The Onion provides meaningful insight into the Truther world

[Alareth]

http://www.theonion.com/content/video/diebold_accidentally_leaks

I honestly believe this is exactly the world some of our paranoid "friends" live in on a daily basis and that makes me a sad panda.

 

[Spud1k]

"I take it that's a hint..."

LOL!!!

 

[Tippit]

http://www.theonion.com/content/video/diebold_accidentally_leaks

I honestly believe this is exactly the world some of our paranoid "friends" live in on a daily basis and that makes me a sad panda.

What's sad is that you interpret that as a parody of the paranoid instead of the sad state of US politics and stolen/meaningless elections.

 

[Tippit]

http://www.theonion.com/content/video/diebold_accidentally_leaks

I honestly believe this is exactly the world some of our paranoid "friends" live in on a daily basis and that makes me a sad panda.

The Onion News Network really is brilliant. Here is another video that is perhaps slightly more relevant:

http://www.theonion.com/content/video/9_11_conspiracy_theories

 

[Bobert]

WEIRD. Neither of those videos will load the play symbol just spins and spins.
Youtube works fine for me but neither one of those does, strange.

 

[Travis]

Stolen election BS? Have we really run out of stupid things to talk about?

 

[Pardalis]

What's sad is that you interpret that as a parody of the paranoid instead of the sad state of US politics and stolen/meaningless elections.

So you think the Onion really thinks there's a shadow government controlling everything?



Truthers are incapable of understanding sarcasm.

 

[Minadin]

Truthers are incapable of understanding sarcasm.

I guess we'll have to add that to the list, next to high-school physics, logic, engineering, materials science . . .

 

[Tippit]

So you think the Onion really thinks there's a shadow government controlling everything?



Truthers are incapable of understanding sarcasm.

Well, presumably "The Onion" is composed of a lot of individuals with the capability to form their own opinions, individually. I also think you don't know the difference between satire and sarcasm. It is obvious that the Onion produces satire, often infused with sarcasm.

Would you deduce from this video:

Bush Tours America To Survey Damage Caused By His Disastrous Presidency

that "The Onion" doesn't think President Bush's presidency has been a disaster, or does it represent satire?

It's mainstream news that there were serious flaws in Diebold voting machines, and allegations of vote fraud. The Onion piece was merely a humorous take on it.

 

[Alex Libman]

The election is unfair first and foremost on the basis that the individuals who choose not vote are expected to abide by the results. That's "taxation without representation" (or a better term would be something like "governance without consent"). How is the government forcing me to accept representation on terms I don't agree with any different then the British Empire forcing its colonies to accept whatever terms it offered them (ex: virtual representation, etc)?

 

[Wildy]

The election is unfair first and foremost on the basis that the individuals who choose not vote are expected to abide by the results. That's "taxation without representation" (or a better term would be something like "governance without consent"). How is the government forcing me to accept representation on terms I don't agree with any different then the British Empire forcing its colonies to accept whatever terms it offered them (ex: virtual representation, etc)?

So I assume that you are in favour of compulsory voting then?

Besides, the people that don't want to vote are just idiots. I personally think that if you have the right to vote, but don't, then you have no right to complain.

 

[Tippit]

So I assume that you are in favour of compulsory voting then?

Besides, the people that don't want to vote are just idiots. I personally think that if you have the right to vote, but don't, then you have no right to complain.

The problem with that logic, of course, assumes that you have a desirable selection of candidates representing favorable positions on issues that you find meaningful and relevant. This is conspicuously absent in the two-party monolith.

Votes of no-confidence when I have no candidates to vote for are a perfectly normal reaction. Anyone who pays taxes and is a member of society has a right to "complain". Especially those who don't buy into the bankrupt plurality voting system.

 

[Jontg]

The problem is, that's precisely what you have: a selection of candidates trying to appeal to the largest amount of people possible by posturing about things that nearly everybody can agree on. Even in this system, the minority is obliged to concede to the will of the majority, which is the implicit assumption that all government runs on. If you want to change the system, you need to persuade the majority that it's worth risking (in this case) a McCain presidency by voting for somebody other than Obama. Or the other way around, if you prefer. Simply put, the two candidates represent the two large groups America has divided itself into; it's essentially an adaptation on the part of both the people and their candidate.

 

[Alex Libman]

So I assume that you are in favour of compulsory voting then?

Wow! It takes a very twisted mind to misinterpret my comments like that! Not that you're abnormal or anything, just a product of government propaganda...

 

[Oliver]

...Simply put, the two candidates represent the two large groups America has divided itself into *snip*

LOL?

 

[Disenchanted]

The election is unfair first and foremost on the basis that the individuals who choose not vote are expected to abide by the results. That's "taxation without representation" (or a better term would be something like "governance without consent"). How is the government forcing me to accept representation on terms I don't agree with any different then the British Empire forcing its colonies to accept whatever terms it offered them (ex: virtual representation, etc)?

To paraphrase Rush, if you choose not to vote then you still have made a choice.

That is a bad analogy because the colonists did not have representation, the U.S. government is made up of those who represent the people.

The U.S. Constitution and State Constitutions are social contracts and unless they are replaced with something else then everyone living here is bound by them.

There is a reason that your anarcho-capitalism has failed so miserably here in the free market of ideas and through out history whenever it has been put to the test. That reason is it is a rundown fantasy with no foundation in reality, so the free market has tossed it on the scrapheap where it belongs. It is only a few who try to rebuild the idea with the same fanciful pieces.

Have you considered living in Somalia?

 

[Wildy]

Wow! It takes a very twisted mind to misinterpret my comments like that! Not that you're abnormal or anything, just a product of government propaganda...

What the hell?

Where do you think I am in the world? I'm not an American, I am an Australian, so I am required by law to enrol to vote, and I am required by law to vote.

The $20 fine is also something of an incentive. I don't see the point in having to pay $20 for not writing a bunch of numbers on a couple of pieces of paper.

 

[Klimax]

Wow! It takes a very twisted mind to misinterpret my comments like that! Not that you're abnormal or anything, just a product of government propaganda...

Ehm and it takes big blinds to not see what you said.
As soon as you will NOT vote,you are giving up one of your rigths,namely right to vote and so you state you do not care whatever outcome is.

So you lose you right to complain about entire set of issues as you have not voted.You can try to get change,but it is far more difficult and often bound to failure as majority which voted had clearly decided.
(BTW Sometims czechs politic scene is perfect example as voters are less interested in voting,so radicals/corrupted gain seats and majority only complains at homes/pubs and not by voting...)

An what others said as usual.

 

[Alex Libman]

LOL, I guess "VOTE!" is the American version of "Arbeit Macht Frei" that American concentration camps will feature as a slogan...

And it's ironic that I've spent a lot of time on Anarcho-Capitalist forums being the moderate one, and at least trying to get them to vote for Ron Paul / Bob Barr. (Here's one particularly nasty thread, but it refers to conversations that took place elsewhere so good reading comprehending skills will be required to find the interesting bits.) I've become much wiser since then...

​

That is a bad analogy because the colonists did not have representation [...]

Yes they did. The king has a "divine right" granted by the flying spaghetti monster, or something like that. I'm sure a British loyalist at the time could explain it very well. Makes as much or as little sense as any other "social contract" that you're supposedly born into.

The U.S. Constitution and State Constitutions are social contracts and unless they are replaced with something else then everyone living here is bound by them.

​

Have you considered living in Somalia?

Yes. Yes I have. If only the damned U.N. would leave it alone....

 

[Wildy]

Alex Libman

I have trouble understanding your position. First you claim that the people who don't vote shouldn't have to accept the authority of the new government because they are being taxed without being represented, but you also oppose measures that make people cast a vote.

You can't have it both ways you know.

If you don't want to vote then don't. Just don't go about claiming that "I'm not being represented" because you made the conscious decision not to vote.