I don’t want to get too political here, because you guys have a tendency to act civil in the comments when we talk politics, and civility has no place on the Internet. However, a couple of TV stars said dumb things over the weekend, and I think it’s worth noting. First, as I’m sure you’re already aware, last Friday on “Piers Morgan,” Kirk Cameron said something that I personally thought was very backwards and moronic, specifically that he thought homosexuality is “unnatural and destructive.” And people wonder why Kirk Cameron celebrates his birthday alone. What is homosexuality destructive of? The institution of marriage, apparently. He claims the definition of marriage — between a man and a woman — is as old as dirt. You know what else is as old as dirt? Dirt. I have no idea why soil gets a say in the matter, but there you go (video below). Also worth noting: I just found out that Kirk Cameron refuses to take photos alone with women. That’s just plain crazycakes.
It should be noted that Tracey Gold, Kirk Cameron’s sensible, more intelligent sister on “Growing Pains” was quick to note on Twitter that she’s a supporter of the LGBT community. Take that for what it’s worth. No word from Boner Stabbone because he’s hanging out with the dirt (too soon?)
Speaking of Twitter, the other big political controversy over the weekend involved Rush Limbaugh’s comments about Sandra Fluke. I won’t get into my feeling on Limbaugh because we’re supposed to avoid the overuse of inappropriate language on this site. Let’s just say that “fat piece of sh*t” doesn’t begin to cover it. At any rate, Andrew-Breitbart (RIP) defender and “The Middle” mom, Patricia Heaton, also wrongly believes that the Sandra Fluke controversy is about taxpayers picking up the tab for birth control. I would like to remind Mrs. Heaton that this is not about taxpayers; it’s about private insurers picking up the bill. The issue is whether the government should compel a private insurer associated with a religious institution to pay for birth control. The taxpayer has no dog in this fight. The taxpayer is hanging out with dirt and Boner Stabbone. I assure you, Mrs. Heaton, that your millions are safe from the likes any 30-year-old law students who enjoy a little of the strange.
Anyway, Patricia Heaton Tweeted a lot of stupid stuff and then quit Twitter, which is typical of celebrities who are embarrassed by their own actions. Someone, however, screenshot Heaton’s Tweets before they were taken down. Here’s a gander.
Here’s Cameron speaking about gay marriage on “Piers Morgan.”
Before you folks leave your comments below, I would also like to note that the language restriction does not apply to comments. Have your fun.
![[avatar]](http://p.uproxxcdn.com/photo/4006/thumb)
![[image]](http://cdn.uproxx.com/wp-content/thumbnails/130/110/2013/01/childrens-hospital-season-3-e1357841248182-150x150.jpg)
![[image]](http://cdn.uproxx.com/wp-content/thumbnails/130/110/2012/12/Scrubs_pdvd_127-e1354639390845-150x150.jpg)
![[image]](http://cdn.uproxx.com/wp-content/thumbnails/130/110/2012/11/Celebs_TeensofTV_EdenSher1-150x150.png)
![[image]](http://cdn.uproxx.com/wp-content/thumbnails/130/110/2012/03/00000031-7122-150x150.jpg)
The only celebrity whose political views matter is Nick Nolte’s crow.
I won’t weigh in on either topic until I hear what Eddie from “Full House” has to say.
did you mean “Family Matters”? Or did you mean the 75 yr old man that DJ Tanner “adopts” in season 5 episode 7, because I could totally see you meaning that. [www.tv.com]
I can’t believe I made that mistake. I can’t even look at myself in the mirror.
I feel the same way about Balki from “Step by Step.”
/sorry Danger, you deserve it.
I definitely deserve it. To quote Tony Montana from Goodfellas, “I’ll take your bullets.”
I fashion all my political views based on what Waldo Faldo says.
@Hobbestetrician, I always loved when Uncle Phil threw him out of the house.
Fuck the whigs. There, I said it.
Toryism or GTFO!
Gentlemen, gentlemen … Let’s remember who our real enemy is here — the Irish.
And we pay attention to what Kirk Cameron says… why?
I love how his anti-homosexuality stance is so general: “I think that it’s uh… it’s-it’s-it’s unnatural, it’s-it’s-it’s detrimental, and, uh, ultimately destructive to so many, uh, of the foundations of civilization.”
And what foundations would those be, Kirk?”
/Gay marriage FTW
I would think someone who can afford to attend Georgetown Law should be able to afford a few boxes of condoms. Maybe even splurge for the fancy ones, ribbed for her pleasure. I recommend the fire and ice ones.
That’s not exactly the issue. Apparently, there’s all sorts of women’s problems that “birth control” gets prescribed for. Things that involve words like “ovarian cysts,” which make me no longer want to stick my penis in there.
As Mo noted, UU, that’s not what this is about. Fluke testified before Congress about a friend who has ovarian cysts and was prescribed the pill by a doctor to deal with it. It’s a common occurrence, but Limbaugh insisted that Fluke was “a slut,” “a prostitute” and having so much sex that he was surprised she could walk straight.
