Saturday, May 3, 2014

"Help Obama repeal the Bill of RIghts"

Mark Dice asks folks (Obama voters to a man no doubt) to sign a petition to repeal the Bill of Rights.

Sleep well. 


  1. This is something that would appeal to Senile old fart as meaning something. You'll always find someone somewhere willing to sign a petition. A video doesn't prove anything when it's probably been edited to delete the individuals who refused to sign.

    The ones who signed possibly did so to get rid of Mark Dice (who apparently is a bit of a conspiracy loon). I wonder if they signed false names. No one knows.

    A few weeks ago I was phoned by someone from Amnesty asking me to 'sign' an online petition to the Mexican government concerning non-prosecution of a crime apparently by members of its armed forces. I refused, because I didn't know anything of the case.

    Anyway. How do you know, 'no doubt', that the signers were Obama supporters? Your bias is showing.

    1. Commissar Boggs, Ministry of TruthMay 3, 2014 at 7:05 AM

      backfire: " I refused..."

      Of course you did, backfire, But we already knew how noble and intelligent you are. You give us little book reports here all the time. Everyone looks forward to them.

      As far as "bias" goes in inferring the politics of those selected to illustrate the point of the video, I merely observe that those individuals were selected for that reason to make the point of the video (and to avoid having just a random video record of people at the beach). Hence, it is not "bias", but merely an understanding of the intentions of the videographer. I realize how that might slip by a man in your condition, whose peripheral sensory organs are, according to you, dumping vast amounts of data.

      But I have a serious question for you, backfire, if you can handle it in your delicate condition. There's a recent video out you might like (even though it's not about psychologists running rilly, rilly important scientific experiments featuring confederates in clown suits)...

      [A] new mouse-scorpion video, released on YouTube by Michigan State University, shows how the hamster-sized southern grasshopper mouse (Onychomys torridus) has evolved to withstand the painful stings of the Arizona bark scorpion (Centruroides sculpturatus). According to research conducted by Michigan State University zoologist Ashlee Rowe, the mice actually transform the venom into a painkiller.
      --- HuffPo

      Tell us the Just-So Story about how this mouse evolved its adaptation to scorpion toxin. Just the evidence, please...

    2. Boggs, you'll never see such a scenario play out in the natural world. These kind of things only happen in controlled labs where people run bizarro experiments and stuff on these poor creatures in order to satiate their god complex.

    3. " noble and intelligent you are..."

      Where do I sign?


    4. I think the point is that a lot of people will sign anything. I agree that there were probably people who refused to sign who were edited out, but in a sane world Mark Dice wouldn't have found a single person to sign that petition.

      The reason I think they were probably Obama supporters is that he prefaced it with >>Help Obama...<<

      Also, it appears that he was probably on the boardwalk in the Los Angeles area. That's another clue that they were probably Obama supporters.

      As a nation, we're losing out freedom. Looking back, I can see a slow erosion over the course of my life, with a sharp increase since 2009 and the rise of Emperor Obama. It doesn't surprise me. A poll from that same year found that only one in one thousand Americans could name all five freedoms guaranteed under the First Amendment. One in one thousand! We can't find to defend our rights when we don't know what they are.

      So we get ourselves into situations like we have now, where Hobby Lobby is being forced to provide abortion-inducing drugs by executive decree. If the first amendment doesn't protect us from that than it doesn't protect us from anything. It's worthless.

      People think the debate has something to do with abortion-inducing drugs, which are really tangential. What's at stake is our very freedom to practice our religion, our first freedom. That sounds corny to those who don't know what those rights are. They just know they want to have lots of sex and send the bill to someone else. Those are the zombies you will find in this video.


    5. Senile old fart,

      Well, why did God design the grasshopper mouse to be able to withstand the venom of the scorpion, it's natural food? Just the evidence please.

    6. Commissar Boggs, Ministry of TruthMay 3, 2014 at 11:02 AM

      A question is not an answer to a question, backfire. Come on now, strut your stuff.

    7. Senile old fart,

      Well, the answer will be similar to the reason why the Indian gray mongoose is immune to the venom of the cobra. Way back when, the ancestor of the grasshopper mouse or the Indian gray mongoose with a mutation giving even slight resistance to its prey survived better and had more offspring. And natural selection favored whatever further mutations (in the case of the mouse in the sodium channel proteins) which gave more resistance.

      It's a testable hypothesis - all you'd need to do is look at the genes for the sodium channel protein and see how it differs from closely related mice.

      There'd also be other predators preying on the scorpion too (probably) - if they're immune, it would be interesting to work out the molecular reason for their immunity too.

      So what's your answer to my question?

    8. JQ, I agree. We're watching our rights and culture be ransacked and destroyed right before our eyes. A government which refuses to respect and protect the citizens' rights doesn't deserve our respect, least of all for us to abide by laws which infringe upon our rights, rights which the Constitution is meant to force them to uphold. They've abdicated their responsibility to the people and only look to serve themselves.

      Further, this whole PC crusade is pure bullshit. Everything they don't agree with is deemed offensive, bigotry, hate speech. Well, these Marxist-communists (there's no mistake; that's what they are) are angry at everyone and everything they cannot control. What about those who find their views offensive? Anti-discrimination laws are a convenient front for others to practice discrimination.

    9. Hobby lobby is a corporation with 558 stores and many thousands of employies. I think it’s absurd in the extreme to give corporations religious rights as if they were individuals.

      Hobby lobby may well be the best example that “our very freedom to practice our religion” is under attack, but exactly opposite of the way you think it is. You’re arguing that because David Green the founder and CEO of Hobby Lobby has a particular religious point of view, that by virtue of the economic power he has over his employees he can manipulate the access to birth control for thousands of people who do not share his religious view. You want to allow one man, or a very small group of people, the power to effectively reduce the religious liberty of thousands of people regarding what should be a personal, moral, and medical decision.

      The absolutely crazy thing is that Hobby lobby DID provide coverage for everything they now suddenly find so objectionable because it was seen as an easy way to rile up the Pavlov’s dogs of the conservative base against the Affordable care act. Because if there’s one thing that conservatives like JQ really can’t stand, it’s other people having lots of sex.


    10. Commissar Boggs, Ministry of TruthMay 3, 2014 at 12:39 PM

      Errrr, backfire...

      I like your story, but where's the evidence? "[A]ll you'd need to do..." is not evidence.

    11. Commissar Boggs, Ministry of TruthMay 3, 2014 at 1:08 PM

      Popeye: "[D Green] can manipulate the access to birth control for thousands of people"

      So... if he doesn't pay for their birth control, it's "access manipulation"?

      Nobody pays for my wine, and I'm damn tired of having my access manipulated that way. Pay up, Popeye.

    12. >>You’re arguing that because David Green the founder and CEO of Hobby Lobby has a particular religious point of view, that by virtue of the economic power he has over his employees he can manipulate the access to birth control for thousands of people who do not share his religious view.<<

      What you've done here is to spin religious freedom on its head. The Greens are merely freely exercising their religious rights under our Constitution. There are no religions that I know of that mandate birth control pills. Even if there were, no one is telling them that they can't have it. They must simply pay for it from their wages, not send the bill to someone else. It's that simple. If they don't like it they can find a new job or go into business for themselves. I did.

      The Constitution of the United States is a document of limitations. It puts restrains on government, which is a very good thing because government needs it. It does not put restraints on your employer. In fact, your employer has protections against government too.

      Taking birth control pills is no one's >>religious liberty<< but refusing to provide them is. In any case, it's wholly immaterial because, as we have already gone over a thousand times, no one is keeping these people from having birth control. They must only buy it for themselves.

      By your logic, an employer who doesn't buy his employees guns is violating their Second Amendment rights. If that person has a religious objection to firearms, so what? That employer can't trample all over his employees right to have guns. Ergo, he must buy them.

      >>regarding what should be a personal, moral, and medical decision. <<

      If it's so personal, keep the Greens out of it. Keep me out of it. I wonder if you've ever considered the personal, moral decisions of those who have to pay for it.

      You want it both ways, KW. You want to tell other people that it's none of their damned business what you do in your bedroom but then you want them to subsidize it. If you're making us pay for it, it is our business.

      You're a whiny child. I don't know your age and I don't care. You're a child all the same. Your temper tantrums are a threat to my liberty.


    13. Tell me KW, what does the First Amendment's free exercise clause protect us from? Be specific.


    14. KW's got a hard on for state power.

      He claims to be a Navy vet, and I suppose I'll take his word for it. I'll simply remind him that he took an oath to support and defend the Constitution. He's chosen instead to wipe his ass with it.

      Little John

    15. KW:

      Refusing to pay to satisfy someone else's desires is a basic human right.

      If you want to have sterile sex, or watch porn, or whatever, that's you business, but no one should be forced by law to pay for it.

      If you feel sorry for Hobby Lobby employees who have to pay for their own condoms, start up a collection for them or organize a benefit concert.

      If religious parents have to pay for tuition for their own kids to go to religious school, despite paying school taxes, condom-worshiping folks can pay for their own rubbers.

    16. By mandating medical coverage for abortion, contraceptives, etc., the government's tactic is calculated to infringe specifically on religious objection, especially Christians whom they're attempting to remove from the workforce. Employers who refuse to pay are fined per employee, so in effect they'd wind up paying anyhow. That constitutes extortion, not to mention a brazen violation of Constitutional law.

      Constitutionally protected liberties don't suddenly cease to exist outside of the confines of your home or church.

  2. Maybe Dice's next petition drive could be to solicit support for DroneFührer Barry's remarkable claim that "1 in 5 women will be a victim of rape in their lifetime."

    Watch this brief video to see this preposterous fib eviscerated: Sexual assault in America: Do we know the true numbers? (4:49).

    1. Commissar Boggs, Ministry of TruthMay 3, 2014 at 11:00 AM

      Thank you for the link. Christina Hoff Sommers, the narrator, is one of the brightest policy stars in America today. And her point is one that must not be forgotten:

      We cannot possibly design effective, or even sane, public policy based on false premises (in the argot, "lies"). The very definition of psychosis is impaired contact with reality, and that is exactly what the CDC was peddling with that ridiculous report.

    2. Senile old fart,

      Actual rape needs to be prosecuted, not made up cases of 'rape' as defined by the CDC in surveys. Rape is under-reported and difficult to prosecute successfully, often due to a lack of evidence.

      The definition of rape has changed over time. Once marital rape was defined as not existing because wives were defined as not being capable of withdrawing consent from their husbands.

      Anyway. I'm bemused you're so approving of this video. After you praised Carol Shakeshaft's study of educator sex abuse of students as being 'definitive' in the thread on 'Saint Pope John Paul (I looked at it when you first raved about it, and found it not as definitive as you claimed - it's currently not available on the hosting website so I haven't been able to look at it again, from memory 'educators' included school bus drivers, reports of sex abuse included 'jokes' and not physical contact, surveys included online volunteers - which is a self selected sample - and reports included third party accounts).

      But anyway. Child sex abuse needs to be actively prosecuted. Ignoring abuse by clergy because it's worse in schools is just silly.

      By the way - you don't like my 'story' about the grasshopper mouse? So what's your story? Science deals with uncertainty. If you want certainty, you need religion - because there's no evidence there. Anything can be made consistent with whatever you want to believe.

    3. Unfortunately, science has become an ideology unto itself, not to mention politicized beyond recognition.

      It isn't that child abuse by clergymen is unimportant; it's that you make it sound like an epidemic while ignoring the rampant abuse in other walks of life.