patrick.net

Putin Fanboy says

Does Patrick hate freedom?

No.

Putin Fanboy says

Girl Scout cookies? Really?

I can only take it that your remark means you are arguing that the very name "Girl Scouts" implies that the subject is trivial and not worthy of addressing. Basing the seriousness of a case on the name of an organization involved in the case is just plain foolish.

As for the Girl Scout organizations, here are a few facts that demonstrate its significance.
1. The number of girl scouts is approximately 2.7 million .
2. The sales of Girl Scout cookies brings in revenue of about $700 million / yr. It's almost a billion dollar a year industry.
3. More than 59 million American women are alumni of the Girls Scouts. That's 37.4% of American females and about half of all American adult women.

The Girls Scouts is hardly an insignificant business or cultural influence.

I think that diabetics should mount a class action lawsuit against those smug, destructive Girl Scouts.

I can include a segment on how to turn an inexpensive Ikea cupboard and some old leather belts from Goodwill into a female subjugating plywood pillory.

Putin Fanboy says

Dan8267 says

I can only take it that your remark means you are arguing that the very name "Girl Scouts" implies that the subject is trivial and not worthy of addressing.

You are incorrect.

The point is that Patrick espouses stealing ideas, concepts, and work product of others.

If I am incorrect about what your intent is, then I have demonstrated that your post does not make the point you want to make, as my interpretation of your short sarcastic remark is the only reasonable conclusion.

Girl Scout cookies? Really?

It would be more effective to explicitly state your central point and then back it up with evidence and reasoning.

Putin Fanboy says

I'll ask you again: why don't you bake cookies and sell them WITHOUT stealing the Girl Scout branding. You can then donate all the money to the Girl Scouts or anyone else you so desire.

I'll ask you again: Why should Girl Scouts not be able to bake their own Girl Scout cookies?

What does it have to do with me?

Nothing. I don't want to bake cookies and have no interest in branding cookies as anything.

I'm just saying that Girl Scouts should have the right to bake Girl Scout cookies themselves.

Why should they not?

Please answer the question. About Girl Scouts.

Welcome back, by the way.

Putin Fanboy says

The Girl Scout Cookie branding belongs the the Girl Scouts of America, not the little girls. Like you, the little girls have done nothing in regards to cultivating and maintaining the brand.

Lol, they are the Girl Scouts of America.

But anyway, you seem to have misunderstood the proposal. I don't care what the cookies are called. I just want Girl Scouts to have the right to bake their own cookies and sell them instead of supporting a corporation.

Safe? Funny!

Personally, I'd buy/own silver bullion as an insurance policy, and invest in gold stocks/ETFs as an investment if you think it's going up.

Booger says

LOL

why not now? there are already plenty of reasons:

www.youtube.com/embed/U68tHvs95Y8

A thoughtful take on Au a couple days ago:

http://www.oftwominds.com/blogfeb17/gold-backed2-17.html

Eeesh you got some ax to grind lady.

Makes me want to go buy Trump merchandise!

I enjoy being contrary.

Trump hasn't owned that casino for years. Why would they fine the new owners? I'm smelling bullshit.

justme says

Please do tell what you know about Sally Boynton Brown.

She looks like a dude.

Can I guess?

Uh. Let me think. Possibly the Russian mafia?

Russia! Wah-wah! Triggered!

APOCALYPSEFUCK_is_ADORABLE says

25th Amendment

Interesting that the corporate media and deep state seem to be pushing this sedition. Too many D&R voters seem also to support it. For most Americans, and for the republic itself, Pence would be much worse.

OK, so according to you, it's OK for Obama to not have Fox News, but it's not OK for Trump to not have the liberal media, correct?

curious2 says

Pence would be much worse

I think that many are focused on the shit sandwich on their plate, and haven't looked into the replacement much yet.

zzyzzx says

OK, so according to you, it's OK for Obama to not have Fox News, but it's not OK for Trump to not have the liberal media, correct?

Eh? Any attempt to ban a major news networks is wrong. The Obama administration was widely castigated for a far less blatant move than this, and yet the Trump supporters on here are praising the banning of multiple major news outlets like it's some kind of worthy move in a democracy. It's not.

What makes you think that Trump is bonkers?

Why does she have three names?

Quote from Sally Boinking Browns

The white man should only exist to financially support the rest of humanity until they die off. In order to further that mission, the white man must be castrated to prevent proliferation of their inferior species.

justme says

Apparently, the DNC learned nothing from the failed strategy of trying to elect Hillary Clinton at the expense of Bernie Sanders.

YUP.

Speaking of an anti-White, anti-Malestrategy:
www.commondreams.org/views/2016/10/11/labor-secretary-advised-clinton-cast-sanders-candidate-whites-turn-minorities

“First, the current storyline is that she does not connect well with young voters. Given that Nevada is far more demographically representative of America, I am confident that HRC can do well with all African Americans, Latinos, and Asian Americans (don’t forget the sizeable [sic] population of Asian Americans in Nevada, including Filipinos.).”

Perez continued, “Emmy and the team have a good plan to attract all minority voters. When we do well there, then the narrative changes from Bernie kicks ass among young voters to Bernie does well only among young white liberals—that is a different story and a perfect lead in to South Carolina, where once again, we can work to attract young voters of color. So I think Nevada is a real opportunity, and I would strongly urge HRC to get out there within a couple days of [New Hampshire].”

Like others in Clinton’s campaign, he described Nevada as Clinton’s “firewall” and was unconcerned about how minorities would feel if they were described in such an exploitative way.

Clinton only won African Americans decisively in the Nevada caucus, according to entrance polls. But more Latinos voted for Sanders so Nevada did not make it abundantly clear that Sanders was incapable of attracting support from people of color.

Tom Perez’s Bank-Friendly Record Could Kneecap the Democratic Party
https://theintercept.com/2017/02/22/dnc-chair-candidate-tom-perezs-bank-friendly-record-could-kneecap-the-democratic-party

Like Patrick said:
rando says

And the strategy to drive straight white men out of the Democratic party continues

You would think he would be more grateful.
This is the same media that arguably got him elected by giving him over twice as much coverage as his opponents.
A record breaking amount of coverage, for any candidate, ever, in fact.
So fucking much obsessive attention that it swept aside the other republican goof-balls and swamped the democrat's gargantuan, record-breaking dark-pool, 1.4 billion dollar, War-Chest-and-Coronation-Fund.
.

Robert Sproul says

This is the same media that arguably got him elected by giving him over twice as much coverage as his opponents.

And the media continues to obsess about Trump's personality, every day, on the front page.

Such trolling, such triggering!

I don't see any journalism at all. I see no "news" items without opinion added from either side. A major "news" outlet's idea of being balanced is adding an entertaining opinionator from the network's flip-side to the Sunday schedule. They would all fail the basic journalism courses I took in college.

I looked at CNN's web page on Friday trying to find a Political or Finance story that wasn't a negative dig on Donald Trump.

Everything else was click bait time suck stories.

Isn't it a Second Amendment right to put down rabid dogs with aftosa with gunfire?

I can hardly wait for the newsreels of Pence's thin, purple lips nictitating over his saliva flecked, yellow teeth, curling in smiles of cruel joy as Trumpligula's body twitches and rolls in the dust in death spasms.

WaPoIsHitler Lipsovitch says

https://theintercept.com/2017/02/22/dnc-chair-candidate-tom-perezs-bank-friendly-record-could-kneecap-the-democratic-party

(I'll repeat what I said in Blurtman's thread)

Wow, Blurtman. This is why nobody ever heard of Tom Perez before. He was hiding in the Justice Department, quietly doing the bidding of the banksters.

And, the dems very smartly appointed Keith Ellison, who I think was the Bernie Sanders candidate, as DNC vice chair. This is the time-honored bring-into-the-tent strategy, where you silence your enemies by giving them a ceremonial role.

Will Steve Bannon allow Mike Pence to usurp the presidency? Is that not the big unspoken question?

zzyzzx says

it's OK for Obama to not have Fox News, but it's not OK for Trump to not have the liberal media, correct?

First off, if OBama banned Fox it would be like Trump banning MSNBC. Secondly, when Obama did try to ban Fox, CNN and the NYT came to Fox's defense. Not all Fox anchors are duechebags like Sean Hannity. http://www.vocativ.com/405883/white-house-media-ban-inspires-viral-reaction-from-unlikely-ally/

EVen many mainstream conservatives such as George Will, are honest enough with themselves to see what's happening.

Check out this abbreviated DAvid Frum (republican) message.

www.youtube.com/embed/DjOdMfTqNMY . He nails it. And this was made before Fridays whitehouse bans.

rando says

Robert Sproul says

This is the same media that arguably got him elected by giving him over twice as much coverage as his opponents.

And the media continues to obsess about Trump's personality, every day, on the front page.

Such trolling, such triggering!

Agreed. What many are missing here is that this is not about whether every little anecdote told is true, half-true or not true at all. It's about the lamestream media taking the bait and getting ground up in these little skirmishes, failing to report actual news. On the big stories they haven't been able to prove jack shit, like the Russian hoax. On the small stories they may be often right in the detail, without realizing that nobody gives a shit about the inauguration crowd size or whether Trump's win was among the greatest (electoral college numbers wise and otherwise) or not, or just among the Republican wins only. It doesn't matter, it was quite an upheaval and surprisingly clear defeat, so he is basking in it and the press - being royally wrong in their "predictions" - appear to be the sore losers pointing out inaccuracies that in the end do not matter as they don't have anything to do with world politics. It's almost like game 101, either as a planned tactic or natural alpha game (and you don't have to be particularly intelligent to be a natural alpha).

Currently never. At this point there is nothing tangible at all that could be used against Trump.