Teabagger Interviews - Ignorance and Fear FTW

[Nolan]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=q_s-lvpRj00&feature=fvhl

Of particular interest are the anti-abortion loon near the beginning and the idiot at 5:25.

[Weezer]

It's so sad it's funny. Somebody failed history class. :rolleyes:

[Drace]

Lmao. Apparently racist as well.

Glenn Beck seems to be so successful.

[SouthernBelle82]

It's so sad it's funny. Somebody failed history class. :rolleyes:

Yes it's always so sad. I can't tell you how many times I've had to say this week that Obama isn't a socialist and that global warming doesn't equal weather. On the plus side with one person I have been having discussions with I think I've grown closer to them which is always a good thing. :)

[mollymae]

Haha, I've seen several videos from this same guy doing the interviews. All the videos are kind of the same but they never get old :D

[Dooga Aetrus Blackrazor]

Where is this and how many people attended it? Canada isn't perfect, but we don't get much of that kind of thing. This scares me. I'm not afraid for myself or anything. I just can't believe these things sometimes. These people likely wouldn't listen to anyone who tried to debate with them. And they are slowly creeping up to be the majority.

Where can we find hope in such a situation? Instead of becoming leftists in economic hardship, many countries have historically became right-wing and authoritarian. And with America's economic influence and the next in line being China, what's in store for the future?

Depressing.

[Nolan]

Another video of interest:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S38VioxnBaI

[Bob George]

You can go anywhere where there are a collection of like-minded people, interview them and show just the ones who said something stupid to make the whole group look bad...

BUybMMYmpxo

[Nolan]

You can go anywhere where there are a collection of like-minded people, interview them and show just the ones who said something stupid to make the whole group look bad...

BUybMMYmpxo

Except those aren't astroturfed by the republican party and corporations. They don't throw bricks through windows and yell racial slurs at congressmen and others.

When you defend the teabaggers, it shows where the "free market capitalists" want to take this country. They yell fascism and nazism, but they're the new violent, racist brownshirts.

[Bob George]

Except those aren't astroturfed by the republican party and corporations. They don't throw bricks through windows and yell racial slurs at congressmen and others.

When you defend the teabaggers, it shows where the "free market capitalists" want to take this country. They yell fascism and nazism, but they're the new violent, racist brownshirts.

I think you guys might just be upset that the revolution is coming from the right. You always expected it to come from the left. Ah well.

[Nolan]

I think you guys might just be upset that the revolution is coming from the right. You always expected it to come from the left. Ah well.

Are you BobDole by any chance?

[Dean]

I think you guys might just be upset that the revolution is coming from the right. You always expected it to come from the left. Ah well.

It's not a revolutionary milieu. They aggressively want those winning factions, the empowered corporate and military interests, to have yet more power. They are the symptom of an aggressively nationalist / "individualist" propaganda campaign that has existed in the US for at least a century.

[Bob George]

Are you BobDole by any chance?

If I was Bob Dole, I don't think I'd be spending any of my time on internet forums. If I was Bob Dole I probably wouldn't know how to use an internet forum.

Btw, you know my last comment was just in jest. Right?

[Nolan]

If I was Bob Dole, I don't think I'd be spending any of my time on internet forums. If I was Bob Dole I probably wouldn't know how to use an internet forum.

Btw, you know my last comment was just in jest. Right?

I was referring to BobDole, a right-wing user we had a while back that turned out to be a.... haha well.

[cb9's_unity]

You can go anywhere where there are a collection of like-minded people, interview them and show just the ones who said something stupid to make the whole group look bad...

What a dumb video. You can find idiots at any college.

The difference is that in the tea party issue they tea partiers came to Washington for a specific issue. When questioned about that issue quite a few of them knew absolutely nothing about it. The guy in your video went around asking random people about random bills and was shocked to quit idiotic responses. And when he talks to socialists he never actually challenges them on any of their beliefs. He doesn't care to actually argue with them about Guevara or Castro because of his obvious superiority complex.

The point is that the tea party has been fed bullshit talking points that either have no grounding in reality or ignore facts that would prove them to be hypocrites.

Oh, and while all slavery is absolutely reprehensible, the guy on the video's attempt to defend America is bullshit. Africans indeed capture slaves but the amount of suffering between slaves in Africa and those in America isn't comparable. Slaves in Africa weren't packed side by side in boats and expected to live in filth while they crossed the ocean. And they weren't brutalized in the same way.

[Comrade B]

Old Man: "There won't be enough doctors"
So we should let poor people die? If there aren't enough doctors for all the sick people, that means that there are people who are being told to go die because they don't have health care. How can you justify letting poor people die?

That kid though is hilarious "He has only been in office for half a year and he has destroyed, like, most of the country"

[LeftSideDown]

Christian extremists and Teabaggers make me:

............................................______ __
....................................,.-'"...................``~.,
.............................,.-"..................................."-.,
.........................,/...............................................":,
.....................,?........................... ...........................\,
.................../.................................................. .........,}
................./.................................................. ....,:`^`..}
.............../.................................................. .,:"........./
..............?.....__............................ .............:`.........../
............./__.(....."~-,_..............................,:`........../
.........../(_...."~,_........"~,_....................,:`........_/
..........{.._$;_......"=,_......."-,_.......,.-~-,},.~";/....}
...........((.....*~_......."=-._......";,,./`..../"............../
...,,,___.\`~,......"~.,....................`.....}............../
............(....`=-,,.......`........................(......;_,,-"
............/.`~,......`-...............................\....../\
.............\`~.*-,.....................................|,./.....\,__
,,_..........}.>-._\...................................|........... ...`=~-,
.....`=~-,_\_......`\,.................................\
...................`=~-,,.\,...............................\
................................`:,,.............. .............`\..............__
.....................................`=-,...................,%`>--==``
........................................_\........ ..._,-%.......`\
...................................,<`.._|_,-&``................`

[mollymae]

Christian extremists and Teabaggers make me:

............................................______ __
....................................,.-'"...................``~.,
.............................,.-"..................................."-.,
.........................,/...............................................":,
.....................,?........................... ...........................\,
.................../.................................................. .........,}
................./.................................................. ....,:`^`..}
.............../.................................................. .,:"........./
..............?.....__............................ .............:`.........../
............./__.(....."~-,_..............................,:`........../
.........../(_...."~,_........"~,_....................,:`........_/
..........{.._$;_......"=,_......."-,_.......,.-~-,},.~";/....}
...........((.....*~_......."=-._......";,,./`..../"............../
...,,,___.\`~,......"~.,....................`.....}............../
............(....`=-,,.......`........................(......;_,,-"
............/.`~,......`-...............................\....../\
.............\`~.*-,.....................................|,./.....\,__
,,_..........}.>-._\...................................|........... ...`=~-,
.....`=~-,_\_......`\,.................................\
...................`=~-,,.\,...............................\
................................`:,,.............. .............`\..............__
.....................................`=-,...................,%`>--==``
........................................_\........ ..._,-%.......`\
...................................,<`.._|_,-&``................`

Amen to that...

[RGacky3]

I think you guys might just be upset that the revolution is coming from the right. You always expected it to come from the left. Ah well.

Its not a revolution, the teabagger numbers are less than those that supoprt and protest for public healthcare and against the big banks.

They get more news coverage because
1. they are corporate backed
2. They are insane
3. Fox news are ther cheerleaders
5. mainly they are corporate backed

The the facts still matter, and when it comes to the facts, they are rediculously wrong, take the public option for example, they have almost all the facts about it wrong.

[Bud Struggle]

They get more news coverage because
1. they are corporate backed
2. They are insane
3. Fox news are ther cheerleaders
5. mainly they are corporate backed

6. They are crazy
7. Fox News cove's their stories
8. They have corporate support
9. Tea baggers are insane
10. Fox News gives them coverage...

:D

[mollymae]

6. They are crazy
7. Fox News cove's their stories
8. They have corporate support
9. Tea baggers are insane
10. Fox News gives them coverage...

:D

11. And don't forget that they're NUTSO!!

Actually, I think the main reason they get so much coverage is because the "liberal" media (Keith Olbermann, etc) loves them. How could they not? If the tea party can weaken the Republicans, which I think they do, all the more power for the Dems.

It's the same reason they talk about Sarah Palin on MSNBC so much. If Palin really does run for president (yikes), they know that she probably couldn't win against Obama. Although, who knows?

[Nolan]

Comrades, can we spell X-E-N-O-P-H-O-B-I-A?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZszXhrIdNl4

[Havet]

Well, you can say thanks to Bush et al. campaign of fear. The country's IQ must've dropped by 50 points those 8 years...

[Salyut]

Of particular interest are the anti-abortion loon near the beginning and the idiot at 5:25.

Note the LaRouchites at :10

[Nolan]

Note the LaRouchites at :10

Aren't they fascists of some sort?

[Bud Struggle]

Aren't they fascists of some sort?

La Rouche started out as a Socialist--and then over the years he "migrated" to the Fascist position. I think at this time he and his people are more of a cult than anything else.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lyndon_LaRouche

On another subject--but neared to the actual subject of the thread-I was out in a bar last night with my posse (I like to take my brother workers out for beer and burgers every now and again) and Sarah Palin came on the TV making a speech for McCain and she was absolutley GREAT as a speaker. Very dynamic, to the point a real rabble rouser. Ovbiously you guys don't like what she has to say--but you can see why organizations like Fox follow here and why people flock to her talks. You Commies would do well to have a charismatic personality represent your cause.

[zimmerwald1915]

You Commies would do well to have a charismatic personality represent your cause.
They keep dying on us :(

[RGacky3]

Ovbiously you guys don't like what she has to say--but you can see why organizations like Fox follow here and why people flock to her talks. You Commies would do well to have a charismatic personality represent your cause.

Organizations like Fox follew her because she parrots their line. She may be a good speaker to some people (although in my opinion shes a horrible speaker to anyone with half a brain cell), but honestly I don't think she is, she comes off as not knowing what she's talking about, what she is is folksy (its fake folksy but still), which people like.

As far as the left having charismatic speakers....


They keep dying on us

The last time the US had a charismatic socialist that became really popular he got locked up.

[Bud Struggle]

Organizations like Fox follew her because she parrots their line. She may be a good speaker to some people (although in my opinion shes a horrible speaker to anyone with half a brain cell), but honestly I don't think she is, she comes off as not knowing what she's talking about, what she is is folksy (its fake folksy but still), which people like.

As far as the left having charismatic speakers.... I was in the bar with my Proletarian worker brothers* and it was those guys that were into her. You can't imagine how they were whooping it up when they cut to a wider shot and they showed her legs. They just love her. She's folksy, she's hot (in an approachable way) and she gives rabble rousing speeches. What's not to love? (Besides her politics.)

If you ride a motorcycle--she is the quintessential "biker momma", sexy, opinionated and doesn't take shit from anyone. I was just at the Daytona Bike Week and there were lots of women with Palinesque glasses on. She's their girl.


