Friday Funnies

Dude, with the signature quotes and the icon, you are the greatest poster in the history of IP and perhaps the internets.

Bobby Knight is still the greatest coach who ever lived.

Great... now we get white supremacist religious tracts.

Un-friggin-believable.

--

Glock21 Op/Ed

I'm not sure how anything ew says or does is a surprise any more.

It's like Marilyn Manson.  Shock value gets boring eventually.

Anonymous 3:39 - hahahahaha!!! Nice one.

The fact that you thought that was appropriate is extremely telling of your thought processes.  Do you tell racist jokes on MLK Day and counter the charging mob with, "Hey, sombody must of thought it was funny, they came up with that joke!"

Seek therapy.

--

Glock21 Op/Ed

Well, if nothing else, you're posting in the right thread.  I'd hate you, but you're too much fun to laugh at. 

--

Glock21 Op/Ed

IP... my apologies for feeding the troll.  I'm far more easily provoked than I'd like to be.  I'd also like to apologize for so quickly suggestng for a ban.  I had no idea how instrumental e-dub here would be in showing how ugly so many things I oppose happen to be.  He shows the ugliest side of bigotry, homophobia, Ron Paulians, and general arrogance.  Even though every time he opens his mouth I want his momma come around and slap him... seeing the consensus of all sides of the political spectrum unite to oppose his idiocy has been pretty heartwarming.

--

Glock21 Op/Ed

I second the admiration of Crumb.  One of our greatest American artists.  I believe he is now living somewhere in France?  My friends and I used to spend many an hour flipping through "Weirdo" magazine laughing our asses off.

That said, there have been a lot of Crumb imitators over the years.  Unfortunately, just because it looks like Crumb that doesn't mean it is Crumb.  But to my untrained eye, this definitely looks like sarcasm to me.  And it is actually pretty damned funny.  I wonder why the sarcasm was so completely lost on people of a conservative mindset?

Boon... we're talking about a guy who is trying to paint McCain as a religious fanatic hell bent on the destruction of the earth due to white supremacist reasons... the same guy who was advocating that the state execute homosexuals here.

Your defense of this lunatic is what is lost on me.  I'm all for warped humor and what not, but this guy has been throwing a bigoted temper tantrum over Paul's loss in the primaries and been swiftboating McCain as a communist manchurian candidate, traitor, etc.  The same crap the GOP pulled on Kerry.

Yet you defend him.  And as usual try to label everyone into a conservative corner to rip on them.  You guys are a great pair.

--

Glock21 Op/Ed

D. Boon, Sandefur -

You pegged it.

It is indeed Robert Crumb himself and it was from Verre d' Eau (Weirdo) #17 (1993).

Crumb is alive and well and living in Sauve, France.

He is presently working on "comic/cartoon style" adaptations of classical literature.

You may remember he did adaptations of Boswell's London Journal, and Kafka.

Crumb was raised Catholic and his wife Aline is Jewish.  One of his projects in the works

is an adaptation of the Book of Genesis.

I was reminded of this cartoon when talking to some one about the war in Iraq

and he told me that we have to continue in Iraq because we have a Holy Mission there

just like the Crusades to beat down the Arabic Islamofascists.  I found a copy of Verre d'Eau  and looked at it

again and the white guy resolving to destroy the world (in the name of Honour) reminds

me so much of McCain and the neocons.  Crumb's Straight Talk Guy talks about of the Duty to fulfill the book of revelations

as if the neocon nutcases make a conscious decision to destroy the world.

I did add the quote from the book of Joel ch 2 (also quoted by Peter at Pentecost in Acts 2)

in which "nukular" smoke clouds are implied (tamara- palm tree shaped clouds of smoke) at

the "end".  I think it fits well with the illustration.

I think the cartoon is extremely funny despite my being to the right of the hyper-conservatives.

Glock says I am a JurassiCon.  I take that as a compliment.

I think the humour was lost on one group because they took it literally, not as sarcasm.

and another group doesn't like what they see in the mirror.

The humor is lost because you're trying to imply that McCain is a white/religious supremacist hell bent on destroying the world with no proof other than your own delusions.  And I said that Ron Paul was a JurassiCon.  With you, I'd probably drop the first few letters.

--

Glock21 Op/Ed

eggs ackley ---

In the movie Forrest Gump

a guy comes running up to Forrest with a t-shirt on which Forrest wipes his face leaving a "smiley face  : )

The guy selling t-shirts is wearing a T-shirt which

bears popular R. Crumb cartoon from

Eggs Ackley in the Land of the Vulture Demonesses

Yet you defend him.  And as usual try to label everyone into a conservative corner to rip on them.  You guys are a great pair.

Whoa there, cowboy!  Who said I was defending ewjohnson?  I was just stating my opinion that the cartoon is satirical.  I don't think that means I now hate gay people, does it?

And I am honestly wondering what it is about this cartoon that brought such a wide variety of reactions.  I read it through, chuckled, and recognized it as satire almost immediately (the 6 pack on the guys stomach helped).  Yet most of the conservatives seemed to get tripped up by it.  Why?  I honestly don't understand.

