Funny (political, religious) pictures

Null

Null

And this just in: A federal judge states it "may be necessary" to depose Hillary Clinton about the nature of her personal email server and about the arrangement of the employment of her top aide, Huma Abedin, that allowed her to do outside work while working for Clinton at the State Department. While working at the State Department, Abedin was also a consultant to the Clinton Foundation and to private consulting firm Teneo Holdings.

http://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news...ary-depose-hillary-clinton-email-case-n568056
 
GasBandit

GasBandit

Staff member
Null said:
And this just in: A federal judge states it "may be necessary" to depose Hillary Clinton about the nature of her personal email server and about the arrangement of the employment of her top aide, Huma Abedin, that allowed her to do outside work while working for Clinton at the State Department. While working at the State Department, Abedin was also a consultant to the Clinton Foundation and to private consulting firm Teneo Holdings.

http://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news...ary-depose-hillary-clinton-email-case-n568056
Click to expand...
Heh, if only the judge meant the OTHER definition of depose.
 
GasBandit

GasBandit

Staff member
fade said:
Haha, nice try. I'm not going in THAT thread.
Click to expand...
I'll just cross-quote the pertinent part for you -

stienman said:
Null said:
I think that Mike Huckabee, Rick Santorum, and Rand Paul should be forced to carry on their campaigns through the third trimester instead of being able to abort them now.
Click to expand...
I was expecting to find an exception, but all of them support abortion if the life of the mother is at risk, so to extend the analogy, they should be allowed to choose to terminate their campaign if it puts their political ambitions at risk.

None of them include provisions for abortion after rape or incest, though, so if they claim that someone attacked them and forced them to carry a presidential campaign, then ending it on those grounds alone would be hypocritical.

If they had trouble starting a campaign in the past, used in vitro campaignization, and then had too many campaigns, none of them have made it clear whether terminating campaigns until only one or two remain should be allowed.

Needless to say, any attempt to self-terminate one's campaign without a competent publicist and board certified speech writer should be discouraged due to the possible political fallout such an action might take. With democrats controlling a majority of publicists and writers, though, and restricting access to these services for those least able to afford them, this is sadly going to continue to happen.

But it's all just a localized symptom of the broader breakdown of traditional politics.
Click to expand...
 
Dave

Dave

Staff member
Obama's whole thing at the correspondent's dinners are (were) amazing. I know he has writers, but he has amazing comedic timing and can pull this stuff off. I can't wait for him to host SNL when he gets out of the office. Because he's the type of guy that would do it.
 
bhamv3

bhamv3

I couldn't believe it when he brought out Luthor last year. Laughed my ass off.

"AND THAT'S WHY WE'RE RUNNING FOR A THIRD TERM!"

"No... no we're not."

"We're not?"

"No."

"WHO THE HELL SAID THAT???"
 
Null

Null

*facepalm* Though I thought that ban on sugary drinks never actually was enacted? Seems like a wag the dog issue, to pull attention away from the mysterious deaths of people interviewed in the NYPD corruption probe, as well as the DiBlasio corruption investigation.
 
GasBandit

GasBandit

Staff member
Null said:
*facepalm* Though I thought that ban on sugary drinks never actually was enacted? Seems like a wag the dog issue, to pull attention away from the mysterious deaths of people interviewed in the NYPD corruption probe, as well as the DiBlasio corruption investigation.
Click to expand...
It bans sizes larger than 16oz, not all sugary drinks outright. But yeah, a court decided it was government overreach. Hopefully saner minds will prevail again this time as well.
 
Gruebeard

Gruebeard

I agree with NYC on this. It's the woman's choice on this, not the bartender's. Just as with that pregnant, smoking coworker of mine I mentioned last week. I think it's a stupid choice, but it's hers to make.


Plus, with drinking, apparently a couple drinks a couple times a week could be fine.
 
GasBandit

GasBandit

Staff member
Gruebeard said:
I agree with NYC on this. It's the woman's choice on this, not the bartender's. Just as with that pregnant, smoking coworker of mine I mentioned last week. I think it's a stupid choice, but it's hers to make.
Click to expand...
It's different when you just see your coworker smoking, than from if she's trying to buy cigarettes from you.
 
strawman

strawman

You can't have abortion as a society and then have a leg to stand on when you try to dictate how a pregnant woman lives her life. The supreme court didn't legalize abortion - the ruling was simply that a woman's right to bodily autonomy was greater than all of the unborn child's rights, whether those rights were to life, or to freedom from preventable disease, addiction, injury, etc.

http://www.thedailybeast.com/articl...ays-fetal-alcohol-syndrome-isn-t-a-crime.html

Freedom from accountability is a de facto recognized right in many "developed" countries.
 
ThatGrinningIdiot!

ThatGrinningIdiot!

Per Steiny's post.

I'm getting leery of people advocating for more rights without any measure of responsibility that comes with them. Seeing neoliberalism rear it's mug around lately is beginning to steer me towards conservatism, and if I had to label myself this moment, I'd be a centrist with leanings towards libertarian and meritocratic values - but given these trends lately I don't know how much longer I consider myself as such.
 
Dave

Dave

Staff member
ThatGrinningIdiot! said:
Per Steiny's post.

I'm getting leery of people advocating for more rights without any measure of responsibility that comes with them. Seeing neoliberalism rear it's mug around lately is beginning to steer me towards conservatism, and if I had to label myself this moment, I'd be a centrist with leanings towards libertarian and meritocratic values - but given these trends lately I don't know how much longer I consider myself as such.
Click to expand...
The difference is where you feel the responsibility lies. In liberalism, every person is an island only responsible for themselves. With liberalism, everyone is basically responsible for helping others as a society. So if I'm able to help, I should. Liberalism is more of an "it takes a village" mindset. If the government raises my taxes to ensure that everyone can have health care, I'm totally cool with that. This election cycle has been pushing me - in most cases - more towards the left than the right, specifically because of Bernie Sanders and the way that he has shown that it's economically viable to help out those in need.
 
ThatGrinningIdiot!

ThatGrinningIdiot!

I'd agree with you on the whole Dave, my qualm I outlined in the previous post is suited to a narrow political spectrum, however, in recent years I'm beginning to see more of an upward trend of people wanting to access more rights and privileges without a balancing force of responsibility that comes with it. I'm not a fan of a select group of people having rights over others and burdening the rest of society with the work of maintaining those rights. I believe GasBandit articulated this well when discussing a common liberal trope with blotsfan.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top