molson_golden2002 Posted April 7, 2007 Share Posted April 7, 2007 This kind of useless TV makes me think about My gross overgeneralization of the day: Mass media has ruined democracy. I thought big government destroyed democracy? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JimBob2232 Posted April 7, 2007 Share Posted April 7, 2007 How could geraldo not see oreillys point?! His point was CLEARLY that if you are in this country illegally, and commit a crime, you need to be deported. The only reason this is big news now, is that the guy was NOT deported, and wound up killing someone. It has nothing to do with drunk driving. It could have been a shooting, drug dealing, anything. I cant believe the apathy in this country towards illegals. I welcome them all in, but file the paperwork, get a green card, get a job, pay taxes, and learn the language. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
/dev/null Posted April 7, 2007 Share Posted April 7, 2007 I thought big government destroyed democracy? I thought George W Bush destroyed democracy? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RLflutie7 Posted April 7, 2007 Share Posted April 7, 2007 How could geraldo not see oreillys point?! His point was CLEARLY that if you are in this country illegally, and commit a crime, you need to be deported. The only reason this is big news now, is that the guy was NOT deported, and wound up killing someone. It has nothing to do with drunk driving. It could have been a shooting, drug dealing, anything. I cant believe the apathy in this country towards illegals. I welcome them all in, but file the paperwork, get a green card, get a job, pay taxes, and learn the language. That's the problem. They refuse to learn the language and thus they don't fit into American Society. Many times the younger children learn the language, but the parents do not. And what does "welcome them all in" mean exactly? And how many of these people are you willing to welcome before you cut them off? We can't have the entire country of Mexico living here. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
molson_golden2002 Posted April 7, 2007 Share Posted April 7, 2007 I thought George W Bush destroyed democracy? No, no, I'm pretty positive it was FDR that destroyed it Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sketch Soland Posted April 7, 2007 Share Posted April 7, 2007 I thought Thomas Hobbes destroyed democracy? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Prognastic Posted April 8, 2007 Share Posted April 8, 2007 I thought Thomas Hobbes destroyed democracy? I thought it was Roy Hobbs? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HereComesTheReignAgain Posted April 8, 2007 Share Posted April 8, 2007 I won't disagree about tossing the DD guy out. You come here, committ a crime, you should have to go back and re-enter America at a later date. But Geraldo was right about the maggot O'Reilly using this as a cheap political stunt to skapegoat an entire class of people. I know, I know, they are 'illegal' so its ok to hate them. If Dildo O'Reilly doesn't like drunk drivers, why doesn't he bash them more? Oh that's right, they are "legal" drunk drivers Illegal immigrants are now a "class of people" that are unfairly discriminated against? Oh well, it's my own fault for "luring them here" according to Geraldo. I hope Geraldo understands that same concept when his wife, sister or daughter lures a rapist with their pretty clothes. I bet Geraldo's home is nicer than mine, I should illegally live on his land and blame him for luring me there with a better lifestyle! By the way, they commit a crime by coming here in the first place, so are you saying they should all be sent back until they can re-enter at a later date? Or do you mean to deport them after they commit more crimes than illegally crossing the border? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wacka Posted April 8, 2007 Share Posted April 8, 2007 Jerry Rivers needs someone to "whoop him up side of his head " to knock some sense into him. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alaska Darin Posted April 8, 2007 Share Posted April 8, 2007 He's a lying, misquoting, lowlife cocksucking piece of sh--. Be as mean as you want. He doesnt deserve better. Please tell me this is going to end soon. I'm not sure I could take another "chasing each other around every thread" thing. Although it did give us "3.5". Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Orton's Arm Posted April 10, 2007 Share Posted April 10, 2007 I won't disagree about tossing the DD guy out. You come here, committ a crime, you should have to go back and re-enter America at a later date. But Geraldo was right about the maggot O'Reilly using this as a cheap political stunt to skapegoat an entire class of people. I know, I know, they are 'illegal' so its ok to hate them. If Dildo O'Reilly doesn't like drunk drivers, why doesn't he bash them more? Oh that's right, they are "legal" drunk drivers O'Reilly isn't a "maggot," nor was his treatment of that issue a "cheap political stunt." For whatever reason, we're not deporting illegal aliens, even after they commit crimes. In this particular case, our government's moral failure directly resulted in a completely preventable drunk driving death. O'Reilly should be making an issue of this, so that similar deaths can be prevented. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Orton's Arm Posted April 10, 2007 Share Posted April 10, 2007 He's a lying, misquoting, lowlife cocksucking piece of sh--. Be as mean as you want. He doesnt deserve better. Molson and I don't always agree, but I don't see him as a bad human being. I honestly believe he's seeking out the truth, to the best of his ability. Are there times when he fails to sufficiently question his own ideology? Yes, but he's hardly alone. It's more likely that Molson will question his liberal beliefs, than it is for Tom to question his own views about race. Yes, Molson believes he already has the truth. But combined with that, there's an earnestness to learn more. And to be completely honest, I strongly prefer Molson's earnest acceptance of liberalism to GG's complacent acceptance of liberalism. GG simply refuses to listen to non-liberal points of view, or to consider even the possibility that any of his liberal beliefs might possibly be wrong. At least Molson will argue with you, which is a lot less arrogant than GG's quiet assumption that any conservative viewpoint is too stupid to deserve an argument. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GG Posted April 10, 2007 Share Posted April 10, 2007 Yes, Molson believes he already has the truth. But combined with that, there's an earnestness to learn more. And to be completely honest, I strongly prefer Molson's earnest acceptance of liberalism to GG's complacent acceptance of liberalism. GG simply refuses to listen to non-liberal points of view, or to consider even the possibility that any of his liberal beliefs might possibly be wrong. At least Molson will argue with you, which is a lot less arrogant than GG's quiet assumption that any conservative viewpoint is too stupid to deserve an argument. I'm sure you're smart enough to read the ToS and stalking a poster who never even posted in a thread. But I enjoy your buffoonery around these parts to notice this flagrant violation. Keep talking and proving how masterful you are to the ordinary humans. ps - Sorry about the '36 Olympics. Maybe next time. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OCinBuffalo Posted April 10, 2007 Share Posted April 10, 2007 He's a lying, misquoting, lowlife cocksucking piece of sh--. Be as mean as you want. He doesnt deserve better. I'm not down with this. However true it may be, and I'm sure you can point out instances of lying and misquoting, there's no point in doing what MG does on a daily basis - talking smack. It doesn't convince anyone of anything. And, I like Darin's idea, simply continue to point out the lies and misquotes - sooner or later something will stick to MG just like the example AD used. Much better to simply contradict MG with the facts. S/He crumples every time(I'm starting to guess MG is a she, btw). I don't have a problem with opinions - I do have a problem with lies, but I have a bigger problem with shrill name calling. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Orton's Arm Posted April 10, 2007 Share Posted April 10, 2007 I'm sure you're smart enough to read the ToS and stalking a poster who never even posted in a thread. But I enjoy your buffoonery around these parts to notice this flagrant violation. I'm not exactly sure what you're getting at, because your sentences border on gibberish. But you've thrown enough insults my way that you don't exactly have the standing to go crying to the mods if I'm not always nice to you. Nor was my post "stalking"--I merely mentioned your complacent acceptance of all things liberal as a contrast to the earnest truth-seeking I see in Molson. In your own mind, was the accusation against you unfair? Do you honestly see yourself as someone who seriously thinks about non-liberal points of view before rejecting them? I've seen no evidence whatsoever that you do this. Instead, you put labels on non-liberal points of view; and in labeling them you reject them. Adding detail--such as the reference to the '36 Olympics--helps you flesh out the label, while sparing you from thinking about the underlying point of view. You use this "label and laugh" technique every time a non-liberal point of view is presented. Are you aware that you do this? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alaska Darin Posted April 10, 2007 Share Posted April 10, 2007 I'm not exactly sure what you're getting at, because your sentences border on gibberish. But you've thrown enough insults my way that you don't exactly have the standing to go crying to the mods if I'm not always nice to you. Nor was my post "stalking"--I merely mentioned your complacent acceptance of all things liberal as a contrast to the earnest truth-seeking I see in Molson. In your own mind, was the accusation against you unfair? Do you honestly see yourself as someone who seriously thinks about non-liberal points of view before rejecting them? I've seen no evidence whatsoever that you do this. Instead, you put labels on non-liberal points of view; and in labeling them you reject them. Adding detail--such as the reference to the '36 Olympics--helps you flesh out the label, while being spared the necessity of thinking about the underlying point of view. You use this "label and laugh" technique every time a non-liberal point of view is presented. Are you aware that you do this? That's just so cool. Now GG is a liberal. Keep 'em coming, man. Keep 'em coming. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Orton's Arm Posted April 10, 2007 Share Posted April 10, 2007 That's just so cool. Now GG is a liberal. Keep 'em coming, man. Keep 'em coming. GG's described himself as a liberal. Furthermore, he's written things like, (not an exact quote), "Molson makes me embarrassed to be a liberal." GG's contempt for Molson is a big reason why my post got under his skin. The last thing GG wanted to hear was that he was less rigorous of a thinker than Molson. Especially if it was true. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alaska Darin Posted April 10, 2007 Share Posted April 10, 2007 GG's described himself as a liberal. Furthermore, he's written things like, (not an exact quote), "Molson makes me embarrassed to be a liberal." GG's contempt for Molson is a big reason why my post got under his skin. Gee, I wonder who knows GG better? You or me? Hmmmmm. Your judgement of anyone here is laughable - but that's certainly not going to stop you from deepening the crevasse you reside in. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Orton's Arm Posted April 10, 2007 Share Posted April 10, 2007 Gee, I wonder who knows GG better? You or me? Hmmmmm. Your judgement of anyone here is laughable - but that's certainly not going to stop you from deepening the crevasse you reside in. Again, I've seen GG describe himself as a liberal. The only types of opinions I've seen him post have been consistent with liberalism. If you're going to try to tell me he's not a liberal, you're going to have to give me something more specific than, "I know him better than you do." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Taro T Posted April 10, 2007 Share Posted April 10, 2007 Again, I've seen GG describe himself as a liberal. The only types of opinions I've seen him post have been consistent with liberalism. If you're going to try to tell me he's not a liberal, you're going to have to give me something more specific than, "I know him better than you do." I could see calling him liberal if you were comparing him to a fascist, but ... Oh, nevermind. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts