The Good Post Gallery

[Lambsbread]

Easy now, gentlemen. Redirect this brawl to the Deluge.

[Okay, maybe Mike Johnson is a competent parliamentarian.]

Obviously most of us are going to disagree with at least parts of this, but it's lucid and as even-handed as one can possibly be about someone like Mrs Thatcher:

Mixed, but clearly lean HP.

HP regarding Chile and South Africa.

FF regarding Falklands and the EU.

Strong woman who fought for her beliefs. But apart from her personal example she didnt do anything to advance the position of women in society. She almost made it a point not to include other women in her cabinet.

Didn't respect that Britain contains four nations and that she didn't have a proper mandate to change Scottish and Welsh societies so radically as she did (she had a constitutional mandate, but not a moral one).

De-industrialization was probably inevitable, but she made it much harsher than it had to be. Her governments treatment of the miners were a disgrace.

Generally not a fan of her brand of Conservatism, which was closer to Classical Liberalism than genuine Conservatism IMO. "There is no such thing as society" is not the words of a true conservative.

[Filuwaúrdjan]

Yes, that is a very good post.

[Okay, maybe Mike Johnson is a competent parliamentarian.]

Particularly the last sentence. That is a very important point to remember when discussing the contemporary right in many countries.

[I spent the winter writing songs about getting better]

Well, neither makes me sad at all, but I voted for the relatively harmless one rather than the servant of genocide and slavery.

How was Thatcher a servant of genocide and slavery?  Shouldn't you show her at least some respect at this time?

All neoliberals were advocating a return to a form of capitalism which clearly kills and enslaves.  This horrible agenda wouldn't be quite so damning if they hadn't also happened to completely succeed in reinstating it.

[I spent the winter writing songs about getting better]

Wow this is old but soooooo good. Just ran across it. We all know someone like krazen would never be able to debunk it:

There are various things one might mean by "overpaid", depending on the standard to which the pay is being compared, and it is worth getting clear on which one we are talking about. In particular, one could be "overpaid":

1. compared to the actual pay obtained by the people in question on the actually existing market, with all the regulations and market distortions that are in place.

2. compared to some external moral standard of the value of the work, which might include non-monetary values.

3. compared to the pay that the work would receive if the entire world were an ECO101-style model free market, with no regulations limiting individual exchange at all.


By standard (1), obviously no profession is underpaid or overpaid, since, tautologically, people are paid what they are paid.

By standard (2), teachers are not overpaid, and CEO's and athletes are, IMHO. Of course others might differ on the underlying philosophical questions.

By standard (3), we are pretty much all overpaid, since the standard of living would be much lower if certain welfare-enhancing medical and technological improvements that depended on co-ordinated state intervention had never occurred. The yellow avatar types would disagree with this, based on what is in my view a naive understanding of the history, psychology and biology of the species, though I generally get the sense people like Gustaf and Franzl wouldn't disagree.

However, when I encounter people claiming that union workers are overpaid, they generally seem to be using none of these criteria. Rather - though it usually isn't explicit - they seem to be using a sort of strange mix of (1) and (3), where we apply (1) to the rest of the economy, keeping fixed the regulations that allow the economy to function as it normally does, but apply (3) to the specific transaction involving the labour of the workers in question, discarding the actually existing labour procedures in favour of individual exchanges between individual workers and their employer. By this standard, yes, teachers are a bit overpaid, as are all union workers, and the more left-wing interlocutor shouldn't deny it, since to do so would be to deny that there is a union wage premium that is advantageous to the worker. But why we should take this funny combination of (1) and (3) as a basis for actual public policy decisions is not clear to me.

[Torie]

Unions in competitive non-ologopolistic industries have next to no impact on wages. The market is a harsh mistress. But the government is a monopoly, so that constraint does not hold for public employees. You need to compare their wages to similar jobs in private industry.

[🐒Gods of Prosperity🔱🐲💸]

All this seems so very far beyond the pale.

It reminds me of a time, when I was living in California, and it came to the ballot--the Westerners love their binding referenda; an excess of democracy if you ask me--anyway, the question came to the ballot of whether it should be allowable to ask one's race on hospital admissions forms.  This was about 2003 maybe.  I forget the exact date.  Anyway, I suppose it seemed important to the population of the California legislature at the time.  (The importance, one side said, was in diagnosing illnesses.  "Black" people, for example, had a much higher incidence of sickle-cell anemia, and knowing if someone was "black" would help in diagnoses of medical conditions.  The other side said that requiring knowledge of someone's race was tantamount to institutionalized bigotry.  It should not be allowed because it was contrary to California's constitution.)  The debate was widely televised, and most informed voters knew at least vaguely about each side's arguments.  At one point, a few days before the vote, a friend of mine was visiting my apartment, and somehow the conversation turned to this particular proposition on the ballot.  He immediately said, "Oh, I'm against that.  It's racist to require someone to state their race on a hospital admissions form.  Um, wait.  Yeah, I think that's it.  That's the racist position, isn't it?" 

AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAaaaah.   Okay, then. 

Dude, stop asking what the "racist" position is or what the "environmentally-unfriendly" position is or whatever position is.  Think for yourself.  It's not as though one group of people is evil and bent on destruction and another group of people farts lilac-scented perfumes and only lives altruistically and wholesome.  (First, there are usually more than two sides to any argument, and second, mostly people just come to the argument with their minds already made up.)

Of course DDT kills bugs that spread malaria.  Of course it also causes all sorts of problems for other species, including humans.  That's pretty much the whole story.  The devil is in the details, and if you have different devils than the other devil, it doesn't make him the devil.  Go out and get a PhD in bioagrochemistry if you're that goddamned interested.  Even then, it may not tell you how to vote, but you'll at least be able to discuss the advantages and disadvantages of its use intelligently. 

As a voter, just get all the info you can, but for heaven's sake, don't go onto a forum populated by twelve-year-old posters and ask what the "right" position is.  (Here, I'm assuming that you're not one of the many twelve-year-old posters that haunt this forum.  If you are, forgive me.)

/rant

[Linus Van Pelt]

To be honest, in looking back at what I wrote, I don't love my own post above from two years ago as much as BRTD appears to. The dichotomy between the actually existing market in (1) and some libertarian model in (3) is kind of silly; there are of course many possible intermediate arrangements where there is still a public sector that makes various kinds of investment but it is less regulatory or less unionized than currently. I take it that normally when someone says that some class of public workers are overpaid, what they mean is that we are overpaying because we could obtain the same level of service for a cheaper price in some such arrangement.

But independent of all that, I don't think you are right about this sector thing Torie. I'm no expert on this, but just Googling the literature a bit, it appears to be a widespread view that there is a union wage premium in the private sector, and to the extent that it differs from the public sector, it tends to be in the opposite direction than you suggest, with the higher wage premium in the private sector. To take one example here is a NBER working paper from 2003 by David Blanchflower and Alex Bryson, finding that the wage premium in the US is 17% for the private sector and 15% for the public sector. Among private industries the biggest they find is in construction, at 41%, which is not monopolistic. As I say, I'm no expert, and I haven't looked at the first-hand data; maybe Snowguy will come along and tell us they left out some low-paid unionized tree-ring counters . But that seems to be the view out there.

[Antonio the Sixth]

Sequel time!

Can we just close the thread? Hash said everything that needed to be said.

Not really, that was pre-majority. Since he got a majority, it's been even worse. To complete that post I made:

-Turned Parliament into an echo chamber. This is more or less common to all majorities, Tory or not, so I won't be a hack and blame just him for that, but he's taken it to such an extent with the omnibus bills which allows him to pack just about everything he wants into bills and rams them through Parliament, sh**tting all over the opposition. Conservative backbenchers are totally useless stooges who just vote party-line (of course, the excessively strong partisanship is an issue for all parties, but Tory backbenchers are a whole new level imo). I haven't heard from my MP (a Tory backbencher) since the election nearly 2 years ago, except the propaganda pamphlet he sends out every few months to prove he's still alive. Again, I won't be a hack and blame just Steve for this, but he's taken it to a whole new level and it is extremely concerning - even if you're more pro-Harpo than I am - to see how this government has stifled parliamentary democracy, debate and accountability. And nobody cares, for a change.