(He’s since apologized for his “poor word choice.” I guess he meant to call her a “strumpet” or a “harlot” or something else whore-ish.)
My wife was prescribed the pill when she was 14 to deal with an inherited medical condition. This is fairly common. And maybe if Republicans had thought to talk to, you know, some actual women or doctors about this issue, they’d understand it.
Otto, I see your point but another option would for her to get her health insurance from somewhere other than Georgetown U. I’m not a fan of the government forcing a private insurer associated with a religious institution to pay for birth control. Guess it’s the libertarian in me.
I’m a Catholic, and if they were forcing Georgetown itself to pay for it, sure, I could see the point. But they’re not. They’re requiring a secular insurance company to cover it, and I don’t think the religious objections transfer to the insurer. (And I should add, Catholic health organizations are fine with the new compromise that puts it on the insurer.)
But if you allow this, then what’s next? Do insurers get to deny coverage to gay and lesbian employees because they have a religious objection? Are the costs of child birth covered in the case of an out-of-wedlock child? What about a child from a mixed-faith couple?
Once this wedge is out there — and especially once you let secular insurers use it as cover — then there’s no stopping it. An insurance company will use whatever excuse they can to deny coverage, and if you don’t think they’ll hide behind God regardless of their own beliefs, then you haven’t dealt with many insurers.
Free is never free. Everything has a cost associated with it. Should the cost be imposed on every person carrying insurance? No, coverage should be an option to be chosen by the insured. The problem we get into this country is everybody sensationalizes this stuff and complicates it beyond what it truly is.
I back this up. Those fire and ice ones are the best.
Check “The Slut’s” cell-phone expense before crying about her exorbitant cost of birth-control pills……..
Do they come in Magnums? I am just asking because of my monster dong.
Otto, the wedge was already out there, and it never got to all that selective denial of service. The wedge has been in existence, somebody just finally pointed it out and then everyone decided to be outraged that the wedge was there to begin with. I know that the tax-payers don’t have to pay for her birth control pills, but the remainder of the people on the Georgetown health plan do through their premiums.
Free is never free. Everything has a cost associated with it. Should the cost be imposed on every person carrying insurance?
So we get to pick and choose? Can I call up my health insurance company and tell them I don’t want to be charged for the treatment of Type II Diabetes because those fat assholes deserve it?
I know that the tax-payers don’t have to pay for her birth control pills, but the remainder of the people on the Georgetown health plan do through their premiums.
You really think birth control pills are driving up their premiums considerably? Really?
I know that the tax-payers don’t have to pay for her birth control pills, but the remainder of the people on the Georgetown health plan do through their premiums.
Women pay premiums too, that’s how insurance works, but because of the “religious objections” of some people they don’t get the full benefit of that health care plan. And if you really want to keep the cost of insurance down, you pay for preventative care like, say… Birth Control! Which is a hell of a lot cheaper than having to pay for someone’s pregnancy and subsequent childrearing.
This whole issues has nothing to do with saving money or making baby jesus cry, its just a way for certain people to feel self righteous about their own ignorance and misogyny.
you’d think with Patricia Heaton being type cast as an overwhelmed and exasperated mother with an idiot husband she’d be all for tons of free birth control.
Ya know, of all the celebrities out in Hollywood, with the BEYOND STUPID leftists, you have to pick on the EASIEST target of Kirk Cameron? Wow, how brave you are.
The man thinks a frickin banana is proof that God is real. Was this the easiest assignment you’ve ever had on here????
As far as Heaton is concerned, news flash folks, she is right. It isn’t YOUR JOB to pay for other’s people’s birth control. But if she’s the dumb one, then you can start paying for my condoms, homie.
You say there are liberals in Hollywood who’ve said things stupider than “the banana is proof of God’s existence.” Who are they? Single them out and I’ll lead the mockery.
Holy shit, you have to be functionally illiterate. NOBODY is requesting that taxpayers pay for birth control. That’s not the rule under discussion, it’s not what Fluke was testifying about, it’s a fucking strawman (look it up).
Heaton is a fucking idiot as are you for defending her. She spouted off about a topic without even the remotest fundamental understanding of the story. When it became apparent that she was completely wrong, she ran and hid. Rush and O’Reilly made up the substance of the testimony so they could say outrageous things; you ate it up because you don’t bother to read source materials (or much of anything, apparently).
We’re not falling for that banana in the tailpipe trick!
People actually watch that Piers Morgan show?
Kirk Cameron has an opinion. Dustin has an opinion. Everyone has an opinion, whoop-tee-doo. I dont give a shit. More Annies boobs or GTFO.
If your employer won’t cover birth control because they are cheap then yes, they should be forced to do so. If you are demanding that religious organizations or those affiliated with them should have to pay for something that goes against their religious beliefs, that’s where you lose my support.
