Random Political Thoughts

[Juan]

I wish we could come together and get some truly necessary legislation passed on all manner of issues, but it seems damn near impossible to me at present.  The Senate passed an immigration bill.  The House appears poised to piss all over it.

Silly boy, don't you know how political ass covering goes in DC?  The Senate passes a bill.  Everyone postures.  Including the Speaker who says they will not even vote on the Senate bill.  Instead they will have their own bill.  It doesn't matter.  Both houses will pass a bill.  Everyone postures again.  Then the conference committee meets in secret, puts together a bill and both houses pass it before we find out what was in it.  Lots of bribes, or what normal people would consider bribes, will be paid.

[PB the Deplorable]

... Any thoughts anyone?

In many ways there are 2 parties in America - those inside the DC Beltway and their various media mouthpieces, and the rest of us

[West of the Rockies]

Silly boy, don't you know how political ass covering goes in DC?  The Senate passes a bill.  Everyone postures.  Including the Speaker who says they will not even vote on the Senate bill.  Instead they will have their own bill.  It doesn't matter.  Both houses will pass a bill.  Everyone postures again.  Then the conference committee meets in secret, puts together a bill and both houses pass it before we find out what was in it.  Lots of bribes, or what normal people would consider bribes, will be paid.

I'm just a bill, yes, I'm only a bill....

[PB the Deplorable]

A European reaction to the monitoring and surveillance.

http://www.spiegel.de/international/world/europe-must-stand-up-to-american-cyber-snooping-a-906250.html

[Sardondi]

Is this really a smart move in Texas? As you may know there's a current brouhaha in Texas where a bill to ban late-term abortions has made that state a temporary national battleground. (Wait - what happened to the talk a decade ago about how no one really ever wanted late-term abortions to be legal, and that it was those fascist anti-abortion forces who had put that out there to make pro choice groups look like evil murderers? Because that was the position of pro-choice groups 10-15 years ago.*) So anti forces were at the Texas state capitol, singing "Amazing Grace". And it seems a bunch of pro-choice counter-demonstrators starting shouting "Hail Satan!" to drown them out. http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2013/jul/3/texas-abortion-battle-heats-activists-hail-satan/

What.the.hell. The mind boggles. Has it really descended to the point with that group that it's all about imposing their will rather than persuasion? what a dumb, dumb move.

*EDIT* When anti-abortion demonstrators started singing "Amazing Grace" at the Texas Capitol, pro-abortion counter-demonstrators tried to drown them out by chanting "Hail, Satan!" (Nah, there is no culture war.)

Which seemed like an incomparably stupid thing to do, unless the pro-abortion group was trying to scare off their wishy-washy supporters and ginger up the base. But now it seems that real Satanists are making sure no one confuses them with the scary women calling on Satan in Austin. http://americanglob.com/2013/07/03/hilarious-real-satanists-want-nothing-to-do-with-abortion-supporters/ Ouch.



*And no, I'm not anti-abortion. It's absolutely necessary. But I can't intellectually accept that a fetus is tissue with no rights one moment and a human the next just because light shines on it. Just as I resent what I see as the intellectual dishonesty of the pro industry, which has turned abortion into little more than a lifestyle decision, akin to removing a mole.

[onan]

I started to post this on the other thread.


I have lost the sarcasm... maybe it will return.


There are approximately 1.3 million abortions in the US every year. 1.4 percent are after 21 weeks. There are over 800,000 miscarriages in the US every year. A vast majority of those are due to poor to non-existent prenatal care. As is almost always the case, if a pregnancy is going to cost someone dollars, then the voice to save the fetus goes silent. I find it puzzling that a large percentage of those opposing abortion also are troubled by birth control. Lately the issue about birth control has been over who should pay for it. Again it seems that many are penny wise and pound foolish. Birth control is much cheaper and much less of a drain on programs that help to financially support a child to adulthood.


I am also puzzled by the religious fervor put forth for the life of the fetus/unborn. Yet these very organizations do little to nothing for the more than 20,000 sentient children that die every day world wide.


And yes I am aware I took the discussion away from two sides both making asses out of themselves... but I thought it needed to be said.