But feel free to keep insulting any commenter who doesn't agree with you, Glock.  You seem to have free reign to do so.

"But feel free to keep insulting any commenter who doesn't agree with you, Glock.  You seem to have free reign to do so."

Yeah, I've probably been a bit cranky lately... it's been a rough couple weeks and bigots are my pet peeve.  Not sure how I've been insulting everybody I disagree with... other than perhaps you think disagreeing is in itself an insult.  I'm also unaware of having any special privileges here, if that's what you're trying to imply.  But if it helps, I'll try harder to ignore both of you to avoid any more of this petty internet nerd battle nonsense.  I'm way too easily provoked by both of you into these pointless back and forths.

--

Glock21 Op/Ed

Glock21: It's a colossally poor position to hate something just because someone you don't like is wielding it.  Bin Laden might brush his teeth, but that's not going to stop me from brushing mine.

I also don't think it's accurate to say that you hate bigots. I think you hate overt bigots. This is a common trait in contemporary America, but it does little to combat bigotry. It just sorts out extreme bigotry and leaves the majority of it buried below the surface.

I don't agree with johnson on much of anything, but so far, because of your hatred of him, you've dismissed a call to actually study Dr. King instead of waving his corpse around like a flag, and the work of Robert Crumb. I don't see how that does anything positive. Destroying a wacko Paulite is not going to integrate our schools.

Brown v. Board is dead and buried, and no one seems to care.

I have studied King... and I've never waved his corpse like a flag.  I feel awful that you think I've done so.

I don't think that you've done so. I said that I thought you dismissed a call to do so. That's a subtle but important difference. If someone I think it a moron says that "Kids should be supported at school so they don't turn to street gangs", it's my responsibility to support that even if I don't like the speaker. If I don't, and someone accuses me of dismissing that point, it doesn't mean that they are saying that I personally am not supporting kids or driving them to street gangs, only that I'm letting my personal grudges get in the way of my support of a good policy.

Likewise, I wasn't accusing you of thinking that B v. BoE was dead and buried. Quite the contrary, I believe that it is dead and buried and that we should all be concerned about that. I think it is important to check individual bigoted speech, but when given the direct choice, I think it misses the main battle to ignore clear and present larger forces of racial oppression to go after an individual bigot.

I agree with you entirely on immigration reform and employment and housing. I would love to collaborate with you on any of the issues. Reforming the real estate business where recent studies have shown approximately 90% of realtors to be guilty of steering of clients according to race would be a good start.

I would stress though that the travesty that is segregated education is probably one of the only areas in which the damage eclipses the examples you've provided. That doesn't mean we shouldn't work on those issues as well and simultaneously--of course we should. However, it does mean I think it's critical to not wave off the start segregation in our school systems (and Run, if you want to go all nutso on vouchers again, please start a thoughtful thread outside of this one--vouchers will only make segregation more stark).

I would agree on the McCain issues, but we have already discussed this. Obviously, any context aside, McCain's past bigoted statements are completely unacceptable, but I can actually understand the trauma that led to them and he seems genuine in his apology.

I can assure you that was not the message/impression I was trying to convey.

I think this is 100% true.

So I would also advise you to follow through on both of these:

I think he does that to himself.  I just need to stop getting so riled up over it and let it stand on its own.

Brown v. Board is dead and buried, and no one seems to care.

On the contrary.  Most of the posters on this board, Glock included, are quite happy that government-mandated integration is dead.  Read it for yourself.

Yeah, that was a hell of a thread. I thought Glock tried his best in that one. I would point out that no one really ever did come up with any decent solutions and I haven't seen any action on the issues except for celebrating Clarence Thomas.

The only thing that has happened is that Adam got a job at Fox News.

I'll give it one last shot:

Foolproof plan to fix inequities in the school system that has ZERO connection with race:

1. All parents register their kids at pre-school age.

2. Kids are randomly assigned to a school within their district.

3. All choice schools become open, random enrollment.

I bet you'd see schools get a lot more attention and funding real fast.

I agree that this is not a long-term fix. It isn't really a program that I'd like more than many others, but it is a program that forces us to face the real issue that you refer to in the last sentence--I believe that in the majority of American's minds, they'd like to think that they are the type of people who want equal opportunity. However, at the same time they are willing to do ALMOST ANYTHING to avoid such if they can pathologically avoid responsibility for that reality.

Your response is tantamount to saying, "We shouldn't build contraptions to move human beings around at greater than natural speeds, because when we get to a million miles per minute, the G forces will melt our faces!"

You are using a worst case scenario to explain why it's ok that a lot of our children have inadequate desks or texts or have to worry more about getting jumped in the hall than about their math homework.

The reason I am against the voucher system is that it will do nothing to address the main problem--folks who don't care if all children have access to a decent education. Sure--we can take some of the money that is currently inadequate in the system and move it to private school operators and richer families, but I fail to see how that will improve things in the poor neighborhoods--you know, at the schools that have trouble attracting qualified teachers already.

