PDA

View Full Version : It's real funny....


PaceAdvantage
01-02-2005, 08:38 PM
...how Sec and LJB constantly reminded us how the PaceAdvantage.Com Off Topic section is innundated with right wing wackos and "neo-con" wingnuts.

All I see are threads started by Bush bashers designed to bait. What should I do now Sec....LJB?

boxcar
01-02-2005, 09:14 PM
PA, never stand in the path of fools, lest you should inhibit them, even unintentionally, from running headlong over the cliff and into the abyss.

Boxcar

toetoe
01-02-2005, 11:15 PM
P.A.,
Very perceptive. However, it may itself be seen as baiting. Oh well, I guess it's that or cut fish.

Tom
01-02-2005, 11:30 PM
There really is no point in arguing with these libs because they are all in denial (I wish they were in "The Nile!"). All they do is post crap then disappear. Not a one them is willing to intellignetly discuss facts. Then they poop up under new names and do the same thing all over again. Bottom line is, more Americans agreed with the current Presidnet and with basic conservative thought than the wack-o crap they subscribe to. They complain that it is an all-republican governement....yes it is, the people have spoken. All the Michael Moore cartoons and Bruce Springsien concerts aside, the real values of America are clear, and not one of these sensless post designed to somehow get even will change that. They learned noting from the last two elections, prefering to cry fould and post endlessly about fixed elections and cheating.

Well boys, have fun. Do what you have to make yourselves believe you are not what you are.......LOSERS!

For me, I got horses to look at, so excuse me if I start ignoring you. After all, you don't listen anyways, and I got the majority of the country on my side.....so enjoy yourselves and I hope your little snits make you all feel better.....losers. :D :D :D

PaceAdvantage
01-03-2005, 12:00 AM
Why is it that they can not, or will not, accept the will of the people?

Healthy criticism of the government and the President is part of the American way. In a free and open country, critics are always necessary.

However, it is interesting that many of the extreme critics posting here can not bring themselves to simply acknowledging there is a large percentage of this country that disagrees with them. Yet, they themselves want their disagreements to be the law of the land!

How very selfish (and dare I say) un-American of them!

schweitz
01-03-2005, 12:47 AM
I no longer feel the need to respond to Bush bashing , gloom and doom, always negative posts about what is perceived to be wrong with this country or this administration. I did feel the need to respond when it was an election year ---but now the country has spoken. :)

Dave Schwartz
01-03-2005, 12:50 AM
PA,

I go round and round about this with my liberal attorney friend. He has made me come to grips with his position - I don't agree with it but I understand it.

He believes that it is his RESPONSIBILITY to question everything the governement does, and especially when conservatives are in power. But it does not end there.

He believes that he should protest and struggle every step of the way. He believes that this is how the founding fathers wanted it.

If you read some of the posts from the more liberal people here (and I am excluding drom that group the couple of left-wing-nuts that cannot be reasoned with under any circumstance) I think you will see what I mean.

Take Hcper, for instance. I don't for a minute agree with his positions, but the man is obviously well-intentioned. And by that I mean his sincerity about his feelings for his country comes through in his posts - the man believes in America - he just doesn't like the current direction.

My point is that part of the belief system of the liberals in this country is to keep fighting for what you believe in even after the "battle" is over. (I am sure that at least one of them would say, "We may have lost the battle but we haven't lost the war.")

Now, I see it as you do... It is kind of like when a club has a voting process to settle an issue. Everyone gentlemenly agrees to abide by the vote so that after it is over the club goes on as one.

But, apparently, they do not see it that way.

The difference between 2004 and elections of 30-40 years ago is that the political ideologies of left and right are very far apart right now and, to make things worse, one side sincerely believes that they were screwed out of the last Presidential election. And, perhaps, if Florida had gone differenly in 2000, it would be the right that was squeeling.

I have thought about this a lot since November and have had numerous discussions with my left-leaning friends. (Yes, I have some of those. <G>) Since those are friends that I value and want to keep, I have to try to understand what makes them think differently than me.

You know how everyone (including the Democratic party) is saying that the Democrats are out of touch with America and they will have to get more in touch? Well, at the same time we need to understand their thinking process as well because even though we (conservatives) have a strong majority those dissenters make up a significant number. They cannot be ignored and their opinions must be heard.

We are, effectively, experiencing a political "civil war" right now. And one side has just had its butt kicked. In making a civil war comparison, one must see the impact upon the Confederacy after the real Civil War. They are still behind they north almost 150 years later. Our two-party system will not work if there is not a reasonable balance between the parties.

I would imagine that to be an effective party in the next decade, the Dems will have to soften their position on many issues. In other words, they will have to come toward us a little. And this is a good thing because the liberalism in this country is out of ontrol (in our opinion).

But we cannot wish for them to go away! We need them as much as they need us! If the Conservatives (with a capital C) really get going and build an even stronger majority so that everything the President wishes for he gets, we will be in more trouble than we are now. Big brother will really take over and freedom for anyone without money and power will go away.

As an example, consider the ACLU. As much as I despise them at times, that organization works hard to protect our rights. Okay, so they have a tendancy to go overboard (as with this "One nation, under God" stuff), but imagine where our privacy would be without them.


Okay, I'll get off the soapbox now.

Just my opinion.


Regards to all,
Dave Schwartz

JustRalph
01-03-2005, 01:05 AM
Hey Dave.........

The civil war ended in about 4 years..........this one will never end........

Dave Schwartz
01-03-2005, 01:34 AM
Ralph,

LOL - You are succinct, aren't you?


Dave

46zilzal
01-03-2005, 01:27 PM
T I got the majority of the country on my side..... :D


About this war??? Don't think so

so.cal.fan
01-03-2005, 02:13 PM
There are a few posters on this board who seem to be rooting against America. They want us to fail and/or look bad on every issue.
I would be interested in reading posts offering different viewpoints.......all issues can be debated honestly..........however, the key word is honestly.
When you hate America, wish this country bad luck at every turn of the road.....you lose your credibility with me.......I don't have to read your posts.....and most often do not.

ljb
01-03-2005, 05:03 PM
PA,
Are you trying to bait either Sec or myself ?
So. Cal fan, Please show me a post that insinuates I hate America.
The rest of you folks, While I agree with some of the philosophies of the Republican party*,I believe the current administration is leading this country down the wrong path. On occasion I will post links to stories or data that supports my beliefs. Usually when I post these links or data I am accused of being everything bad and called names. This will not stop me, as my biggest fear is a complete silence of all dissenting voices. To wit: lsbets wrote a note reffering to a visit to Iraq by Rummy where the media didn't take over. My response to this is: Heaven forbid the press should ask the Secretary of Defense a question he did not approve of! This type of media control and silence of dissenters has happened in the past and it lead to anarchy.
* I am anti-abortion for one, and I will never have an abortion.

boxcar
01-03-2005, 05:12 PM
LJB writes:

* I am anti-abortion for one, and I will never have an abortion.

LJB, I gotta ask this: Have you ever seriously refelcted on your life and regretted the fact that your mom wasn't a pro-choicer? :D

Boxcar

ljb
01-03-2005, 05:39 PM
Boxcar,
Thank you for making my point.

Tom
01-03-2005, 06:47 PM
Isn't abortion retroactive? :D

ljb
01-03-2005, 07:24 PM
From Tom;
"Isn't abortion retroactive? "
Yes, but you folks call it "the death penalty" Or in some cases collateral damage.:D

Secretariat
01-03-2005, 07:46 PM
I suppose I will succumb to PA's baiting LJB and myself.

The inference is I do not like Republicans. This is not true. I voted for Dole in 96 and have always liked McCain and Powell. I think Arlen Spector has done a decent job in PA as well. I respect Richard Lugar and Chuck Hagle.
But as for Bush I beleive is heading us down a disastrous path.

I do worry about what constitutes the Republican Party anymore, as I do the Democratic party.

For example, I was disapointed in Bill Clinton and his centrist attitudes and NAFTA push. He was a great orator, but not a good President in my opinion. I beleive the Democratic Party will move towards Bill Clinton's policies in 2008 and I think that is the wrong direction. Does that make me an anti-democrat? I don't think so.

