Geez, I hope Mikey doesn't get any ideas. Anything produced from that pairing would surely be hazardous to humans. That's some scary stuff (shudder).wow, again with in Ms. Hilary's district.... maybe she and Mikey should screw?
Fahrenheit 911 - The Temperature at which Freedom Burns
-
WearePennState
- New Member
- Posts: 7
- Joined: Wednesday May 26, 2004
OK, first of all, Michael Moore is an idiot who never worked a day in his life. Where was his outrage when our rangers got killed in Somalia?? Remember that?? Now that is was a civil war we had no right being involved in, but no one seems to criticize then president Klinton for that one? Iraq is a totally different situation. We can argue over and over if Al-Quida and Saddam have ties (and and terrorism expert will tell you they do and have been alligned for a long time), but I don't think anyone can deny that their are anti-American terrorists in Iraq that were funded by Saddam, and these individuals are itching to cause the next 9-11. President Bush is taking a "pro-active" approach to fighting these terrorists rather than a "re-active" approach he was forced to take after 9-11. It's a bold step. The president could have easily stopped after Afghanistan, and would have been easily re-elected in a landslide. But he is determined to prevent the next 9-11, rather than respond to it after it occurs. [/b]
-
lonewolf
- Diamond Member
- Posts: 6249
- Joined: Thursday Sep 25, 2003
- Location: Anywhere, Earth
- Contact:
Yep, I loved it. BACKFIRE for Mr. Moore. That was the kind of stuff we came to expect from Ronald Reagan. Of course, that was the 80s when we didn't have any F&%king PC or sensitivity bullshit. (or should I say "cattle excrement"). The funny thing is, George Bush has many of Reagan's traits, ideals, policies, but new age PC and sensitivity, etc. has demonized him.The way he put in about the look at this drive shit was funny.
I wonder how Reagan would have handled the PC/new age/sensitized schmucks that are trying to influence the courts and media?
...Oh, the freedom of the day that yielded to no rule or time...
lonewolf, its a matter of being at the right place at the right time. reagan was at the right place at the right time, and conquered communism. I believe GWB is at the right place at the right time.
just think if congress gave the position to al gore. he would still be asking the u.n. for permission to protect america, and we wouldnt be saying all this stuff to each other. im not sure if we would be better off though.
just think if congress gave the position to al gore. he would still be asking the u.n. for permission to protect america, and we wouldnt be saying all this stuff to each other. im not sure if we would be better off though.
Reagan would've told them all to go shit in their hats... Literally. Remember too, Reagan was often criticized for the way he spoke to the people, to the press, etc... He was a down home guy, that talked straight to you, Phuck PC, he didn't want to blow bubbles up your ass, and could shred when it came time to in a debate. He called a spade a spade, and had the stones to back up anything that he said at all times... he spoke from the heart.
Funny, GWB has a lot of that!
Funny, GWB has a lot of that!
punkinhead you hit the nail on the head. that was great took the words right from my mouth.
you know what i find really funny is the fact that are poloticians have to bash each other to find votes, to me so disrespectful!! makes them look like a 4 year old millionaire! whether it be dem or rep, they can't just state what they are going to do if they get elected, now a days they target their biggest opponent and find he flaws and whatvever else he/she has done wrong and try to get votes out of it!! what the hell is that?
you know what i find really funny is the fact that are poloticians have to bash each other to find votes, to me so disrespectful!! makes them look like a 4 year old millionaire! whether it be dem or rep, they can't just state what they are going to do if they get elected, now a days they target their biggest opponent and find he flaws and whatvever else he/she has done wrong and try to get votes out of it!! what the hell is that?
"I've always been crazy, but it's kept me from going insane" ~ Waylon Jennings
-
bassist_25
- Senior Member
- Posts: 6815
- Joined: Monday Dec 09, 2002
- Location: Indiana
Well, the main reason is, it's usually because of ad hominem insults, and not a discussion of actual issues.RobTheDrummer wrote:what's the deal with not calling each other what they are? I mean if someone calls me a Republican or Right Winger, I take that as a compliment. But when I say leftist or Lib, everyone gets upset? What's the big deal, take pride in what you believe!!!
Secondly, people often times misuse the labels. "Conservative" and "right-winger" are used interchangably, but calling George Bush a conservative is a misnomer, and calling John McCain a right-winger is also a misnomer. A conservative is someone who believes "if it ain't broke, don't fix it". They believe that the constitution should be preserved as much as possible. A right-winger supports certain economic and cultural beliefs. For example, someone who believes in seperation of church and state, is a true conservative. Someone who pushes a Christain agenda is part of the religous right. (The founding fathers were actually Unitarians and Deists, not fundamentalist Christains, as some people would like you to believe)
Third, I don't think most peoples' political views can be summed up in one word. I pretty much consider myself a libertarian, which by definition, would make me a conservative. I believe in small government. Many Republicans like to say, "Small government", but that's really just code for small government for business, but they are more than happy to tell you who to have sex with, who to marry, and what to put in your body. I'm a huge Capitalist; I love free trade. But I also realize that you need a Socialist saftey net. I also realize that you can use a Socialist means to achieve a Capitalist ends. (i.e. PELL grants for college for someone to better themselves)
Lastly, I think personal pride in issues is irrelevant. Values, and concepts are bigger than the individual. When I talk about a value, I don't even use any personal pronouns. Why? Because, I'm irrelevant in the argument. Self-identification gets in the way of evolution. Ego (ego in the eastern sense, not the Freudian sense) is one of the biggest obstacles in finding the truth.
"He's the electric horseman, you better back off!" - old sKool making a reference to the culturally relevant 1979 film.
Bassist 25, you hit the nail on the head.
The main point in my post was to say "let the facts tell their own story." I've seen a lot of folks on both sides of this argument resort to emotion or bias rather than facts. Judge the politicians based on performance, not on bravado.
Rob The Drummer: My point to you is that I don't appreciate you labeling people as left or right wingers because it implies an inflexibility to look the other way. I am definitely a liberal thinker, but I have voted for both Republicans and Democrats. I'd have voted for Tom Ridge in the last election if he'd have run. I'll admit that Al Gore was a terrible candidate. Why do so many people have such problems admitting that their own point of view is sometimes half (or less than half) the story. Backing a bad candidate out of party loyalty is being disloyal to your country! Voting a straight party ticket is evidence that a voter didn't even look at the ticket.
We have reasons to be angry at a lot of the world, but the same is true conversely. We cannot blame 100% of Anti-US sentiment on assumptions that the rest of the world simply hates Western Culture. Is this irrational hate part of it? Yes. But it's not the whole story. The US does bad things in the world too, and to some people, we're the bad guys. As long as we live and die by a global economy, we've got to respect other people and cultures too.
China has the worst human-rights violations in the world and pose the biggest potential threat next to the former Soviet Union. Why don't we invade them? Well, first off, they've got nukes. Secondly, we get $30 dvd players and $200 televisions from them.
But back to the war at home.....
As musicians, and thereby creative people, we should be wary of the Government's intrusion into our lives. The typical pro-government answer is "why should I care? I've got nothing to hide." You've got nothing to hide until the people in charge decide that what you believe in is wrong.
What goes on in our own homes should be none of the government's damn business. If you value your privacy, Read the Patriot Act. Patriot Act II wil actually allow for secret arrests of citizens without charges, a trial, or even informing the family of the accused.
I completely disagree with nearly 100% of what Rob the Drummer has to say, but, damn it, he should have the write to say it. And he should have the right to talk on the phone without wondering if its being monitored. He should be able to order things online without being spied upon. He should be able to read smut (even really kinky smut!) if he so chooses without the local authorities knowing it (not making any judgments, Rob, just an example).
Freedom isn't about safety. It's about being free!
Kent
The main point in my post was to say "let the facts tell their own story." I've seen a lot of folks on both sides of this argument resort to emotion or bias rather than facts. Judge the politicians based on performance, not on bravado.
Rob The Drummer: My point to you is that I don't appreciate you labeling people as left or right wingers because it implies an inflexibility to look the other way. I am definitely a liberal thinker, but I have voted for both Republicans and Democrats. I'd have voted for Tom Ridge in the last election if he'd have run. I'll admit that Al Gore was a terrible candidate. Why do so many people have such problems admitting that their own point of view is sometimes half (or less than half) the story. Backing a bad candidate out of party loyalty is being disloyal to your country! Voting a straight party ticket is evidence that a voter didn't even look at the ticket.
We have reasons to be angry at a lot of the world, but the same is true conversely. We cannot blame 100% of Anti-US sentiment on assumptions that the rest of the world simply hates Western Culture. Is this irrational hate part of it? Yes. But it's not the whole story. The US does bad things in the world too, and to some people, we're the bad guys. As long as we live and die by a global economy, we've got to respect other people and cultures too.
China has the worst human-rights violations in the world and pose the biggest potential threat next to the former Soviet Union. Why don't we invade them? Well, first off, they've got nukes. Secondly, we get $30 dvd players and $200 televisions from them.
But back to the war at home.....
As musicians, and thereby creative people, we should be wary of the Government's intrusion into our lives. The typical pro-government answer is "why should I care? I've got nothing to hide." You've got nothing to hide until the people in charge decide that what you believe in is wrong.
What goes on in our own homes should be none of the government's damn business. If you value your privacy, Read the Patriot Act. Patriot Act II wil actually allow for secret arrests of citizens without charges, a trial, or even informing the family of the accused.
I completely disagree with nearly 100% of what Rob the Drummer has to say, but, damn it, he should have the write to say it. And he should have the right to talk on the phone without wondering if its being monitored. He should be able to order things online without being spied upon. He should be able to read smut (even really kinky smut!) if he so chooses without the local authorities knowing it (not making any judgments, Rob, just an example).
Freedom isn't about safety. It's about being free!
Kent
Kent, Bass, The Grimm, Lies Inc. The British Invasion
grimmbass@gmail.com
www.myspace.com/liesinc
www.myspace.com/thegrimmband
grimmbass@gmail.com
www.myspace.com/liesinc
www.myspace.com/thegrimmband
-
tornandfrayed
- Diamond Member
- Posts: 1761
- Joined: Tuesday Dec 23, 2003
- Location: The Jaded Empire
- Contact:
At the risk
At the risk of someone jumping on me and persoanlly attacking my values without knowing me at all, I am going to post anyway(LOL) I can tell that the vast majority of you are thinking induhviduals who know their facts.
It scares me to see the blind devotion that occurs. I am wondering which side wins and is there a middle ground? How do we come together on something when the verbage is so tense? I admire belief in one's views but ....
No one has to go see Moore's movie, maybe no one will. Maybe a lot of people will. Maybe it is true maybe it isn't. If it is not true then it will be found out. If it is true...
It scares me to see the blind devotion that occurs. I am wondering which side wins and is there a middle ground? How do we come together on something when the verbage is so tense? I admire belief in one's views but ....
No one has to go see Moore's movie, maybe no one will. Maybe a lot of people will. Maybe it is true maybe it isn't. If it is not true then it will be found out. If it is true...
Torn & Frayed
One World, One Voice, One God!
Music is LIFE!
One World, One Voice, One God!
Music is LIFE!
-
bassist_25
- Senior Member
- Posts: 6815
- Joined: Monday Dec 09, 2002
- Location: Indiana
Just a rhetorical question here; if we were to, hypothetically, "liberate" communist China, I wonder how that would effect the world's economy. And I'm not just talking about how greedy CEO's would have to move back to Mexico to pay 50 dollars a week to employees. Imagine if a country as large as China, became a major competitor in a capitalistic market.grimmbass wrote:
China has the worst human-rights violations in the world and pose the biggest potential threat next to the former Soviet Union. Why don't we invade them? Well, first off, they've got nukes. Secondly, we get $30 dvd players and $200 televisions from them.
Kent
"He's the electric horseman, you better back off!" - old sKool making a reference to the culturally relevant 1979 film.
-
RobTheDrummer
- Diamond Member
- Posts: 5227
- Joined: Tuesday Dec 10, 2002
- Location: Tiptonia, Pa
Did anyone ever hear "sticks and stones" I can't believe how sensitive you all are about "labeling" or name calling. Talk about PC invading the music world...since when did any musicians give a damn what they say or are called? It's the left in the country that's pushing for all the PC bullshit and hindering your right to free speech, but you want to blame it on right-wingers. I'm sorry if I hurt anyone's feelings or ego's for this "labeling" 
.
.Rob,
This has nothing to do with sensitivity or PC, its about avoiding giving something or someone a two-dimensional spin. I find it amusing that the first thing you do is refer to limitations on free speech as being a "left" issue when so many members of the "right wing" (a term you, individually, embrace so readily) want to silence any loyal dissenters as being non-patriotic. How about the "right wing" (your term, again) vendetta against free speech on the airwaves (i.e. the Howard Stern situation). The general sentiment seems to be that "we want to hear what you have to say so long as you agreee with us."
