|
Post by starbux on Mar 12, 2013 20:33:23 GMT -6
Joe: Starbux is spoofing you with comm chatter. I post on a number of different political bulletin boards. His spiel "I used to be a staunch Repulican blah blah blah..." Is fairly common there. It's never taken seriously, as it should not be here, because it's so transparent. On the political boards, we call them "false flag posters." Don't kid yourself. He's a leftist and probably always has been, but he's a leftist who has read Alinksy's "Rules for Radicals." Thanks for the course correction Bob, but I was talking about the other new guy - Hangemhigh As far as Starbux is concerned, he is Honky in another disguise. Entertaining, but supremely wrong on all points. So we are now getting racial. Because I do not believe in everything that comes out of Rush and Beck as sound policy, that makes me a white leftist I am not the only Pro Death guy on this forum that has progressive views in other policy.
|
|
|
Post by Californian on Mar 13, 2013 9:47:43 GMT -6
So we are now getting racial. Actually, no. Joe is talking about a long-gone poster here, Honky Bouffant. "Honky" for short. Oh, now you're a "progressive?" Who knew?
|
|
|
Post by starbux on Mar 13, 2013 11:34:59 GMT -6
No I have some progressive views in certain areas. Traditionally I was mostly a fiscal conservative, I think they referred it as a "Fiscal Hawk" When It comes to military and national security issues I side with the Right. They seem to have reversed their stance lately. When it comes to global politics and policies. I side mostly with the left. I side with left on social policies, except the death penalty and crime.
Is it that odd to you to support viewpoints from both sides? I say that rhetorically, because obviously you must think so.
I support policies that progress society that allow us to move forward. I am against policies that are archaic or xenophobic in nature. I am not a religious guy so I do not support any policy that is backed up by religion. I support only things that empirically make sense.
I hate extremes on both sides, they are tearing apart this nation!
|
|
|
Post by SubSurfCPO(ret) on Mar 13, 2013 12:35:07 GMT -6
Thanks for the course correction Bob, but I was talking about the other new guy - Hangemhigh As far as Starbux is concerned, he is Honky in another disguise. Entertaining, but supremely wrong on all points. So we are now getting racial. Because I do not believe in everything that comes out of Rush and Beck as sound policy, that makes me a white leftist I am not the only Pro Death guy on this forum that has progressive views in other policy. Hey Genius! Honkyboufant was a previous poster. Try picking a fight somewhere else sport.
|
|
|
Post by starbux on Mar 13, 2013 12:54:44 GMT -6
So we are now getting racial. Because I do not believe in everything that comes out of Rush and Beck as sound policy, that makes me a white leftist I am not the only Pro Death guy on this forum that has progressive views in other policy. Hey Genius! Honkyboufant was a previous poster. Try picking a fight somewhere else sport. Was not trying to Chief! Thanks for the update because obviously that was not clarified above I am not trying to fight, you are the one that baited us into answering your questions. Now you guys are attacking me. I have been trying to be civil in the tone. So far you and Calli have been doing anything but that. I am on your F'ing side on the Death Penlaty, if that was not obvious from my past 300 and some odd posts. So what, I dont agree with everything that you or calli do on other issues. And I get name called a leftist, I did not provoke it. It was not my intent.
|
|
|
Post by SubSurfCPO(ret) on Mar 13, 2013 13:58:45 GMT -6
Great, so you are a DP supporter as is Joe Phillips, but I don't agree with him on much else. Kay is anti, but we share more in common than that. As far a baiting you or anyone else into answering my poll; that was your decision.
300+ posts - good job. Keep hanging around - it gets much more interesting when we start taking apart your position on just about everything. Nothing personal, that's just the way we are.
