My God, you are an idiot.

[Cletus Miller]

Originally Posted by Adder

We did it before and it didn't bring huge growth. That isn't meaningless.

But yeah, it's only a correlation. It could be that other factors undermined growth when we did it before, or that other factors will make it grow this time. But that doesn't make it not evidence (hi, Hank!).

But maybe without the cuts, there would have been 10% annual *contraction* from 2001-2008. Then the net "growth" resulting from the cuts would be phenomenal.

There is nothing that dictates that the true baseline size of the economy is the prior year.

[sgtclub]

Originally Posted by sebastian_dangerfield

Magic Underwear problem. In all sincerity, I could not vote for a Mormon. All religion is a bit far fetched, of course, and yes, I understand that many do not actually believe in their church's loony teachings, but instead use it as an "inside handshake" thing for business purposes (I've been told as much by Mormon friends). Still, anyone even professing to buy into a faith so comical on its face, and so unequivocally proven to have been a fraud, perpetrated by a historically acknowledged con man,* shows a capacity for suspension of disbelief and lack of judgment so deep as to disqualify him from office.

And I think most of the country agrees with me. Justifiably, and for good reason.

*Also an unabashed racist and misogynist.

Why is Mormonism any more ridiculous than any other religion?

[Adder]

Originally Posted by Cletus Miller

But maybe without the cuts, there would have been 10% annual *contraction* from 2001-2008. Then the net "growth" resulting from the cuts would be phenomenal.

There is nothing that dictates that the true baseline size of the economy is the prior year.

Yes, one needs to assume something about the base case. You can choose to assume something extreme if you want. That's silly, of course, and if you're really curious you can go find what the people who model these thing if you want.

[Adder]

Originally Posted by sgtclub

Why is Mormonism any more ridiculous than any other religion?

I tend to favor the candidate who seems least likely to believe in his professed religion and agree that I don't see Mormonism any differently.

[Adder]

In this instance, Norquist, Klobuchar, bad. Coburn good.

[Cletus Miller]

Originally Posted by Adder

Yes, one needs to assume something about the base case. You can choose to assume something extreme if you want. That's silly, of course, and if you're really curious you can go find what the people who model these thing if you want.

But that's part of the point. The choice of prior-year-actual as a baseline is itself argumentative in this circumstance, especially when comparing 2001-2010 growth to all post-war growth, without any (non-inflation-related) adjustment.

[Cletus Miller]

Originally Posted by Adder

In this instance, Norquist, Klobuchar, bad. Coburn good.

In what instance is Norquist "good"? At least in your view.

[sebastian_dangerfield]

Originally Posted by sgtclub

Why is Mormonism any more ridiculous than any other religion?

Let's go with a comparison to the Big Three.

1. Judaism is probably the most sensible and credible religion becuase it is basically common sense rules for living embroidered with divine myths. Why the embroidery? Because you needed myths to create authority to compel the population to follow the rules. But if you consider any Talmudic debates, you'll see logic more than religion.

2. Christianity co-opted the rules of Judaism, and added the somewhat unrealistic, but nevertheless laudable teachings of Jesus. Sadly, it also centralized into a Church, which is basically a gaudy, silly bureacratic mess, obsessed with bizarre and inane rituals.

3. Islam is the Godfather III of the bunch. It's a contradictory mess of pieces of the first two bastardized into a political/legal framework by an oppressed and deeply resentful culture. It's the sequel no one needed that has, unfortunately, persisted like the Rocky Horror Picture Show.

I don't address Buddhism and Hinduism because they are more personal than community-based.

But what do the Big Three share? They all took hold a long time ago, and the alleged historical facts underpinning them can never be completely validated or debunked. They've also stood the test of time, which many followers can misapprehend as proof they are earnest, or at least more than cynical frauds started by proven con men.

Mormonism, on the other hand, is recent, and can be proven beyond any contrary argument to have been created by a charlatan, a criminal of notorious and embarrassing history. The record of Smith's probable mental illness and sociopathic nature is not in question. And the divine story he wove is so bizarre, and so contrary to the historical record, one cannot accept the Book of Mormon as much more than science fiction. That Joseph Smith is recorded as having created this stuff from behind a sheet, allegedly reading stones immersed in water, in a cabin in upstate New York (a hotbed of religious cults in his day), only renders the myth more ludicrous.

Those belonging to old faiths at least have the excuse that they can never know how much of what they believe in their gospels or verses actually took place. Mormons who are honest with themselves know they're worshipping the ravings of at best a lunatic, at worst a craven degenerate who hated women and blacks and sought nothing more than to fuck as many of a "flock" of deluded female followers as he could. It's nonsense, and I would hope as a country we would question the fitness of any candidate professing to believe something so objectively absurd.

[Hank Chinaski]

Mormons who are honest with themselves know they're worshipping the ravings of at best a lunatic, at worst a craven degenerate who hated women and blacks and sought nothing more than to fuck as many of a "flock" of pathetic deluded female followers as he could. It's nonsense, and I would hope as a country we would questions the fitness of any candidate professing to believe something so objectively absurd.

if I could start over I'd be Mormon on the off chance I could nail a chick from BYU's dance team.

[Adder]

Originally Posted by Cletus Miller

In what instance is Norquist "good"? At least in your view.

Good point. The other's tend to flop around in my estimation.

[sgtclub]

Originally Posted by sebastian_dangerfield

Let's go with a comparison to the Big Three.

1. Judaism is probably the most sensible and credible religion becuase it is basically common sense rules for living embroidered with divine myths. Why the embroidery? Because you needed myths to create authority to compel the population to follow the rules. But if you consider any Talmudic debates, you'll see logic more than religion.

2. Christianity co-opted the rules of Judaism, and added the somewhat unrealistic, but nevertheless laudable teachings of Jesus. Sadly, it also centralized into a Church, which is basically a gaudy, silly bureacratic mess, obsessed with bizarre and inane rituals.

3. Islam is the Godfather III of the bunch. It's a contradictory mess of pieces of the first two bastardized into a political/legal framework by an oppressed and deeply resentful culture. It's the sequel no one needed that has, unfortunately, persisted like the Rocky Horror Picture Show.

I don't address Buddhism and Hinduism because they are more personal than community-based.

But what do the Big Three share? They all took hold a long time ago, and the alleged historical facts underpinning them can never be completely validated or debunked. They've also stood the test of time, which many followers can misapprehend as proof they are earnest, or at least more than cynical frauds started by proven con men.

Mormonism, on the other hand, is recent, and can be proven beyond any contrary argument to have been created by a charlatan, a criminal of notorious and embarrassing history. The record of Smith's probable mental illness and sociopathic nature is not in question. And the divine story he wove is so bizarre, and so contrary to the historical record, one cannot accept the Book of Mormon as much more than science fiction. That Joseph Smith is recorded as having created this stuff from behind a sheet, allegedly reading stones immersed in water, in a cabin in upstate New York (a hotbed of religious cults in his day), only renders the myth more ludicrous.

Those belonging to old faiths at least have the excuse that they can never know how much of what they believe in their gospels or verses actually took place. Mormons who are honest with themselves know they're worshipping the ravings of at best a lunatic, at worst a craven degenerate who hated women and blacks and sought nothing more than to fuck as many of a "flock" of deluded female followers as he could. It's nonsense, and I would hope as a country we would question the fitness of any candidate professing to believe something so objectively absurd.

Sorry, I just don't see it. Your argument seems to be that Mormonism is worse because it is newer and we can prove for certain that it's based on bunk. In my mind, the only difference between the big 3 and Mormonism is that the big 3 are older. They are all based on bunk. Period. End. Of. Story.

This is not to say that many of the teachings of these religions are not worthy and historically important (or perhaps critical) in human evolution. But they are all based on fantasy and to rule out a candidate solely based on one of these religions as opposed to another blows my mind.

[Cletus Miller]

Originally Posted by sgtclub

Sorry, I just don't see it. Your argument seems to be that Mormonism is worse because it is newer and we can prove for certain that it's based on bunk. In my mind, the only difference between the big 3 and Mormonism is that the big 3 are older. They are all based on bunk. Period. End. Of. Story.

This is not to say that many of the teachings of these religions are not worthy and historically important (or perhaps critical) in human evolution. But they are all based on fantasy and to rule out a candidate solely based on one of these religions as opposed to another blows my mind.

You are aware that there is no way to know whether any muslim is a terrorist and/or wants to impose Sharia law on the USA, right?

[sgtclub]

Originally Posted by Cletus Miller

You are aware that there is no way to know whether any muslim is a terrorist and/or wants to impose Sharia law on the USA, right?

Huh?

[Cletus Miller]

Originally Posted by sgtclub

Huh?

Herm Cain:

"You have peaceful Muslims and you have militant Muslims – those that are trying to kill us. And so when I said I wouldn't be comfortable [appointing a Muslin to his cabinet or as a judge] I was thinking about the ones that are trying to kill us"

...

"I do not believe in Sharia law in American courts. I believe in American laws in American courts, period."

Fucking Magnets, How Do They Work?

[Gattigap]

Sebby,

If you didn't happen to have followed Weed's advice and watched the Tonys, go find a YouTube clip of the kid singing "I Believe" from the Parker and Stone show, The Book of Mormon. You'll love it.