Since you seem so knowlegable on the subject, tell me what the "left" is doing to hinder free speech and privacy, and while you're at it, enlighten me as to how the "right" is protecting my right to privacy. I mean, you've read the Patriot Act right? You've read the proposed Patriot Act II, right?
Explain it to me, with specific answers and examples if you please. Tell me how John Ashcroft cares about my confidentiality and is enacting legislation to protect me. Tell me about how much the President cares about what the public thinks. Tell me about how they are both concerned with the First Amendment.
I'm waiting Rob. Give me something beyond bravado, platitutes, and the company line. Prove your point with facts.
Kent "the (apparently) overly sensitive left wing guy who hates being labeled" Tonkin
This has nothing to do with sensitivity or PC, its about avoiding giving something or someone a two-dimensional spin. I find it amusing that the first thing you do is refer to limitations on free speech as being a "left" issue when so many members of the "right wing" (a term you, individually, embrace so readily) want to silence any loyal dissenters as being non-patriotic. How about the "right wing" (your term, again) vendetta against free speech on the airwaves (i.e. the Howard Stern situation). The general sentiment seems to be that "we want to hear what you have to say so long as you agreee with us."
Since you seem so knowlegable on the subject, tell me what the "left" is doing to hinder free speech and privacy, and while you're at it, enlighten me as to how the "right" is protecting my right to privacy. I mean, you've read the Patriot Act right? You've read the proposed Patriot Act II, right?
Explain it to me, with specific answers and examples if you please. Tell me how John Ashcroft cares about my confidentiality and is enacting legislation to protect me. Tell me about how much the President cares about what the public thinks. Tell me about how they are both concerned with the First Amendment.
I'm waiting Rob. Give me something beyond bravado, platitutes, and the company line. Prove your point with facts.
Kent "the (apparently) overly sensitive left wing guy who hates being labeled" Tonkin
Kent, Bass, The Grimm, Lies Inc. The British Invasion
grimmbass@gmail.com
www.myspace.com/liesinc
www.myspace.com/thegrimmband
grimmbass@gmail.com
www.myspace.com/liesinc
www.myspace.com/thegrimmband
WOW!! First, don't worry Rob, I too feel complimented when someone calls me a conservative. (I'll talk more about that later).
Second; I personally hate the Patriot Act. But I have to ask myself and all of you a simple question: Would it have mattered who was in office?
Seriously, the patriot act was something that was spawned by 9/11. With the technology today, and with the attack on this country, they had to do something. I really doubt it would be much different if we had a rep or dem in office. And, my second question is this - How many of you have been violated by the patriot act? Okay, maybe this question is not fair because there is always the chance that you could be in the near or distant future. I really don't believe the patriot act (in the beginning) had anything to do with partisan beliefs - It was brought about because our government needed to quickly establish a way to attempt to protect it's citizens. I still don't like it. I still disagree with a lot of it. But, I think I understand the initial intention.
As for labeling (don't attack me here - I'm going to attempt to stir you up and add humor at the same time - if that is possible). I think many of our liberal friends on this site are upset by being labeled as "Left Wingers" because this: When the labels were first invented (and I am making this up), someone truly gave a lot of thought to the naming convention and this is what they came up with:
Right Wing - Right meaning (from Websters!!) 1. upright, virtuous 2. correct 3. designating the side meant to be seen 4. mentally or physically sound
Left Wing - of course left is the opposite of right. Or, maybe it means "no longer there" as in "Elvis has left the building".
Seriously - I am not attacking any of you. Many of you that have posted on here have had good sound reasons for your beliefs (even if I don't agree). I respect those that can articulate their beliefs.
You all have a wonderful evening - I decided that I am going to post more on this frustrating topic - I just don't know when since we are playing 3 times in the next two days. (I'm just warning (or threatening) you)
Urbs
Second; I personally hate the Patriot Act. But I have to ask myself and all of you a simple question: Would it have mattered who was in office?
Seriously, the patriot act was something that was spawned by 9/11. With the technology today, and with the attack on this country, they had to do something. I really doubt it would be much different if we had a rep or dem in office. And, my second question is this - How many of you have been violated by the patriot act? Okay, maybe this question is not fair because there is always the chance that you could be in the near or distant future. I really don't believe the patriot act (in the beginning) had anything to do with partisan beliefs - It was brought about because our government needed to quickly establish a way to attempt to protect it's citizens. I still don't like it. I still disagree with a lot of it. But, I think I understand the initial intention.
