Alaska Darin Posted September 30, 2004 Share Posted September 30, 2004 IT LIVES? Spend a lot of time on the phone today? 51424[/snapback] Work is really getting in the way of my internet time. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stevestojan Posted September 30, 2004 Author Share Posted September 30, 2004 Saying something like "backwoods moron" in alot of little towns in this country is just as likely to get your guts stomped out as using the word you supposedly despise so much. 51419[/snapback] That's true. But at least I'm not denying that I said it. and "porchie (porn+couch) boy" you can come up with something way better than that. I know you can. come on, that just wasnt very creative. (And an insulting nickname is never a good one if you have to explain it like you did)... Come on... like for you? Eskimo Heston... or something like that... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stevestojan Posted September 30, 2004 Author Share Posted September 30, 2004 Ever heard of free speech? 51419[/snapback] ever hear of hate speech? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
_BiB_ Posted September 30, 2004 Share Posted September 30, 2004 143 and counting. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paco Posted September 30, 2004 Share Posted September 30, 2004 Nothing better than hiding behind a ridiculous argument. Ever heard of free speech? You really ought to get out of your house more often, porchie (porn+couch) boy. Saying something like "backwoods moron" in alot of little towns in this country is just as likely to get your guts stomped out as using the word you supposedly despise so much. 51419[/snapback] Actually, Darin, I can understand what stevestojan is saying, really. Using racist names is bad because it assaults a certain group of people, whereas when he refers to backwoods morons, he's referring to basically all the people he considers himself better than. You know...people who work retail...people who didn't go to college...people who are watching the debates...those folks. But he'd never stoop so low as to stand in judgement of another person because of their ethnicity. THAT would be wrong. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stevestojan Posted September 30, 2004 Author Share Posted September 30, 2004 ok, Im done, cause this could go on forever. Im off to do my homework. Later. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
_BiB_ Posted September 30, 2004 Share Posted September 30, 2004 ok, Im done, cause this could go on forever. Im off to do my homework. Later. 51438[/snapback] Next weeks TV guide come in or posting on Billzone? (Couldn't resist ) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dan Gross Posted September 30, 2004 Share Posted September 30, 2004 Nothing better than hiding behind a ridiculous argument. Ever heard of free speech? You really ought to get out of your house more often, porchie (porn+couch) boy. Saying something like "backwoods moron" in alot of little towns in this country is just as likely to get your guts stomped out as using the word you supposedly despise so much. 51419[/snapback] Yeah, you've got a real pretty mouth on you there, Steve. I'd best be careful 'bout whatchew say 'round us backwoods morons! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dan Gross Posted September 30, 2004 Share Posted September 30, 2004 ok, Im done, cause this could go on forever. Im off to do my homework. Later. 51438[/snapback] Just don't come back here looking for the answers! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John from Riverside Posted September 30, 2004 Share Posted September 30, 2004 I just don't get it...... Rather than watching what is a big decision for our country, A decision that will effect everyday life in America you need to/want to watch a reality show? I work all day long why in Fvckin god's name would I go home to watch people compete for a job? Isn't that what we do all day long? 51176[/snapback] Because they are going to keep reairing it all night.... But hey......the bikini shows....now...that is important stuff..... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mead107 Posted September 30, 2004 Share Posted September 30, 2004 stevestojan u need help with your home work? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DC Tom Posted September 30, 2004 Share Posted September 30, 2004 My point is, and I think you affirm it, is that nobody has a full grip on all their candidates position. Most people will pick two or three issues that are close to them and decide on those. BOTH candidates are convulted and self-contradictory on many positions. (Yes Republicans, Bush does flip-flop, like all politicians do). In the 2000 debates, Bush claimed to be against nation building. How has that played out? I doubt, though, that Bush's flip-flop will prevent any Republicans from voting for him. Bush and Cheney don't seem to agree on the gay marriage amendment. Will that cost them votes? Anyway, like you, I believe that the debates could be important, but in reality, they'll probably be worthless. And I avoid the PPP board, because I've found that intelligent debate is difficult with that audience. 51403[/snapback] Reasonably, as pissed as I am at this administration's flip-flop on nation building...I have a hard time criticizing the change in position. I think the principle carries with it the inherent caveat of "unless you directly attack the civilian population of the continental US with kamikaze airliners". Realistically, 9/11 changed ALL the rules on national security (if you're mathematically minded: I think of it as akin to a discontinuity in a curve, where the equation that governs said curve can be different on either side). Anyone who changed the way they view national security issues on 9/11...they get a pass on that in my book. Also, I think the way the administration vacillates is fundamentally different than the way Kerry himself vacillates. Kerry's vacillation seems to me to be more grounded in a sort of personal weakness...it almost seems like he feels he has to be liked by everyone, or at the very least be fashionable according to the definition of the moment (and I've got maybe a few dozen examples that support this conjecture). The administration...I'm at somewhat more of advantage, as I have ties to more than a few people that work in the administration itself. The vacillation in the administration seems to be more due to a sort of "too many kings, not enough peasants" problem, where senior administration officials are given too much independence in policy matters, which leads to situations where Rumsfeld tries to play Secretary of State, or one spokesman calls war with Iraq a "matter of national security" in which the UN isn't relevant while across town on the same day another calls it "an international issue for the UN to resolve". The other issue with the administration is: they couldn't sell space heaters to Siberians. They quite simply can not present anything they want to say or think or believe to the American public in a marketable or even coherent form. How many reasons are we up to for invading Iraq now? Twenty-three? And what's the real reason? Well...it's actually kind of complicated, involving what I think is a questionable policy that ties anti-proliferation too closely to anti-terrorism. But it's not like the administration ever sold that on it's own merit...or even tried to, for that matter. But overall, when I consider the individuals involved in the administration, they all uniformly (with the possible exception of Cheney) seem to operate from a set of heartfelt, core beliefs. I don't necessarily agree with those beliefs, mind you, and they don't necessarily all share the same beliefs...but it's tough to argue that at the individual level the current administration is composed of people with a strong sense of moral direction - whether you agree with their morals or not. Kerry, on the other hand...he demonstrates what looks to me like a consistent tendency to do or "believe" what's popular. He doesn't have moral direction...he's got fashion sense. That, I think, is the essential difference in "flip-flopping": for one, it's a systemic problem. For the other, it's personal. And personally, I doubt the debates will be worth much. I'll watch, because national security is a key issue for me, and I'm still trying to get a bead on how precisely Kerry's plan is supposed to differ from what's going on right now...and like I said (or at least implied), you can't have too much information. You can pick up the strangest nuggets of gold in the biggest pile of steaming stevestojan sometimes. But my expectation is, again like I said, I'll get as much out of staring at two potatoes for an hour. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
_BiB_ Posted September 30, 2004 Share Posted September 30, 2004 Because they are going to keep reairing it all night.... But hey......the bikini shows....now...that is important stuff..... 51449[/snapback] I thought the internet was for porn. Didn't someone round these parts tell us so? Why half step with bikinis? Although I do like that little bit of wonder. Hey, they killed the good thread yesterday, got to get something up to 500 posts. Bye week really ain't that bad. Had a lot of fun. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DC Tom Posted September 30, 2004 Share Posted September 30, 2004 funny tom... you use the n-word and then can't even be man enough to admit it... whats wrong? scared you might have offended someone? Realize in the heat of the moment you probably shouldnt have typed out that word? Poor tom. . . tough guy, uses the N-word (and the word spic, and another terrible term) but 5 minutes later has to hide behind pretending that i used them. Sorry pal, not gonna work. You showed your true colors. 51418[/snapback] Couldn't win a debate, so you have to put words into my mouth? Again, ask the mods... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
_BiB_ Posted September 30, 2004 Share Posted September 30, 2004 Reasonably, as pissed as I am at this administration's flip-flop on nation building...I have a hard time criticizing the change in position. I think the principle carries with it the inherent caveat of "unless you directly attack the civilian population of the continental US with kamikaze airliners". Realistically, 9/11 changed ALL the rules on national security (if you're mathematically minded: I think of it as akin to a discontinuity in a curve, where the equation that governs said curve can be different on either side). Anyone who changed the way they view national security issues on 9/11...they get a pass on that in my book. Also, I think the way the administration vacillates is fundamentally different than the way Kerry himself vacillates. Kerry's vacillation seems to me to be more grounded in a sort of personal weakness...it almost seems like he feels he has to be liked by everyone, or at the very least be fashionable according to the definition of the moment (and I've got maybe a few dozen examples that support this conjecture). The administration...I'm at somewhat more of advantage, as I have ties to more than a few people that work in the administration itself. The vacillation in the administration seems to be more due to a sort of "too many kings, not enough peasants" problem, where senior administration officials are given too much independence in policy matters, which leads to situations where Rumsfeld tries to play Secretary of State, or one spokesman calls war with Iraq a "matter of national security" in which the UN isn't relevant while across town on the same day another calls it "an international issue for the UN to resolve". The other issue with the administration is: they couldn't sell space heaters to Siberians. They quite simply can not present anything they want to say or think or believe to the American public in a marketable or even coherent form. How many reasons are we up to for invading Iraq now? Twenty-three? And what's the real reason? Well...it's actually kind of complicated, involving what I think is a questionable policy that ties anti-proliferation too closely to anti-terrorism. But it's not like the administration ever sold that on it's own merit...or even tried to, for that matter. But overall, when I consider the individuals involved in the administration, they all uniformly (with the possible exception of Cheney) seem to operate from a set of heartfelt, core beliefs. I don't necessarily agree with those beliefs, mind you, and they don't necessarily all share the same beliefs...but it's tough to argue that at the individual level the current administration is composed of people with a strong sense of moral direction - whether you agree with their morals or not. Kerry, on the other hand...he demonstrates what looks to me like a consistent tendency to do or "believe" what's popular. He doesn't have moral direction...he's got fashion sense. That, I think, is the essential difference in "flip-flopping": for one, it's a systemic problem. For the other, it's personal. And personally, I doubt the debates will be worth much. I'll watch, because national security is a key issue for me, and I'm still trying to get a bead on how precisely Kerry's plan is supposed to differ from what's going on right now...and like I said (or at least implied), you can't have too much information. You can pick up the strangest nuggets of gold in the biggest pile of steaming stevestojan sometimes. But my expectation is, again like I said, I'll get as much out of staring at two potatoes for an hour. 51456[/snapback] Thanks Barry. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DC Tom Posted September 30, 2004 Share Posted September 30, 2004 I just read Tom's signature, very amusing 51416[/snapback] And thank you for taking it in the spirit in which it was written. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DC Tom Posted September 30, 2004 Share Posted September 30, 2004 Thanks Barry. 51459[/snapback] You're on the internet...go ask someone to read it for you while you watch TV... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
_BiB_ Posted September 30, 2004 Share Posted September 30, 2004 And thank you for taking it in the spirit in which it was written. 51461[/snapback] I'm certainly glad that I now know PPP is a place where no one understands the issues. I was working on WMD interdiction aspects to the Special Operations Commands warplan for the defeat of Al Queda today. What did you do? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DC Tom Posted September 30, 2004 Share Posted September 30, 2004 I'm certainly glad that I now know PPP is a place where no one understands the issues. I was working on WMD interdiction aspects to the Special Operations Commands warplan for the defeat of Al Queda today. What did you do? 51467[/snapback] I...uh...had an argument with a total idiot on the internet about tonight's TV schedule... <...slinks off...> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alaska Darin Posted September 30, 2004 Share Posted September 30, 2004 ever hear of hate speech? 51431[/snapback] I've heard of it, I just don't care too much about it. It doesn't matter whether I like it or not. What matters is the actual right. Nowhere in the Constitution are you granted the right not to be offended. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts