Monday, June 26, 2006

I need a real challenge

So, Steve the Pirate (you may debate the nature of his piracy in the comments) came by with some more tripe and hollow arguments. So I decided to cruise by the cobag's site and see what was up. Well, they have pretty much given up on writing anything at all and have completely given in to cut and paste blogging. I left a few comments that I might have been better off without, but low hanging fruit is a little fun to kick. I am not doing anyone any favors, though, so maybe I should just leave those guys alone. I should really be looking for someone of my own intellectual caliber, but I haven't met any that weren't liberal.

What is a genius to do?

29 comments:

Anonymous said...

Chuckles, I actually do have stuff to chat about, but commenting would take to long and would hurt my fingers with all the typing.

I do have a question though. Don't you ever get tired of people living off the government? I'm not talking about those who need it for a moment in their lives, I'm talking about generations of families living off Uncle Sam. It's one thing to say you how much you care and love and just wanna help the human race, but what about coddling these people; in turn not helping them out at all.

I am going to make a bold statement and say, you are totally, 100% wrong when you say Republicans (conservatives) are only out to help themselves. Steve was stating a fact that people do not need to government in order to succeed (Steve, my mother is an example of that). Sure they may need help for a MOMENT in time, but not for their lives. Can you agree with that statement? Can you agree that yes, there needs to be a certain extent of welfare, but one does not to be depended on it. It's not so cold hearted to want people to succeed instead of seeing them live off hand outs from the government.

Maybe if we lived closer to each other we could meet up for whatever it is you drink and chat about this more in depth. However, we don't and I've typed too much -my fingers hurt.

Anonymous said...

ps. That was from me, Canuck.

Steve the Pirate said...

Of all the people I've ever met, you are absolutely the most narcissistic, self-absorbed, conceited, egotistical maniac I have ever known. I feel a great deal of pity for you; anyone who has to constantly remind himself and his readers that he is a genius (whether that is true or not remains to be seen) is obviously compensating for something. It's almost as if that internet IQ test score is a security blanket for you; every time you're proven wrong you simply wrap up in it and stick your head in the sand. "But I'm a genius! I'm right! You're wrong! It doesn't matter that I don't have any evidence to support my claims!"

You claim to be a genius; well, if I'm so intellectually inferior to you, why is it that every time I attempt to start a debate you dodge my arguments and simply stick to personal attacks? If you're so superior to me and my friends, why can't you argue the issues? You're not looking for a "real challenge," you're looking for more like-minded Kommie Aid drinkers to grab your dick and yank it as fast as they can. You don't want debate, you don't want discussion, you want more blind followers of your deranged doctrine and the complete destruction of those that do not agree with you.

Then again, if you're such a "genius," why do you constantly
use a simple man's vocabulary? I've never seen a blogger drop as many f-bombs in one entry as you have. It's almost like you're watching a Samuel L. Jackson movie: you want those mothereffing bloggers off the mothereffing web, but there ain't a got-damn thing you can do.

So, if you feel the need to continue trolling our site, be our guest! And hey, remember fmragtops and I have blogs of our own! Come troll those too! Send all the little hippiebots you want to; we'll bitch-slap them just like we've done you time and time again.

Now go flip my burgers, boy.

Chuckles said...

You claim to be a genius; well, if I'm so intellectually inferior to you, why is it that every time I attempt to start a debate you dodge my arguments and simply stick to personal attacks?

I guess you haven't read my responses to you. Your entire comment is exactly what you whine about. You come here and claim that all I do is insult you and then spend the next three paragraphs attempting to insult me and everybody else.

Claiming that an opponent is behaving in a way that can only describe your position is called transference, Steve. You have been whining about attacks on your character since you came over here. It is true that I have insulted you in the past. It is also true that you have learned the victim position very well. You consistently Democrats and other people that feel social responsibility are constantly victimizing you. I've got some news for you: the people that are victimizing you are the Republican'ts. That $20 you want back from your taxes will just cost you $50 later. Who do you think will be left with the bill for this war? Will Dick Cheney or the other oil men in charge be writing any checks? Does it ever bother you that you are being gouged at the pump by the gasoline companies that are posting record net profits?

I am looking for an opponent that can base their argument on facts and not Op/Ed pieces from the WSJ. The Op/Ed pages of every newspaper are not held to any journalistic standard beyond the written language. That is why they are called Opinions/Editorial.

My use of f-bombs (as if that weren't the most childish expression EVAR!, oh dear I do believe I am getting the vapors!) is a result of the inarticulate rage that occurs when I read arguments and statements of such mind boggling inconsistency as are posted on Shootaliberal.

Canuck, do you have any evidence that they are families anywhere that have lived for generations on welfare? It almost sounds believable but that is the siren song of the conservative movement. It all sounds so reasonable, but when you look at the results and the fine print, you are getting screwed. The Republican't party is all about big business.

I will state that I think both our welfare/social services and prison systems need revision. I could point out that Republican'ts have been hacking funding for everything but business subsidies and the military but that apparently doesn't matter for either of you.

If you two are so upset and affrointed by welfare, why aren't you up in arms over the farm subsidies? Why aren't you all screaming every time Bush says that he is going to lower the gas prices by giving another big hunk of money to the gas companies? I will reiterate my earlier statement of fact: the gasoline companies are posting record net profits. Net profits, not gross profits. Net. Everybody is gettign screwed by this situation but you all are worried about the chump change items in the government's budget.

Anonymous said...

How long to you think a person/family should be on welfare, or any government program? How long is long enough for you? I'm not upset by the idea of welfare, I'm upset about reactions stated by you regarding welfare.

Welfare is not and should not be someone's income they rely on. And for me to be making such a statement does not make me a bad person who doesn't care about their neighbour.

As for the oil companies, supply and demand. Show me where they've been gouging or doing anything evil, then perhaps I'll be upset. The farmers? I have no idea what they are getting so I can't comment.

Canuck

Chuckles said...

Canuck, that is a lovely little straw man, sorry, straw person you have there. I have never made any claims about the lengths of time a person should be on welfare. I am saying that welfare exists to help those who can't help themselves. You consistently bring up welfare in right field contexts, as in out of right field.

As for the oil companies, supply and demand.

Not really. The allegation is that the oil companies are artificially raising the price of gasoline at the pump. The investigation is ongoing. I don't know the current events/progress on it at the moment because I don't work in the House or Senate. I don't have much confidence in it since Bush is involves because he is an oilman.

Chuckles said...

That last sentence didn't come out right.

I don't have much confidence in the investigation since Bush is involved and he is an oilman.

Clif said...

I love it when alleged conservatives try to justify certain corporate pricing structures by chanting the mantra "supply and demand, supply and demand." They forget -- or probably never even knew -- that in classical economic theory supply and demand functions properly only in a perfectly competitive market with no external costs. The wholesale gasoline market is characterized by a high degree of concentration and extremely high barriers to entry, so it's not one where pricing is naturally constrained by the "invisible hand" of the market.

In practical terms this has meant that sellers in that market can maximize profits by withholding supply -- and there appears to be evidence that this is going on. Often such behavior might encourage competitors to build more production capacity but not only are there high barriers to entry but also there are high barriers to expansion: oil refineries are expensive and take a number of years to come on line.

Perhaps Canuck should go back and consult his Economics 101 textbook before he tries to play Milton Friedman.

Chuckles said...

Clif, I couldn't agree more with your statements and I should definitely read the rest of my textbook on economics.

I just have one point of clarification. Canuck is a woman. Other than that, you are still teh roxxorz!1!!!uno!

Anonymous said...

Chuckles, I ask you simple questions and yet you give no real answers.

I am saying that welfare exists to help those who can't help themselves.

And yet we have perfectly capable people on welfare who CAN help themselves. hmmm.... How long do we allow those people to keep mooching?

And Cliff, considering our gas is still somewhat very cheap compared to the rest of the world, I'd still like to see the proof as to how exactly we are being raped so violently at the pump by the oil companies; " ...appears to be evidence" doesn't help your cause in trying to convince me otherwise. You are right about one thing, it does take a while to build the refineries in order to meet the demand of our oil consumption today, so I ask you, why AREN'T they being built? Why AREN'T we drilling closer to home? Until we can meet the demand we consume I'd say the prices we pay at the pump are somewhat justified. Do I enjoy paying them, no. However, I'm not going to start the crying game of blaming the oil companies just yet.

Kevin Wolf said...

Chuckles, I followed a link in this post and then read the comments above and now - I hate you. Why must you hurt me so?

I kid. There's actually some small (very small) entertainment value in reading the comments of not very smart people making like experts and pundits.

Chuckles said...

Canuck, the investigation into the alleged price gouging is ongoing. I am sure that the results will be very big news, but I am also sure that this news won't be released on my timetable.

Furthermore, there is no we in petroleum. Unless you are advocating that the government seize all American oil drilling and refining, there is no we in oil. That is like asking why we don't make more clothing or computers in the US.

You brought up a completely irrelevant argument, Canuck. Your, so far, unfounded examples of "generations" of people one

Adorable Girlfriend said...

Perhaps Canuck should go back and consult his Economics 101 textbook before he tries to play Milton Friedman.


I'd play Milton Friedman with you Cliffie. I love the Jew toys! And numbers, oh my!

Anonymous said...

Chuckles, I'm trying to remember which show I had seen about those on welfare -it followed teens with babies, living on welfare, following their mother's path of life. Once I find the name of the program perhaps they will give specifics on just how many generations usually live on welfare, but I doubt it.

Furthermore, there is no we in petroleum. Unless you are advocating that the government seize all American oil drilling and refining, there is no we in oil. That is like asking why we don't make more clothing or computers in the US.

Also, who's "we"? There is no "we" in a lot of words. What are you talking about? Please, dumb it down for this conservative gal.

Anonymous said...

Here Chuckles, Welare, it's not info about that program, but some stats for you. However, I really don't believe you actually think all recipients of welfare are brand spanking's new with no prior history of parents being on, or living on welfare.

Chuckles said...

From your comment, Canuck:

You are right about one thing, it does take a while to build the refineries in order to meet the demand of our oil consumption today, so I ask you, why AREN'T they being built? Why AREN'T we drilling closer to home? Until we can meet the demand we consume I'd say the prices we pay at the pump are somewhat justified. Do I enjoy paying them, no. However, I'm not going to start the crying game of blaming the oil companies just yet.

I will reiterate my statement. The allegations that forced the Congressional investigation state that the oil companies have artificially raised the price on gasoline in order to generate profits. They are raising prices above that which the market pressures should indicate.

It is an entirely separate discussion to compare the gasoline prices in the US and the rest of the world. I know that we are paying roughly half (or less) than Europeans pay, but that has nothing to do with the situation in America in terms of price fixing.

Chuckles said...

I checked out your link, Canuck. That "study" you cited was actually more of a press release about a study from 1967-1971 and then again from 1984-1988. They noticed trends that working parents were more likely to have working children.

The book/study will be published by the Employment Policies Institute, another conservative think tank.

Just so we are clear on this issue, I will once again state my opinion that both our bloated prison system and our backwards welfare system need to be reformed. I do not want to give out a dole or keep people sitting around. Welfare and low security prisons should have far more training and educational aspects. I will also restate my earlier position that conservatives in government will slash funding for everything but big business and war for as long as they can and then claim that programs that have long been underfunded are ineffective and a waste of time and money.

By the way, the Employment Policies Institute insists that the defeated minimum wage increase would only help those who earn more than $48,000 a year. They don't state any evidence, but then they are a conservative fink tank and don't concern themselves with evidence.

Adorable Girlfriend said...

Thanks for clarifying the article Chuckles. I noted the same thing and it was when AFDC was still available.

Lindsey said...

Geez...I'm scared to write anything here...

Anonymous said...

Chuckles, I'm never really sure why you ever ask me for stats, when I do you never like what you get and dismiss what I give you.

Working parents have working children...hmmmm. Great concept, don't ya think? Kind of goes with what I was saying.

Anyway, I hope you aren't getting too soaked up by you. From what I was reading it sounds awfully dreadful. (I could state my source on that, but you'd only say it's right leaning, or a conservative something. :P)

Canuck

Chuckles said...

It hasn't rained today by me, but until this morning we had had 4 days of solid rain. 36 more and Canuck would be dancing on her boat.

The thing is Canuck, you can't trust organizations that lean too far in either direction, but conservatives especially so. Now, the Pew Charitable Trusts and stuff like that, yeah fine, but going straight to hard core wingnut/moonbat land for sources is a dumb idea in any debate.

Anonymous said...

It hasn't rained today by me, but until this morning we had had 4 days of solid rain. 36 more and Canuck would be dancing on her boat.

Ha! Don't worry Chuckles, if I saw you on a rooftop, I'd pick you up -then you'd be dancing too. ;)

almostinfamous said...

wow, ok. this is totally blowing my mind.

shootaliberal now has their own domain? WTF?

Canuck, for a canuck, you sure are mighty concerned about the american government. you have a right to an opinion, so whatever. but the majority of the 'welfare queen' mythos is based on a deep-seated racist streak of america which teaches that the lazy (black or mexican) folk are mooching off of the hard work of the industrious (and always white) man. just FYI, so you realize what you are buying into.

Anonymous said...

Almost, I live in America.

And, uh huh. I just love when the racist card is played. Cause, you know, that's exactly what we were talking about, how the poor white man supports the lazy black man. *rolls eyes*

Chuckles said...

Canuck, remember, you brought his whole topic up. The original conversation started because of my post about the minimum wage and the cobagz who voted for a COLA raise for Congress, but denied any discussion of an increase in the minimum wage.

108 Democrats owe us all an explanation. Republican'ts don't owe me an explanation because their motivations are pretty simple: screw everybody else.

Adorable Girlfriend said...

What explanation Chuckles? It's the American way: lie to get your way, i.e. "I care about the people", then when you get the chance look out only for yourself and screw the people who put you there. Due to global warming, it's crossing lines now.

Go team USA!

almostinfamous said...

Cause, you know, that's exactly what we were talking about, how the poor white man supports the lazy black man.

i was just saying that your rhetoric was edging closer to the racist roots of the anti-welfare brigade. if it was already there, i would have called you a racist cobag.

and AG the only lines being crossed are the ones made of cocaine.

Anonymous said...

Almost: Uh huh. Sure they were. I'm sure you see race issues and hatred in everything you hear and/or see. Must suck to live that way.

Canuck

almostinfamous said...

i see them, canuck, because they exist. slavery hasn't been gone for that long, and actual civil rights were granted barely 40 something years ago. there's still people alive who remember the 'good ol' days' when segregation was teh shit and all that.

race issues run very deep in america and do affect most if not all the important issues
and how they are perceived. it would be naive or plain ignorant to think otherwise