The last time the US had a charismatic socialist that became really popular he got locked up. Eugene Debs?

*That's something I learned from my days in the IWW--I address all my fellow workers "brother" or "sister." I wasn't sure how the Black guys would take it--in my day the brothers were THE BROTHERS. But no problem. Also I call the older Spanish women in labeling dept as "Senioritas" and they call me "El Gordo" which I've taken to translate as "the Handsome One". They just love that joke. :D

[The Ben G]

Lenin, WE NEED YOU!

[The Ben G]

Comrades, can we spell X-E-N-O-P-H-O-B-I-A?

ZszXhrIdNl4

How about F-A-S-C-I-S-M?

[Bud Struggle]

How about F-A-S-C-I-S-M?

OK, these guys aren't Fascists--they are just idiots. But really and truly they came from nowhere and they are getting a billion times more attention then the radical Left has ever gotten.

And it's not about Fox News--they are crazy and interesting, (some are crazy but it's a nice lead in to the more sane members among them.)

They have a mojo working for them. I'm not sure if it's planned out, but it works. Just imagine what the Radical Left could do with the same momentum.

You guys don't think you need to revise your tactics?

[Publius]

Oh, and while all slavery is absolutely reprehensible, the guy on the video's attempt to defend America is bullshit. Africans indeed capture slaves but the amount of suffering between slaves in Africa and those in America isn't comparable. Slaves in Africa weren't packed side by side in boats and expected to live in filth while they crossed the ocean. And they weren't brutalized in the same way.

I hear this a lot, but is it really true?

I always find it faintly ridiculous to hear this "African slavery wasn't so bad" thing.

It was African slavers who sold the slaves to traffickers to take them to America in those ships in the first place.

How can that not be morally equivalent?

[Che a chara]

Paranoidal, scare mongering bullshit as usual from the teabaggers. Uneducated fools.

[heylelshalem]

I think a lot of this teabagger bullpocky is really just a reaction..a reaction to the changes that are going on right now that they really are'nt too well educated about and that the corporate right wing media throws the gasoline on the fire of that fear. Most if not all of them are seriously undereducated on the issues and are just going off of what they get from propagandists like glenn beck spoon feed them..the fact that faux news gives them positive press only reinforces it.

Its a sad fact but the US is probably one of the most conservative countries in the world, and we all know that what kind of worked for this country is definately not working..its tearing apart at the seams and the house of cards is collapsing...these people are just trying to vent their own aggrivation and their own insecurites about the future...

What the left should be doing more is trying to deflate the bullshit memes that are spread about us. I think this whole ordeal boils down to the fact that a lot of these working people are really blind to the fact that we are on their side..and that the very people that they are standing for ..well are obviously more interested in keeping the corporate control structure going.

I have seen a few good videos of people trying to pop that reality bubble by doing parody of the irony of the people flipping out about the government doing something that is actually quite good for the people in general. But i think as the situation in this country economically gets worse people will be more open to the only real option we have of saving this country from self-imploding and that is adopting more progressive change to fix a lot of what was wrong with this country and was the cause of a lot of the chaos we are facing now ironically.

[Publius]

I think a lot of this teabagger bullpocky is really just a reaction..a reaction to the changes that are going on right now that they really are'nt too well educated about and that the corporate right wing media throws the gasoline on the fire of that fear. Most if not all of them are seriously undereducated on the issues and are just going off of what they get from propagandists like glenn beck spoon feed them..the fact that faux news gives them positive press only reinforces it.

Its a sad fact but the US is probably one of the most conservative countries in the world, and we all know that what kind of worked for this country is definately not working..its tearing apart at the seams and the house of cards is collapsing...these people are just trying to vent their own aggrivation and their own insecurites about the future...

What the left should be doing more is trying to deflate the bullshit memes that are spread about us. I think this whole ordeal boils down to the fact that a lot of these working people are really blind to the fact that we are on their side..and that the very people that they are standing for ..well are obviously more interested in keeping the corporate control structure going.

I have seen a few good videos of people trying to pop that reality bubble by doing parody of the irony of the people flipping out about the government doing something that is actually quite good for the people in general. But i think as the situation in this country economically gets worse people will be more open to the only real option we have of saving this country from self-imploding and that is adopting more progressive change to fix a lot of what was wrong with this country and was the cause of a lot of the chaos we are facing now ironically.

I think this analysis has some truth to it, but I think it's naive in respects.

I think you misunderstand the sentiment of these people. While there's no question they're taken advantage of by the capitalist class, they truly believe (due, of course, to propaganda) that they want to participate in the capitalist system.

Of course the trick is they have no power, either politically or economically, but they've been deluded into to think that a system which rewards the rich and punishes them (the middle class and poor) is really just, because of "personal responsibility" or "equality of oppurtunity" or whatever lie they believe in.

The point is, you have people who defend, in principle, their own subjugation and disenfranchisment because they think that's how the just world functions.

These people think God has ordained society to be a certain way. While your interests do match theirs more than the capitalist class, their interests are funamentally opposed to their ideology. That's what's so sad and so damaging about this fundamentalist conservative ideology.

These people complain about government spending and taxes when they benefit from this spending.

It's a psychological fact that these people's entire ideology is built around the idea that the world is just, and that people get what they deserve. It's their religion, and it's their economics.

These people believe that capitalism (the way it's practiced here in America, now) and a certain form of fundamentalist Christianity are the only way of viewing the world. And I don't really see what you can say to these people to shake them of this delusion.

You are EXACTLY what their belief system is built to defend against. It's just psychological possible to really "fix" these people's warped worldviews.

Their worldview isn't even coherent -- it's large corporations cheating the system fo whatever weak and ineffectual government controls that existed which created this recession/depression. How do you think you can reason with someone whose on beliefs don't make any sense, and which crumble under the slightest scrutiny? These people believe in an image of America, nothing else. And as long as your image is less appealing than the image of America as the mightiest and Godliest empire that's ever existed (and it is less appealing than that -- how could it not be?) then you lose the battle.

[Bob George]

While I don't support the violence of the tea party movement, and the racist/homophobic elements amongst them make me cringe, I totally understand their anger and I know where they're coming from.

A lot on the American left seem to think their anger is unfounded and is purely fuelled by the right-wing faction of the liberal media. I just watched a recent episode of Real Time with Bill Maher where he and his panel expressed this very sentiment. This seems to suggest that their anger is illegitimate. It's not. The fact that their anger is encouraged by the conservative media doesn't mean they don't have a legitimate reason to be angry.

Over the course of the 20th century, America has become increasingly more progressive. Government has grown catastrophically. Progressive like to pretend that their agenda has never really been represented in national politics, even now with a Democrat congress and President. But in reality, the government has carried out nothing but progressive policy for at least the last hundred years.

It's not surprisingly really. Progressives by definition are people who want the government to do more for their people. So naturally they are going to be the ones who are actively demonstrating for their cause on a constant basis. Conservatives want government to do less. When they want something done they look to the market, to private individuals. So they aren't actively demonstrating for their cause politically as much as progressives. Their political activism is reactionary. They wont get involved until government actually does something and by that time it's too late. You can't repeal a government program once it's been enacted. It's pretty much impossible.

So the progressives got central banking, income tax, minimum wage, equal pay laws, affirmative action, the New Deal (social security), the Great Society (Medicare and Medicaid), and of course these expanded greatly over the years until you get to a point where the national debt gets so out of control that paying it back seems impossible. Note that this wasn't only caused by the massive progressive government programs enacted during the earlier part of the 20th century, but also the massive defense spending of Republican Presidents, who focused on fighting wars instead of repealing some of these costly and expansive domestic programs, in the later part of the 20th century and early 21st century.

So around the time of 2007, 2008 and 2009 a conservative movement emerges (originally grassroots) at a time when the national debt is astronomical, the government has expanded enormously over the last century, they just had a Republican President who acted like a Great Society liberal, and were about to get a new Democrat President who seemed like the most progressive yet. 1+1+1=3. It was the equation for a perfect storm.

I am not one bit surprised that the anger in the conservative movement spilled over. It makes perfect sense to me and is completely understandable. They've had to put up with a century of government growing, and growing, and growing, with very little resistance, absolutely no regression, and it looks like government is going to grow even bigger, perhaps like we've never seen before. So damn straight they are going to throw rocks through windows. What the hell else do you expect them to do? Bend over and take it? Not this time.

[Nolan]

While I don't support the violence of the tea party movement, and the racist/homophobic elements amongst them make me cringe, I totally understand their anger and I know where they're coming from.

A lot on the American left seem to think their anger is unfounded and is purely fuelled by the right-wing faction of the liberal media. I just watched a recent episode of Real Time with Bill Maher where he and his panel expressed this very sentiment. This seems to suggest that their anger is illegitimate. It's not. The fact that their anger is encouraged by the conservative media doesn't mean they don't have a legitimate reason to be angry.

Over the course of the 20th century, America has become increasingly more progressive. Government has grown catastrophically. Progressive like to pretend that their agenda has never really been represented in national politics, even now with a Democrat congress and President. But in reality, the government has carried out nothing but progressive policy for at least the last hundred years.

It's not surprisingly really. Progressives by definition are people who want the government to do more for their people. So naturally they are going to be the ones who are actively demonstrating for their cause on a constant basis. Conservatives want government to do less. When they want something done they look to the market, to private individuals. So they aren't actively demonstrating for their cause politically as much as progressives. Their political activism is reactionary. They wont get involved until government actually does something and by that time it's too late. You can't repeal a government program once it's been enacted. It's pretty much impossible.

So the progressives got central banking, income tax, minimum wage, equal pay laws, affirmative action, the New Deal (social security), the Great Society (Medicare and Medicaid), and of course these expanded greatly over the years until you get to a point where the national debt gets so out of control that paying it back seems impossible. Note that this wasn't only caused by the massive progressive government programs enacted during the earlier part of the 20th century, but also the massive defense spending of Republican Presidents, who focused on fighting wars instead of repealing some of these costly and expansive domestic programs, in the later part of the 20th century and early 21st century.

So around the time of 2007, 2008 and 2009 a conservative movement emerges (originally grassroots) at a time when the national debt is astronomical, the government has expanded enormously over the last century, they just had a Republican President who acted like a Great Society liberal, and were about to get a new Democrat President who seemed like the most progressive yet. 1+1+1=3. It was the equation for a perfect storm.

I am not one bit surprised that the anger in the conservative movement spilled over. It makes perfect sense to me and is completely understandable. They've had to put up with a century of government growing, and growing, and growing, with very little resistance, absolutely no regression, and it looks like government is going to grow even big, perhaps like we've never seen before. So damn straight they are going to throw rocks through windows. What the hell else do you expect them to do? Bend over and take it? Not this time.


No. Here we go again with the "big government" talking points. It's not about progressivism or government, it's about party politics and racism. Where were all these people when Bush was in office? 99% of them were home. Remind me what party was egging on the tea party recently?

Have you completely forgot about the Reagan years? There was nothing remotely "progressive" about that.

[Bob George]

No. Here we go again with the "big government" talking points. It's not about progressivism or government, it's about party politics and racism. Where were all these people when Bush was in office? 99% of them were home. Remind me what party was egging on the tea party recently?
The first tea party demonstration was held in 2007, during the Bush Presidency. It was primarily Ron Paul supporters and libertarian types though. It didn't really become a huge national conservative movement until the Obama administration though and it was pretty much a reaction to the stimulus plan. But a lot of their anger was caused by Bush and spilled over when Obama got into office. They felt disenfranchised by the whole Bush presidency. He wasn't a conservative at all. Then when Obama got into office, who was way more progressive (judging by his rhetoric, the most progressive President the US has ever had), the anger boiled over.


Have you completely forgot about the Reagan years? There was nothing remotely "progressive" about that.
And like I said, it was unfortunate that he focused so much on fighting the Cold War. He did some good things. He basically enacted supply-side economic policy during his presidency. He was more of a road-block for progressivism. He didn't actually regress in anyway. It's not good enough to just halt progress, if you don't also regress. But slowing government growth for those eight years was a good thing. It was the one slight moment in 20th century where government didn't grow at the insane rate it had for the rest of the century. Doesn't really make up for anything though.

[Drace]

Whats with the black guy saying his not black o.O

[RGacky3]

I was in the bar with my Proletarian worker brothers* and it was those guys that were into her. You can't imagine how they were whooping it up when they cut to a wider shot and they showed her legs. They just love her. She's folksy, she's hot (in an approachable way) and she gives rabble rousing speeches. What's not to love? (Besides her politics.)

If you ride a motorcycle--she is the quintessential "biker momma", sexy, opinionated and doesn't take shit from anyone. I was just at the Daytona Bike Week and there were lots of women with Palinesque glasses on. She's their girl.

I agree with you there, she's a celebrety, and people like watching her, I like watching her, its always fun, but that does'nt mean people agree with her politics or take her seriously, you might as well have Bono up there talking about politics.

As far as the biker momma, I don't know what type of bikers you hangout with, but the few bikers I've known are pretty damn masogonistic, but thats just a side note.


OK, these guys aren't Fascists--they are just idiots. But really and truly they came from nowhere and they are getting a billion times more attention then the radical Left has ever gotten.

And it's not about Fox News--they are crazy and interesting, (some are crazy but it's a nice lead in to the more sane members among them.)

They have a mojo working for them. I'm not sure if it's planned out, but it works. Just imagine what the Radical Left could do with the same momentum.

You guys don't think you need to revise your tactics?

It IS about Fox news, look at the way they cover the teabaggers compared to the way the cover the left wing protesters, Fox news has been prodding these guys up, for a good reason, Fox news is a right wing political organization.

[Skooma Addict]

Speaking of stupid ignorant people, look at this gem.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gNfG8gwamKM

Just your stereotypical progressives I guess.

It seems that Caplan's The Myth of the Rational Voter is more relevant than ever.

[IcarusAngel]

lol. The vast majority of scientists are liberal.

You can't even do pre-calculus and claim to be an economist. Don't comment on logic and mathematics until you learn the subjects first.

[IcarusAngel]

I remember when Olaf claimed that Frege had a more complete system of logic than Russell even though Russell completely demolished Frege's attempt to form an axiomatic approach to mathematics.

Anyway, I don't like the womanizing in that video. Womanizing isn't the same thing as ignorance but it's pretty close imo... as it doesn't bring true happiness.

[Skooma Addict]

I remember when Olaf claimed that Frege had a more complete system of logic than Russell even though Russell completely demolished Frege's attempt to form an axiomatic approach to mathematics.


I don't recall. I remember when you said something is pseudo-science if it hasn't been peer reviewed. Funny times.


Anyway, I don't like the womanizing in that video. Womanizing isn't the same thing as ignorance but it's pretty close imo... as it doesn't bring true happiness.

Yea, most progressives aren't too bright.

[Havet]

Speaking of stupid ignorant people, look at this gem.

Wow, terrible marketing...

[Skooma Addict]

lol. The vast majority of scientists are liberal.

You can't even do pre-calculus and claim to be an economist. Don't comment on logic and mathematics until you learn the subjects first.

Oh, here we go again.

I can do pre-calc and I told you 1000 times that I don't claim to be an economist. Why do you say I know nothing about logic? Can you give me the logical basis for supporting holism in testing?

[Skooma Addict]

Wow, terrible marketing...

I know. I am starting to think they are actually against the causes they claim to support.

[IcarusAngel]

I never made any such a claim. I said that is one of the characteristics.

Anyway, you're committing the fallacy of the hasty generalization.

Frankly I find that video hard to believe. It looks like they went and got a bunch of jocks and frat boys to make a video, instead of a political science nerds or what have you. I doubt those guys worry too much about their health care and the environment, they seem like healthy lads to me.

You're mixing up the difference between advertising to get a message across and the dogmatism of the "tea baggers" and your fellow Miseans who speak out of school when they talk about logic and mathematics etc. You should know the difference.

[Skooma Addict]

I never made any such a claim. I said that is one of the characteristics.

There is peer reviewed and published pseudo-science all the time. Whether or not something has been peer reviewed has absolutely nothing to do with whether or not the claim is scientific. You would know this if you read anything on the subject besides Wikipedia (which is where you got your ideas on what constitutes pseudo-science from).


Frankly I find that video hard to believe. It looks like they went and got a bunch of jocks and frat boys to make a video, instead of a political science nerds or what have you. I doubt those guys worry too much about their health care and the environment, they seem like healthy lads to me.

I find the ignorance of many progressives hard to believe as well.


You're mixing up the difference between advertising to get a message across and the dogmatism of the "tea baggers" and your fellow Miseans who speak out of school when they talk about logic and mathematics etc. You should know the difference.


Both are "advertising to get a message across."

[IcarusAngel]

Oh, here we go again.

I can do pre-calc and I told you 1000 times that I don't claim to be an economist.

You claim to be an economist when you make controversial claims and claim that Mises has disproven all other economic systems but Misean economics and so on. If there was any empirical evidence to back this up you'd provide it.


Why do you say I know nothing about logic?

If mathematics is just logic, you can't really say you're good at logic until you've at least hit discrete mathematics, ODEs and PDEs, and other advanced mathematics.

You also make illogical statements.

For example, I've proven time and time again that there have been more libertarian-socialists in science and math than there have been Misean economists, whose total number is zero in science and math.

Of course I'm not progressive but most scientists are progressive and the "conservative" ones are conservative in order to curtail some of the abstract nonsense of the progressives. They are traditional, "empirical" conservatives.


Can you give me the logical basis for supporting holism in testing?

You seem to think someone discovered all of the principles for use in science. No one has done this and all scientists practice different methods depending upon their specialization.

[IcarusAngel]

There is peer reviewed and published pseudo-science all the time. Whether or not something has been peer reviewed has absolutely nothing to do with whether or not the claim is scientific. You would know this if you read anything on the subject besides Wikipedia (which is where you got your ideas on what constitutes pseudo-science from).

The process of peer-review is essential to making valid claims. Any scientist who knowingly distorts his evidence and is discovered by peer-review loses his credibility, so it's an attempt to keep scientists inherently honest.

Also, by far most pseudo-science is not peer-reviewed. Thus, a lack of peer-review and cooperative research is likely to be a key indicator whether something is pseudo-science or not. You also ignore the fact that peer-review is what gets the pseudo-science out of science. Give me an example of something in science that is known to be pseudo-science that has been kept in the scientific community because of peer review.


I find the ignorance of many progressives hard to believe as well.

I find your ignorance hard to believe. You make broad statements about science and economics without proving them or without citing sources - instead only attacking opponents.

I got onto your ignorance of science and logic almost immediately and I imagine other people do as well.

You can't do high school mathematics and then criticize people for not knowing what they're talking about - it's hilarious.


Both are "advertising to get a message across."

No there is a difference. The tea baggers have proven to have no knowledge of the subject.

But that advertisement does not prove that the people have no knowledge of what they're talking about.

[Skooma Addict]

If there is a God, please kill me now.



You claim to be an economist when you make controversial claims and claim that Mises has disproven all other economic systems but Misean economics and so on. If there was any empirical evidence to back this up you'd provide it.The fact that I make economic claims does not mean that I claim to be an economist. This should be blatantly obvious. I don't think Mises has disproven all other "economic systems" (whatever it is you mean by that). I think Mises was wrong on quite a bit of stuff actually. I don't know what exactly it is you want me to provide empirical evidence for.


If mathematics is just logic, you can't really say you're good at logic until you've at least hit discrete mathematics, ODEs and PDEs, and other advanced mathematics.You can be good at one and not the other. Although there usually is some overlap.


You also make illogical statements.

For example, I've proven time and time again that there have been more libertarian-socialists in science and math than there have been Misean economists, whose total number is zero in science and math.So this is an example of me making an illogical statement?



You seem to think someone discovered all of the principles for use in science. No one has done this and all scientists practice different methods depending upon their specialization.Thanks for the non-answer. And if you didn't know, what you are referring to is methodological pluralism.

[IcarusAngel]

The fact that I make economic claims does not mean that I claim to be an economist. This should be blatantly obvious. I don't think Mises has disproven all other "economic systems" (whatever it is you mean by that)....

I think Mises was wrong on quite a bit of stuff actually. I don't know what exactly it is you want me to provide empirical evidence for.

You said that it is only possible to calculate the value of resources within a capitalistic framework. Where is your proof of this?



You can be good at one and not the other. Although there usually is some overlap.

If you know so much about logic go to the link in my signature and use proof designer to show that Russell's paradox is correct.

And if math and logic are the same thing, then being good at one necessitates being good at the other (do you see how the logic works?).


Thanks for the non-answer. And if you didn't know, what you are referring to is methodological pluralism.

Mathematics is the basis of science, or the language of science. You sound like an idiot when you lecture people on scientific philosophy without ever having taken a science course in your life.

[Skooma Addict]

The process of peer-review is essential to making valid claims. Any scientist who knowingly distorts his evidence and is discovered by peer-review loses his credibility, so it's an attempt to keep scientists inherently honest.

Also, by far most pseudo-science is not peer-reviewed. Thus, a lack of peer-review and cooperative research is likely to be a key indicator whether something is pseudo-science or not. You also ignore the fact that peer-review is what gets the pseudo-science out of science. Give me an example of something in science that is known to be pseudo-science that has been kept in the scientific community because of peer review.It may just so happen that more often than not pseudo-science is not peer reviewed, but that is still a moot point which adds nothing to the discussion as it has no bearing over whether or not something is pseudoscience.

But anyways, as for examples...

