| 8th November 2006 08:31 PM |
|
|
| Joey |
quote:
LadyJane wrote:
Kins...why is everyone fighting??
Why all the acrimony?
Why can't they give the Dems a chance??
Why????????????????????????????????
LJ.
I do not know my Stonesian Queen ...........
But we all realize how much needs to be done ... and if our HEARTS are RIGHT ...then we shall overcome the mendacity and divisiveness that pervades the nation's collective consciousness and WE SHALL OVERCOME !!!!
LBJOEY !
....
[kins]
[Edited by Joey] |
| 8th November 2006 08:32 PM |
|
|
| LadyJane |
quote:
Joey wrote:
I do not know my Stonesian Queen ...........
But we all know how much needs to be done ... and if our HEARTS are RIGHT ...then we shall overcome the mendacity and divisiveness that pervades our collective consciousness and WE SHALL OVERCOME !!!!
LBJOEY !
I think I love you!!!!!!!!!!!
LadyBirdJ. |
| 8th November 2006 08:33 PM |
|
|
| Joey |
quote:
LadyJane wrote:
I think I love you!!!!!!!!!!!
LadyBirdJ.
Is LadyBird still ' kickin' ?!
Uncle Ho ! ™ |
| 8th November 2006 08:35 PM |
|
|
| pdog |
Did Allen concede yet? |
| 8th November 2006 08:36 PM |
|
|
| Joey |
quote:
pdog wrote:
Did Allen concede yet?
He will tomorrow
We hit an " Inside Straight " Baby !!!! |
| 8th November 2006 08:48 PM |
|
|
| Nellcote |
I will resist the urge to fight.
It's not becoming.
Remember, for 12 years GOP has taken beatings for Dem losses.
Clinton not adequately backing his own Vice President when he ran for President, Dems lost seats in house & senate.
Al Gore running from Joe Lieberman, same thing happened.
These are but two items which did not help the Dems win in over a decade.
Bush was smart to come out and say he would work with Pelosi, despite Pelosi calling him every name in the book over the past several years.
After all is said and done, while the Dems may have control, if they are smart, they will allow Bush, a wartime President, to implement policy, with concessions.
After all, they would not want to take the blame when the policy goes wrong, they can blame the lame duck President!
In otherwords, as Joey likes to sing, in US Politics:
"Meet the new boss, same as the old boss" |
| 8th November 2006 08:52 PM |
|
|
| robpop |
 |
| 8th November 2006 09:15 PM |
|
|
| pdog |
quote:
Nellcote wrote:
I will resist the urge to fight.
It's not becoming.
Remember, for 12 years GOP has taken beatings for Dem losses.
Clinton not adequately backing his own Vice President when he ran for President, Dems lost seats in house & senate.
Al Gore running from Joe Lieberman, same thing happened.
These are but two items which did not help the Dems win in over a decade.
Bush was smart to come out and say he would work with Pelosi, despite Pelosi calling him every name in the book over the past several years.
After all is said and done, while the Dems may have control, if they are smart, they will allow Bush, a wartime President, to implement policy, with concessions.
After all, they would not want to take the blame when the policy goes wrong, they can blame the lame duck President!
In otherwords, as Joey likes to sing, in US Politics:
"Meet the new boss, same as the old boss"
You know that saying, there's not an ounce of truth, well you just laid down a few lbs of truthiness!
The good thing is, The Dems won't allow our troops to go unfunded, despite what some say... That would be insane and criminal, and it just won't happen.
I still got my fingers crossed the the blunderfuck that is Iraq has some good end, especially for the people who not only suffered under Saddma, but now suffer under Shi'ite fuckheads. I never thought Sunni Ba'thists were the nicest people, but jessus, they're the smartest between those two. |
| 8th November 2006 09:20 PM |
|
|
| pdog |
Had to post this since Gazza closed, should've deleted that thread!
quote:
Gazza wrote:
Jesus..not another new politics post. Cant you guys keep these on the same thread?
Fuckin' Americans!!! And we wonder why the world dislikes us soo much!!!
We love to hear ourselves talk!
We ain't all that bitches!!! |
| 8th November 2006 10:14 PM |
|
|
| WJ |
quote:
Joey wrote:
Let Us .... CONTINUE ......................
 |
| 8th November 2006 10:45 PM |
|
|
| Brainbell Jangler |
quote:
pdog wrote:
I laugh at people who follow Jesus and Hate...
What next, Hippies for Hitler!!!
Indeed. And Log Cabin (gay) Republicans make as much sense as Jews for Hitler. |
| 8th November 2006 10:57 PM |
|
|
| Brainbell Jangler |
quote:
Jaxx wrote:
my issue with the same sex lifestyle validation, whether chosen or not (yeah, i believe there are folks that do choose, but certainly not all) is that sexuality is a private issue. i don't announce my heterosexuality in a gay bar and force the folks in there to deal with me and my date making out all over the place.
free to be, but i don't need to know if my kid's teacher, coach, scout leader is gay. if they are so be it, but don't broadcast it and don't take this opportunity to preach your lifestyle as an "alternative" lifestyle.
my children went with some friends to elitch gardens. no where posted outside did they say it was gay pride day. my kids and their friends and chaperone went in and were treated to queens, transvestites and same sex couples sleazing around flaunting their sexuality. when one of the bewildered 10 year olds stared at 2 men french kissing, she was greeted with, "what are you staring at honey?"
Would your reaction be the same at the sight of a man and woman French kissing? Why not? Is it because you implicitly view homosexuality as deviant, wrong and inferior to heterosexuality? Would you describe a young heterosexual couple kissing in public as "sleazing around flaunting their sexuality"? All of us are surrounded by blatant heterosexuality all the time: on the street, on television, in movies and magazines. We take it for granted. True equality means taking homosexual displays of affection for granted in the same way. As a gay friend's bumper sticker says: "I don't mind straight people as long as they act gay in public." |
| 8th November 2006 11:07 PM |
|
|
| Brainbell Jangler |
quote:
Fiji Joe wrote:
Agreed...do as you wish...but that hardly means I cannot personally reject the lifestyle...I do believe that many gays have made a conscience choice...I do not remotely believe that ALL are born that way...tolerance vs. acceptance...big difference between the two
Nobody would choose to take on the hatred and discrimination inflicted on homosexuals in this country, any more than they would choose to be black. Have you seen that hilarious Chris Rock routine where he tells the whites in his audience that none of them would trade places with him, "And I'm a millionaire!"?
 |
| 8th November 2006 11:15 PM |
|
|
| Brainbell Jangler |
quote:
Jumping Jack wrote:
I don't care what people do in the privacy of their homes or bath houses. If they want to risk their lives, that their business. Just don't expect the rest of the country to pay the associated health care costs for their irresponsible behavior.
Do you hold the same position on cigarette smokers, McDonald's Super-Sizers, mountain climbers and other voluntary risk-takers?
 |
| 8th November 2006 11:24 PM |
|
|
| Brainbell Jangler |
quote:
Fiji Joe wrote:
Not sure if it's diminimis now, but I do know it hasn't always been that way...and anytime you violate the laws of nature, you run the risk of new healthcare concerns...this is common sense...if you bufu someone with AIDS or Hepatitis, you run a good risk of contracting same...your risks are diminshed greatly if you avoid that behavior with people of questionable health status...that should be taught in schools
Laws of nature? If that were the case, why is homosexual behavior exhibited among animals? Don't forget that racists justified anti-miscegenation laws with the same argument. Mistaking your personal prejudices for natural law is just sloppy thinking and unworthy of anyone trained to think like a lawyer.
http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2004/07/0722_040722_gayanimal.html |
| 8th November 2006 11:30 PM |
|
|
| Fiji Joe |
quote:
Brainbell Jangler wrote:
Nobody would choose to take on the hatred and discrimination inflicted on homosexuals in this country, any more than they would choose to be black.
