Obama's Rhetoric is the Real Catastrophe - Page 24

UGAalum94 · #**346** 02-19-2009, 04:37 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by deepimpact2

And what exactly do YOU bring? Besides ridiculous comments insinuating alcoholic stupor?

Just that. It's sometimes enough.

DaemonSeid · #**347** 02-19-2009, 04:37 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Senusret I

Nope.

If anyone is seriously thinking "What can I say that will piss them off" then that's crazy.

My thought process is: "This person is being stupid."

Then I say: "You're being stupid."

This is how it works with me in real life.

So, you are saying that you are innocent?

You are saying that you never called anyone on this board out of their name with malicious intent?

Mmmmmkay.....

I would think about that before I would answer.

KSUViolet06 · #**348** 02-19-2009, 04:39 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by DaemonSeid

So, you are saying that you are innocent?

You are saying that you never called anyone on this board out of their name with malicious intent?

Mmmmmkay.....

I would think about that before I would answer.

You need to chill out buddy.

This is the INTARWEBZ. Not real life.

agzg · #**349** 02-19-2009, 04:39 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by DaemonSeid

LOL

Sorry, that's gonna stay for awhile...no matter how many pages you post.

Shock value.

That whole thing last night went far too far, and I think you know it. I'm not saying you're *completely* to blame but I think I made it really clear what issues I was having with what people were saying.

MysticCat · #**350** 02-19-2009, 04:42 PM

After trying to read this thread,

DaemonSeid · #**351** 02-19-2009, 04:42 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by alphagamzetagam

That whole thing last night went far too far, and I think you know it. I'm not saying you're *completely* to blame but I think I made it really clear what issues I was having with what people were saying.

I know I took it too far, you know I know it.

I take my blame and I have ABSOLUTELY no problems doing that.

To KSU...

some of this has stretched over to real life.

THAT is part of the issue.

Senusret I · #**352** 02-19-2009, 04:45 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by DaemonSeid

Part of the issue with a lot of what happens here is ALL OF US get caught up trying to outsnark each other that we don't give a shit anymore about trying to be rational, even in situations when it's not called for.

ALL OF US CAN point a finger of blame to ourselves and think....when XYZ posts...."hmm what can I say that will piss them off" and hijacks begin

That's why A LOT OF US don't talk and CAN't TALK and WON'T TALK to each other because we are more busy trying to prepare the next drive by snarking before we even begin to think, let's talk about this openly and honestly.

I will take my finger now....anyone else care to follow?

Quote:

Originally Posted by DaemonSeid

So, you are saying that you are innocent?

You are saying that you never called anyone on this board out of their name with malicious intent?

Mmmmmkay.....

I would think about that before I would answer.

That last bitch-made remark is exactly why I don't **** with you.

This is not me trying to outsnark you.

This is not me being irrational.

This is me thinking "DS is being stupid."

This is me saying "DS, you're being stupid."

The same as I would in real life. This does not prove your point.

DaemonSeid · #**353** 02-19-2009, 04:46 PM

So is everything here hunky dory or does anyone really want to step forward and address some underlying issues on this board?

If we are all cool or cooled out....let's just KIM.

agzg · #**354** 02-19-2009, 04:48 PM

Well we were back on topic at some point today. Apparently these issues are just more interesting for people to talk about.

I think I've discovered a way to hijack the song name game thread. But, just like Chuck Norris, I don't sleep, I wait.

DaemonSeid · #**355** 02-19-2009, 04:49 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Senusret I

That last bitch-made remark is exactly why I don't fuck with you.

This is not me trying to outsnark you.

This is not me being irrational.

This is me thinking "DS is being stupid."

This is me saying "DS, you're being stupid."

The same as I would in real life. This does not prove your point.

You feel better now that you got that off of your chest, don't you?

Try to talk to some of you here and be PEACEFUL and I'M stupid...

Try to be forward and upfront so we can get past some of the ignorance here BUT you want to call me stupid.

Heh...yeah...ok...I will be the stupid idiot today.

That's another problem some of you are too busy with blinders on you can't see straight.

UGAalum94 · #**356** 02-19-2009, 04:55 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Munchkin03

This will probably surprise a ton of people, but I don't care too much about teaching evolution or creation in schools. I figure that's a pretty personal belief that people will teach their kids regardless of what's being taught in the schools. I remember in my HS biology classes, there were a group of 3-4 fundamentalist Christians who challenged the science texts. Most people come in with their ideas on this topic, and you can't really change their minds too much.

The states with the most military bases are Florida, California, and North Carolina--and they all break just about even with the tax thing. The whole thing seems to have less to do with population or even military involvement, and the general economic picture of the state. For example, the same states that always show up at the bottom of the lists for quality of life--Alabama, Mississippi, West Virginia, and New Mexico--also take a ton more than they give to the government.

I don't care much about the evolution-intelligent design-creationism stuff either. I think it's important kids get a good foundation in actual science and that's what should drive the state curriculum, but I think a certain fundamentalist segment oversells how much aggressive Godlessness is required for this. I grew up with a traditional evolution based curriculum, I guess, but we didn't get into the who or why; just the general overview of how. It wasn't incompatible with my belief in God.

I just think it's interesting who politically can get away with holding certain views and advocating them in office and who can't. Palin got painted with a pretty broad brush for advocating things there's little evidence she used her offices to press for. Jindal doesn't and it intrigues me. What accounts for that? Jindal projecting higher IQ generally? Maybe.

As far as revenue, and I still haven't looked at the links I confess, it would make sense that if you didn't have an economy that generated much money, you'd contribute less in taxes. Any money that you then took in from the federal government would look disproportionate.

But you'd also have a pretty low bar for keeping your generally crappy economy going so maybe you could claim you didn't need as much stimulus funding.

But I think it's more about positioning with the GOP than really exercising good fiscal judgment.

On the other hand, I have the impression, having not read the bill I can't say for sure, that it contains a ridiculous amount of funding for projects unrelated to present economic health. So one probably could turn down some of the pork.

agzg · #**357** 02-19-2009, 04:59 PM

The pork is my biggest issue with many of the laws coming out of DC, but I think that's a pretty widely held sentiment among Americans who care enough to look at the stuff.

KSUViolet06 · #**358** 02-19-2009, 05:00 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by UGAalum94

I don't care much about the evolution-intelligent design-creationism stuff either. I think it's important kids get a good foundation in actual science and that's what should drive the state curriculum, but I think a certain fundamentalist segment oversells how much aggressive Godlessness is required for this. I grew up with a traditional evolution based curriculum, I guess, but we didn't get into the who or why; just the general overview of how. I wasn't incompatible with my belief in God.

I agree with you, esp. on the "aggressive Godlessnes" point. I've been told that I am following "complete heresy" because of my opinions about God/science/evolution. I have to consider the source though.

deepimpact2 · #**359** 02-19-2009, 05:01 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by KSig RC

I think you're confusing me with him - your problems are with me, not with him.

It's still a general "you." It can be applied across the board.

agzg · #**360** 02-19-2009, 05:05 PM

On either side of the spectrum people are vilified for their beliefs on creationism v. evolution.

I think the issue with Palin was that for a while that was the bulk of what many people knew policywise about her. That and the Bridge to Nowhere talk. Perhaps with Jindal we just know more about his other policies?