How about all the so-called inclusive occupy movements? Finding the black guy in most of them is harder than finding Waldo. But you would find guns, drugs, criminals and so on.

 

Better yet the fair share guys refusing to share food with the homeless people who show up at their sites.

Does anyone believe it is possible to not be perceived as hypocritical on anything? People push this to extremes. Unless you support something to the extremist level, someone will brand you as a hypocrite. Someone doesn't think that the animal shelter should euthanize dogs and cats? Well you better have 25 dogs and a hundred cats if you are that concerned or else you look like a hypocrite.

Does anyone believe it is possible to not be perceived as hypocritical on anything? People push this to extremes. Unless you support something to the extremist level, someone will brand you as a hypocrite. Someone doesn't think that the animal shelter should euthanize dogs and cats? Well you better have 25 dogs and a hundred cats if you are that concerned or else you look like a hypocrite.

It's old, but has happened since then as well.

http://www.consumerfreedom.com/2005/06/109...g-dumping-dogs/

This is not the first public mention of PETA’s large-scale euthanasia program. In May 2005 the Center for Consumer Freedom (CCF) unveiled a giant Times Square billboard and a new website (www.PetaKillsAnimals.com). CCF had obtained official records from the state of Virginia showing the militant animal-rights group had put over 10,000 dogs and cats to death since 1998.

 

In 2003 PETA euthanized over 85 percent of the animals it took in, finding adoptive homes for just 14 percent. By comparison, the Norfolk SPCA found adoptive homes for 73 percent of its animals and the Virginia Beach SPCA adopted out 66 percent. PETA’s required report documenting its 2004 record is currently over 4 weeks late.

 

Killing dogs that are beyond care is one thing. Killng 86% of the dogs you take in because your cash goes to salary and advertising expenses instead of actually helping animals, is hypocritical. Claiming the world is gonna end as we know it due to the use of fossil fuel while riding around of private jets to say that is hypocritical.

Killing dogs that are beyond care is one thing. Killng 86% of the dogs you take in because your cash goes to salary and advertising expenses instead of actually helping animals, is hypocritical. Claiming the world is gonna end as we know it due to the use of fossil fuel while riding around of private jets to say that is hypocritical.

 

the first one may be a fair point; I've heard PETA criticized for that before but I'm not at all familiar with it. The second one isn't, at all, because that advocacy could lead to a reduction in global carbon output that's several orders of magnitude less than one person's jetting about. A better example would be Gore's gigantic house.

 

edit: I guess I don't understand what the point of this tangent is, though.

Edited January 7, 201214 yr by StrangeSox

the first one may be a fair point; I've heard PETA criticized for that before but I'm not at all familiar with it. The second one isn't, at all, because that advocacy could lead to a reduction in global carbon output that's several orders of magnitude less than one person's jetting about. A better example would be Gore's gigantic house.

The point that Vice President Gore has made repeatedly is that right now, we have the technology to move beyond fossil fuel energy use and deal with climate change without sacrificing our standard of living...and it is government policy directed in the wrong way that is keeping that from happening. Personal sacrifice is nice, but it's not what he's asked for, he's asked for government policy to be fixed.

Huntsman now climbing to 3rd in latest NH Poll at 16% (with Romney falling a bit to 37%, and Paul at 19%). A few of the recent polls have Jon in double digits, but this is the highest yet, and he is trending up.

 

Everyone else in that field has peaked at some point, I guess this was inevitable... but I don't see him catching Romney in NH, not nearly enough time or money. A 2nd place finish keeps him alive and still in the picture, 3rd is marginal. Lower than that, and he's toast (meaning zero chance toast, as opposed to the current 1% chance not-quite-toast).

 

If he doesn't win NH, by a large margin, he is toast. Even though the media (FOX News) is playing him up as a contender, I don't see it even as a remote possibility.

Of course, this doesn't count hidden, unaccountable SuperPAC spending, but it's a fun graph nonetheless. Money spent per vote in Iowa.

 

nice graphics. you from Iowa or somethin?

Andrew Sullivan's live blog of tonight's debate was thoroughly entertaining.

Andrew Sullivan's live blog of tonight's debate was thoroughly entertaining.

 

i read some of it, before becoming thoroughly bored with his monotonous liberal "observations". it really was a pointless read.

 

 

i read some of it, before becoming thoroughly bored with his monotonous liberal "observations". it really was a pointless read.

 

you can't really argue that the GOP candidates' version of history is noticeably detached from reality.

i read some of it, before becoming thoroughly bored with his monotonous liberal "observations". it really was a pointless read.

Liberal? Andrew is pretty well balanced and definitely leans conservative on economic issues.

 

FYI, he is gay in case you didn't know. That's why he may have a differing view on social issues than a typical right winger.

Edited January 8, 201214 yr by BigSqwert

Romney is going to get pounded over and over for his CONSTANT flip-flops. Apparently during the debate today he switched in a matter of seconds from having never seen one of his SuperPAC attack ads to having seen one.

Romney is going to get pounded over and over for his CONSTANT flip-flops. Apparently during the debate today he switched in a matter of seconds from having never seen one of his SuperPAC attack ads to having seen one.

 

http://www.buzzfeed.com/nycsouthpaw/mitt-r...ls-a-rick-james

 

you can't really argue that the GOP candidates' version of history is noticeably detached from reality.

 

How so?

How so?

you could read sullivan's summary for some great examples!

you could read sullivan's summary for some great examples!

 

it's mostly just talk about how much he loves Huntsman, loves outsourcing to China, and he thinks everyone is out to get him cause he's gay.

Edited January 9, 201214 yr by mr_genius

Liberal? Andrew is pretty well balanced and definitely leans conservative on economic issues.

 

FYI, he is gay in case you didn't know. That's why he may have a differing view on social issues than a typical right winger.

Andrew is generally only considered conservative by liberals.

Andrew is generally only considered conservative by liberals.

Because his policies certainly aren't liberal, but he is gay.

Billionaire Republican Sheldon Adelson (owns the Venetian casino in Vegas) has given $5 million to a pro-Gingrich Super-PAC, specifically for the purpose of running a long series of anti-Mittens attack ads in South Carolina over the next 2 weeks.

 

Apparently this will include running a 30 minute attack ad. Here's its trailer.

 

Andrew is generally only considered conservative by liberals.

 

He's definitely not a hard-line conservative, but his positions mostly fit in with the center-right or libertarians.

 

you can't really argue that the GOP candidates' version of history is noticeably detached from reality.

I noticed something funny along these lines... after the debate, as usual CNN ran a "Truth Squad" article, checking into various claims by the candidates. It only found 2 or 3 false or somewhat false statements. I seemed to recall there had been typically 10 or 12 in each of those articles before... then I remembered that Bachmann had dropped out of the race and wasn't at this debate.

 

that Gingrich superpac video is devastating. I can't believe a video like that is coming from the right. It's stuff like this that pisses people off about Gingrich.

He's playing to win. This is his last race IMHO. I'm still feeling someone knocks Romney out but a third person reaps the rewards.

He's playing to win. This is his last race IMHO. I'm still feeling someone knocks Romney out but a third person reaps the rewards.

I think that person would be Huntsman.