The problem is that churches now operate for profit businesses, which include having employees who are covered by health insurance.
That’s the issue. Those organizations being held to the same standard as all other organizations, as well they should be. And, bear in mind, something like 8 states ALREADY require them to cover it. Including Georgia.
And if you don’t hold those organizations to those standards…..can health insurance also disclaim out of wedlock pregnancies?
Rush Limbaugh, who railed about drug addicts before being exposed as a prescription shopping hillbilly heroin addict probably has insurance cover his Viagra.
And second….Kirk Cameron, and all these other fundies believe homosexuality is destructive because they think everyone can be swayed by the lure of penises, parades, and sassy hats. Why? Because their grip on their heterosexuality is weak enough that they COULD be swayed by the lure of penises, parades and sassy hats.
Truly heterosexual men recognize that nothing could chip away at the attraction to the female form.
“Truly heterosexual men recognize that nothing could chip away at the attraction to the female form.”
Except a Jon Hamm wink and a smile. That’s tough to resist.
Yeah, that is the irony here. Boner pills have been covered, even though they are intended purely for sex. The birth control pill, widely used by doctors to regulate a number of hormonal issues, is not.
As for Jon Hamm, I am flatered and maybe a little curious, but I simply don’t go in for those backdoor shenanigans.
Viagra is NOT a birth-control option…..
…not taking Viagra can be a birth-control option
Viagra is not a birth control option….it is the exact opposite. It is a necessity for some men to HAVE sex. And insurance covers it because having sex is a “quality of life” issue.
Do you not see the disconnect in that? Covering one medication to help men have sex, while not covering another medication because “sluts should pay for it themselves”?
Free birth control for some. Small American flags for others.
-Kang/Kodos 2012
This made me happy. [sclipo.com]
+1
Food for thought: If allowing some employers not to pay for contraceptive coverage amounts to a “contraception ban” then not requiring every employer to buy every employee a gun means you’re being denied the right to bear arms. I say contraception and guns for all!
Look, on the one hand I hate Kirk Cameron, on the other…this is what the guy believes. I disagree with him but honestly? That’s his opinion. This is the exact same shit as the beauty queen who didn’t like gay marriage getting dumped on by Perez Hilton. When you ask someone a direct question and they say something you don’t like, sometimes you’re the asshole for asking.
Kirk Cameron is an asshole. We can all accept that. But he isn’t a lawmaker, this isn’t a mover and a shaker of American public policy. When a politician says he doesn’t believe the earth is round, that’s a major issue that needs to be debated over.
But this? Really, who gives a shit. People have different opinions and even if you’re a celebrity and you open your mouth in front of the mic, at what point do we just sort of say “I don’t agree with you.” and let that be the end of the argument?
“How do you feel about black people?”
“I don’t like them”
“Well….that’s ok. At least you’re not a politician.”
When people go about spreading messages of hate, it becomes more acceptable to more like-or-weak-minded people to think that way….eventually INFLUENCING policy. This is a problem.
They have a RIGHT to their opinion, but we have not only a right, but an OBLIGATION to point out that their opinion is wrong, damaging, and hateful. His opinion is what is damaging to society. And it’s not like it’s an opinion he generally keeps to himself. He promotes it. Regularly.
But here’s the problem with that: at what point does your OBLIGATION become just as oppressive? What I’m saying is, when every single statement uttered by someone becomes a war of words, when are we just shutting people up if we don’t like what they’re saying?
In that scenario you mentioned, yeah that’s how I’d take it. If the guy isn’t hurting people or actively going out and murdering people…let him be a racist. That’s his choice. If Kirk Cameron wants to say that or even sell books and movies based on that and people buy them, that’s sort of just something we have to live with.
thecursor is right. Morgan should’ve focused his questions on the upcoming season of Growing Pains, the real reason Kirk Cameron was on the talk show to begin with.
I honestly have no earthly idea as to why that motherfucker was on that show. He seems like such a “left field” guest. I know he’s got a new movie out and they’ve been promoting the hell out of it on conservative blogs and shit.
He was on the show because he is only noteworthy now for his hate speech.
And again, “let him be racist” is all fine and dandy until you realize that having someone say those things makes people who already lean that way that much more resilient in their position. No one thinks they are wrong is ONE other person agrees with them.
TFBuckFutter is right. Freedom of speech is totally overrated and anyone who holds a different opinion should be waterboarded until they change it.
Demosthenes, You don’t understand the 1st Amendment if you think private citizens calling someone an idiot for holding stupid opinions violates it.
Hint: Freedom of Speech only applies to the Government. The Government can’t punish you (for the most part) for your speech. That’s it. Morons thinking that people getting boycotted for the stupid shit they say, and eventually losing their job is some kind of Freedom of Speech issue are just that….morons.
I understand the 1st Amendment just fine. You however, missed the point of my strawman.
Sorry….how was your post not a sarcastic suggestion that I believe in (or have the ability to) infringing on the 1st Amendment?
More importantly, since when did mocking someone’s absurd opinion become a constitutional issue?
That’s the beauty of this country: you’re entitled to your dumbass opinion, and I’m entitled to make fun of it. If calling a public figure (as much as it pains me to apply that label to him) out for an ignorant opinion is considered oppressive, call me Mothafucking Stalin. Seems to me Cameron is the one pushing a view, and the response is largely defensive of the LGBT community. Seems to me the oppression is very one sided.
(I do understand your hypothetical of the possibility of contrasting views being equally oppressive, I just don’t think it’s applicable here)
There’s also a difference between oppressing IDEAS and oppressing PEOPLE. “I think we should spend taxes on this.” “Shut up! You’re wrong and stupid! We should spend taxes on this!” is much different than “I think it’s wrong to be (black, Asian, white, gay, short, ginger, anything else people can’t control)”.
That’s not an “idea” or an “opinion”. It’s just ignorance and bigotry. “I don’t agree with (a person’s existence)” is not a debate.
Whatever your opinion is on this issue can we all agree the word “slut” should be used for real sluts like Lindsy Lohan and the cast of The Jersey Shore.
Agreed, and anyone who wears a “Slut” t-shirt. They’re just asking for it.
Lindsey’s not technically a slut. She’s technically a drug addict who does slutty things.
I mean, as long as we’re being picky.
Paris Hilton though is totally a slut.
Can we also agree that sluts are awesome? Because they are.
I agree 100% – sluts rule. How many men would still be virgins if it weren’t for the tireless (and thankless) efforts of society’s sluts?
/raises hand
Agreed!
*Bangs gavel* Case dismissed.
Why are birth-control pills or condoms an insurable event…?
Because it costs an insurance company a shitload more money to insure a kid (not to mention his birth) than to give you a few bucks a month to make sure you don’t have one. The same reason regular checkups are usually free or nearly free with most insurance.
No offense Alton……but that is ridiculous reasoning……
Why aren’t boob jobs, nose jobs and penis-enlargement creams covered by insurance…?
…because they are options NOT required for health (other than a husband’s mental health, perhaps)
Because female birth control is prescribed for medical conditions other than Sluticockus.
Condoms are not covered, nor should they be. This particular instance is regarding ovarian cysts, and eliminating the most common (and cheapest, mind you) treatment option, which just so happens to be birth control pills.
And yes, the sole purpose of my response was the inclusion of sluticockus.
Why are birth-control pills or condoms an insurable event…?
Condoms aren’t, and whoever you’re listening to who said that’s even part of the debate is a moron.
Birth control is covered because doctors prescribe it.
Viagra is currently covered, and none of the modern-day Puritans in the GOP ever had a problem with that.
Otto…..
…the dopey lying whore….or slut, if you will…….did NOT want her birth control paid for due to her medical condition……she just WANTED it…..and wanted someone else to pay for it….
Basically the entire “liberal agenda”………gimme…..and YOU pay….
(words omitted were…lunatic fringe, has-been, totally unoriginal, mindless beehive…….and the rest of the sad spectrum of liberal “thought” that is slowly dying out with the sixties boomer generation….)
Whoa….wait Otto…..you are a fuckin’ genius……you’ve identified (in viagra) the conservative double-standard)
Imagine…..insurance plans that only cover prostate exams for men and pap smears for women……..testicle exams for men and mammography for (mostly) women…..
(i.e. Viagra coverage is NOT a good argument for what “the slut” was bitching about……a conservative Has to help liberal “thought”….or they would get lost in the ozone)
Can someone help translate Observerwwtdd for me? I left my Dipshit-to-English dictionary at the office.
Seriously, though, please keep ranting and raving about how this young woman is a slut. I have no doubt that line of argument is going to be a major winner for the Republicans this fall.
I got ya covered Otto. I think this is what he MEANT to say. With an ellipsis indicating the omission of words and all:
Whoa…(, even after trolling my absurd position for several hours I have had an epiphany.)…wait Otto…(, after careful consideration I truly and honestly believe that)…you are a fuckin’ genius…(. Despite my previous statements to the contrary I now recognize that) …you’ve identified (in viagra) the conservative double-standard.
Imagine…(no possessions. I wonder if you can. No need for greed or hunger. A brotherhood of man. Imagine all the people sharing all the world. And in such a world)…insurance plans that only cover prostate exams for men and pap smears for women…(would be considered largely insufficient, as they are in every other first world country. Most of the second world countries too, now that you mention it. Come to think of it, what is Canada? Technically I think it’s a first world country, but it feels that gives them too much credit. Speaking of Canada, last time I was there, I personally administered just over a thousand)…testicle exams for men and mammography for (mostly) women…(It was the best vacation ever.)
(i.e. Viagra coverage is NOT a good argument for what “the slut” was bitching about…(because as we’ve covered multiple times in this conversation, you and I both know that Viagra has nothing to do with this argument whatsoever. I too find it ludicrous that someone clearly as uneducated as myself once thought that)…a conservative Has to help liberal “thought”…(especially considering that up until this point I have not demonstrated the capacity for rational thoughts of my own. Also, on an unrelated side note, you should know that it’s important to have a good parachute on your model rockets)…or they would get lost in the ozone)
Gentlemen…..
…allow me to clarify (i.e. simplify)..
Liberals are fucking crybabies who cannot think rationally.
Oh, Observer. All hat, no cowboy. You’re a good sport tho, irrational as you may be.
Mushroom (eater)…..
I’ll go easy on you….because it is clear you are confused…
following current nomenclature….(i.e. “reverse day”)….
Liberal = bad
Conservative = good
Thank you for taking it easy on us simple folk. My masta letten me learn my letters and all.
That said, I should point out that the logic of your last post refers to using “reverse day” terms, then goes on to assert that in said “reverse day” “liberal = bad” and “conservative = good.” Leading one to surmise that in fact the correct application (ie “normal day”) would be liberal = good and conservative = bad. Either you are a phenomenal troll (probable) or a closeted liberal.
Ignoring the questionable nature of your foundational assertions, and assuming you in fact intended to demean liberals, I would kindly ask that you provide the logical elements of your conclusion, as you have yet to add any substantive fact or germane contention to the discussion.
But on the other hand, as a probably visitor to the site wwtdd, I’m sure your motives are as much to get a reaction out of liberals as they are to engage in any serious debate (side note: I love the narrative of that site for the very same reason). Furthermore, you are only a few hours away from getting 3 days worth of entertainment out of a ho-hum post, so there’s something to be said about that.
And for the record, I do enjoy mushrooms as they are especially tasty on a good burger or stuffed and deep fried. Not a fan of the psychedelic ones tho (as I assume you were referring). I did that on the 4th of July in college. Awesome at first, horrifying in the end. Never again.
Mushroom…
…I’m sure you are trying….so…
In the olden days Liberals were for freedom, free trade, less government control, etc etc etc …..and Conservatives tried to protect the King and his minions from adjusting to changes….
Personally…..and this may be hate speech……I don’t like Aristocrats and their lackeys…..therefore I hate all Socialists….(to a degree – my wife’s mother’s cousin is an avowed socialist……but he is a good guy)
Also….Mushroom….
…you should try the “real” use of ellipses…..soon….
On another point…..I’m sure WWTDD will one day post an update…….I think the celebs are BOUND to do something (not something interesting….just something)…..soon….
Ah yes, the Classical Liberalism definition.
Although (putting my largely useless Poli Sci degree to good use) I would point out that the term “liberal” derived it’s definition at that time from the desire to change the status quo. So by the TRUE definition, both Occupiers and Tea Partiers would be considered “Liberal.”
Interesting to group Socialists and Aristocrats into the same group, as were decidedly on opposite sides of the political spectrum. At least when both were still relevant.
Socialism is horrid. It’s a deeply, deeply flawed system that breeds nothing but laziness and kills innovation. Conversely, unregulated markets don’t harmonize, they cannibalize. And the major difference between Adam Smith’s ideology and reality is the barrier to entry and required infrastructure caters itself to trusts and monopolies, not to mention our economy uses market based pricing, not cost based. The best system is somewhere in the middle, but there is no room for reason in today’s political climate.
Then again, my father-in law – who is awesome in every other aspect – is a hardcore Ron Pauly. I can live with diversity of thought.
I do often use an ellipsis as an indicator of dramatic pause. But given that you got called out on it – and that I used it to leverage a joke – I’ve been doing my best to avoid it.
I think the long pauses between posts at wwtdd – and the subsequent lame excuses – actually make me like the site more. I tend to gravitate to fellow procrastinators (for example, I’m sitting at my desk with a daunting workload and a deadline later today, yet still found the time to go back 3 pages on WG and formulate a retort).
Mushroom….
…and yet Apple is still in business and Microsoft waits to pounce…
These barriers to entry are insurmountable…
Because Apple received protection and Microsoft was kept in check by anti-trust lawsuits in the late 90s.
My internet bill increases every year disproportionately to cost because they have territorial agreements with other large telecom companies. There is no other option.
My point isn’t that Capitalism is bad – I work for a small business for God’s sake – but that unregulated markets don’t necessarily produce a competitive market. It’s all about competition.
The biggest “barriers to entry” are the legal ones…..
Why do you think Cable and Internet providers were so eager to secure town-by-town “franchise” rights way back when……
Who is going to do the “regulatory oversight”…? Wholly disinterested martians?
The biggest barriers to entry are financial. Every legal barrier is a result of, and can be reversed by, campaign spending. Even where municipal licensing has been ruled illegal (like my town – thank you liberal local government), telcom companies still own the infrastructure, and it costs too much for someone like ATT to come in and rewire it.
Delegation of the regulatory oversight is an interesting issue. But the fact that everyone has a skin in the game isn’t impetus to abandon the idea. Our current system certainly could use some modernization, but some sort of simple check/balance system should suffice. Of course you could just eliminate campaign contributions and this would all be much easier, but there’s no time for reasonable solutions…
(ellipsis meant to signify trailing off mid sentence – that’s the proper application, right?)
I’m not the one who posted the ellipses criticism………
Barriers to entry are hardly financial…….as any venture capital guy……getting around regulatory “restriction” is usually the problem……..
Why did Google make so much money…..why did Apple recover…
I am not against regulations…..these makes perfect sense:
Massachusetts Cosmetology Licensing Requirements
In order to obtain a license in Barbering, Cosmetology, Nail Technology, Esthetics, or Electrology in the state of Massachusetts, individuals must complete the requirements listed below. Other requirements may apply.
Cosmetologist: 1000 hours
Esthetician: 300 hours
Nail Technician: 100 hours
Electrology: 1100 hours
Barber: 1000 hours
Why SHOULDN’T a barber be trained for 1000 hours to do what my 10 year old did to my 3 year old in 10 minutes….
….and when their mom paints their nails……it seems to take 100 hous….
Of course VC guys would agree – they ALL hate regulation. In other news, drug dealers hate cops.
I should clarify my position. My office is next to a VC firm, and I actually had a conversation with one of my buddies there at lunch today, and he (mostly) validated my opinion. In many markets the financial barrier to entry makes the turn to profitability prohibitively long. This in turn limits the industries where innovation and new money start flowing. In those industries, the economy flourishes: green energy, bio tech, etc… The problem exists in the other industries, which make up the majority of the market place. In these the “old guard” (his words, not mine) have set up a variety of barriers that basically entrench their market position, and keep any new blood from entering. This is why when something bold like Apple going into the phone business happens, it’s big news. These barriers may include legalities, handshake agreements with competitors, and/or business models that just cost a hell of a lot to get into without the margins of other industries. In short, the money may be there, but the opportunity is probably better somewhere else. That is the crux of what I’m saying. A LOT of niches where there are no regulations turn into a closed system, old boys network that has minimal competition.
Conversely, don’t believe that I think all regulation is good. To me the point of regulation is to promote competition. Again, competition breeds all sorts of good for everyone involved (outsourcing notwithstanding).
In fact, your very relevant example of the absurd licensing procedure in Massachusetts I would classify as bad regulation – a point I use in arguments with my liberal friends. I havn’t taken that stance here because I agree with Liberals on the original argument (female birth control was being used as more than just a contraceptive, it was the cheapest of the treatment options, and to restrict it based on religious mores is inappropriate), and somehow I don’t think I need to convince you that bad regulation exists. The evidence and logic I’ve presented recently has been more to illustrate that some regulation is necessary. Balance, my friend, balance.
Oh, and my ellipsis comment was in jest. You did tell me to start using them the right way, afterall…
Technically speaking….
The original argument should have been whether a religion can object to be forced to engage in practices to which it objects……for whatever reason…..
Hard to believe……but ……I am relatively well-aware of the uses of birth control “pills” as a medicinal tool rather than simply contraception.
Your VC guy is either lying (very likely….it’s habitual with them), has higher ROI requirements than others, mistaken (again very likely in their “class”), a poor judge of success, or something else.
My point was that capital formation is not that difficult in general but for any “specific case” being studied reviewed it is impossible.
In other words……a “good” (marketable or sellable) idea will find money…..just ask Pillow Pets and all their imitators…..
Large corporations set up combinations all the time, small companies find “angel” investors, etc.
The biggest obstacle to doing business is “not allowed” or licensing restrictions. The dynamic is not that “every” undertaking is successful but that a variety of undertakings will be.
TECHNICALLY speaking, the original issue was about a 3rd party, secular organization denying treatment, not GU itself (I know, GU and it’s students pay for it, but I said “technically” dammit). And as a proud graduate of a Jesuit institution, in my experiences birth control pills were handed out like candy (thank God). I certainly understand the opposing position to prescribing birth control, and I think in a lot of ways they have a point. The problem is the precedent it sets. There are a lot bizarre religious practices out there, and if an organization such as Georgetown doesn’t require you to be of a certain faith to attend, it is wrong to force you to adhere to those mores. What about companies with religious affiliations? Would they be able to deny service to employees? At what point would they be able to start requiring/prohibiting other treatment options? This particular case certainly falls in a shade of gray, but it’s a slippery slope to a very bad place.
As far as my VC buddy goes, I seriously doubt he’s lying. Acting pompous? That I don’t doubt. And I think we’re having a disagreement of scale. There will always be room for the pillow pets of the world – CPG (which his firm doesn’t deal with) is one of the easiest and cheapest markets to break into (thank you, infomercials). Angel investors are awesome – a small company that I’ve freelanced for is the product of a rich, bored housewife in northern California. But even in CPG there NEEDS to be regulation, mostly in consumer protections (or else we’d still have low cost, highly carcinogenic products on the market). I’m not saying all regulation is good – in fact there’s some we could do away with – but some is necessary.
My concern is much larger in scale. In an absence of regulation, resources consolidate, and consolidation of said resources breeds a strong separation of classes while limiting viable competition. Look to our own country’s economic history, and it’s littered with this, usually broken up either by economic booms or strong (excessively, imo) leftist political movements that shake things up. Again, I’m not saying the far left is right either. Both too much regulation and too little kills competition – and this isn’t really debatable, it’s been proven in the real world over and over.
I’m not preaching socialism, or over-governance – I’m preaching moderation.
The truth is….”The Slut” was making up most of her testimony…….she has already admitted it…..
The “real” issue here is why Kirk Cameron and Patrica Heaton are criticized for bringing sense to Hollywood whilst the likes f@ggot Matt Damon and useless Sean Spicoli Penn are glorified for indulging in their world fantasies….
Where did she recant her testimony? Link?
Here is one link…..
…I’ll keep checking….
[observerwwtdd.tumblr.com]
I like how you made it easy for me to disregard your entire argument by using a slur. Saved me a bunch of time.
How is pointing out that Sean Penn is useless to be considered a “slur”?
Limbaugh has a f@ gut, your argument is poorly phrased and the ellipsis is only used as an indication that words have been omitted.
the ellipsis is only used as an indication that words have been omitted.
Or, in this instance, thought as well.
. . . that’s a burn . . .
Otto…
…you make a great echo…..
…and nothing else…
Observer, you are a clown, and nothing else.
(Check out those commas!)
Junior…..
….you are…..a nothing…….
(words and phrases omitted …..for Junior’s comprehension)
Most sympathizers of that damned granny-’ol-pussy are assholes. Fuck ‘em all…
Remember how awesome the day started thanks to Christina Hendrick’s titties?
Please use the proper term “Sliznut”
Were Adam and Eve married by law? I mean I always thought Adam and Eve were just a couple of freaks thrown into a garden together, naming animals and banging like the animal that would be called a rabbit until we came to this point, with me on the internet.
Weren’t their children (let alone their childrens’ children) super incest babies? As my corrupt heathen brain understands it, Eve was fashioned out of Adam’s rib because Adam was bored or something.
Holy shit, that means she was genetically male. People have been misreading the Bible all this time. God’s totally cool with homosexuality. I mean, he started it for chrissakes.
Also why is it that tax payers are so upset about paying for something like health care, but not worried about all that tax money that goes to paying for things like jet rides, helicopters, weapons and the dozens of other things that are actually wasted at the state and federal level.
Because they’re sheep who have to be told what to be mad at.
Cameron’s comments are utterly devoid of compassion and empathy. Which is totally acceptable because gay people can be reduced to the act of gay sex because what else could they possibly be thinking about all the time constantly? Sex is all that gay people are and do. So so simple, people.
In his defense, Christ never really said anything about being compassionate or empathetic of our fellow men’s needs.
I believe my favorite quote from Jesus was the one he said about the leper….I believe it was “Fuck that guy, he should get a job.”
Or remember when he said it would be easier for a camel to go through the eye of the needle than it would be for a poor man to get into heaven?
I love watching the Republican debates, where they seem to believe the central message of the New Testament is “get rich or die tryin’”
Don’t forget about the time he knocked over the beggar’s pans, then handed all the money to the money exchangers to invest so that the beggars would reap the trickle down benefits of more jobs.
Jesus said “The good man brings good things out of the good stored up in his heart, and the evil man brings evil things out of the evil stored up in his heart. For out of the overflow of his heart his mouth speaks.”
What a snob!
Remember when he taught that guy to fish and then told him to go fuck himself and get his own equipment?
Do you remember the time Jesus bet the bartender $500 he could piss into that bronze spitoon behind the top-shelf mead?
I remember when turned one loaf of bread into enough bread to feed an entire army….
And then charged everyone for it because hey, this shit isn’t free and if you want free bread you learn how to create it magically.
haha I think Republican Jesus is a fantastic concept for a meme.
Let us not forget that Jesus made a point every day to call Mary Magdalene a stupid fucking slut.
Jesus walked on water….and then build a building around the lake, called it his, and charged $10 admission for ice skating.
Republican Jesus is a thing, and has been for a while. Check out this site and enjoy.
Shouldn’t he have a mustache, not a beard, and short gelled up hair and not long hippy hair?
Ask and ye shall receive.
Or, if you believe Ted Nugent, Republican Jesus looks like this.
.
The meek are definitely going to be pissed about that Estate Tax thing.