First, there is 99% of the peer reviewed publications which make a case against physicalism, and then there are 99% of the publications on metaphysics and a good amount of publications on epistemology.

Also, don't you think AE is pseudo-sceince? There is a lot of peer reviewed AE.

One can also make the case that Freudian psychology is pseudo-science. There have been quite a few peer reviewed articles on this topic if I am not mistaken.

But anyways, this is further complicated by the fact that you apparently have no way to distinguish science from pseudo-science. Also, if you are a follower of Kuhn (and many people are) then what constitutes pseudo-science changes over time.


I find your ignorance hard to believe. You make broad statements about science and economics without proving them or without citing sources - instead only attacking opponents.
Followed by....


I got onto your ignorance of science and logic almost immediately and I imagine other people do as well.

You can't do high school mathematics and then criticize people for not knowing what they're talking about - it's hilarious. Priceless.

[heylelshalem]

haha i think it would be more then natural that scientists are more likely to be socialists...what i dont understand is why that more socialist are'nt progressive? if one understands evolution ..one would have to understand that organisms/systems etc. have to change and adapt to survive. I would think that this same principle would work quite well to explain what is happening now with the current system. Corporate capitalism is the dinosaur not able to keep up with the current environment. Built itself on principles and practices that are not sustainable and therefor will cause its death.

I myself am not tremendously well educated on economics(though i HAVE bought myself a copy of the marx/engles reader and own das kapital) but from what i have read about the economic crisis..it shows all the warning signs of a appocolyptic total failure of americas economy. The socialists in this country should'nt be too scared anyways as i bet that china will soon eclipse our power soon enough to be the new global superpower.

So yeah all you capitalist dinosaurs be ready. The next stage in economic evolution is coming :P

[IcarusAngel]

First I find out that you can't do calculus while bragging about how only you understand economics, now I've found out you don't know anything about logic either.

At least "progressives" and socialists don't have to lie about what they know and don't know.

And your attempt to bring "metaphysics" into a discussion on science proves you have no fucking idea what you're talking about.

Stick to pseudo-science Olaf with your fellow Misean travelers if you don't want your ignorance exposed.

[IcarusAngel]

haha i think it would be more then natural that scientists are more likely to be socialists...what i dont understand is why that more socialist are'nt progressive?

The socialists that were/are scientists and mathematicians (Einstein, Russell, Graber, Chomsky, Kropotkin, Sokal) were/are also progressive as well.

[Skooma Addict]

This will be my last post as you are clearly going insane.



First I find out that you can't do calculus while bragging about how only you understand economics, now I've found out you don't know anything about logic either.Because I definitely said I am the only one who understands economics :rolleyes:. You "found out" nothing. You just make stuff up and hope it is true. Like your (false) claim that I have never taken a science class.


At least "progressives" and socialists don't have to lie about what they know and don't know. So you aren't a socialist or a progressive then? Since you claim to know things about me that you really don't?


And your attempt to bring "metaphysics" into a discussion on science proves you have no fucking idea what you're talking about.I guess Quine didn't know what he was talking about either then when he said philosophy is just a continuation of science?


Stick to pseudo-science Olaf with your fellow Misean travelers if you don't want your ignorance exposed. Mhmm. I await for the day where you give me criteria for distinguishing pseudo-science from science.

[heylelshalem]

The socialists that were/are scientists and mathematicians (Einstein, Russell, Graber, Chomsky, Kropotkin, Sokal) were/are also progressive as well.

i KNEW IT! proof that logic and reason if properly applied supports socialism. Well..to me anyways. Well, back to hitting the books. thank you comrade.

[IcarusAngel]

Since the basis of Mises is logic, and Olaf doesn't understand logic, one could only conclude that he doesn't even know anything about Misean economics either in addition to his lack of knowledge of basic logic/set theory/college mathematics/science.

Miseans like Olaf are anti-intellectual. You could hand Olaf a proof on a platter and he wouldn't know what to do with it if his life depended on it, right after he claims he knows a lot about logic. None of these Miseans have degrees in what they claim to study.

This is what Misean necessitates: a rejection of what is known in modern science and these other fields. Misean pseudo-science would be very dangerous if they actually had a presence in academia beyond that of creationists.

[Skooma Addict]

Oh how the proud fall...


You make broad statements about science and economics without proving them or without citing sources - instead only attacking opponents.


Since the basis of Mises is logic, and Olaf doesn't understand logic, one could only conclude that he doesn't even know anything about Misean economics either in addition to his lack of knowledge of basic logic/set theory/college mathematics/science.

Miseans like Olaf are anti-intellectual. You could hand Olaf a proof on a platter and he wouldn't know what to do with it if his life depended on it, right after he claims he knows a lot about logic. None of these Miseans have degrees in what they claim to study.

This is what Misean necessitates: a rejection of what is known in modern science and these other fields. Misean pseudo-science would be very dangerous if they actually had a presence in academia beyond that of creationists.

[Bud Struggle]

You Commies are going to love this one:

http://www.flickr.com/photos/pargon/sets/72157623594187379/show/

:D

[HankMorgan]

Great slide show, Bud Struggle. The spelling was on par with the writing in this thread.

Some of the Tea Party folks can't spell but they know when their government is taking the country in the wrong direction AT BREAKNECK SPEED.

See you all at the polls in November.

[Ryke]

Great slide show, Bud Struggle. The spelling was on par with the writing in this thread.

Some of the Tea Party folks can't spell but they know when their government is taking the country in the wrong direction AT BREAKNECK SPEED.

See you all at the polls in November.