And choice--what a joke. What choice will there be when people have a measly voucher that will only pay for enough to go to a substandard school? We have enough trouble finding qualified administrators and teachers as it is, how will LESS money improve that?

The problem with spending-centered solutions is that implicit is the  assumption

that the problem is money or the lack thereof, and by throwing money at a stupid child

you will make him into a Einstein, and the only difference between a genius and the

nincompoop who cant seem to get your order right is how much money the nanny state lavished on them.

On the contrary, genetics has a lot more to do with it than any of us are willing to admit.

It is not the genetics of being a spic, wop, nigger, kike, honky, gook, mick, chink, cracker or what ever group

you happen to belong to through no choice of your own.  It does have something to do

with what subset you might be among any of those groups and how you came out in the genetic crapshoot.

Genetics is not all of it though.  Environment is part of it for sure. 

Just throwing more money at kids doesnt make them smarter.

Adversity rather than luxury tends to make us better.

Luxury is like overwatering...it tends to produce weakness and lousy roots.

I agree that opportunity is a wonderful thing, though.

But it is stupid to try to make everyone be the same because we all have different abilities.

It is the small imperfections that make us all beautiful and

it is those imperfections and inadequacies that cause us to have need for one another.

--

Glock21 Op/Ed

I appreciate your usual rants, but answering my questions will help us move from the realm of emotions into the realm of reality.

Yes, because opening with an insult and then saying "usual rants" really helps us open a dialogue. You are welcome to move into the realm of reality anytime by hopping the greyhound and coming to my school. Otherwise, stop being so condescending or shut up.

I would like every school to have equal access to facilities, clerical staff and instructional and extra curricular materials. I would like schools in poorer neighborhoods to have some additional funding for college trips, security and transportation.

As you said, I never said anything about equal outcomes. Clearly that's impossible--even with educational privilege, we haven't had equal outcomes among the members of this board.

"Are you doing it for shock value?"

Yes. 

ewjohnson has no real persuasive talents, so he's left with nothing but to try to provoke or try to insult.  It's pretty sad, actually.

IP, that's like saying -

"IP has no real interest in discussing difficult social issues, so he's left with nothing but to act offended and try to deflect the issues.

It's pretty sad, actually"

 IP

That's why the question was rhetorical.  :P

I occasionally like to ridicule stupidity when I find it, in an attempt to hold up a mirror that might help that person recognize sloppy logic and change a bit.  Probably a result of many years of working customer service, where stupidity must still be treated with respect and kindness.

But ew's brand of stupidity is just a waste of my time and everyone else's on this blog.  My two cents, for what they're worth.

Kem

Ron Paul's priority is running for Congress:

Let me tell you my thoughts. With Romney gone, the chances of a brokered convention are nearly zero. But that does not affect my determination to fight on, in every caucus and primary remaining, and at the convention for our ideas, with just as many delegates as I can get. But with so many primaries and caucuses now over, we do not now need so big a national campaign staff, and so I am making it leaner and tighter. Of course, I am committed to fighting for our ideas within the Republican party, so there will be no 3rd party run. I do not denigrate third parties—just the opposite, and I have long worked to remove the ballot-access restrictions on them. But I am a Republican, and I will remain a Republican.

I also have another priority. I have constituents in my home district that I must serve. I cannot and will not let them down. And I have another battle I must face here as well. If I were to lose the primary for my congressional seat, all our opponents would react with glee, and pretend it was a rejection of our ideas. I cannot and will not let that happen.

In the presidential race and the congressional race, I need your support, as always. And I have plans to continue fighting for our ideas in politics and education that I will share with you when I can, for I will need you at my side. In the meantime, onward and upward! The neocons, the warmongers, the socialists, the advocates of inflation will be hearing much from you and me.

If I were a Ron Paul supporter, I'd feel a little used.

IP, you really really really dont get it.

It's far from OV3R.

Can it please be as over on here as it is in the Presidential race?

I'm tired of your insults and transparent provocations.  Since you clearly cannot participate in a constructive way, I'd appreciate it if you would please take your schtick elsewhere.

To say that RP as dropped out is a misrepresentation of the facts.

Yes, it's clearly a lie spread by secret agents of the United Nations.

--

Glock21 Op/Ed

All I'm doing is quoting the man's own words.  He's clearly stating that his priority is winning re-election to his congressional seat so that his constitutents can be properly served.

Is it even truthful to say that he can drop out of the race at this point? I mean, "dropping out" is basically a symbolic act admitting you're not going to win the race. The primary ballots are all decided at this point and they're not going to change whether or not he drops out. If by an act of God or mass hallucination at the RNC, Paul or Romney actually got the Republican nomination, do you think either of them would say "No, thanks"? About the only thing he can say is he'll spend less on advertising for the Presidential race in the future.

I really do not mind the personal attacks at all.

Actually such is to be encouraged.

It gives the attacker the infrequent occasion of being truly genuine.