I never liked Everybody Loves Raymond because that show sucked, but when I heard about Heaton forcing her opinions on cast and crew members, I vowed to never watch her stuff.
I’ve heard that The Middle is pretty good. Don’t care, she’s a nasty piece of work.
Kirk Cameron? Who’s he?
Rush Limbaugh is scum. He first came to my attention when he attacked Donovan McNabb, and as an Eagles’ fan, I hate him.
Limbaugh, or McNabb?
Or both?
Limbaugh. I’m one of those rare Eagles’ fans who still loves Donovan McNabb for what he did for us.
I HAVE AN OPINION.
Patricia Heaton was great in Space Jam.
THAT IS ALL.
Heard that.
I’ll double down on that one!
“What is homosexuality destructive of?”
Buttholes, not that there’s anything wrong with that.
The Catholic Church’s stance on birth control is solely designed to create more Catholics.
That also applies to the Republican stance on education.
Don’t go to college, you’ll stop listening to our shit!
I think religious institutions’ insurance carriers should also have the option to not cover bastard children or divorced women.
Of all of this, I think I’m most offended by Patricia Heaton’s twitter avatar.
Gentlepeople, what I believe we can all agree on is this:
If we can get this picture to trend, maybe we can get Subway to make a statement disowning his statements despite his noted love for their blandwiches, and next year that table will just have a sad little cake.
That, and “Thicke of the Night” was underappreciated.
Maybe the reason so many of these religious folk think people turning gay is a real threat is because sucking a dick actually IS a more appealing option than facing their awful wives every day for the rest of their life but oops, they made a commitment before they bothered to look at a few women naked and compare.
If there’s one thing I’m okay with my tax money going towards, it’s keeping idiots from having more of their stupid fucking kids. Use like 90% of it on free birth control, I’m all for that.
That’s a point I don’t get about the whole birth control/adoption argument….
How do Republicans figure that more orphans will somehow equal lower taxes?
I’d much rather $400 of my tax dollars go to fund an abortion as opposed to $1000+ a month payments to families fostering those children for 18 years.
There is already PLENTY of free birth control out there….
…it’s called “asshole”……everyone’s got one (AND they all stink)
I think that a person should have to apply for a license to have children. The application includes a drug test, a reading comprehension and a verbal quiz to determine whether or not you are a moron.
The Evil Twin, But then what would we do with a completely unpopulated South and Midwest in 2-3 generations?
There already is free birth control–picture Patricia Heaton during sex and you will delay ejaculation until infinity.
HEY! I’m in the midwest… wait, you mentioned a drug test. Damn.
Appears Observerwwtdd is down with anal. That’s something I can get behind.
If there is one thing that was severely lacking on this blog it was divisiveness…..
Too bad this post didn’t actually bring out much of it. Except for the one Obvious Troll.
Wow, I used to just THINK that Patrica Heaton was an over-rated c*nt. Now she’s PROVEN it! Thanks, Patricia Heaton! Don’t worry–maybe someday insurance will cover your face-lifts, too.
These people are M-O-R-O-N-S!!! Please do not vote republican this year!
Ron Paul > Obama
/trollface
Demosthenes…..
Shit on a shingle > Obama….
We won’t have none of that Obama race-mixin here! And don’t expect us to pay for your interracial birth control either!
OK, this was a response to one of those spam things for a meet-black-guys site, and the admins killed the spam. WAAAAAAY out of context now.
Kirk Cameron speaks from the authority of God (who the author ignores). For man, God designed marriage and sex between a man and his wife, from a covenant that is meant to last until they die. But, the point isn’t even that the author thinks Kirk is stupid, but that God’s law is ignored and there is a disconnect between us and Him. Unless we follow and obey Jesus Christ, we will always be disconnected and will suffer for it, even AFTER we die. Grind your teeth and spew out insults and threats all you want, but you are ALL (author included) faced with a choice. Obey God, or not.
It’s okay to disagree with what he said, but let’s not lie about Kirk being alone for his birthday. There were clearly two other people there.
Hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahhahahahahahahahhahahahahahahahahhahahahahahahahahahahhhhhh
Timothy, you’re so fucking dumb! God’s authority?! First of all, whether or not God exists, and I don’t think you or I or anyone are in the least bit qualified to answer that, the Bible explicitly states that he gave us free will. Are you denying that? Do we not have a right to choose who we want to be with? Or if you say that we don’t, then do we not have free will? Or, do you follow every single rule in the Bible? Do you not eat pork or not touch yourself? If you don’t, then you’re a retarded hypocrite picking and choosing the laws you want to follow. God, you are such a fucking dumbass motherfucker it’s unbelievable. You can believe whatever the hell you want, don’t try and force other people to follow whatever dumb fucking laws you’ve decided to cherry pick from the Bible. That would be slavery, asshole.
Marriage is defined as the union of one man and one woman?
Poor Kirk Cameron, it can never get married at all.