Victor Hanson

[Stankleberry Sullivan]

In this thread I shall link to Victor Hanson articles that are good.

Please enjoy "Not This Pig" (http://pajamasmedia.com/victordavishanson/not-this-pig/).

[Richard Waveington]

But other than continuing past policy on the two wars, almost everything Obama had done is consistent with his past associates (Pfleger, Ayers, Wright, Khalidi, etc.)
:roflmao:

There's more quotable goodness in there too, recommended Satire!

Thanks Stank :)

[Stankleberry Sullivan]

Yes, it's so sad and disturbing that it is funny.

[Richard Waveington]

Anyone who describes Donald Rumsfeld as (a) "proud and honest-speaking visionary" does not deserve to be listened to.

[Stankleberry Sullivan]

No, of course you can't read this stuff. I can't imagine how much stuff you have to completely dismiss to remain as much of a dumbass as you are.

[Richard Waveington]

No, of course you can't read this stuff. I can't imagine how much stuff you have to completely dismiss to remain as much of a dumbass as you are.

I read the article. in fact I read right leaning articles more than I do left leaning.

Don't let that get in the way of yet another repeat post, though...

You must just have a fucking notepad on your desktop with you 5 responses to posts you read to copy paste in... you're repetitive and boring. :yep:

[Stankleberry Sullivan]

I read the article.



No, you didn't.

[Richard Waveington]

I'm starting to worry about you Skank.. tell me, do you accuse your doctors of trying to trick you into taking medication by any chance?

[Weedy]

What's the matter Stank? Brain not working today?

You gotta post a link of another dumbass, because you can't come up with anything equally dumbass?

You are losing your touch there, little man.

[Stankleberry Sullivan]

What's the matter Stank? Brain not working today?

You gotta post a link of another dumbass, because you can't come up with anything equally dumbass?

You are losing your touch there, little man.



You should try to read it too. It sounds like you're even more deluded than poor Richard, though, so you likely don't even have the ability to read and understand much of the article. Poor Weedy.

[Weedy]

I don't feel the need to read something a necon posts, pushing thier agenda for the purpose of attention.

I've already identified who the principle nutjobs are on this story and as such dismissed them, lest I waste anymore valuable time.

I live in the real world, dealing with real issues.

[Stankleberry Sullivan]

I don't feel the need to read something a necon posts, pushing thier agenda for the purpose of attention.

I've already identified who the principle nutjobs are on this story and as such dismissed them, lest I waste anymore valuable time.

I live in the real world, dealing with real issues.



Yes yes, of course. You are wrong about things because you actively avoid learning about many things. If you allowed yourself to read things like this with an open mind, you'd start to realize that you're wrong. But you have too much pride and ego to do that, so you are stuck as you are, completely wrong about just about everything, constantly fighting to keep yourself from learning about why you are so wrong.

It is really quite pathetic, but it's not really your fault. You are in a cult.

[Weedy]

Yes yes, of course. You are wrong about things because you actively avoid learning about many things. If you allowed yourself to read things like this with an open mind, you'd start to realize that you're wrong. But you have too much pride and ego to do that, so you are stuck as you are, completely wrong about just about everything, constantly fighting to keep yourself from learning about why you are so wrong.

It is really quite pathetic, but it's not really your fault. You are in a cult.

You sure project for a guy who preaches about projecting.

It's not that I expect you understand. In fact, I understand you'll likely never see the hypocricy in it. You prove it with almost every post.

Enough projection on my part.

I actually did read it. They lost me at "But Obamacare is not really about medicine. It is rather aimed at absorbing more of the private sector"

Just more rhetorical drivel.

Fail.

[Richard Waveington]

There's absolutley nothing said in the article that hasnt been spewed before... it's just rearranged talking points, with a few assumptions thrown in for good measure...

"We all know what that" :roflmao: that's a great way to start a paragraph!

[Stankleberry Sullivan]

You sure project for a guy who preaches about projecting.

It's not that I expect you understand. In fact, I understand you'll likely never see the hypocricy in it. You prove it with almost every post.

Enough projection on my part.

I actually did read it. They lost me at "But Obamacare is not really about medicine. It is rather aimed at absorbing more of the private sector"

Just more rhetorical drivel.

Fail.


I remember when someone posted something here and I dismissed it and declared that I would not read it because it doesn't fit with what I believe.

Oh wait, I've never done that. Not only do you not know how to spell hypocrisy, but not surprisingly, you have no idea what the word means.

You don't have to explain how you go about dismissing things you don't want to understand. I am already very aware.

[Stankleberry Sullivan]

There's absolutley nothing said in the article that hasnt been spewed before... it's just rearranged talking points, with a few assumptions thrown in for good measure...

"We all know what that" :roflmao: that's a great way to start a paragraph!


You didn't read it, so you have no idea. Listen, I realize that you are a long long way from ever recognizing what you're doing, and you'll likely never be self-aware enough to see it, but I am telling you the truth. Your brain forces you to dismiss perfectly logical things constantly in order to maintain your very illogical beliefs. I realize that you just cannot understand this, but I am honestly trying to help you.

[Richard Waveington]

Sadly for you, Skank, I did read it.. which makes the rest of your post kinda stupid...for a change.

[Weedy]

I remember when someone posted something here and I dismissed it and declared that I would not read it because it doesn't fit with what I believe.

Oh wait, I've never done that. Not only do you not know how to spell hypocrisy, but not surprisingly, you have no idea what the word means.

You don't have to explain how you go about dismissing things you don't want to understand. I am already very aware.

I prefer sources who are verifiable and actually speak from personal experience as it applies to them.

The blogged ramblings of malcontented outsider are completely meaningless to me.

Unlike your ilk Stank, I got my education from scholars and institutions. Not FOX News or rightwing blogs. This whole fallacy of posting a link and EXPECTING everyone to read it, lest they are uninformed is just childish and insecure.

Yet again, I don't expect you to understand.

[Lum]

I read it (Victor Davis Hanson is a writer I'm familiar with, and has done some good historical writing when not raving about neocon issues or the horrible leftists stealing his string).

I disagreed with most of it. I especially enjoyed how he completely misrepresented the health care debate (few are even proposing a public OPTION, much less "government takeover of the health industry). But then again the only way the right will get away with staving off insurance industry reform is through repeating lies enough that they become fact.

It'd be nice to have a political discussion forum here. I'm fairly certain this is not it. I wonder what Stankle did to get his own forum/talk show, though!

[Cocoanut Koala]

I notice that it wasn't till post 14 that either of your detractors here actually addressed the article. Sort of.

They don't talk what's in about the article, they talk about how awful they think you are.

I haven't read the article yet. I don't comment on articles unless and until I have read them. And when I do, I comment on the article, and the ideas therein, not on the person who posted it.

This is a textbook example of how pointless it is to try to discuss anything with some people. They can't.

Classic textbook. You post something for discussion, and get garbage back. Just garbage.

Endless, mind-numbing garbage.

Edit: Note Lum posted while I was posting this, and I don't include him in the above comments.

[Cocoanut Koala]

I prefer sources who are verifiable and actually speak from personal experience as it applies to them.

The blogged ramblings of malcontented outsider are completely meaningless to me.

Unlike your ilk Stank, I got my education from scholars and institutions. Not FOX News or rightwing blogs. This whole fallacy of posting a link and EXPECTING everyone to read it, lest they are uninformed is just childish and insecure.

Yet again, I don't expect you to understand.

Outsider?

I looked up Victor David Hanson and he was born in and lives in California. (And is a scholar.)

You know who the outsider is? YOU, Weedy.

You are the outsider.

coco

[Richard Waveington]

That's not what she meant by outsider...

[Stankleberry Sullivan]

Unlike your ilk Stank, I got my education from scholars and institutions. Not FOX News or rightwing blogs.


Ahahaha, you should learn more about who Professor Hanson is then... :yep:

[Cocoanut Koala]

Then what did she mean, Richie?

[Weedy]

Outsider?

I looked up Victor David Hanson and he was born in and lives in California. (And is a scholar.)

You know who the outsider is? YOU, Weedy.

You are the outsider.

coco

When I said outsider, I meant outside of the story's principles. Not geography.

The blog might merit some attention, if the individual was directly involved in the issue. The blogger is not. He is merely presenting his opinion on a matter. Right, wrong or indifferent, everybody has one. He could be right, he could be wrong. It's doesn't matter unless they are a player in the game.

For example, our local hockey team contracted the goalie to a 12 year contract. Personally, I think it was a wrong (and expensive) decision, but how much weight does my opinion carry? None, zero, zip, because I am not an owner, player or coach. I'm just a fan.

Collectively, maybe the fans can come up with a protest or objection, but that's something completely different than the opinion of one person, expecting to be heard.

[Morgan Genna]

No, of course you can't read this stuff. I can't imagine how much stuff you have to completely dismiss to remain as much of a dumbass as you are.

Welcome to my ignore list, Stankle. You sound like a chainsaw on metal. Boring.

[Cocoanut Koala]

When I said outsider, I meant outside of the story's principles. Not geography.

The blog might merit some attention, if the individual was directly involved in the issue. The blogger is not. He is merely presenting his opinion on a matter. Right, wrong or indifferent, everybody has one. He could be right, he could be wrong. It's doesn't matter unless they are a player in the game.

For example, our local hockey team contracted the goalie to a 12 year contract. Personally, I think it was a wrong (and expensive) decision, but how much weight does my opinion carry? None, zero, zip, because I am not an owner, player or coach. I'm just a fan.

Collectively, maybe the fans can come up with a protest or objection, but that's something completely different than the opinion of one person, expecting to be heard.

Thank you. (I wonder if that is what Richie would have said you were thinking!)

As I've said before (perhaps in this thread), I read analyses, and find them useful for discussion purposes, and for thinking.

coco

[Stankleberry Sullivan]

The blog might merit some attention, if the individual was directly involved in the issue. The blogger is not. He is merely presenting his opinion on a matter. Right, wrong or indifferent, everybody has one. He could be right, he could be wrong. It's doesn't matter unless they are a player in the game.



Ahaha, this is another fine way to dismiss things you don't want to accept. "I don't even read things written by people unless they are directly and professionally involved in the thing that they're writing about." That is quite hilarious. I'm sure you dismiss all kinds of leftist nonsense because it's written by people not directly involved in what they're writing about.

You are really just trying to convince yourself right now. Trying to make yourself feel better about dismissing things for nonsense reasons. That is the tiny logical part of your brain trying to convince the vast illogical leftist part of your brain that you are not deluded. It is getting more and more difficult, huh?

[Richard Waveington]

Thank you. (I wonder if that is what Richie would have said you were thinking!)

As I've said before (perhaps in this thread), I read analyses, and find them useful for discussion purposes, and for thinking.

coco

There or there abouts..

I'm over HERE (http://www.victorhanson.com/articles/hanson080209.html) reading the rest of this guys articles, lest I be accused of not reading his stuff...

[Weedy]

Ahaha, this is another fine way to dismiss things you don't want to accept. "I don't even read things written by people unless they are directly and professionally involved in the thing that they're writing about." That is quite hilarious. I'm sure you dismiss all kinds of leftist nonsense because it's written by people not directly involved in what they're writing about.

I do actually, moreso than rightwing stuff, remember I come from Canada.

I could get handed unsubstantiated claims everyday of the week, but I don't read them. I have deadlines and ethics restraints. You simply cannot air unsupported facts under any circumstances. Whether I believe in the issue personally or not, has nothing to do with it.

I can express my opinion here, but I don't expect anyone to understand it. That is the difference between me and Stank, because he cannot stand the fact someone's might differ from his, and as such, being unable to articulate those reasons, tosses a blanket insult.

It's childish.

[Stankleberry Sullivan]

I can express my opinion here, but I don't expect anyone to understand it. That is the difference between me and Stank, because he cannot stand the fact someone's might differ from his, and as such, being unable to articulate those reasons, tosses a blanket insult.

It's childish.



Haha, well, at least you have accepted that your opinions and beliefs don't make any sense, and are difficult for other people to comprehend. The next step is to realize that having opinions and beliefs that don't make any sense is probably not a good way to go through life.

I can stand people having different views on things, but I am a nice person, so I try to help people that are wrong. I'd like them to be less silly about the world, so it's a less shitty place. I have no problems articulating anything, obviously. You might just be confused because you're forced to not read what I write because I don't have an official badge of expertise from the government that says that I can discuss these things. :yep:

Ha, you telling me that I'm being childish is like a dog telling me that I'm being too doggish.

[Weedy]

Haha, well, at least you have accepted that your opinions and beliefs don't make any sense, and are difficult for other people to comprehend. The next step is to realize that having opinions and beliefs that don't make any sense is probably not a good way to go through life.

I can stand people having different views on things, but I am a nice person, so I try to help people that are wrong. I'd like them to be less silly about the world, so it's a less shitty place. I have no problems articulating anything, obviously. You might just be confused because you're forced to not read what I write because I don't have an official badge of expertise from the government that says that I can discuss these things. :yep:

Ha, you telling me that I'm being childish is like a dog telling me that I'm being too doggish.

Here you go projecting again. Have another heaping helping of hypocricy.

To me, your opinion is not much less than indoctrinated bigotry. Until you can actually address, articulate and provide rational discourse to a CONCLUSION, you are just another uneducated talking head, starved for attention.

Fail

[Stankleberry Sullivan]

Here you go projecting again. Have another heaping helping of hypocricy.

Fail


I wonder how many times I'll have to make fun of you for your misspelling of hypocrisy before you'll either learn to spell it properly or stop using the word. I don't think you know what it means, either. Are you able to access dictionary sites up in Canada?

[Cocoanut Koala]

Maybe it's spelled with a c in Canada.

[YOUR MOM]

This thread delivers.

[Lucifer Baphomet]

i just grilled a sirloin steak with onions garlic and mushroom, because i'm a real man


what did you pussies eat this evening?

[Weedy]

Maybe it's spelled with a c in Canada.

No it's spelled with an s.

Sometimes I make mistakes. Whether it's a "c" or an "s" does not by virtue make everything else wrong.

That's a perfect example of the fallacies generated by people who lack the skillsets to actually deal directly with issues. They grasp at tiny straws, thinking other's minds are so small that they accept it.

[YOUR MOM]

i just grilled a sirloin steak with onions garlic and mushroom, because i'm a real man


what did you pussies eat this evening?

Handful of almonds, a navel orange and a stone peach.

[Lucifer Baphomet]

Handful of almonds, a navel orange and a stone peach.

Commie hippy

[Weedy]

i just grilled a sirloin steak with onions garlic and mushroom, because i'm a real man


what did you pussies eat this evening?

Two cups of Saltspring Island coffee and a slice of homemade apple pie. The MacIntosh's are peaking at the moment.

[Stankleberry Sullivan]

That's a perfect example of the fallacies generated by people who lack the skillsets to actually deal directly with issues. They grasp at tiny straws, thinking other's minds are so small that they accept it.



Ahaha, says the person who just dismissed someone's writings because they decided that they were not enough of an expert in the field that they are writing in, without even knowing anything about the writer. :yep:

[Richard Waveington]

Ham and cheese pasta bake.. was actually awesome.

[Richard Waveington]

Ahaha, says the person who just dismissed someone's writings because they decided that they were not enough of an expert in the field that they are writing in, without even knowing anything about the writer. :yep:

You dismiss the majority of your population for much less.

[Lucifer Baphomet]

not enough meat....

I'm having a cottage pie now

[Cocoanut Koala]

i just grilled a sirloin steak with onions garlic and mushroom, because i'm a real man


what did you pussies eat this evening?

Well I copped out with some frozen Manchurian Beef stirfry and some frozen Garlic Bread.

I know. (I know.)

:coco:

[Cocoanut Koala]

You dismiss the majority of your population for much less.

You have a funny idea about the majority of our population.

coco

[Richard Waveington]

You have a funny idea about the majority of our population.

coco

majority support Obama.. you live in one of the most liberal countrys in the world.

[Stankleberry Sullivan]

You dismiss the majority of your population for much less.


I do? I know that it's difficult for you to not project on this, but I already know all of your arguments, inside and out. I even know all of the arguments somewhat intelligent leftists come up with on things. That's because I read quite a lot of stuff from both sides.

I dismiss the left because I know what they believe, and I know how illogical it is, and I see how you folks have to constantly contort yourselves to avoid recognizing or accepting any of the vast available information that shows why each thing you believe in is idiotic. Understand?

[Lucifer Baphomet]

Stank, didn't you eat?

[Stankleberry Sullivan]

majority support Obama.. you live in one of the most liberal countrys in the world.


Barely, according to some polls. I don't dismiss Obama, unfortunately he is our president for the moment. I do recognize when he says something stupid, and I recognize that most things he believes in would be bad for the US if he were able to implement them.

But luckily, America may be saved by Obama and the rest of the Democrats and their ridiculous, hilarious incompetence. The presidency, huge majorities in Congress, and they can't pass shit. So awesome.

[Weedy]

I do? I know that it's difficult for you to not project on this, but I already know all of your arguments, inside and out. I even know all of the arguments somewhat intelligent leftists come up with on things. That's because I read quite a lot of stuff from both sides.

I dismiss the left because I know what they believe, and I know how illogical it is, and I see how you folks have to constantly contort yourselves to avoid recognizing or accepting any of the vast available information that shows why each thing you believe in is idiotic. Understand?

Right can dismiss left, but left cannot dismiss right, right?

Such hypocisy

Better now?

[Stankleberry Sullivan]

Stank, didn't you eat?


I had some breakfast awhile ago.

[Stankleberry Sullivan]

Such hypocisy

Better now?