-Our environmental policy has turned into even more of an embarrassing joke at this point. The Tories no longer even try to pretend to give a sh**t about the environment, they just walk out on the international stage and embarrass us. He pulled us out of Kyoto, sure Kyoto was a joke, but it's the symbolism of the act. It's basically as if Harper's cabinet is nothing more than the board of some oil company and Harper is nothing more than an oil lobbyist. He has totally destroyed environmental assessment for economic development projects, massively defunded Environment Canada and scientific research and silenced opposition to his various pipeline schemes (which, once again, involves shipping our natural resources to Asia or the US instead of feeding Ontario or Quebec...). All this in the name of "economic development" and "job creation", with no respect whatsoever for the environment. Harper is a disaster now, but his policies will be disastrous far after he leaves office.

To top it all of, we have a Natural Resources minister (Joe Oliver or something, a forgettable run-of-the-mill Purgatory retard) who goes out there to say that those who oppose Keystone or Pacific Gateway (two pipeline projects, the latter of which is contested by Aboriginal groups, environmentalists etc) are traitors, anti-Canadians and radicals/socialists funded by 'foreign' radicals and socialists (like George Soros...). No, this isn't a joke. This government, again, has only contempt for those who didn't vote for them. It responds to any kind of criticism or opposition with slander, lies, dishonesty and heavy-handed shut downs. "Government of Canada" my ass, more like "Government of the 40% Who Voted Purgatory"

-A slow and steady destruction of the public sector, all in the name of "fiscal responsibility" (perhaps laudable, but this government doesn't give a sh**t about fiscal responsibility in practice). We're being force fed an austerity agenda on the basis of an ideological "small government" agenda which aims to weaken government - particularly the more inconvenient parts of government, like those pesky scientists and their ideas about how the tar sands aren't the coolest thing ever or those environmental assessment boards or those commissions on human rights or women's rights. How dare they criticize Dear Leader?! Justified by lies of the genre that "Canada could end up like Greece", which is, of course, absurd. It has all created a terribly poisonous atmosphere in the public sector, making it very tough for students to find internships or placements and destroying the morale of many employees. It is backed by the detestable climate of public servant-bashing: lazy, inefficient, wasteful, useless, bloated, fat cats etc. (most of which are lies of course). Why can't we run this government like Wal-Mart or McDonalds, goddamn it!

-I might be a bit less critical of this government's austerity agenda if it gave proof that it was actually committed to "fiscal responsibility". But it isn't. It has paid lip service to the accountability agenda it was originally elected on in 2006. Countless ministers have been caught up in ethics scandal, and Harper stood by their side until their position became untenable. Peter McKay going on fishing trips on DND helicopters and taxpayers' money. Bev Oda (who had already lied to Parliament and illegally altered an official document) wanted to stay at a pricier hotel in London ($665 per night for three nights) and $16 orange juice, originally at the expense of the taxpayer. And now Peter Penashue... and the list goes on.

Or, how about the F-35 scandal, which the government is still committed to despite everybody in the world saying how much of a f-up that whole thing was. And how it seems to be costing more and more every week that goes by.

Or maybe how the government is spending tons of tax money on propaganda that tells us how great they are. Or even on propaganda to rewrite the history of the War of 1812 to promote their agenda of jingoistic Canadian nationalism. Thank god 2012 is over, I would have killed myself with more of those "WE DEFENDED OUR COUNTRY@!!!11 AND CANADA WAS BORN" ads.

Also, let's not forget the robocalls scandal. The Tories used robocalls to suppress voting in close ridings in the 2011 election. This is a serious case, but the government never gave a sh**t and killed the original outrage quickly.

However, it's all fine and dandy to extend corporate tax cuts to big businesses like those in the oil sand! We keep subsidizing the fantastic tar sands which are destroying the environment and sure as hell are rich enough to go without federal subsidies, or spending tons on propaganda and jails and fighter jets and guns. But the public servants are all lazy fat cats, and there's no money for the arts, sciences, research, culture, child care, healthcare, human rights, women rights or education. Nope. Who needs that kind of lousy socialist sh**t anyways? Let's run this country like a Wal-Mart.

-A repressive crime policy, rammed through in an omnibus bill, which builds more unneeded super-jails and even stiffer sentences. Abolished the gun registry, sure it was a sh**tfest and wasted money, but it also destroyed the records and registers which were very useful for law enforcement. We almost got a massive internet surveillance bill which would have allowed authorities to monitor the internet, thankfully it was abandoned when everybody realized how stupid it was and how Vic Toews was a massive douchebag. Still, we had more of the same ol' charming rhetoric, those who didn't support internet surveillance were branded by Toews as endorsing child predators. This from the government which said it abolished the long form census because it invaded our privacy and civil liberties. Really?

