Forbidden Donut

"When did you stop beating your wife?"
"I nev-"
"WHEN did you stop beating... your wife?"

They were asking questions with the intent of having this be the result. Kind of mean spirited if you ask me.

Now if you were to ask a non-loaded question like, "why are you voting for McCain?" what might you hear?

Howard Stern is barely smarter than a dingleberry.

Say what you want -- this was horrible. I can't view your video (at work, filters wahoo) so why don't you tell me what it's about.

Not knowing a) who the VP is, /cool.gif" style="vertical-align:middle" emoid="B)" border="0" alt="cool.gif" /> what the core fundamentals of a candidate are is what makes this disturbing.

Granted who knows how many people he asked to get this response, but still, this is just frightening.

With some of the babble I've seen on this and meathammer's forums, I don't find that much more frightening /tongue.gif" style="vertical-align:middle" emoid=":P" border="0" alt="tongue.gif" />

God damnit I hate you. ;p

No it's not scary that Howard Stern's buddy went to Harlem, asked leading questions with the intention to make people look stupid and found 6 or 7 that it worked on... IN HARLEM.

What IS scary is that the VP CANDIDATE didn't know what a VP does (I still don't think she gets it), that the PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATE seems to be confused all the time, and there's still almost half of the country cheering him on. The video I sent is a video of a guy walking around a McCain rally asking why they want McCain to be president. They don't even talk about McCain once, they just say that they can't vote for a negro, that he's a muslim, that he's a terrorist, that he's a communist, that he's a socialist.

So one side has people who are easily tricked by tricky questions.
The other side has a bunch of ignorant fucks.

But continue to be scared and disturbed if it helps you sleep.
Practice it now and it won't feel so awkward in January: "President Obama"

I didn't know you were so good at self analyzing! Freud would be proud!

You go to any Obama rally and you'll find just as many who are voting for Obama because he is black, because he brings "change," or because he isn't Bush. You get the same for McCain, people only voting because he's a good Christian or he's white. Both sides of the fence have more then enough people who couldn't name an issue if they had to, and are only voting for superficial reasons. Despite how we disagree on just abut every issue, Andrew, at least you are voting for the issues and not just appearances like so many of the people out there. 90% of the people 've met voting for Obama can't give me a good reason for doing so. I could probably say the same for McCain voters, but I meet so few it's hard to say accurately.

Hey whaddya know. So this whole conversation of being scared that Howard Stern asked some people in Harlem confusing questions and cherry picked the answers in an effort to paint all Obama supporters as ignorant is ... you know... stupid.

Also there is a HUGE difference between not being able to talk intelligently about the issues, and being a hateful and willfully ignorant fuckhead.

Who exactly are you targeting?

Watch the video.

/also Stern & co. - they are less funny than Preston & fuckin' Steve even and they get paid a shit load of money to be retarded. It's the radio version of Ow! My Balls.

Don't talk bad about Preston and Steve.

I don't plan on watching any of Howard Sterns videos. The man is a blight on society.

And you're right, there is a HUGE difference between not being able to talk intelligently about the issues, and being a hateful and willfully ignorant fuckhead. However, there are people voting for Obama because they hate white people just as there are people voting McCain because they hate blacks. Racism covers every walk of life. Again, there are stupid and ignorant people on both sides of the election.

Come save us Ron Paul /sad.gif" style="vertical-align:middle" emoid=":(" border="0" alt="sad.gif" />

Seriously. Save this country from itself!

I personally love 'em. They spent yesterday eating gross foods and last night farting into jars to bring in today and see if that works. Some had 1 fart, others 4 or 5. It was an interesting experiment. /tongue.gif" style="vertical-align:middle" emoid=":P" border="0" alt="tongue.gif" />

And the Bizarre Files is like the front page of Fark on the radio.

I just didn't want to appear biased XD

Good. Because they make my morning not only bearable but enjoyable.

XKCD RULES THIS WEEK

Only if that blimp was faster!

I think what you are referencing is when Palin said she would be President of the Senate and looked forward to getting in there to work with them on policy issues. Literally, if she felt the VP had the RIGHT to tell the Senate what to do on policy issues, then she was wrong. But if she was only explaining what she hoped to do, I don't see what is wrong with what she said. So she wants to go out and stump for issues before the Senate with the hopes of swaying policy....she does have such a right. Can she literally sit in on Senate committee meetings and vote on things? No, but she can have private meetings with Senators and express her opinion to them if they are willing to meet with her.

Here is an interesting bit of information:
http://www.senate.gov/artandhistory/histor...President.htm#2

I really can't crack your protective shell of double think can I?

If Obama says something it's immediately parced looking for things that can be quoted and spun to make him look like X*. Palin, on the other hand:


And that means she has an intricate understanding of her potential role as VP? And your reason is that if you make an assumption and don't take her literally... then she's technically right! While Obama would "have such a right" to do everything he wants to do, but that makes him dangerous. How would Palin "get in there with the senators and make a lot of good policy changes"? What policy changes? one's that "Will make life better for Brandon and his family and his classroom."

The woman is an idiot and you're an apologist. If you bought into that view of Obama you'd be calling him "The One" without being sarcastic. And you'd be the only one.

*X = whatever the republican talking point about him is. This is based on what the party believes the american people are most afraid of right now.

I don't call Obama an idiot now, do I? Who's the protective one? !

An interesting argumentative tactic. Are you saying this as a way of defending Palin's intelligence? Or are you saying this as a way of defending your own?

It also seems like you don't quite understand what I meant by "doublethink"

She is plenty smart and so am I, damn it. And no I didn't think too hard about doublethink. But now that I looked at it, I am sure that I do it regularly. For example, I am a conservative so that is supposed to mean I love family values, yet at the same time I really enjoy Howard Stern. Those don't really fit together yet I do them both anyway.

Being conservative doesn't require a love of family values. Being a republican does...

So you're saying no... you don't understand what doublethink is.

Here's an actual example:
"Obama is smart. He thinks about what he says. When he says the words redistributive change, he's talking about socialism, regardless of the context."
"Palin is smart. She makes mistakes when she talks. When she says she would "really get in there with the senators and make a lot of good policy changes that will make life better for Brandon and his family and his classroom." she is demonstrating a safe and legitimate understanding of her role as Vice President."

The form of this particular logical fallacy is as follows:
X is A because Z
Y is not A because Z

there are some other forms it may appear in as well. Doublethink is a problem because it promotes *gasp* partisan decision making... so if you fear you do it regularly, and you choose to not examine your analyses of situations for example of this logical fallacy then you are being actively ignorant, and should be mostly ignored.

I think I'm in a position to have a pretty unbiased opinion when comparing the candidates of the two major political parties since I don't support Obama nor McCain and disagree pretty much across the board with both of their stances on all of the issues facing every nook and cranny of our country. Obviously I may have bias against the candidates, but I believe they're at least equally awful.

So with that out of the way, Sarah Palin is by far the dumbest out of the four politicians on center stage. By fffffaaaaarr the dumbest.

X is A because Z
Y is not A because Z

Strippers are not good for family values because they arent good role models.
Strippers on the Howard Stern show dont have to do with family values because they are funny.

My example isnt even close?
I guess I got it wrong, but it also isnt fair to attribute your example to me. I never said that about Obama.

Double think requires that you use the same reasoning to come to two different conclusions based on the subject you wish to apply the conclusion to. This thread is an example.

It's "just straight disturbing" for people to find Obama supporters who are stupid.
When equally (IMO they are worse) retarded people are shown to be on the other side, suddenly it's "oh well there's stupid on both sides"

You've actually impressed me lately now that I've spent time on meathammer's forum and subsequently got banned (apparently?) That place is a whirling dervish of cognitive dissonance.

I should have said this when I opened this thread:

This has nothing to do with Obama, or Obama supporters. This is just a total "fuck you" to intelligence.

Donno if I'd have bought it. The thing is, there have been numerous underreported videos of idiotic or downright offensive McCain supporters. There have been relatively few instances such as this, and this one was manufactured. By posting this one and nothing else you're already demonstrating teh spin-inating. Not that that's especially bad. People are going to see the world through whatever eyes they happen to have. But for all my (blatant) bias, I haven't picked up on the talking points a day after the fact to paint a narrative. If I did, you'd all be much more annoyed with me than you already are. You're a rational guy though, so I *know* you *know* that this goes on on both sides, but if that were the narrative you truly wished to deliver I doubt this would have been how you'd go about it. You're smarter than that.

If I were going to say our congress is corrupt I wouldn't just bring up Ted Stevens. I'd also bring up Nancy Pelosi funneling money to relatives for personal contracts. Picking one or another side as an example invites criticism such as this.

All that aside, you've got a great point. The electorate is mostly retarded. The MSM is probably a major culprit, but I think that all this playing the refs nonsense as a way to create a false dichotomy is the primary cause of the problems with our media. Historically speaking, both sides have played that game, whining about bias, bitching about unequal coverage, etc, though lately the R's have gotten really vocal and pissy about the liberal media. The simple fact of the matter is this:

If you give equal time to all points of view, regardless of merit, you aren't educating people but rather confusing the living shit out of them. "According to scientific studies, the sky is blue, water is wet, and cats don't get along with dogs. Here to present another perspective is some dick with a PhD in psychology who has never been affiliated with a scientific study in his entire career, please help me welcome... Doctor Whoujamamma." Just because there IS another opinion doesn't mean that we need to hear it. It could just be well... wrong. By setting up this worldview that no facts are stationary, that there's always a dissenting opinion, and that simply by dissenting the status-quo your opinion is granted equal merit promotes ignorance.

A better example is the global warming thing. For decades, most scientists in the field have been clamoring about our contribution to the problem. As we've pumped shit into the air, the concentrations have become higher than they've been in all of human history. When these concentrations are high enough (see mercury) the planet gets hotter than it would otherwise. A small increase can have huge consequences. Then groups arrive on the scene to say, "that's just a theory, you don't KNOW we're the cause." And they are treated as equally well informed. Our "journalists" need to start practicing "journalism" and not act like a bulletin board for retarded ideas. I think that might lead some of our electorate out from their rocks of ignorance.

Is this worse?

A French Canadian radio show host convinces Sarah Palin that he's Nicolas Sarkozy.

Something I noticed the second listen that gave me a giggle. When they are waiting for her to actually get on the phone you can hear her say to somebody, "It's a call from France."

Does ANYBODY still think this woman is capable of running anything bigger than a PTA meeting?
(lookin at you Evestay)

Dear John McCain,

You fucked up.

You have FUCKED UP.

From c!,
with love

(ps. this whole charade reminds me of the simpsons episode where ralph gets a valentine and says 'you choo choo choose me?')

yeah, Alaska.... but not the country yet. 4 years as vp (they probably wont win though) would prepare her to be p just fine though.

suuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuure it will. So you think there's some evidence to support the idea that she learned... something... while governor that she didn't have a grasp of as mayor? Because if you contend that she would learn enough from her experiences as VP to prepare her for the Presidency, I'd love to feel more confident in her ability to learn at all.

Sarah Palin represents everything that is wrong with American Democracy. Equal credence given to ignorance as intelligence. The dumbing down of the electorate. Single issue voting. Divisive politics. Corruption. Nepotism. Greed. I'm not sure what there is about her that makes her appealing to anybody as a politician. Sure, she's homey and folksy and gosh darn it she has her finger on the pulse of "real america", but she shouldn't even have been elected Mayor, and the only reason she's been able to rise this far is because of her beauty queen status and a REALLY stupid electorate.

You are an ass. How the hell am I supposed to dig into her brain and proved she learned something. By virtue of the fact that she became Governor and dealt with new statewide issues, I would say she learned things that she didn't know or deal with as mayor.

What exact "experience" do you both require from a president? I hear the republicans trash Obama for his lack of "experience" while the democrats trash Palin for her lack of "experience", but no one actually talks about what they qualify as "enough" experience or even what the hell they exactly think is necessary "experience" to be president.

Being president requires someone to be able to handle great deals of pressure 24/7/1461, but I don't really know what type of experience you expect someone to have in order to meet that qualification. Single mothers have to deal with great deals of pressure for more than 4 times longer than the President of the United States, so should we assume all single mothers are qualified to be president?

No but you could read what other people who have dug into her head are saying now that she's not a candidate:

huff po - but the video is from The O'Reilly Factor

That's the same guy who said this:


It's okay to admit it man. She was a terrible pick and she may well have cost McCain the election.


Brought to you by Alaska who just re-elected Ted "Series of Tubes", "Bridge to nowhere", "just convicted of fraud" Stevens.

Truly a state of "real Americans".

Wow you really, really, really don't like this woman.

I thought she was an absolutely terrible choice the day she was picked. I had been joking with friends about her being on the short list thinking there was no way the party was that stupid. Then they proved me wrong. Then more and more and more about her came out that was negative. Did you here about the new newsweek where reporters come clean on all the crap that went on that they didn't think they could get away with reporting? Apparently, the RNC gave her a credit card and said gear up for the general election. She chose to go to places like Neiman Marcus, and to tell her subordinates to also buy her shit. The tab for the RNC was 150k, but she bought more than that through her staff, and now her staff is calling in the bill. Numbers range from another 20 to another 50k. Then she had the GALL to say that the RNC made her buy fancy clothes and that if it were up to her she'd shop like "real Americans". The firing of Monegan is one thing. The clear intent to cover it up by declaring executive privilege is the same shit we saw with Cheney. She either doesn't read, or is so afraid to talk about what she reads that she can't even make other shit up when asked. She's been playing the refs for her entire stay on the ticket. She was the single most vile stumper, riling up the crowd and getting them incensed about Obama's ties to terrorists and crap.

What's there to like? She's a bad politician, a bad person, a bad mother, a bad mayor, and a mediocre Governor of one of the easiest states to govern. Yeah. I'm sure she's a nice lady or whatever, and she's kinda pretty, but gosh darn it she represents the absolute worst in American politics.

Link Please

My pleasure



That gets followed up by a Palin aide saying, no that didn't happen, not true, neener-neener.

By the way that article is actually really awesome.