When it comes to the argument when the fetus isn't considered alive to the paradigm shift to a living soul, I agree it does get a bit complex. But at some point the decision needs to be made as to who's rights are paramount? It is a tough question. To add, the argument of when life begins has been a moving target for centuries. As has been argued many times in many places, at one time life was thought to begin upon crowning, then centuries later fetal movement became the standard, and current thought is at conception (personally, I don't think the bastards have souls until they hit their late teens to eary twenties... but that's me)


If one believes ensoulment does occur at conception; then it must be painful to realize that hundreds of thousands of soul filled blastocysts never make it to implantation. I am not sure what that means spiritually. But I do know if it was a plan it was a poor one.






While going to school, I worked as a guard at a women's health clinic, for a very short time. Every day I worked protesters would picket, would spray holy water from flasks, and would attempt to block the passage into the clinic. I have seen elderly women toss plastic models of fetuses at women entering the clinic. I could go on but I think the picture is drawn.


Yes the mind does boggle. At so many places in the argument... boggle seems too weak a term.


That was the first time I thought the supreme court made a bad decision. This should have been voted on by the public. We never got to have a say and it has been divisive ever since.

[RealCool Daddio]

I am hesitant to wade into any discussion on abortion, but thought those unfamiliar with the thought experiments from Judith Jarvis Thomson's " A Defense of Abortion" might find this interesting:


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/A_Defense_of_Abortion[/size]

[onan]

I am hesitant to wade into any discussion on abortion, but thought those unfamiliar with the thought experiments from Judith Jarvis Thomson's " A Defense of Abortion" might find this interesting:


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/A_Defense_of_Abortion

I wasn't aware... thanks

[b_dubb]

i'm not a supporter of late term abortions. they should be BANNED in my opinion.  after the 1st trimester i think they should not be allowed as the fetus is already highly developed. 

the bottom line is that women will ALWAYS have a choice.  if they don't want to have a baby they will find a way out.  if no legal method is available then they will seek out other means.  all increasingly dangerous. 

in making abortion illegal, you restrict access to safe abortion to the wealthy and advantaged.  a woman born to a family of means will be able to find safe abortion methods.  as in "my dad went to college with a guy who's a doctor" and so the wealthy have resources. only the poor will be affected by an abortion ban.  unwanted children or dangerous procedures.  they either die horribly or are made even poorer by an added burden. and in country that doesn't seem capable of lifting a finger to help that's a bad situation to bring children into

[Sardondi]

...While going to school, I worked as a guard at a women's health clinic, for a very short time. Every day I worked protesters would picket, would spray holy water from flasks, and would attempt to block the passage into the clinic. I have seen elderly women toss plastic models of fetuses at women entering the clinic. I could go on but I think the picture is drawn....

I find these tactics so incredibly offensive. And, just as the "Hail, Satan!" mean-spiritedness was nothing but an ineffective "position hardener", shouting, "You're killing your baby!" to what are so often young girls who are in horrendous psychological pain and emotional turmoil strikes me as little short of torture. But if you are convinced you're acting to save babies' lives, I suppose in your opinion you're justified because all else pales by comparison. Measured responses and fine distinctions in difficult philosophical problems aren't ordinarily found at protests, especially for or against such a red-hot issue as abortion.   

And about Thompson's "thought experiment", I found this one line absolutely chilling: "the right to life, Thomson says, does not entail the right to use another person's body". Ho-lee crap. So much for motherhood and the survival of the species. I understand it's a think piece. Still, that uber-coldness sounds like a hospital "bio-ethicist" (whose job titles it sometimes seems should be "explainers of why traditional mores and morality are not as important as making sure our transplant team has plenty of spare parts available").

i'm not a supporter of late term abortions. they should be BANNED in my opinion.  after the 1st trimester i think they should not be allowed as the fetus is already highly developed. 

the bottom line is that women will ALWAYS have a choice.  if they don't want to have a baby they will find a way out.  if no legal method is available then they will seek out other means.  all increasingly dangerous. 

in making abortion illegal, you restrict access to safe abortion to the wealthy and advantaged.  a woman born to a family of means will be able to find safe abortion methods.  as in "my dad went to college with a guy who's a doctor" and so the wealthy have resources. only the poor will be affected by an abortion ban.  unwanted children or dangerous procedures.  they either die horribly or are made even poorer by an added burden. and in country that doesn't seem capable of lifting a finger to help that's a bad situation to bring children into

I was serious about the point that 10-15 years ago pro-choice industry was in high dudgeon about what they said were anti-groups' propaganda that late-term abortions would ever, ever be considered. That was the pro groups' argument: horror stories about late term abortions were just "frighteners", because everyone agreed they were barbaric and never to be sought except under the most stringent and emergency situations.

But I see from the arguments in the Texas hooha that the pro groups are arguing that now efforts to ban late-term abortions are just vagina-stealing by the GOP. The pro-groups' position changed because things are different. Because.

[onan]

I find these tactics so incredibly offensive. And, just as the "Hail, Satan!" mean-spiritedness was nothing but an ineffective "position hardener", shouting, "You're killing your baby!" to what are so often young girls who are in horrendous psychological pain and emotional turmoil strikes me as little short of torture. But if you are convinced you're acting to save babies' lives, I suppose in your opinion you're justified because all else pales by comparison. Measured responses and fine distinctions in difficult philosophical problems aren't ordinarily found at protests, especially for or against such a red-hot issue as abortion.   

And about Thompson's "thought experiment", I found this one line absolutely chilling: "the right to life, Thomson says, does not entail the right to use another person's body". Ho-lee crap. So much for motherhood and the survival of the species. I understand it's a think piece. Still, that uber-coldness sounds like a hospital "bio-ethicist", (whose job titles, btw, from what admittedly limited experience I have from reading about their findings, it seems should be "explainers of why traditional mores and morality are not as important as making sure our transplant team has plenty of spare parts available.")

I agree with every word. I would like to edify a bit here. There is a difference in protestations. No one supporting choice, as far as I know, has barricaded the the oppositions side from moving freely. Nor have they had in their rank and file who has specifically targeted the opposition's members for harassment or worse.


To expound on my story a bit, one day my wife met me at that clinic. As she left one of the protesters followed her and as you can guess frightened her. Whether that fear was purposeful or merely my wife's imagination has little bearing. She came back to me and pointed him out. I almost went to jail that day. I assaulted him and threatened more than bodily harm. Lucky for me nothing more came from it.


It is very complicated and it would be foolish to suggest that those with strong feelings are somehow less than. I wish I had the answer.

[Juan]

I agree with every word. I would like to edify a bit here. There is a difference in protestations. No one supporting choice, as far as I know, has barricaded the the oppositions side from moving freely. Nor have they had in their rank and file who has specifically targeted the opposition's members for harassment or worse.

There is a federal law limiting protests outside abortion clinics. I don't remember all the details, but there have been prosecutions and imprisonment of people who think they are exercising their free speech rights. As the law was pushed by Planned Parenthood and other pro-choice groups, I'd classify this as barricading the oppositions side from moving freely.

This is a hellish argument that will never be solved by laws or protests.  Only the acceptance of a societal norm will solve it, and I don't see that happening as both sides have legitimate arguments.

[Sardondi]

...To expound on my story a bit, one day my wife met me at that clinic. As she left one of the protesters followed her and as you can guess frightened her. Whether that fear was purposeful or merely my wife's imagination has little bearing. She came back to me and pointed him out. I almost went to jail that day. I assaulted him and threatened more than bodily harm. Lucky for me nothing more came from it....

All bets are off when it comes to threats (or perceived threats) to the wives. It gets primal. Feminists no doubt would turn it into nothing more than a man mad about somebody messing with his chattels. But screw them - when someone affronts the spousal unit things go red, as you describe.

Your reaction was so very similar to an occasion when I watched a young teenager - I'd say he was no more than 15 at best, maybe younger - walk up behind my wife as she stood waiting for me to catch up with her as we were exiting a football game. He casually slid his hand between her buttocks and just let it ride there awhile. I was behind about 10 yards and when he heard me he hustled off. I was stunned at what I'd seen, and went to my wife in hopes I was mistaken. She was almost speechless at even this relatively minor assault. But she could barely get out a whispered "yes" when I asked if he had put his hands on her like that. By this time the kid had gotten out of the stadium and was hightailing it away (on his bike - sheesh). So I go chasing him, several of our friends who had also seen it trailing me. I catch the budding sex criminal about 100 yards away. I yank him off the bike, grab at him, tearing his shirt off, and I'm yelling at him about what I'd seen, what he'd done, and what I was gonna do. I think the verb "kill" was used.

