The Gaming Den

ckafrica wrote:Grade school students asked to choose which races survive the end of the world

What the hell?

I mean, seriously, how do you even pretend that's justifyable, let alone educational?

I swear this is what the article says wrote:Newly elected Republican National Committee Chairman Michael S. Steele plans an “off the hook” public relations offensive to attract younger voters, especially blacks and Hispanics, by applying the party's principles to “urban-suburban hip-hop settings.”

He's right.

The current GOP needs to come up with reasons why any sane person in anything other than the most rural settings would ever consider voting for them.

Heath has a point.

The law simply states that any cell with the human genome in it is a person. In other words, a cancerous tumor is a person.

-Crissa

Oh, here's one of our CA-R weenies.

ckafrica wrote:Grade school students asked to choose which races survive the end of the world

.... huh?

How is this shit even considered in our times? Why are special interest groups not latching on to this in court like a swarm of piranhas?
"Slammed", sure, but I suspect the average American reaction is "Oh. It's Canada, don't bother."

Well, while we're catching up with the US, Canadians are, in my experience, substantially less litigious than yanks.

So if every set of cells with it's own human DNA is a person do Chimeras get multiple votes in state elections?

Well technically I don't think that an embryo actually is an organism at all, it's still just a chimeric cell line inside the mother. So the exact wording gives the right to vote to the HeLa cell line, and I think it gives property ownership to transgenic cotton - but it doesn't do its intended purpose of stopping abortions.

Basically some staunch abortion foe wrote up something that sounded super scientific but is actually just crazy rantings and now it's bouncing around in the North Dakota state legislature.

-Username17

ckafrica wrote:Well, while we're catching up with the US, Canadians are, in my experience, substantially less litigious than yanks.

You find that when an injury doesn't bankrupt someone with medical costs, people are less likely to sue others. Oh wait, they changed the laws, medical expenses are no longer valid for Bankruptcy, you still have to pay them regardless.

In any case, desperation makes people do things they wouldn't consider beforehand.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20090220/ap_ ... st_cartoon

Yeah, I thought insinuating that you'd like to harm the president was a felony.

The article Count Arioch linked to wrote:The newspaper had stood by the cartoon, which its editor called "a clear parody" about the death of Travis, the chimp that Connecticut police killed Monday after it mauled a friend of its owner. Editor-in-chief Col Allan had said the intent was to ridicule Washington's efforts to revive the economy.

Travis was shot because his owner gave him Xanax and he went psycho. I have no idea how the comic was "a clear parody" of that incident at all.

Which isn't to say that I immediately thought the chimp in the comic was Obama. I thought the intended idea was that the people putting together the stimulus package were monkeys in that they just sat around throwing shit out and seeing what stuck.

Count Arioch wrote:Yeah, I thought insinuating that you'd like to harm the president was a felony.

Yep. Boy do we know about that one.

:secretservice:

PhoneLobster wrote:So if every set of cells with it's own human DNA is a person do Chimeras get multiple votes in state elections?

What, and make limb grafts a popular method of gaining extra votes?
*speeeew*

Maj wrote:Which isn't to say that I immediately thought the chimp in the comic was Obama. I thought the intended idea was that the people putting together the stimulus package were monkeys in that they just sat around throwing shit out and seeing what stuck.

Yes, but that wasn't the author, per se, as much as Congress trying to figure out what random things they'd have to do to get a few defectors from the Repubs.

Personally, the random way the 'bipartisan centrists' acted, I think Obama should go Blue-Sky and then let them chip at it from there. I doubt they would've randomly chosen 500b to knock off instead of 100b if we'd started at 1.3t instead like the budget office said to.

-Crissa

Oh Michael Steele, you so crazy wrote:Mike Gallagher: Do you favor civil unions?

Michael Steele: No, no no. What would we do that for? What are you, crazy? No. Why would we backslide on a core, founding value of this country? This isn’t something that you just kind of like, 'Today I feel loosey-goosey on marriage'."

Source: http://gayrights.change.org/blog/view/n ... _crazy_one


You know, I'm starting to warm up to this guy. Maybe he'll be more entertaining then the crazy racist guy after all.

I think his promise to start an "off the hook" public relations campaign is more amusing. He's just absurdly blunt and/or slangy about everything. It'll get boring after a while.

I think his promise to start an "off the hook" public relations campaign is more amusing. He's just absurdly blunt and/or slangy about everything. It'll get boring after a while.

I'm more of a fan of irony, especially when we get the hilariously unintentional Double Irony.

I'm not going to point it out in the statement I posted; it'll be funnier if you figure it out for yourselves.

I don't think there was any irony. Just Michael Steele's ignorance of the fact that civil unions aren't marriages.

