Well, one person does seem to say “hail satan” right at the end. The rest of them could have been chanting “I am the walrus” for all I could tell.
A warning to others: Turn down the volume before you start the clip. The audio is bad, and loud.
A random Texan, of unknown politics, tries to get her 15 seconds of fame by saying “Hail Satan.”
This is worthy of mention because … ?
Hell, Austin is full of Satanists, lesbians and homosexuals, sometimes all three at once! Surprised they didn’t have a Darth Chorale, singing Carmina Burana.
Meg’s back in town?
I hope the “Hail Satan” chanter(s?) have good balance because they’re living life on the edge.
I remember in one of my first college history classes I learned that, after a coup or usurping, the first group of people targeted for extinction were the liberals. I wondered, being a liberal at the time, why that would happen. After all, they are among the educated classes. They would be able to guide a civilization to happiness, where everyone could both flourish as humans and live in peace.
Seeing threads like this, though, I understand. All the liberals in this thread all really annoying.
And that is what makes them a threat to the power-craving thugs who typically hijack the revolutions or coups they did not instigate themselves. It isn’t hard to understand.
Assuming that Presidential folly still qualified for this thread:
Not seeing the stupid here. 
One can argue whether the NSA surveillance is or is not a “vital counter terrorism tool”, but if it is (as apparently the president thinks) then hastily dismantling it would be a bad idea.
Am I missing something?
I’m not sure that qualifies as a Stupid Liberal Idea of the Day - apart from it basically being a difference of policy opinion about national security, the WH appears to be taking a position further to the right (on an authoritarian scale) to Congress. I’d also note that this is the sort of move that would previously have branded the person proposing the bill as being “soft on terror”, particularly by the Republicans.
(That said, I can’t tell from the article detail whether I agree with the bill or not. I’m all for less surveillance but on the face of it this appears a little hamhanded. Need more data.)
Yeah, that’s more “wrong” or “evil” than “stupid”.
From the article: “abortion supporters” and “pro-abortion activists”? That doesn’t sound like the AP. How is one lone protester mocking the other side a ‘liberal idea’?
Given the collection of telephone communication metadata was occurring during the Bush administration, one fails to see how continuing it is a ‘liberal idea’. Honestly, I don’t get what the big deal is. The government has been involved in surveillance of telephone and internet communications under the auspices of domestic defense for years and NOW it’s suddenly an issue? Why should I be concerned that on some hard-drive somewhere is data that my phone number called another phone number at a specific date and time from a specific cell tower and that the government has access to that data? Is there some threat to my civil rights inherent in that access?
I must confess, I always feel a little thrill whenever I see this thread get bumped.
I’ve become rather bored by the SRIOTD thread. Kind of like when your once-favourite TV show goes into it’s sixth season and just starts to grow tired.
And yet whenever I check this thread, I am invariably dissapointed.
Sure it was fun at first to see Clothahump cackling over various reasonable, understandable, or entirely forgivable “liberal” ideas not actually of the day, only to have the inanity of his selections pointed out to him.
But I was hoping that after a while we’d begin to see some genuine examples of stupidity from the left.
It seems that right-leaning dopers are for the most part incapable of recognising genuine stupidity in politics, or are just unwilling to participate (understandably). So, I urge all you (non-crazy) left-leaning dopers in the US to expose some unarguably stupid ideas from your own side of the political spectrum.
I know you can do it!
Well, you’re not real busy, are you? And you seem to offer yourself as non-partisan and hence, unbiased. Seems you are the best person for the job. Besides, you seem to think its pretty easy.
Well, we’ve got “Carlos Danger” back for Round 2 of waving his Wiener. That’s got to count.
I’m uncertain about government surveillance. We treasure privacy and freedom, yet there are bad guys and real dangers. When a progressive thinker like Obama continues some Bush programs, I’ve got to suspect I would also were I getting the intelligence briefings he gets.
But whether stupid or not, it seems wrong to call this a “liberal idea.” It’s certain thinkers “on the right”, starting with Joe McCarthy, who’ve consistently advocated surrendering personal freedom in pursuit of foreign enemies.
I recently read about a Memphis City Councilman who opposed “smart meters” for home electricity because they were “a new form of communism.” He ran non-partisan, but I Googled his political affiliation and … didn’t post to SRIOTD because he’s an important Democrat! Perhaps it was dishonest to spend the time researching, then not post here.
Anyway I think the liberty-vs-government and rich-vs-poor conceptions of American political policy rather miss the point. Many of the major debates are just plain smart-vs-stupid.
There are plenty of stupid people in both major parties. The difference is: Democrats tolerate their morons. Republicans elevate them and, like ancient Babylonians or Etruscans did with the entrails of slaughtered sheep, treat their morons’ verbal diarrhea as wise divination.
There is a reason that the rest of Texas refers to it as The People’s Republic of Austin…
The genuine stupidity in politics from the left happens on a daily basis. It’s almost overwhelming. Take Obamacare for example. A horrible piece of legislation that got rammed down our throats. Only 37% of the public thinks it’s a good idea. And yet, efforts to repeal it are continually rebuffed by the libs in Congress.
Etc, etc, ad fucking nauseam.
You are forgetting that at least half of those who dislike it, dislike it because it does not go far enough and they want real single-payer UHC.