MTV runs modern Holocaust ads

[Bindare_Dundat]

Whats up with the creepy ads?

[w8tlftr]

I'm sure it's fear mongering against big bad conservatives and Christians. 

Don't vote for a conservative! He wants to protect your right to own firearms!

Don't vote for a conservative! He wants to protect your right to private property!

Don't vote for a conservative! He wants to lower your taxes giving you more disposable income and financial empowerment!

Don't vote for a conservative! He wants to use private industry, not the government, to find ways to reduce carbon emmissions and protect the environment!

Fortunately for the far left there are no conservatives running in the 2008 election.

[ribonucleic]

Don't vote for a conservative! He wants to protect your right to private property!

Those Supreme Court justices who fucked us over with their ruling on eminent domain were appointed by Republicans.

Don't vote for a conservative! He wants to lower your taxes giving you more disposable income and financial empowerment!

They're not lowering my taxes. You've confused me with someone wealthy.

Don't vote for a conservative! He wants to use private industry, not the government, to find ways to reduce carbon emmissions and protect the environment!

Because the government's been doing a heckuva job responding to that environmental crisis, right? After they stopped trying to pretend it doesn't exist, I mean.

[w8tlftr]

Those Supreme Court justices who fucked us over with their ruling on eminent domain were appointed by Republicans.

Wrong. The "Republican" voted against eminent domain and don't confuse Republican with conservative - not the same anymore.

They're not lowering my taxes. You've confused me with someone wealthy.

CONSERVATIVES lower taxes for everyone who pays them and if you don't pay as much taxes as a wealthier person why should you get back more? Are you looking for a socialist hand out?

Because the government's been doing a heckuva job responding to that environmental crisis, right? After they stopped trying to pretend it doesn't exist, I mean.

Everything the government tries to regulate/control turns to shit. Private industry will always do a better job. History has proven that time and time again.

And like I said before, the socialist-liberals in this country have nothing to worry about. There are no CONSERVATIVES running in 2008. America had it's chance with Ron Paul and pissed it away. They will get the government they deserve.

[Deicide]

Wrong. The "Republican" voted against eminent domain and don't confuse Republican with conservative - not the same anymore.

CONSERVATIVES lower taxes for everyone who pays them and if you don't pay as much taxes as a wealthier person why should you get back more? Are you looking for a socialist hand out?

Everything the government tries to regulate/control turns to shit. Private industry will always do a better job. History has proven that time and time again.

And like I said before, the socialist-liberals in this country have nothing to worry about. There are no CONSERVATIVES running in 2008. America had it's chance with Ron Paul and pissed it away. They will get the government they deserve.

Ron Paul is great. May the non-existent God most Americans have deluded themselves into believing bless him.

[w8tlftr]

Ron Paul is great. May the non-existent God most Americans have deluded themselves into believing bless him.

 

[Slapper]

Wrong. The "Republican" voted against eminent domain and don't confuse Republican with conservative - not the same anymore.

Are you fucking kidding me?!

CONSERVATIVES lower taxes for everyone who pays them and if you don't pay as much taxes as a wealthier person why should you get back more? Are you looking for a socialist hand out?

Everything the government tries to regulate/control turns to shit. Private industry will always do a better job. History has proven that time and time again.

And how exactly did you come to that conclusion? Research? Studies? Bullshit you've heard over and over and has now become a reflex (like scratching your nuts)?

And like I said before, the socialist-liberals in this country have nothing to worry about. There are no CONSERVATIVES running in 2008. America had it's chance with Ron Paul and pissed it away. They will get the government they deserve.

No, that's the thing, the republicans are indeed conservative. The only difference is that whereas previous conservative movements were contempt to rule the country under the umbrella of the Constitution, and recognized their job was to safeguard the greater good of all Americans (and by extension the whole world-by staying the fuck out of someone else's problems-) today's conservatives basically wipe their asses with the Constitution.

Face it, CEOs and pastors are now running your party, but make no mistake, their ideals ARE, although radical, conservative indeed. It's those very same CEOs and pastors who know say "you know what? I don't have to follow the rules of the Constitution. I have a higher calling, a higher motive, a 'better' Constitution called the Bible/Corporate goal of the moment". That's why McCain, a moderate, is looked at negatively by an ample sector of the Republican party: because it has moved so far to the right that even Hitler would feel right at home.