I don't think there was any irony. Just Michael Steele's ignorance of the fact that civil unions aren't marriages.

Irony #1: Slavery and race-hating was also a traditional founding value of this country. If they had held on to this traditional value Michael Steele would not be in fucking charge of the RNC to look down his noses at other minorities.

Irony #2: The Republican party was the party aimed at demolishing this traditional fouding value in the first place!

Irony #2 doesn't count, actually.

Because politicians hate future historians, that was a different republican party. The current republican party is closer to the democratic party of the time. Even geographically WRT the states that exist in both time periods.

Even the people in the current Republican Party were Democrats more than fifty years ago.

May they die off more quickly.

-Crissa

name_here wrote:Irony #2 doesn't count, actually.

Because politicians hate future historians, that was a different republican party. The current republican party is closer to the democratic party of the time. Even geographically WRT the states that exist in both time periods.

The point was that once upon a time the GOP solely existed to challenge a fundamental feature of our country that existed to strip people of their rights. And now they have apparently abandoned their roots to do the same thing that they were formed to fight. Regardless of where the party now stands, that's what originally brought them together.

Granted, this just may be garden-variety hypocrisy.

Look everyone Canada is on TV!!!

God my country is pathetic. How the fuck is it newsworthy to mention the fact that we were mentions on a TV show. It's like how we cling to anything that has even been in our presence. I mean there fucking lists of famous canadians just so we can know to extra proud of them.

Did you know Peter North is from my home town? Just telling people that is almost as good as getting a faceful of his love goo myself.
We also had some scenes of Titanic filmed there. It's almost as if me a Leo are neighbors!

http://www.suntimes.com/news/nation/144 ... 09.article

My mouth laughs, but my heart is crying.

OK, so Pakistan is having what is perhaps the dumbest political meltdown ever. First of all, the Supreme Court of Pakistan Barred Nawaz Sharif from contesting for office in parliament. And while in general I support kicking that asshole out of power permanently because he threatened to start a nuclear war with India and got deposed by force because of it (sending India into 8 years of military dictatorship); the actual legal ruling is based on Article 62 of the Pakistani constitution.

What is article 62?

Article 62, Pakistani Constitution wrote: 62. Qualifications for membership of Majlis-e-Shoora (Parliament).
A person shall not be qualified to be elected or chosen as a member of Majlis-e-Shoora (Parliament) unless :-

• (a) he is a citizen of Pakistan;
  (b) he is, in the case of the National Assembly, not less than twenty -five years of age and is enrolled as a voter in any electoral roll in-
  • (i) any part of Pakistan, for election to a general seat or a seat reserved for non-Muslims; and
    (ii) any area in a Province from which he seeks membership for election to a seat reserved for women.
  (c) he is, in the case of Senate, not less than thirty years of age and is enrolled as a voter in any area in a Province or, as the case may be, the Federal Capital or the Federally Administered Tribal Areas, from where he seeks membership;
  (d) he is of good character and is not commonly known as one who violates Islamic Injunctions;
  (e) he has adequate knowledge of Islamic teachings and practises obligatory duties prescribed by Islam as well as abstains from major sins ;
  (f) he is sagacious, righteous and non-profligate and honest and ameen;
  (g) he has not been convicted for a crime involving moral turpitude or for giving false evidence;
  (h) he has not, after the establishment of Pakistan, worked against the integrity of the country or opposed the Ideology of Pakistan

Provided that the disqualifications specified in paragraphs (d) and (e) shall not apply to a person who is a non-Muslim, but such a person shall have good moral reputation; and

• (i) he possesses such other qualifications as may be prescribed by Act of Majlis-e-Shoora (Parliament).

That is seriously the most fucked up legal document I have ever seen. Aside from all the bullshit where you have to have not committed any "major sins" which is entirely fucking subjective and literally up to anyone off the street who declares themselves to be an Islamic scholar to decide for themselves; or the even more insane (d) where you can seriously be disqualified based on hearsay - I direct you to point (h) as the worst constitutional law ever. You seriously are not allowed to run for parliament if you've ever been an opposition member of parliament.

What the fucking hell Pakistan? Is that why your government collapses into anarchy and dictatorship like clockwork once a fucking decade? Because your actual constitution is more retarded than a crayon sketch drawn by actual retarded children? Fuck you Pakistan. Fuck you in your fuck holes.

-Username17

ckafrica wrote:Look everyone Canada is on TV!!!

God my country is pathetic. How the fuck is it newsworthy to mention the fact that we were mentions on a TV show. It's like how we cling to anything that has even been in our presence. I mean there fucking lists of famous canadians just so we can know to extra proud of them.

What happened to the fistfuls of comedians in the 80s and 90s making debut in Western comedy?
I mean, isn't that enough to feel prideful about?
Waynes World, etc. Classic.