Fun Site to Clarify History.

[michaelbak]

Where In The Constitution? (www.whereintheconstitution.com)

[Fisherking]

Looks like terrible internet lolbertarian bullshit.

You'll forgive me if I question the powers of constitutional interpretation and general legal know-how of people whose political opinions were largely formed by South Park.

[WesScog]

What about people whose political opinions were largely formed by Clutch Cargo?

[Alasdair]

where in the constitution does it say you're not a moron

[Alasdair]

also read the ninth amendment

[theSarge00]

What about people whose political opinions were largely formed by Clutch Cargo?

Don't knock The Clutch - he was a shrewd economist: he saved millions by cutting back on animation to anything but his mouth.

God that was a disturbing show...

[WesScog]

Don't knock The Clutch - he was a shrewd economist: he saved millions by cutting back on animation to anything but his mouth.

God that was a disturbing show...

I'm not knocking Clutch. I am just insinuating that my politics were formed by exposure to it, and thus where I fit into the equation.

[theSarge00]

I'm not knocking Clutch. I am just insinuating that my politics were formed by exposure to it, and thus where I fit into the equation.

Well damn vBulletin to hell: I'd typed up a lengthy bit about the difference between Clutch, who might have impacted your stance on mad scientists in underwater lairs, and alien despots (and really bad animation with living mouths), and South Park which routinely took a stance (and for many of the younger viewers, their FIRST stance) of condemning anything and everything that took a stance on social/political issues. That cynical cowardly fence-sitting "we hate everybody equally" attitude can be entertaining in it's wrongness for adults, but since it came in the candy shell of being a cartoon (a format traditionally reserved for children - and was in fact targeted to children in some markets), was insidiously dangerous. It's a given that one can overcome such impressions, but that's generally only if life puts you in a place where such things can be challenged. Think of it like advertizing: if you've had a medical condition that forced you to go through all the options, and see a commercial for some drug, you may know that it's not the best option, whereas someone who's never had to deal with your condition, when asked, would reccomend the brand they saw on tv, because that's been their only contact with it. A kid growing up in a christian home will have life examples to counter a South Park diatribe about christians, whereas their understanding of Judism might stand at what South Park says about it, particularly if it's reinforced by bigotry in the home.

Granted, there's a degree of hyperbole involved here, but it is valid to point towards South Park as a legitimate influence, whereas Clutch Cargo is not.

[Alasdair]

to clarify:

ninth amendment basically says "yo we're not retarded we can't possibly mention ALL your rights, just because something isn't in here doesn't mean you don't get it! don't use this to deny people's rights!!"

and the amendment process's existence means we can add more specific stuff the guys 200 years ago didn't think of because it was the fucking 18th century

[theSarge00]

to clarify:

ninth amendment basically says "yo we're not retarded we can't possibly mention ALL your rights, just because something isn't in here doesn't mean you don't get it! don't use this to deny people's rights!!"


Dunno if that's clearer, but it's certainly more modern.


and the amendment process's existence means we can add more specific stuff the guys 200 years ago didn't think of because it was the fucking 18th century

The bible certainly would benefit from this...then again, the history of dogmatism has shown that the church isn't all that good at ammending it...