So his shirt is in tatters, and I land a lick or two, enough to make him bleed from the mouth. But he's 100% street, mouthing like a jackass, and he spits blood on my shirt as he dances as I am just hoping to lure him into arm's reach, the asshole. Then it hits me. I'm a 30-something (at the time) ex-jock, 6'4", 265, and I'm screaming at and trying to beat this wiry kid, on a bike, fer Chrissakes, who is maybe 6' and about 165 pounds, and.....dum dum duuuuuum.....he's black. Great. And even though the Red Veil had descended when this began, all of a sudden fight mode becomes defendant-in-a-civil-suit mode. I'm starting to think, "What the hell must this look like to passersby? Lawyer passerby in particular." We were 100 yards away from where the incident actually took place, which was inside the stadium. No one who was watching us now would have any idea what it was about. All they would see would be this huge, white, Grand Kleage bully using firehoses and teargas and killer dogs on a strong, poor, proud, black man-child who just wanted to get an education. (Okay, I really got carried away imagining Bonfire of the Vanities kind of news stories.) Also, out of nowhere he had a small posse join him and surround us, males and females, all mouthing like magpies, egging him on and cursing me.

And where a moment earlier I might have killed this kid if I'd been able to get my hands around his throat (an iffy prospect, since he was mongoose fast, and I had only caught him a glancing blow, which was probably a good thing), all of a sudden I feel ridiculous and silly and just want to go home. The power of PC even in the late 80's. I just turned around and went to my wife. The jackals howled as if they'd beaten George Wallace.

I felt bad about the whole thing. I think I was absolutely right - I could see no law anywhere, even though it was a football game. (And anyway, afterwards my wife said the last thing she wanted was a police issue. The idea of talking to anyone about what the kid did made her sick.) But even though I felt justified, I also felt impotent, that I had failed my wife. Our friends thought it was a famous victory, but it just made me sick. Even though I've had various set-to's in my life, I think I've always felt vaguely guilty when they were done, even though I always thought I was in the right. Maybe you felt differently after the incident with your wife's assaulter was done, but I wouldn't be surprised if you felt a little guilty or out of sorts. All that socialization our Moms do to us.

[onan]

There is a federal law limiting protests outside abortion clinics. I don't remember all the details, but there have been prosecutions and imprisonment of people who think they are exercising their free speech rights. As the law was pushed by Planned Parenthood and other pro-choice groups, I'd classify this as barricading the oppositions side from moving freely.

This is a hellish argument that will never be solved by laws or protests.  Only the acceptance of a societal norm will solve it, and I don't see that happening as both sides have legitimate arguments.

Well actually there is a significant difference. If I were protesting, and by law prohibited by advancing too close, I could put down my placard and move freely, as long as I didn't interfere. To my knowledge no one on the choice side has went to the church where the protesters organize and block their exit. No one has chained themselves to a church to stop their activities. No one has used violence to intimidate peoples access.

[onan]

All bets are off when it comes to threats (or perceived threats) to the wives. It gets primal. Feminists no doubt would turn it into nothing more than a man mad about somebody messing with his chattels. But screw them - when someone affronts the spousal unit things go red, as you describe.

Your reaction was so very similar to an occasion when I watched a young teenager - I'd say he was no more than 15 at best, maybe younger - walk up behind my wife as she stood waiting for me to catch up with her as we were exiting a football game. He casually slid his hand between her buttocks and just let it ride there awhile. I was behind about 10 yards and when he heard me he hustled off. I was stunned at what I'd seen, and went to my wife in hopes I was mistaken. She was almost speechless at even this relatively minor assault. But she could barely get out a whispered "yes" when I asked if he had put his hands on her like that. By this time the kid had gotten out of the stadium and was hightailing it away (on his bike - sheesh). So I go chasing him, several of our friends who had also seen it trailing me. I catch the budding sex criminal about 100 yards away. I yank him off the bike, grab at him, tearing his shirt off, and I'm yelling at him about what I'd seen, what he'd done, and what I was gonna do. I think the verb "kill" was used.