As to my biggest complaint about the Republican platform is twofold (1) the accumulation of the largest deficits in history while providing tax relief to the highest income group in our country, especially during wartime. This is the most egegious irresponsible action I have ever seen from a party that advocates fiscal discipline and fiscal restraint. (2) The involvement in foreign wars under the eventual premise of democratization of a foreign country. I think this is a slippery slope. Involvement of middle-class and poorer american's lives to defend a policy of international democracy is one I strongly disagree with. This bothers me as I respect our soldiers fighting over there very much, but disagree strongly with the policy objective as it has now been presented.

If I was some far out left wing liberal I wouldn't waste my time here. Actually, I have been surprised by the overall neo-conservative slant of many of the horseplayers who post here in Off Topic.

46zilzal
01-03-2005, 07:52 PM
however, the key word is honestly.
When you hate America, wish this country bad luck at every turn of the road.....you lose your credibility with me.......I don't have to read your posts.....and most often do not.

a common rhetoric when ANYONE questions authority: "you Hate __________"

The old Hatfield and McCoy's fued idea: "your'e with me or aggin' me!"

there are 256 shades of gray between poles....sooem folsk look THERE and not at extremes for answers

PaceAdvantage
01-04-2005, 12:41 AM
Well, LJB and Sec chose to reply, but failed to address my point, or answer my question.

Oh well.

Secretariat
01-04-2005, 12:57 AM
Well, LJB and Sec chose to reply, but failed to address my point, or answer my question.

Oh well.

Hmm..let's see. Your questions was:

"All I see are threads started by Bush bashers designed to bait. What should I do now Sec....LJB?"


Here are a few I see:

SQ – Here’s a Draft Army forya – 135 postds (Top posts)
LJB – Here is another funny
JR – Should we be helping
JR – The Hydrogen Car – Fact or Fallacy
SQ- Kerry article
BetHorses- Powell Running for Governor
Boxcar – The Bible on Trial – 51 posts

Obviously, you haven't read that enlightening discussion of the bible by Reverend Boxcar yet.

PaceAdvantage
01-04-2005, 01:38 AM
I don't know why you included the following on your list:

Should we be helping?
The Hydrogen Car
Powell Running For Governor

The Bible posts I don't read verbatim. Too much for me....

But those other three....why would you classify them as posts designed to bait the anti-Bush crowd? I look at those three posts as pretty even handed. Should everything be turned into a political discussion?

You still haven't addressed my point that tide has apparently turned, and now the baitees have become the baiters, and what should be done about that, since you had a problem when it was the other way around (or so you said)

boxcar
01-04-2005, 06:05 AM
LJB wrote:

Thank you for making my point?

And just what "point" would that be? There's no need to thank me for one protruding from the top of your head; for I am most certain of this: I did not father you! (Thank God!) :rolleyes: :rolleyes: :rolleyes:

Boxcar

boxcar
01-04-2005, 07:07 AM
I suppose I will succumb to PA's baiting LJB and myself:

The inference is I do not like Republicans. This is not true.

No...methinks the far more accurate "inference" is that you don't like Conservatives. The Repubs you mentioned are okay to you because they all have wide liberal streaks running down their backs.

Your inaccurately stated inference is further borne out by the rest of your post:

I do worry about what constitutes the Republican Party anymore, as I do the Democratic party.

For example, I was disapointed in Bill Clinton and his centrist attitudes and NAFTA push. He was a great orator, but not a good President in my opinion. I beleive the Democratic Party will move towards Bill Clinton's policies in 2008 and I think that is the wrong direction. Does that make me an anti-democrat? I don't think so.

Since Slick Willy wasn't far enough to the Left for your tastes, you would be more than merely disappointed if anyone more conservative than him were in office -- regardless of party affiliation.

As to my biggest complaint about the Republican platform is twofold... (2) The involvement in foreign wars under the eventual premise of democratization of a foreign country. I think this is a slippery slope. Involvement of middle-class and poorer american's lives to defend a policy of international democracy is one I strongly disagree with. This bothers me as I respect our soldiers fighting over there very much, but disagree strongly with the policy objective as it has now been presented.

Yeah...this is understandable (not!), especially since all those "middle-class and "poorer" soldiders freely chose to serve in the military. And especially, again, since if we had a draft, the number of the "rich" in this country would still dwarf the combined number of "middle class" and "poor", which means even with a draft the ratio of the former group to the latter serving woud amount to an insignificant change. (Funny how liberals are "pro-choice" when it comes to women deciding whether or not to murder the innocent human life within their wombs, but are anti-choice when it comes to the "poor" and "middle class" freely choosing to serve in the military and to take up arms to defend our country and preserve our liberties, when or if necessary. (Oh yeah...I forgot:.The rich's daddys mommies either serving in the Congress, or who are in a position to exert their influence in the Congress would, in either case, make Congress more reticent about sending their own to war or their rich contributor's sons to war, is that it?)

If I was some far out left wing liberal I wouldn't waste my time here

You say, "If"!? I see you, too, have cut the tether that kept you safely bound to the "mother ship" (read: reality!). Besides this, the only reason you hang out here instead of the DUmb site, for example, is because on sites like that original ideas are harder to find than a hen's tooth that slipped overboard into the deep blue. At least over here, you get an opportunity on a daily basis to talk to some intelligent, informed...and let's not forget...compassionate folks.

Other than all this, Eq...fine post. :rolleyes: :rolleyes:

Boxcar

ljb
01-04-2005, 07:11 AM
Boxcar,
You should just stick to trying to impose your interpetrations of the bible. While most don't read those posts, I am sure it is good therapy for your illness. :D :D :D

boxcar
01-04-2005, 07:25 AM
Secretariat wrote:

Obviously, you haven't read that enlightening discussion of the bible by Reverend Boxcar yet.

Hmm..."Reverend"? You've given me an idea. Perhaps I could pretend to be a libeal preacher and wrangle a preaching engagment in JessieJackAss' church -- or even Rev. Al-Not-Sharp(ton's).

You mean the "discussion" between 'Cap and me? And "obviously" you're already basking in 'Cap's Dark Nothingness of Ignorance -- for nothing truly describes what his irrational, absurd objections amount to.

Btw, did you write, star in, direct or produce the Lost Boys?

Boxcar

hcap
01-04-2005, 08:06 AM
Sec, ljb,

He is trying to convince us that the bible says what he wants it to say. He is sure that he can Know the Mind of God, and what's on God's to-do list.

Like divine retribution for all liberals. And maybe anyone else not officialy approved by The Boxhead Church of Inspirational Hubris.

When he says stuff like: " 'Cap's Dark Nothingness of Ignorance -- for nothing truly describes what his irrational, absurd objections amount to.,
It's in response to me questioning his credentials to "Know the Mind of God, and what's on God's to-do list. So far he denies the burden of proof squarely rests on his shoulders. And wonders how any infidel dares to object to the Rev Boxhead.

Box, I will be back to question you further in a few days. Horse racing is now more gonna be much more profitable since I have learned to "divine" the winner. Came across a book called "The Horse Racing Bible", by The-old Handicrapper. I am talking him at his word until proven wrong.

Burden of proof, you say? Don't need no stinken' burden.


:p

ljb
01-04-2005, 09:51 AM
Hcap,
I recognised the "reverend" boxcar's fallacious postings long time ago. Keep in mind he is just practicing here for his real job. In warm weather he works at a carnival selling snake oils and various cures for what ails the gullible . He has found many customers on this board. :D :D :D

Equineer
01-04-2005, 11:26 AM
I have speculated that Boxcar could be incarcerated... maybe a trustee lifer serving as a chaplain's assistant. This would explain why he presses NASB biblical arguments that God condones murder, kidnapping, and slavery. If so, he may be in the Utah prison system since he renounces the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints, and he refuses to admit that Jesus survived the crucifixion in Jerusalem and miraculously fled to North America where he preached and practiced polygamy, as described in scriptures discovered by Mormons.

===

I hope everyone had the best possible holidays considering the tragic circumstances around the globe. I have been visiting VS and her dad... but this trip is going to be expensive because VS and my wives are out shopping again as I write.

===

PA, I too have noticed that your neo-cons are under assault by the liberal barbarians. When I get home, I promise that I will resume my duties as the fair and balanced buffer between the pernicious liberals and your enlightened faculty of neo-con scholars.

PaceAdvantage
01-04-2005, 05:07 PM
Dude, I've changed my mind, it's (meaning you) just not funny anymore.

46zilzal
01-04-2005, 05:43 PM
Meaning of SUCCINCT
Pronunciation: 'suksingkt

definition: [adj] briefly giving the gist of something; "a short and compendious book"; "a compact style is brief and pithy"; "succinct comparisons";

Secretariat
01-04-2005, 07:39 PM
I don't know why you included the following on your list:

Should we be helping?
The Hydrogen Car
Powell Running For Governor

The Bible posts I don't read verbatim. Too much for me....

But those other three....why would you classify them as posts designed to bait the anti-Bush crowd? I look at those three posts as pretty even handed. Should everything be turned into a political discussion?

You still haven't addressed my point that tide has apparently turned, and now the baitees have become the baiters, and what should be done about that, since you had a problem when it was the other way around (or so you said)

So that was the point...the baitees have become the baiters?

I'll tell you PA I've never posted something to bait anyone, but because I felt strongly about the issue.

sq764
01-04-2005, 08:55 PM
So that was the point...the baitees have become the baiters?

I'll tell you PA I've never posted something to bait anyone, but because I felt strongly about the issue.

Oh my God, watch out for the lightning bolts!!

All things aside, you probably never do bait anyone, as it is, in fact, your 'civic duty' to post everything that you do..

Tom
01-04-2005, 11:39 PM
"... hope everyone had the best possible holidays considering the tragic circumstances around the globe. I have been visiting VS and her dad... but this trip is going to be expensive because VS and my wives are out shopping again as I write."

How many wives do you have? I thought same sex marriages were out?
Has Frank finished his book on wrestling yet? Been wating for it to come out. ;)

toetoe
01-05-2005, 12:10 AM
Can't they be right-leaning or simply conservative? If I called you a neo-lib would I be a neo-Spiro (as in Agnew)?

Suff
01-05-2005, 12:52 PM
Conservatives....and more often, George Bush Supporters , are Ill-informed, Uneducated, Bigots, Racists, Fear Mongerers, Religous Zealots, Walmart buying unamerican, with high percentages of Illiterates, unemployed or low wage earners , terrfiifed, hate spreading , dividers who are at the TOP OF THE HEAP, (or bottom , dependind on how you look at it) of virtuallly every significant social stat....

High School diploma , as a % of citizens
Home Ownership........, ""
Divison 1 College Dergree ,,,' " "
Graduate Degrees, " " "
Abortion Rates, " " "
Median Income "" "
Housing Value, " "
Percenatge of citizens Below the Poverty Lines.. " "
Employment Rate
Divorce rate


It goes on and on... Blue Sates lead the Nation in most of not all of the relevant social issues that define a community.....

But hey... The people spoke. The Republicans won. George Bush is my President. I respect that. Just don't tell me we dont' get it. Because, believe me... We get it. But what you got... we don't want.

PaceAdvantage
01-05-2005, 01:20 PM
Whatever you say Suff....whatever you say....:confused:

sq764
01-05-2005, 01:22 PM
Conservatives....and more often, George Bush Supporters , are Ill-informed, Uneducated, Bigots, Racists, Fear Mongerers, Religous Zealots, Walmart buying unamerican, with high percentages of Illiterates, unemployed or low wage earners , terrfiifed, hate spreading , dividers who are at the TOP OF THE HEAP, (or bottom , dependind on how you look at it) of virtuallly every significant social stat....

High School diploma , as a % of citizens
Home Ownership........, ""
Divison 1 College Dergree ,,,' " "
Graduate Degrees, " " "
Abortion Rates, " " "
Median Income "" "
Housing Value, " "
Percenatge of citizens Below the Poverty Lines.. " "
Employment Rate
Divorce rate


It goes on and on... Blue Sates lead the Nation in most of not all of the relevant social issues that define a community.....

But hey... The people spoke. The Republicans won. George Bush is my President. I respect that. Just don't tell me we dont' get it. Because, believe me... We get it. But what you got... we don't want.

Ok, you can somewhat factualy prove income of Bush voters, as well as employment and divorce rates (in theory).. But where do you get the information that Conservatives are uneducated, bigoted, racist, religious zealouts, hate spreaders?

I am assuming you are on another wicked bender.. These types of angry posts of yours seem to come out around those times.

sq764
01-05-2005, 01:24 PM
Suff, aren't you a self-proclaimed drunken horseracing gambler degenerate?

How many of those 'social values' do you fit?

Suff
01-05-2005, 02:05 PM
Suff, aren't you a self-proclaimed drunken horseracing gambler degenerate?

How many of those 'social values' do you fit?


Did'nt I ask you to leave me alone the last time you and I had a Go? Huh? I thought I did. The Post isn't angry. Its Factual. And its pertaining to National Statistics that I have read in many places. And they are available to anyone who'd like to spend a few hours a week researching such things. As I did during the election. Liberal States, or Blue States, by and large are in the Top Ten, or even more to the truth... The top 5 in many , if not all social issues that communities strive for to define themselves as successful.

Many non-partisan information sources have these stats on WWW sites that are easy to navigate and decipher. Like I said Bush won... He won because he got more votes. Thats how it works. I respect that. I'm for representative democracy. My own personal opinon of the Rank and File Bush Voter may be harsh and It was designed to be a little over the Top... But hey... sometimes I get in the mood to puke it up. Its my right as well as anyone elses.

I know I guy on this board who once described himself as not being a "Political Activity".... and also suggested the USA Plant Weapons of Mass Destruction in Iraq or we'd "Look Foolish" and the war would be "Unjustified"... and that same guy once defined what his ROI needs to be to make a profit... Minus the Beer expense. And also said The President embarrass's the country by butchering the Language... and to top it all off.. Once told another memeber that he was Glad Abortion was Legal so people like him could be stopped in the womb.

I don't bother with him...

1. He's a real Knucklehead and hypocrytical bore.

2. Not my style.

sq764
01-05-2005, 02:28 PM
Your portrayal of the Bush voter isn't harsh, it's inaccurate.

But whatever helps you sleep (or pass out) at night..

lsbets
01-05-2005, 02:39 PM
Maybe we should have a poll to determine the dumbest post on PA. I can think of several nominees, and the scary thing is I might not vote for Suff's post (but I would have to give it serious thought).

Tom
01-05-2005, 05:24 PM
So, the message is clear....come over to our side and you too can be on top of the heap! the view is so much better up here ;) :D :rolleyes:


BTW, if I am really on top of the heap, it is becasue I worked my ass off ot get there. I never, ever, took a gov't handout, never got laid off (you make yourself irreplacable), started working in high school, held three jobs to pay for own college education, then started at the bottom and worked my way up over the next 32 years. When the "libs" were out taking thier 20-30 sick das a year, I was covering for them. I have missed 1.5 days in the last 28 years.

I have no repsect or tolerance for those who don't perform and expect to be taken care of.

Yeah, top of the heap was always my goal. Not government cheese.

Equineer
01-06-2005, 04:00 AM
Dude, I've changed my mind, it's (meaning you) just not funny anymore.After re-reading this thread up to date, it is clear that you don't know funny!

You promised us a funny thread ("Its real funny..."), but you failed to deliver.

To date, my post was indeed the funniest.... where were you funnier?

The results look like just another serious baiting thread, and I'm glad I didn't fall for it.

However, since the bait was taken... in several categories, here's the authoritative breakdown...

FUNNY:
Equineer (http://www.paceadvantage.com/forum/showpost.php?p=157820&postcount=28)
ToeToe (http://www.paceadvantage.com/forum/showpost.php?p=157940&postcount=34)

LUCID EXPOSITIONS:
Dave Schwartz (http://www.paceadvantage.com/forum/showpost.php?p=157642&postcount=7)
Secretariat (http://www.paceadvantage.com/forum/showpost.php?p=157757&postcount=17)
Suff (http://www.paceadvantage.com/forum/showpost.php?p=158041&postcount=35)

ADULT OPINIONS:
Schweitz (http://www.paceadvantage.com/forum/showpost.php?p=157641&postcount=6)
So.Cal.Fan (http://www.paceadvantage.com/forum/showpost.php?p=157704&postcount=11)

LUCID DEBATE POINTS/COUNTERPOINTS:
Paceadvantage (http://www.paceadvantage.com/forum/showpost.php?p=157640&postcount=5)
LJB (http://www.paceadvantage.com/forum/showpost.php?p=157728&postcount=12)
Secretariat (http://www.paceadvantage.com/forum/showpost.php?p=157788&postcount=20)
Paceadvantage (http://www.paceadvantage.com/forum/showpost.php?p=157796&postcount=21)
Boxcar (http://www.paceadvantage.com/forum/showpost.php?p=157805&postcount=23)

MEANINGFUL QUIP:
46zilzal (http://www.paceadvantage.com/forum/showpost.php?p=157759&postcount=18)

CLEVER QUIP:
LJB (http://www.paceadvantage.com/forum/showpost.php?p=157750&postcount=16)

DUMBFOUNDING QUIP:
JustRalph (http://www.paceadvantage.com/forum/showpost.php?p=157643&postcount=8)

MOSTLY CRAP:
The rest. :)

PaceAdvantage
01-06-2005, 04:07 AM
Hey Equineer,

Drop by the War Room this weekend, and share in the joy of picking winners. I'd love to catch a glimpse of you handicapping, even if it is under the fairly restrictive environment of a chat room.

What do you say?

JustRalph
01-06-2005, 04:29 AM
boy this is one broad brush you are swinging here..........


High School diploma , as a % of citizens
+A little Extra College on top.

Home Ownership........, ""
I am on my 4th home since 1990

Divison 1 College Dergree ,,,' " "
Sorry......don't have that one. Avoided the Liberal Indoctrination that goes with it........ Your spelling is funny though.;)

Graduate Degrees, " " "
See above

Abortion Rates, " " "
Never been a party to one

Median Income "" "
In 2004 my household beats the average by 200% and my wife has
just about the same amount of education as I do. Less than a 4 year degree.

Housing Value, " "
This will be tough to compare depending on the area of the country........at $225k .........I am doing pretty good for Ohio.

Percenatge of citizens Below the Poverty Lines.. " "
Can't argue that one, not sure on the stats........but the southern half of Ohio is pretty damn poor.

Employment Rate :
Ohio Sucks in this Category.......for sure.........Thanks to Gov. Taft

Divorce rate:
I have one of these on the old probate records. But been with the latest wife for 19 years, come April.


You have convinced me....... I am a degenerate bastard who shouldn't be allowed to vote. You can take mine back. But Bush still wins by over a 115k in this poor miserable state. It is a damn shame the Founding Father's didn't provide for you guys up in New England who know more than we do. There is no way they could have conceived that we couldn't think for ourselves. Such a flaw in the evolution of our country should have been dealt with a long time ago. Death to the Red State Stooges !

Equineer
01-06-2005, 05:42 AM
JustRalph,

I am not suprised that Suff has you on the verge of conversion! :)

Actually, you do often bring a hot dish (meat and potatoes) to the party... but your Civil War quip was dumbfounding.

The ideological rifts associated with the Civil War lasted much longer than four years and many issues that precipitated the secessions and inflamed the combat have been divisively contested ever since.

The Civil War ranks second only to the American Revolution and our founding principles with respect to influencing and shaping our civic consciousness and policies. The ideological rifts and divisive prejudices between North and South shared prominence only with issues arising out of Westward expansion between the 1840s and roughly 1900, and many of these same issues remained ominipresently potent through the Civil Rights movement and are only now waning with the emergence of the Modern South.

toetoe
01-06-2005, 09:18 AM
I wasn't even trying to be funny. Now watch, I'll try and fail. I may take it out on Dorothy's ankle.

sq764
01-06-2005, 09:35 AM
boy this is one broad brush you are swinging here..........



You have convinced me....... I am a degenerate bastard who shouldn't be allowed to vote. You can take mine back. But Bush still wins by over a 115k in this poor miserable state. It is a damn shame the Founding Father's didn't provide for you guys up in New England who know more than we do. There is no way they could have conceived that we couldn't think for ourselves. Such a flaw in the evolution of our country should have been dealt with a long time ago. Death to the Red State Stooges !

I think Suff is having an identity crisis.. I think he realizes he fits all the categories he mentioned yet he still voted Democrat.. Give him some time, he'll figure it all out..

PaceAdvantage
01-06-2005, 10:40 AM
Ok Equineer, I'll give you a few days to think about it....

betchatoo
01-06-2005, 02:12 PM
I asked the doctor for a vasectomy. He said with my face I didn't need one
Rodney Dangerfield

I thought there ought to be something funny in this thread

Suff
01-06-2005, 05:31 PM
boy this is one broad brush you are swinging here..........



You have convinced me....... I am a degenerate bastard !


Ralphy Boy..

I was just spouting off. I know you a tiny bit and you and I have had the pleasure to speak a number of times. I know you to be a complete gentleman, generous and affable and an outstanding all around guy. I didn't intend to insult you personally. I apologize for being a bit much.

But with that said.... I do believe that a significant chunk of the Bush Vote came from ill-informeds, bigots, religous zealots, Racists, and regional bias's. I'm not up for a long political post tonight so I'll leave it a that.

I don't know if you saw my thread where I explained that I drove from Boston to Orange Texas just after the election. I went right through the heart of the deeep south. I met some great people, great americans. And I listened to well thought out and sensible opinions on why People voted for Bush (or against Kerry). Its a Great Country, with great people in every corner. IMHO... I thought and still think John Kerry would have made a better President. I just feel he is the right man for the right times. I don't care for Bush, his cabinet, his secrataries nor his policys. This isn't the time nor place for me to get into to it tonight. Maybe someday I'll be lucky enough to spend some time with you and we could discuss ideology. Its hard on the Board because I really do just come here for Horse racing talk and Its difficult for the "tenor" of things to get through effectively.

But my point is Valid. The Social Stats that agencies compile favor the Blue States. Particulary the New England States. Its difficult to see people knock liberalism and then spout "values".... as a Red State issue. The clear facts are that Blue States are the leading states in most relevant catergories. I'll give you two that give you an indication of what I am talking about.

Massaschusetts... Commonly refered to as the most Liberal State in the Union... very Pro-choice. And we are. Yet.. Massachusetts has the lowest abortion rate of any state in the country (per thousand residents)...

Culture? You saw the recent Superbowl controversy over the women who dropped her towel in front of Terrel Owens? It was in an NFL commercial? Did you see it? It comes from that new show "desperate housewives"..

All the typical Family Value orginizations went off in an uproar about it...

But the truth is... Do you know what States have the Highest Ratings for watching desperate Housewives? The Bible Belt States. All through the South... Thats where the show has gone through the roof...

Anyway.. Thats all I was getting at. Things like that.

Have a good night.

Suff

sq764
01-06-2005, 05:54 PM
Sufferin, do you make this shit up in your head?? In 2003, Massachusetts had the 9th highest abortion rate per 1000 women in the entire country!

Put the bottle down and do some actual factual research...

Kreed
01-06-2005, 05:58 PM
SQ you're an idiot. Like the pyramids you'll take a long time to decay. But
you're still an idiot ... "U should pick the bottle UP & get some positive life
energy. You're a future suicide statistic.

sq764
01-06-2005, 06:52 PM
SQ you're an idiot. Like the pyramids you'll take a long time to decay. But
you're still an idiot ... "U should pick the bottle UP & get some positive life
energy. You're a future suicide statistic.

Wow, what do you know, another new poster with no city, no state, no name... Just another coward.. Move on little boy

ljb
01-06-2005, 06:59 PM
SQ,
He may be a new poster, but he seems to know you well.

Equineer
01-06-2005, 07:25 PM
SQ764,

You need to grasp the big picture... governments that are fervently Pro-Life are also most likely to be perniciously Anti-Child with respect to what happens after birth. In contrast to the Pro-Life states, Massachsetts is acknowledged as a Pro-Child state by virtually all secular and non-secular child welfare organizations.

Abortions are on the rise, but that is only half the story.

=====

Bush's Policies Spur Trend Towards Abortions

Pro-life? Look At The Fruits
by Dr. Glen Harold Stassen (http://www.sojo.net/index.cfm?action=sojomail.display&issue=041013)

I am a Christian ethicist, and trained in statistical analysis. I am consistently pro-life. My son David is one witness. For my family, "pro-life" is personal. My wife caught rubella in the eighth week of her pregnancy. We decided not to terminate, to love and raise our baby. David is legally blind and severely handicapped; he also is a blessing to us and to the world.

I look at the fruits of political policies more than words. I analyzed the data on abortion during the George W. Bush presidency. There is no single source for this information - federal reports go only to 2000, and many states do not report - but I found enough data to identify trends. My findings are counterintuitive and disturbing.

Abortion was decreasing. When President Bush took office, the nation's abortion rates were at a 24-year low, after a 17.4% decline during the 1990s. This was an average decrease of 1.7% per year, mostly during the latter part of the decade. (This data comes from Minnesota Citizens Concerned for Life using the Guttmacher Institute's studies).

Enter George W. Bush in 2001. One would expect the abortion rate to continue its consistent course downward, if not plunge. Instead, the opposite happened.

I found three states that have posted multi-year statistics through 2003, and abortion rates have risen in all three: Kentucky's increased by 3.2% from 2000 to 2003. Michigan's increased by 11.3% from 2000 to 2003. Pennsylvania's increased by 1.9% from 1999 to 2002. I found 13 additional states that reported statistics for 2001 and 2002. Eight states saw an increase in abortion rates (14.6% average increase), and five saw a decrease (4.3% average decrease).

Under President Bush, the decade-long trend of declining abortion rates appears to have reversed. Given the trends of the 1990s, 52,000 more abortions occurred in the United States in 2002 than would have been expected before this change of direction.

How could this be? I see three contributing factors:

First, two thirds of women who abort say they cannot afford a child (Minnesota Citizens Concerned for Life Web site). In the past three years, unemployment rates increased half again. Not since Hoover had there been a net loss of jobs during a presidency until the current administration. Average real incomes decreased, and for seven years the minimum wage has not been raised to match inflation. With less income, many prospective mothers fear another mouth to feed.

Second, half of all women who abort say they do not have a reliable mate (Minnesota Citizens Concerned for Life). Men who are jobless usually do not marry. Only three of the 16 states had more marriages in 2002 than in 2001, and in those states abortion rates decreased. In the 16 states overall, there were 16,392 fewer marriages than the year before, and 7,869 more abortions. As male unemployment increases, marriages fall and abortion rises.

Third, women worry about health care for themselves and their children. Since 5.2 million more people have no health insurance now than before this presidency - with women of childbearing age overrepresented in those 5.2 million - abortion increases.

The U.S. Catholic Bishops warned of this likely outcome if support for families with children was cut back. My wife and I know - as does my son David - that doctors, nurses, hospitals, medical insurance, special schooling, and parental employment are crucial for a special child. David attended the Kentucky School for the Blind, as well as several schools for children with cerebral palsy and other disabilities. He was mainstreamed in public schools as well. We have two other sons and five grandchildren, and we know that every mother, father, and child needs public and family support.

What does this tell us? Economic policy and abortion are not separate issues; they form one moral imperative. Rhetoric is hollow, mere tinkling brass, without health care, health insurance, jobs, child care, and a living wage. Pro-life in deed, not merely in word, means we need policies that provide jobs and health insurance and support for prospective mothers.

Glen Stassen is the Lewis B. Smedes Professor of Christian Ethics at Fuller Theological Seminary, and the co-author of Kingdom Ethics: Following Jesus in Contemporary Context, Christianity Today's Book of the Year in theology or ethics.

+ Read David Batstone's open letter to Catholic bishops who are instructing Catholics to make a "pro-life vote" + Read Rose Marie Berger's column "Eucharist in an Election Year" about the "Catholic vote"

====

Pro-Choice Governments Are Pro-Child...
Pro-Life Governments Trash Their Live Births.

Why Pro-Life Doesn't Always Mean Pro-Child
By Louis Rom (http://www.timesofacadiana.com/html/AA8B7519-D542-4637-BA00-EF12F8D0A89E.shtml)

Historically, when the conversation turns to abortion, Louisiana's pro-life politicians wax compassionately about how they want to protect the most vulnerable, defenseless Americans of all - the unborn.

They express how their actions - through which they've made it harder for women in Louisiana to obtain abortions and for doctors to perform them - are motivated by their desire to protect the unborn.

Their rhetoric suggests that being pro-life correlates to being pro-child.

The facts, however, suggest that, too often, lawmakers' concern for a fetus stops once it enters the world, crying and flailing in its mother's arms.

The fact here in Louisiana is this: The state is No. 1 in its efforts to limit access to abortion, with more than 20 laws on the books that do just that, yet it ranks near the bottom in virtually every category regarding child welfare.

In 1999, the last year for which accurate data is available, Louisiana ranked fourth in the percentage of uninsured children, according to U.S. Census data. One in five Louisiana children is uninsured, and one third of those 5 and under live in poverty.

That same year, Louisiana was the third most dangerous state for a child less than 1 year old. The state ranked third in infant mortality (thank God for Mississippi and South Carolina), according to the federal National Center for Health Statistics.

In addition, the state's record when it comes to protecting children and mothers from abusive men is abysmal.

And, if that weren't discouraging enough, sadly, our record in Louisiana pales in comparison to several comparably developed nations.

In fact, Cuba - not the country that comes to mind when one thinks about compassionate government - is the only country in Latin America that permits abortion without restriction, has universal free healthcare and education and the lowest infant mortality rates in that region - better, even, than Louisiana..

But what about the Child Health Insurance Program, also known as CHIP, you ask? Well, while the number of children enrolled in CHIP has increased greatly in recent years, those gains have been offset to a great extent by losses of children covered by Medicaid - children whose medical coverage disappeared when their parents were tossed from the welfare rolls.

Says Ronald Pollack, president of Families USA: "We're no further down the road toward protecting children than we were in 1996 or '97."

Further proof that Louisiana, a so-called pro-life state, does little to ensure the well-being of its children.

And Louisiana is not alone. Internationally, the availability of unrestricted abortions and government programs and assistance that protect the well-being of children after they are born are inversely, not positively, related.

Pro-life governments are far less likely to provide support for the poorest and most needy children, for adoption, foster care and welfare programs, studies have shown.

Countries like France and Norway, Sweden and Canada - which offer some of the world's most expansive services for and protection of children - also offer unrestricted access to abortions. In several pro-life countries infant mortality, universal access to healthcare and education were among the worst in their respective regions. A contradiction, pro-lifers would say, but a reality almost across the board.

According to Jean Ruth Schroedel, an associate professor of political science at Claremont Graduate University and author of several books on reproductive rights policies, states that restrict abortion typically do a poor job of protecting children outside the womb.

Schroedel says the data "showed that anti-abortion states do not consistently value fetal life."

What's equally as troubling, writes Schroedel, is the hidden reality behind the statistics, one that suggests that women's political, social and economic status is lower in pro-life states than pro-choice states.

"The evidence was quite clear cut," writes Schroedel. The lower women's status - their education, earnings compared to men, positions of power in government - the more restrictive their governments were regarding reproductive freedom.

====

Lastly, when are you going to put your money where your cowardly mouth is? :cool:

Suff
01-06-2005, 07:32 PM
Sufferin, do you make this shit up in your head?? In 2003, Massachusetts had the 9th highest abortion rate per 1000 women in the entire country!

Put the bottle down and do some actual factual research...

I'm borderline perplexed/amused why you insist on posting to me. I don't really enjoy it. I'd prefer you did'nt. But I've asked you twice.. This makes three. Your constant references to my alcohol intake is hilarious. Thats the only part of what you say that makes me smile. It's cute.

But anyway... While I gut you here... what did you do? Read my statement that Mass has lowest rate of abortion per 1000 Residents and do a Google search... saw something different and came out firing? Thats Typical of a Bush Voter... Very simple. Not a complex thinker at all. It takes work and reason to decipher the truth of the Poltical and cultural effects on abortion data reporting. There are no federal laws requiring states to report and states alter thier stats commonly... Also... Because Massachusetts has easy access to abortion we do an inordinate amount of "out of state" residents that alter the per 1000 stats. It really takes multiple sources and a concerted effort over time to understand the numbers

Comments on abortion statistics


Abortion statistics and other data is intended to improve the accessibility of abortion statistics. It is under continuing development. The reader should be aware that abortion statistics are often hard to obtain, and those statistics that are available are frequently inaccurate.


Official abortion statistics are often low due to incomplete reporting. In the United States, for example, not all states mandate such reporting. Even in those states that require or encourage reporting of abortion statistics, this reporting is incomplete (as demonstrated by higher numbers reported to abortion advocacy organizations). From 1988 to 1997, the total number of U.S. abortions reported to the U.S. Centers for Disease Control was 11.3% lower than the total number reported to the Alan Guttmacher Institute (the research branch of Planned Parenthood). In 1998 four states discontinued state-level gathering of abortion statistics, contributing to the 25.4% drop in CDC figures from 1997 to 1998.

In contrast, other organizations that provide estimates of abortion statistics may be motivated to inflate the numbers. Currently, the Alan Guttmacher Institute is an important source for estimates of both legal and illegal abortions worldwide
http://www.johnstonsarchive.net/

http://www.johnstonsarchive.net/policy/abortion/usa/ab-usa-ma.html

Scott... I don't want to get into anything large with you. I'm here for horse racing. I just want to roll in and read some things and enjoy myself. Your a brain drainer... You take to much work to get along with and understand. Now STFU and leave me alone. Please.

sq764
01-06-2005, 07:32 PM
SQ,
He may be a new poster, but he seems to know you well.

Kinda curious why I would commit suicide? I am quite happy with my life..

sq764
01-06-2005, 07:35 PM
Hey Alchy, how in the world could I do a google search on your state?? How could a dumbass trailer trash Bush voter like myself even spell Massamachoooseetts??

Go smoke your ganja and leave the thinking folk alone..

Equineer
01-06-2005, 07:36 PM
Ok Equineer, I'll give you a few days to think about it....I'm on the road with only my laptop, but I did briefly visit the new WR on VS's dual-monitor desktop today. I will try to drop by for AQU Sunday... tomorrow we are going to play at a simulcast outlet.

boxcar
01-06-2005, 09:26 PM
SQ wrote:

Your portrayal of the Bush voter isn't harsh, it's inaccurate.

But whatever helps you sleep (or pass out) at night.

LOL! Inaccurate and harsh are both right. I have to think Suff was intoxicated on some bad wine that was pressed out after the election from Sour Grapes.

Boxcar

boxcar
01-06-2005, 10:14 PM
Equineer writes:

You need to grasp the big picture... governments that are fervently Pro-Life are also most likely to be perniciously Anti-Child with respect to what happens after birth. In contrast to the Pro-Life states, Massachsetts is acknowledged as a Pro-Child state by virtually all secular and non-secular child welfare organizations.

Abortions are on the rise, but that is only half the story.[/iB]

=====

[i]Bush's Policies Spur Trend Towards Abortions

Under President Bush, the decade-long trend of declining abortion rates appears to have reversed. Given the trends of the 1990s, 52,000 more abortions occurred in the United States in 2002 than would have been expected before this change of direction.

How could this be? I see three contributing factors:

[i]First, two thirds of women who abort say they cannot afford a child (Minnesota Citizens Concerned for Life Web site). In the past three years, unemployment rates increased half again. Not since Hoover had there been a net loss of jobs during a presidency until the current administration. Average real incomes decreased, and for seven years the minimum wage has not been raised to match inflation. With less income, many prospective mothers fear another mouth to feed.

Ahh..."they cannot afford a child"? And they didn't think about this little "insignifcant" eventuality before they got pregnant, right? And just how many of those preganancies were out of wedlock? (Would love to see the stats on that.) So...these women have the wherewithal to play, but only after they're pregnant do they finally get around to figuring out they can't pay? Is that deal? All hindsight. No foresight! Besides, it so much easier to compalin and whine about one's financial conditon after preganancy, right?

Second, half of all women who abort say they do not have a reliable mate (Minnesota Citizens Concerned for Life). Men who are jobless usually do not marry. Only three of the 16 states had more marriages in 2002 than in 2001, and in those states abortion rates decreased. In the 16 states overall, there were 16,392 fewer marriages than the year before, and 7,869 more abortions. As male unemployment increases, marriages fall and abortion rises.

Hmm...So, these women don't mind at all playing around with jobless men, who aren't very likely to want to get married, or have a proposal accepted -- but these immoral, irresponsible women only figure this all out after pregnancy, eh? I guess pregnancy must serve as big wake up call, eh? Maybe in this 21st Century someone should invent an electronic, digital alarm clock that would insert inside a woman's vagina that would sound a very loud alarm the moment the device senses penetration. Might help cut down on unwanted or unexpected pregnancies.

Third, women worry about health care for themselves and their children. Since 5.2 million more people have no health insurance now than before this presidency - with women of childbearing age overrepresented in those 5.2 million - abortion increases.

Ahh...this one I really love. These irresponsible and immoral women (in many if not most cases) are warm, compassionate and concerned about health care for themselves and supposedly for their children, but then turn right around and murder the child in their womb!? Who needs that kind of compassion and concern!?. Speaking for all those who never accorded the chance to speak themselves, I'd say they certinaly were not in need of such "overwhelming compassion and worry".

Besides all this, I see nowhere in the Constitution where the Federal Government has the responsibility to provide jobs, living wages, healthcare, health insurance, child care, food, etc. for the people. What has made this nation great is the fact that we've been a people who have taken great pride in self-respect, self-dignity, self-reliance, self-sufficiency and last but not lease self-responsibility.

This "Christian" ethicist sounds like a bleeding heart Socialist to me, espcially coming from Fuller which is as liberal as it gets.

Boxcar

toetoe
01-06-2005, 11:10 PM
You tryin' to start WWW III ( .com optional ) ?

46zilzal
01-06-2005, 11:16 PM
Ladies who do not want a child will find a way.....Interesting to see how many fervent ANTI-ABORTIONISTS are MEN. As a resident, I scrubbed in on many of the CLEAN ones ...always thought the way they coverd it up on the OR sheet was strange: CONDITION: Anxiety state. PROCEDURE :ETOP (elective termination of pregnancy)

Just saw a terrifying documentary on The Army of God: nut cases in the South who advocate murdering heatlh professionals..."We must KILL to save lives."

Equineer
01-07-2005, 09:20 AM
Boxcar,

I think 2,000 years is more than a sufficient trial period to demonstrate that your gospel has failed mankind. The fault I think is that you rely on mysticism to magically engender moral and ethical principles that are best engendered when derived from collective reasoning and propagated through education.

Your previous post attributes the woes of unwanted children to immorality without acknowledging that your gospel has failed to impart morality because you trifle with it by invoking revelations, fables, and miracles to serve as a quick and dirty sales pitch. Far too much your gospel makes The Lord of the Rings read like an anthropology journal.

If you cut out all of the nonsense that you insist must be accepted as a matter of faith, your gospel could be reduced to a compendium of moral and ethical principles that would serve mankind exceedingly well if we accept that inculcation is the difficult and ongoing temporal responsibility of society. Where you err is peddling mysticism as the "miraculous" vacuum cleaner that is necessary to empower your moral and ethical attachments.

boxcar
01-07-2005, 11:04 AM
Boxcar wrote:

I think 2,000 years is more than a sufficient trial period to demonstrate that your gospel has failed mankind. The fault I think is that you rely on mysticism to magically engender moral and ethical principles that are best engendered when derived from collective reasoning and propagated through education.

"Collective reasoning"? Hmm..like from a Herd of Deep Thinking of Liberals who have all Assumed the Position?

And "education"? Hmm...Sex Ed 101 -- 101 things you can do with a condom when your boyfriend doesn't want to wear one.

Alternative Lifestyles 101, included a course on How to Be Gay about your Gayness Even when your Dying of Aids.

Tips for Pedophiles include How To Love Little Boys in the Great Outdoors...and Indoors, such as Public Restrooms, Dark Alleyways, etc.

And Advanced Courses in Alternative Lifestyles 202 would include tips and techniques for how to Seduce your Favorite Animal (which would include any Deep Thinking Liberal), and how to Legally Marry As Many Girls Under the Age of 14 as Desired, and Get the Marriage to Stick. Then afterwards, those Perverts would need to learn How to Get the Taxpayer's to Support All Those Young Wives by Getting Them Enrolled in such Programs as WIC, Welfare, Food Stamps,etc. for the rest of their lives.

Yes! Let's hear it for "education"!

Your previous post attributes the woes of unwanted children to immorality without acknowledging that your gospel has failed to impart morality because you trifle with it by invoking revelations, fables, and miracles to serve as a quick and dirty sales pitch. Far too much your gospel makes The Lord of the Rings read like an anthropology journal.

You Hypocrite! Don't knock miracles. You know fully well you believe in all the many miracles of evolution. And I gotta think you're hoping that our Resident Bland Man (that way from birth) will be able to pull out a miracle somehow from where his head lives to save himself from drowning right now in the Deep, Dark Sea of Ignorance. (Hey, Eq...why don't you do the charitable thing for 'Cap and see if you find that "something" for him that must be "out there" somewhere. Maybe that "something" can save him.)

If you cut out all of the nonsense that you insist must be accepted as a matter of faith, your gospel could be reduced to a compendium of moral and ethical principles that would serve mankind exceedingly well if we accept that inculcation is the difficult and ongoing temporal responsibility of society.

Right on, Brother! Once Society becomes converted to Christianity -- things will start to look a lot better. Of course the first thing, as a society we'll have to do is burn all the Hard-headed, Stone-hearted, Uncoverted Human Secualrists at the Stake. But hey..it beats burning some Tree-Hugger's poor tree that had some endangered species living in it to boot.

Where you err is peddling mysticism as the "miraculous" vacuum cleaner that is necessary to empower your moral and ethical attachments

But your error is far more grievous becuase your Socialism and all its ideals find no support in the U.S. Constitution.

Now...before signing off, here's a verse for you to memorize and upon which to meditate today. It is most appropriate for you in more ways than one:

Job 11:12
12 But a stupid man will get wisdom [only] when a wild donkey's colt is born a man [as when he thinks himself free because he is lifted up in pride].
AMP

Boxcar

Equineer
01-07-2005, 12:38 PM
Originally posted by Boxcar,

... 101 things you can do with a condom when your boyfriend doesn't want to wear one.

... a course on How to Be Gay about your Gayness Even when your Dying of Aids.

Tips for Pedophiles include How To Love Little Boys in the Great Outdoors...and Indoors, such as Public Restrooms, Dark Alleyways, etc.

... tips and techniques for how to Seduce your Favorite Animal...

... the first thing, as a society we'll have to do is burn all the Hard-headed, Stone-hearted, Uncoverted Human Secualrists at the Stake.Was that really you? Regular readers of your posts will sense the sudden eruption of angst and vitriol embodied in your preceding post.

I sincerely hope that your hostility has not been fueled by a trangression that resulted in the curtailment of your privileges. Whatever mischief we might imagine, such as the chaplain finding naughty content in your user documents, your time would be better spent repenting rather than ranting against goodwill among men. :cool:

You can start reforming by wishing me good luck... after baiting me into being a few minutes late to leave for a long day of simulcasting. :D

46zilzal
01-07-2005, 02:12 PM
HB1677, “Report of Fetal Death by mother, penalty”

It sounds preposterous to talk about criminalizing women who suffer miscarriages, but one Virginia legislator is proposing just that. HB1677, “Report of Fetal Death by mother, penalty” is a bill introduced by John A. Cosgrove (R) of Chesapeake. Cosgrove’s bill requires any woman who experiences “fetal death” without a doctor’s assistance to report this to the local law-enforcement agency within twelve hours of the miscarriage. Failure to do so is punishable as a Class 1 Misdemeanor.

Background: Reporting of Fetal Deaths

Almost all states mandate reporting of fetal deaths to vital statistics bureaus. These statistics are then collected nationally by the CDC. In most states, health care providers must provide statistics on fetal deaths after 20 weeks gestation (or at a certain fetal weight approximating 20 weeks gestation). Virginia is one of only 7 states, however, that mandate the reporting of deaths of all “products of conception” regardless of gestational age. This includes both spontaneous losses of pregnancy and induced terminations of pregnancy, though the required data fields are different for abortions.

In Virginia, all losses of pregnancy must be reported by health care providers according to current law. The reality, though, is that countless women experience spontaneous abortions in the first few gestational weeks without even being aware of pregnancy, so not all pregnancies of early gestational age are reported. Women who experience miscarriages at home without a doctor’s care may not even think to inform their doctors, especially if the pregnancy is so early that they have not yet even sought prenatal care. Until this bill, though, no one has suggested it was in the interest of the Commonwealth of Virginia to track down these unreported losses of "products of conception".

The Bill: text
When a fetal death occurs without medical attendance, it shall be the woman's responsibility to report the death to the law-enforcement agency in the jurisdiction of which the delivery occurs within 12 hours after the delivery. A violation of this section shall be punishable as a Class 1 misdemeanor.

The Bill: The Most Odious Infringement on the Privacy of Virginia women...ever
Delegate Cosgrove’s bill is an outrageous attack on the privacy of Virginia women. Consider this - there is no law mandating that a woman must report a pregnancy to the Commonwealth, or even seek medical treatment for one. But this bill proposes that a woman report a LOSS of a pregnancy to the Commonwealth, whatever the gestational age of the embryo/fetus.

Furthermore, this bill means that a woman who experiences a spontaneous loss of pregnancy will have her privacy violated significantly more than if she had chosen an abortion. Though Virginia requires that induced terminations of pregnancy be reported, those reporting forms require only a “patient number” and information on the procedure. The “report of fetal death” asks for the woman’s full name, her history of prenatal care, her marital status, her education history, her previous deliveries (if any), and a number of other very intrusive data items.

If the miscarriage occurred under a physician’s care, all of this information would be provided by the physician out of the patient’s medical records. Physicians and/or funeral directors are given 24 hours to file this report. Delegate Cosgrove’s bill gives women who experience miscarriage without a doctor only 12 hours to report, adding insult to injury.

freeneasy
01-07-2005, 04:24 PM
PA, never stand in the path of fools, lest you should inhibit them, even unintentionally, from running headlong over the cliff and into the abyss.

Boxcar
to funny man, to funny

boxcar
01-08-2005, 10:09 AM
Equineer wrote:

Was that really you? Regular readers of your posts will sense the sudden eruption of angst and vitriol embodied in your preceding post.

No "angst" or "vitriol". Why are you upset with me? I thought your answer for the betterment and improvement of socieity was "education". Aren't you a big believer in "education"? Just about everyone here knows all too well what Libs mean when they start talking "education". Essentially what happens, in the context of the morally bankrupt public school systems (generally speaking), is the 3 Rs get flushed down the toilet to be replaced Revisionist History, all manner of Sex-related courses, and Diversity and Tolerance Courses, except tolerance for Chrisitians, of course. Is it any wonder, the US is falling so far behind other countries in math and science skills, for example? We have Socialists like you to thank! Conversely, though, we find a striking contrast between the lack of quality of education in most public school systems and the genuine quality of edcuation in private schools and homeschooling programs -- not to mention the fact that private schools, generally, provide this quality education at about half the cost of what taxpayer's are paying the public schools to Dumb Down our kids.

sincerely hope that your hostility has not been fueled by a trangression that resulted in the curtailment of your privileges.

Not at all! Besides, I thrive on adversity. It really gets my creative juices flowing. And don't you know that some of the Apostle Paul's best epistles were penned when he was imprisioned?

Whatever mischief we might imagine, such as the chaplain finding naughty content in your user documents, your time would be better spent repenting rather than ranting against goodwill among men.

Liberals are complete strangers to "goodwill" and know not the true meaning of same. Good intentions? Oh, yes. Libs know nearly everything about "good intentions", save for the most important thing: that the very broad path to Hell is paved with them.

You can start reforming by wishing me good luck

God forbid! I do not blindly believe in some unidentifiable, unknowable force that either brings fortune or advesity, nor that anything in this world happens by mere happenstance. Darkened Minds like yours are much better fitted for such stupid and ignorant superstitions.

Boxcar

Equineer
01-08-2005, 12:40 PM
Originally posted by Boxcar,
Not at all! Besides, I thrive on adversity. It really gets my creative juices flowing. And don't you know that some of the Apostle Paul's best epistles were penned when he was imprisoned?I am a product of the generation when girl's names like Dawn, Heather, Faith, Hope, and Charity became popular.

In this regard, I learned as a teenager to appreciate Paul's wisdom... as a rule of thumb based only on their names, hit on Charity if you're lookin' for Love.

In view of your expertise as a biblicist, you will no doubt agree with Paul and me about the meaning of Charity! :)

boxcar
01-09-2005, 07:47 PM
Equineer wrote:

I am a product of the generation when girl's names like Dawn, her, Faith, Hope, and Charity became popular

Ahh...yes. This must be same generation of which Peter spoke. And it's evident to me have you ignored his wise exhortation...which will prove to be to your own detriment, if you persist in your stubborness.

Acts 2:40
40 And with many other words he solemnly testified and kept on exhorting them, saying, "Be saved from this perverse generation !"
NASB

In this regard, I learned as a teenager to appreciate Paul's wisdom... as a rule of thumb based only on their names, hit on Charity if you're lookin' for Love.

In view of your expertise as a biblicist, you will no doubt agree with Paul and me about the meaning of Charity! :)

Not really, Eq. Chairty and Love mean the same thing, as they come from the same Greek word:

agape
NT:26 agape (ag-ah'-pay); from NT:25; love, i.e. affection or benevolence; specially (plural) a love-feast:


KJV - (feast of) charity ([-ably]), dear, love.

Only the KJV ranslates "agape" as "charity". (Even the translators of the NKJV saw the error of their ways.) Therefore, I can assure you that if you were hittin' on Charity you got probably got smacked upside for inapproriate behavior by her, as well. As that song goes: "Lookin' for Love in all the wrong places..." ;)

Boxcar

Equineer
01-10-2005, 02:25 PM
You continue to approach delirium with every post. :)

About Charity... It seems you do agree that charity and love are the same, and hence you agree with Paul and me that given Faith, Hope, and Charity, dance with Charity first and last if you want to roll in the hay or frolic in the meadow.

About Socialism... you err by repeatedly assuming that enlightened child welfare advocates would endorse socialism rather than capitalism.

Indeed, you apparently have given little or no thought to the welfare of women or children, so I will take it upon myself to enlighten you.

Pure capitalism and polygamy would be the cornerstones of a compassionate world that truly cares about family values and child welfare.

Just as the most dominant of stags command the largest herds of does, it has been estimated that the wealthiest two percent (2%) of men would be keen to provide ample security and welfare for up to twenty percent (20%) of women and children, and the wealthiest twenty percent (20%) of men would do likewise for up to eighty percent (80%) of women and children, leaving only eighty percent (80%) of men and twenty percent (20%) of women and children mired in relative poverty at any point in time.

Misguided critics might complain that wealth will cherry pick the most attractive women, but ugliness is already no stranger to ignorance and poverty, and the net result would be that half of the world's population would be relatively better off, on average, than they are today.

ljb
01-10-2005, 03:48 PM
Boxcar defined:
I have been trying to understand this fellows rantings and such for sometime now. I think after reading Equineers post with Boxcars quotes, i finally figured this dude out. He is Col. Frank Fitts (USMC) from the movie American Beauty.
:D :D :D Repressing your inner desires is bad for your health Boxcar Fitts, you should just give in to the urges. Tom, another easily angered poster on this board has, in the past, made homosexual advances towards me, you may want to send him a pm. Perhaps the two of you could hook up. :D

so.cal.fan
01-10-2005, 04:47 PM
You're really out of line, ljb.
:mad:

PaceAdvantage
01-10-2005, 04:51 PM
I agree SCF, LJB is out of line. His most recent reply serves absolutely no purpose to this thread, and is only meant to bait, put others down, and make himself feel good and worthy, all at the same time.

Very odd.

JustRalph
01-10-2005, 07:47 PM
Usual Crap.....from the Crap Brothers.......or is one of them a sister?

Tom
01-10-2005, 11:17 PM
Ljb lives in a littel dream world. He can make all the cute little remaks about me he wants to.....it doesn't matter because......WE GOT THE WHITE HOUSE, SENATE, HOUSE, AND SOON THE COURT!
BRAWWWWWWHAWWWWWWWWW!

boxcar
01-11-2005, 12:26 AM
PaceAdvantage says in part about LJB:

... and make himself feel good and worthy, all at the same time.

PA, in defense of LJB, please consider this: It's a dirty, rotten, slimy, putrid smellin', below minimum wage payin' job that virtually no one around here wants -- but someone has to do it. Besides all this, he seems eminently qualified to stroke his own back(side?). ;)

Boxcar

boxcar
01-11-2005, 12:57 AM
Equineer writes:

You continue to approach delirium with every post.

That may be. But you, sir, have already arrived and crash landed in that wretched state.

About Charity... It seems you do agree that charity and love are the same, and hence you agree with Paul and me that given Faith, Hope, and Charity, dance with Charity first and last if you want to roll in the hay or frolic in the meadow.

You see what I mean? Given all the sublime and exquisite qualities of Charity, as explained by the Apostle, what makes you think she would give a carnal-minded character like you a first look, let alone desire to come within six cubits of your space? But I'm equally sure that the Devil wouldn't mind giving you a twirl on the dance floor. I have to think such an encounter would be "love" at first sight. (Afterwards, you could spend quality, romance time with him roasting chestnuts in the flames in a place called The Lake of Fire.)

About Socialism... you err by repeatedly assuming that enlightened child welfare advocates would endorse socialism rather than capitalism.

Indeed, you apparently have given little or no thought to the welfare of women or children, so I will take it upon myself to enlighten you.

The one thing that has never occurred to me is to be "enlightened" by a reprobate who also suffers from delirium. (But you'll be glad to learn that knowing someone in your condition has motivated me to rethink the ethics of Euthenasia.)

Boxcar

Equineer
01-11-2005, 09:02 AM
Boxcar,

Once again you have slyly employed in-line posting to confound your readers.

More than once, you have conveniently skirted polygamy... and for good reason.

Your exegesis would have to condone polygamy in order to remain consistent with your other biblical rants.

Indeed, when David already had seven wives (1_Samuel 18:27, 25:42-43, 2_Samuel 3:2-5), God gave him even more wives (2_Samuel 12:8) despite his adultery with Bathsheba.

Apparently the biblical message is: a-tisket, a-tasket, wenches by the basket... the more wives, the merrier!The Bible's Polygamy Hall of Fame

Abdon Abijah Abraham Ahab Ahasuerus
Ashur Belshazzar Benhadad Caleb David
Eliphaz Elkanah Esau Ezra Gideon
Heman Hosea Ibzan Issachar Jacob
Jair Jehoiachin Jehoram Jerahmeel Joash
Lamech Machir Manasseh Mered Moses
Nahor Rehoboam Saul Shaharaim Shimei
Simeon Solomon Terah Zedekiah Ziba

ljb
01-11-2005, 10:59 AM
What a bunch of hypocrits we have here. The rightys can call me names and make jokes about me with total freedom. But when I make a snarky remark about a couple of them I am "out of line". You folks should try to open your eyes and look at the total picture. Or in otherwords "Get Real"!!! :rolleyes: :rolleyes: :rolleyes:

sq764
01-11-2005, 11:39 AM
What a bunch of hypocrits we have here. The rightys can call me names and make jokes about me with total freedom. But when I make a snarky remark about a couple of them I am "out of line". You folks should try to open your eyes and look at the total picture. Or in otherwords "Get Real"!!! :rolleyes: :rolleyes: :rolleyes:

Why would you insinuate someone is a homosexual? What exactly does that accomplish?

so.cal.fan
01-11-2005, 12:43 PM
PA is very LIBERAL about the posts made here........most moderators would pull some of these threads.....he allows free speech.
LJB made an inappropriate post........period.
Tom is a long time, popular member on this board.....and those of us who are his friends found it offensive.
Stick to politics and avoid these personal attacks or many of the readers here will stop reading your posts.

toetoe
01-11-2005, 09:54 PM
Dave,
Your analogy with a men's club is good. That said, I would stop far short of claiming
1) Any such thing as "the will of the people" exists.
2) Any politician of any stripe could ever represent that will.
A.E. Housman's notion of a collective unconscious is wonderful, but if it ever existed in the behemoth known as the U.S.A., it doesn't now. That's no excuse for being long-suffering sore losers; it's just that "will of the people" and "mandate" should be left to the talking heads selling us soap. ... Hey, soap in a ... SOAPBOX! Well, maybe ...