• Announcements

    • UnderDawg

      A Few Simple Rules   05/22/2017

      Sailing Anarchy is a very lightly moderated site. This is by design, to afford a more free atmosphere for discussion. There are plenty of sailing forums you can go to where swearing isn't allowed, confrontation is squelched and, and you can have a moderator finger-wag at you for your attitude. SA tries to avoid that and allow for more adult behavior without moderators editing your posts and whacking knuckles with rulers. We don't have a long list of published "thou shalt nots" either, and this is by design. Too many absolute rules paints us into too many corners. So check the Terms of Service - there IS language there about certain types of behavior that is not permitted. We interpret that lightly and permit a lot of latitude, but we DO reserve the right to take action when something is too extreme to tolerate (too racist, graphic, violent, misogynistic, etc.). Yes, that is subjective, but it allows us discretion. Avoiding a laundry list of rules allows for freedom; don't abuse it. However there ARE a few basic rules that will earn you a suspension, and apparently a brief refresher is in order. 1) Allegations of pedophilia - there is no tolerance for this. So if you make allegations, jokes, innuendo or suggestions about child molestation, child pornography, abuse or inappropriate behavior with minors etc. about someone on this board you will get a time out. This is pretty much automatic; this behavior can have real world effect and is not acceptable. Obviously the subject is not banned when discussion of it is apropos, e.g. talking about an item in the news for instance. But allegations or references directed at or about another poster is verboten. 2) Outing people - providing real world identifiable information about users on the forums who prefer to remain anonymous. Yes, some of us post with our real names - not a problem to use them. However many do NOT, and if you find out someone's name keep it to yourself, first or last. This also goes for other identifying information too - employer information etc. You don't need too many pieces of data to figure out who someone really is these days. Depending on severity you might get anything from a scolding to a suspension - so don't do it. I know it can be confusing sometimes for newcomers, as SA has been around almost twenty years and there are some people that throw their real names around and their current Display Name may not match the name they have out in the public. But if in doubt, you don't want to accidentally out some one so use caution, even if it's a personal friend of yours in real life. 3) Posting While Suspended - If you've earned a timeout (these are fairly rare and hard to get), please observe the suspension. If you create a new account (a "Sock Puppet") and return to the forums to post with it before your suspension is up you WILL get more time added to your original suspension and lose your Socks. This behavior may result a permanent ban, since it shows you have zero respect for the few rules we have and the moderating team that is tasked with supporting them. Check the Terms of Service you agreed to; they apply to the individual agreeing, not the account you created, so don't try to Sea Lawyer us if you get caught. Just don't do it. Those are the three that will almost certainly get you into some trouble. IF YOU SEE SOMEONE DO ONE OF THESE THINGS, please do the following: Refrain from quoting the offending text, it makes the thread cleanup a pain in the rear Press the Report button; it is by far the best way to notify Admins as we will get e-mails. Calling out for Admins in the middle of threads, sending us PM's, etc. - there is no guarantee we will get those in a timely fashion. There are multiple Moderators in multiple time zones around the world, and anyone one of us can handle the Report and all of us will be notified about it. But if you PM one Mod directly and he's off line, the problem will get dealt with much more slowly. Other behaviors that you might want to think twice before doing include: Intentionally disrupting threads and discussions repeatedly. Off topic/content free trolling in threads to disrupt dialog Stalking users around the forums with the intent to disrupt content and discussion Repeated posting of overly graphic or scatological porn content. There are plenty web sites for you to get your freak on, don't do it here. And a brief note to Newbies... No, we will not ban people or censor them for dropping F-bombs on you, using foul language, etc. so please don't report it when one of our members gives you a greeting you may find shocking. We do our best not to censor content here and playing swearword police is not in our job descriptions. Sailing Anarchy is more like a bar than a classroom, so handle it like you would meeting someone a little coarse - don't look for the teacher. Thanks.

