General Political Thread

[Guest Don Draper]

Well that's certainly true. We're talking post-coitus, right?

[KevinG]

Relating the Duck Dynasty thing to gay marriage makes no sense at all, not to me anyway. Jindal is joining in because "free speech" is what resonates with the base, not the gay thing. And Phil has no place in this at all anymore.

No one's going to let me in on this in-joke are they?

 

While Jindal's comments are on the free speech side, his comments on free speech are misguided and completely wrong.  TV networks have never believed in the first amendment.  They believe in the bottom line.  If you hurt the bottom line you will be let go.  It is their right to do so.

 

What everyone is glossing over here is what is not in Jindal's statement and others who support Robertson.  No where does he denounce what Robertson said.  And he said some pretty bigoted and hateful things.  To me that is troubling.

 

When I brought this up, it was not in the context of look at the racist TV star saying stupid stuff, let's get 'em.   It was, look at the politicians and the Right and their blatant stupidity over the First Amendment.  

 

Personally, I think A&E is wrong to suspend Robertson.  The dude is 67 year old bearded duck hunter (farmer?  I am not quite sure) from the Louisiana Bayou.  I am surprised it took him this long to say something stupid and racist.  I don't think you should be fired for your beliefs.  But that is not the way this country works.  You are free to say what hell you want, but you do not have the right to a job.  

[Guest Don Draper]

Jindal is the governor of Louisiana, so I can't seem to hear him saying that's wrong. Also, didn't Phil say this in the context of the Bible? No way would Jindal denounce people think came from the Bible. Half of the sourthern base probably still thinks he's a terrorist.

[Doug C]

Relating the Duck Dynasty thing to gay marriage makes no sense at all, not to me anyway. Jindal is joining in because "free speech" is what resonates with the base, not the gay thing. And Phil has no place in this at all anymore.

It only makes sense to me in that all of these enemies of freedom can blather on about bestiality, sin, male anuses vs. vaginas, etc. all they want but will soon have their own state recognizing all loving relationships between two consenting adults as legally valid. And if you think that the "gay thing" doesn't resonate with the base, then you're just whistlin' Dixie.

[NoJ]

Well that's certainly true. We're talking post-coitus, right?

 

Whenever.....during, after, its all good, baby!

[Guest Don Draper]

I'm troubled by male vaginas too, for what it's worth.

 

I mean that I think that freedom of speech is the big-ticket item. Anyone who doesn't see that we've reached a watershed moment with the gay stuff is a total knuckle-dragger, and there are few of those than people like to think.

 

Are you insinuating that anti-gays are enemies of freedom? That seems like a stretch to me.

[Doug C]

I'm troubled by male vaginas too, for what it's worth.

 

I mean that I think that freedom of speech is the big-ticket item. Anyone who doesn't see that we've reached a watershed moment with the gay stuff is a total knuckle-dragger, and there are few of those than people like to think.

 

Are you insinuating that anti-gays are enemies of freedom? That seems like a stretch to me.

No one said anything about male vaginas. Misunderstood freedom of speeech is the big ticket item, yes but the Bible is a huge ticket item and Leviticus means alot to them.

I'm not insinuating that they are enemies of freedom, I'm saying it. They are enemies of freedom the same way that segregationists were.

[Guest Don Draper]

I think they love freedom very much, and value it quite a bit. They are trying to seek freedom their way, and I think that it's misguided but calling anyone an "enemy of freedom" who isn't actually, that's a big deal and a major insult and I don't agree with characterizing them that way ever.

[KevinG]

Don one hand you say this:

Jindal is the governor of Louisiana, so I can't seem to hear him saying that's wrong. Also, didn't Phil say this in the context of the Bible? No way would Jindal denounce people think came from the Bible. Half of the sourthern base probably still thinks he's a terrorist.

 

On the other hand you say this:

I mean that I think that freedom of speech is the big-ticket item. Anyone who doesn't see that we've reached a watershed moment with the gay stuff is a total knuckle-dragger, and there are few of those than people like to think.

 

So are you saying that half the people in LA are knuckle draggers?

[Guest Don Draper]

"there are fewer of those people than we think"

 

You can disagree with the gay stuff, but I'm talking about people who don't see the inevitability of it.

[Doug C]

I think they love freedom very much, and value it quite a bit. They are trying to seek freedom their way, and I think that it's misguided but calling anyone an "enemy of freedom" who isn't actually, that's a big deal and a major insult and I don't agree with characterizing them that way ever.

Ha ha ha ha ha ha!!!! You should do standup. Kudos. Were segregationists enemies of freedom? And if so, what's the difference?

[Guest Don Draper]

Everybody on both sides wants what they think is best for America. Some are racist and hateful, but in their hearts they want what's best.  Calling someone an enemy of freedom is inflammatory and just not necessary to me. Let's agree to disagree.

[Doug C]

Okay. I agree that we should agree to disagree. Therefore, I won't reply to your above point, this recreation of a Ratt song needs to end. The last word is yours. I know better than to try and go toe to toe with a lawyer.

[Guest Don Draper]

I know better than to try and go toe to toe with a lawyer.

I'm not a lawyer, and I think this is related to your other post. Can you please stop this, at least in the political thread? If you want to talk to me about something, please PM me. If you want to have a conversation about it with others, start a thread I don't have to participate in.

 

I find this distracting in the political thread, I don't get it, and I don't like being the butt of a joke I don't get.

 

Thanks.    And I'm not angry, I just don't think you mean this with good intentions.

[Doug C]

Good intentions were meant. Since I was not the first to make the inside joke, I assumed that it was in the open. I apologize, sincerely, for my mistaken assumption. I will only discuss the topic at hand in the thread.

[NoJ]

Don, I dont think you are the butt of a joke.

[Guest Don Draper]

Maybe I am the male vagina of a joke, then.  Because I don't get it, I don't know if I'm the butt of it or not.

 

And yes Doug, I know you're not the first which is why it wasn't in a PM.

[NoJ]

Ok, I dont know whats happening then.

[Atticus]

Ok, I dont know whats happening then.

 

you should start a thread.

[tinnitus photography]

maybe a dumb question,  but can't you just ignore certain posts in a topic?

 

 

and regarding stopping this, why is the political thread a sacred cow?

 

 

Can you please stop this, at least in the political thread?

[Mr. Heartbreak]

maybe a dumb question,  but can't you just ignore certain posts in a topic?

 

 

and regarding stopping this, why is the political thread a sacred cow?

Not only can you ignore certain posts, but you can also ignore certain posters. "Ignore" is wonderful.

[Doug C]

At the risk of a mod slap (though I'd counter with 'Tim Robbins is an angry drunk'),

[Guest Don Draper]

maybe a dumb question,  but can't you just ignore certain posts in a topic?

 

 

and regarding stopping this, why is the political thread a sacred cow?

I edited this to change my answer:  There are lots of topics I ignore in this thread, but they are related to politics. I don't like side-talk that seems to be an in-joke about me that I'm not in on, that has nothing to do with my political stance.

 

I'll drop this. 

[ovenbird]

This is a fun read... (uh, do you guys have real jobs?)

 

(Oh. Yeah, me too.)

[John Smith]

Not to change the subject, but Skate has a pretty good article about THE Welfare Queen brought up by the Reagan campaigns. It's really quite illuminating and she is not quite who she was portrayed to be...she was much worse, sort of a gypsy type of swindler. It really is worth the read.