter of believe it is saying the word love and tolerance than bitching about the group of people you don't like.

Everyone is guilty of that. But Atheists are very smug about it.

Yes Christians can be also too. I don't encounter nearly as many smug Christians though.

In order to be an Atheist you have to have a smugness about you.

Not everything is about God tell that to the Atheists and their minds will explode.

I think it's something you sort of adopt to shield yourself from the barrage of ***you get from people about how terrible you are. Sort of a, "You believe in a man in the sky controlling life? That's cute; do you still think the Sun orbits the Earth, too?"

You're right though. A lot of atheists, especially outspoken ones, can be pretty condescending.

I try not to be. I think it's rude and alienates people from ever agreeing with you.

I don't always succeed. Sometimes, in fact, I fail spectacularly.

It happens in all sides of pretty much all arguments, but you're right. A greater percentage of atheists probably have that affect than percentages of other groups in whatever other belief or topic you're debating.

The only reason I know this is I get a lot of ***from Facebook from them. I don't make it my mission in life to debate Atheists. But when they fill up my news feed it gets old fast.