Play the Podcast (https://bogosity.podbean.com/mf/web/ysr2pv/BogosityPodcast-6-6-2011.mp3)
News of the Bogus:
- Albemarle Road church fined $100 per branch for excessive tree pruning http://www.charlotteobserver.com/2011/05/28/2333197/church-fined-for-improper-tree.html
- Charlotte Crime Data http://www.neighborhoodscout.com/nc/charlotte/crime/
Mobility Project - State-by-State Analysis of Future Congestion and Capacity Needs - North Carolina http://reason.org/news/show/126781.html
Park Police investigates dancing arrests http://www.wtop.com/?nid=41&sid=2403007
- Video of the event http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8jUU3yCy3uI
Dance Off: Court rules against birthday dance at Jefferson Memorial http://www.wtop.com/?nid=41&sid=2386097
Federal regulations on parks: http://edocket.access.gpo.gov/cfr_2004/julqtr/36cfr7.96.htm
Italian Seismologists Charged With Manslaughter for Not Predicting 2009 Quake http://www.foxnews.com/scitech/2011/05/27/italian-scientist-charged-manslaughter-failing-predict-earthquake/
Biggest Bogon Emitter: World Health Organization http://www.iarc.fr/en/media-centre/pr/2011/pdfs/pr208_E.pdf
- WHO: Cell phone use can increase possible cancer risk http://www.cnn.com/2011/HEALTH/05/31/who.cell.phones/
Brain tumour risk in relation to mobile telephone use: results of the INTERPHONE international case–control study http://www.oxfordjournals.org/our_journals/ije/press_releases/freepdf/dyq079.pdf
Idiot Extraordinare: Sen. Rand Paul http://www.ronpaul2012podcast.com//2011/05/26/sen-rand-paul-on-sean-hannity-show-5262011/
- Brandenburg v. Ohio, 395 U.S. 444 (1969) http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/scripts/getcase.pl?court=us&vol=395&invol=444
This Week's Quote: "There is always a well-known solution to every human problem—neat, plausible, and wrong." —H.L. Mencken
I'm about to listen to this podcast. Needless to say, I was a bit surprised to hear the bit on Youtube and then confirmed here that Rand Paul is the this week's "Idiot Extraordinaire". O_O
Rand Paul is a fucking dunce. I like his dad, and I hope his dad suplexes his son onto a turnbuckle post for displaying such hypocrisy and idiocy. Actually, it's kind of disheartening to see it so casually placed on Ron's site and he isn't called out for his blatantly hypocritical and anti-constitutional remarks.
Couldn't have said it better myself, Turcotte.
Quote from: MrBogosity on June 05, 2011, 06:54:38 PM
Couldn't have said it better myself, Turcotte.
I feel a proper suplex is the best way to handle such nonsense.
That reminds me. Charlotte, North Carolina is due for a nice suplex too.
@D & Shane: Fair enough. I really don't keep up with him, or politicians in general, being an anarchist and all. :P
But what can we expect? Being a part of the state has that effect on people.
Adam Kokesh, the guy from "Adam Versus the Man" was one of those people arrested. And he's a war veteran. He's also reformed from that crap (statism) and is quite anti-state. Stefan commented on that: [yt]x2_iu0qH0fY[/yt]
Pffft. I lost all respect for the World Health Organization when I was informed by Shane that they gave false information about health in various countries. That stuff about infant mortality for example.
I still hold out hope for Rand Paul. It's not like he is promoting any legislation that would allow the invasions of privacy he is talking about and I've always felt it is more important what a candidate does than what that candidate says. To get elected you have to speak in a way that caters to the majority and being on fox news I sure he knew that he can't let it seem like he would let the terrorists have all the freedom that everybody else enjoys in our country.
I'll agree that he said some stupid things but as far as what the policies he is actually promoting (that I know of) I would still prefer him over virtually any other politician today. But we still gotta keep an eye on these guys.
In fact, since Rand Paul does seem to understand the libertarian rhetoric he espouses, I say he and others like him should be held to a higher standard.
So I posted on the Ron Paul page that the Rand interview was on and I got this response:
QuoteSenator Paul, I believe, was just offering an alternative to the PATRIOT Act, and the TSA- (in an impromptu way). I'm absolutely certain that the Senator would not support such legislation, if it were to come to a vote tomorrow. However, there is no right to incite people to violently overthrow the government- and that was the crux of his argument- not to chill or investigate legal political speech!
It comes down to whether you think it is more just to treat every American as a suspect, as opposed to demanding more scrutiny on students from certain overseas nations.
Rand Paul stood up to the leadership of both parties and demanded debate over the 4th amendment destroying Patriot ACt! But rather than give the guy a little credit, the left has chosen to demagogue a suggestion the man made on a radio show. I only wish you leftists would be as noisy about the rights of all Americans, as opposed to civil liberties for foreign students, illegal immigrants, and their ilk. Should guests of this country not have a higher standard of security assessment than little girls and old WWII vets at the nation's airports?
I'm sick of your demagoguery, the liberties of EVERY AMERICAN are under attack constantly. For whatever reason, you people don't give a damn unless you can play racial politics with an issue.
This guy is clearly a loon and doesn't see the sheer hypocrisy that Rand showcased in this interview. This is almost as bad as Obama supporters claiming that if you don't like him, you automatically must be an evil heinous redneck Bush supporter.
Not to mention the fact that I'm hardly a leftist.
Quote from: MrBogosity on June 07, 2011, 08:56:37 AM
Not to mention the fact that I'm hardly a leftist.
Well, the straw man is strong with that one.
I find it hilarious how he tries to defend Rand's statements by claiming that he's merely giving an "alternative" to the Patriot Act. If you have an alternative that still infringes upon civil liberties, what alternative do you truly have? None.
Quote from: D.Turcotte on June 07, 2011, 09:07:00 AM
Well, the straw man is strong with that one.
I find it hilarious how he tries to defend Rand's statements by claiming that he's merely giving an "alternative" to the Patriot Act. If you have an alternative that still infringes upon civil liberties, what alternative do you truly have? None.
That's cults of personality for you.
QuoteIf you follow Ron Paul and his son, David, then you know that their ideology is virtually identical. They just have a different way of approaching the issues. Like I said before, the Senator did stick his foot in his mouth abit in this interview, he was just trying to offer a Patriot Act alternative on-the-fly to a terror-crazed Hannity audience. I called you out as a liberal, not because you disagreed with Rand Paul, but because I think this whole leftwing (Soros-outfit) fueled "debate" is itself, a straw-man. We both know that it is illegal to invoke violence against ANYONE- calling for violence is not protected speech.
Now, I too am very concerned about government surveillance of political speech. BUT THEY ARE ALREADY DOING THAT NOW. Just google "ron paul MIAC" or "Campaign for Liberty florida fusion center". ThinkProgress and MSNBC showed no concern about that invasion of free speech. My point is, this isn't proposed legislation, or a written article. It's a paragraph spoken on a radio show that the left has decided to demagogue. And at this time, I want the government to spend MORE TIME investigating the known violence-inducing speech of foreigners than searching through everyone's bank-records, and touching everyone's genitals at the airports. Whether you're a liberal or not, that should not be an outrageous statement.
EXCUSES, EXCUSES EVERYWHERE.
"calling for violence is not protected speech."
I think I covered that pretty well in the podcast. Calling for violence IS protected. The only way the government can stop it is if the violence is not only likely, but also IMMINENT.
Quote from: MrBogosity on June 08, 2011, 12:54:24 PM
"calling for violence is not protected speech."
I think I covered that pretty well in the podcast. Calling for violence IS protected. The only way the government can stop it is if the violence is not only likely, but also IMMINENT.
I linked the person to the 1969 ruling as well.
What kills me is that he thinks that Rand's statements are perfectly okay because they are meant to appease someone like Hannity. If anything, i find that just as dishonest as being a straight up hypocrite.
Quote from: D.Turcotte on June 08, 2011, 01:15:19 PM
I linked the person to the 1969 ruling as well.
What kills me is that he thinks that Rand's statements are perfectly okay because they are meant to appease someone like Hannity. If anything, i find that just as dishonest as being a straight up hypocrite.
If there's one thing Shane has learned it's that compromise doesn't work in the realm of libertarian principles. I'm sorry, but it just doesn't.
Libertarian means ARE libertarian ends, as Stargazer5781 has said.
Quote from: surhotchaperchlorome on June 08, 2011, 04:20:16 PM
If there's one thing Shane has learned it's that compromise doesn't work in the realm of libertarian principles. I'm sorry, but it just doesn't.
Libertarian means ARE libertarian ends, as Stargazer5781 has said.
Exactly. One should stand their ground and hold strong on their position rather than alter or change things just for the sake of appeasing someone or a group of people. As I stated earlier, I find it to be a form of dishonesty, if not to everyone who voted you in based on your libertarian principles, then at the very least, to yourself.
Quote from: D.Turcotte on June 07, 2011, 07:04:48 AM
So I posted on the Ron Paul page that the Rand interview was on and I got this response:
This guy is clearly a loon and doesn't see the sheer hypocrisy that Rand showcased in this interview. This is almost as bad as Obama supporters claiming that if you don't like him, you automatically must be an evil heinous redneck Bush supporter.
Could you link to that? Who was it that responded to you?
The link is on the 1st page under Idiot Extraordinaire:
http://www.ronpaul2012podcast.com//2011/05/26/sen-rand-paul-on-sean-hannity-show-5262011/
The guy's name is JTWilliams.
On the cell phone causing cancer nonsense, of course Bill Maher has bought into it. He's using this for the whole "Americans will gladly kill themselves for the sake of convenience" argument. He even referenced global warming for an analogy. He posed the question, "If you could stop global warming right now, just by dropping the remote for your television and never using it again, would you? Of course not."
Not that I need more evidence for Maher's idiocy, but I figure I may as well throw this here since it is relevant to the WHO drivel.
Quote from: D.Turcotte on June 08, 2011, 11:54:49 PM
On the cell phone causing cancer nonsense, of course Bill Maher has bought into it. He's using this for the whole "Americans will gladly kill themselves for the sake of convenience" argument. He even referenced global warming for an analogy. He posed the question, "If you could stop global warming right now, just by dropping the remote for your television and never using it again, would you? Of course not."
Not that I need more evidence for Maher's idiocy, but I figure I may as well throw this here since it is relevant to the WHO drivel.
And yet ANOTHER reason why Bill Maher is a snobby, elitist douche-bag and professional fucktard.
Quote from: surhotchaperchlorome on June 09, 2011, 12:27:44 AM
And yet ANOTHER reason why Bill Maher is a snobby, elitist douche-bag and professional fucktard.
I despise the man honestly. Whenever I hear that obnoxious voice of his, I feel physically ill.
When the Atheist Experience guys said they didn't know of any case where an atheist engaged in quote-mining, I was tempted to call in the next week and mention Mahr.
Quote from: MrBogosity on June 09, 2011, 11:12:10 AM
When the Atheist Experience guys said they didn't know of any case where an atheist engaged in quote-mining, I was tempted to call in the next week and mention Mahr.
I wish you would just dedicate an entire segment to destroying him, but I know that would require you to actually watch his show or listen to him speak which is a form of torture in and of itself.
Quote from: MrBogosity on June 09, 2011, 11:12:10 AM
When the Atheist Experience guys said they didn't know of any case where an atheist engaged in quote-mining, I was tempted to call in the next week and mention Mahr.
Or of that kDest guy who quote mined Ludwig von Mises. Really, statists are like that it seems...
Maher wasn't even being a statist at the time! I was thinking about his Adams quote-mine in Religulous.
QuoteAgain, in regards to the "profiling" of political speech, the Senator never advocated any particular measures. It's not as if he proposed rendition, the Guantanamo Bay treatment, followed by water-boarding! All he said was that certain individuals who produce intelligence interest should be more closely scrutinized than the giant TSA/DHS dragnet for the entire population! Of course I thought you were coming from a leftist perspective, ThinkProgress and the like were out there saying: "Rand Paul wants to criminalize speech" or "Rand Paul Wants To Know Where Every Middle East Exchange Student Is At All Times." Is that not an absurd paraphrasing of his argument?
>Rand specifically states that they should be deported and/or imprisoned for being in attendance of violent political speeches.
>Also states that he wants to invade the privacy of foreign exchange students simply for being born in the Middle East.
>Claim that he doesn't mean these things.
>Claim that we're just paraphrasing, even though it was a direct quote.I'm starting to think this person is on some heavy duty drugs. If he is, I think he should share.
Why would you want drugs that turn you in to a jackass?
Isn't that what most drugs do anyway?
Quote from: MrBogosity on June 10, 2011, 01:45:38 PMIsn't that what most drugs do anyway?
What about prescription painkillers that aren't being abused? Unless you were talking about illegal drugs. :P