Actress with Down Syndrome from Family Guy ep tells Palin to suck it

how, might i ask?

 

I see what you are saying and i agree to an extent... however I don't know the dynamics of her and Rush's relationship so i can't comment.
here is an example.. I'm white (big shock) but i have alot of friends who aren't.. I am at a level with them relationship wise where we can make fun of each others races or differences without getting offended... but I guarantee you if someone else said the crap they say or I say to them, it'd be on... is that hyporcritical? there is alot that goes into how things are said or the meaning behind them... and since I don't follow Rush or Palin, I'm not sure exactly what Rush's quote was.. if you want to provide it though it may change my mind on the situation.

 

I heard something remarkably similar from my stepfather the day before yesterday and I will tell you the same thing I told him. If you actually believe this, you don't watch the Daily Show, which lampoons the stupid s*** that the Democrats do regularly. Now, if you want to get into the relative sizes of the piles of stupid s*** done by the left versus the right, we should prolly start another thread.

 

Sometimes, you seem reasonable and then you go and add to the pile of stupid s*** with comments like this.

 

The daily show does, and so does the Colbert Report, oh and Southpark... however leading up to the election you didn't see too much satire directed at the Dems, but you saw alot directed at the Reps... SNL, Letterman, Family Guy, Daily Show, I could go on and on and on... the media in general is pro-lib.. that is the bottom line.. and that is a POWERFUL tool with the simple weakminded people that we have in this country today... not saying Libs are simple or weakminded... but there are alot of people who vote who know nothing about the issues but only vote on popularity, and that is a scary thought.

 

rush wasn't addressing Palin directly

 

I'll add on to mark's post just below this one and say that there have been several instances where banned posters DID come back under different monikers, started the same arguments using the same debunked BS and were later proven to have been the previously banned poster.

The history around here is long and in some cases troubled (see BJ vs. basso, me vs. T_J, MacBeth vs. everyone on the board), but if you actually come in here with a civil tone (see examples by refman, MadMax, among others), your point of view is discussed in a civil tone, for the most part.

You had the bad luck of coming in right about the same time as a few other posters with styles very, nay, eerily similar to previous posters.

 

yah I really have my moments... ha.. i guess in retrospect it's kinda a crappy thing to say... but it just feeds my point..you got offended at the meer notion of me attacking someones family... I don't think it is right to attack anyones family in real life or for political gain... I thought we were past that point as a society.

 

well I try to stay civil for the most part... I have controversial (around here anyways) views, and like to express them... my views upset some people, just like their views upset me... but to attack someone because of their views is offensive. I will argue my point to the death with someone who is willing to have a legitimate conversation, but the minute someone attacks me personally it's going to come right back at them.. I don't like being called a communist, or being accused of things that are not true, and i certainly don't appreciate the way certain people have disrespected my military service/ career that insures that they have the right to post in forums like this one..

 

check your sig

 

Here's some pansies for you:

 

Those three seem to be the best at going after everyone fairly equally. I love how SP has pretty much gone after every single religion out there, but was only retaliated against by the "Church" of Scientology.

To be fair, the last guy made his own personal pile of stupid s*** that towered over everything and everyone in that election cycle. Could it be that over the years immediately preceding the '08 election that the majority of the stupid s*** was done by the GOP?

If you answer that question honestly, I don't know how you could make this next statement...

Now we get into the statement you really wanted to make here. I don't believe that the entire media (save Faux) is "pro-lib," but then again, maybe I just don't know because I don't get my news from CNN, MSNBC, or Faux because I believe that 24 hour "News" has turned journalism into the E! channel.

If you are being as fair and balanced as Faux claims to be, you would see that there are just as many (more, actually, look at Faux' Nielsen ratings) "simple weakminded people" who simply believe the bold-faced lies on that channel. Again, maybe I just haven't seen it because I don't watch CNN or MSNBC, but I just don't see them out-and-out lying like Faux does.

The strange gulf I see is that when you poll people about whether they are conservative or liberal, more people self-identify as conservative. However, when you poll on the issues, progressive or "liberal" issues nearly always poll higher than the opposing viewpoint. Social Security and Medicare poll through the roof even though the GOP would do away with them if it were politically possible. Stem cell research polls solidly in favor and GWB just wiped out federal funding with the stroke of a pen (to be reversed by Obama, thankfully, medical science is one place we cannot fall behind the world). Even abortion polls solidly on the pro-choice side, depending on the wording of the question.

Attacking the media (as Palin does regularly), attacking the opponents (as all politicians do), and attacking each other just doesn't solve anything. I wouldn't mind the attacking if we were attacking the ideas and policies, but we don't, at least not honestly (keep your government hands off my Medicare).

IMO, the true "enemies" are the corporations, who pay to have elected the people they want (hedging their bets by contributing to both sides so they will have a seat at the table no matter who is in office) and have disproportionate access to elected officials. As long as the corporations can continue to turn Americans against each other, they will continue to run the show because we will be too busy calling each other Socialists and Nazis when in reality we are all just dunces.

 

What you don't seem to be getting is that nobody has attacked Palin's family. The outrage is manufactured and fed down to the people to take on. The people who have made comments about Trig in the sense of making fun have done so to poke fun at Palin herself, not her differently-abled son.

Again, we are having things fed to us to keep us fighting with each other so that the CEOs can laugh all the way to the bank.

 

Again, to be fair, you have used your military service as a cudgel to try to invalidate other people's opinion. When you do that, it makes it much more difficult to have a reasonable conversation. I'm not attacking, just trying to point out my observation as civilly (is that a word?) as possible. My father graduated from the USAFA, so I have plenty of respect for anyone who serves.

 

well atleast we can agree that the name calling has to stop. I am for some social programs but I think there should be some sort of balance. I don't believe in the government controling every aspect of my life, but it seems like alot to the far left, and right for that matter would have it that way. to your points though I found it ironic that you would attack fox news when MSNBC is the same way but for the other side... You say look at the fox ratings for weakminded people.. yadda yadda... but what you fail to realize is fox is the ONLY strictly conservative news channel. Liberals have MSNBC, CNN, CBS, NBC, not as much ABC, MTV, shows like Family Guy, Oprah, Letterman, movies like Avatar (good movie but giant green commercial), and so on and so on pushing their political ideology. Alot of Americans are so stupid, sadly, that they don't do research and formulate their own opinions on things... They believe people like Al Gore without even checking into what he believes just because it has been media hyped... you see what I'm saying? how could the average person take al gore seriously on climate change when his carbon footprint is that of a small town.. but people buy into it because the media tell them to.. don't understimate media power, Hitler (no i'm not calling libs nazis) knew how powerfull propoganda was and look at what he was able to get the masses to believe.

 

I see what you are saying, but I didn't mean to come off like that. I have more insight than most (unless they live in Mass) about how much bureucratic BS there is in getting ANYTHING done when it is in Government control due to the fact that I have lived the life for the past 15yrs and had to deal with it on a daily basis.. I think I should be able to relate my experiences with out being lambasted for it.

 

if she can dish it, she should be prepared to take it. if she doesn't like it, she can pack up, move back to alaska, and get the f out of the public eye.

 

See it's moronic posts like this that set your side back... First of all I don't care what's said about Palin, but her family should be off limits (see Letterman).

 

"My mother did not carry me around under her arm like a loaf of French bread the way former Governor Palin carries her son Trig around looking for sympathy and votes."

"“The America I know and love is not one in which my parents or my baby with Down syndrome will have to stand in front of Obama’s ‘death panel’ so his bureaucrats can decide, based on a subjective judgment of their ‘level of productivity in society,’ whether they are worthy of health care. Such a system is downright evil,”

 

Hear, hear.

Here is where I will ask you to stop generalizing. I don't believe that anyone, not even the far left and right want "government controlling exery aspect" of their lives. If you have specific points about proposals that would increase the control that government has on people's lives, please feel free to discuss them, but I don't think it is in any way fair to paint with the incredibly broad brush you used here.

Perhaps I didn't say it explicitly enough for you, I think that ALL of the 24 hour "news" organizations are steaming piles of manure.

There is one difference that I have to point out, while MSNBC has a clear liberal bias, they have not distorted and flat out lied to their viewers the way that Fox has. There are certainly inaccurate stories, and some of the commentators are (sorry for the pun) liberal with their interpretations, but as far as flat out fabrications, nobody matches Fox.

No, the point I was trying to get across was that there are "weakminded" people on all sides of the political spectrum. However, it could be argued that Fox influences more of these people than the other 24 hour "news" channels because their network consistently gets higher ratings.

I think you are making a very mistaken assumption. just because Fox says that every other outlet is "liberal" does not make it so.

Sadly, you are right about the stupidity, people will believe things like "death panels" and "socialism" simply at the behest of a media outlet fanning the flames of dissention.

I would ask you to take a look at the way you phrase things, you are setting up a straw man and attacking, not the idea of AGW, but a single man who believes in it. Just because Gore is a sensationalist doesn't invalidate all of the research that has been done with regards to AGW. There is still way more evidence pointing to man being a significant cause of AGW than there is to the contrary. A few leaked emails and a couple of overhyped claims do not invalidate the work done by the rest of the field of climatology.

Yes, they do, and on both sides. It is somewhere between difficult and impossible to have an intelligent, reasonable discussion about AGW, for example, because of, well, just see the "Remarkable Weather" thread and you will get my drift.

You don't have to, just invoking the name "Hitler" is a subtle jab at your political rivals. It is a comment that is meant to do nothing but engulf the discussion in flame wars and is extremely effective at that goal. I will admit that it has been used, to my disgust, by members of both political parties. If you honestly want to have a reasonable discussion, just leave the name "Hitler" out of it.

Yes, Fox News was able to get their viewers to believe that the "public option" was socialist, which it is not even with a very liberal reading of the definition, which I will provide for you...

-a political theory advocating state ownership of industry
-an economic system based on state ownership of capital

The public option did not advocate for state ownership of industry, it set up a mechanism to provide more cometition for PRIVATE industry. In no way did the public option strive to create an economic system based on state ownership of capital, even in healthcare.

However, because of the propaganda that Fox News put out, people were screaming about socialism, communism, and even fascism at those town hall meetings. Fox didn't want reasonable discussion, they wanted screaming matches and they got them. This part of our political process needs to change. You can help change it by soothing the tempers of the people on your side, encouraging them to stop watching the propaganda, and helping them to engage in reasoned debate.

If you don't, the CEOs will continue to eat our lunch election cycle after election cycle.