As for labeling (don't attack me here - I'm going to attempt to stir you up and add humor at the same time - if that is possible). I think many of our liberal friends on this site are upset by being labeled as "Left Wingers" because this: When the labels were first invented (and I am making this up), someone truly gave a lot of thought to the naming convention and this is what they came up with:
Right Wing - Right meaning (from Websters!!) 1. upright, virtuous 2. correct 3. designating the side meant to be seen 4. mentally or physically sound
Left Wing - of course left is the opposite of right. Or, maybe it means "no longer there" as in "Elvis has left the building".
Seriously - I am not attacking any of you. Many of you that have posted on here have had good sound reasons for your beliefs (even if I don't agree). I respect those that can articulate their beliefs.
You all have a wonderful evening - I decided that I am going to post more on this frustrating topic - I just don't know when since we are playing 3 times in the next two days. (I'm just warning (or threatening) you)
Urbs
A liberal is someone who feels a great debt to his fellow man; a debt he proposes to pay off with your money. -G Gordon Liddy
-
bassist_25
- Senior Member
- Posts: 6815
- Joined: Monday Dec 09, 2002
- Location: Indiana
Again, you a completely missing the point that Kent and I are trying to illustrate.RobTheDrummer wrote:Did anyone ever hear "sticks and stones" I can't believe how sensitive you all are about "labeling" or name calling. Talk about PC invading the music world...since when did any musicians give a damn what they say or are called? It's the left in the country that's pushing for all the PC bullshit and hindering your right to free speech, but you want to blame it on right-wingers. I'm sorry if I hurt anyone's feelings or ego's for this "labeling"
If someone is too busy slamming peoples' ideologies with no hard evidence, why should I even attempt to try to see it their way? Their already projecting an aggresive front, so my intrinsic reaction is to throw back ad hominem rhetoric. If somone wants to persuade me to see things there way, they'll have better luck by taking the central route to perception, rather than the peripheral route. Tossing out personal insults on Rockpage or on Rush Limbaugh doesn't matter, but if you do it in a political science class, or on C-span, people are going to think you're an unlearned idiot with no skills for intelligent argument. (not saying your idiot, Rob, I'm just making a generalization
)And as always, when it comes to ideological differences, insert cliche Voltaire quote.
"He's the electric horseman, you better back off!" - old sKool making a reference to the culturally relevant 1979 film.
-
Imgrimm01
- Platinum Member
- Posts: 806
- Joined: Monday Jan 06, 2003
- Location: Jaw deep in your ASS !!
- Contact:
I dont care
Hello again.. I must say I totally see what Kent and bassist 25 are saying about labels , But I also see why people like Rob throw them around so readily, the real thing is this he uses these labels as a way to get a little dig in , NEVER once on this post has he answered any of the questions directed at him he just dances around the issues and tosses names out there, BUT he gets this smoke and mirrors technique honestly after all isn't that what " his people" have been doing for nearly 2 years now? Flashing one thing in front of our face to distract us from another.. I on the other hand am proud as hell to admit I'm liberal not 100% but prob. 85-90 and I thought I would lay some of it out PUBLICALLY for ya'll I'm not ashamed of who I am... I believe and support abortion, I agree with welfare I do not believe the homeless are homeless because they are lazy, I also believe we should not destroy a forest because we want a new mall for rich folks to shop, I believe everyone should have health care it's insane that the richest country in the world has kids who can't get proper health care or adults for that matter I mean come on .. On the other side of the coin I think we should have the right to have a gun ...BUT.. there's NO reason to carry a tech 9 into wal-mart to shop lets have reasonable gun laws, and on and on etc.. etc.. ok I'm done ranting if any of you have any questions about any of this please feel free to ask I will not duck and run I will straight up tell ya what ya wanna know.. have a GREAT WEEKEND
Bobby "the left wing liberal Mutha FuKKa " Lee
Bobby "the left wing liberal Mutha FuKKa " Lee
I'm glad I didn't have to fight in a war, I'm glad I didn't get killed or kill somebody, I hope my kids enjoy the same lack of manhood
I'd like to interject that this discussion is another example of why I'm proud to be a part of this local scene. I absolutely love listening to smart people debate, especially when I know them. That's what sets this online community apart... we all know one another in "real life."
I have no real reason to suck up... but I really think this is a great group of people. Thanks, all. Keep it up.------>JMS
I have no real reason to suck up... but I really think this is a great group of people. Thanks, all. Keep it up.------>JMS
-
lonewolf
- Diamond Member
- Posts: 6249
- Joined: Thursday Sep 25, 2003
- Location: Anywhere, Earth
- Contact:
The Howard Stern situation has nothing to do with free speech. It has to do with the venue. Howard Stern can say pretty much whatever he wants just about anywhere he wants. He just said it in the wrong place. The airwaves are owned by the U.S. government (i.e. we citizens) and are LICENSED to various TV and radio stations. As a condition of these licenses, they are subject to decency standards set down by the FCC. Howard Stern isn't being persecuted, he is the only one on a licensed frequency who was flagrantly violating the decency standards on a regular basis. Nobody hassled him about his TV show on the private venue "E".How about the "right wing" (your term, again) vendetta against free speech on the airwaves (i.e. the Howard Stern situation).
It's kinda like the seatbelt or helmet law. Because driving is a privilege and not a right the government can tell you what to wear or not wear while driving. In PA's case, the government relented to ABATE on the helmet issue. We still don't have the RIGHT to not wear helmets, we now have the PRIVILEGE to not wear helmets.
...Oh, the freedom of the day that yielded to no rule or time...
-
lonewolf
- Diamond Member
- Posts: 6249
- Joined: Thursday Sep 25, 2003
- Location: Anywhere, Earth
- Contact:
The beauty of our Republic is that its chock full of checks and balances. The founding fathers didn't just make constitution soup. A great deal of thought went into balancing the government so that no entity could gain too much power and assume control over the government. You can gain a lot of insight into the reasoning behind the constitution by reading "The Federalist Papers".
I don't want to spew out a basic civics lesson, but one of the key points of having a republic and NOT having a democracy is to prevent mob rule. I'm sure you've all see westerns where somebody kills a popular town citizen and the whole town storms down to the jail for a good old-fashioned lynching. Imagine what would have happened on 9/12 if we were run by online democratic referendum. There would probably be a big crater between the mediterranian sea and the himalayas.
The patriot act is a good piece of legislation with some really, really bad flaws in it. The flaws will get weeded out in due course. I'm sure the courts will find problems with it and strike down certain parts. Thats part of the process. Unfortunately, everybody wants everything now. Like I keep saying, it doesn't work that way and it never will.
I don't want to spew out a basic civics lesson, but one of the key points of having a republic and NOT having a democracy is to prevent mob rule. I'm sure you've all see westerns where somebody kills a popular town citizen and the whole town storms down to the jail for a good old-fashioned lynching. Imagine what would have happened on 9/12 if we were run by online democratic referendum. There would probably be a big crater between the mediterranian sea and the himalayas.
The patriot act is a good piece of legislation with some really, really bad flaws in it. The flaws will get weeded out in due course. I'm sure the courts will find problems with it and strike down certain parts. Thats part of the process. Unfortunately, everybody wants everything now. Like I keep saying, it doesn't work that way and it never will.
...Oh, the freedom of the day that yielded to no rule or time...
-
tornandfrayed
- Diamond Member
- Posts: 1761
- Joined: Tuesday Dec 23, 2003
- Location: The Jaded Empire
- Contact:
Free speech?
Hmmm.. Nothing to do with free speech? The governement owns the airwaves? So you can say whatever you want as long as no one can hear you? Or as long as your not on the government's airwaves ( our airwaves? ). So the government owns all public broadcast and therefore I guess freedom of speech is an illusion? Because if we can't use the media (airwaves) for anything that the goverment deems "indecent" then....Well I know that it takes common sense for someone not to stand in a theater and not yell fire but, If you don't like Howard don't listen! he still has the right to say what he wants! He has a large group of people ( 17 million ) that seem to like what he is saying. I guess the goverment can tell us what is indecent as long as we agree with them but what about when they say that anything with the word fuck in it can't be on their airwaves? Oh wait they already did that! Does the word fuck really have that much power? Have we gotten to the point where...
In Blair County no one can hear you scream! (because the government deemed it obscene?) No rights only priveledge's? What the fuck? Oh sorry I mean Heck! Didn't mean to possibly offend anyone's sense of "politcally correctness!"
I can't even argue that logic, I would lose my mind!
By the way I hope that "Howlin at the moon" does not stirke anyone as inappropriate!
Good Luck!
In Blair County no one can hear you scream! (because the government deemed it obscene?) No rights only priveledge's? What the fuck? Oh sorry I mean Heck! Didn't mean to possibly offend anyone's sense of "politcally correctness!"
I can't even argue that logic, I would lose my mind!
By the way I hope that "Howlin at the moon" does not stirke anyone as inappropriate!
Good Luck!
Torn & Frayed
One World, One Voice, One God!
Music is LIFE!
One World, One Voice, One God!
Music is LIFE!
-
Imgrimm01
- Platinum Member
- Posts: 806
- Joined: Monday Jan 06, 2003
- Location: Jaw deep in your ASS !!
- Contact:
Well Said
Torn I could not have said it any better , I was going to post a reply to wolf earlier but i was speechless I was thinking of a way to say it without just shouting " WHAT THE FUKK MAN " but I couldn't come up with it so thank you for saving me from that. I swear these guys just don't get it.
I'm glad I didn't have to fight in a war, I'm glad I didn't get killed or kill somebody, I hope my kids enjoy the same lack of manhood
Re: I dont care
Imgrimm01 wrote:. I on the other hand am proud as hell to admit I'm liberal not 100% but prob. 85-90 and I thought I would lay some of it out PUBLICALLY for ya'll I'm not ashamed of who I am...
Bobby "the left wing liberal Mutha FuKKa " Lee
Bobby,
I am a bit confused. You are proud to be a liberal and stated some of your beliefs. That is all well and good, except for one thing that always amazes me with liberal beliefs.
How can a person state that they are against the war and give one of the reasons being our young men and women in the service are being killed and at the same time say they believe in abortion? On one had you have adults who volunteered to become soldiers to defend our country, are being paid to do so, and have been trained to do so. While on the other hand you have no problem with someone murdering unborn american children. (I remember reading a quote somewhere that said something like this: "It's funny that all of the people who favor abortion have already been born").
I have had a similar argument with liberal friends of mine who approve of abortion but are against capital punishment. Again, how does that make any sense. Objecting to killing someone who was found guilty of a serious crime and yet not objecting to the murder of innocent unborn babies - what am I missing here?
I have been thinking about this since I saw someone make the statement that "noone died when Clinton lied". That is untrue and someone on here already pointed that out. But let's take it a step further. Our legislators saw fit to vote a bill that would ban partial birth abortion and Clinton with a stroke of his pen vetoed that bill and with that pen stroke took more american lives than this war.
And one other thing that has bothered me about this post. First, the post was started regarding a "movie" that is so slanted that I could never take any of it seriously. Then there were remarks that the last election was not won by popular vote. During the last political thread on Rockpage I gave a link that showed a map of the United States and depicted the counties that bush won. My post was dismissed by the left because it was on a Conservative website (sound familiar). The difference between my (right wing) reference to the map and this (left wing) reference to the movie is that the map was origianlly on the front of USA Today. I would expect you to dismiss any of the comments made on that web page that are obviously partial to a right wing agenda (just like I will dismiss this movie). But, you can't discredit the map or the statistics that were published by USA Today, unless you are completely closed minded and not as willing to hear from the other side (as many of you claim). Again, we all will dismiss comments that are obviously coming from the extreme far side away from our beliefs (I would not expect any of you to pay attention to Rush Limbaugh), but we still need to look at the facts, disregard the comments from the far right and left and then process it all.
Urbs
A liberal is someone who feels a great debt to his fellow man; a debt he proposes to pay off with your money. -G Gordon Liddy
Bush did not win the popular vote. Period. I pointed this out before. Although it was a photo finish, Gore won the popular vote. This is not a "leftist" theory. If you need a verification, don't take my word for it, check in with the Fedral Election Commission. Here's the link:
http://www.fec.gov/pubrec/2000presgeresults.htm
By the way, this is an official government statistic, not theory or conjecture.
Know your facts.
Kent
BTW, I'm ProLife. Bob is my best friend and he's ProChoice. We play in a band together. Differences of opinion do not have to divide people.
Also BTW, remember that America was founded by people who nobody else wanted. They came here to practice their own beliefs without being bothered.
We are, by definition, a nation of outcasts and people with crazy ideas.
And Thank God for it.
Kent
http://www.fec.gov/pubrec/2000presgeresults.htm
By the way, this is an official government statistic, not theory or conjecture.
Know your facts.
Kent
BTW, I'm ProLife. Bob is my best friend and he's ProChoice. We play in a band together. Differences of opinion do not have to divide people.
Also BTW, remember that America was founded by people who nobody else wanted. They came here to practice their own beliefs without being bothered.
We are, by definition, a nation of outcasts and people with crazy ideas.
And Thank God for it.
Kent
Kent, Bass, The Grimm, Lies Inc. The British Invasion
grimmbass@gmail.com
www.myspace.com/liesinc
www.myspace.com/thegrimmband
grimmbass@gmail.com
www.myspace.com/liesinc
www.myspace.com/thegrimmband
-
Imgrimm01
- Platinum Member
- Posts: 806
- Joined: Monday Jan 06, 2003
- Location: Jaw deep in your ASS !!
- Contact:
answer
Byn
I will answer your question BUt it will prob. start an age old argument on abortion... any way here it goes. The difference to me is simple every ejaculation is not a baby man, if it were I 'd have thousands of children in sewers all over the state of Pa. At what point is this a life ya know? I mean I know you're going to say immedietly I however disagree. i guess that's all there is to say on it . As far as the death penalty that is i guess one of my conservative beliefs I do believe in the death penalty ... BUT there needs to be absolute certainty , and the punishment needs to fit the crime.
Happy to clear this up for you.
I will answer your question BUt it will prob. start an age old argument on abortion... any way here it goes. The difference to me is simple every ejaculation is not a baby man, if it were I 'd have thousands of children in sewers all over the state of Pa. At what point is this a life ya know? I mean I know you're going to say immedietly I however disagree. i guess that's all there is to say on it . As far as the death penalty that is i guess one of my conservative beliefs I do believe in the death penalty ... BUT there needs to be absolute certainty , and the punishment needs to fit the crime.
Happy to clear this up for you.
I'm glad I didn't have to fight in a war, I'm glad I didn't get killed or kill somebody, I hope my kids enjoy the same lack of manhood
Kent,grimmbass wrote:Bush did not win the popular vote. Period. I pointed this out before. Although it was a photo finish, Gore won the popular vote. This is not a "leftist" theory. If you need a verification, don't take my word for it, check in with the Fedral Election Commission. Here's the link:
http://www.fec.gov/pubrec/2000presgeresults.htm
By the way, this is an official government statistic, not theory or conjecture.
Know your facts.
Kent
Thank you for the web site. Now I know the facts. It is very interesting to see that (vote for vote) Gore won. I have to admit that I did not see the stats presented in that format before - but now I know better. What is interesting is the different slants on how the numbers and statistics are displayed. Vote for vote - Gore won, Electorial College - VERY CLOSE, and county by county - Bush won overwhelmingly. Just interesting, but nevertheless, I am now more informed and I thank you for that.
grimmbass wrote: BTW, I'm ProLife. Bob is my best friend and he's ProChoice. We play in a band together. Differences of opinion do not have to divide people.
Also BTW, remember that America was founded by people who nobody else wanted. They came here to practice their own beliefs without being bothered.
We are, by definition, a nation of outcasts and people with crazy ideas.
And Thank God for it.
Kent
I never said issues like that should divide people. My point was that his opinion on abortion conflicts with his opinion regarding our soldiers dying in this war.
Urbs
A liberal is someone who feels a great debt to his fellow man; a debt he proposes to pay off with your money. -G Gordon Liddy
Re: answer
No that does not clear anything up. I won't argue the point when life begins - I don't want to go there. But, if you reread my post, I specifically talked about partial birth abortion and how Clintons veto caused more american deaths than Bush.Imgrimm01 wrote:Byn
I will answer your question BUt it will prob. start an age old argument on abortion... any way here it goes. The difference to me is simple every ejaculation is not a baby man, if it were I 'd have thousands of children in sewers all over the state of Pa. At what point is this a life ya know? I mean I know you're going to say immedietly I however disagree. i guess that's all there is to say on it . As far as the death penalty that is i guess one of my conservative beliefs I do believe in the death penalty ... BUT there needs to be absolute certainty , and the punishment needs to fit the crime.
Happy to clear this up for you.
A liberal is someone who feels a great debt to his fellow man; a debt he proposes to pay off with your money. -G Gordon Liddy