Vox Popoli: Rushmore isn't enough

Last month, MSNBC's Al Sharpton conducted a spirited debate about whether Obama belongs on Mount Rushmore or instead deserves a separate monument to his greatness (just weeks before replacing frequent Obama critic Cenk Uygur as MSNBC host, Sharpton publicly vowed never to criticize Barack Obama under any circumstances: a vow he has faithfully maintained). Earlier that day on the same network, a solemn discussion was held, in response to complaints from MSNBC viewers, about whether it is permissible to ever allow Barack Obama's name to pass through one's lips without prefacing it with an honorific such as "President" or "the Honorable" or perhaps "His Excellency" (that really did happen).

I would absolutely love to see Obama added to Mount Rushmore. The ears alone would be hysterical. Given that the great destroyer of American liberty is already up there, it seems only fitting that the penultimate consequence of his actions should be memorialized in stone there as well.

However, I don't think Mount Rushmore is sufficient memorial for Barack Soetoro-Soebarkah-Obama. I think he merits a "Chairman Mao" style statue of the sort that the Chinese carved for Martin Luther King. The bigger, the better. I want future generations to be able to see precisely how far the nation descended before its final collapse. Ideally, it would be atop a square platform decorated by a carved frieze featuring 1) the Folsom Street Fair, 2) a squad of female Marines going into action, 3) an image of 9/11, and 4) Mexicans crossing the border.

Labels: decline and fall, politics

210 Comments:

Kickass February 21, 2013 9:55 AM: I can hear you giggling all the way over there in NJ. You are just starting to rub it in now.
Kickass February 21, 2013 9:56 AM: Let it be known, I am on my first cup of coffee. HERE.
DrTorch February 21, 2013 9:58 AM: People aren't hard enough on TR.
Remo February 21, 2013 10:05 AM: I live in China and *every city* is required to have a statue of Mao, smack dab in the city center. You can't have a bus stop without a Mao statue waving at you and I think that is the better way to go. Have monstrously huge statues of obama erected in every town with a population greater than 3. Detroit, and other bastions of diversity should be first to be so honored.
Josh February 21, 2013 10:05 AM: We obviously need to build an entire mountain shaped like Obama.

Or something like Abu Simbal with four giant statues of Obama.
Brutha named Cheddarman February 21, 2013 10:06 AM: Puttin' Barack's image on white granite is raciss.

I want his beautiful face carved on black granite.
Tiny Tim February 21, 2013 10:10 AM: I believe his statue should sit atop a hollow stand, large enough for 16 men to comfortably kneel inside, around the perimeter. Then we could drill these holes in the sides, 4 per side, right at crotch level of the average man (provide stools for vertically challenged worshipers). Then, the worshipers, on the outside of the chamber, could insert, into the predrilled holes, into the chamber that houses 16 of his most fervent admirers, members of the "rainbow military", if available, in full dress uniform, would then insert their............

And in tribute to his greatest admirer, Chrissy "Tingles" Matthews, we would let him go first.
dlcarroll February 21, 2013 10:11 AM: Off-topic: The Chinese government reads AG:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/magazine-21320560:

Meanwhile, the state-run media keep up a barrage of messages aimed at just this sort of "picky" educated woman.

"Pretty girls do not need a lot of education to marry into a rich and powerful family. But girls with an average or ugly appearance will find it difficult," reads an excerpt from an article titled, Leftover Women Do Not Deserve Our Sympathy, posted on the website of the All-China Federation of Women in March 2011.

It continues: "These girls hope to further their education in order to increase their competitiveness. The tragedy is, they don't realise that as women age, they are worth less and less. So by the time they get their MA or PhD, they are already old - like yellowed pearls."
Salt February 21, 2013 10:11 AM: Rushmore isn't cheesy enough. Better to employ many starving artists and carve the Moon into Obama's likeness.
Chris Rock / Tucker Speaking February 21, 2013 10:12 AM: when we gonna change the "White" house to the Black House?

Black guy gotta live in the Black House, right?

Black blackie black.

(Imagine I said that like Chris Tucker or Chris Rock... much funnier, I assure you)
Orion February 21, 2013 10:14 AM: Agreed Doctor. The pernicious effects of anti-monopoly laws on the consumer, the sequestration of huge tracts of land into the public domain, gunboat diplomacy, and other Progressive idiocies were brought to the fore by him. Even giving him a pass on helping Wilson get elected, I rank TR as one of the worst presidents right beside his relative FDR.
ENthePeasant February 21, 2013 10:15 AM: I want to see Obama sitting, with Joe Biden chained up like a monkey on his lap. We'll even have Joe wearing one of those little box hats. And we'll have tours, with Liberals having to crawl on their hands and knees, nekkid, for half a mile to worship at his feet... And Sharpton can run the concessions. It'll be awesome.
Alexander February 21, 2013 10:15 AM: A monument is not good enough for our leader. Let's rename a state after him. As a show of bipartisanship, we'll throw in an Islamic reference.

And thus: Al-Obama is born.
Giraffe February 21, 2013 10:18 AM: You will not deface our state. Any more than it already is, anyway. I'll be up there with a rifle picking off the sculptors. I doubt I'd be the only one.

On the other hand, if we carve his face over the top of Lincoln or Roosevelt it might be an improvement.
Tad February 21, 2013 10:21 AM: @Vox Day

I would absolutely love to see Obama added to Mount Rushmore.

Well, there just isn't any room on Mt. Rushmore. So there is that. However, I suspect that upon the President's exit from office and in subsequent years there will be a good deal of celebration of his presidency for a number of reasons among which are...

1. He played a key role in assuring that the Right Wing Recession didn't become a depression

2. He kept Detroit in business

3. He too the U.S. out of Afghanistan and Iraq

4. He ended Don't ask don't tell

5. He took the moral road and supported gay marriage.

6. He engineered the first steps toward a more rational health care system

7. He ended Osama Bin Laden and crippled the Al Quiada network

8. He helped topple Gaddafi

9. He took the moral step of getting the U.S. out of the Torture business

10. He led the move to double fuel efficiency for cars

11. He nominated and got confirmed two outstanding, you Supreme Court Justices

12. Ended the ban on stem cell research

13. Ended Federal support for the Defense of Marriage Act

14. He ended the decline in America's image and increased respect for America that plummeted during the two GWB administrations.
Agent Asper February 21, 2013 10:24 AM: Shut up, Tad.

Please.
Roundtine February 21, 2013 10:24 AM: Vox, you gave some good imagery to work with. What we need is Obama as tall as one of the twin towers and the planes have blown holes in Obama and the tower. But Mexicans are pouring through the hole in Obama and female marines and firefighters are climbing up his body. The other tower has the Folsom Street Fair and what ever else.
DrTorch February 21, 2013 10:24 AM: And thus: Al-Obama is born.

Winner!
VryeDenker February 21, 2013 10:25 AM: What the fuck has he actually done except being half-black? At least Tiger Woods is a great golfer and even Martin Luther King (I can never remember if it was senior or junior) got a revolution going. But what has your president actually done?

South Africa has this same attitude towards Nelson Mandela. His face is on money and his name is on just about every building and street. Yet the only thing he did was sit in prison (which, to be fair, is still more than Barack Obama did).
Roundtine February 21, 2013 10:28 AM: Chinese government reads AG

My Chinese econ prof explained it one day. She drew a picture with 5 men and 5 women. She drew a line from girl 2 to boy 1 on top. At the end, boy 5 and girl 1 were alone. All the Asians in the class nodded. The two or three euros were offended. This isn't even news in Asia, they all know it. Chinese parents press their daughters to marry around age 20-21 if they are not in college. At age 25, they start getting told they are old.

This reminds me, Sanda Fluke should be coming out of Obama's vagina in the statue.
Giraffe February 21, 2013 10:32 AM: I withdraw my support for allowing Tad to stay. I repent in ashes. Does anyone have some sackcloth?. Please forgive me. Make it stop Vox.
newrebeluniv February 21, 2013 10:34 AM: Rushmore was intended as a single work of art, not an incomplete venue that would be added to from time to time. The proper place for Obama's statue is on the national mall. But since there is already one black man there, then the MLK statue would have to be removed to make room. (sort of like how we had to roll all the presidents together to make room for MLK day). The really fun part would be deciding what words would be inscribed on it. Maybe, "if I had a son..."

--Hale
newrebeluniv February 21, 2013 10:36 AM: Besides, Obama's monument should at least be in a state that has some black people. It's not as if the Dakotas want more black tourists in their state.

--Hale
Claymore February 21, 2013 10:39 AM: Why not just re-purpose Washington, adding holes at the hairline for plantings of flowering cherry trees. That way it will look like a halo when it blooms.
The other skeptic February 21, 2013 10:40 AM: President Obama PBUH should received everyone's adulation. There can be no question about that.
VryeDenker February 21, 2013 10:42 AM: There is no god but globalization and Obama is his prophet.
The other skeptic February 21, 2013 10:42 AM: At least Tiger Woods is a great golfer and even Martin Luther King (I can never remember if it was senior or junior) got a revolution going. But what has your president actually done?

And by my calculation, Tiger is less than half black. Hmmm, does that mean ...
VD February 21, 2013 10:44 AM: He played a key role in assuring that the Right Wing Recession didn't become a depression

(laughs). That's remarkably stupid, even by your already impressive standards.
Imatiger February 21, 2013 10:44 AM: Come on. Al Sharpton is such an easy target for ridicule. Find something more challenging. I am stupider for reading this.
Anonymous February 21, 2013 10:45 AM: 9. He took the moral step of getting the U.S. out of the Torture business

Seriously Toad er I mean Tad? So now we can't water board, I mean torture enemy combatants to get information to save American lives but we can use drones to assassinate American citizens thought to be in bed with Al-Qaeda or some other terrorist group without due process. Moral Step my a$$.
The other skeptic February 21, 2013 10:45 AM: Tad, that is a wonderful list.

8. He helped topple Gaddafi

I think you mean: He helped Libya descend into chaos.

However, I like your bold approach to Obama's legacy. Let's see if it holds up.
Daniel February 21, 2013 10:52 AM: I'd prefer a cast of Obama as Major Kong, riding a drone, wearing lady jeans and awkwardly waving a basketball above his head.
Anonymous February 21, 2013 10:52 AM: 2. He kept Detroit in business

No he kept the UAW in business. The auto makers could have filed for bankruptcy to reorganized their debt and nullify the chocking union contracts coming out as better and financially stronger companies. The bailout was not done to help the auto maker but the unions so that they could keep their current bargaining agreements. Tad your level of naiveté, gullibility and stupidity are truly world class.
Giraffe February 21, 2013 10:53 AM: 10. He led the move to double fuel efficiency for cars

I'm curious about this one. Have we cut our gasoline consumption in half in the last four years?
RobertT February 21, 2013 10:53 AM: Nobody can be this stupid. Maybe he's not. Maybe Tad comments on this blog because it's a safe place to vent an ideology he knows is about 30' off kilter. Everybody here just blows it off, and he expects that, but elsewhere it could very likely meet with a different reception. And maybe, just maybe, that's just too much for Tad. Notwithstanding VD, this is a pretty safe place to say wild and crazy things.
Alexander February 21, 2013 10:55 AM: Tad's entire list is a sight to behold. I've heard liberals recite every one of them but it's really something else to see it in writing.

This will be the last time I ask because really I'm beating a dead horse and going OT in every thread, but if Tad still has responses left and as he's clearly in the mood to wax lyrical this administration's accomplishments:

1. Tad, do you concede that gun confiscation is a legitimate concern for gun owners, given the actions of legislatures in California, Missouri, and Washington?

2. Do you believe gun confiscation is acceptable?

3. Regardless of whether or not it is acceptable to you personally, do you believe it is constitutional?
VD February 21, 2013 10:57 AM: Find something more challenging.

This from the guy who was having a tough time keeping up with the subjective value discussion? You seriously want me to make it even harder for you to follow?

Suppongo che posso scrivere il prossimo articolo sulla De Moneta di Galiani in italiano invece inglese, se preferisci cosi, perche non ho un traduzione completo. Sarebbe una sfida abbastanza interessante per voi?
rienzi February 21, 2013 11:05 AM: Five hundred years from now, if there still is anything of a civilization left, historians could well be spending a great deal of their energy in trying to explain today's obsession with elevating complete and total non-entities to the level of demi-gods. I can imagine any number of parallels being drawn between Obama and Incitatus by the future's learned professors .
Agent Asper February 21, 2013 11:05 AM: 9. He took the moral step of getting the U.S. out of the Torture business

Tad, You do realize that we are still doing extraordinary rendition, correct? Outsourcing torture and terror is hardly the moral high-ground.
Stilicho February 21, 2013 11:05 AM: Obamandias..."look on my works ye mighty and...guffaw."
Nate February 21, 2013 11:08 AM: Oh man... so much fail. So. Much. Fail.
Stilicho February 21, 2013 11:08 AM: Last month, MSNBC's Al Sharpton conducted a spirited debate about whether Obama belongs on Mount Rushmore or instead deserves a separate monument to his greatness ...a solemn discussion was held... about whether it is permissible to ever allow Barack Obama's name to pass through one's lips without prefacing it with an honorific such as "President" or "the Honorable" or perhaps "His Excellency" (that really did happen).

Brian: I'm not the Messiah!
Arthur: I say you are, lord, and I should know... I've followed a few.
Harsh February 21, 2013 11:12 AM: @Tad

The comedy writes itself.
Nate February 21, 2013 11:13 AM: "Suppongo che posso scrivere il prossimo articolo sulla De Moneta di Galiani in italiano invece inglese, se preferisci cosi, perche non ho un traduzione completo. Sarebbe una sfida abbastanza interessante per voi?"

Am I the only one that pictured this coming from an angry ghetto black woman.. doing the chicken head and snapping her fingers in a circle out of pure indignation?
Stilicho February 21, 2013 11:17 AM: Am I the only one that pictured this coming from an angry ghetto black woman.. doing the chicken head and snapping her fingers in a circle out of pure indignation?

Well, you were...asshole
zen0 February 21, 2013 11:18 AM: Speaking of Sharpton, Tawana Brawley was tracked down in January and ordered to pay the guy she accused of rape in 1987 over $400K.
Stilicho February 21, 2013 11:19 AM: He ended the decline in America's image and increased respect for America that plummeted during the two GWB administrations.

Mandy: Now, you listen here: 'e's not the Messiah, 'e's a very naughty boy! Now, go away!
Krul February 21, 2013 11:20 AM: However, I don't think Mount Rushmore is sufficient memorial for Barack Soetoro-Soebarkah-Obama. I think he merits a "Chairman Mao" style statue of the sort that the Chinese carved for Martin Luther King. The bigger, the better. I want future generations to be able to see precisely how far the nation descended before its final collapse.

I just had a funny mental image...

The beach at sunset. President Obama's huge stone countenance leering at a vacant landscape from just above the encroaching sand and tide - think 'Ozymandias by the sea with a shiteater grin'.

Enter Charlton Heston:
"YOU IDIOTS! YOU BLEW IT UP! DAMN YOU! DAMN YOU ALL TO HELL!"
Daniel February 21, 2013 11:23 AM: Ho paura Verde uova e prosciutto in Esperanto sarebbe troppo per me. Quanto peggio sarebbe per l'anti-metafisica gigante di analfabetismo? Per favore no. Si tratta di una perdita di tempo e irrita il maiale.

Vuole anche essere abbastanza curiosi per tradurre questo online come ho fatto? Il suo interesse sembra essere in argomento, non lo studio.

[Curiosità - questo senso? La mia familiarità con lo spagnolo fa questo Italiano aspetto grazioso, ma precisa? Nessun indizio.]
Stilicho February 21, 2013 11:24 AM: The beach at sunset. President Obama's huge stone countenance leering at a vacant landscape from just above the encroaching sand and tide - think 'Ozymandias by the sea with a shiteater grin'.

It's called Easter Island
Porky? February 21, 2013 11:29 AM: Given that the great destroyer of American liberty is already up there...

You mean Teddy?
swiftfoxmark2 February 21, 2013 11:32 AM: To quote Malcolm Reynolds:

It's my estimation that every man ever got a statue made of him was one kind of sommbitch or another.
Noah B. February 21, 2013 11:34 AM: "He led the move to double fuel efficiency for cars"

Only double????

Why didn't he increase the fuel efficiency by 100x or 1000x? What a selfish bastard we have for a president.
A February 21, 2013 11:38 AM: This kind of thing makes me wonder if the ancient statues of gods were actually depictions of rulers. That, or at least the ancients knew that their statued persons were gods, or non-humans, or fake, but modern man, as seen from the perspective of two thousands years from now, pretty much worships its rulers as gods. Actually, this tends to support the view that mankind hasn't changed all that much from his ancient days. People are taught that ancient man was stupid and simplistic by seeing the pharaoh as a living god, or the caesars as gods and so forth, but we do exactly the same thing today, it's astounding, yet makes sense.
JartStar February 21, 2013 11:39 AM: The monument needs markers for the people killed by drones, particularly civilian markers.
Tad February 21, 2013 11:39 AM: @Vox Day

He played a key role in assuring that the Right Wing Recession didn't become a depression

(laughs). That's remarkably stupid, even by your already impressive standards.

The hallmark of a failed economic analyst is their unwillingness to admit the most basic truths on their way to occupying an intellectual space that the rest of the community has abandoned as without foundation.

The idea that America is or was in a depression is without merit.

The really interesting thing to ponder is why, against all the evidence, one would desire to convince others that 1) we are in a depression and 2) that collapse is coming. Both these messages are fear inducing when they are demonstrably untrue. It's a bit like making the earnest case that secession is coming or that immigrants will destroy our civilization: unsupportable ideas that if they do anything, they are meant to cause fear.

Why one would be willing to attempt to make others hold on to an irrational fears is an interesting question. And it's not easy to answer. But I suspect it goes back to the issue of the importance of spotting folks who it is best you studiously avoid when you spot them on the street....for safety's sake.
Daniel February 21, 2013 11:40 AM: Heh. "Double fuel efficiency?" He did far more than that. He made fuel efficiency infinite.

By propping up GM, he ensured the production of millions vehicles that no one will ever drive.
By withdrawing the debt from the banks and putting it on the taxpayer, he ensured that unemployment would cut demand for gasoline to a minimum.
Cash for Clunkers modified the standard engine into one that no longer uses any gas.

The guy is a regular Nikola Tesla of fuel efficiency.
mjb February 21, 2013 11:40 AM: If Tad is representative of most of those on the other side, then us civilized folks have nothing to worry about when everything finally hits the fan.
Daniel February 21, 2013 11:42 AM: The idea that America is or was in a depression is without merit.

Tad, I'm dead serious. If you write a book refuting The Return of the Great Depression, I will buy it.
Porky February 21, 2013 11:44 AM: He ended the decline in America's image and increased respect for America that plummeted during the two GWB administrations.

Yes, I've heard Pakistanis are just crazy about drone attacks. Idiot.

My God you are dumb, Tad. Just breathtakingly, painfully dumb.

As in "I get all my political information from Al Sharpton" dumb. I'm talking dumb.
YIH February 21, 2013 11:45 AM: Ta(r)d: 3. He too the U.S. out of Afghanistan and Iraq

http://www.dianawest.net/BlogArchive/tabid/56/Default.aspx

And he wonders why he gets trolled so much
Imatiger February 21, 2013 11:46 AM: @ VD

Oh, a personal attack on my intelligence. That's not new.

I already said I was stupid. What else do you want?

Non, je sais assez au sujet de l’utilite et economie de penurie. Je prefererais que tu baisez toi-meme. Ou bien, essayer etant moins arrogant.
Anonymous February 21, 2013 11:46 AM: "demonstrably untrue"

-Tad

So, demonstrate.

-Archiver
Roundtine February 21, 2013 11:49 AM: 1. He played a key role in assuring that the Right Wing Recession didn't become a depression -the Right Wing is currently in a recession, America is in a depression, Democrats are doing fine

2. He kept Detroit in business - parts of Detroit are being turned into farmland

3. He too the U.S. out of Afghanistan and Iraq -except they're still there

4. He ended Don't ask don't tell -he can get a statue in Greenwich Village for that

5. He took the moral road and supported gay marriage. -he took the political road

6. He engineered the first steps toward a more rational health care system -didn't Romney do that?

7. He ended Osama Bin Laden and crippled the Al Quiada network - except Al-Qaeda is now in Mali, killed ambassador to Libya, and even gave weapons to Al-Qaeda in Syria. So if by cripple you mean support and funded, then yes, he is cripplin' them good.

8. He helped topple Gaddafi -and the subsequent sodomizing with sticks! +2 for Greenwich Village Statue

9. He took the moral step of getting the U.S. out of the Torture business -and into the strait up killin' bizness. Cause you get a life sentence anyway. Thug life, yo!

10. He led the move to double fuel efficiency for cars -he also is an engineer who creates new materials and engine designs? Amazing. Wait for his Nobel science prize.

11. He nominated and got confirmed two outstanding, you Supreme Court Justices. -Bush did that. Just sayin.

12. Ended the ban on stem cell research -massive skillz needed for that one.

13. Ended Federal support for the Defense of Marriage Act - Caligula and a +3 for Greenwich Village monument.

14. He ended the decline in America's image and increased respect for America that plummeted during the two GWB administrations. -Wha?? Do you get outside of the U.S.? The U.S. is a bigger laughing stock. People just think Obama speaks well and has a nice tan.
Daniel February 21, 2013 11:50 AM: You clearly don't know enough, Imatiger.

But if you are taking requests, I'd like a few more admissions of your stuipdity. And candlesticks always make a nice gift.
Stilicho February 21, 2013 11:51 AM: The idea that America is or was in a depression is without merit.

Yet a Nobel Laureate economist who often writes for VERY prominent publications says it is a depression.
Roundtine February 21, 2013 11:51 AM: Have we cut our gasoline consumption in half in the last four years?

Detroit may have.
Roundtine February 21, 2013 11:56 AM: Enter Charlton Heston:

"Well, at least they have advanced statue technology."
Alexander February 21, 2013 11:57 AM: French Grammar Nazi!

Imatiger, 'Tu' is second person singular, 'baisez' is second person plural.
VD February 21, 2013 11:57 AM: The hallmark of a failed economic analyst is their unwillingness to admit the most basic truths on their way to occupying an intellectual space that the rest of the community has abandoned as without foundation.

The rest of the community said everything was fine in 2008. I correctly predicted the crisis. And I correctly predicted the failure of all the "recoveries".

It doesn't matter if all the other economic analysts say everything is fine now. I'm still correct and Z1 proves it.
Joshua_D February 21, 2013 11:59 AM: Shut. Up. Tad.

Seriously, you're being an idiot.
Uninterested Observer February 21, 2013 11:59 AM: Why one would be willing to attempt to make others hold on to an irrational fears is an interesting question.

Tad; two words, precious metals.
Jeigh Di February 21, 2013 12:02 PM: A monument is not good enough for our leader. Let's rename a state after him. As a show of bipartisanship, we'll throw in an Islamic reference.

And thus: Al-Obama is born.

I nominate Massachusetts. We should also mandate Obama bobble heads on every automobile dashboard and introduce a three dollar bill featuring His likeness.
James Dixon February 21, 2013 12:02 PM: Re: Tad, points 1-15.

I see you're lying again Tad.
Jack Amok February 21, 2013 12:03 PM: It's called Easter Island

Good, let's send him there immediately to pose for the statue, and send all his voters along too to watch and admire.
VD February 21, 2013 12:03 PM: Oh, a personal attack on my intelligence. That's not new.

It's not an attack, it's a direct observation of the discussion yesterday. Je suis desole, je parlez solemante un petit tipu francais.
Joshua_D February 21, 2013 12:04 PM: How about Obama urinal cakes?
Jack Amok February 21, 2013 12:08 PM: Seriously, you're being an idiot.

You've conjugated the verb incorrectly. As much as the phrase present progressive might seem to apply to Tad, grammatically it makes the your sentence incorrect. I believe you want the 2nd person present singular form of "to be."
Daniel February 21, 2013 12:09 PM: How about Obama urinal cakes?

Good.

Better: Obama ritual urine magic.
Imatiger February 21, 2013 12:10 PM: @ VD

Yeah well, look it up. It's what I did for the Italian.

Your problem is that you consistently mistake your opinion for fact. Unfortunately, it narrows the scope of the information available for you to digest.

I am reminded of one of my favorite teachers. He said "Confused yet? Good, you are ready to learn."

You are so sure that you are the smartest guy in the room, that you've got all the answers, yet you can't even get to the synthesis part of the dialetic. You have no problem admonishing other people, and treating your perspective as objective fact, but you yourself are synthetically retarded. You are stuck.

@ Alexander

Good catch. I am rusty.

@ Daniel

I am stupid ad infinitum. Satisfied?
George of the Hole February 21, 2013 12:14 PM: Tad is not very bright. He inserts his male protuberance in human excrement.
bob k. mando February 21, 2013 12:15 PM: OT for Tad:
www.youtube.com/watch?v=DKKxmMaORWo
Anonymous February 21, 2013 12:16 PM: "A monument is not good enough for our leader. Let's rename a state after him."

Let's start small and say name a city after him...Detrobama. Fitting I think.

Jeff
James Dixon February 21, 2013 12:16 PM: > You are so sure that you are the smartest guy in the room...

Arrogance is not stupidity, Imatiger.
Daniel February 21, 2013 12:20 PM: Imatiger
I am stupid ad infinitum. Satisfied?

Nope, but that's not a bad start!
James Dixon February 21, 2013 12:21 PM: > ...and introduce a three dollar bill featuring His likeness.

Considering the colloquial phrase normally associated with a three dollar bill, I'd say this is an excellent idea.

We should get Rush and Hannity on this immediately. The best thing is that the democrats could be called racist if the opposed it. :)
JW February 21, 2013 12:24 PM: "And in tribute to his greatest admirer, Chrissy "Tingles" Matthews, we would let him go first".

Yes. And Chrissy would love it.
VD February 21, 2013 12:24 PM: Your problem is that you consistently mistake your opinion for fact. Unfortunately, it narrows the scope of the information available for you to digest.

You said that before. You are still wrong. You simply are not intelligent enough to reliably distinguish between my EXPRESSION of my opinion and my CITATION of a demonstrable fact.

You are so sure that you are the smartest guy in the room, that you've got all the answers, yet you can't even get to the synthesis part of the dialetic. You have no problem admonishing other people, and treating your perspective as objective fact, but you yourself are synthetically retarded. You are stuck.

I'm not always the smartest guy in the room. I am USUALLY the smartest guy in the room. I'm not always correct. I am RELIABLY correct and readily admit that I am wrong on the occasions that it is demonstrated. You can't seem to grasp that there cannot be any synthesis between true and false, between subjective and objective, between that which is and that which is not. It is a logical impossibility. And you have things entirely backwards. My perspective is not objective fact, but rather I do my best to base my perspective on what has been determined to be either objective fact or rock-solid reason.

This is nothing new. You complain in nebulous and general terms, but when it goes to specifics, I will be proven correct. Again. And again.
Joshua_D February 21, 2013 12:24 PM: Jack Amok February 21, 2013 12:08 PM
Seriously, you're being an idiot.

You've conjugated the verb incorrectly. As much as the phrase present progressive might seem to apply to Tad, grammatically it makes the your sentence incorrect. I believe you want the 2nd person present singular form of "to be."

What are you talking about? How is "You are being an idiot." incorrect?
Roundtine February 21, 2013 12:25 PM: Find something more challenging.

The rest of the article is not about Al Sharpton. In fact, the second sentence isn't either. It's about MSNBC and Obama worship. An article written by a liberal, in the Guardian. And Vox didn't mentioned the Sharpton point, but the other. 很可怜。
Giraffe February 21, 2013 12:27 PM: What are you talking about? How is "You are being an idiot." incorrect?

Here is the correction:

"Tad, you ARE an idiot."

Your sentence assumes he as the capacity to stop.
Kickass February 21, 2013 12:28 PM: Tad isn't real...right?
Nate February 21, 2013 12:29 PM: " I'm still correct and Z1 proves it."

Wait...

We're accepting a report published by the Fed as proof of something? how about we back that down to... provides strong circumstantial evidence for it.
Rex Little February 21, 2013 12:31 PM: What we need is another Rushmore to commemorate the Presidents who've done the most to destroy American liberty. I'm not sure Obama belongs on that one yet; he has stiff competition from Lincoln, Wilson, FDR, LBJ, Nixon (wage and price controls) and Dubya (TSA). Obama still has 47 months to build his legacy; plenty of time to catch up.
Susan February 21, 2013 12:34 PM: I guess Tadster isn't aware that the MI governor has the next 30 days to decide if Detroit can go bankrupt or not. I am guessing it will happen. Unless Obama pulls some strings.
Imatiger February 21, 2013 12:35 PM: @ VD

Sure, sure. Proven correct.

Such as what you said here: "The rest of the community said everything was fine in 2008. I correctly predicted the crisis. And I correctly predicted the failure of all the "recoveries".

Roubini. Taleb, Schiff, Soros, and Elizabeth Warren, of all people, predicted the crisis. I predicted the friggin crisis. The rest of the community demonstrably did not say everything was fine. Chew on that nebulousness.
Joshua_D February 21, 2013 12:36 PM: Giraffe February 21, 2013 12:27 PM
What are you talking about? How is "You are being an idiot." incorrect?

Here is the correction:

"Tad, you ARE an idiot."

Your sentence assumes he as the capacity to stop.

Ah, I stand corrected. And I obviously need to brush up on my grammar. I mean, I know this is supposed to mean something - "2nd person present singular form of "to be." - but it just looks like blurry hieroglyphs.
Stilicho February 21, 2013 12:38 PM: ou can't seem to grasp that there cannot be any synthesis between true and false, between subjective and objective, between that which is and that which is not. It is a logical impossibility

That bird is no more!

Not LOB like the others, but I'm only human and I could not resist
jack February 21, 2013 12:41 PM: Daniel February 21, 2013 11:42 AM

The idea that America is or was in a depression is without merit.

Tad, I'm dead serious. If you write a book refuting The Return of the Great Depression, I will buy it.

I would too. There never seems to be enough things to laugh about as you read them. Yes. Write the book Tad.
Giraffe February 21, 2013 12:42 PM: Ah, I stand corrected. And I obviously need to brush up on my grammar. I mean, I know this is supposed to mean something - "2nd person present singular form of "to be." - but it just looks like blurry hieroglyphs.

Don't worry about it. My own comment had a typo, and did not make sense, as sentences don't assume.

We can look at the amazing transformation of Nate from barely literate, "I can typing", to effective communication for inspiration.
Nate February 21, 2013 12:48 PM: Hey... old man... "I CAN TYPING!!" is a reference to a popular web cartoon.

keep your meme's straight or we're going to put water and magnesium in your colostomy bag again.
Giraffe February 21, 2013 12:53 PM: My meme's are straight. That very much described you in the early years. I can only assume homeschooling the boys helped the teacher as well.
IM2L844 February 21, 2013 12:56 PM: The rest of the article is not about Al Sharpton. In fact, the second sentence isn't either. It's about MSNBC and Obama worship.

Yes. It's about Obama's "Two Witnesses", Gibbs and Axelrod.
Nate February 21, 2013 12:58 PM: "My meme's are straight. That very much described you in the early years. I can only assume homeschooling the boys helped the teacher as well."

bah... and nonsense... you've just read the ellipses so much now you have accepted them as stylist license.
Nate February 21, 2013 1:00 PM: Fact is I got a 5 on the AP english exam and skipped 3 semesters of college english lit because of that and my ACT scores.

I just don't ever proofread anything.
Porky! February 21, 2013 1:05 PM: I can think of no higher honor for our Dear Leader than to have a new species of parasitic worm named after him.

Paragordius Obamai, a parasitic worm from phylum Nematomorpha.

Some fun facts about Obamai:

*Discovered in Kenya

*Known as a Gordian worm because of it's tendency to tie itself in knots.

*Obamai is parthogenetic - it possesses no male sex organs and only gives birth to females.

*Likes to induce it's host to commit suicide, then reproduce like crazy inside the corpse.
Imatiger February 21, 2013 1:07 PM: @ VD

I suggest you re-educate your self on dialetics. Why, just this morning I was able to wikipedia information about dialetics that refutes your argument that polar opposites, true and false, cannot be reconciled. Indeed, the whole point of much of dialetics is to free ourself from that perspective.

From Wikipedia:

For example, formal dualism regards the opposites as mutually exclusive entities, whilst monism finds each to be an epiphenomenon of the other. Dialectical thinking rejects both views. The dialectical method requires focus on both at the same time. It looks for a transcendence of the opposites entailing a leap of the imagination to a higher level, which (1) provides justification for rejecting both alternatives as false and/or (2) helps elucidate a real but previously veiled integral relationship between apparent opposites that have been kept apart and regarded as distinct.

If you were paying attention yesterday, you would see that I arguing for an integral relationship between subjective and objective value, value and price. Exactly as dialectics seeks. You seem to have difficulty getting out of black and white thinking. Fortunately, dialetical behavior therapy can help you.
Porky February 21, 2013 1:07 PM: No, I didn't make it up.
Ferd February 21, 2013 1:09 PM: "5. He took the moral road and supported gay marriage."

Sighs,
There is nothing moral about gay marriage except in the minds of delusional deviates.

And,I believe an iron one trillion dollar coin would be appropriate for Obummer's likeness. Then it can rust to a nice flaky crust sorta like our economy. Oh, and it would be the exact size of a manhole cover so every city and town in America can have an image of his likeness to drive over in their Priuses. Take that Chairman Mao!!
Nate February 21, 2013 1:10 PM: "Fortunately, dialetical behavior therapy can help you."

Yeah Vox!

Then you too can be one of the brilliant folks that thinks 2+2 = purple badger.
VD February 21, 2013 1:23 PM: I suggest you re-educate your self on dialetics. Why, just this morning I was able to wikipedia information about dialetics that refutes your argument that polar opposites, true and false, cannot be reconciled. Indeed, the whole point of much of dialetics is to free ourself from that perspective.

Yes, that's Hegelian dialectic. It is wildly and ludicrously incorrect; I suggest you read Karl Popper's take on the fraud that was Hegel. I'll stick with the Aristotelian dialectic, thank you very much. You can reconcile true and false all you like. I'll stick with the unvarnished truth and A != Not A.
VD February 21, 2013 1:28 PM: Roubini. Taleb, Schiff, Soros, and Elizabeth Warren, of all people, predicted the crisis. I predicted the friggin crisis. The rest of the community demonstrably did not say everything was fine. Chew on that nebulousness.

Sure you did. How typical. After getting told I was crazy and stupid, and people pointing to the mainstream economists saying everything was fine and there wasn't a housing bubble, now everyone is claiming to have seen what I did, and wrote about, back in 2002. Hell, people were still trying to make fun of RGD in 2010, saying "so where is that depression".

No doubt in 2020, you'll be claiming that we were in a depression in 2013 too.
Daniel February 21, 2013 1:32 PM: Wow, Ima, do you truly not know that fundamental difference? I strongly recommend you stop typing and start reading. It really doesn't take that long to get through the basics, but the basics are most clearly what you lack.
Nate February 21, 2013 1:33 PM: he'll probably inform us that he was telling everyone to buy and horde gold back in 2004 when it dipped below 400 bucks.
Stilicho February 21, 2013 1:54 PM: stylist license

Yes, Nate, I suppose that would explain some of your comments. Will you rename your blog "The salon"?
Tad February 21, 2013 1:55 PM: @Ferd

Sighs,
There is nothing moral about gay marriage except in the minds of delusional deviates.

No, there is nothing inherently "Moral" about gay marriage. Nor is there anything inherently moral about straight marriage. Nor is there anything inherently immoral or moral about choosing not to marry at all.

However, there an inherent moral good in supporting a person's right and ability to marry the person they love, whether gay or straight. This is where President Obama succeeded in taking the moral high ground. I'll grant, it wasn't hard. The moral high ground has been ceded by a good percentage of Americans blinded by absurd and immoral notions that homosexuals ought not be allowed to legally marry while straight folks may.
mjb February 21, 2013 2:06 PM: Tad,

You're the fool so often spoken about in the Bible.

Why do you even bother posting here? Most of us don't go on feminist/gay blogs trying to convince them that their ways are foolish and will ultimately lead to the downfall of western civ.
George of the Hole February 21, 2013 2:06 PM: Tad: ...inherent moral good...

Since when does an atheist believe in "inherent moral good"? Lol!
Josh February 21, 2013 2:12 PM: For his next act, imatiger is going to somehow try to convince us that subjective value is moral relativism.
Josh February 21, 2013 2:15 PM: No, there is nothing inherently "Moral" about gay marriage. Nor is there anything inherently moral about straight marriage. Nor is there anything inherently immoral or moral about choosing not to marry at all.However, there an inherent moral good in supporting a person's right and ability to marry the person they love, whether gay or straight.

Your conclusion, as usual, contradicts the three sentences preceding it.

This is nothing than a naked assertion.

If nothing is inherently moral about marriage, gay marriage, or no marriage, how can supporting gay marriage be inherently moral?
Robert in Arabia February 21, 2013 2:16 PM: Elect Mugabe, get Zimbabwe.
allyn71 February 21, 2013 2:16 PM: Because the homo said so. Just like every other thing that comes out of his incontinent mouth.
Imatiger February 21, 2013 2:26 PM: @ VD

So now you've changed your words from the "rest of the community" to "mainstream economists". Shifting goalposts VD. Nice deflection to distract from your wrongness.

It didn't take a genius to see the housing bubble. It didn't take a genius to see it would pop like all the rest. Or maybe it did, since you and I are both card carrying Mensa members.

At least we've cleared up which brand of dialetics we each subscribe to.

No I won't be declaring a Depression anytime. It is a term way too loaded with rhetorical baggage and without a consensus definition.

@ Daniel

Oh Daniel, riding the coattails of our host.
Daniel February 21, 2013 2:30 PM: Better than being its parasite.
George of the Hole February 21, 2013 2:37 PM: Tad's not very bright. He dips his dong in doody.
Tad February 21, 2013 2:38 PM: @josh

If nothing is inherently moral about marriage, gay marriage, or no marriage, how can supporting gay marriage be inherently moral?

It is a moral good for a community to provide all its members with the same freedoms and rights under the law. This is what President Obama and others who support gay marriage are doing. There is nothing inherently moral about being married. But it's supporting the idea that all people ought to be treated equally under the law because all people are equally human that is the moral good.

I shouldn't have to explain this.

In the end, however, this battle for making America is more ethical and moral place is over since the battle over gay marriage is itself over: We won. Now it's just about cleaning up the mess that the immoral opponents of gay marriage created.
Soga February 21, 2013 2:44 PM: Tad insists a political system is intrinsically moral. And yet, insists religion shouldn't be involved in politics. That says it all there. He has a gay hamster in his head skullf***ing his brain.

Female hamsters don't even compare to this.
Daniel February 21, 2013 2:44 PM: Soga wins.
Dan in Tx February 21, 2013 2:45 PM: Tad: "In the end, however, this battle for making America is more ethical and moral place is over since the battle over gay marriage is itself over: We won. Now it's just about cleaning up the mess that the immoral opponents of gay marriage created."

Oh and it looks like the end result is going to be so much better. I just can't wait. Hearing people like this with their complete disconnect from reality is like listening to someone trying to go on about how far superior their new chimney free fireplace is while the house is burning down around them.
Donald Young February 21, 2013 2:51 PM: I like the idea about Biden sitting on his lap with a chain and monkey hat..the only change I would make is incorporate Reggie Love in it, also in monkey garb.
Frank Brady February 21, 2013 2:54 PM: "Tad" allegedly wrote, "Well, there just isn't any room on Mt. Rushmore. So there is that. However, I suspect that upon the President's exit from office and in subsequent years there will be a good deal of celebration of his presidency for a number of reasons among which are..."

I confess that I've been slow to pick up on this but clearly "Tad" and probably "dh" and "Imatiger" are (how to say this politely) "artificial" personalities ginned up by Vox to keep the Ilk's adrenalin flowing and engender lively discussion. I'm a bit surprised that Vox would use such tactics but that MUST be what's happening. No living human beings can possibly be simultaneously as consistently arrogant and stupid as these posters.
Alexander February 21, 2013 3:00 PM: Nah. Anyone using Tad as a sock-puppet would never have said half the things Tad has, out of fear that they would be so ridiculous they would give the game away.
James Dixon February 21, 2013 3:03 PM: > ...but clearly "Tad" and probably "dh" and "Imatiger" are (how to say this politely) "artificial" personalities ginned up by Vox to keep the Ilk's adrenalin flowing and engender lively discussion.

Vox has already made it clear that's not the case. Besides, comparing dh to Tad is an insult to dh. Imatiger hasn't been around long enough to judge.
The Deuce February 21, 2013 3:17 PM: Tad:

2. He kept Detroit in business

Yeah, good thing he prevented a financial emergency in Detroit: http://www.reuters.com/article/2013/02/20/us-usa-detroit-emergency-idUSBRE91I13I20130220
Starbuck February 21, 2013 3:19 PM: However, there an inherent moral good in supporting a person's right and ability to marry the person they love, whether gay or straight. This is where President Obama succeeded in taking the moral high ground. I'll grant, it wasn't hard. The moral high ground has been ceded by a good percentage of Americans blinded by absurd and immoral notions that homosexuals ought not be allowed to legally marry while straight folks may. - Tad

You know what Tad. God did not say murder was an abomination before him. However, he did say that homosexual acts were. Remember that when your precious democrat leaders implode the economy and warlords rise up through this land. They will care not one bit for homosexual anything and slit your throat just to see the funny look on your face.

No matter what you or any deviant says, your sexual sin cannot be normalized. Too bad. Live with it.
George of the Hole February 21, 2013 3:22 PM: Tad: I shouldn't have to explain this.

Explain what? Why you are an atheist who suddenly believes in inherent moral good?

ROFL!
Anonagain February 21, 2013 3:27 PM: personalities ginned up by Vox to keep the Ilk's adrenalin flowing and engender lively discussion

Time is too precious a commodity for Vox to waste pretending to be a diseased, demented, degenerate with an incurable case of verbal diarrhea merely for the purpose of enlivening the blog discussion - not to mention the fact that it would be injurious to any sound mind to produce such Leftist garbage for any prolonged period of time.
Tad February 21, 2013 3:39 PM: @Starbuck

You know what Tad. God did not say murder was an abomination before him. However, he did say that homosexual acts were.

Why bring in an imaginary friend to this discussion. No god said any such thing. Rather, human beings wrote this many years ago. Any attempt to base a moral system on the the imaginary declarations of an imaginary invisible being doesn't get too far.

Remember that when your precious democrat leaders implode the economy and warlords rise up through this land. They will care not one bit for homosexual anything and slit your throat just to see the funny look on your face.

And now we are back to the imaginary "uprising" in the U.S. Lovely. You, Vox Day, and others keep predicting and hoping and praying for this. Why I can't imagine. Let me be among those who break it to you. There will be no uprising and throat slitting. But you can always pray to your imaginary god for it.
Tad February 21, 2013 3:40 PM: @George

Explain what? Why you are an atheist who suddenly believes in inherent moral good?

No sillier than believing an imaginary god provides advice on what is inherently morally good.
VD February 21, 2013 3:42 PM: So now you've changed your words from the "rest of the community" to "mainstream economists". Shifting goalposts VD. Nice deflection to distract from your wrongness. It didn't take a genius to see the housing bubble. It didn't take a genius to see it would pop like all the rest. Or maybe it did, since you and I are both card carrying Mensa members.

I'm not changing anything. The rest of what "community"? I was referring to the only group who took public positions on the matter, whose positions can be verified. And while it certainly didn't take a genius to see the housing bubble, it did take a fairly perceptive individual to simultaneously call the housing bubble, connect it to the potential collapse of the global financial system, and recommend going heavily into gold, all in a single month in 2002.

We're seriously into a depression already, it's just that you have to know which measures matter. We're $22 trillion south of where we should be by the 60-year postwar growth average. That's a depression.
JartStar February 21, 2013 3:43 PM: It is a moral good for a community to provide all its members with the same freedoms and rights under the law.

Which is why non-citizens, children, and felons should be allowed to vote and have the exact same freedoms and rights as citizens in a community. Anything less is immoral since clearly they are all equally human.
Tad February 21, 2013 3:48 PM: @jartstar

Which is why non-citizens, children, and felons should be allowed to vote and have the exact same freedoms and rights as citizens in a community. Anything less is immoral since clearly they are all equally human.

We draw lines where they clearly, obviously and rationally should be drawn. There is literally no clear, obvious or rational justification for denying homosexuals the right to marry. The only justification is bigotry driven by ignorance.
Alexander February 21, 2013 3:53 PM: If for no other reason, a society is fully rational to take action against normalizing homosexuality on the basis of its rates of infectious disease.
James Dixon February 21, 2013 3:55 PM: > There is literally no clear, obvious or rational justification for denying homosexuals the right to marry.

Agreed. Of course, there is the small matter of defining "marriage". But, like Asher, you think the way I use language is hopelessly out of date.
Tad February 21, 2013 3:58 PM: @Alexander

If for no other reason, a society is fully rational to take action against normalizing homosexuality on the basis of its rates of infectious disease.

There is nothing about homosexuality that causes disease or increased rates of infectious disease. Risky activity causes higher rates of infectious disease. There is nothing about being homosexual or engaging in homosexual sex that naturally results in disease.

Move along....you are over your head.
Sun Xhu February 21, 2013 3:58 PM: There is literally no clear, obvious or rational justification for denying homosexuals the right to marry. The only justification is bigotry driven by ignorance.

"Marriage" is a construct of the church. Any efforts to "legalize" "homosexual-marriage" are an attack on the churches.

We need to remove all state and federal legislation relating to the institution of marriage, as it violates people's freedom of religion rights.
Whos ur taddy February 21, 2013 3:59 PM: "If for no other reason, a society is fully rational to take action against normalizing homosexuality on the basis of its rates of infectious disease."

And their high rates of child molestation.
Tad February 21, 2013 3:59 PM: @james

Agreed. Of course, there is the small matter of defining "marriage". But, like Asher, you think the way I use language is hopelessly out of date.

Yep. It's true that the old, illegitimate idea of defining marriage as something only between a man and woman is not merely out of date, but irrational.
Alexander February 21, 2013 4:01 PM: So... you want me to reword it as Society has an incentive not to normalize "risky activity".

OK then, but the point still stands.
Imatiger February 21, 2013 4:03 PM: @ Sun Xhu

Exactly.
James Dixon February 21, 2013 4:06 PM: > ,,,but irrational.

A definition going back almost a thousand years in English, and derived from the Latin going back thousands is irrational. But obviously Tad is completely rational at all times.
Nate February 21, 2013 4:08 PM: "We're seriously into a depression already, it's just that you have to know which measures matter. We're $22 trillion south of where we should be by the 60-year postwar growth average. That's a depression."

...

FFS...

Economics that doesn't involve keynesian gibberish... or claims measured in keynesian gibberish... those are the posts I cherish.

yes yes... by the terms of their own keynesian gibberish they are wrong.

its still flinging poo.
Sun Xhu February 21, 2013 4:09 PM: In the United States, the government has no business deterring any activity at all, by one of its citizens, which doesn't harm another citizen, without that citizen's consent.

Morality is the purview of whichever religion you subscribe to, not any form of US govt.
David of One February 21, 2013 4:13 PM: Too much about a tad too little.

A number of the Ilk have tried to help you grow & understand ... and believe it or not VD has too.

I sincerely hope 'the light goes on' in your mind and you understand how much you've accepted as truth without trying to challenge what you think you know.

Understandably, most of the Ilk just don't have the patience.

If, at some point, you do begin to understand most will not hold it against you as most have been where you are now.

I would be happy for you if or when you begin to see and understand more clearly about Life is really about and what is important.

You have passion without understanding. Your reciting rote "facts" without exerting the effort to challenge what you think you know is true or not.

It would be very sad if you never achieve this. Regardless of our current differences, I do not wish this for you or anyone else ... to go through their entire life never knowing what has been kept and/or stolen from them.

Most of the rest of the Ilk understand the folly of my attempt here and now ... but to a fault I and others are still trying because we think you are worth the effort.
The Deuce February 21, 2013 4:17 PM: Tad:

There is nothing about homosexuality that causes disease or increased rates of infectious disease.

Ah, well then, homosexuals must just have the absolute worst luck in the world. All that disease just by chance, with no relationship to their lifestyle whatsoever. Poor fellows.
Imatiger February 21, 2013 4:21 PM: @ Tad

While I do believe government should have no business getting involved in marriage, and you should be able to do what you want among consenting adults, and I don't get why there is so much hate directed to you;

the fact is that certain groups of homosexuals do engage in high risk behavior that spread disease, in a pattern that is qualitatively different from heterosexuals. That's why there have been so many social programs targeting homosexual sub-populations. Epidemiologists will group HIV transmission rates by sexual preference, and they aren't doing it because they want to be bigoted assholes.
Anonagain February 21, 2013 4:24 PM: and I don't get why there is so much hate directed to you;

See all of human history for a clue.
Nate February 21, 2013 4:24 PM: "Oh, do tell David....what is clear about life that I need to understand?"

Well we could start with the rather obvious... I mean you seem a bit confused about the whole... not sucking dick thing.
The Deuce February 21, 2013 4:25 PM: Tad:

There is literally no clear, obvious or rational justification for denying homosexuals the right to marry.

There is literally no rational justification for "gay marriage" in the first place, and no rational foundation whatsoever for the notion that there is such a "right". Proponents invariably start from the bizarre assumption that the existence of such a "right" is universally self-evident, and that marriage and having a sodomy buddy are somehow self-evidently identical, without ever arguing for either claim.
David of One February 21, 2013 4:28 PM: Tad,

My intent is not to teach ... instead I am attempting to challenge you to challenge yourself and what you think you know.

It is a challenge to you and for you.

This shouldn't be an affront to you ... this isn't about me thinking or saying I'm smart & right and you are the opposite.

Besides, you are waaaay over your 5 post limit per thread. ;-)
Anonymous February 21, 2013 4:28 PM: You aren't making any sense. - Tad

HAHAHAHA!
Now that's rich, Princess.
Anonagain February 21, 2013 4:29 PM: This is why the freak of nature has to go. He refuses to follow the 5-comment limit imposed on him and the constant emission of faggotosis is intolerable.
Alexander February 21, 2013 4:32 PM: Straight marriage brings with it a family structure that provide a male with an incentive to produce in excess of his personal need. It provides a female with the necessary resources to have offspring, who in turn are absolutely necessary if the society wants to exist in 50 years time.

So in short, the (heterosexual) family unit recognized by society and codified in religious and secular law has been the bedrock of civilization's wealth and continuity.
Alexander February 21, 2013 4:34 PM: I apologize to everyone else. There was absolutely no need to play into Tad's game and distinguish marriage with the prefix "straight". I won't make that mistake again.
WaterBoy February 21, 2013 4:35 PM: Anonagain: "the constant emission of faggotosis is intolerable"

And yet, it isn't Tad who is constantly talking about where he's sticking his private parts.

Seriously, guys...if you're going to go so far off topic, can you at least stick to football, guns, and whiskey?
The Deuce February 21, 2013 4:40 PM: Tad:

The thing though, as it relates to this discussion, is that there is nothing about homosexuals that justify discriminating against them, as was suggested.

Actually, what was "suggested", or rather stated outright by you, is that there is nothing about homosexuality that causes increased rates of infectious disease, a claim that is clearly false to facts.

As for there being nothing to justify discrimination, let's examine that word shall we? Discrimination just means treating two things differently. It tends to be used negatively in our present culture, in which telling someone they aren't the best thing since sliced bread is commonly considered the worst thing you can possibly do, but it has positive connotations too, as in "He has discriminating tastes."

Now, treating things differently when they are in fact different is not unjustified, but is rather basic rationality. So, if a particular sexual lifestyle causes greatly increased rates of infectious disease compared to others, it's not unjustified, but rather logical, to treat it as if it causes greatly increased rates of infectious disease.
WaterBoy February 21, 2013 4:41 PM: Shutup, Tad. That wasn't directed at you.
Anonagain February 21, 2013 4:43 PM: And yet, it isn't Tad who is constantly talking about where he's sticking his private parts.

Of course not - it's a disgusting admission which goes without saying. But, there are those who can't and won't so easily overlook this freak of nature here in the midst of the blog. There is no topic that cloaks the inherent degeneracy in the commenter.
Alexander February 21, 2013 4:49 PM: Tad, given how you're so eager to refute my points today, any chance of you answering my gun questions?
The Deuce February 21, 2013 4:50 PM: Tad:

I suppose. But then again there would be no rational justification for straight marriage.

Wrong. It's trivially easy to make a rational justification for straight marriage. For starters, it's necessary for the continuation of the human race, given its association with birth rates. It's also trivially easy to point to the lack of civilization and/or demographic collapse wherever the nuclear family has fallen apart or didn't exist in the first place.

The issue is there a rational justification for discriminating between straight and gay marriage. And of course there is not.

Well, let's see here. We need marriage for social stability, continuation of the human race, and civilization. We need gay marriage for... well, nothing really. Pretending that the two are the same thing is, well, just that: a massive game of pretend.
David of One February 21, 2013 4:50 PM: It is about you.

You are the point.

No rabbit out of the hat magic trick, no earth shattering stupendous life changing logic. Just me asserting that after a life of making some incredibly stupid mistakes based upon crap I was fed growing up and learning otherwise ... I think you are important. No charity.

Otherwise you can tell me to just fuck off, eat shit & die with my sappy old guy 'caring' stuff and other fucked up crap about life, love and the meaning of the universe.
Anonagain February 21, 2013 4:51 PM: Don't flatter yourself, freak. People have always had a morbid curiosity when it comes to freak shows, train wrecks, fires, etc.
David of One February 21, 2013 4:51 PM: Sorry ... I'm going to be offline a while. Gotta get back to work.
The Deuce February 21, 2013 4:57 PM: Tad:

But of course homosexuality does not cause increased rates of infection. Just as with heterosexuals, it is risky and unsafe sex that causes increased rates of infection.

And homosexuality causes more risky and unsafe sex, and therefore increased rates of infection. The rates of infection among homosexuals are not chance, and aren't going go away. They follow from the lifestyle common to them, and the commonality of that lifestyle follows from the nature of homosexuality itself. Hence, to treat it as if it were the same as tendencies that don't have the same consequences is not being just or moral (not that an atheist such as yourself has any rational basis for moral claims in the first place). It's just sticking one's head in the sand and being deliberately irrational.
Nate February 21, 2013 4:58 PM: "But there is no "not sucking dick thing". There is no law against it. You aren't making any sense."

What does law have to do with it? We're talking about what is clear about life. What is clear is that dick sucking is a rather dumb thing for a man to do.

Its clear to a huge percentage of the male population... which is why we don't do it... and actually use it as an insult.

There are all manner of justifications for that knowledge... the most obvious being happiness depression and life expectancy. You can play the snowflake all you want... but the plain truth is homosexuals are far less happy... far more likely to suffer depression... more likely to off themselves... and have a lower life expectancy.

These facts are taught in medical schools all over the country.

But hey... Med Schools are run by people that hate homosexuals right?
papabear February 21, 2013 5:01 PM: Hasn't he hit the limit of 5 for a thread?
James Dixon February 21, 2013 5:09 PM: > Hasn't he hit the limit of 5 for a thread?

Vox is apparently busy at the moment.
The Deuce February 21, 2013 5:20 PM: We could easily replace the word "marriage" with "coupling" and we'd have a continuation of the human race.

Wrong. We've got some examples right here and now where marriage has been replaced with coupling, and the results are social chaos, crime, and demographic collapse.

Well, gay marriage also, by definition, results in stability.

No it doesn't, nor can you simply define it as such. There has been no increase in family or social stability in those places that have decided to officially declare gay relationships tantamount to marriage.

And must I remind you that homosexuals can and do produce children.

Not through homosexuality or homosexual relationships

But unless you are going to require that marriage only be allowed if children are produced, then that issue is off the table.

No it isn't. Marriage is the type of institution that produces children and raises them in manner that is healthy and upholds civilization, even if not every single marriage ends up actually fulfilling that end. The idea that we should all say that homosexual relationships are marriage on that basis is like the idea that we should all pretend that men are women on the basis that not all women get pregnant.
Imatiger February 21, 2013 5:25 PM: @ Nate

Correlation is not causation. They may be more depressed, suicidal, etc., but an equally logical explanation than what you are putting forth is that the persecution directed their way causes these feelings, not being homosexual.
George of the Hole February 21, 2013 5:27 PM: George of the Hole: you are an atheist who suddenly believes in inherent moral good?

Tad: No sillier than believing an imaginary god provides advice on what is inherently morally good.

ROFLMAO!! Notice, everyone, that when Tad is confronted with his own cognitive dissonance and his own contradictory statements on record for all to see his immediate reaction is to... lash out at God!

What a dark dungeon is the mind of the gaytheist.
The Deuce February 21, 2013 5:32 PM: Imatiger:

Correlation is not causation. They may be more depressed, suicidal, etc., but an equally logical explanation than what you are putting forth is that the persecution directed their way causes these feelings, not being homosexual.

That's the usual excuse, of course (and also the only possible one), though the same trends hold even in extremely liberal, gay-friendly places. I suspect that there is such a feeling of persecution and of not being accepted which has a lot to do with it, but I suspect that feeling cannot be eradicated no matter how much acceptance a society has for the practice, because they will always have the subconscious feeling of nature itself nagging at them.
Dan in Tx (waiting for Utopia to break out any minute) February 21, 2013 5:39 PM: What was the topic again? How the hell did we get bogged down in all this gay shit? Oh yeah....

Shut up Tad
kh123 February 21, 2013 5:48 PM: As per the Taddites, a massive upside-down phallic with two Venus symbols domineering over it; from which Skyy vodka, Pabst, or some other hipster drink of choice pours continually from the tip.

Mt Lushmore, otherwise known as Candy Cock Mountain.
kh123 February 21, 2013 5:55 PM: ..."Strength, Terror, Domineer" in classic Latin font engraved at the base.

And all the Taddites say "A-MAN".
Imatiger February 21, 2013 6:01 PM: @ kh123

That's pretty funny. Do you do gay marketing? You've got something here that you can monetize.
Soga February 21, 2013 6:03 PM: "Correlation is not causation. They may be more depressed, suicidal, etc., but an equally logical explanation than what you are putting forth is that the persecution directed their way causes these feelings, not being homosexual."

Persecution?

Persecution is being crucified upside down on a cross because of a belief. Persecution is being beaten, whipped, and driven out of your home because of a belief. Persecution is having your body broken, your home seized, and your wife taken and raped, all because of a belief you held.

What gays experience is no different from what Christians experience on a daily basis in America from atheists. It's not persecution. To call that persecution is laughable.

That said... do you believe homosexuality is a behavior that should not be shamed?
Imatiger February 21, 2013 6:15 PM: @ Soga

Nah. I ask myself what would Jesus do? He hung out with thieves and whores. I don't remember him being ashamed, or him telling them they should be. So homosexuals? Nah.
kh123 February 21, 2013 6:20 PM: "You've got something here that you can monetize."

I was thinking "Shame, Tease, Dissimulate" would be a more Pink appropriate option. All depends on if engraving letters at that size on a Campbell's soup can is feasible. Though with government funds, anything is possible.
VD February 21, 2013 6:37 PM: Hasn't he hit the limit of 5 for a thread?

Yep, he's done here. He lasted a day longer than I thought he would.
Soga February 21, 2013 6:46 PM: "Nah. I ask myself what would Jesus do? He hung out with thieves and whores. I don't remember him being ashamed, or him telling them they should be. So homosexuals? Nah."

Jesus hung out with thieves and whores who realized the error of their ways and were seeking repentance. Those who DID NOT realize the errors of their way - such as the Pharisee - He seemed to use a lot of shaming language toward, like "you brood of vipers!" and "you are the sons of your father, the devil!"

For those of the former group, Jesus was always telling them to repent and make peace with God. And they would. These of the latter group were told to repent, but didn't and rather continued to rattle swords at Him.

So homosexuals? Yah.
Rex Little February 21, 2013 6:50 PM: Everything you guys are saying about homosexual behavior may be true, but that's irrelevant to gay marriage. As defined by today's laws, marriage has nothing to do with sex. Consider:

- Sex outside of marriage is legal in all 50 states. (If there are any states which still outlaw adultery and fornication, they're not enforcing those laws.)

- Sex in marriage is not a legal requirement. If your wife refuses sex, and you force her, you can be charged with rape.

- Adultery isn't grounds for divorce, or rather it's not necessary as grounds. You and your wife can split up whether or not one of you cheated, and it won't affect the financial arrangements one way or the other.

- If a couple has children, their obligation to each other and to the children regarding support is the same whether or not they are married.

Legally, marriage is a contract between two people to pool their earnings and to split them up in a specified way if the agreement ends. Nothing more, nothing less. I see no reason why two gays, two lesbians, or indeed any two adult humans should not be free to enter into such a contract.

Of course, most people attach personal and/or religious significance to their marriages beyond the legal contract. Nothing about gay marriage prevents them from continuing to do so.
tz February 21, 2013 6:55 PM: A biblical clarification - Murder is not spoken of as an abomination like male homosexuality in Leviticus, however there are four things which cry out to God (for redress):

Murder - shedding innocent blood (Abel's blood when shed by Cain).
The sin of Sodom
Oppression of Widows and Orphans.
Defrauding/withholding just wages from workers.

http://www.catholicculture.org/commentary/articles.cfm?id=29

Also, Tad is far over his quota. Of course the discussion is always over his head.
Homosexuals can and do have children.
Apparently there is a squadron of storks delivering to gay couples that I don't know about. Or Monsanto has been conducting frankenstein experiments in cabbage patches. Right next to the unicorns that excrete skittles.

When someone has his head up his arse, it can be very hard to tell if the fecal matter is going into or coming out of his mouth. Unless they persist in emitting it in public.
tz February 21, 2013 7:00 PM: Homosexuals can and do have children.
Of course Tad might merely be semantically imprecise or simply have been excessively brief.
Tad didn't specify how they had the children.
Some may be cannibals or pedophiles. Fava beans and an nice Chianti?
General Butt Naked, channeling Margaret Sanger February 21, 2013 7:08 PM: Now THAT sounds like a plan.
tz February 21, 2013 7:09 PM: @Rex Little

You are absolutely correct assuming you limit it to civil unions (including heterosexual ones).

But also polygamy or "incest" should also make no difference.

I noted in another thread:

If a man and woman pledge "till death do us part", the state ought to enforce that even if both parties wish to break the contract. Just because both wish to commit fraud does not mean that they be allowed to. I would also note that Catholic marriage - their definition and requirements for marriage are not enforceable.

For me, I would prefer a two-provision constitutional amendment (at state level), 1. No discrimination based on definition of marriage, i.e. Catholic adoption agencies can place kids only with those they consider to be validly married and the state must permit it. 2. Marriage "contracts" could not be broken, so in order to be married in the church the couple would have to sign a contract based on the church's idea of the terms of the marriage covenant and the state would enforce that.

Put another way, given the choice between recognizing and enforcing indissolubility and heterosexuality, I would choose the former - the latter is an obvious fake, but the former is very corrosive.

And Lincoln (who might have been worse than TR) noted even if you call a tail a leg, a horse still has only 4 legs. But a small government that recognizes but doesn't impose or enforce stupidity is better than a large, intrusive one that gets most things correct.
tz February 21, 2013 7:13 PM: @Soga - yes, homosexuality should be shamed, but heterosexuals do far more shameful and destructive things, and generally we accept or even laud many of those things.

We have lost the ability to feel ashamed, and thus the ability to shame.
Rex Little February 21, 2013 7:14 PM: Apparently there is a squadron of storks delivering to gay couples that I don't know about. Or Monsanto has been conducting frankenstein experiments in cabbage patches. Right next to the unicorns that excrete skittles.

Now you're being deliberately dense. Homosexual men can impregnate women, and have. Homosexual women can get pregnant, and have. So, as Tad said, homosexuals can and do have children.
WaterBoy February 21, 2013 7:34 PM: Rex Little: "Homosexual men can impregnate women, and have."

Not only that, but there's also artificial insemination in which the same thing is done indirectly.

The fact that there are ways for homosexuals to pass on their genes (thus not an evolutionary dead-end) is the one thing Tad got right.
James Dixon February 21, 2013 7:35 PM: > Sex in marriage is not a legal requirement.

I believe a marriage can still be annulled in many states if it is not consummated. So that's not completely true.
Soga February 21, 2013 7:35 PM: tz wrote:
"@Soga - yes, homosexuality should be shamed, but heterosexuals do far more shameful and destructive things, and generally we accept or even laud many of those things.

We have lost the ability to feel ashamed, and thus the ability to shame."

You say that like homosexuals and heterosexuals doing sinful things are different categories of people. Quite possible, since homosexuality is specifically mentioned as one thing that is an abomination to God, but they are nevertheless subject to the same rules as every other sinner: repent and be saved, or...