I don't agree with that as it relates to homsexuality...because I have seen people make the choice and then unmake the choice and hate was never something they considred...the reality, in both cases, the chicks went straight when their other gay friends went straight...and quite frankly, when they were dyking it up, they were some of the most surly individuals you could ever meet...most are pleasant individuals now |
| 8th November 2006 11:31 PM |
|
|
| Brainbell Jangler |
quote:
Fiji Joe wrote:
Glad to know you're not one of those people who thinks banning smoking in public places is a good thing and that the drinking age should be abolished and that "Supersize Me" was all just Republican propaganda concocted in some Hollywood studio
Public smoking bans are not intended to protect the smokers from themselves,but to protect the rest of us from them. Smoke doesn't know how to stay in a smoking section. As the old saying goes, "Your rights stop at the tip of my nose." |
| 8th November 2006 11:32 PM |
|
|
| Fiji Joe |
quote:
Brainbell Jangler wrote:
Do you hold the same position on cigarette smokers, McDonald's Super-Sizers, mountain climbers and other voluntary risk-takers?
I do...damn straight...the lines are when it effects others involuntarily...that's why I can see some of the limitations on smoking...but outright bans, as they have in my city, make little sense when the means of choice are available...and they always are |
| 8th November 2006 11:35 PM |
|
|
| Brainbell Jangler |
quote:
Fiji Joe wrote:
I don't agree with that as it relates to homsexuality...because I have seen people make the choice and then unmake the choice and hate was never something they considred...the reality, in both cases, the chicks went straight when their other gay friends went straight...and quite frankly, when they were dyking it up, they were some of the most surly individuals you could ever meet...most are pleasant individuals now
I think it's different with women because, let's face it, we dudes enjoy the idea of chicks doing each other. Ask Howard Stern.
 |
| 8th November 2006 11:35 PM |
|
|
| Fiji Joe |
quote:
Brainbell Jangler wrote:
Public smoking bans are not intended to protect the smokers from themselves,but to protect the rest of us from them. Smoke doesn't know how to stay in a smoking section. As the old saying goes, "Your rights stop at the tip of my nose."
I don't disagree...but that does not explain bans on smoking lounges patronized and employed by people who choose to subject themselves to the risk...more accurately, political opportunism explains that phenomenon...and what of SUVs and other excessively polluting vehicles?...where are my nose's rights on that issue? |
| 8th November 2006 11:41 PM |
|
|
| Brainbell Jangler |
quote:
Fiji Joe wrote:
I am proud to say that I have never invited an openly gay man to my house...the last thing I need is someone second guessing my choice of decor
[Edited by Fiji Joe]
LOL. Actually, it could be the very thing you need. |
| 8th November 2006 11:45 PM |
|
|
| Brainbell Jangler |
quote:
pdog wrote:
I know more gay people than you, and yes I've seen all kinds switch sides in all directions. That just proves one thing, humans are sexual creatures and free to what feels right to them! Within reason of course, I don't need to hear about child fuckers or dog blowers!
Yeah, but what if the dog consents and is old enough (in dog years)? |
| 8th November 2006 11:46 PM |
|
|
| Fiji Joe |
quote:
Brainbell Jangler wrote:
Laws of nature? If that were the case, why is homosexual behavior exhibited among animals?
Yeah right...like animals go to Broadway shows and shave themselves incessantly
I tell you what...I'll sleep solely with women and you sleep solely with men and we'll just see who has the more superior offspring...and don't cheat...if I see you approaching little boys with lollipops and dalmatian puppies the game is over |
| 8th November 2006 11:57 PM |
|
|
| Brainbell Jangler |
quote:
Jaxx wrote:
you know the old saying, "16 will get you 20?" under 18 i think is statuatory. pedaphile would be pre teen and younger?
That's basically it. Pedophilia is sexual attraction to persons who are prepubeescent. Sexual attraction to pubescent but not fully physically mature persons is called ephebophilia.
The common law distinguished sexual activity with children from such activity with those who were merely below some arbitrary age of consent. The former was considered "malum in se" (wrong in itself) while the latter was labelled "malum prohibitum" (wrong only because it is legally deemed to be wrong). |
| 9th November 2006 12:14 AM |
|
|
| Brainbell Jangler |
quote:
Joey wrote:
Is LadyBird still ' kickin' ?!
Uncle Ho ! ™
Mrs. Johnson is alive and will celebrate her 94th birthday next month.
 |
| 9th November 2006 12:24 AM |
|
|
| Brainbell Jangler |
quote:
Fiji Joe wrote:
Yeah right...like animals go to Broadway shows and shave themselves incessantly
I tell you what...I'll sleep solely with women and you sleep solely with men and we'll just see who has the more superior offspring...and don't cheat...if I see you approaching little boys with lollipops and dalmatian puppies the game is over
No, thanks. I prefer mine warm, wet and concave. As for natural selection, couldn't homosexuality be part of that process, as explained in the National Geographic article and also as a sort of winnowing phenomenon, where some specimens "opt out" of the gene pool? Or just plain fun, as some scientists suggest? BTW, did you bother to read the article? What do you think of the fact that scientists have observed animal homosexuality for years but have hesitated to write/talk about it for fear of igniting political or religious reaction? Does it remind you of Giordano Bruno's burning at the stake by the Inquisition for espousing the heliocentric theory of the solar system and Galileo's subsequent fearful recantation? And isn't it interesting that some male flamingos not only exhibit homosexual behavior but even practice gay adoption? I guess that explains their color.
[Edited by Brainbell Jangler] |
| 9th November 2006 12:40 AM |
|
|
| Brainbell Jangler |
quote:
Fiji Joe wrote:
I don't disagree...but that does not explain bans on smoking lounges patronized and employed by people who choose to subject themselves to the risk...more accurately, political opportunism explains that phenomenon...and what of SUVs and other excessively polluting vehicles?...where are my nose's rights on that issue?
I think SUVs are socially responsible. I can see your point on smoking lounges, though it is my understanding that bar/restaurant employees have the third highest rate of lung cancer after smokers and smokers' spouses. |
| 9th November 2006 12:46 AM |
|
|
| Fiji Joe |
quote:
Brainbell Jangler wrote:
No, thanks. I prefer mine warm, wet and concave. As for natural selection, couldn't homosexuality be part of that process, as explained in the National Geographic article and also as a sort of winnowing phenomenon, where some specimens "opt out" of the gene pool? Or just plain fun, as some scientists suggest? BTW, did you bother to read the article? What do you think of the fact that scientists have observed animal homosexuality for years but have hesitated to write/talk about it for fear of igniting political or religious reaction? Does it remind you of Giordano Bruno's burning at the stake by the Inquisition for espousing the heliocentric theory of the solar system and Galileo's subsequent fearful recantation? And isn't it interesting that some male flamingos not only exhibit homosexual behavior but even practice gay adoption? I guess that explains their color.
[Edited by Brainbell Jangler]
Even if these animals practice homosexuality, and even if it's for the same reasons as humans, what does this prove?...is this a validation of the same behavior in humans?...I saw a show the other day where the light orange monkeys were turning on the dark orange monkeys for no reason, according to the commentator, other than the monkeys were darker...and we all know the big dogs literally piss on the little dogs...not to mention the breeds of primates who fling their own feces when they're angry or excited...Is this a door you want to open?
[Edited by Fiji Joe] |
| 9th November 2006 12:48 AM |
|
|
| Fiji Joe |
quote:
Brainbell Jangler wrote:
I think SUVs are socially responsible.
I.E.,you own one
Relatively speaking, given the alternatives and effect, they're the most socially irresponsible vehicles on the road...not that I really care |
| 9th November 2006 12:56 AM |
|
|
| Brainbell Jangler |
That's my big typo for the night. Of course I meant socially and environmentally irresponsible. Howe about that National Geographic article?
 |