Well, at least you've finally spelled it properly, but you still don't seem to have any idea of what the word means.

[Cocoanut Koala]

majority support Obama.. you live in one of the most liberal countrys in the world.

They do him, according to most polls. But not necessarily his policies.

In any case, it is a slim majority, I'm afraid.

coco

[Richard Waveington]

They do him, according to most polls. But not necessarily his policies.

In any case, it is a slim majority, I'm afraid.

coco

It must seem like the whole world hates his polices standing amidst the white bread masses at your "Tea Parties"

[Weedy]

Well, at least you've finally spelled it properly, but you still don't seem to have any idea of what the word means.

I do, you don't.

Contradicting yourself in the same breath seems to be your forte, that's why you are such an easy mark.

Never bring a knife to a gun fight.

You are not even a very good neocon, because all you do is point and say "look what he said", instead of articulating the issue yourself. When you make an attempt to match wits with my obviously higher academic standards, you really fall short.

[Richard Waveington]

It must seem like the whole world hates his polices standing amidst the white bread masses at your "Tea Parties"

To add, I felt the same standing in the middle of thousands of anti war protesters and getting home to see hundreds of thousands all marching to the same drum on TV.. I felt we where invincible! right was on our side, possibly God. (if he exists)

Alas it came to nothing... our majority had to wait... and wait and wait.

Now you guys have paltry corporate backed Astro Turf organised marches against your very own interests... and you feel the same! SEAN FUCKING HANNITY ATTENDED!!! the world is ours!


reality will suck.

[Stankleberry Sullivan]

I do, you don't.

You are not even a very good neocon, because all you do is point and say "look what he said", instead of articulating the issue yourself. When you make an attempt to match wits with my obviously higher academic standards, you really fall short.


You really don't, though. I guess if you keep telling yourself you do, you end up believing it. That is why you believe in so much nonsense.

Yes, dismiss me now because I posted a link to something someone else said. You should start to watch yourself, and watch how you always come up with silly reasons for why you don't need to pay any attention to what certain people are saying. You do that because the things you believe in cannot stand up to any sort of logical scrutiny.

Ahahah, I am falling short of you in the wits contest. I wish I had some high academic standards, where people don't know how to spell simple words. :yep:

[Richard Waveington]

You really don't, though. I guess if you keep telling yourself you do, you end up believing it. That is why you believe in so much nonsense.

Yes, dismiss me now because I posted a link to something someone else said. You should start to watch yourself, and watch how you always come up with silly reasons for why you don't need to pay any attention to what certain people are saying. You do that because the things you believe in cannot stand up to any sort of logical scrutiny.

Ahahah, I am falling short of you in the wits contest. I wish I had some high academic standards, where people don't know how to spell simple words. :yep:

Link me to some of these fabled, fact filled posts you authored. please.

[Stankleberry Sullivan]

Link me to some of these fabled, fact filled posts you authored. please.



Here you go (http://www.secondcitizen.net/Forum/showpost.php?p=23083&postcount=48). You're welcome.

[Richard Waveington]

Exactly.

[Sally Rosebud]

I do? I know that it's difficult for you to not project on this, but I already know all of your arguments, inside and out. I even know all of the arguments somewhat intelligent leftists come up with on things. That's because I read quite a lot of stuff from both sides.

I dismiss the left because I know what they believe, and I know how illogical it is, and I see how you folks have to constantly contort yourselves to avoid recognizing or accepting any of the vast available information that shows why each thing you believe in is idiotic. Understand?

Well, let's dismiss Stankleberry as well. :wave:

[Stankleberry Sullivan]

Well, let's dismiss Stankleberry as well. :wave:


Hehe, dismissing facts and truth out of spite is exactly why most leftists believe the ridiculous things they do. It's not about logic for you people, it is about ridiculous things like spite.

But again, it's not your fault. That's just where you're stuck, really. I wish I could help you better.

[Richard Waveington]

Hehe, dismissing facts and truth out of spite is exactly why most leftists believe the ridiculous things they do. It's not about logic for you people, it is about ridiculous things like spite.

But again, it's not your fault. That's just where you're stuck, really. I wish I could help you better.

It wouldnt be spite... actually I feel a little sorry for you. It would be because you're a sad man.

I'd bet your pretty bitter and un-likeable in real life too, the kind of guy who pisses guests off with racist rants about Illegal aliens and sad diatribes about how much better off you'd be if you weren't stiffed out of that job by some AA minority..

you paint a lovely picture of yourself..

[Cocoanut Koala]

It must seem like the whole world hates his polices standing amidst the white bread masses at your "Tea Parties"

I'm talking about polls, not tea parties.

And you - are racist.

:coco:

[Richard Waveington]

I'm talking about polls, not tea parties.

And you - are racist.

:coco:

Thats not fair, I have a black friend!!!

[Cocoanut Koala]

To add, I felt the same standing in the middle of thousands of anti war protesters and getting home to see hundreds of thousands all marching to the same drum on TV.. I felt we where invincible! right was on our side, possibly God. (if he exists)

Alas it came to nothing... our majority had to wait... and wait and wait.

Now you guys have paltry corporate backed Astro Turf organised marches against your very own interests... and you feel the same! SEAN FUCKING HANNITY ATTENDED!!! the world is ours!


reality will suck.

I don't feel anyone is invincible. I'm too old to think that.

But I do believe I was among the ones who were ahead of the curve regarding the spending at the tea party.

And I'm glad to say that more people have become concerned about the spending. (Course, you'd kind of have to be an idiot not to be concerned; I mean, it takes a while for people to learn exactly what is going on.)

In fact, I ran across a poll that said that overspending was the greatest concern (don't know where that poll was, though).

Secondly, I'm not a "you guys." I'm my own person, and do things by my own lights.

Thirdly, there is no such thing as "corporate backed Astro Turf organised marches against your very own interests". There just isn't. If you mean the town halls (that is what was last accused of astroturfing), it just isn't.

Polls on that show that the attempt to paint town hall protestors as astroturf, nazis, or whatever else, didn't work, and most people believe they are sincere persons there of their own accord.

I was at my Town Hall of my own accord.

And guess what! That is what the whole thing is about here! You get to say what you think, at town halls and elsewhere. It's the whole idea! And you get to vote for those who most closely represent your opinions.

I know there are some who are in the business of constantly dismissing anyone who disagrees with their viewpoint, as being manufactured, or evil, or something, but the pure fact is, we have a range of opinions in this country, and everyone gets to express them.

Whether you like it or not! And I was there, expressing my opinion (through applause when I heard something I agreed with).

That may rankle people, but again, it is exactly what this country stands for - or is supposed to stand for: government by, of, and for the people.

Not government by and for the government, foisted onto the populace. Needless to say, we can't make everything go the way we want it to, but we can certainly get out there and make our opinions known.

coco

(Yes, I read a lot of polls.)

[Fox Stirling]

I'm talking about polls, not tea parties.

And you - are racist.

:coco:

Not so sure that was meant to be a racist comment..


white bread Featured Word

adjective


bland, uninspired, boring, or insipid. Especially used to describe "middle-American" mores, people, etc. Derogatory description of things that are naively wholesome, suburban, and middle class.


Derogatory perhaps, but I think the term encompasses a life style or way of thinking more than a particular race.

[Cocoanut Koala]

Thats not fair, I have a black friend!!!

You constantly talk like there is something wrong with being white.

I'm of Irish heritage (1/4 Irish), and have always been terribly (if slightly irrationally) proud of that.

However, knowing you are Irish, it kinda makes me rethink that . . . a little. :D

:coco:

[Cocoanut Koala]

Not so sure that was meant to be a racist comment..



Derogatory perhaps, but I think the term encompasses a life style or way of thinking more than a particular race.

Possible, yes. Probable . . . well . . .

coco

[Lum]

I have no problems articulating anything, obviously.

Good. Then you won't have any problems with these questions;

1) Explain how you believe the health care industry in the US should be reformed so that it can provide health care to all Americans without collapsing under the weight of its own costs. Compare and contrast your proposals with *actual* health care bills put forth in Congress so far.

2) Explain the differences between the Pakistani Taliban, the Afghan Taliban, and al'Qaeda. Propose briefly how you believe the US should deal with each of these.

3) Explain the causes of the near-economic collapse of 2008.

Note that blind link-posting and parroting of talking points will be disqualified, obviously, since we all have access to Google, not just yourself.

As you have said you have no problems articulating things, articulating the causes and possible solutions to our primary policy dilemmas should be easy for you.

:popcorn:

[Weedy]

Needless to say, we can't make everything go the way we want it to, but we can certainly get out there and make our opinions known.

coco



Of all the townhalls held, I'm sure most of them were peaceful and people on both sides of the issue were allowed to speak freely and peacefully.

Your media chooses not to portray it that way, by giving the impression, that everyone everywhere behaves like that. That is really unfair to decent people, with genuine concerns.

This is where your media fails on all levels. They only showed the sensationalized aspect, while systematically ignoring the real issue.