So his shirt is in tatters, and I land a lick or two, enough to make him bleed from the mouth. But he's 100% street, mouthing like a jackass, and he spits blood on my shirt as he dances as I am just hoping to lure him into arm's reach, the asshole. Then it hits me. I'm a 30-something (at the time) ex-jock, 6'4", 265, and I'm screaming at and trying to beat this wiry kid, on a bike, fer Chrissakes, who is maybe 6' and about 165 pounds, and.....dum dum duuuuuum.....he's black. Great. And even though the Red Veil had descended when this began, all of a sudden fight mode becomes defendant-in-a-civil-suit mode. I'm starting to think, "What the hell must this look like to passersby? Lawyer passerby in particular." We were 100 yards away from where the incident actually took place, which was inside the stadium. No one who was watching us now would have any idea what it was about. All they would see would be this huge, white, Grand Kleage bully using firehoses and teargas and killer dogs on a strong, poor, proud, black man-child who just wanted to get an education. (Okay, I really got carried away imagining Bonfire of the Vanities kind of news stories.) Also, out of nowhere he had a small posse join him and surround us, males and females, all mouthing like magpies, egging him on and cursing me.

And where a moment earlier I might have killed this kid if I'd been able to get my hands around his throat (an iffy prospect, since he was mongoose fast, and I had only caught him a glancing blow, which was probably a good thing), all of a sudden I feel ridiculous and silly and just want to go home. The power of PC even in the late 80's. I just turned around and went to my wife. The jackals howled as if they'd beaten George Wallace.

I felt bad about the whole thing. I think I was absolutely right - I could see no law anywhere, even though it was a football game. (And anyway, afterwards my wife said the last thing she wanted was a police issue. The idea of talking to anyone about what the kid did made her sick.) But even though I felt justified, I also felt impotent, that I had failed my wife. Our friends thought it was a famous victory, but it just made me sick. Even though I've had various set-to's in my life, I think I've always felt vaguely guilty when they were done, even though I always thought I was in the right. Maybe you felt differently after the incident with your wife's assaulter was done, but I wouldn't be surprised if you felt a little guilty or out of sorts. All that socialization our Moms do to us.

You have no reason to feel guilt here. But, you are a smarter man than I, you already know this on an intellectual level. But convincing our hearts is another matter. All I can say is sometimes behaviors demand an aggressive defense. You did not elicit violence, to many it would be apparent, you were provoked beyond any semblance of reason. In that very present moment you may have been completely unaware and unable to use rational thought. 15 minutes later rational thought would start to present itself. The heat of the moment is a very real scenario, especially when our core beliefs are threatened.

[Sardondi]

...But convincing our hearts is another matter. All I can say is sometimes behaviors demand an aggressive defense. You did not elicit violence, to many it would be apparent, you were provoked beyond any semblance of reason. In that very present moment you may have been completely unaware and unable to use rational thought. 15 minutes later rational thought would start to present itself. The heat of the moment is a very real scenario, especially when our core beliefs are threatened.

I think I really could have killed him. Along with his pack of yowling hyenas which somehow immediately magically appeared to be the interactive audience for his rendition of "Beclowning The White Dude".

...But, you are a smarter man than I, you already know this on an intellectual level....

It would be unendurable for someone to act coy about this, so please understand when I say, "Bullshit", I mean it. It's embarrassing to me. And it is plainly not true. For one thing, and I'm guilty of it too, people tend to view a little verbal facility as the equivalent of intelligence. It's not. I use words pretty well - it's the reason I'm a lawyer: I flunked Organic Chemistry and needed to come up with something else to do besides Med School. But it's not the same thing as true intelligence - certainly not the whole thing.

I think also, and I'm guessing because self-analysis is hard to do accurately, but I suspect sometimes my responses carry some sting in the tail, and even on the anonymous internet it can make people leery of engaging me. I don't really mean this, it's my nasty nature peeking through I guess. Maybe people are a little standoffish because they don't want to become a target. If so that also embarrasses me because it's not my intent.