And for the record, Bob definitely thinks you're a leftist. I'm still trying to make up my mind.
|
|
|
Post by starbux on Mar 13, 2013 21:46:36 GMT -6
Great, so you are a DP supporter as is Joe Phillips, but I don't agree with him on much else. Kay is anti, but we share more in common than that. As far a baiting you or anyone else into answering my poll; that was your decision. 300+ posts - good job. Keep hanging around - it gets much more interesting when we start taking apart your position on just about everything. Nothing personal, that's just the way we are. And for the record, Bob definitely thinks you're a leftist. I'm still trying to make up my mind. I suppose he does. I will admit I agree on some left viewpoints on certain issues, that should not imply that I am a pure"Leftist." My right wing viewpoints are that I agree with smaller government, less wasteful spending. Government should stay the hell out of business. IMO the government should not bail out failed companies. That in theory is a right wing viewpoint. At the same time regulations need to be in place to hold businesses accountable for unscrupulous practices. That is not a pure right wing viewpoint some view it as left wing. The regulations should not place barriers to entry for other businesses. That would be a conservative viewpoint. I think ongoing subsidies for highly profitable industries should be removed. I think the taxes on the middle class should be minimal, but I have no problem for the super rich carrying the burden with their personal pockets I know that is a left view. I do not believe government should give grants to businesses that move jobs overseas. I am against the government putting on the facade of downsizing the military when, it results in less uniformed personnel jobs in place of higher contractor support. That has cost the DOD more money and in some cases providing a lower quality product in the long run. Contractors are limited to the scope of the contract, where as the uniformed guy as you being a retired E-7 know, follow orders. As for things like abortion, I do not follow the lines of either party. Not Pro-Life, but not pro choice or at least in the liberals stance. In a sense my view is utilitarian, I believe abortion is cheaper for the tax payer in the long run. It prevents a mother on relying on those left wing social programs. I do not believe in able bodied people being on the government dull for ever. At the same time it is better for all of us in the long run if there are programs in place to give those people the skills to make themselves self sufficient, such as education grants and access to higher education. I think our education system needs to be revamped. We need to get back to science and mathematics, we are losing our stronghold in this area very fast to India and China. This in a nutshell are my viewpoints.
|
|
|
Post by SubSurfCPO(ret) on Mar 14, 2013 5:31:00 GMT -6
point of view comes up from time to time especially here. somethings are not a simple as they would appear. I can see from your previous post there are points of common ground and contention . that is the uniqueness of this board, we do not stop at the waters edge but dive in on just about everything.
|
|
|
Post by iamjumbo on Mar 20, 2013 5:42:09 GMT -6
where the hell have you been? Same old same old. You can't read? Would it be fair to say, then, that he failed to understand that working with congress is one of the most important thing a president does, and that there might be some opposition?JFK said "politics is the art of the possible." I see his inability to persuade and gather his opposition into the fold as a large failure. And he's spent almost $6 trillion dollars that we don't have. We agree. We as a nation don't have a revenue problem-we have a spending problem. We're completely capable of leaving within our means if we choose to do so. You mean, much like 2010? And which of us aren't "real" Americans? no, my boy. i have never stopped being able to read. the difference between us is that i comprehend what i'm reading there usually is some opposition. of course, usually, the opposition is intelligent enough to compromise. the tea baggers adamantly refuse to even try to get things right. what was the first thing that the mcconnell imbecile said? that is the typical right wing mantra. obviously, it would be true if they were interested in getting rid of the waste, such as corporate subsidies. since they want to pad the budget with millions of dollars for exxon mobil et al, they should find a way to pay for it. of course, the ONLY legitimate way to pay for such nonsense is raising revenue. those who think that fictitional entities are as important as the poorest people
|
|
|
Post by iamjumbo on Mar 20, 2013 6:16:10 GMT -6
Thanks for the course correction Bob, but I was talking about the other new guy - Hangemhigh As far as Starbux is concerned, he is Honky in another disguise. Entertaining, but supremely wrong on all points. So we are now getting racial. Because I do not believe in everything that comes out of Rush and Beck as sound policy, that makes me a white leftist I am not the only Pro Death guy on this forum that has progressive views in other policy. it would be funny if it weren't so stupid. don't feel bad though. bob is fond of calling me a liberal also. i just don't know that many true liberals who are pro death penalty, pro gun, and anti homo marriage. they just have to try to come up with something since there is no merit to their right wing lunatic fringe garbage
|
|
|
Post by iamjumbo on Mar 20, 2013 6:23:03 GMT -6
No I have some progressive views in certain areas. Traditionally I was mostly a fiscal conservative, I think they referred it as a "Fiscal Hawk" When It comes to military and national security issues I side with the Right. They seem to have reversed their stance lately. When it comes to global politics and policies. I side mostly with the left. I side with left on social policies, except the death penalty and crime. Is it that odd to you to support viewpoints from both sides? I say that rhetorically, because obviously you must think so. I support policies that progress society that allow us to move forward. I am against policies that are archaic or xenophobic in nature. I am not a religious guy so I do not support any policy that is backed up by religion. I support only things that empirically make sense. I hate extremes on both sides, they are tearing apart this nation! the problem is that these chaps do not bother with facts. they simply follow in lock step with rush, sean, ann, and the rest of the lunatic fringe. as you seem to have done, i have taken what is right from all sides, and formed the perfect ideology. on some things, i am to the right of rush. on some things, i am to the left of nader. it is prima facie stupid to totally adhere to everything that one side says
|
|
|
Post by iamjumbo on Mar 20, 2013 6:31:48 GMT -6
Starbux: I'm not quite sure where to begin with you. I need to find you initial post in this thread. I'm curious to know where you currently stand on the Death Penalty, Gun Control and the Abortion/Pro Life Issues. With respect to your current post, above, I find the term "Tea Baggers" despicable. I assume you know what it means, but in the event that you don't---as well as for others who may not know----Wikipedia defines it thusly: "To tea bag is a slang term for the sexual act of a man placing his scrotum in the mouth of a willing sexual partner for pleasure or onto the face or head of another person. The name of the practice, when it is done in a repeated in-and-out motion, is derived from its passing resemblance to the dipping of a tea bag into a cup of hot water as a method of brewing tea," Although there are other possible meanings, people who make disparaging references to those who adhere to Tea Party values generally intend to demean them by referring to the Wikipedia definition cited, above. Ironically, the party evolved from a sentiment you seem to be in accord with, tow wit, the fact that while the Democrats were profligate spenders who believed that the bigger the government, the better the government and who were blind to the facts that (1) rich people pay a grossly disproportionate amount of all taxes, (2) Obama's spending programs not only have swelled the Deficit and the overall Debt without achieving ANY significant gain and (3) in a horrible economy, cutting taxes---not raising them---will generate economic growth and, concommittantly,a growth in tax revenues. (See JFK, Reagan for examples). Notwithstanding the worthlessness of the Democratic Party, the Republican Party lacked cajones and was simply a version of Democrats "Light". Instead of standing up to the Democrats and showing the total lack of efficacy of the Democratic approach, the Republicans were too worried about being called "insensitive" and so either mimicked the Democrats or kept their mouths shut. Not much of a way to wub elections---particularly in an era when the Press leans overwhelmingly Leftist and seldom even bothers to criticize Obama. The Tea Party was essentially a grassroots movement of everyday individuals who wanted a forum to air their views. They ran a number of campaigns in the 2010 election and, for the most part, were extremely successful---notwithstanding some mockery and some made-up claims of racism from the Leftist Press. I'm probably every bit as opposed to "corporate welfare" as you are, Starbux. But, guess what? The biggest purveyor of corporate welfare is Obama. Take GE (General Electric). I don't have enough time right now to look up the details, but about a year ago, they earned something like $17 Billion----and paid virtually no taxes. How did they do it? They bought or otherwise acquired a bunch of tax credits. The name of the CEO of GE escapes me, but he held---and perhaps still does hold---a position in the Obama administration. He supported Obama. And lest you unduly conclude that he and GE are some sort of aberration, what about Billionaires like George Soros, Warren Buffett and Bill Gates, all of whom supported Obama. IMO, Soros was slanderous in some of his criticisms of Bush, calling hm a Nazi and making other unsupportable and totally over-the-top statements. You make some sort of vague reference to the Housing Bust and seem to attribute it to Wall Street. The Housing Bust never would have----neve could have---happened with the Legislation that was relentlessly pushed by the Democrats. Pressure was brought to bear on the banks to lend to poor people who were poor credit risks. Those banks that didn't acquiesce were thwarted if they attempted to engage in merger activity or otherwise pressured. No downpayment loans were made to people who didn't have a snowball's chance in hell of being able to repay them. It was an instant recipe for failure. And all this, my friend, was the Democrats doings. When you talk about "limited government" and how the ideals thereof were violated by those who helped to bail out the Banks and the Wall Street fat cats, please provide a list of Tea Party members or advocates who were guilty of this phenomenon. Take your time. I don't know if you can come up with ANY. You mindlessly rip the Tea Party and yet they are the only ones who espouse the values you profess to admire. starbux probably doesn't mean it that way, but i do. you are right in that the tea party originally started as a grass roots group, primarily devoted to smaller government. that is NOT what it has been the past few years. it has been hijacked by the despotic right wing lunatic fringe, such as mcconnell, cantor, ryan, et al. when someone believes that it is better for a baby to die, than for an insurance company to lose a penny of profit, as cantor wrote in a letter, that certainly shows their true colors.
|
|
|
Post by Californian on Mar 20, 2013 7:22:05 GMT -6
it would be funny if it weren't so stupid. don't feel bad though. bob is fond of calling me a liberal also. No, Ji, you're not a liberal. You're a populist. Most of your positions are what used to be called the "classic liberal," which we today call a "conservative." Your populist views come in on things like land use and gasoline prices, and are utter crap. Oh, and I forgot health insurance. It's apparent that the laws of contracts elude you. That's generally in line with the beliefs of populists.
|
|
|
Post by SubSurfCPO(ret) on Mar 21, 2013 6:15:36 GMT -6
So we are now getting racial. Because I do not believe in everything that comes out of Rush and Beck as sound policy, that makes me a white leftist I am not the only Pro Death guy on this forum that has progressive views in other policy. it would be funny if it weren't so stupid. don't feel bad though. bob is fond of calling me a liberal also. i just don't know that many true liberals who are pro death penalty, pro gun, and anti homo marriage. they just have to try to come up with something since there is no merit to their right wing lunatic fringe garbage When you use my quotes in the future don't cherry pick so you can twist it to make your statement have value. That trick is easily exposed and renders your response worthless.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 22, 2013 1:19:28 GMT -6
As an aside, have I mentioned in the past 24 hours how much I love my new revolver? This morning was trash day or actually dogs in the trash day. No animals were physically harmed in the defense of my trashcans, but they did have the crap scared out of them - literally. So did my neighbors, they were so scared I had shot or would shot their dogs they were calling my mother to apologize hoping mom could calm me down. They know Janet and I feel the same way. I squashed a huntsman with my bible the other day
|
|
|
Post by The Tipsy Broker on Mar 22, 2013 2:47:41 GMT -6
As an aside, have I mentioned in the past 24 hours how much I love my new revolver? This morning was trash day or actually dogs in the trash day. No animals were physically harmed in the defense of my trashcans, but they did have the crap scared out of them - literally. So did my neighbors, they were so scared I had shot or would shot their dogs they were calling my mother to apologize hoping mom could calm me down. They know Janet and I feel the same way. I squashed a huntsman with my bible the other day
|
|
|
Post by SubSurfCPO(ret) on Mar 22, 2013 18:41:17 GMT -6
It must be a big heavy bible.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 22, 2013 19:27:44 GMT -6
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 22, 2013 20:01:29 GMT -6
|
|
|
Post by The Tipsy Broker on Mar 22, 2013 23:44:17 GMT -6
Its not as big as my complete Shakespeare. Or as well written
|
|
|
Post by SubSurfCPO(ret) on Mar 23, 2013 5:38:18 GMT -6
You are right about that. You can tell there were many different writers and while some were good theologians they were not engaging authors. And I don't think dome were very spiritual either. On the other hand not all if Shakespeare's work was up to his ability. As a complete body of work Shakespeare wins on mass. Single volumes, The Bible hands down. Especially when it contains cross references and concordance. I have one if those (I know there is no huge surprise there). It is in the coffee table book section of my library. But the winner, by sheer size and weight of one book, normal print size, in my possession, Strong`s Exhaustive Concordance of The Bible. It is larger than the PDR and my book on the Norman Rockwell collection.
Throw that at your huntsman.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 23, 2013 5:59:03 GMT -6
You are right about that. You can tell there were many different writers and while some were good theologians they were not engaging authors. And I don't think dome were very spiritual either. On the other hand not all if Shakespeare's work was up to his ability. As a complete body of work Shakespeare wins on mass. Single volumes, The Bible hands down. Especially when it contains cross references and concordance. I have one if those (I know there is no huge surprise there). It is in the coffee table book section of my library. But the winner, by sheer size and weight of one book, normal print size, in my possession, Strong`s Exhaustive Concordance of The Bible. It is larger than the PDR and my book on the Norman Rockwell collection. Throw that at your huntsman. Of course there are numerous authors, the Bible was written across 1000+ years. The best coffee table books I can recommend is Gary Larson's the Far side. I am not sure how big he would be in the states but he is popular down under. The Bible was a last resort after numerous shoes and DVD's didn't work
|
|
|
Post by The Tipsy Broker on Mar 23, 2013 6:02:07 GMT -6
This another thing I love about this board. From guns to the Bard and nobody whining (yet LOL) about 'off topic'
|
|
|
Post by SubSurfCPO(ret) on Mar 24, 2013 6:25:22 GMT -6
Oh, the dreaded off topic sheriff. Well then, I will keep off topic. It just dawned on me that we were talking about a spider.
|
|
|
Post by iamjumbo on Mar 24, 2013 9:50:16 GMT -6
it would be funny if it weren't so stupid. don't feel bad though. bob is fond of calling me a liberal also. No, Ji, you're not a liberal. You're a populist. Most of your positions are what used to be called the "classic liberal," which we today call a "conservative." Your populist views come in on things like land use and gasoline prices, and are utter crap. Oh, and I forgot health insurance. It's apparent that the laws of contracts elude you. That's generally in line with the beliefs of populists. i guess populism would be close. obviously, populism is certainly the only side that is truly right on every issue, by definition. rational people know that what is best for the poor and middle class is what is best for america. i'm fully aware of the laws on contracts. as far as contracts with health insurance companies, particularly if you want to consider a policy to be a contract, every contract should be void as against public policy
|
|
|
Post by iamjumbo on Mar 24, 2013 9:52:41 GMT -6
it would be funny if it weren't so stupid. don't feel bad though. bob is fond of calling me a liberal also. i just don't know that many true liberals who are pro death penalty, pro gun, and anti homo marriage. they just have to try to come up with something since there is no merit to their right wing lunatic fringe garbage When you use my quotes in the future don't cherry pick so you can twist it to make your statement have value. That trick is easily exposed and renders your response worthless. what the hell is your point? i was defending YOUR stance. i certainly didn't cherry pick anything at all
|
|
|
Post by iamjumbo on Mar 24, 2013 9:55:40 GMT -6
This another thing I love about this board. From guns to the Bard and nobody whining (yet LOL) about 'off topic' for the most part, there is very little that can ever be off topic. almost anything can be correlated to anything else if you look hard enough
|
|
|
Post by SubSurfCPO(ret) on Mar 24, 2013 13:46:58 GMT -6
When you use my quotes in the future don't cherry pick so you can twist it to make your statement have value. That trick is easily exposed and renders your response worthless. what the hell is your point? i was defending YOUR stance. i certainly didn't cherry pick anything at all My bad. Must be having an almost senior moment, a flash back or a stroke. Or I am still trying to get used to the Kindle screen.
|
|
|
Post by starbux on Mar 25, 2013 4:44:27 GMT -6
No I have some progressive views in certain areas. Traditionally I was mostly a fiscal conservative, I think they referred it as a "Fiscal Hawk" When It comes to military and national security issues I side with the Right. They seem to have reversed their stance lately. When it comes to global politics and policies. I side mostly with the left. I side with left on social policies, except the death penalty and crime. Is it that odd to you to support viewpoints from both sides? I say that rhetorically, because obviously you must think so. I support policies that progress society that allow us to move forward. I am against policies that are archaic or xenophobic in nature. I am not a religious guy so I do not support any policy that is backed up by religion. I support only things that empirically make sense. I hate extremes on both sides, they are tearing apart this nation! the problem is that these chaps do not bother with facts. they simply follow in lock step with rush, sean, ann, and the rest of the lunatic fringe. as you seem to have done, i have taken what is right from all sides, and formed the perfect ideology. on some things, i am to the right of rush. on some things, i am to the left of nader. it is prima facie stupid to totally adhere to everything that one side says Sounds like we are on the same thought process on how we decide to chose what seems valid versus what is not. You and I may have differing views on things, but that is how it should be. I think you would agree on that. You are right, people fail to peel back the onion an look what is beneath the layers. The fringes on the right listen to the words of Rush, Beck, Hannity and Anne, as if they were profits from god. At the same time the left fringe buys off on everything that comes out of Mathews, Maher, and Michael Moore. No one will ever have the perfect ideology on how to run a society. There will always be those who are disenfranchised by whatever outcome is made. The world must accept compromise in some areas. The question is how bad does the disenfranchisement hurt the individual that is targeted. I do not believe in class warfare. However, there is a growing disparity among the privilege to the middle class. The middle class is seeing their way of life being eroded at the same time the top have yet to fell even the slightest pinch of a mosquito bite in the big scheme of things. Even when the economy hit rock bottom the rich still were very rich. Even the rich who made poor decisions on how they ran their companies into the ground were rewarded by a government bailout and subsequent golden parachute. I find it interesting on how the rich have managed to build a huge fan base of middle to lower class citizens who act as cheerleaders of their lifestyles and actions. In some sense I find it out right despicable that the top are allowed to do what they want without impunity. While a middle class guy who loses his job will be out on his *&( with little to no compensation. Sounds like we have at least looked at the world around us. I just wish the rest of the country would do the same. Unfortunately, Americans are more likely to know who won last seasons idle was versus knowing who represents them in the government.
|
|
|
Post by iamjumbo on Mar 25, 2013 6:49:24 GMT -6
the problem is that these chaps do not bother with facts. they simply follow in lock step with rush, sean, ann, and the rest of the lunatic fringe. as you seem to have done, i have taken what is right from all sides, and formed the perfect ideology. on some things, i am to the right of rush. on some things, i am to the left of nader. it is prima facie stupid to totally adhere to everything that one side says Sounds like we are on the same thought process on how we decide to chose what seems valid versus what is not. You and I may have differing views on things, but that is how it should be. I think you would agree on that. You are right, people fail to peel back the onion an look what is beneath the layers. The fringes on the right listen to the words of Rush, Beck, Hannity and Anne, as if they were profits from god. At the same time the left fringe buys off on everything that comes out of Mathews, Maher, and Michael Moore. No one will ever have the perfect ideology on how to run a society. There will always be those who are disenfranchised by whatever outcome is made. The world must accept compromise in some areas. The question is how bad does the disenfranchisement hurt the individual that is targeted. I do not believe in class warfare. However, there is a growing disparity among the privilege to the middle class. The middle class is seeing their way of life being eroded at the same time the top have yet to fell even the slightest pinch of a mosquito bite in the big scheme of things. Even when the economy hit rock bottom the rich still were very rich. Even the rich who made poor decisions on how they ran their companies into the ground were rewarded by a government bailout and subsequent golden parachute. I find it interesting on how the rich have managed to build a huge fan base of middle to lower class citizens who act as cheerleaders of their lifestyles and actions. In some sense I find it out right despicable that the top are allowed to do what they want without impunity. While a middle class guy who loses his job will be out on his *&( with little to no compensation. Sounds like we have at least looked at the world around us. I just wish the rest of the country would do the same. Unfortunately, Americans are more likely to know who won last seasons idle was versus knowing who represents them in the government. that is the truly sad thing. too many don't bother thinking for themselves, and finding out the truth. they just believe what they're told. it is unreal how many people are stupid enough to drink the "rich being job creators" kool ade. no one with an iq above forty, and the ability to use it, believes that stupidity. they know that the rich get rich by destroying jobs, as mitty boy spent his life doing, and putting their riches in the cayman islands. yet, how many unemployed voted for mitty thinking he would get them a job, when he had a proven track record of creating even more unemployment? it is this kind of idiocy that created the economic mess that we are in, along with the republican stupidity in deregulating everything.
|
|