Jump to content


What Webster has to say about it


  • Please log in to reply
67 replies to this topic

#1 HardOnWind

HardOnWind

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,794 posts
  • Location:Tacoma, WA

Posted 02 March 2014 - 06:34 PM

1545786_243481519153583_487915487_n.jpg



#2 Sean

Sean

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,804 posts
  • Location:Sag Harbor, NY

Posted 02 March 2014 - 06:50 PM

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

#3 R Booth

R Booth

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 38,717 posts
  • Location:Just out of eyesight....
  • Interests:Postponing my funeral 'til tomorrow....

Posted 02 March 2014 - 06:57 PM

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.....

#4 badlatitude

badlatitude

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 12,083 posts
  • Location:Marina Del Rey, Ca.

Posted 02 March 2014 - 07:07 PM

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."



#5 Olsonist

Olsonist

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 9,164 posts
  • Location:Oakland, CA

Posted 02 March 2014 - 07:15 PM

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.



#6 bgytr

bgytr

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,038 posts

Posted 02 March 2014 - 07:23 PM

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.

#7 Sol Rosenberg

Sol Rosenberg

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 51,106 posts
  • Location:Earth

Posted 02 March 2014 - 07:25 PM

The side other than mine: Big stoopid doodie heads who call people names.

#8 Regatta Dog

Regatta Dog

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 20,173 posts

Posted 02 March 2014 - 09:08 PM

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.



#9 mainsheetsister

mainsheetsister

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,373 posts
  • Location:the backwash of fennario
  • Interests:sarcasm
    and
    the sky

Posted 02 March 2014 - 09:31 PM

Giant douche or turd sandwich?



#10 benwynn

benwynn

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 15,016 posts

Posted 02 March 2014 - 09:32 PM

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?



#11 HardOnWind

HardOnWind

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,794 posts
  • Location:Tacoma, WA

Posted 02 March 2014 - 11:21 PM

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?



#12 badlatitude

badlatitude

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 12,083 posts
  • Location:Marina Del Rey, Ca.

Posted 03 March 2014 - 12:34 AM

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.



#13 R Booth

R Booth

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 38,717 posts
  • Location:Just out of eyesight....
  • Interests:Postponing my funeral 'til tomorrow....

Posted 03 March 2014 - 12:39 AM


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

#14 Olsonist

Olsonist

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 9,164 posts
  • Location:Oakland, CA

Posted 03 March 2014 - 12:44 AM

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



#15 R Booth

R Booth

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 38,717 posts
  • Location:Just out of eyesight....
  • Interests:Postponing my funeral 'til tomorrow....

Posted 03 March 2014 - 12:46 AM

Futbol?.....

#16 benwynn

benwynn

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 15,016 posts

Posted 03 March 2014 - 01:45 AM

 

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. 



#17 GRUMPY

GRUMPY

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 26,953 posts
  • Location:Balikpapan, Indonesia
  • Interests:Hobie Miracle 20

Posted 03 March 2014 - 02:04 AM

Futbol?.....

 

No, volleyball....

 

b23_RTR1ON6T.jpg



#18 Regatta Dog

Regatta Dog

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 20,173 posts

Posted 03 March 2014 - 02:05 AM

 

 

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.



#19 benwynn

benwynn

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 15,016 posts

Posted 03 March 2014 - 02:36 AM

 

 

 

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....



#20 Regatta Dog

Regatta Dog

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 20,173 posts

Posted 03 March 2014 - 02:44 AM

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

 
 

Because this ----

 


P7zictt.gif?q

 

 

Pussy pants.
 



#21 Saorsa

Saorsa

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 18,853 posts

Posted 03 March 2014 - 03:24 AM

 

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.



#22 Saorsa

Saorsa

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 18,853 posts

Posted 03 March 2014 - 03:25 AM

 

 

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.



#23 Olsonist

Olsonist

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 9,164 posts
  • Location:Oakland, CA

Posted 03 March 2014 - 03:41 AM

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

#24 HardOnWind

HardOnWind

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,794 posts
  • Location:Tacoma, WA

Posted 03 March 2014 - 04:58 AM

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.



#25 Spatial Ed

Spatial Ed

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 18,603 posts
  • Location:The Dark Side of Kolob
  • Interests:Subhuman Mongrels in momjeans

Posted 03 March 2014 - 08:55 AM

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

#26 Gouvernail

Gouvernail

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 21,620 posts
  • Location:Austin Texas
  • Interests:margaritas, hippie chicks, durable flying discs for retriever dog play

Posted 03 March 2014 - 10:52 AM

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

#27 Turd Sandwich

Turd Sandwich

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 684 posts
  • Location:Douche Bag

Posted 03 March 2014 - 12:31 PM

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



#28 Turd Sandwich

Turd Sandwich

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 684 posts
  • Location:Douche Bag

Posted 03 March 2014 - 12:58 PM

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



#29 bgytr

bgytr

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,038 posts

Posted 03 March 2014 - 01:27 PM

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.



#30 Spatial Ed

Spatial Ed

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 18,603 posts
  • Location:The Dark Side of Kolob
  • Interests:Subhuman Mongrels in momjeans

Posted 03 March 2014 - 02:23 PM

  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.  



#31 tuk tuk joe

tuk tuk joe

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,767 posts

Posted 03 March 2014 - 02:41 PM

  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

#32 plchacker

plchacker

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,770 posts
  • Location:Helwestern AL

Posted 03 March 2014 - 02:44 PM

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. 



#33 bgytr

bgytr

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,038 posts

Posted 03 March 2014 - 02:50 PM

  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.



#34 Spatial Ed

Spatial Ed

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 18,603 posts
  • Location:The Dark Side of Kolob
  • Interests:Subhuman Mongrels in momjeans

Posted 03 March 2014 - 02:58 PM

 

  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.



#35 bgytr

bgytr

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,038 posts

Posted 03 March 2014 - 03:03 PM

 

 

  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?



#36 Spatial Ed

Spatial Ed

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 18,603 posts
  • Location:The Dark Side of Kolob
  • Interests:Subhuman Mongrels in momjeans

Posted 03 March 2014 - 03:07 PM

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.



#37 Turd Sandwich

Turd Sandwich

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 684 posts
  • Location:Douche Bag

Posted 03 March 2014 - 03:15 PM

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



#38 bgytr

bgytr

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,038 posts

Posted 03 March 2014 - 03:16 PM

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.



#39 Spatial Ed

Spatial Ed

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 18,603 posts
  • Location:The Dark Side of Kolob
  • Interests:Subhuman Mongrels in momjeans

Posted 03 March 2014 - 03:37 PM

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?



#40 cmilliken

cmilliken

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,119 posts

Posted 03 March 2014 - 03:41 PM

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.



#41 Spatial Ed

Spatial Ed

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 18,603 posts
  • Location:The Dark Side of Kolob
  • Interests:Subhuman Mongrels in momjeans

Posted 03 March 2014 - 03:43 PM

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



#42 bgytr

bgytr

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,038 posts

Posted 03 March 2014 - 03:55 PM

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?



#43 BigGuyWithPinkHat

BigGuyWithPinkHat

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 340 posts

Posted 03 March 2014 - 05:15 PM

 

  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: ->  :)



#44 Cruisin Loser

Cruisin Loser

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,639 posts
  • Location:West Texas, Taos, Maine
  • Interests:Sailing, rock climbing, skiing, steatopygia, stuff

Posted 03 March 2014 - 05:22 PM

 

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?



#45 Olsonist

Olsonist

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 9,164 posts
  • Location:Oakland, CA

Posted 03 March 2014 - 05:26 PM

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

#46 JMD

JMD

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 5,371 posts

Posted 03 March 2014 - 05:47 PM


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.

#47 Battlecheese

Battlecheese

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,775 posts
  • Interests:Sailing, music, physics.

Posted 03 March 2014 - 11:03 PM

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.

#48 Cruisin Loser

Cruisin Loser

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,639 posts
  • Location:West Texas, Taos, Maine
  • Interests:Sailing, rock climbing, skiing, steatopygia, stuff

Posted 03 March 2014 - 11:06 PM

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

 
http://taxfoundation.../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.

#49 Spatial Ed

Spatial Ed

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 18,603 posts
  • Location:The Dark Side of Kolob
  • Interests:Subhuman Mongrels in momjeans

Posted 04 March 2014 - 12:31 AM

 

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.



#50 Point Break

Point Break

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 10,135 posts
  • Location:Long Beach, California

Posted 04 March 2014 - 12:56 AM

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

#51 R Booth

R Booth

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 38,717 posts
  • Location:Just out of eyesight....
  • Interests:Postponing my funeral 'til tomorrow....

Posted 04 March 2014 - 01:04 AM

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?....

#52 bgytr

bgytr

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,038 posts

Posted 04 March 2014 - 02:06 AM


 


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.

#53 Spatial Ed

Spatial Ed

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 18,603 posts
  • Location:The Dark Side of Kolob
  • Interests:Subhuman Mongrels in momjeans

Posted 04 March 2014 - 03:31 AM


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?



#54 Saorsa

Saorsa

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 18,853 posts

Posted 04 March 2014 - 03:38 AM

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

 
http://taxfoundation.../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.



#55 Olsonist

Olsonist

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 9,164 posts
  • Location:Oakland, CA

Posted 04 March 2014 - 03:57 AM

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/p..._sc/2012/az.pdf

http://www.ssa.gov/p..._sc/2012/ca.pdf

 

Any additional malarkey y'all want to try?



#56 benwynn

benwynn

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 15,016 posts

Posted 04 March 2014 - 06:00 AM

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.

#57 bgytr

bgytr

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,038 posts

Posted 04 March 2014 - 12:36 PM

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.

#58 Cruisin Loser

Cruisin Loser

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,639 posts
  • Location:West Texas, Taos, Maine
  • Interests:Sailing, rock climbing, skiing, steatopygia, stuff

Posted 04 March 2014 - 03:55 PM

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/p..._sc/2012/az.pdf
http://www.ssa.gov/p..._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.

#59 Olsonist

Olsonist

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 9,164 posts
  • Location:Oakland, CA

Posted 04 March 2014 - 09:36 PM

Fine then I'll ignore you.



#60 Dog

Dog

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 16,376 posts

Posted 05 March 2014 - 12:07 PM

Fine then I'll ignore you.

 

That’s it? 



#61 Olsonist

Olsonist

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 9,164 posts
  • Location:Oakland, CA

Posted 05 March 2014 - 12:16 PM

That was to CL. Was more necessary?

#62 Dog

Dog

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 16,376 posts

Posted 05 March 2014 - 12:28 PM

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.



#63 GRUMPY

GRUMPY

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 26,953 posts
  • Location:Balikpapan, Indonesia
  • Interests:Hobie Miracle 20

Posted 05 March 2014 - 12:28 PM

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?



#64 another 505 sailor

another 505 sailor

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 7,638 posts

Posted 05 March 2014 - 03:09 PM

Grumpy rushes to the defense of malarkey.

#65 Dog

Dog

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 16,376 posts

Posted 05 March 2014 - 03:41 PM

Grumpy rushes to the defense of malarkey.

 

Really… You think CL’s argument was malarkey? 



#66 another 505 sailor

another 505 sailor

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 7,638 posts

Posted 06 March 2014 - 12:31 AM

Malarkey is to Grumpy as a bell is to Pavlov's dogs.

#67 Sean

Sean

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,804 posts
  • Location:Sag Harbor, NY

Posted 06 March 2014 - 01:34 AM

Some fun facts:
http://m.motherjones...e-effects-facts

#68 benwynn

benwynn

    Anarchist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 15,016 posts

Posted 06 March 2014 - 06:55 AM

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.






0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users