There are three sides to every story. Right, wrong and reality.

[Cocoanut Koala]

Man, that's quite the assignment there, Lum!

I think you should go first.

:coco:

[Cocoanut Koala]

Of all the townhalls held, I'm sure most of them were peaceful and people on both sides of the issue were allowed to speak freely and peacefully.

Your media chooses not to portray it that way, by giving the impression, that everyone everywhere behaves like that. That is really unfair to decent people, with genuine concerns.

This is where your media fails on all levels. They only showed the sensationalized aspect, while systematically ignoring the real issue.

There are three sides to every story. Right, wrong and reality.

Our media fails in so many ways you could write a book about it.

I disagree, though, with your assessment about right, wrong, and reality. If you're talking about whether person x shot person y or did not shoot person y, there is a fairly simple reality. But a lot of other stuff is pretty complex, with results not entirely known, and consequently there are different viewpoints.

coco

[Richard Waveington]

I don't feel anyone is invincible. I'm too old to think that.

But I do believe I was among the ones who were ahead of the curve regarding the spending at the tea party.

And I'm glad to say that more people have become concerned about the spending. (Course, you'd kind of have to be an idiot not to be concerned; I mean, it takes a while for people to learn exactly what is going on.)

In fact, I ran across a poll that said that overspending was the greatest concern (don't know where that poll was, though).

Secondly, I'm not a "you guys." I'm my own person, and do things by my own lights.

Thirdly, there is no such thing as "corporate backed Astro Turf organised marches against your very own interests". There just isn't. If you mean the town halls (that is what was last accused of astroturfing), it just isn't.

Polls on that show that the attempt to paint town hall protestors as astroturf, nazis, or whatever else, didn't work, and most people believe they are sincere persons there of their own accord.

I was at my Town Hall of my own accord.

And guess what! That is what the whole thing is about here! You get to say what you think, at town halls and elsewhere. It's the whole idea! And you get to vote for those who most closely represent your opinions.

I know there are some who are in the business of constantly dismissing anyone who disagrees with their viewpoint, as being manufactured, or evil, or something, but the pure fact is, we have a range of opinions in this country, and everyone gets to express them.

Whether you like it or not! And I was there, expressing my opinion (through applause when I heard something I agreed with).

That may rankle people, but again, it is exactly what this country stands for - or is supposed to stand for: government by, of, and for the people.

Not government by and for the government, foisted onto the populace. Needless to say, we can't make everything go the way we want it to, but we can certainly get out there and make our opinions known.

coco

(Yes, I read a lot of polls.)

http://progressivenation.us/2009/08/11/the-difference-between-astroturfing-and-grassroots-protests/

THOSE BEING ASTROTURFED DON’T KNOW IT

This is not to say that these protesters even know that’s what they’re doing. Many of them honestly believe that health care reform is some diabolical plot to socialize medicine, ration health care, and euthanize the elderly.

[Vengence Opus]

Man, that's quite the assignment there, Lum!

I think you should go first.

:coco:

no, u.

[Weedy]

Our media fails in so many ways you could write a book about it.

I disagree, though, with your assessment about right, wrong, and reality. If you're talking about whether person x shot person y or did not shoot person y, there is a fairly simple reality. But a lot of other stuff is pretty complex, with results not entirely known, and consequently there are different viewpoints.

coco


I am talking about normal people. While some think Obama is Lenin and some think Bush is Hitler, there are alot more people in the world who don't think either.

That's reality.

[Fmeh]

No, of course you can't read this stuff. I can't imagine how much stuff you have to completely dismiss to remain as much of a dumbass as you are.

Nice namecalling. That's cool. :rolleyes:

I dismiss the left because I know what they believe, and I know how illogical it is, and I see how you folks have to constantly contort yourselves to avoid recognizing or accepting any of the vast available information that shows why each thing you believe in is idiotic. Understand?

I'd like to offer this same paragraph back to you, except change the word "left" into "right". You call that a "fact-filled" post? HA!

Your opinion does not equal fact. It's sad when people get stuck in that kind of mindset. Almost laughably sad.


The article lost me at this:

Our environmentally-correct czar believes that we were behind 9/11, that whites pollute poor neighborhoods on purpose, that American agriculture is pathological, that Republicans are “assholes” and so on. He is the ideological version of the buffoonish Robert Gibbs. What do they teach at Yale (and Harvard) law school? Is admission there synonymous with graduation?

The new Supreme Court Justice thinks that some judges are better than others based on their gender and race. The Attorney General (we are “cowards” afraid to talk about race) wants to try agents of the CIA, not hunt down terrorists that plotted to destroy America. No wonder, in a past incarnation he helped to pardon terrorists from Puerto Rico for similarly careerist purposes.

Victor Davis Hanson is rather hard to imagine as anything other than a bitter person who tries to grasp at the most extreme elements he can possibly grab from to make his "case". It's hard to take his article seriously after that and also after praising Rumsfeld like he did.

[Circe Timtam]

No, of course you can't read this stuff. I can't imagine how much stuff you have to completely dismiss to remain as much of a dumbass as you are.


There's some more of that non-name calling. YAY for your totally awesome debate tactics!

[Joy Honey]

It seems some have forgotten (http://forums.secondlife.com/search.php?searchid=4331593)

[Stankleberry Sullivan]

1) Explain how you believe the health care industry in the US should be reformed so that it can provide health care to all Americans without collapsing under the weight of its own costs. Compare and contrast your proposals with *actual* health care bills put forth in Congress so far.

2) Explain the differences between the Pakistani Taliban, the Afghan Taliban, and al'Qaeda. Propose briefly how you believe the US should deal with each of these.

3) Explain the causes of the near-economic collapse of 2008.


1: US health care will not be reformed in that way, I don't think. People generally don't like having the government blatantly take money from people who earn it and spend it on people who haven't. Americans are ok with some of that, but it has to be done properly, not the ridiculous Obama and Democrats way, trying to jam things through without giving anyone time to read or think about them, etc.

I believe health care in the US is as good as it's going to get, and it will naturally adjust itself to America's wealth getting reduced, perhaps drastically. Getting the government even more involved will only make it adjust more slowly and stupidly.

It seems like people are vastly underestimating the effects socialized American medicine would have on the rest of the world.

2: I like this attitude like you think you're in a position to give me a quiz. You can go look up the differences for yourself.

I think the US and every other high quality country should kill them until they give up their territories to civilized human leadership and stop attacking civilized peoples.

3: The economic collapse of 2008 was apparently mostly caused by the housing bubble. Banks got overly loany. Obviously there were thousands of other reasons. The overall reason is demographics.

[Stankleberry Sullivan]

There's some more of that non-name calling. YAY for your totally awesome debate tactics!


Hehe, like I've said, people will get exactly as much respect from me as they deserve.

But you can whine about it if you'd like, it's fun. I remember when you whined about it when people called me similar names. Oh shit, that's right, you didn't at all. That's weird, right? And you also somehow forgot about it, huh? I bet you just didn't read any of those threads. Or this one. :yep:

[Stankleberry Sullivan]

The article lost me at this:

Victor Davis Hanson is rather hard to imagine as anything other than a bitter person who tries to grasp at the most extreme elements he can possibly grab from to make his "case". It's hard to take his article seriously after that and also after praising Rumsfeld like he did.



See, dismissing someone as "bitter" without making any sort of argument against what they're saying is really rather devoid of the old "facts" that you are hungering for. Extreme elements? He's referring to things that happened. I guess he's not allowed to do that when he's saying something you don't want to accept? Yes.

[Morgan Genna]

Well I copped out with some frozen Manchurian Beef stirfry and some frozen Garlic Bread.

I know. (I know.)

:coco:

How can I ever take you seriously as a food emo again?

[Lum]

Actually - yes, I am in a position to give you a quiz. You claimed to be able to wax poetically about anything. I challenged that assertion. This is how conversations work, in case you haven't had any recently.

1: US health care will not be reformed in that way, I don't think. People generally don't like having the government blatantly take money from people who earn it and spend it on people who haven't. Americans are ok with some of that, but it has to be done properly, not the ridiculous Obama and Democrats way, trying to jam things through without giving anyone time to read or think about them, etc.

This doesn't answer the question. I asked how you would reform health care, given two assumptions that nearly every commentator agrees on - the system is going broke, and something has to be done regarding uninsured patients, because the latter going to emergency rooms instead of proper care is rapidly causing the former.

Also, no proposed health care bill in Congress "takes money from people who earn it and spend it on people who haven't". At the moment, there is no public option on the table, which, as far as I can tell, is the closest to what you're talking about. Remember, I asked you to evaluate the bills that exist, not the ones you claim exist. Again - there is no public option currently proposed (which angers many Democrats, btw), merely health insurance reform. You may want to actually look into what's being debated in Congress instead of relying on others to do that for you.

In any event, I asked for proposals, and you provided none save "do nothing". We'll grade this one a miss, then.

2: I like this attitude like you think you're in a position to give me a quiz. You can go look up the differences for yourself.I don't need to. I already know. I asked for you to show that you do.

I think the US and every other high quality country should kill them until they give up their territories to civilized human leadership and stop attacking civilized peoples.Clearly, you do not. Another miss.

3: The economic collapse of 2008 was apparently mostly caused by the housing bubble. Banks got overly loany. Obviously there were thousands of other reasons.Well, at least you got that one a quarter right to half right, depending on how you match "banks got overly loany" with the actual cause of the market collapse (over-leveraged securities companies indulging in speculation and failing, toxic asset mortgages being treated as assets, and above it all a lack of oversight by any regulatory authority).

The overall reason is demographics.I certainly hope you're not referring to the right wing talking point that "the wrong kinds of people, a.k.a. those poor people, a.k.a. those people who look different from us, tried to buy houses and its all their fault". You're not, right? I'd hate to call anyone racist who was merely incapable of expressing themselves.

In any event, your initial assertion:

I have no problems articulating anything, obviously.has still not been backed up with any evidence. Would you like more questions? I mean, clearly, you tell everyone here that you know the *truth* and are the only person extant that *knows things*. I'm more than willing to let you prove it!

[Stankleberry Sullivan]

Actually - yes, I am in a position to give you a quiz.


Hehe, you really aren't. But you can keep trying.

[Lum]

Hehe, you really aren't.

And what do you base that statement on?

[Stankleberry Sullivan]

Reality.

[Fmeh]

See, dismissing someone as "bitter" without making any sort of argument against what they're saying is really rather devoid of the old "facts" that you are hungering for. Extreme elements? He's referring to things that happened. I guess he's not allowed to do that when he's saying something you don't want to accept? Yes.
Sort of like when you call people "dumbass".

I don't disagree with his facts, I disagree with his conclusions, and his conclusions make him look like a bitter person, and the facts that he cherry picks makes him seem rather desperate to paint the Obama administration as the most polarizing that has existed since the 1920's.

[Stankleberry Sullivan]

Sort of like when you call people "dumbass".

I don't disagree with his facts, I disagree with his conclusions, and his conclusions make him look like a bitter person, and the facts that he cherry picks makes him seem rather desperate to paint the Obama administration as the most polarizing that has existed since the 1920's.


Some people are dumbasses. It's not a big deal. If they don't want to hear about their being a dumbass, they don't have to pester me with their idiocy.

"His conclusions make him look like a bitter person" is not a logical argument. Why do you disagree with his conclusions? It's all straightforward and logical. That's why you have to resort to dismissing him because of your silly unfounded hatred of Rumsfeld.

[Vengence Opus]

:nope:

[Lum]

So, essentially, you won't defend any of your assertions when called on them, insinuate anyone who disagrees with you is stupid and/or crazy, and insist that you are the only knowledgeable poster on anything here.

Good to know.

/ignore

[Cocoanut Koala]

How can I ever take you seriously as a food emo again?

I know.

:coco:

[Joy Honey]

So, essentially, you won't defend any of your assertions when called on them, insinuate anyone who disagrees with you is stupid and/or crazy, and insist that you are the only knowledgeable poster on anything here.

Good to know.

/ignore

Didn't you read my link? http://www.smileyshut.com/smileys/new/Battle/throw-rocks.gif (http://www.smileyshut.com/Smileys/Smiley-Huts-Free-Battle-Smileys.html)

[Fox Stirling]

So, essentially, you won't defend any of your assertions when called on them, insinuate anyone who disagrees with you is stupid and/or crazy, and insist that you are the only knowledgeable poster on anything here.

Good to know.

/ignore

Stank is the King Troll of the Politics and Religion forum, and that's how he rolls. Didn't you know this already? :D

[Fmeh]

Some people are dumbasses. It's not a big deal. If they don't want to hear about their being a dumbass, they don't have to pester me with their idiocy.

"His conclusions make him look like a bitter person" is not a logical argument. Why do you disagree with his conclusions? It's all straightforward and logical. That's why you have to resort to dismissing him because of your silly unfounded hatred of Rumsfeld.

I can look at the same facts that he gives and draw a different conclusion from them. The problem with the article is that it's actually rather difficult to extrapolate the facts from the very strong, stubborn opinions. The facts are hidden in the opinions. Articles written in such ways are very difficult to counter, which I'm guessing is why you chose the article--so you can belittle anyone who can't separate the facts from the opinions efficiently enough for the standards in which you desire.

Maybe if you posted articles that posted more facts than opinions, it would be easier to discuss, but I personally don't think that's the goal you have in mind. If you were to post an article written more in the style of William F. Buckley vs the style of Rush Limbaugh, Bill O'Reilly, or Ann Coulter, people would be able to talk about it a little bit easier. It is difficult to argue with hatred.

There was no reason for him to bring up Wright. Wright is a racist and everyone knows it. There's no debating that.



There are areas that I agree with the article: I think Obama should be considering nuclear power. I think there is too much spending in this administration--but I also felt the last administration did too much spending as well.

I agree about his point of "The war against those who want to get rich" in that people are trying to spread the wealth, but I don't have a problem with the concept, he does, he's very very hateful towards the concept.

When he says

We all know what that a good health care system can be improved by increased competition, tort reform, tax credits for catastrophic insurance plans, deregulation, etc.

We all know? No, we don't. Those things have never been proven to work--it's wanting to try something that has never been proven to work. Tort reform? That's NEVER going to happen. Tort reform is never going to happen, just as real campaign finance reform will never happen. Deregulation? In the United States, when has deregulation ever resulted in anything good? Deregulation would mean that the crappy situation we currently have will be a tenfold worse because they'll be able to charge whatever they want and offer as little actual services as they want. The idea of deregulation in these industries is lunacy as it has never worked.

I also disagree with how he thinks that Obama going back on his word about the troops in Iraq is a good thing. The longer we're in Iraq, the longer we'll be spending money we don't have and increasing the deficit and increasing the negative opinions and rumors about our troops in the middle east.

But I DO agree with him that Obama is copying the actions of the previous administration--but I don't think that's a good thing. He does.

[Stankleberry Sullivan]

Stank is the King Troll of the Politics and Religion forum, and that's how he rolls. Didn't you know this already? :D


As usual, leftists attack people who don't agree with their silly beliefs, then whine about those people reacting to them in a disrespectful way. That's what one does when they want to avoid actually thinking about their ridiculous illogical beliefs.

But you dismiss me as a troll or whatever you like to keep yourself from questioning your crap beliefs.

[Richard Waveington]

It seems some have forgotten (http://forums.secondlife.com/search.php?searchid=4331593)

Sorry - no matches. Please try some different terms.

:(

[Joy Honey]

Sorry!

Just go to the SL forums and search for posts by Stanky. Good times, good times.

EDIT: The posts are over 3 years old, but the tunes are all the same.

[Richard Waveington]

Holy shit he's a Creationist!! :roflmao:

[Cocoanut Koala]

http://progressivenation.us/2009/08/11/the-difference-between-astroturfing-and-grassroots-protests/

I read that earnest piece.

You actually believe it.

I guess you want to believe it.

Basically, it said that those who are in the tea parties and at the town halls, like the people in picture number 1, are astroturf, but just don't realize it.

They are sincere, just stupid!

People may think they want to tell their representative not to vote for something, or want to tell him to stop the spending, but really, they are just tools - they don't really know what they think, or what to think. Because they are stupid. They can't know anything about spending. Or health care.

Proof? Some other people somewhere, like insurance companies, probably want the same thing, see! And as for the spending - well, what do people know? Do you think they can actually read government charts?

So these people should just go home and shut up, because their viewpoints can't be valid on the face of it, understand? (We know that anyway, because we know they are wrong.)

As opposed to the people in picture #2! Who are sincere and smart!

Who aren't astroturf, but genuine grassroots!

Of course, the article explains, "People did flock to groups like MoveOn.org, A.N.S.W.E.R. coalition, and United for Peace and Jus*tice, who did some top down organizing, but the central difference is that this was an upswell of homegrown outrage which coalesced into a national movement."

But that's DIFFERENT, see. Because that's genuine. Those on the other side don't know what they are doing.

"Astroturfing means to mimic a grassroots movement, with the powerful lobbyists behind the movement hiding their agenda by pretending to be individuals voicing their opinions," the article explains carefully to its audience, who have apparently lived their lives in a paper bag.

"See the difference?" the article asks condescendingly. Well, do you? Fool?

The article also quoted a web site that has a total of 5k readers as its proof. This same web site has been quoted everywhere as "proof."

Naturally people were talking about all this unprecedented spending and this ridiculous health care bill. Naturally they are organizing tea parties and the like. Just as they organize anti-war marches and the like.

If you could be here, Richie, and could attend a tea party or a town hall, you would see and know that these people are just regular people from the area. People who other people recognize as their neighbors. It's like looking at the people at a PTA meeting or something.

That's why the public didn't buy the idea of astroturfing (or racists, or nazis, or whatever). Because they know these people. They are their neighbors, their fathers, their grandmothers, the same people they see at the local PTA meeting and the grocery store. So it just didn't wash.

It also doesn't wash to have to conclude that all these people are stupid. About the only people who could conclude that are the same sorts of people who write articles like that one, who think everyone on their side is smart, and everyone on the other side must be dupes.

I have been in on the tea parties since the beginning, and if anything, they aren't organized enough. The town hall meetings - well, it doesn't take someone telling me to go to one for me to come up with the idea of going to one. Ditto the tea party - I was ready for that before they ever thought that up.

(It does, however, take considerable top-down organizing from the Democratic Party to counter the health care bill protests, who immediately organized for SEIU and others to start attending town halls, and provided buses, t-shirts, and signs for the occasion. They had to - because regular people just weren't rising to the occasion, like we were.)

But given the circular argument of that article, it doesn't matter that they are just regular, sincere people, because they are actually being herded! Astroturfed!

The poor things, if they could only think for themselves, they would decide that spending way more than we will ever be able to shake a stick at is actually a wonderful idea, and that health care bill fiasco was the most fabulous piece of thinking ever known to man!

It's very circular, Richie, that piece. You could write the exact same thing about the people in picture #2, and it would be just as valid.

Take-away from article: It's something we agree with, it is grassroots, no matter who is involved. If we don't agree with it, then it's astroturf! Evil forces taking advantage of the stupid people!

***

It's interesting - people can tell each other this all they want, but the congress people don't buy it. They know it is real, and they know it is grassroots.

coco

[Stankleberry Sullivan]

Sorry!

Just go to the SL forums and search for posts by Stanky. Good times, good times.

EDIT: The posts are over 3 years old, but the tunes are all the same.


You must be pretty tone deaf. I, unlike you, have a different tune than I had 4 years ago. You're the one stuck rigidly believing the same silly things that don't make any sense.

[Richard Waveington]

man.. the amount of these, Stank: *edited* Reason: remove intolerant behaviour

shameful shit..

[Joy Honey]

Oh, Stanky, just because you don't say "der hippie" anymore doesn't mean you don't still say the same things.

Oh, wait! Do you no longer believe homosexuality is a disability?

[Richard Waveington]

I miss when that forum was fun... good times :(

[Fox Stirling]

As usual, leftists attack people who don't agree with their silly beliefs, then whine about those people reacting to them in a disrespectful way. That's what one does when they want to avoid actually thinking about their ridiculous illogical beliefs.

But you dismiss me as a troll or whatever you like to keep yourself from questioning your crap beliefs.

Ohhh I get it, ok my turn: As usual, Stank posts controversial, inflammatory, irrelevant or off-topic messages in an online community, such as an online discussion forum, chat room or blog, with the primary intent of provoking other users into an emotional response, or of otherwise disrupting normal on-topic discussion.

(ok, so I cheated, that's a slightly truncated definition of a forum troll, but hey, if the shoe fits ;) )


Nah I'm not a leftist, I just don't agree with your views, but I guess to you I might as well be since I don't lean as far right as you do. Also, I'm not dismissing you, you make for awesome comic relief for an otherwise completely boring subject to me, we need you here.
Nice try pinning me as a leftist though, I'll certainly award you points on that one, if for no other reason than prompting me to respond. This is why you are the King after all ;)

[Stankleberry Sullivan]

man.. the amount of these, Stank:

shameful shit..


Haha, yes, that was a really shitty message board. Imagine a place where people like you had the ability to replace peoples' posts with that, really any time they didn't agree with what the posts said.

You would like it there.

[Cocoanut Koala]

I certainly hope you're not referring to the right wing talking point that "the wrong kinds of people, a.k.a. those poor people, a.k.a. those people who look different from us, tried to buy houses and its all their fault". You're not, right? I'd hate to call anyone racist who was merely incapable of expressing themselves.

I *think* he was referring to Barney Frank and all that deal where the banks had to loan money to people who had little hope of ever repaying it back.

Is it racist to mention that? Do we now just have to pretend everyone can have whatever size loan they want? (Well, or just those who look different from us?)

coco

[Richard Waveington]

Reading Kendra handing you your Ass, Stank.. brings a tear to my eye...

[Richard Waveington]

Haha, yes, that was a really shitty message board. Imagine a place where people like you had the ability to replace peoples' posts with that, really any time they didn't agree with what the posts said.

You would like it there.

Jeska Linden.

[Cocoanut Koala]

Didn't you read my link? http://www.smileyshut.com/smileys/new/Battle/throw-rocks.gif (http://www.smileyshut.com/Smileys/Smiley-Huts-Free-Battle-Smileys.html)

Your link was broken when I tried to follow it.

coco

[Cocoanut Koala]

I can look at the same facts that he gives and draw a different conclusion from them. The problem with the article is that it's actually rather difficult . . .
. . .I also disagree with how he thinks that Obama going back on his word about the troops in Iraq is a good thing. The longer we're in Iraq, the longer we'll be spending money we don't have and increasing the deficit and increasing the negative opinions and rumors about our troops in the middle east.

But I DO agree with him that Obama is copying the actions of the previous administration--but I don't think that's a good thing. He does.

You agree with him on some stuff, disagree on other stuff, and overall, mostly disagree.

But why the "bitter" part?

coco

[Stankleberry Sullivan]

Ohhh I get it, ok my turn: As usual, Stank posts controversial, inflammatory, irrelevant or off-topic messages in an online community, such as an online discussion forum, chat room or blog, with the primary intent of provoking other users into an emotional response, or of otherwise disrupting normal on-topic discussion.

(ok, so I cheated, that's a slightly truncated definition of a forum troll, but hey, if the shoe fits ;) )


Yes, and when you contort that definition to include anyone that dares to question leftist nonsense, you are using "troll" as a way to dismiss ideas that you are not allowed to consider. My posts only are "controversial" because there are apparently a lot of people here who are not used to or good at being around people who don't believe the same leftist nonsense that they do. I'm not trying to be controversial. I believe everything I say.

Dismissing controversial people is what religions do, right? Anyone that dares to question beliefs that are accepted, but clearly false. Crap religion.

[Circe Timtam]

http://sarcasmic.net/misc/over.jpg

[Stankleberry Sullivan]

Oh, Stanky, just because you don't say "der hippie" anymore doesn't mean you don't still say the same things.

Oh, wait! Do you no longer believe homosexuality is a disability?



I don't think I ever actually said "der hippie" when I was there. That was a couple of mentally ill people there that made that phrase so annoying, by repeating it over and over, in different colors, spamming the shit out of the forum. Because someone that doesn't believe the same things that they do dares to visit. Very tolerant, right?

I don't know if I ever said it was a disability. I probably said it was a defect.

[Cocoanut Koala]

man.. the amount of these, Stank:

shameful shit..

AS IF - SL forums are any indication of any sort of common sense whatsoever.

[Fmeh]

You agree with him on some stuff, disagree on other stuff, and overall, mostly disagree.

But why the "bitter" part?

coco

Just a hunch, a feeling, I have nothing to back it up. It just seems that way.

[Joy Honey]

AS IF - SL forums are any indication of any sort of common sense whatsoever.

Those were the posts Jeska removed. He had basically said homosexuality was a disability or something along those lines.

[Richard Waveington]

You must be pretty tone deaf. I, unlike you, have a different tune than I had 4 years ago. You're the one stuck rigidly believing the same silly things that don't make any sense.

Stank April 2006
Again, consider what it is about me that pisses you off so much. Is it really the way I present my ideas, or is it the ideas themselves that upset you? Perhaps you're angry because the things that I say make so much sense and the things you believe in make very little sense. People often get upset in that situation, it's difficult to let go of religious beliefs that you've held for so long, so you have an angry reaction to protect yourself.


:roflmao:

[Stankleberry Sullivan]

Stank April 2006



:roflmao:



Haha, yes, some things are still very true, and need to be said over and over, so people can recognize that they're doing it, so they may become wise about the world and how things work.

[Joy Honey]

You must be pretty tone deaf. I, unlike you, have a different tune than I had 4 years ago. You're the one stuck rigidly believing the same silly things that don't make any sense.

Why yes, I believe you say the same silly things that don't make any sense that you did 4 years ago.

[Stankleberry Sullivan]

Why yes, I believe you say the same silly things that don't make any sense that you did 4 years ago.


No I don't. You do.

[Richard Waveington]

smiling ear to ear here... so much win and fail at the same time..

[Joy Honey]

No I don't. You do.

YouTube - I know you are but what am I? - Pee-Wee's Big Adventure

[Circe Timtam]

Hehe, like I've said, people will get exactly as much respect from me as they deserve.

But you can whine about it if you'd like, it's fun. I remember when you whined about it when people called me similar names. Oh shit, that's right, you didn't at all. That's weird, right? And you also somehow forgot about it, huh? I bet you just didn't read any of those threads. Or this one. :yep:


Actually I was commenting more about another thread (or maybe it was this one...all these baiting threads meld into one) where someone mentioned that you never resort to name calling.

See, I note that people might call you names after repeatedly slamming their head against the wall that is your constant spew, but your 'tactics' seem to be to just push forth one of your talking points and then when people actually try to engage you in a real discussion, you epically FAIL to really provide any sort of debate other than to call anyone who holds a varying opinion various names...usually referencing their intelligence. I have yet to see you engage in any sort of debate where you don't do this. SO, while I think resorting to name calling is a bit ridiculous in any discussion and from anyone, you come out of the box doing it. SO I am going to choose to laugh hysterically at you giving me shit for calling YOU on your ridiculousness. Show us you can have any kind of discussion without immediately calling someone who disagrees a name and actually post some REAL info on a subject, then I might revise my opinion.

"You are a moron and clearly cannot understand and so I am dismissing all of your intelligent statements, assuming you are wrong and will continue to mock and namecall." Is not a good discussion or debate tactic. And people will call you on your shit. KTHX BAI!

[Weedy]

double post

[Weedy]

Stank is the King Troll of the Politics and Religion forum, and that's how he rolls. Didn't you know this already? :D

Stank is a lightweight.

I kick three of his type out of my office before coffee break.

He is obviously unable to speak from experience, education or knowledge. Instead he insults others, contradicts himself and cannot answer a single question question without hyperbole and his own FOX news spoon-fed delusions.

Let him cry in his beer for the next 7.5 years, probably the next 15.5 years.

With every word, he alludes to why the GOP lost.

And I laugh :roflmao:

[Lucifer Baphomet]

I forgot how much Coco despised him, till I reread the kicking a dog to death thread....

Yes Coco, stank is the guy who disgusted you by supporting an American's right to kick an old deaf blind dog to death.

[Vengence Opus]

I forgot how much Coco despised him, till I reread the kicking a dog to death thread....

Yes Coco, stank is the guy who disgusted you by supporting an ameericans right to kick an old deaf blind dog to death.

From my extensive research on the matter, it appears to be a wagon circle of convenience.

[Stankleberry Sullivan]

I forgot how much Coco despised him, till I reread the kicking a dog to death thread....

Yes Coco, stank is the guy who disgusted you by supporting an American's right to kick an old deaf blind dog to death.



It was like 3.5 years ago. In internet time that is like 10 years. I was definitely more of a trouble maker back then. I have had very many private sexually perverted conversations with Coco since then.

[Shagazm]

It was like 3.5 years ago. In internet time that is like 10 years. I was definitely more of a trouble maker back then. I have had very many private sexually perverted conversations with Coco since then.

I was there, I saw it all

[Cocoanut Koala]

I forgot how much Coco despised him, till I reread the kicking a dog to death thread....

Yes Coco, stank is the guy who disgusted you by supporting an American's right to kick an old deaf blind dog to death.

What?

[Lucifer Baphomet]

It was like 3.5 years ago. In internet time that is like 10 years. I was definitely more of a trouble maker back then. I have had very many private sexually perverted conversations with Coco since then.


You were a bad boy back then, and I hope Coco spanks you....


no wait...


you'd like that.

[Freya]

:nothingtoadd: :D


oh Luc, I had a lovely London Broil last night. was quite tasty.

http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2658/3898930144_6896219475_m.jpg

[Vivianne Draper]

Welcome to my ignore list, Stankle. You sound like a chainsaw on metal. Boring.

i love you a little more with every post you make.

[Vivianne Draper]

Didn't you read my link? http://www.smileyshut.com/smileys/new/Battle/throw-rocks.gif (http://www.smileyshut.com/Smileys/Smiley-Huts-Free-Battle-Smileys.html)

i can't from work sob

[Asher Bertrand]

In this thread I have learned that Richard Wavington=Richie Waves and that Stank needs more attention to feel good about being alive.

Also, I won't be having mushrooms on my steak, Luc, as I am allergic to them and they give me the shits.

That is all.

[Richard Waveington]

I had to mix the name up to confuse google stalkers :)

[Stankleberry Sullivan]

Stank needs more attention to feel good about being alive.


You are not very good at learning.

[Asher Bertrand]

You are not very good at learning.

Aw heck, Snookieberry, this thread isn't about health care. Just as you intended, it's about you! You, and what people had for dinner. So combining those, here's another serving of what you crave:

http://blackmenvent.com/attention_whore.jpg

[Stankleberry Sullivan]

Aw heck, Snookieberry, this thread isn't about health care. Just as you intended, it's about you! You, and what people had for dinner. So combining those, here's another serving of what you crave:


No, it's not about health care. It's about something Victor Hanson wrote. Other people took it off topic, not me.

The only people that whine about "attention whores" are people who themselves are attention whores, who get jealous any time anyone else gets some attention.

Or you're just a lefty trying yet another strategy for shutting down anyone who doesn't believe the same dumb shit you do.

One or the other.

[Asher Bertrand]

No, it's not about health care. It's about something Victor Hanson wrote. Other people took it off topic, not me.

The only people that whine about "attention whores" are people who themselves are attention whores, who get jealous any time anyone else gets some attention.

Or you're just a lefty trying yet another strategy for shutting down anyone who doesn't believe the same dumb shit you do.

One or the other.

You're trying really hard to make people upset. I suppose it gives you a rush and makes you feel alive and vindicated or whatever.

So, do anything fun over the weekend?

[Stankleberry Sullivan]

You're trying really hard to make people upset. I suppose it gives you a rush and makes you feel alive and vindicated or whatever.


I'm not trying really hard, it is very easy to upset people that are in a cult with beliefs that make no sense. All I have to do is post some truths. Then they flip out like children. Poor babies.

[Richard Waveington]

No, it's not about health care. It's about something Victor Hanson wrote. Other people took it off topic, not me.

The only people that whine about "attention whores" are people who themselves are attention whores, who get jealous any time anyone else gets some attention.

Or you're just a lefty trying yet another strategy for shutting down anyone who doesn't believe the same dumb shit you do.

One or the other.

you are fucked..

[Asher Bertrand]

Me, I stripped wallpaper. Not so much fun.

[Lucifer Baphomet]

Me, I stripped wallpaper. Not so much fun.

bet you'd rather have been stripping Killian :p

[Cocoanut Koala]

TONIGHT'S dinner (are we still on dinners?) was beef stew, cornbread, and green beans.

Hubby is down there scarfing it up as we speak. Me, I'm waiting a bit, as I had some lunch at 1:00.

:coco:

[Stankleberry Sullivan]

Victor Hanson on 9/11 (http://article.nationalreview.com/?q=NGU2ZWM2YzI5MzkxMjhjOTVhYWU1ZTZlZGM5ZGY0Y2U=)

[Stankleberry Sullivan]

Consider: The 120,000 troops in “the surge is not working” Iraq are now complaining of ennui —while the White House is paralyzed over whether to send more troops to the new escalating front in Afghanistan. (http://pajamasmedia.com/victordavishanson/obamanoia/) How odd the present perceptions: Bush’s bad optional war became good in the public mind, and Obama’s necessary good war became bad. (Careful study of the history of both countries, the existing challenges, and the topography might have suggested to candidate Obama to be careful about demonizing the surge while chest-thumping a war he never wished to finish. Did Obama really think he would be elected, hailed as the anti-war laureate, simply summon home the troops from the “quagmire” in Iraq, and then fly over to Kabul to do a Victory Column speech?).

The Russian gambit failed; Putin humiliated the Eastern Europeans and then rubbed it in by lecturing us about “hands off Iran.” The July threat to Iran of comply—or “face consequences” by September—morphed into September’s comply—or “face consequences by the October head-to-head meetings—which, in turn, morphed into October’s comply—or some day soon face consequences.


Another good article from Victor Hanson.

[Lucifer Baphomet]

You post things Hanson said...