-A new immigration policy which allows the minister to arbitrarily designated "safe countries" and deny rejected refugee claimants the possibility to appeal. And the wonderfully named "Faster Removal of Foreign Criminals Act" goes too far, allowing the government to deport longtime non-citizens who committed only minor offenses (see editorial here)

-Allowed his backbenchers to re-open the abortion debate, although to his credit he himself has managed to steer clear from social conservative bullsh**t although he condones it (to be fair, he doesn't have much of a choice given how big the socon caucus is and how they might get pissed at him).

Probably forgot a few things, given how massively and catastrophically horrible these past 2 years have been for this country.

In conclusion, Stephen Harper is the worst PM in this country's history and a massive, horrible reactionary scumbag and pile of sh**t. I hope he dies in a fire. I'm kind of ashamed that he's "my" Prime Minister, but I have never felt that he is "my" Prime Minister given how he hates people like me and has nothing but contempt for us. God he sucks balls.
HP

[Lambsbread]

[Mechaman]

Sequel time!

Can we just close the thread? Hash said everything that needed to be said.

Not really, that was pre-majority. Since he got a majority, it's been even worse. To complete that post I made:

-Turned Parliament into an echo chamber. This is more or less common to all majorities, Tory or not, so I won't be a hack and blame just him for that, but he's taken it to such an extent with the omnibus bills which allows him to pack just about everything he wants into bills and rams them through Parliament, sh**tting all over the opposition. Conservative backbenchers are totally useless stooges who just vote party-line (of course, the excessively strong partisanship is an issue for all parties, but Tory backbenchers are a whole new level imo). I haven't heard from my MP (a Tory backbencher) since the election nearly 2 years ago, except the propaganda pamphlet he sends out every few months to prove he's still alive. Again, I won't be a hack and blame just Steve for this, but he's taken it to a whole new level and it is extremely concerning - even if you're more pro-Harpo than I am - to see how this government has stifled parliamentary democracy, debate and accountability. And nobody cares, for a change.

-Our environmental policy has turned into even more of an embarrassing joke at this point. The Tories no longer even try to pretend to give a sh**t about the environment, they just walk out on the international stage and embarrass us. He pulled us out of Kyoto, sure Kyoto was a joke, but it's the symbolism of the act. It's basically as if Harper's cabinet is nothing more than the board of some oil company and Harper is nothing more than an oil lobbyist. He has totally destroyed environmental assessment for economic development projects, massively defunded Environment Canada and scientific research and silenced opposition to his various pipeline schemes (which, once again, involves shipping our natural resources to Asia or the US instead of feeding Ontario or Quebec...). All this in the name of "economic development" and "job creation", with no respect whatsoever for the environment. Harper is a disaster now, but his policies will be disastrous far after he leaves office.

To top it all of, we have a Natural Resources minister (Joe Oliver or something, a forgettable run-of-the-mill Purgatory retard) who goes out there to say that those who oppose Keystone or Pacific Gateway (two pipeline projects, the latter of which is contested by Aboriginal groups, environmentalists etc) are traitors, anti-Canadians and radicals/socialists funded by 'foreign' radicals and socialists (like George Soros...). No, this isn't a joke. This government, again, has only contempt for those who didn't vote for them. It responds to any kind of criticism or opposition with slander, lies, dishonesty and heavy-handed shut downs. "Government of Canada" my ass, more like "Government of the 40% Who Voted Purgatory"

-A slow and steady destruction of the public sector, all in the name of "fiscal responsibility" (perhaps laudable, but this government doesn't give a sh**t about fiscal responsibility in practice). We're being force fed an austerity agenda on the basis of an ideological "small government" agenda which aims to weaken government - particularly the more inconvenient parts of government, like those pesky scientists and their ideas about how the tar sands aren't the coolest thing ever or those environmental assessment boards or those commissions on human rights or women's rights. How dare they criticize Dear Leader?! Justified by lies of the genre that "Canada could end up like Greece", which is, of course, absurd. It has all created a terribly poisonous atmosphere in the public sector, making it very tough for students to find internships or placements and destroying the morale of many employees. It is backed by the detestable climate of public servant-bashing: lazy, inefficient, wasteful, useless, bloated, fat cats etc. (most of which are lies of course). Why can't we run this government like Wal-Mart or McDonalds, goddamn it!

-I might be a bit less critical of this government's austerity agenda if it gave proof that it was actually committed to "fiscal responsibility". But it isn't. It has paid lip service to the accountability agenda it was originally elected on in 2006. Countless ministers have been caught up in ethics scandal, and Harper stood by their side until their position became untenable. Peter McKay going on fishing trips on DND helicopters and taxpayers' money. Bev Oda (who had already lied to Parliament and illegally altered an official document) wanted to stay at a pricier hotel in London ($665 per night for three nights) and $16 orange juice, originally at the expense of the taxpayer. And now Peter Penashue... and the list goes on.

Or, how about the F-35 scandal, which the government is still committed to despite everybody in the world saying how much of a f-up that whole thing was. And how it seems to be costing more and more every week that goes by.

Or maybe how the government is spending tons of tax money on propaganda that tells us how great they are. Or even on propaganda to rewrite the history of the War of 1812 to promote their agenda of jingoistic Canadian nationalism. Thank god 2012 is over, I would have killed myself with more of those "WE DEFENDED OUR COUNTRY@!!!11 AND CANADA WAS BORN" ads.

Also, let's not forget the robocalls scandal. The Tories used robocalls to suppress voting in close ridings in the 2011 election. This is a serious case, but the government never gave a sh**t and killed the original outrage quickly.

However, it's all fine and dandy to extend corporate tax cuts to big businesses like those in the oil sand! We keep subsidizing the fantastic tar sands which are destroying the environment and sure as hell are rich enough to go without federal subsidies, or spending tons on propaganda and jails and fighter jets and guns. But the public servants are all lazy fat cats, and there's no money for the arts, sciences, research, culture, child care, healthcare, human rights, women rights or education. Nope. Who needs that kind of lousy socialist sh**t anyways? Let's run this country like a Wal-Mart.

-A repressive crime policy, rammed through in an omnibus bill, which builds more unneeded super-jails and even stiffer sentences. Abolished the gun registry, sure it was a sh**tfest and wasted money, but it also destroyed the records and registers which were very useful for law enforcement. We almost got a massive internet surveillance bill which would have allowed authorities to monitor the internet, thankfully it was abandoned when everybody realized how stupid it was and how Vic Toews was a massive douchebag. Still, we had more of the same ol' charming rhetoric, those who didn't support internet surveillance were branded by Toews as endorsing child predators. This from the government which said it abolished the long form census because it invaded our privacy and civil liberties. Really?

-A new immigration policy which allows the minister to arbitrarily designated "safe countries" and deny rejected refugee claimants the possibility to appeal. And the wonderfully named "Faster Removal of Foreign Criminals Act" goes too far, allowing the government to deport longtime non-citizens who committed only minor offenses (see editorial here)

-Allowed his backbenchers to re-open the abortion debate, although to his credit he himself has managed to steer clear from social conservative bullsh**t although he condones it (to be fair, he doesn't have much of a choice given how big the socon caucus is and how they might get pissed at him).

Probably forgot a few things, given how massively and catastrophically horrible these past 2 years have been for this country.

In conclusion, Stephen Harper is the worst PM in this country's history and a massive, horrible reactionary scumbag and pile of sh**t. I hope he dies in a fire. I'm kind of ashamed that he's "my" Prime Minister, but I have never felt that he is "my" Prime Minister given how he hates people like me and has nothing but contempt for us. God he sucks balls.
HP

After reading the first one two years ago and now this one I've come to the conclusion that one has to be a pretty freaking hack to think Harper is anything other than an auto-HP.

[Lief 🗽]

Nobody's arguing for mandatory guns, Link, you're creating strawmen again.

The problem with removing excess sugar from the American diet is that diet is, inherently, a personal choice. While it may be a bad choice, once you allow the government to interfere in personal decisions (which don't affect anyone else), you open the door for a system that can easily be abused to interfere with your life. We've seen time and time again (in Prohibition, in the War on Drugs) how interference in personal choices has always been a costly and ultimately unsuccessful endeavor.

The government intervenes in personal choices all the time.  You just happened to cherry pick two examples and give your interpretation.  Wearing seatbelts is a personal choice and the government interventions have been a success.

