Stupid liberal idea of the day

[gonzomax]

We could practically do a stupid Republican idea of the hour.

[Ravenman]

Alas, Clothahump doesn’t post that often.

[Clothahump]

@Euphonious_Polemic

Yes indeed.

That is the major problem with this thread - in contrast to the “Stupid Republican idea of the day” thread, we have this “Stupid liberal idea of the day” thread. (instead of “stupid Democrat idea of the day”)

Why do you suppose that is?

Because Democrat = Liberal.

[Clothahump]

@elbows

Clothy old boy, quit hogging all the stupid, save some for the others, k?

I love ad hominem responses like this. They get posted because you can’t refute what I put up, so you attack me. When you do this, you might as well go out and get the word LOSER tattooed across your forehead.

Thanks for playing anyway.

[septimus]

@Clothahump

I could have started with Obamacare. I could have gone back to Social Security and Medicare. We are all aware that those are massive doses of liberal stupidity; I chose something more recent.

@Clothahump

Because Democrat = Liberal.

@Clothahump

… you can’t refute what I put up, so you attack me. When you do this, you might as well go out and get the word LOSER tattooed across your forehead.

Why is this in BBQ Pit? Isn’t there some amateur comedy forum?

[Justin_Bailey]

@Clothahump

Suppose your neighborhood association sets up a week long event where the kids come for, say, three hours an afternoon for a week to play games and have fun. By no stretch of the imagination is this a “camp”, but under these guidelines, it would be, with registration fees, etc., etc..

What do you think those events are called? I’ll give you a hint, it starts with a C and ends with a P. That’s right, in NY state we call those events Clothahump.

No, we call them camp.

[Enderw24]

@Clothahump

I love ad hominem responses like this. They get posted because you can’t refute what I put up, so you attack me. When you do this, you might as well go out and get the word LOSER tattooed across your forehead.

Thanks for playing anyway.

I love responses like this. They get posted because you can’t refute what any other poster put up, so you attack the one single thing you can. When you do this, you might as well go out and get the word LOSER tattooed across your forehead.

Thanks for playing anyway.

[ElvisL1ves]

Dude. If you can’t fly with the Migs, don’t fly Mig Alley.
kthxbai

[Polycarp]

@Clothahump

Because Democrat = Liberal.

True to exactly the same extent that Clothahump = Dolt

[Knorf]

@Clothahump

Because Democrat = Liberal.

This statement alone proves you’re an ignoramus.

[Ludovic]

I noticed a sequential title just now in the Pit:

Stupid liberal idea of the day
Nuclear meltdown! Holy Godzilla NOOOO!!!

Why don’t we all move over to that thread, since it is a much more fertile ground for stupid liberal ideas than anything in this thread so far.

Which is not to say it’s a very good target, since I am not rabidly pro-nuclear and not all anti-nuke people are liberal, but “more” is a relative term.

[Lobohan]

@Clothahump

I love ad hominem responses like this. They get posted because you can’t refute what I put up, so you attack me. When you do this, you might as well go out and get the word LOSER tattooed across your forehead.

I think you’ve been kicked in the head too many times. Maybe you should choose a lower-impact martial art.

Your drivel has already been refuted. You live in a fantasy world and are, so far as I’ve seen, actually immune to facts. I know you want to live in a simple world. But just because you can’t understand the complex issues whizzing around you, doesn’t mean that they aren’t there.

Thanks for playing anyway.

I notice that when you’re losing utterly, you declare victory. Good strategy, that.

[Gyrate]

Are the New York Times still considered liberal? They got spoofed by The Onion recently.

A series of pictures last Sunday of covers of the magazine Tiger Beat, with an article about how the original teen-girl tabloid has remained virtually unchanged since its inception in 1965, erroneously included a parody cover, produced by the satiric newspaper The Onion, that featured a picture of President Obama.

Happy now?

[Stoid]

@Enderw24

I’m both a liberal and a Democrat and I’d actually welcome a thread like the OP’s. I think that if there’s stupidity on my side of the political spectrum it should be highlighted, addressed, discussed, and sometimes mocked. I think if there’s enough stupidity out there, and enough people willing to discuss it, eventually we’ll get something close to its cousin thread of stupid Republican ideas.

Well, it ain’t new by any means, but it’s my favorite Stupid Idea. I’m sad to say that too many people didn’t recognize how stupid it was and now it’s everywhere…sigh:Hate Crime, which I prefer to refer to by its truer name: Thought Crime.

My fellow liberals can be just a bit much at times…they lose sight of the core principals we’re supposed to care about.

[Richard_Parker]

Like Seymour Skinner, and Mr. Belding? We don’t discuss them that much, it’s true.

But there’s probably been a dozen threads on hate crimes, with a lot of liberals showing up to denounce the laws. E.g.

[Steve_MB]

@Bosstone

I’d definitely prefer a stupid Democrat thread. It makes things much more straightforward when the only criteria is “Someone with a (D) after their name did something stupid.”

Yep. Just confirm that the cite that the person actually has a (D) after their name isn’t Fox News, and you’re good to go…

[Kobal2]

@Stoid

Well, it ain’t new by any means, but it’s my favorite Stupid Idea. I’m sad to say that too many people didn’t recognize how stupid it was and now it’s everywhere…sigh:Hate Crime, which I prefer to refer to by its truer name: Thought Crime.

Nonsense. Nobody’s going to arrest you for thinking racist thoughts or even saying those thoughts out loud. However, if you kill somebody just because he’s black, then that’s a hate crime.

Wouldn’t you agree that senseless violence is worse for society in general than purposeful violence (e.g. robbery & whatnot), and much harder for the individual to protect himself from ? Chief Justice Rehnquist seemed to think so:

[QUOTE=Rehnquist]
this conduct is thought to inflict greater individual and societal harm… bias-motivated crimes are more likely to provoke retaliatory crimes, inflict distinct emotional harms on their victims, and incite community unrest."
[/QUOTE]

(cite)

He was a Republican, btw, so it’s not like the hate crime idea is a specifically lefty prerogative.

[Death_of_Rats]

@Clothahump

Because Democrat = Liberal.

Execpt of course for Blue Dogs…

and centerists…

and Pres. Obama…

But, other than that, I think you may be on to something! I think you should run with this a fast as possible and let no one stand in your way!

[Stoid]

@Kobal2

Nonsense. Nobody’s going to arrest you for thinking racist thoughts or even saying those thoughts out loud. However, if you kill somebody just because he’s black, then that’s a hate crime.

Correction. If I kill somebody, for ANY reason or NO reason, that’s a crime.

My REASON should not be a crime in the land of the free, and I am deeply ashamed of my liberal brethren for insisting on making it so.

Wouldn’t you agree that senseless violence is worse for society in general than purposeful violence (e.g. robbery & whatnot), and much harder for the individual to protect himself from ?

Absolutely not, and I can’t even fathom the reasoning behind that statement. Is Joe Deadguy extra dead because he was killed for being Jewish? Is Joe Deadguy less dead because he died during a liquor store robbery?

I think crime is crime and people who are intent on harming others will do so for a thousand reasons and it is not the State’s business to consider those reasons for the purposes of increasing the punishment except insofar as the crime is actually against the state or the population as a whole, as in assassination of leaders and murder of law enforcement, or to consider them as a mitigting factor to lesson or eliminate punishment, as in self-defense.

Nothing is improved, gained, changed or made better in any way that I have ever seen by boosting the punishment based on the motives of individual criminals, and I think things are made worse. It’s a slippery slope, as they say.

Chief Justice Rehnquist seemed to think so:
He was a Republican, btw, so it’s not like the hate crime idea is a specifically lefty prerogative.

Well, we already know Republicans have lots of stupid ideas, I was just trying to be nice and throw some liberal stupid into the ring.

[Fear_Itself]

@Death_of_Rats

Execpt of course for Blue Dogs…

and centerists…

and Pres. Obama…

Forget it, Jake. Clothahump thinks Bush was a liberal.