I see
Oh oh oh oh oh
Yeah

You have so many relationships in this life
Only one or two will last
You go through all the pain and strife
Then you turn your back and they're gone so fast
Oh yeah
And they're gone so fast, yeah
Oh
So hold on the ones who really care
In the end they'll be the only ones there
And when you get old and start losing your hair
Tell me who will still care
Can you tell me who will still care?
Oh care

Mmmbop, ba duba dop
Ba du bop, ba duba dop
Ba du bop, ba duba dop
Ba du
Yeah
Mmmbop, ba duba dop
Ba du bop, Ba du dop
Ba du bop, Ba du dop
Ba du
Yeah

Oh yeah
In an Mmmbop they're gone
Yeah yeah

Plant a seed, plant a flower, plant a rose
You can plant any one of those
Keep planting to find out which one grows
It's a secret no one knows
It's a secret no one knows
Oh, no one knows

Mmmbop, ba duba dop
Ba du bop, ba duba dop
Ba du bop, ba duba dop
Ba du, yeah
Mmmbop, ba duba dop
Ba du bop, Ba du dop
Ba du bop, Ba du dop
Ba du, yeah

Oh
Yeah oh

In an mmm bop they're gone
Oh yeah oh
In an mmmbop they're gone
In an mmm bop they're not there
In an mmmbop they're gone
In an mmm bop they're not there
In an mmmbop they're gone
In an mmmbop they're not there
In an mmmbop they're gone
In an mmmbop they're not there
Until you lose your hair
Oh
But you don't care

Mmmbop, ba duba dop
Ba du bop, ba duba dop
Ba du bop, ba duba dop
Ba du, yeah
Mmmbop, ba duba dop
Ba du bop, Ba du dop
Ba du bop, Ba du dop
Ba du, yeah

Yeah
Oh yeah oh oh
So hold on the ones who really care
In the end they'll be the only ones there
And hen you get old and start losing your hair
Tell me who will still care
Can you tell me who will still care?
Oh care

Mmmbop, ba duba dop
Ba du bop, ba duba dop
Ba du bop, ba duba dop
Ba du, yeah
Mmmbop, ba duba dop
Ba du bop, Ba du dop
Ba du bop, Ba du dop
Ba du, care

Can you tell me? oh
No you can't 'cause you don't know
Can you tell me? oh
You say you can but you don't know
Can you tell me? oh
(Which flower's going to grow?)
No you can't 'cause you don't know
Can you tell me? oh
(If it's going to be a daisy or a rose?)
You say you can but you don't know
Can you tell me? oh
(which flower's going to grow?)
No you can't 'cause you don't know
Can you tell me? oh
You say you can but you don't know
Oh yeah
You say you can but you don't know
You dont know
You dont know, oh

Mmmbop, ba duba dop
Ba du bop, ba duba dop
Ba du bop, ba duba dop
Ba du, yeah
Mmmbop, ba duba dop
Ba du bop, Ba du dop
Ba du bop, Ba du dop
Ba du, care

Oh
Can u tell me? oh
No you can't 'cause you don't know
Can u tell me? oh
You say you can but you don't know
Can u tell me? oh
No you can't 'cause you don't know
Can u tell me?
You say you can but you don't know

[Charlemagne Allen]

Dude, do some good music...

Times have changed,
And we've often rewound the clock,
Since the Puritans got a shock,
When they landed on Plymouth Rock.
If today,
Any shock they should try to stem,
'Stead of landing on Plymouth Rock,
Plymouth Rock would land on them.

In olden days a glimpse of stocking
Was looked on as something shocking,
But now, God knows,
Anything Goes.

Good authors too who once knew better words,
Now only use four letter words
Writing prose, Anything Goes.

The world has gone mad today
And good's bad today,
And black's white today,
And day's night today,
When most guys today
That women prize today
Are just silly gigolos
And though I'm not a great romancer
I know that I'm bound to answer
When you propose,
Anything goes

When grandmama whose age is eighty
In night clubs is getting matey with gigolo's,
Anything Goes.

When mothers pack and leave poor father
Because they decide they'd rather be tennis pros,
Anything Goes.

If driving fast cars you like,
If low bars you like,
If old hymns you like,
If bare limbs you like,
If Mae West you like
Or me undressed you like,
Why, nobody will oppose!
When every night,
The set that's smart
Is intruding in nudist parties in studios,
Anything Goes.

The world has gone mad today
And good's bad today,
And black's white today,
And day's night today,
When most guys today
That women prize today
Are just silly gigolos
And though I'm not a great romancer
I know that I'm bound to answer
When you propose,
Anything goes

If saying your prayers you like,
If green pears you like
If old chairs you like,
If back stairs you like,
If love affairs you like
With young bears you like,
Why nobody will oppose!

And though I'm not a great romancer
And though I'm not a great romancer
I know that I'm bound to answer
When you propose,
Anything goes...
Anything goes!

:woot:

[Seven]

[nvm]

[Lucifer Baphomet]

Which one is Victor?

http://www.boston.com/ae/sidekick/blog/hanson.jpg

[Govi]

Come gather 'round people
Wherever you roam
And admit that the waters
Around you have grown
And accept it that soon
You'll be drenched to the bone.
If your time to you
Is worth savin'
Then you better start swimmin'
Or you'll sink like a stone
For the times they are a-changin'.

Come writers and critics
Who prophesize with your pen
And keep your eyes wide
The chance won't come again
And don't speak too soon
For the wheel's still in spin
And there's no tellin' who
That it's namin'.
For the loser now
Will be later to win
For the times they are a-changin'.

Come senators, congressmen
Please heed the call
Don't stand in the doorway
Don't block up the hall
For he that gets hurt
Will be he who has stalled
There's a battle outside
And it is ragin'.
It'll soon shake your windows
And rattle your walls
For the times they are a-changin'.

Come mothers and fathers
Throughout the land
And don't criticize
What you can't understand
Your sons and your daughters
Are beyond your command
Your old road is
Rapidly agin'.
Please get out of the new one
If you can't lend your hand
For the times they are a-changin'.

The line it is drawn
The curse it is cast
The slow one now
Will later be fast
As the present now
Will later be past
The order is
Rapidly fadin'.
And the first one now
Will later be last
For the times they are a-changin'.
For the better, I hope.

[Don Mill]

Which one is Victor?

http://www.boston.com/ae/sidekick/blog/hanson.jpg

The redneck?

:hug:

[Cocoanut Koala]

Redneck?

Victor Davis Hanson (born 1953 in Fowler, California) is a military historian, columnist, political essayist and former classics professor, notable as a scholar of ancient warfare.

Hanson, who is of Swedish ancestry, grew up on a family farm at Selma, in the San Joaquin Valley of California. His mother was a lawyer and judge, his father an educator and college administrator. Along with his older brother Nils and fraternal twin Alfred, he attended public schools and graduated from Selma High School. Hanson received his B.A. from the University of California, Santa Cruz in 1975[citation needed] and his Ph.D. in classics from Stanford University in 1980.

ye olde wikipedia

[Don Mill]

Redneck?

Victor Davis Hanson (born 1953 in Fowler, California) is a military historian, columnist, political essayist and former classics professor, notable as a scholar of ancient warfare.

Hanson, who is of Swedish ancestry, grew up on a family farm at Selma, in the San Joaquin Valley of California. His mother was a lawyer and judge, his father an educator and college administrator. Along with his older brother Nils and fraternal twin Alfred, he attended public schools and graduated from Selma High School. Hanson received his B.A. from the University of California, Santa Cruz in 1975[citation needed] and his Ph.D. in classics from Stanford University in 1980.

ye olde wikipedia

Coco, do you realize that none of the Hanson boys in that picture have a red neck? I was being ironic... *sigh*

:hug:

[Cocoanut Koala]

OK, sorry, misunderstood any joke.

coco

[Stankleberry Sullivan]

Another fine Victor Hanson article about Palin (http://pajamasmedia.com/victordavishanson/palin-odes/), and the reasons she causes the insane reactions that she does.


1. Why does she create hysteria?

i). Feminists are enraged that her can-do, have a Down’s Syndrome child in her 40s, shoot-moose persona will be used as a paradigm of a liberated women. She is quite attractive, fertile, and married to a Jack-Armstrong 19th-century man.

Her success as an independent female, who was an up-from-the-bootstraps small-town council member, mayor, state regulator and governor, is antithetical to doctrinaire feminism. The latter devolved into a political and grievance-based creed. It is often whiny, and increasingly dominated by single, childless shrill elites. Many try to equate their own unhappiness in matters of family and sex into some sort of cosmic complaint against male patriarchy—as a way of leveraging influence, access, money, and power or simply justifying now regrettable life choices made in their 20’s and 30’s.

Feminism is not about ensuring that Dorothy at K-Mart is not fired because she is female. It is more about an upper-middle-class Dedi Wilson-Reynolds getting to the top of the university food chain, law firm, or government bureaucracy, on the assumption that her gender deserves compensation, in the manner of being non-white or foreign-born or non-Christian.

In such a climate, here comes snazzy, breezy, winking Sarah—happy, good-looking, a mom, and in no need of a rich husband or well-connected dad (in the manner of her critics like a Andrea Mitchell, Sally Quinn, Nancy Pelosi, etc). She inherently exposes feminism as a liberal advocacy movement rather than a bipartisan effort to ensure equal opportunity for women in the workplace and society at large.

Truth.

[margaret mfume]

"As my father likes to say: she's not retreating; she's reloading," Ms Palin replied in folksy Alaskan.

Reloading? That's the most accurate description of her resignation as governor and in regards to how this action best serves the people in her opinion?

okay, then.

[margaret mfume]

I think I know where Laurynce gets his thread killing qualities from. :smitten:

[Joy Honey]

From Stankleberry?













:hidecouch:

[margaret mfume]

oh lord, even I can see better than that in the cornfield



even with my eyes closed