The country is going at breakneck speed... to a very, very mild position which is not a significant change from anything we've seen in the last 20 years. Healthcare reform isn't even on par with what the rest of the world already did long ago.

May not see you at the polls, have fun pretending the two choices you're given are actually opposed in any way.

[Bud Struggle]

The country is going at breakneck speed... to a very, very mild position which is not a significant change from anything we've seen in the last 20 years. Healthcare reform isn't even on par with what the rest of the world already did long ago.

May not see you at the polls, have fun pretending the two choices you're given are actually opposed in any way.

No, I think Hank makes a valid point--there CAN be other choices besides the two party system if the people want. And what the Tea Partyers are doing is taking that other route. Now claim all you want that it's media etc. that are supporting it--there are lots of people moving twords the right these days and it WILL be reflected in election results in November.

For that matter look at Britain (and I'm no expert here) but it seems not only are the Conservatives are going to get in again in the next election--but they are going to make a genuine aristocrat (David Cameron) their PM.

It's funny.

[La Comédie Noire]

You can go anywhere where there are a collection of like-minded people, interview them and show just the ones who said something stupid to make the whole group look bad...

BUybMMYmpxo

Whoever produced that show is an idiot, Lincoln did belong to the Whig Party in his early career.

[La Comédie Noire]

But I think we can all agree, nobody likes liberals.

[Robert]

But I think we can all agree, nobody likes liberals.

Nobody? Not even other liberals?

[La Comédie Noire]

Nobody? Not even other liberals?

They have a deep self hatred because they are impotent and unimportant.

[Jazzratt]

For that matter look at Britain (and I'm no expert here) but it seems not only are the Conservatives are going to get in again in the next election--but they are going to make a genuine aristocrat (David Cameron) their PM.

Firstly genuine aristos hold seats in the House of Lords thanks to their peerage. Cameron sits in the House of Commons and has never had a peerage as far as I'm aware. Unless you were using "genuine", incorrectly, as an intensifier and "aristocrat" to mean "upper class numpty" (a demographic from which our Prime Ministers have been chosen almost exclusively) then you're plain wrong there.

The win is far from garunteed, too. Lots of people are looking for alternaties to New Labour and so go for the torie in the polls. Then the tories do something disasterous for their poll numbers: they announce their policies and suddenly their lead drops until it's negligible. Why do you think that might be? In addition to this many of the children of people who grew up under and in opposition to Thatcher are coming to voting age now and they have the same "any fucker but the tories" mindset. Jesus, I've heard some of them advocate for Labour for fuck's sake.

On a more anecdotal level I've met very few tory voters around here and I live in a place that isn't exactly a hotspot for progressivism. What I have seen are a couple of election billboards that have been graffitied over (Billboard: "I've never voted tory". Handwriting:...and I never fucking will! Being a favourite).


Great slide show, Bud Struggle. The spelling was on par with the writing in this thread.

Some of the Tea Party folks can't spell but they know when their government is taking the country in the wrong direction AT BREAKNECK SPEED.

It's not the spelling that I find hilarious (hell, I have problems with it - although I'd certainly double check any placard I was taking out in public) but the insane rhetoric and beliefs. Shit like talking about America becoming hellishly socialist or whatever "AT BREAKNECK SPEED" tickles me.

[RGacky3]

No, I think Hank makes a valid point--there CAN be other choices besides the two party system if the people want. And what the Tea Partyers are doing is taking that other route. Now claim all you want that it's media etc. that are supporting it--there are lots of people moving twords the right these days and it WILL be reflected in election results in November.

Actually the Tea Partiers are essencailly a part of the republican party, and because of that, the republican party is loosing a lot of support (looking at the numbers), because they are moving farther and farther right and more away from mainstream America, but also the democrats are loosing because they are loosing the left.

[Bud Struggle]

Firstly genuine aristos hold seats in the House of Lords thanks to their peerage. Cameron sits in the House of Commons and has never had a peerage as far as I'm aware. Unless you were using "genuine", incorrectly, as an intensifier and "aristocrat" to mean "upper class numpty" (a demographic from which our Prime Ministers have been chosen almost exclusively) then you're plain wrong there. Fair enough. As I said I'm no expert on things British. But it seems that this Cameron guy's great grandfather was King of England while my great grandfather was a serf working for the Tsar so he seems a bit farther up the feudal food chain than I am.


The win is far from garunteed, too. Lots of people are looking for alternaties to New Labour and so go for the torie in the polls. Then the tories do something disasterous for their poll numbers: they announce their policies and suddenly their lead drops until it's negligible. Why do you think that might be? In addition to this many of the children of people who grew up under and in opposition to Thatcher are coming to voting age now and they have the same "any fucker but the tories" mindset. Jesus, I've heard some of them advocate for Labour for fuck's sake.

On a more anecdotal level I've met very few tory voters around here and I live in a place that isn't exactly a hotspot for progressivism. What I have seen are a couple of election billboards that have been graffitied over (Billboard: "I've never voted tory". Handwriting:...and I never fucking will! Being a favourite). Well best of luck on that one--when do you think the election will be held?


Actually the Tea Partiers are essencailly a part of the republican party, and because of that, the republican party is loosing a lot of support (looking at the numbers), because they are moving farther and farther right and more away from mainstream America, but also the democrats are loosing because they are loosing the left.

They aren't Republicans AT ALL. The Republicans are hanging around Fetish clubs in LA spending 1000s of dollars on bondage strippers and fighting for the rights of big business. These Tea Baggers are middle American, middle class, Christian working people. They hate what has become of the Republican party.