Hey KELLY, this is for you!

calicowboy925 · Post by **calicowboy925** » Wed Nov 03, 2004 8:21 am

Lets see, Executive, House and Senate ALL dominated by GOP! How's it feel to be an arm flapping loser and have your ass handed to you????

Alpha · Post by **Alpha** » Wed Nov 03, 2004 8:35 am

Calico, it saddens me that you are my fellow countryman.

Silver 2 · Post by **Silver 2** » Wed Nov 03, 2004 8:39 am

Cali, please see my statement in the "we're fucked thread".

geekster · Post by **geekster** » Wed Nov 03, 2004 8:45 am

I would say that comment was less than useful, calicowboy. Yes, the left did have their asses handed to them but rubbing people's noses in it is not constructive.

calicowboy925 · Post by **calicowboy925** » Wed Nov 03, 2004 8:53 am

Well Alpha, apparently you are in the minority with your views as the country has spoken. And Silver, the scary stories didnt work in the election and are not going to work now. I have taken many hits on the chin from people on here over my political views. It's ok to have an opinion as long as it leans to the left . From personal remarks to name calling, the liberal folk have let me have it here. OK, so maybe I have been gloating a bit this am, but with all the crap slinging in here because I had an opposing view... thats not very accepting or tolerant as the left tries to portray themselves. Like I said before, you can't win on the "He's no good" ticket, you have to have a solution . The party of Lawyers and their feeble Kerry candidacy with a freshman lawyer senator bringing his zero experience to the ticket, what did you expect. I really do hope the Dems get a candidate next time who actually HAS a position and some strengnths. THEN we may have an viable option to the status quo.

Alpha · Post by **Alpha** » Wed Nov 03, 2004 9:40 am

calicowboy925 wrote:Well Alpha, apparently you are in the minority with your views as the country has spoken.

Indeed, and now the dilemma for so many of us becomes identical to the "Why I'm Not Going Back to BurningMan" thread. Do we admit defeat and leave this misguided country in the hands of those whose opinions we do not share? Or do we try to "enlighten" those to our own point of view? (quotes are intentional, I realize the majority would like to enlighten the rest of us)

In the end, most most of us will just hold onto our ankles and grimace, hoping that the fall of this country is evident enough to persuade a majority of voters to our own point of view, but not so disastrous as to leave this once-great country irreparably damaged.

As for me, I'm hoping that once 30% of us are out of work and living below the poverty line, and most of our children dead, that the Canadians will invade. They will be greeted as liberators.

tisha2 · Post by **tisha2** » Wed Nov 03, 2004 9:50 am

calico -

i have to point out that you are not the only one on these boards with those views, but you are pretty much the only one who gets flamed for them...why do you think that is?

geekster · Post by **geekster** » Wed Nov 03, 2004 10:00 am

I know why *I* said something. Because his post was directly aimed at a specific individual. I didn't think that was useful.

Silver 2 · Post by **Silver 2** » Wed Nov 03, 2004 10:00 am

Silver, the scary stories didnt work in the election and are not going to work now.

I didn't consider it a scary story, I was trying to look on the bright side of things. We've got almost 1,200 dead now (not sure how many wounded), a 2.5 trillion debt and active terrorist cells operating in Iraq along with the Iraqies themselves. In a couple of years I am hoping that these facts and what results from them will get the American public to wake up and try and fix things. And, yes you are right, the hole that Bush has gotten us into thus far was not enough. I have no doubt that it is only going get deeper and wider. The upbeat side is that things are going to get so bad that it will force the American public to get off their asses and think for once. I really do believe that the United States will be able to recover from this mess, I was just hoping that the recovery would start sooner rather than later.

Simply Joel · Post by **Simply Joel** » Wed Nov 03, 2004 10:02 am

tisha2 wrote:calico -

i have to point out that you are not the only one on these boards with those views, but you are pretty much the only one who gets flamed for them...why do you think that is?

fate?

chaos theory?

cacophany?

i am so deeply amused with myself today.

geekster · Post by **geekster** » Wed Nov 03, 2004 10:05 am

Silver, if it is senseless killings you are against, there is a lot of that right here. I think more than 1000 Americans were killed in Chicago over the same period of time.

calicowboy925 · Post by **calicowboy925** » Wed Nov 03, 2004 10:09 am

Geekster, well, my post was aimed directly at KELLY as he posted one last week using my name in the title, so I felt it was appropriate, and Trisha, you were one who so smugly tried to put me in my place last week also. It's funny that some feel this is their board and the old vs. new...Dont ya know how easy it is to come back as someone else here??? Maybe time to go back to my old screen name and I can sit high on the throne looking down my nose at those with "few" postings! Ha Ha..as If....that's the lamest thing yet.

calicowboy925 · Post by **calicowboy925** » Wed Nov 03, 2004 10:12 am

This was it Re: This is for Calicowboy (though everyone should enjoy it)

Simply Joel · Post by **Simply Joel** » Wed Nov 03, 2004 10:15 am

i can't imagine myself saying this... but hey everyone, how about a little civility...

OK, that is as gracious as i can stand myself.

geekster · Post by **geekster** » Wed Nov 03, 2004 10:17 am

Yes, I looked at that thread. She posted an article, I don't recall her calling you names. You said:

How's it feel to be an arm flapping loser

I am not sure I remember her calling you names like that.

tisha2 · Post by **tisha2** » Wed Nov 03, 2004 10:17 am

Sweetie, how 'bout you answer my question instead of attacking me with your defensive perceptions?

calicowboy925 · Post by **calicowboy925** » Wed Nov 03, 2004 10:25 am

Defensive perceptions?? If I wanted to weed through all your mindless drivel and dig up the posts in which attacked me I could. But frankly, you're not worth the effort...

tisha2 · Post by **tisha2** » Wed Nov 03, 2004 10:28 am

you win.

calicowboy925 · Post by **calicowboy925** » Wed Nov 03, 2004 10:28 am

Didn't have to go far...shall we start here????

calicowboy925

Joined: 29 Sep 2004
Posts: 76
Location: Inside your head
Posted: Thu Oct 28, 2004 12:13 pm Post subject:

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

OK...I'll ask.....How do you all feel about "Crime Scene Sex"??? Y'know....when Aunt Flo is visiting??? Do you like that????
_________________
Love and Laugh With Me!!!

Back to top

tisha2

Joined: 08 Jun 2004
Posts: 798
Location: Blue Lake, CA
Posted: Thu Oct 28, 2004 12:47 pm Post subject:

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

way to kill the mood.

you must be all kinds o popular with the ladies.
_________________

Silver 2 · Post by **Silver 2** » Wed Nov 03, 2004 10:32 am

Silver, if it is senseless killings you are against, there is a lot of that right here. I think more than 1000 Americans were killed in Chicago over the same period of time.

Huh? If folks want to kill each other off freelance the tradtional American view is that of no big deal, it happens. I know enough history to know that a kill rate of around 20-30K a year is normal for us.

What I was referring to is the number of American military dead. The American public tends to have a problem with 'our boys', and now girls, getting shot to shit for nothing. As time goes on and more and more rural towns and villiages get more and more dead children coming home and the terror alerts stay the same ( or more likely gets worse, with Bush's terrorist recruiting) and the Iraq war just seems to go on and on I do believe that the public might just figure out that something is wrong. Granted I am at loss as to why they have not figured it out by now, though I do kind of understand what you were saying in the other thread. I was talking to friends the other day and mentioned how the religious nuts were going to be a factor because they are scared. I really don't understand how people like me could scare them anywhere near as much as they scare me.

calicowboy925 · Post by **calicowboy925** » Wed Nov 03, 2004 10:37 am

That was a great post Silver, especially the use of "freelance".....

geekster · Post by **geekster** » Wed Nov 03, 2004 11:04 am

I don't understand ... is a person killed in war somehow "deader" than someone killed in a drive-by at Burger King?

My thinking was that if it is just senseless killing you are against, we have bigger fish to fry. About 100 per day are killed on the highway. A person that VOLUNTEERS for the military, goes through training and is shipped overseas to a combat area at least has an inkling that they might be placed into harms way, as opposed to the child asleep in the back of the mini-van as it is t-boned by the asshole that ignored the stop sign.

We kill 40-some thousand a year in this country every year just with cars. Add another 30K or so due to murder and you start putting things into perspective. Leaving emotion out of it and only looking at it logically, the Iraq campaign has been an amazing success. Go back 5 years and tell someone that you are going to take the entire country of Iraq with only 3 light Army divisions, some Marines and special forces, AND hold it for 2 years and only loose 1,000 people and you would have been laughed off the podium. You would have been told that you were going to loose more than that in one day in Baghdad. Militarilly the Iraq campaign has been a brilliant success, an AMAZING success.

I am not pro war but I am not going to run around trying to make things look a lot worse than they really are, either.

Of the 1,119 deaths, 860 have been the result of hostile action. 860 soldiers, sailors, airmen, and marines over a 2 year period. I am pretty tired of people making attempts to parallel Iraq with Vietnam, too. It ain't going to happen. In the Tet offensive of 1966 the US had 5,000 killed and 30,000 wounded. Lets just try to keep perspective, please.

geekster · Post by **geekster** » Wed Nov 03, 2004 11:31 am

Silver 2 wrote: Granted I am at loss as to why they have not figured it out by now, though I do kind of understand what you were saying in the other thread. I was talking to friends the other day and mentioned how the religious nuts were going to be a factor because they are scared. I really don't understand how people like me could scare them anywhere near as much as they scare me.

The main reason is that some people think they have this mission to "take care" of the rest of the population via government when they neither want to be taken care of nor take care of anyone else. It is kindof a self-reliance thing. It is a feeling of loss of control over the decisions they make to guide their lives. Yeah, that's it, it's a control thing. They like feeling more in control of their lives and resent handing over that control to the government. They don't want the government telling what doctor they can see and when. They don't want the government deciding which treatments they can and can not get for their sick kids. It is basically a fear of government because it takes away from their own control of their own life. There are SOME that want that. SOME people need that. Most don't, though.

CoworkerLurker · Post by **CoworkerLurker** » Wed Nov 03, 2004 11:43 am

geekster wrote:I don't understand ... is a person killed in war somehow "deader" than someone killed in a drive-by at Burger King?

I think it's just that we feel more of a sense of responsibility for the person killed in war. In part because they did volunteer. And because we see the connection between the decision and the death.

samtzu · Post by **samtzu** » Wed Nov 03, 2004 11:50 am

Dinglebutt wrote:

And Silver, the scary stories didnt work in the election and are not going to work now.

Well, yes they did work. America was scared into voting for "The Simple Choice". Fear was a very large component of the stategy of both parties.

It's funny that some feel this is their board and the old vs. new...Dont ya know how easy it is to come back as someone else here??? Maybe time to go back to my old screen name and I can sit high on the throne looking down my nose at those with "few" postings! Ha Ha..as If....that's the lamest thing yet.

Yup... a rose by anyother name (like "Horseshit") would still smell...

Alpha · Post by **Alpha** » Wed Nov 03, 2004 11:50 am

geekster wrote:Yeah, that's it, it's a control thing.... They don't want the government telling what doctor they can see and when.

Super, I look forward to these people supporting Roe v. Wade when it comes up in front of George's new Supreme Court.

geekster · Post by **geekster** » Wed Nov 03, 2004 11:57 am

That is another issue that is not understood. Roe V. Wade has nothing to do with the LEGALITY of abortion. What Roe V. Wade said was that abortion on demand was a CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHT and that if a woman can not pay for one, one must be provided at government expense because in not providing a free abortion at government expense, her constitutional rights would be violated. It is about WHO PAYS, not about whether it is legal or not. The SIDE issue was that since the Supreme Court decided that abortion was a constitutional right, it automatically struck down anti-abortion laws in many states.

I don't think the government needs to go meddling in people's reproductive choices BUT at the same time, I have read the constitution over and over and never once did I read about abortion as a consitutional right. What about vasectomy? What about removal of an unattractive facial birthmark that might impact one's earning capacity? Is that a CONSITUTIONAL RIGHT to have that removed at public expense?

Roe V. Wade isn't about abortion so much as it is about money.

stuart · Post by **stuart** » Wed Nov 03, 2004 12:01 pm

They don't want the government telling what doctor they can see and when. They don't want the government deciding which treatments they can and can not get for their sick kids.

yes, but their worshipping of the free market has another body of bastards making those decisions for us instead. A primary difference being that the sysem we are currently slaves to does not even have to feign being out for our best interests. The age of america having the best healthcare is over for the vast majority of us. And so it will go with many services the 'nanny state' provides for us: power, water, roads, etc..

I also find the analogies drawn between gang related deaths and war deaths to be tenuous at best. War deaths come as a direct result of government decree, i.e., the system has created a space where killing is legal.

stuart · Post by **stuart** » Wed Nov 03, 2004 12:02 pm

the Canadians will invade. They will be greeted as liberators.

that's the coolest thing I've read all day

theCryptofishist · Post by **theCryptofishist** » Wed Nov 03, 2004 12:12 pm

stuart wrote:
They don't want the government telling what doctor they can see and when. They don't want the government deciding which treatments they can and can not get for their sick kids.
yes, but their worshipping of the free market has another body of bastards making those decisions for us instead. A primary difference being that the sysem we are currently slaves to does not even have to feign being out for our best interests. The age of america having the best healthcare is over for the vast majority of us. And so it will go with many services the 'nanny state' provides for us: power, water, roads, etc..

Cheer up, Stuart. In a few years we'll catch up with that bastion of the Free Market and freedom from the meddling of all government--Russia. And then it's joy all around at the big rock candy mountain.