On the other hand, I agree with you on the fact that the Democratic party is just as out of tune with their constituency as the Republican party. I honestly DO NOT want to see Hillary as my president (although she's my neighbor). I'd much rather see what Barak "wheah my fried chicken at?" Obama as president, cause it'd bring a breath of fresh air to the White's House.

[headhuntersix]

None of which is at the core of the Conservative movement. The evangelicals don't represent the Conservative base much as the nutbags that have hijacked the Dems, represent the base of that party. I have nothing in common with the bible thumpers, much the same as a Berkley nutbag has with a UAW blue collar guy in Detroit. We believe in a smaller government that allows for lower taxes and a business centric solution as opposed to Federal involvement. The libs bitch about all the supposed suppression of rights..it will only get worse under a Dem. Obama has no new ideas..its just packaged better then Hil's ideas.

[w8tlftr]

Are you fucking kidding me?!

And how exactly did you come to that conclusion? Research? Studies? Bullshit you've heard over and over and has now become a reflex (like scratching your nuts)?

No.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/06/23/AR2005062300783_pf.html

http://usgovinfo.about.com/od/rightsandfreedoms/a/eminentd.htm

http://usgovinfo.about.com/b/2005/06/24/supreme-court-backs-government-power-to-seize-private-land.htm

Voted against: Chief Justice William H. Rehnquist, Justice O’Connor, Justices Antonin Scalia and Clarence Thomas

Would you label O'Conner, Scalia, or Thomas liberals or conservatives?

No, that's the thing, the republicans are indeed conservative. The only difference is that whereas previous conservative movements were contempt to rule the country under the umbrella of the Constitution, and recognized their job was to safeguard the greater good of all Americans (and by extension the whole world-by staying the fuck out of someone else's problems-) today's conservatives basically wipe their asses with the Constitution.

Face it, CEOs and pastors are now running your party, but make no mistake, their ideals ARE, although radical, conservative indeed. It's those very same CEOs and pastors who know say "you know what? I don't have to follow the rules of the Constitution. I have a higher calling, a higher motive, a 'better' Constitution called the Bible/Corporate goal of the moment". That's why McCain, a moderate, is looked at negatively by an ample sector of the Republican party: because it has moved so far to the right that even Hitler would feel right at home.

On the other hand, I agree with you on the fact that the Democratic party is just as out of tune with their constituency as the Republican party. I honestly DO NOT want to see Hillary as my president (although she's my neighbor). I'd much rather see what Barak "wheah my fried chicken at?" Obama as president, cause it'd bring a breath of fresh air to the White's House.

**sigh**

You're a reminder of why I try to avoid having rational discussions with angry people. I'd have better luck trying to teach a dog how to speak. Your blind hatred of Republicans has seriously clouded your ability to reason.

[Slapper]

None of which is at the core of the Conservative movement. The evangelicals don't represent the Conservative base much as the nutbags that have hijacked the Dems, represent the base of that party. I have nothing in common with the bible thumpers, much the same as a Berkley nutbag has with a UAW blue collar guy in Detroit. We believe in a smaller government that allows for lower taxes and a business centric solution as opposed to Federal involvement. The libs bitch about all the supposed suppression of rights..it will only get worse under a Dem. Obama has no new ideas..its just packaged better then Hil's ideas.

Yeah, but you're dealing with too different concepts of reality: The dem's nutbags fight for too much freedom, which is GOOD. The reps keep fighting to take away our freedoms, which is BAD.

You see the distinction?

[w8tlftr]

Yeah, but you're dealing with too different concepts of reality: The dem's nutbags fight for too much freedom, which is GOOD. The reps keep fighting to take away our freedoms, which is BAD.

You see the distinction?

Slapper, I'm betting you're a Ron Paul supporter? Are you? If so that's good. That means you believe in core conservative values of minimal government, states rights, and individual liberty and freedom.

If you truly believe that what the left is pitching equals more individual liberty can you please cite references. I'm curious how socialist programs and dependency on the government is good for the American people.

[w8tlftr]

None of which is at the core of the Conservative movement. The evangelicals don't represent the Conservative base much as the nutbags that have hijacked the Dems, represent the base of that party. I have nothing in common with the bible thumpers, much the same as a Berkley nutbag has with a UAW blue collar guy in Detroit. We believe in a smaller government that allows for lower taxes and a business centric solution as opposed to Federal involvement. The libs bitch about all the supposed suppression of rights..it will only get worse under a Dem. Obama has no new ideas..its just packaged better then Hil's ideas.

Ding ding ding.

Winnah winnah chicken dinnah!!!

[Deedee]

Whats up with the creepy ads?

MTV got a conscience after turning a generation toward mindlessness and apathy? 

Kidding, sort of. They're viral branding ads that get passed around, so they achieve what they set out to do, with a simple, compelling message. (You passed it around.) The ads are aimed at 18-year-olds, don't forget. In the subway clip, I like how the older businessman ends up standing there looking helpless and bewildered. That stuck out more than anything.

[Slapper]

No.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/06/23/AR2005062300783_pf.html

http://usgovinfo.about.com/od/rightsandfreedoms/a/eminentd.htm

http://usgovinfo.about.com/b/2005/06/24/supreme-court-backs-government-power-to-seize-private-land.htm

Voted against: Chief Justice William H. Rehnquist, Justice O’Connor, Justices Antonin Scalia and Clarence Thomas

Would you label O'Conner, Scalia, or Thomas liberals or conservatives?

You posted stuff about eminent domain. I was referring to your comment that private enterprise will always do a better job than a government when it comes to public programs. Any ways, I'm a firm believer that if a government can develop a branch that collects taxes (to the last penny) and base its laws on a 900-page book then, by logic, it shouldn't have any problems moving resources from point A to point B to help defenseless US citizens.

As far as eminent domain goes, if my memory serves me right... the main purpose of the ruling was to whether allow cities to grab private land and turn it to private enterprise in order to revitilize the area or not. Although I understand your point, I was referring to your comment sort of insinuating something like "you see, my party also cares about the poor and the needy". I do agree with you in disagreeing with the basis of the law. Private property is private property, bottom line. But make no mistake, Bush passed his executive order because he knows that the ones who will suffer the most are those who own the land, hence the rich and powerful. Land speculation is not a thing of the poor. You do know that, don't you?

**sigh**

You're a reminder of why I try to avoid having rational discussions with angry people. I'd have better luck trying to teach a dog how to speak. Your blind hatred of Republicans has seriously clouded your ability to reason.

You see, this is why I say you have a terrible time reading. I do not hate republicans, I hate some of their ideals. Next thing you know you'll be asking me whether I hate America (or not).

You definitely have an ADD dude.

[Deedee]

**sigh**

You're a reminder of why I try to avoid having rational discussions with angry people. I'd have better luck trying to teach a dog how to speak. Your blind hatred of Republicans has seriously clouded your ability to reason.

I don't find his posts angry. What he says sounds very well thought out. You sound patronizing when you imply that he's stupider than a dog.

Going back to your first post, I'm not clear on your statement that privatization of environmental issues will bring better results. Are you saying industries should be in charge of policing themselves? If so, that's like asking a 10-year-old to babysit himself in a candy store all afternoon.

[Slapper]

Slapper, I'm betting you're a Ron Paul supporter? Are you? If so that's good. That means you believe in core conservative values of minimal government, states rights, and individual liberty and freedom.

No, I do like Ron Paul and I do agree with most of the stuff he says, although I am left wing, sort of an pseudo-anarchical democrat. To put it plain and simple: I feel I do not have to go to anybody to ask for permision when doing something to my property, the government MUST tell me what it's doing with the taxes I pay, etc. I believe the government has to do a lot more for its citizens than collecting taxes and sending our kids to wars we have no business fighting.

If you truly believe that what the left is pitching equals more individual liberty can you please cite references. I'm curious how socialist programs and dependency on the government is good for the American people.

There you go again. Seriously dude, read! I was talking about HH6's comments on our democratic "nutbags". By that I guess he meant the radical democracts like the anarchists, the sindicalists, etc. They do vogue and fight for a much more free America than your Wolfowitz types, whose résumé shows he has a tendency to undermine democratic principles. And this applies to all your people on the extreme right.

Do I have to say again that the democratic party has lost touch with its contituents as much as their republican counterparts?

[w8tlftr]

I don't find his posts angry. What he says sounds very well thought out. You sound patronizing when you imply that he's stupider than a dog.

Going back to your first post, I'm not clear on your statement that privatization of environmental issues will bring better results. Are you saying industries should be in charge of policing themselves? If so, that's like asking a 10-year-old to babysit himself in a candy store all afternoon.

No, Dee Dee, I'm saying that because Slapper hates Republicans so much (which I'm not) I don't think anyone can have a rational discussion with him. I never said he was stupider than I dog. I said I would be a better use of my time trying to train one how to talk vs. trying to discuss a topic with Slapper.

And hell no. I never said that private industry should police themselves. What I mean is that our government is incompetent because it's bogged down by corrupt politicians and layers of BS.

[w8tlftr]

You posted stuff about eminent domain. I was referring to your comment that private enterprise will always do a better job than a government when it comes to public programs. Any ways, I'm a firm believer that if a government can develop a branch that collects taxes (to the last penny) and base its laws on a 900-page book then, by logic, it shouldn't have any problems moving resources from point A to point B to help defenseless US citizens.

As far as eminent domain goes, if my memory serves me right... the main purpose of the ruling was to whether allow cities to grab private land and turn it to private enterprise in order to revitilize the area or not. Although I understand your point, I was referring to your comment sort of insinuating something like "you see, my party also cares about the poor and the needy". I do agree with you in disagreeing with the basis of the law. Private property is private property, bottom line. But make no mistake, Bush passed his executive order because he knows that the ones who will suffer the most are those who own the land, hence the rich and powerful. Land speculation is not a thing of the poor. You do know that, don't you?

You see, this is why I say you have a terrible time reading. I do not hate republicans, I hate some of their ideals. Next thing you know you'll be asking me whether I hate America (or not).

You definitely have an ADD dude.

You said the following when I stated that Republicans (in the Supreme Court) voted against eminent domain and that not all Republicans are conservatives, "Are you fucking kidding me?" Did I miss something here?

[w8tlftr]

No, I do like Ron Paul and I do agree with most of the stuff he says, although I am left wing, sort of an pseudo-anarchical democrat. To put it plain and simple: I feel I do not have to go to anybody to ask for permision when doing something to my property, the government MUST tell me what it's doing with the taxes I pay, etc. I believe the government has to do a lot more for its citizens than collecting taxes and sending our kids to wars we have no business fighting.

There you go again. Seriously dude, read! I was talking about HH6's comments on our democratic "nutbags". By that I guess he meant the radical democracts like the anarchists, the sindicalists, etc. They do vogue and fight for a much more free America than your Wolfowitz types, whose résumé shows he has a tendency to undermine democratic principles. And this applies to all your people on the extreme right.

Do I have to say again that the democratic party has lost touch with its contituents as much as their republican counterparts?

I think I interpreted your comments fine.

You think that the extreme left wing will actually give us more personal liberties and the right wing will take more away.

I think that both are just as bad and that both will take our personal liberties away.

So I don't agree with your far left - GOOD and far right - BAD assessment.

I do fully agree that both parties have lost touch with their constituents. IMO they're two sides of the same coin.

[Deicide]

I like Ron Paul a lot. Many secular folk do but we don't like his strange fundamentalist Christianity. Nothing rolled eyes about it.

[Slapper]

I like Ron Paul a lot. Many secular folk do but we don't like his strange fundamentalist Christianity. Nothing rolled eyes about it.

He's a good man, a great candidate (one of the best out there right now). The only problem is he's 25-50 years ahead of his time. America isn't ready for Ron Paul (or so the American media would have you think).

[Deicide]

He's a good man, a great candidate (one of the best out there right now). The only problem is he's 25-50 years ahead of his time. America isn't ready for Ron Paul (or so the American media would have you think).

At least he keeps his mythology to himself.