SO Iowa voters get to choose between someone confused about climate change and a guy who thinks only lawyers are qualified to be Senators. Wow.
Experience tells me that the confusion is either willful or just stupid, the lawyer though is more on the money:
http://braley.house.gov/issue/climate-issues
One does not need to be a brain surgeon 
to realize that one has to consult the proper experts to make better decisions for the future of our nation and the world.
Has Sarah signed on as speechwriter?
The thing is, what Iowa has more of than corn, soybeans, and hogs is wind, and corn, beans, hogs, and windmills are not mutually exclusive. It could be both the breadbasket of the country and a major power source for the upper Mississippi. I thought Republicans could smell a profit a mile away. :smack:
FOX “news” “analyst” and former SEAL: “Women who wear high heels to work should keep a separate pair they can slip into in case of an ISIS attack.”
Having a spare change of clothes in case of emergency isn’t really a dumb idea. Fashionable office clothing – for both sexes – isn’t the ideal if, say, there’s a bunch of broken glass on the floor, jet fuel is burning in the insulation spaces, etc.
The emphasis on women and high heels is, of course, typical Republican tone-deafness.
Wow. It’s a little disturbing how paranoid people can get. (That being said, keeping a pair of shoes you can move easily in and a go bag are not bad ideas. Be Prepared!)
Can people who were around back when communism was the big bad and people built bomb shelters in their backyards for fear of nuclear war comment on how the fears and paranoia we see now compare to what was seen then? Is it about the same or worse? Does the vastly better communication capabilities we have now make the paranoia worse, or are we just more aware of the paranoia?
I think the difference is, as a person who lived through the tail end of the Cold War, that there actually WAS a likelihood, however small, of a nuclear war…an engagement with another superpower where we both had enough weaponry to end civilization as we know it.
In perspective, terrorism (in the US, anyway) is small beans. The 9/11 attacks were horrible, but they were very limited in scope compared to any nuclear exchange scenario. The paranoia was at least marginally justified in the latter case. Not so much in the former.
I have noticed how lacking in perspective the debate on these issues is in the media. Sure, beheadings are terrible, especially of innocent journalists whose nationality is the real reason they are being killed. So is the enslavement and repeated rape of innocent women. But this is occurring within the context of war, where mass groups of people are killing each other and blowing each other up. The soldier who dies in an instant from a rifle shot to the head is just as dead as the journalist who is beheaded, perhaps not as innocent, but just as dead. And the only thing that makes this war different from others is how media savvy the bad guys are, playing the American public’s feelings like violins.
If you want to deal EFFECTIVELY with ISIS, you’d best not be acting on the basis of fear and rage generated by a Youtube video. Recognize that it’s war, perhaps the most miserable and pathetic activity that human beings regularly engage in, and go on from there.
Nah. I think it was Elisabeth Hasselbeck. The whole clip is great, but she starts in at the 2-minute mark. Her logic is flawless.
Let’s be honest, here. Braley’s plea to the trial lawyers was about not having a lawyer as chair of the Judiciary Committee, not just as a Senator per se. I think it was a silly and politically dumb comment to make, but misrepresenting it as “he sez only them librul lawyers are fit tuh be seniators!!!1!!” is buying into the lowest-common-denominator Tea Party schtick.
And Ernst is nothing but lowest common denominator. She’s basically a puppet with the Koch brothers’ arm up her ass … to have her in the Senate and Steve King in the House would bring Iowa dangerously close to Florida-type mockage territory.
I don’t think Ernst is that bad. You have to distinguish between a political novice’s statements and how she’ll grow in office. Of course, some people never do, but most of the time, once they get a professional staff and have to sit in the same room with other Senators, they start to learn pretty quickly that it’s no fun to be ridiculed for being ignorant.
Of course, some Republicans live for the publicity, figuring there’s no such thing as bad publicity. Again, I refer to Bachmann, someone who got way too much attention for too long given her relative position in the GOP caucus.
Ignorance can be fixed. Stupid is forever.
To coin a phrase.
The problem here is that people are treating intelligence and stupidity as if they were mutually exclusive traits. There are heights of stupidity that take true genius to achieve. The problem with someone like Ben Carson it that he has harnessed his genius and put it into the service of his idiocy.
I have found that people who pose an argument with the use of vulgarities, usually do not have one.
Your conclusion is bullshit.
No, vulgarities can be very useful, especially when mocking stupidity.
Calliing someone a “running dog jackal of the Ruling Class” isn’t really vulgar, as such. However, calling someone a “cocksucker” is rude, crude, and socially unacceptable! Besides, some of my very best friends…
Remember: an oral compulsion can be a very endearing characteristic!
You are absolutely correct.
You have no argument.
You are cordially invited to perform oral stimulation of one’s generative member.