I really doubt if you ban big gulps Colombian cartels, Chicago mobsters, and LA Street gangs are going to take over distribution and murder each other for turf.  I personally don't know what effect the ban would have if allowed to go forward.  You are still permitted to buy multiple drinks if you really want that volume of sugar water.  I think the point is the creep of empty calories is very insidious in the American diet.  If you travel you will realize that other countries are not full of crazy gym fanatics and dieters.  They just aren't trained to get huge drinks and servings at restaurants.  It never occurs to them to gorge themselves.  You speak of choice but the average person is not making a conscious choice.  Through psychology, marketing, and ignorance they are being trained to engage in unhealthy and harmful behavior.  I don't think if you inject someone with heroin for five year in year six if they crave heroin it can be argued to be a "personal choice."

[Grumpier Than Uncle Joe]

1. I can't see you doing computer-aided drafting.

i dont want to be rude inks.  but...

you seem to be berating bushie more than encouraging him.  you come across as someone who is quite miserable in your own life.

you constantly tell him to apply to jobs.  fine.  but then i seem to remember you telling him something like: 'i wouldnt hire you and i work in food service...' 

and i should add it really doesnt matter one damn bit what you can or cant see bushie doing.  your visions of bushie's future are irrelevant.

we all agree bushie needs help.  professional help.  continually berating him isnt going to push him to get that help.  trust me on that.

[Antonio the Sixth]

Bushie isn't seeking for help, and he won't take any help from this forum (or anywhere else for that matter). All he's seeking for is attention.

[opebo]

FDR: Better
Truman: Better
Eisenhower: Better
Kennedy: Better
Johnson: Better
Nixon: Worse
Ford: Worse
Carter: Worse
Reagan: Worse
Bush I: Worse
Clinton: Neutral
Bush II: Worse

Neoliberalism marches on.

[opebo]

Is that you again jmfcst?

Yes, Admiral Motti, it is I.  Do not be too proud of your Moderator terror.  The ability to ban a poster is insignificant next to the power of Truth.  You can infract, but the weakness of your illogical Rebellion against God's word remains exposed for all to see.  And it nags at you day and night.  Why else would you bother distorting the word if the word doesn't bother you? 

And, BRTD is no different.  Even though it has been demonstrated Jesus' statements can't possible be meant to serve as an exhaustive definition for sin (since Jesus mentioned neither bestiality or witchcraft), BRTD still dishonestly brings out that same failed argument. 

But, hey, the absence of logic within both of your arguments will not cause anyone to be deceived, rather your willingness to continue to cling to arguments already shown to be illogical is a result of deception.  Likewise, the acceptance of gay marriage will not cause the downfall of marriage, rather the acceptance of it is a result of a society that already has lost respect for marriage.  For instance, nearly half of babies in the US are now born to unwed mothers. 

[Antonio the Sixth]

It is either a vast left-wing conspiracy that, whenever "State representative/senator did ____, said ___" appears in the news for something offensive or stupid, they are almost invariably Republican, or that party is just rotten to the core. I tend to think the latter.

[Napoleon]

It takes a Liberal to point out that Chaiman Sanchez and Leftbehind are both wrong because both refuse to see that the other has any valid points of view at all. Humans are inherantly selfish an have an inherant need to live in a state of mutually supportive community. Unless you understand both all hope is lost.

I should want to register the fact than she only hastened the collapse of UK industry and mining. She did it in a pretty brutal and heartless way, too.

But, it would have collasped at a point.

The Industrial Era is finished. We are currently entering the Tech Era.

[Marokai Backbeat]

The key point is that the pressure for privatisation doesn't just come from ideology or from a governmental version of the feeling that leads people through the doors of depressing little shops with the words 'cash for gold' in the window, although both these things are factors, obviously. Privatisation also often acts as a form of legalised corruption.

[Lambsbread]

Snowguy's posts about the graphic images in the Boston thread go here.

[Paul Kemp]

We should seriously ban teenagers from posting here.

[Antonio the Sixth]

We should seriously ban teenagers from posting here.

Good things I'm officially not a teenager anymore since last month.

[© tweed]

We should seriously ban teenagers from posting here.

Good things I'm officially not a teenager anymore since last month.

of course Al and Kemp posted tens of thousands of times as teenagers.

[RI]

It is either a vast left-wing conspiracy that, whenever "State representative/senator did ____, said ___" appears in the news for something offensive or stupid, they are almost invariably Republican, or that party is just rotten to the core. I tend to think the latter.

Confirmation bias (plus some availability bias) much?