StrangeSox

a funny, non-partisan pic: also this

QUOTE (bmags @ Oct 19, 2012 -> 01:58 PM) In most newspapers they are seriously hindered from showing any outward political allegiances (QUEUE HYSTERICAL LAUGHTER FROM CERTAIN POSTERS), and I'm sure most don't care. I remember when NPR fired their weekend opera show person because she attended an OWS rally.

I don't know where to dump this, but it relates to the discussion over hours worked that came up in the CTU strike thread. Turns out people overestimate how much they work on average: http://www.slate.com/blogs/moneybox/2012/1...nd_working.html nothing really political, just thought it was interesting.

QUOTE (Jake @ Oct 19, 2012 -> 01:53 PM) Business owners don't get less of a voice just because people might listen more. You can't suppress the information. they are legally allowed to tell employees they will be fired if Obama wins, and I don't think that should be illegal. But it is, imo, immoral to use that position of authority and control over others' livelihood for political messaging.

QUOTE (Jake @ Oct 18, 2012 -> 03:13 PM) I actually think this is perfectly okay. I would want to know if a candidate is going to directly cause me peril at my place of work. If I work in pornography and Mitt Romney plans to ban it, I would like to know about this. Then the onus is on me to verify what my employer says, just like anything I hear anywhere else. If the employers want to somehow leverage people's jobs to bundle votes, then they can get in trouble as they should. In the end, more people talking is a good thing even if they might talk out of their ass (like anyone might do). It's a form of intimidation and works to suppress the speech of employees. How comfortable would you be with an Obama bumper sticker on your car if your boss told you there will be cutbacks if he wins?

Jill Stein (Green) was arrested outside of the last debate http://blogs.seattleweekly.com/dailyweekly...ttle_sunday.php

QUOTE (KyYlE23 @ Oct 19, 2012 -> 10:30 AM) this is what, the 5th time?

3000 is actually a pretty large sample for a national poll, statistically speaking.

Romney wants small businesses owners to tell their employees how to vote http://www.slate.com/blogs/the_slatest/201...ees_who_to.html

It's funny you should mention it being a campaign issue because "southern strategy" as if the strong animus couldn't possibly be racial

Let's send the illegitimate Kenyan, secret-Muslim, America-hating president back to Africa! Just like saying you don't like lbj, am i right?

QUOTE (Jenksismyb**** @ Oct 18, 2012 -> 02:31 PM) Explain to me how that's any different than the birthing scenario. Fine, let's add the qualifier that I dislike Lebron and Wade because they're not on the Bulls. They're not "us." Same s***. You can separate the racial component from the citizenship issue. You linking to a study that simply proves that racist people are racist doesn't change that. do you honestly think saying birtherism is racist is the same as saying anyone who doesn't like lbj is racist? Do you really, honestly believe that's a logical extension of the racial subtext alleged to be behind burthers?

QUOTE (Jenksismyb**** @ Oct 18, 2012 -> 12:26 PM) SS racism logic: 1. I dislike Lebron James and Dwayne Wade. 2. Lebron James and Dwayne Wade are black. 3. I'm racist! Nope! I don't know if it's intentional or not but your responses to this issue are always these bad straw men. Birtherism (and othering in general) is rooted in racial resentment. Making these weak posts doesn't support your claim to the contrary.

QUOTE (Jenksismyb**** @ Oct 18, 2012 -> 08:52 AM) Oh please, read between the lines. After this became a story she was suddenly out the next morning taking the blame. I'm sure she totally wanted to look like the idiot here. I don't know what RedState or Hot Air is, so I don't need to step away from them. I'm tired of reading your liberal spin in the filibuster where you pretend like certain issues are 100% clear or that there's no counter argument when that's not the case. It is 100% clear that Obama called it an act of terror twice in two days immediately after the attack. This has been a story for weeks now, so i won't read between the lines to come to the political conclusion you like.

QUOTE (Jenksismyb**** @ Oct 18, 2012 -> 10:30 AM) Oh god. If you disagree with Obama, it's because you're a subtle racist! If you don't vote for Obama, it's because you hate black people. That's the line of thinking in this "study." the whole thing behind birtherism is othering. It's racist at its roots. So buying into it and making jokes about sending hill back to Kenya is racist.

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Oct 18, 2012 -> 12:25 PM) Or so the Bilderbergs would have you believe... Lol

QUOTE (Soxbadger @ Oct 17, 2012 -> 08:34 PM) Then scrutinize those actions. Dont waste my time about whether it was called terrorism, terror or a monkey dance. I dont care about semantics. I completely agree with the fact that you catch more flies with honey and I think it does nobody any good to sabre rattle. Would you prefer that he threatened extremists? That doesnt work, look at Israel. Israeli's flat out kill terrorists and terrorists still shoot rockets at them. Words mean s***, I apologize all the time when I dont mean it. Its the path of least resistance. As for Care to find a quote to back up that nonsense? Im pretty sure what most people think is that Muslim Extremists are nothing but a fly and that once in awhile under the perfect circumstances a fly can kill an elephant. It doesnt mean the elephant changes its entire life out of fear, the elephant says f*** it, I cant kill every fly. Not to mention, how many people has Obama blown up with drones now?

yeah nothing at all racist about birthers! oh wait http://content.usatoday.com/communities/sc.../1#.UH9h7cXAeSo

QUOTE (Jenksismyb**** @ Oct 17, 2012 -> 08:23 PM) No one thinks that. Stop being dumb. The issue here is that the administration's foreign policy is to bend over and apologize for everthing Americans ever do. lol, stop trying to channel Hannity Yes, that's clearly the ideology of Mr. Drone-Your-Ass-Even-if-You're-A-US-Citizen "Four people," no. It was more than that. And we had 8 years of Bush f***ing up because he was a giant f***-up who was obsessed with Iraq from day 1. Their were requests for additional security mainly in Tripoli, which wouldn't have meant s*** for Benghazi. More importantly, they were not "ignored" but denied, and they were made by security officials, not "the ambassador." Was that the right move? In hindsight, clearly not, and what should have been the right call pre-9/11 is a legitimate point of discussion. But every time dumb, easily refuted lies about never calling it terror and apologizing for America are repeated is a chance blown for actual discussion. Obama has not gotten "zero blame" for this, but Romney has done everything possible to blow any opening here, from his original 9/11 attack to this latest fail at the debate. Who begged Hillary? You have some info here, or echo-chamber speculation? And Obama unequivocally owned up to it last night before Romney made a fool of himself. Step away from the RedState and Hot Air for a couple of days, it'll do you some good.

QUOTE (Jenksismyb**** @ Oct 17, 2012 -> 08:17 PM) A good read about the WH press secretary refusing to call it a terrorist attack a week after the attack, which sort of goes against ya know, what his boss supposedly claimed the day after the attack: http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/right-...e6a4b_blog.html you realize how silly you look when you say this, right?

QUOTE (Jenksismyb**** @ Oct 17, 2012 -> 08:08 PM) God this is such liberal bulls***. It's not as cut and dry as Romney wanted to argue during the debate, but you're completely ignoring 2 weeks of the administration blaming a video for a premeditated terrorist attack on Sept. 11th. Yes, that's a significant problem given the complete FAILURE of the state department to react to the ambassador's request for more security IN f***ING LIBYA. This is not at all comparabale to "uh, hey guys, there's this guy Osama, I think he might do something soon....maybe." I was explicitly referring to the dumb thing Romney said, where he falsely accused Obama of taking 14 days to call it an act of terror and looked like a god-damned fool when he kept going on it. He said it and was shocked that Obama would deny it. Why would his debate team prep him on this false information if they weren't stuck in the echo chamber? What the state department cables show, by the way, was not "the ambassador" requesting more information but the security officials in Libya requesting more security mainly for Tripoli. What's bulls*** is the attempt to call this some massive foreign policy/intelligence failure while at the same time characterizing what the intelligence community was telling the Iraq-obsessed Bush administration in your hilarious fashion. Was it a failure? Yes, absolutely. Has the conservative media echo chamber completely blown many things out of proportion and focused on the dumbest aspect instead of anything important, namely how quickly was it called terrorism? Yes, absolutely.

Well, I think it exposed that the Romney campaign is relying too heavily on Fox News narratives for their information. Nobody outside of conservative political media is pushing that flatly untrue story, yet Romney believed it to be completely true and couldn't believe that Obama would clearly and succinctly deny it. It's the echo chamber coming full circle.

man republicans sure are making it easy for me to press my desperate agenda lately

Romney nor his staff never met any smart, capable conservative women in their years of experience prior to taking office? Replace "women" with minorities and look how transparently awful his answer becomes. The rest of his answer was about how women need more flexibility to both work and be in the kitchen, and how the only way women will get equal pay and opportunities is when we have full employment and a tight labor market because they're only marginally employable. edit: but at the very least his Binders story is a very compelling argument in favor of affirmative action!