But this board has as many whip-smart commenters as any I've ever taken part in. There are great posts and great posters here. And there are many times in the give-and-take topics when I'll see a response of an "opponent", and yes, sometimes they're yours, which just take the wind out of my sails. I think "Oh, hell, I just don't have the strength to answer it! Run away! Run away!" So it works both ways.

[Juan]

I think also, and I'm guessing because self-analysis is hard to do accurately, but I suspect sometimes my responses carry some sting in the tail, and even on the anonymous internet it can make people leery of engaging me. I don't really mean this, it's my nasty nature peeking through I guess. Maybe people are a little standoffish because they don't want to become a target. If so that also embarrasses me because it's not my intent.

I think it's because of your previous description of yourself - your size, and the fact that you have a sabre slash across your face and wear an eye patch. You scare them. Ha.

[Sardondi]

I think it's because of your previous description of yourself - your size, and the fact that you have a sabre slash across your face and wear an eye patch. You scare them. Ha.

Oh, yeah. But it's really a shovel slash. And I always thought the eye patch merely marked me as damaged goods to most people, and a good target to enterprising young hoodlums. I've never had a babe come up to me and say, "Ooh, that eye patch is so cool; and that scar that looks like a four-lane highway over your eye just adds to the sexah!". Besides, I'm so overcome with pseudo-intellectual ambivalence and middle-class guilt that, even if I might have at one time done some rowdy things, I almost always felt ashamed immediately afterward. So gimme a break: "I am not an animal!"

[onan]

"I am not an animal!"

I am an animal... the kind that likes to overeat and take naps.

[West of the Rockies]

I read on Little Green Footballs (a political blog) that Ted Nugent is pondering a run for president in '16.  This is the guy who admitted to purposefully shitting his pants to avoid being drafted.  He proudly said to a large crowd that he shot 450 feral hogs from a helicoptor in four hours and then jjoked, "Now let me loose in South Central... just kidding...." 

Surely, we won't be so stupid as to elect this dufus, will we?  Would he have any sort of legitimate chance in the Republican primary?  Both parties do seem to get swoony over celebs-turned-politicians.

[onan]

I read on Little Green Footballs (a political blog) that Ted Nugent is pondering a run for president in '16.  This is the guy who admitted to purposefully shitting his pants to avoid being drafted.  He proudly said to a large crowd that he shot 450 feral hogs from a helicoptor in four hours and then jjoked, "Now let me loose in South Central... just kidding...." 

Surely, we won't be so stupid as to elect this dufus, will we?  Would he have any sort of legitimate chance in the Republican primary?  Both parties do seem to get swoony over celebs-turned-politicians.

Yeah, what a good idea... I can't wait to see how the republican party would extricate themselves from this guy's campaign. He plays well to maybe 5 percent of the conservative base... yeah he would be a big tent kind of pundit... lemme get the popcorn.

[Eddie Coyle]

 
        Nugent can't even sell records anymore and that's his metier. And by anymore, I mean at least two decades. Or more.

        Though he'd fit right in a place like SouthCentral LA. He mindlessly loves his guns and...has at least three children out of wedlock.

        *"Icarus" Johnson of Little Green Footballs is a better guitar player than Nugent as well.

[PB the Deplorable]

        Nugent can't even sell records anymore...

I saw him at a show in San Francisco back in 2007 and it just blew.  He was a caricature of himself, wearing raccoon tails or something off the back of his cowboy hat, dressed up in cammo.  He was yakking between every song, things like joking about all the animals he shot on the way to the gig - he really overdid it that night.  He had assault weapons and other gun related shit on stage as props.  And, oh yeah, he didn't play all that great either.  I think he may have thought he would try to provoke the audience, being in SF and all, not realizing that the people that bought tickets were going to be his fans and not PETA, ARF or ELF.

He didn't come across as all that bright, it was mostly just dumb and obnoxious.  I'd never go again. 

I don't think anyone's going to take him seriously.  Not after they've heard him talk for awhile.

[Eddie Coyle]

I saw him at a show in San Francisco back in 2007 and it just blew.  He was a caricature of himself, wearing a raccoon tail or something off the back of his cowboy hat, dressed up in cammo.  He was joking about all the animals he shot on the way to the gig.  He had assault weapons and other gun related shit on stage as props.  And, oh yeah, he didn't play all that great either.  I think he may have thought he would try to provoke the audience, being in SF and all, not realizing that the people that bought tickets were going to be his fans and not PETA, ARF or ELF.

He didn't come across as all that bright, it was mostly just real dumb and obnoxious.  I'd never go again.

Won free tickets from a radio station to see him in 1994...and your experience echoes mine. He wasted more time bullshitting and bragging(probably 25-30 minutes in all) and the venue was about 2/5 empty. He was under the impression it was 1977 and still the big star he was back then. And you're absolutely correct about his antagonism. He must have mentioned PETA two dozen times, like there was even ONE vegan in that audience. And according to a guy near us, Nugent's setlist was literally the same 13 songs it was when that guy saw him in '88.

[Juan]

Feral hogs are an invasive species and very dangerous in some places.  Shooting 450 of them might not have been a bad idea.

[onan]

Feral hogs are an invasive species and very dangerous in some places.  Shooting 450 of them might not have been a bad idea.

First off, wild pigs don't congregate. If he shot 450 of them, they were corralled. And at that point shooting 450 of them seems a bit sadistic. Who knows perhaps the nugent's bipolar disorder had him manically helicoptering to several different locations.


All wildlife is a threat to some domesticated livestock. Perhaps the roving bands of bloodthirsty pigs have started attacking local communities and turning the victims into zombies... I haven't kept up with the news.

[PB the Deplorable]

First off, wild pigs don't congregate. If he shot 450 of them, they were corralled. And at that point shooting 450 of them seems a bit sadistic. Who knows perhaps the nugent's bipolar disorder had him manically helicoptering to several different locations.


All wildlife is a threat to some domesticated livestock. Perhaps the roving bands of bloodthirsty pigs have started attacking local communities and turning the victims into zombies... I haven't kept up with the news.

They are a real problem here in Calif.  They are in much of the states parkland and open space.  They are aggressive and dangerous with those long razor sharp tusks and will attack people, but fortunately they mostly only come out at night - in all my years of hiking and mtn biking, I've seen every other animal out there but not these things.  I've seen the damage they do though - they'll stick a tusk in the soft ground and just absolutely tear the entire area up looking for food.  They can tear up a whole hillside overnight.  They don't really have any predators - mountain lions almost always go for deer when they can. 

They breed fast with lots of little pigs, they're hard for the people hired to eradicate them to find, we'll never get rid of them.

Nugent is still an ass, killing for fun.

[Yorkshire pud]

First off, wild pigs don't congregate. If he shot 450 of them, they were corralled. And at that point shooting 450 of them seems a bit sadistic. Who knows perhaps the nugent's bipolar disorder had him manically helicoptering to several different locations.


All wildlife is a threat to some domesticated livestock. Perhaps the roving bands of bloodthirsty pigs have started attacking local communities and turning the victims into zombies... I haven't kept up with the news.

Or the simple answer is in your first para Onan. Nugent is just a sadistic knuckle dragging arsehole, who puffs his chest out to make him look like fucking Rambo..Wild pigs are, after all known to eat children live on Gerry Springer; won't anyone think of them?

[stevesh]

Your reaction was so very similar to an occasion when I watched a young teenager - I'd say he was no more than 15 at best, maybe younger - walk up behind my wife as she stood waiting for me to catch up with her as we were exiting a football game. He casually slid his hand between her buttocks and just let it ride there awhile.


I felt bad about the whole thing.

The 'feeling bad' part was your only mistake, IMO. I'd have beaten the kid bloody and slept like a baby that night. If we just roll over for behavior like that, regardless of whatever socialization we were subjected to or whatever legal ramifications occur to us, the animals win.

[PB the Deplorable]

30,000 prisoners in California are apparently on a hunger strike.

Now to me, this sounds like a great opportunity to cut costs a little.  But I imagine the usual hand wringers will run around all concerned and plead with them to start eating again or even force feeding them.  Like what is going on in Gitmo right now.

I say if they don't want to eat, so be it, but wouldn't the easiest way to end it also be to just ignore it?