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

HardOnWind

What Webster has to say about it

68 posts in this topic

1con·ser·va·tive adjective \kən-ˈsər-və-tiv\

: believing in the value of established and traditional practices in politics and society : relating to or supporting political conservatism

 

Conservative : of or relating to the conservative party in countries like the United Kingdom and Canada

 

: not liking or accepting changes or new ideas

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Oh boy but this oughta be one great thread. To whit;

 

Liberal----a person you've never met, but is absolutely convinced that he knows how to run your life better than you do.....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Oh boy, but this ought to be one great thread to whit:

 

Conservatives: People who, under the pretext of religion and false "moral truths" perpetuate their greed and gain in a free-market system by exploiting the poor and working to extinguish as many civil liberties as possible. They also typically label pacifists and intellectuals as "freedom haters" and other ridiculous bullshit."

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Oh boy but this oughta be one great thread. To whit;

 

Liberal----a person you've never met, but is absolutely convinced that he knows how to run your life better than you do.....

 

Ricco, how's it hanging over there in the Copper State? Has Sherriff Joe given you a vaginal probe yet?

Did you know that AZ is a Moocher State? Well, now you know.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Partisan: a foaming mouth conservative or liberal hell bent on their own views being absolutely correct, and thus any deviation from such is añ evil that must be condemned by any means necessary.

An individual incapable of reasonable compromise.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Oh boy, but this ought to be one great thread to whit:

 

Conservatives: People who, under the pretext of religion and false "moral truths" perpetuate their greed and gain in a free-market system by exploiting the poor and working to extinguish as many civil liberties as possible. They also typically label pacifists and intellectuals as "freedom haters" and other ridiculous bullshit."

 

Your short sightedness is pathetic. I'm not at all religious, and I am a conservative.

 

The weak of mind blame religion, because that is so much easier than creative thinking.

 

When you qualify for an event in the Special Olympics, PM me. I'll make a donation.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Oh boy, but this ought to be one great thread to whit:

 

Conservatives: People who, under the pretext of religion and false "moral truths" perpetuate their greed and gain in a free-market system by exploiting the poor and working to extinguish as many civil liberties as possible. They also typically label pacifists and intellectuals as "freedom haters" and other ridiculous bullshit."

 

While you're at it, how about a definition for black people with some references to fried chicken and holding up liquor stores?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Oh boy, but this ought to be one great thread to whit:

 

Conservatives: People who, under the pretext of religion and false "moral truths" perpetuate their greed and gain in a free-market system by exploiting the poor and working to extinguish as many civil liberties as possible. They also typically label pacifists and intellectuals as "freedom haters" and other ridiculous bullshit."

 

While you're at it, how about a definition for black people with some references to fried chicken and holding up liquor stores?

What, no mention of watermelon?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Oh boy, but this ought to be one great thread to whit:

 

Conservatives: People who, under the pretext of religion and false "moral truths" perpetuate their greed and gain in a free-market system by exploiting the poor and working to extinguish as many civil liberties as possible. They also typically label pacifists and intellectuals as "freedom haters" and other ridiculous bullshit."

 

While you're at it, how about a definition for black people with some references to fried chicken and holding up liquor stores?

 

I love this place. I rattle a stick against the cage to get a response from the animals and what do I end up with? Someone who gives an award winning Al Sharpton impression.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

Oh boy but this oughta be one great thread. To whit;

Liberal----a person you've never met, but is absolutely convinced that he knows how to run your life better than you do.....

Ricco, how's it hanging over there in the Copper State? Has Sherriff Joe given you a vaginal probe yet?

Did you know that AZ is a Moocher State? Well, now you know.

 

 

Oh no! I never should have fled Kalifukistan and moved to a free state! What will I ever fuking do?......:lol:

 

 

 

 

1393429648.jpg

 

1393801786.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Nice shot! I'm actually off to visit family in AZ to watch the US Mexico friendly in April. Dragging my bike along.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Futbol?.....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

Oh boy, but this ought to be one great thread to whit:

 

Conservatives: People who, under the pretext of religion and false "moral truths" perpetuate their greed and gain in a free-market system by exploiting the poor and working to extinguish as many civil liberties as possible. They also typically label pacifists and intellectuals as "freedom haters" and other ridiculous bullshit."

 

While you're at it, how about a definition for black people with some references to fried chicken and holding up liquor stores?

 

I love this place. I rattle a stick against the cage to get a response from the animals and what do I end up with? Someone who gives an award winning Al Sharpton impression.

 

If you think defending Conservatives sounds like Al Sharpton, I should defend Liberals see if you call me on impersonaiting Sean Hannity.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Futbol?.....

 

No, volleyball....

 

b23_RTR1ON6T.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

 

Oh boy, but this ought to be one great thread to whit:

 

Conservatives: People who, under the pretext of religion and false "moral truths" perpetuate their greed and gain in a free-market system by exploiting the poor and working to extinguish as many civil liberties as possible. They also typically label pacifists and intellectuals as "freedom haters" and other ridiculous bullshit."

 

While you're at it, how about a definition for black people with some references to fried chicken and holding up liquor stores?

 

I love this place. I rattle a stick against the cage to get a response from the animals and what do I end up with? Someone who gives an award winning Al Sharpton impression.

 

If you think defending Conservatives sounds like Al Sharpton, I should defend Liberals see if you call me on impersonaiting Sean Hannity.

 

If you defend conservatives, you get your marching orders from Rush. Please try and keep up, Ben.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

 

 

Oh boy, but this ought to be one great thread to whit:

 

Conservatives: People who, under the pretext of religion and false "moral truths" perpetuate their greed and gain in a free-market system by exploiting the poor and working to extinguish as many civil liberties as possible. They also typically label pacifists and intellectuals as "freedom haters" and other ridiculous bullshit."

 

While you're at it, how about a definition for black people with some references to fried chicken and holding up liquor stores?

 

I love this place. I rattle a stick against the cage to get a response from the animals and what do I end up with? Someone who gives an award winning Al Sharpton impression.

 

If you think defending Conservatives sounds like Al Sharpton, I should defend Liberals see if you call me on impersonaiting Sean Hannity.

 

If you defend conservatives, you get your marching orders from Rush. Please try and keep up, Ben.

 

Slow down... I'm still trying to figure out where Al Sharpton came in....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Slow down... I'm still trying to figure out where Al Sharpton came in....

 

 

Because this ----

 

 

P7zictt.gif?q

 

 

Pussy pants.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

Oh boy, but this ought to be one great thread to whit:

 

Conservatives: People who, under the pretext of religion and false "moral truths" perpetuate their greed and gain in a free-market system by exploiting the poor and working to extinguish as many civil liberties as possible. They also typically label pacifists and intellectuals as "freedom haters" and other ridiculous bullshit."

 

While you're at it, how about a definition for black people with some references to fried chicken and holding up liquor stores?

 

I love this place. I rattle a stick against the cage to get a response from the animals and what do I end up with? Someone who gives an award winning Al Sharpton impression.

Al's a liberal.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

 

Oh boy, but this ought to be one great thread to whit:

 

Conservatives: People who, under the pretext of religion and false "moral truths" perpetuate their greed and gain in a free-market system by exploiting the poor and working to extinguish as many civil liberties as possible. They also typically label pacifists and intellectuals as "freedom haters" and other ridiculous bullshit."

 

While you're at it, how about a definition for black people with some references to fried chicken and holding up liquor stores?

 

I love this place. I rattle a stick against the cage to get a response from the animals and what do I end up with? Someone who gives an award winning Al Sharpton impression.

 

If you think defending Conservatives sounds like Al Sharpton, I should defend Liberals see if you call me on impersonaiting Sean Hannity.

 

It's the Rev. Al Sharpton, the religious shit gets soooo confusing.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Equating Al Sharpton and Sean Hannity seems about right although I would be tempted to put Sharpton on a lower rung.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Equating Al Sharpton and Sean Hannity seems about right although I would be tempted to put Sharpton on a lower rung.

on the fucktard ladder.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The best definition of conservatism I've read is a desire to maintain traditional authority figures. Male, Caucasian, land owners.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Infringed:

Fucking pestered, restricted, bothered, annoyed, restricted, interrupted , hindered, limited, caused to adjust behavior in any way shake or form

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Far Left = Crazed fucktard, usualy rich, considers themselves elite, convinced that they know how the world should be run and is willing to lie, cheat and steal to get their way

Normal Left = politicaly motivated, votes, has great ideas, cares about others and wants a better future, honest

Middle of the road = could give a fuck about politics, busy with their lives, wants a fair shake, would like to belive that we elect good people

Normal Right = politicaly motivated, votes, has great ideas, cares about others and wants a better future, honest

Far Right = Crazed fucktard, usualy rich, considers themselves elite, convinced that they know how the world should be run and is willing to lie, cheat and steal to get their way

 

One day the blinders will come off of the middle as the world gets more and more divided. We have to take away the power of crazed fucktard money in politics. Until then we are all screwed

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The rich far right and left are the ones giving away the Kool Aid. You can tell the sheep that have had a sip pretty easily so perhaps we should add two more classes of right and left.

 

Left Sheep = Have swallowed the lies and propaganda hook line and sinker, political activist, foot soldier of the rich elite, pain in the ass, brain washed POS, asshole to a fault, not rich

 

Right Sheep = Have swallowed the lies and propaganda hook line and sinker, political activist, foot soldier of the rich elite, pain in the ass, brain washed POS, asshole to a fault, not rich

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The best definition of conservatism I've read is a desire to maintain traditional authority figures. Male, Caucasian, land owners.

 

partisan viewpoint.

 

Most moderate conservatives want to be rewarded for working hard and have the govt be responsible with their tax dollars, and get pissed when govt fritters it away paying for earmarks on both sides of the aisle, corporate bailouts and such big money payoffs, as well as subsidize lazy shits who expect something for nothing.

 

And most just want a fair shake from the git go. judge people on their merits and achievements, not quota based standards that are different from group to group. I get pissed that my white middle-class son who will be going to college in 5 years, will be the last pick by colleges regardless of his grades and achievements, as well as for jobs when he gets out of school.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I get pissed that my white middle-class son who will be going to college in 5 years, will be the last pick by colleges regardless of his grades and achievements, as well as for jobs when he gets out of school.

If your son has great grades and achievements, he will not be picked last by colleges. There is plenty of injustice in the world for conservatives to get pissed about, this is not one of them.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

I get pissed that my white middle-class son who will be going to college in 5 years, will be the last pick by colleges regardless of his grades and achievements, as well as for jobs when he gets out of school.

If your son has great grades and achievements, he will not be picked last by colleges. There is plenty of injustice in the world for conservatives to get pissed about, this is not one of them.

And to graduate as an indentured servant is a nice liberal way to start... DUH

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Oh boy, but this ought to be one great thread to whit:

 

Conservatives: People who, under the pretext of religion and false "moral truths" perpetuate their greed and gain in a free-market system by exploiting the poor and working to extinguish as many civil liberties as possible. They also typically label pacifists and intellectuals as "freedom haters" and other ridiculous bullshit."

Tolerance and diversity are deep with this one. He is such a shining example. All good people should aspire to such noble platitudes.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

I get pissed that my white middle-class son who will be going to college in 5 years, will be the last pick by colleges regardless of his grades and achievements, as well as for jobs when he gets out of school.

If your son has great grades and achievements, he will not be picked last by colleges. There is plenty of injustice in the world for conservatives to get pissed about, this is not one of them.

Who the fuck are you to make any comment about injustice directed at my son?

Fuck off asshole. Like you know better than everyone else.

If he has the same grades and achievements of some "disadvantaged" group, you can bet your ass he will be last picked. This most certainly is something to be pissed about, the equal treatment of my son...

 

You are an arrogant dick.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

I get pissed that my white middle-class son who will be going to college in 5 years, will be the last pick by colleges regardless of his grades and achievements, as well as for jobs when he gets out of school.

If your son has great grades and achievements, he will not be picked last by colleges. There is plenty of injustice in the world for conservatives to get pissed about, this is not one of them.

Who the fuck are you to make any comment about injustice directed at my son?

Fuck off asshole. Like you know better than everyone else.

If he has the same grades and achievements of some "disadvantaged" group, you can bet your ass he will be last picked. This most certainly is something to be pissed about, the equal treatment of my son...

 

You are an arrogant dick.

You said independent of his grades and achievements, he will always be picked last. That is simply not true. Either you have no idea how things work or your rage clouds your reasoning. Pointing this out does not make me a dick.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

 

I get pissed that my white middle-class son who will be going to college in 5 years, will be the last pick by colleges regardless of his grades and achievements, as well as for jobs when he gets out of school.

If your son has great grades and achievements, he will not be picked last by colleges. There is plenty of injustice in the world for conservatives to get pissed about, this is not one of them.

Who the fuck are you to make any comment about injustice directed at my son?

Fuck off asshole. Like you know better than everyone else.

If he has the same grades and achievements of some "disadvantaged" group, you can bet your ass he will be last picked. This most certainly is something to be pissed about, the equal treatment of my son...

 

You are an arrogant dick.

You said independent of his grades and achievements, he will always be picked last. That is simply not true. Either you have no idea how things work or your rage clouds your reasoning. Pointing this out does not make me a dick.

 

Really?

Are you involved in hiring or know anything about college entrance quotas? How do you have the gall to ascertain what I know?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Really?

Are you involved in hiring or know anything about college entrance quotas? How do you have the gall to ascertain what I know?

Yes.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Why did Obummer lie about his origin to get in to school then. Does it only work for kids with shitty grades that say they are from Kenya?

 

Sorry could not resist it is Monday after all

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Really?

Are you involved in hiring or know anything about college entrance quotas? How do you have the gall to ascertain what I know?

Yes.

Ok, then relate to me how I'm wrong based on description of your position, and I will give you just one example of my direct experience in hiring practices.

I was our department recruiter for a couple years. After collecting and reviewing resumes, I took the 3 best candidates (recent college grad, entry position) based on GPA and relevant work experience. I couldn't care less what their physical features or sex was. The GPAs of my top 3 picks were 3.85 to 4.0, with great summer experience at jobs which had direct relation to what we do. Took the resumes to the department head, and his direct quote was, "where are the women and minorities?" I immediately told him I did not want to be involved in recruiting anymore.

 

You tell me how things work on your end then. And tell me I'm wrong that the courts have heard numerous cases on college entrance that whites have brought against colleges for discrimination.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So in your example, If their grades and achievements put them in the finalists, then how could they be chosen last regardless of their grades and achievements? Do you see the disconnect?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So in your example, If their grades and achievements put them in the finalists, then how could they be chosen last regardless of their grades and achievements? Do you see the disconnect?

 

In a two horse race where one kid gets in and one kid doesn't, last is still last.

 

There are two arguments in favor of quotas. The first is the 'fairness - white privilege' argument that suggests white kids do better because of cultural bias and that their scores are inflated primarily through institutionalized discrimination against others. So de-rating them makes sense if you really want to apples-to-apples. There really not special, they're just advantaged.

 

The corollary, of course, is that in the name of 'equality' you're institutionally punishing someone who doesn't deserved to be punished. Righting one wrong by perpetuating another doesn't seem very progressive.

 

The other argument is that society as a whole benefits from diversity. Studies have suggested that an average kid can become exceptional if placed in an exceptional environment and so, promoting 'average' kids of diverse background (in place of statistically better but non-diverse background) is good for society as a whole. The exceptional kids who are passed over will get by anyway. Sort of a "needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few" argument. Sucks to be the few but there it is.

 

The corollary to that argument is how would you like to be the 'average' guy who only got in because of a quota. The people in the school KNOW you're there for diversity sake and that you've been promoted over a superior candidate not because of acumen but because of political correctness. That's a heavy burden in it's own right.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Grades and achievements will put you last every time. Or so its said.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So in your example, If their grades and achievements put them in the finalists, then how could they be chosen last regardless of their grades and achievements? Do you see the disconnect?

WTF?

 

You sound like Orwellian double-speak. They were passed over because they were not women or minoroties, regardless of their superior performance and experience. Spin the language any way you want.

BTW what is your experience in the matter as you claim to have?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

I get pissed that my white middle-class son who will be going to college in 5 years, will be the last pick by colleges regardless of his grades and achievements, as well as for jobs when he gets out of school.

If your son has great grades and achievements, he will not be picked last by colleges. There is plenty of injustice in the world for conservatives to get pissed about, this is not one of them.

Who the fuck are you to make any comment about injustice directed at my son?

Fuck off asshole. Like you know better than everyone else.

If he has the same grades and achievements of some "disadvantaged" group, you can bet your ass he will be last picked. This most certainly is something to be pissed about, the equal treatment of my son...

 

You are an arrogant dick.

 

Bgytr needs to be in an anger management program. :angry: -> :( -> :mellow: -> :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

Oh boy but this oughta be one great thread. To whit;

Liberal----a person you've never met, but is absolutely convinced that he knows how to run your life better than you do.....

Ricco, how's it hanging over there in the Copper State? Has Sherriff Joe given you a vaginal probe yet?

Did you know that AZ is a Moocher State? Well, now you know.

 

Oh no! I never should have fled Kalifukistan and moved to a free state! What will I ever fuking do?...... :lol:

You are aware that the "moocher state" canard has been thoroughly debunked.

 

Including here, several years ago:

 

It does change year to year, but the overall point is a valid one. It was a fav of Senator Moynihan of New York, who was fond of pointing out that states like his paid more and got less, while "flyover" states paid less and got more per citizen. Each state gets two Senators, and they all bring home some bacon. Some to more citizens than others.

Not necessarily. In 2004, a year for which there happens to be a lot of data, California got back 66% in retirement and disability payments of what they paid in social insurance taxes. NY got back 73%, RI 85%

 

Meanwhile, Florida got 122%, Montana 123%, New Mexico 127%. See a pattern? Do you have any idea how many retirement refugees from California I meet in Taos and Santa Fe? What portion of the Social Security and Medicare spent in Florida goes to refugees from New York and Rhode Island? California has a large, young working population, and their retirees leave, taking their checks with them. No mystery.

 

Social security and retirement checks go to the retiree, not the state where they were earned. People on fixed incomes tend to flee high tax states in retirement, and their federal checks follow them. Does that make those retiree friendy states freeloaders? Hardly. Senator Moynihan should have been asking himself why NY's retirees were moving to Florida and takng that Federal money with them.

 

In 2004, New York received $87 per capita in defense wages and salaries. They haven't got much in the way of military bases. California received $276 per cap. Texas $290, and New Mexico a whopping $455 per capita. Again, where's the beef?

 

Simplistic thinking leads to simplistic conclusions. Simply looking at the whole, uncut numbers is extremely misleading, which was obviously the goal of the authors of the chart, and they got a lot of people here to bite.

Would you like some cheese and crackers with your whine?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

CL, I gave cites and my cites gave cites. Y'all wanna try your bunk again with some cites? Probably not.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

So in your example, If their grades and achievements put them in the finalists, then how could they be chosen last regardless of their grades and achievements? Do you see the disconnect?

WTF?

 

You sound like Orwellian double-speak. They were passed over because they were not women or minoroties, regardless of their superior performance and experience. Spin the language any way you want.

BTW what is your experience in the matter as you claim to have?

 

 

Maybe I can help. Ed is addressing what you said, which from all appearances is not what you think you said or appeared to have meant:

"I get pissed that my white middle-class son who will be going to college in 5 years, will be the last pick by colleges regardless of his grades and achievements, as well as for jobs when he gets out of school."

Your white, middle-class son may be picked behind a Latina in a wheelchair if they have comparable "grades and achievements," but that is not anywhere close to the same as the "last pick."

 

I'm sure there are instances where colleges or employers decide to hire a less qualified person to add "diversity," but if you truly believe that universities and jobs always and without fail go with the "diversity" candidate over the white guy regardless of qualifications then I don't know what to tell you. That's warped.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm sure there are instances where colleges or employers decide to hire a less qualified person to add "diversity," but if you truly believe that universities and jobs always and without fail go with the "diversity" candidate over the white guy regardless of qualifications then I don't know what to tell you. That's warped.

Applying for jobs through the HR process is a suckers game. 70% of all jobs are never advertised, and none of the good ones are.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

CL, I gave cites and my cites gave cites. Y'all wanna try your bunk again with some cites? Probably not.

http://taxfoundation.org/sites/taxfoundation.org/files/docs/sr139.pdf

 

Tables #4 and #5.

 

Virtually the entire difference in per capita federal spending can be explained by retirees moving and taking their SS and medicare with them and by defense and defense related spending, or costs related to Federal ownership of large swathes of certain states, such as Wyoming and NM. I don't recall a lot of states competing with New Mexico for the WIPP nuclear waste disposal site and it's $19 billion cost, nor for White Sands or Los Alamos. Combine this with a relatively small population and a state 42% owned by the Federal government, it's pretty easy to get the per capita number up.

 

2 of the 3 most expensive states for Federal spending are Virginia and Maryland. Is Maryland a "freeloader", or is this easily explained by the large federal presence in the state? The same question can be asked about Virginia or D.C.

 

I realize that there exists a temptation to make political hay out of the disparity in total spending, as whack-job idiot sites like Mother Jones tries to do, but as citizens we should try to not be so gullible as to fall for this sort of gross misuse of statistics to mislead.

 

The truth is out there, but you are as likely to hear it from Newsmax or Lyndon LaRouche as from Mother Jones.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

So in your example, If their grades and achievements put them in the finalists, then how could they be chosen last regardless of their grades and achievements? Do you see the disconnect?

WTF?

 

You sound like Orwellian double-speak. They were passed over because they were not women or minoroties, regardless of their superior performance and experience. Spin the language any way you want.

BTW what is your experience in the matter as you claim to have?

 

Maybe I can help. Ed is addressing what you said, which from all appearances is not what you think you said or appeared to have meant:

>"I get pissed that my white middle-class son who will be going to college in 5 years, will be the last pick by colleges regardless of his grades and achievements, as well as for jobs when he gets out of school."

Your white, middle-class son may be picked behind a Latina in a wheelchair if they have comparable "grades and achievements," but that is not anywhere close to the same as the "last pick."

 

I'm sure there are instances where colleges or employers decide to hire a less qualified person to add "diversity," but if you truly believe that universities and jobs always and without fail go with the "diversity" candidate over the white guy regardless of qualifications then I don't know what to tell you. That's warped.

 

I think the biggest disadvantage his son will face, is that his dad has instilled upon him an idea that no matter how hard you work, some minority will steal it from you. With that kind of baggage, how could anyone present themselves in an interview with a can do attitude. His child is disadvantaged, but not for the reasons he thinks.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Wow it sounds all smarmy and feels good. That's all that's important.........how it feels. I'm convinced.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yeah, 'cuz that whole ridiculous idea that someone once called for would never, ever gain traction in this country. What'd that idiotic racist moron call it back then? Affirmitive Action or something?....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

 

 

 

So in your example, If their grades and achievements put them in the finalists, then how could they be chosen last regardless of their grades and achievements? Do you see the disconnect?

WTF?

 

You sound like Orwellian double-speak. They were passed over because they were not women or minoroties, regardless of their superior performance and experience. Spin the language any way you want.

BTW what is your experience in the matter as you claim to have?

Maybe I can help. Ed is addressing what you said, which from all appearances is not what you think you said or appeared to have meant:

>"I get pissed that my white middle-class son who will be going to college in 5 years, will be the last pick by colleges regardless of his grades and achievements, as well as for jobs when he gets out of school."

Your white, middle-class son may be picked behind a Latina in a wheelchair if they have comparable "grades and achievements," but that is not anywhere close to the same as the "last pick."

 

I'm sure there are instances where colleges or employers decide to hire a less qualified person to add "diversity," but if you truly believe that universities and jobs always and without fail go with the "diversity" candidate over the white guy regardless of qualifications then I don't know what to tell you. That's warped.

I think the biggest disadvantage his son will face, is that his dad has instilled upon him an idea that no matter how hard you work, some minority will steal it from you. With that kind of baggage, how could anyone present themselves in an interview with a can do attitude. His child is disadvantaged, but not for the reasons he thinks.

Still waiting on your self proclaimed experience in the matters ed. Lets hear it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Still waiting on your self proclaimed experience in the matters ed. Lets hear it.

would it change your mind? I doubt it. So why go through the effort?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

CL, I gave cites and my cites gave cites. Y'all wanna try your bunk again with some cites? Probably not.

http://taxfoundation.org/sites/taxfoundation.org/files/docs/sr139.pdf

 

Tables #4 and #5.

 

Virtually the entire difference in per capita federal spending can be explained by retirees moving and taking their SS and medicare with them and by defense and defense related spending, or costs related to Federal ownership of large swathes of certain states, such as Wyoming and NM. I don't recall a lot of states competing with New Mexico for the WIPP nuclear waste disposal site and it's $19 billion cost, nor for White Sands or Los Alamos. Combine this with a relatively small population and a state 42% owned by the Federal government, it's pretty easy to get the per capita number up.

 

2 of the 3 most expensive states for Federal spending are Virginia and Maryland. Is Maryland a "freeloader", or is this easily explained by the large federal presence in the state? The same question can be asked about Virginia or D.C.

 

I realize that there exists a temptation to make political hay out of the disparity in total spending, as whack-job idiot sites like Mother Jones tries to do, but as citizens we should try to not be so gullible as to fall for this sort of gross misuse of statistics to mislead.

 

The truth is out there, but you are as likely to hear it from Newsmax or Lyndon LaRouche as from Mother Jones.

 

Yep, Florida and Arizona look good as places to retire to and hence pick up the SS payments. CA is expensive as are the states in the NE. Since the feds are taking it all their working lives, it doesn't get invested or spent in those states.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So, California has a population of 38 million and Arizona has a population of 6.55 million.

There are 116,106 people getting Social Security in the Copper State.

There are 1,294,393 people getting Social Security in the Golden State.

 

1,294,393 / 38M is 3.4% of California is on Social Security

116,106 / 6.55M is 1.7% of Arizona is on Social Security

 

http://www.ssa.gov/policy/docs/statcomps/ssi_sc/2012/az.pdf

http://www.ssa.gov/policy/docs/statcomps/ssi_sc/2012/ca.pdf

 

Any additional malarkey y'all want to try?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

My white kid did well in school, got picked up by an engineering firm, and is doing just fine. Bgytr... Try not to instill your victim mentality on your kid. It's a self fuliling prophecy that won't serve him well.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It is the victim mentality that perpetuates the current hypocritical race and sex based affirmative action policies. Enough is enough.

 

Institionalized discrimination is still discrimination. And it is wrong and harmful to everyone.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So, California has a population of 38 million and Arizona has a population of 6.55 million.

There are 116,106 people getting Social Security in the Copper State.

There are 1,294,393 people getting Social Security in the Golden State.

 

1,294,393 / 38M is 3.4% of California is on Social Security

116,106 / 6.55M is 1.7% of Arizona is on Social Security

 

http://www.ssa.gov/policy/docs/statcomps/ssi_sc/2012/az.pdf

http://www.ssa.gov/policy/docs/statcomps/ssi_sc/2012/ca.pdf

 

Any additional malarkey y'all want to try?

That's actually irrelevant, as you should know. What matters is the SS tax receipts/payments ratio, for Arizona it was 1.095 dollars spent/received in FY 2004.

 

Do you have the corresponding numbers for 2012?

 

On a side note, I apologize for using the word "whine" in my initial post on the subject. It was juvenile and not conducive to civil discussion. I have you on ignore, and only saw your comment because it was quoted, but that is no excuse.

 

I appreciate the links to raw data, and only wish they included state by state receipts as well. Obviously, on a gross (national) basis, the benefit/tax receipt ratio will be greater than 1.00, since SS ran a deficit in 2012.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That was to CL. Was more necessary?

 

I was enjoying the debate. Saying you will ignore him sounds like you’re throwing in the towel.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yeah, you do owe him an honest response to a civil question.

 

I wouldn't have apologised about the whining comment personally. Are you gonna man up and retract the malarkey comment?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Grumpy rushes to the defense of malarkey.

 

Really… You think CL’s argument was malarkey?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Grumpy rushes to the defense of malarkey.

 

Really… You think CL’s argument was malarkey?

 

Subtle jokes are the best, but they count on people keeping up.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites