Google Groups no longer supports new Usenet posts or subscriptions. Historical content remains viewable.
Dismiss
GOP insists on trying to justify genuine rapes: "Rate of pregnancies from rape is 'very low'
6 views
Skip to first unread message
Ramon F. Herrera
Jun 12, 2013, 7:25:51 PM6/12/13
to
Are Conservatives biologically incapable of LEARNING???
The funniest aspect is how their system of beliefs id based on White
Supremacists and yet they are evolutionarily INFERIOR.
-Ramon
--------------------------------------------
Dear Ramon F --
As a woman in politics, nothing makes me angrier than when Republicans
make up outrageous claims to take away women's rights.
Here's what just happened: The House Judiciary Committee -- full of
Republican men -- voted to dramatically restrict women's access to
reproductive health care.
Trent Franks, the author of the extreme measure, said that there
should be NO exceptions for victims of rape and incest because "the
incidence of rape resulting in pregnancy are very low."
This isn't just a reprehensible and utterly false claim. It's
dangerous.
We need to call out Congressman Franks and House Republicans for their
radical agenda to take away women's rights IMMEDIATELY. Will you help
us fight back?
Donate $3 or more to our Women's Health Rapid Response Fund >>
The idea that Republican men are using made-up claims to force women
to carry to term the product of a rape is outrageous.
If we don't act now, women's rights are in jeopardy. That's why I'm
asking you to step up today:
http://dccc.org/Rapid-Response-Fund
Thanks,
Emily
Emily Bittner
DCCC National Press Secretary
BeamMeUpScotty
Jun 12, 2013, 7:44:04 PM6/12/13
to
On 6/12/2013 7:25 PM, Ramon F. Herrera wrote:
>
> Are Conservatives biologically incapable of LEARNING???
>
> The funniest aspect is how their system of beliefs id based on White
> Supremacists and yet they are evolutionarily INFERIOR.
>
> -Ramon
>
> --------------------------------------------
>
Poor Ramon a genius trapped in a body of a Coyote.
>
> Are Conservatives biologically incapable of LEARNING???
>
> The funniest aspect is how their system of beliefs id based on White
> Supremacists and yet they are evolutionarily INFERIOR.
>
> -Ramon
>
> --------------------------------------------
>
He has all the answers but like Wile E. Coyote - Ramon always manages
to drop that safe on his own head.
Meep Meep
Sid9
Jun 12, 2013, 7:54:07 PM6/12/13
to
"Ramon F. Herrera" <ra...@conexus.net> wrote in message
news:b38938b8-e5d1-4043...@b4g2000yql.googlegroups.com...
school fail to teach about mammalian reproduction?
Bill Graham
Jun 12, 2013, 9:32:15 PM6/12/13
to
> On 6/12/2013 7:25 PM, Ramon F. Herrera wrote:
>>
>> Are Conservatives biologically incapable of LEARNING???
>>
>> The funniest aspect is how their system of beliefs id based on White
>> Supremacists and yet they are evolutionarily INFERIOR.
>>
>> -Ramon
Neither party has learned that you can't make friends with people by giving
>>
>> Are Conservatives biologically incapable of LEARNING???
>>
>> The funniest aspect is how their system of beliefs id based on White
>> Supremacists and yet they are evolutionarily INFERIOR.
>>
>> -Ramon
them something for nothing. This is why the whole world hates Americans, and
why even many Americans hate their own government. But the freebies just
keep coming, and coming.........
Neolibertarian
Jun 12, 2013, 9:43:16 PM6/12/13
to
In article
<b38938b8-e5d1-4043...@b4g2000yql.googlegroups.com>,
claim.
How many cases of pregnancies resulting from rapes are there?
--
Neolibertarian
"Global Warming: It ain't the heat, it's the stupidity."
<b38938b8-e5d1-4043...@b4g2000yql.googlegroups.com>,
"Ramon F. Herrera" <ra...@conexus.net> wrote:
> Are Conservatives biologically incapable of LEARNING???
>
> The funniest aspect is how their system of beliefs id based on White
> Supremacists and yet they are evolutionarily INFERIOR.
>
Ramon and H.L. Mencken, two of Mendels' Peas in a Pod.
> Are Conservatives biologically incapable of LEARNING???
>
> The funniest aspect is how their system of beliefs id based on White
> Supremacists and yet they are evolutionarily INFERIOR.
>
>
> As a woman in politics, nothing makes me angrier than when Republicans
> make up outrageous claims to take away women's rights.
This should make us care...why again?
> As a woman in politics, nothing makes me angrier than when Republicans
> make up outrageous claims to take away women's rights.
>
> Here's what just happened: The House Judiciary Committee -- full of
> Republican men -- voted to dramatically restrict women's access to
> reproductive health care.
No it didn't, you hysterical loon.
> Here's what just happened: The House Judiciary Committee -- full of
> Republican men -- voted to dramatically restrict women's access to
> reproductive health care.
>
> Trent Franks, the author of the extreme measure, said that there
> should be NO exceptions for victims of rape and incest because "the
> incidence of rape resulting in pregnancy are very low."
>
> This isn't just a reprehensible and utterly false claim. It's
> dangerous.
Statistics and data would easily discredit the white Republican mens'
> Trent Franks, the author of the extreme measure, said that there
> should be NO exceptions for victims of rape and incest because "the
> incidence of rape resulting in pregnancy are very low."
>
> This isn't just a reprehensible and utterly false claim. It's
> dangerous.
claim.
How many cases of pregnancies resulting from rapes are there?
--
Neolibertarian
"Global Warming: It ain't the heat, it's the stupidity."
NotMe
Jun 12, 2013, 10:53:00 PM6/12/13
to
"Neolibertarian" <cogn...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:kpb7qi$73b$3...@dont-email.me...
Neolibertarian
Jun 13, 2013, 7:18:58 PM6/13/13
to
In article <kpbc12$o6i$1...@dont-email.me>, "NotMe" <m...@privacy.net>
wrote:
So, the White Racist Representatives are correct?
wrote:
NotMe
Jun 13, 2013, 7:35:31 PM6/13/13
to
news:kpdjnu$68s$1...@dont-email.me...
Conclusion based on facts not in evidence.
Message has been deleted
Harold Burton
Jun 13, 2013, 9:54:04 PM6/13/13
to
In article
<b38938b8-e5d1-4043...@b4g2000yql.googlegroups.com>,
"Ramon F. Herrera" <ra...@conexus.net> wrote:
<b38938b8-e5d1-4043...@b4g2000yql.googlegroups.com>,
"Ramon F. Herrera" <ra...@conexus.net> wrote:
> Are Conservatives biologically incapable of LEARNING???
>
> The funniest aspect is how their system of beliefs id based on White
> Supremacists and yet they are evolutionarily INFERIOR.
>
> -Ramon
>
> --------------------------------------------
>
> Dear Ramon F --
>
> As a woman in politics, nothing makes me angrier than when Republicans
> make up outrageous claims to take away women's rights.
Laugh . . . laugh . . . laugh. Dear, it's the the Democrats who make
>
> The funniest aspect is how their system of beliefs id based on White
> Supremacists and yet they are evolutionarily INFERIOR.
>
> -Ramon
>
> --------------------------------------------
>
> Dear Ramon F --
>
> As a woman in politics, nothing makes me angrier than when Republicans
> make up outrageous claims to take away women's rights.
outrageous claims.
snicker
Harold Burton
Jun 13, 2013, 9:56:41 PM6/13/13
to
So you agree, there's no proof to discredit the claim "the incidence of
rape resulting in pregnancy are very low."
Leftard herrera is just bloviating.
snicker
Bret Cahill
Jun 13, 2013, 10:10:21 PM6/13/13
to
> it's the the Democrats who make
> outrageous claims.
Try not to spree but if you must spree, try to spree local. Just
> outrageous claims.
shoot up your parents' doublewide.
Nickname unavailable
Jun 13, 2013, 10:14:42 PM6/13/13
to
On Jun 12, 6:25 pm, "Ramon F. Herrera" <ra...@conexus.net> wrote:
> Are Conservatives biologically incapable of LEARNING???
>
yes.
> Are Conservatives biologically incapable of LEARNING???
>
> The funniest aspect is how their system of beliefs id based on White
> Supremacists and yet they are evolutionarily INFERIOR.
>
Nickname unavailable
Jun 13, 2013, 10:16:03 PM6/13/13
to
On Jun 13, 8:54 pm, Harold Burton <hal.i.bur...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> In article
> <b38938b8-e5d1-4043-a954-75ad04d3c...@b4g2000yql.googlegroups.com>,
when are you going to apologize for calling our WWII vets war
criminals.
https://groups.google.com/group/alt.politics.economics/browse_thread/thread/8455997cbba5630d/e891055dbf97c108?hl=en&q=Harold+Burton++world+war+two&lnk=ol&
Harold Burton
View profile
More options May 19, 8:14 pm
In article
<90d4c035-5a00-4dc5-b0c5-3b981dc6d...@s9g2000pbc.googlegroups.com>,
Bret Cahill <BretCah...@peoplepc.com> wrote:
- Show quoted text -
Well doh. Democrat FDR proved that in the 40s when he firebombed
thousands of innocent women and children in Dresden, Tokyo and
numerous
other cities.
snicker
you were responded to promptly by a patriot.
https://groups.google.com/group/alt.politics.economics/browse_thread/thread/8455997cbba5630d/b08042a9da25f19f?hl=en&q=Harold+Burton++world+war+two&lnk=nl&
While It's ALWAYS DISconcerting To Encounter a HOPELESS IGNORAMUS,
it is Conversely, a GREAT PLEASURE To Illustrate - And Hopefully
DISSIPATE - The HARM of The DEPENDABLY, Self-Serving, Fact-
INTOLERANT, Delusional And INTRACTABLE IGNORANCE of such Notable
RighTARDS as "Harold Burton"...
THUS: The Rationale For AND Decision To Bomb [FIRST With High-
Explosives, THEN With Incendiaries] Dresden [Among OTHER High-Value
Targets] Was a - Waaaaait Forrr Iiiiiit - *British* Undertaking...
FDR's Involvement being Limited To his Administration's LONG-Standing
Acquiescence To Placing [American] Eighth Air Force assets At The
Disposal Of British Air Marshalls... As Would Be Expected Of a GOOD
War-Time Ally...
ERGO: *The British* Bombed Dresden [Among OTHER High-Value
Targets] employing Combined Military Assets of British and American
Forces... The *British* FIRST Low-Level Attacking at *Night*, Per
British Strategy; American Forces [Under *British* Command] High-
Level Attacking by Next Daylight...
ERGO - The Sequel: CONTRARY To Harold The RighTARD's HOPELESSLY
IGNORANT And Self-Serving, Ignoramus-Speak Blather, FDR had LITTLE OR
NOTHING To Do With The Bombing Of Dresden and Most Likely, Wasn't
Even Aware that The British High Command had Determined To Bomb
Several East German Cities, In Aid Of The Burgeoning Russian
Advance...
even after knowing the slaughter of americans in the Philippines,
and all of the other atrocities commited by them, they would have to
be worn down, as they tried to do to us.
and here is your response, you defended the nazis, and now you defend
the imperialists japanese.
https://groups.google.com/group/alt.politics.economics/browse_thread/thread/8455997cbba5630d/b08042a9da25f19f?hl=en&q=Harold+Burton++world+war+two&lnk=nl&
The CiC takes ultimate responsibility for what our armed services do.
The buck stopped at FDR's desk.
> . . . .and Most Likely, Wasn't Even
> Aware that The British High Command had Determined To Bomb Several
> East German Cities, In Aid Of The Burgeoning Russian Advance...
Hahahahahahahahahaha. Now THAT's even funnier.
I also notice you did your best to ignore the firebombing of
Tokyo . . . and Osaka . . . and Kobe . . . and Fukuoka . . . and,
oh hell just check out http://www.ditext.com/japan/napalm.html. How
are you going to blame that on the Brits?
then i demanded a apology,
https://groups.google.com/group/alt.politics.economics/browse_thread/thread/8455997cbba5630d/b08042a9da25f19f?hl=en&q=Harold+Burton++world+war+two&lnk=nl&
and he owes WWII vets a apology.
you said,
Just as you owe sentient beings an apology
Hahahahahahahahahahah
you sir are not only a liar, but a unpatriotic one at that.
and you added this recently
https://groups.google.com/group/alt.politics.economics/browse_thread/thread/3803f1d64d8e4b45/5d73a1560313be84?hl=en&
. . . and deliberately targeting and murdering civilians.
snicker
> In article
> <b38938b8-e5d1-4043-a954-75ad04d3c...@b4g2000yql.googlegroups.com>,
criminals.
https://groups.google.com/group/alt.politics.economics/browse_thread/thread/8455997cbba5630d/e891055dbf97c108?hl=en&q=Harold+Burton++world+war+two&lnk=ol&
Harold Burton
View profile
More options May 19, 8:14 pm
In article
<90d4c035-5a00-4dc5-b0c5-3b981dc6d...@s9g2000pbc.googlegroups.com>,
Bret Cahill <BretCah...@peoplepc.com> wrote:
- Show quoted text -
Well doh. Democrat FDR proved that in the 40s when he firebombed
thousands of innocent women and children in Dresden, Tokyo and
numerous
other cities.
snicker
you were responded to promptly by a patriot.
https://groups.google.com/group/alt.politics.economics/browse_thread/thread/8455997cbba5630d/b08042a9da25f19f?hl=en&q=Harold+Burton++world+war+two&lnk=nl&
While It's ALWAYS DISconcerting To Encounter a HOPELESS IGNORAMUS,
it is Conversely, a GREAT PLEASURE To Illustrate - And Hopefully
DISSIPATE - The HARM of The DEPENDABLY, Self-Serving, Fact-
INTOLERANT, Delusional And INTRACTABLE IGNORANCE of such Notable
RighTARDS as "Harold Burton"...
THUS: The Rationale For AND Decision To Bomb [FIRST With High-
Explosives, THEN With Incendiaries] Dresden [Among OTHER High-Value
Targets] Was a - Waaaaait Forrr Iiiiiit - *British* Undertaking...
FDR's Involvement being Limited To his Administration's LONG-Standing
Acquiescence To Placing [American] Eighth Air Force assets At The
Disposal Of British Air Marshalls... As Would Be Expected Of a GOOD
War-Time Ally...
ERGO: *The British* Bombed Dresden [Among OTHER High-Value
Targets] employing Combined Military Assets of British and American
Forces... The *British* FIRST Low-Level Attacking at *Night*, Per
British Strategy; American Forces [Under *British* Command] High-
Level Attacking by Next Daylight...
ERGO - The Sequel: CONTRARY To Harold The RighTARD's HOPELESSLY
IGNORANT And Self-Serving, Ignoramus-Speak Blather, FDR had LITTLE OR
NOTHING To Do With The Bombing Of Dresden and Most Likely, Wasn't
Even Aware that The British High Command had Determined To Bomb
Several East German Cities, In Aid Of The Burgeoning Russian
Advance...
even after knowing the slaughter of americans in the Philippines,
and all of the other atrocities commited by them, they would have to
be worn down, as they tried to do to us.
and here is your response, you defended the nazis, and now you defend
the imperialists japanese.
https://groups.google.com/group/alt.politics.economics/browse_thread/thread/8455997cbba5630d/b08042a9da25f19f?hl=en&q=Harold+Burton++world+war+two&lnk=nl&
The CiC takes ultimate responsibility for what our armed services do.
The buck stopped at FDR's desk.
> . . . .and Most Likely, Wasn't Even
> Aware that The British High Command had Determined To Bomb Several
> East German Cities, In Aid Of The Burgeoning Russian Advance...
Hahahahahahahahahaha. Now THAT's even funnier.
I also notice you did your best to ignore the firebombing of
Tokyo . . . and Osaka . . . and Kobe . . . and Fukuoka . . . and,
oh hell just check out http://www.ditext.com/japan/napalm.html. How
are you going to blame that on the Brits?
then i demanded a apology,
https://groups.google.com/group/alt.politics.economics/browse_thread/thread/8455997cbba5630d/b08042a9da25f19f?hl=en&q=Harold+Burton++world+war+two&lnk=nl&
and he owes WWII vets a apology.
you said,
Just as you owe sentient beings an apology
Hahahahahahahahahahah
you sir are not only a liar, but a unpatriotic one at that.
and you added this recently
https://groups.google.com/group/alt.politics.economics/browse_thread/thread/3803f1d64d8e4b45/5d73a1560313be84?hl=en&
. . . and deliberately targeting and murdering civilians.
snicker
NotMe
Jun 13, 2013, 10:15:26 PM6/13/13
to
"Harold Burton" <hal.i....@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:hal.i.burton-05AA...@d90-136-209-74.cust.tele2.de...
reported in part due to the actions of those to whom the rape is reported.
Just look at the problems the DoD is facing.
I work as a guardian ad litum in family court and with the foster program.
In my experience with the system 1 in 10 rapes are reported. When they are
even fewer are prosecuted.
Mitchell Holman
Jun 13, 2013, 10:27:09 PM6/13/13
to
Harold Burton <hal.i....@hotmail.com> wrote in
news:hal.i.burton-05AA...@d90-136-209-74.cust.tele2.de:
that "the incidence of rape resulting in pregnancy
are very low"?
SaPeIsMa
Jun 13, 2013, 10:59:35 PM6/13/13
to
"Harold Burton" <hal.i....@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:hal.i.burton-A932...@d90-136-209-74.cust.tele2.de...
And then, they are actually stupid enough to believe them too..
news:hal.i.burton-A932...@d90-136-209-74.cust.tele2.de...
BeamMeUpScotty
Jun 13, 2013, 11:03:37 PM6/13/13
to
allows for so many rapes?
This means that Abortions are a band-aid that hide the problem so that
you don't have to cut government programs that enhances the opportunity
for rapes resulting in pregnancy.
Cure the disease rather than relieving the symptoms.
--
*Rumination*
#29 - For your WELFARE there's the CHINESE MASTERCARD, but Freedom is
priceless.
Bill Graham
Jun 14, 2013, 12:02:49 AM6/14/13
to
"men" in it. So, the only laws against women that are on the books must have
been made since the constitution, and are probably unconstitutional in
nature. As a libertarian and a constitutionaslist, I am against any such
laws. Affirmative action, for example is such a law. (if it is a law at all)
If it is just a recommended practice, it is still basically unconstitutional
in nature. If you want to stop discrimination, then start with your own
house. Don't just blame someone else and pretend that your own hands are
clean.
Bill Graham
Jun 14, 2013, 12:16:48 AM6/14/13
to
abortion wheather she was raped or not. And today, they even day after drugs
that will terminate pregnancies immediately after the fact. AQnd, even as we
speak, opther drug companies are coming up with newer, cheaper, and more
effective ones. Soon, they will be for sale at candy counter check-out lines
just like the candy bars that they sell right now, and for much the same
price. So you are pissing against a gale, and soon it will become a
typhoon......
BeamMeUpScotty
Jun 14, 2013, 12:17:46 AM6/14/13
to
On 6/14/2013 12:02 AM, Bill Graham wrote:
> Harold Burton wrote:
>> In article
>> <b38938b8-e5d1-4043...@b4g2000yql.googlegroups.com>,
>> "Ramon F. Herrera" <ra...@conexus.net> wrote:
>>
>>> Are Conservatives biologically incapable of LEARNING???
>>>
>>> The funniest aspect is how their system of beliefs id based on White
>>> Supremacists and yet they are evolutionarily INFERIOR.
>>>
>>> -Ramon
>>>
>>> --------------------------------------------
>>>
>>> Dear Ramon F --
>>>
>>> As a woman in politics, nothing makes me angrier than when
>>> Republicans make up outrageous claims to take away women's rights.
>>
>>
>> Laugh . . . laugh . . . laugh. Dear, it's the the Democrats who make
>> outrageous claims.
>>
>>
>> snicker
>
> When I read the Constitution, I see nothing that distinguishes "women"
> from "men" in it. So, the only laws against women that are on the books
> must have been made since the constitution, and are probably
> unconstitutional in nature. As a libertarian and a constitutionaslist, I
> am against any such laws. Affirmative action, for example is such a law.
> (if it is a law at all) If it is just a recommended practice, it is
> still basically unconstitutional in nature.
The 14th amendment.... and "equal under the law" makes government
> Harold Burton wrote:
>> In article
>> <b38938b8-e5d1-4043...@b4g2000yql.googlegroups.com>,
>> "Ramon F. Herrera" <ra...@conexus.net> wrote:
>>
>>> Are Conservatives biologically incapable of LEARNING???
>>>
>>> The funniest aspect is how their system of beliefs id based on White
>>> Supremacists and yet they are evolutionarily INFERIOR.
>>>
>>> -Ramon
>>>
>>> --------------------------------------------
>>>
>>> Dear Ramon F --
>>>
>>> As a woman in politics, nothing makes me angrier than when
>>> Republicans make up outrageous claims to take away women's rights.
>>
>>
>> Laugh . . . laugh . . . laugh. Dear, it's the the Democrats who make
>> outrageous claims.
>>
>>
>> snicker
>
> When I read the Constitution, I see nothing that distinguishes "women"
> from "men" in it. So, the only laws against women that are on the books
> must have been made since the constitution, and are probably
> unconstitutional in nature. As a libertarian and a constitutionaslist, I
> am against any such laws. Affirmative action, for example is such a law.
> (if it is a law at all) If it is just a recommended practice, it is
> still basically unconstitutional in nature.
engaging in affirmative action, unconstitutional.
You and I can discriminate, the constitution prevents the government
from discriminating, including so called affirmative discrimination.
The constitution is mostly about limiting the Government NOT the people.
As far as the *government is allowed to see* , we are all the same. And
that is where we are all equal. there was no other way a constitution
could create any equality. Liberals and Progressive-Socialists are
idiots that don't understand the U.S. Constitution.
To try to apply this limit on "We the People" is unconstitutional.
--
*Rumination*
#17 - Life is like a box of chocolates, you never know where the nuts
are? -Gump that-
Message has been deleted
deadrat
Jun 14, 2013, 2:15:05 AM6/14/13
to
>
> You and I can discriminate, the constitution prevents the government
> from discriminating, including so called affirmative discrimination.
What an ignoramus! The 14th Amendment doesn't require the government to
> You and I can discriminate, the constitution prevents the government
> from discriminating, including so called affirmative discrimination.
treat everyone identically. The Supreme Court has set the rules for
affirmative action.
> The constitution is mostly about limiting the Government NOT the people.
> As far as the *government is allowed to see* , we are all the same.
are an ignoramus.
> And
> that is where we are all equal. there was no other way a constitution
> could create any equality. Liberals and Progressive-Socialists are
> idiots that don't understand the U.S. Constitution.
and the law has to treat us all the same, how come I can't get veterans
benefits in spite of the fact that I never served in the military?
Isn't the government treating me and veterans unequally?
> To try to apply this limit on "We the People" is unconstitutional.
>
>
>
>
Ramon F. Herrera
Jun 14, 2013, 3:22:00 AM6/14/13
to
On Jun 13, 11:17 pm, BeamMeUpScotty
It is always fascinating to witness the ideological contortions and
circus acts that the Far Right goes in order to justify their
selfishness and racism. We just witnessed another instance:
interpreting the Constitution backwards.
-Ramon
ps: John Roberts just called: your application to join the Justices
was tossed in the dumpster.
http://patriot.net/~ramon/misc/Swing-Vote.jpg
--------------------------------------
"The modern conservative is engaged in one of man's oldest exercises
in moral philosophy; that is, the search for a superior moral
justification for selfishness."
-John Kenneth Galbraith
<ThenDestroyEveryth...@blackhole.nebulax.com> wrote:
> On 6/14/2013 12:02 AM, Bill Graham wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> > Harold Burton wrote:
> >> In article
> >> <b38938b8-e5d1-4043-a954-75ad04d3c...@b4g2000yql.googlegroups.com>,
> On 6/14/2013 12:02 AM, Bill Graham wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> > Harold Burton wrote:
> >> In article
circus acts that the Far Right goes in order to justify their
selfishness and racism. We just witnessed another instance:
interpreting the Constitution backwards.
-Ramon
ps: John Roberts just called: your application to join the Justices
was tossed in the dumpster.
http://patriot.net/~ramon/misc/Swing-Vote.jpg
--------------------------------------
"The modern conservative is engaged in one of man's oldest exercises
in moral philosophy; that is, the search for a superior moral
justification for selfishness."
-John Kenneth Galbraith
Harold Burton
Jun 14, 2013, 7:57:06 AM6/14/13
to
In article
<2e331947-743e-4a21...@x4g2000yqk.googlegroups.com>,
. . . don't shoot up Bret's trailer park.
<2e331947-743e-4a21...@x4g2000yqk.googlegroups.com>,
Bret Cahill <Bret_E...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> > it's the the Democrats who make
> > outrageous claims.
>
> Try not to spree but if you must spree . . .
> > it's the the Democrats who make
> > outrageous claims.
>
. . . don't shoot up Bret's trailer park.
Bret Cahill
Jun 14, 2013, 9:26:52 AM6/14/13
to
You forgot to change the header.
LOL!
> > > it's the the Democrats who make
> > > outrageous claims.
You sore losers need to stop whining.
LOL!
> > > it's the the Democrats who make
> > > outrageous claims.
BeamMeUpScotty
Jun 14, 2013, 10:58:11 AM6/14/13
to
The trailers attract tornadoes that kill people and gun free zones
attract Liberal mental patients that want kill people.
Bret is living in a trailer park in what is ground zero for some kind of
tragedy, he has a 99% chance of shooting himself or going postal and
taking out his neighbors, or of the killer weather doing it before Bret
gets enough welfare checks to finish his pressure cooker and ball
bearing jihad.
It's a race to the finish line for Bret. Drag a $100 bill through a
trailer park and you get a psychotic Liberal Hate monger on a government
stipend..... what happened to the good old days when it would just
attract a prostitute that was in business for themselves.
--
*Rumination*
#52 - Socialism is a philosophy of mediocrity, a creed of intolerance,
and a feeling of malice towards the good fortune of others!
Bill Graham
Jun 14, 2013, 7:21:36 PM6/14/13
to
reverse discrimination? Or, do you just naturally assume that all
discrimination against WASPS is really, "reverse discrimination", and all
discrimination against third world people is the bad, original, real
discrimination? And jusst who are these people? What do you do when someone
is half WASP, and half third world? How about 70% WASP and 30% third world?
WWhat if you donlt know? Who gets to decide? Some clerk in a government
office or behind a government hand out window somewhere? Why can't you see
how wrong you are? You must know that all discrimination based on racial
background is bad. Nobody can go back and change his heritage. How would you
like to be truned down for a job because of your grandparents and not
because of something that you could be held accountqble for? And, if you
wouldn't like that, then why do you assume that its OK to do it to me or to
anybody else?
Joe Cooper
Jun 14, 2013, 7:34:59 PM6/14/13
to
"Bill Graham" <we...@comcast.net> wrote in
news:K7adnf8ebrEfOCbM...@giganews.com:
>> circus acts that the Far Right goes in order to justify their
Ramon, how are we normal folks supposed to know who these "Far Right"
people are?
For that matter, how do we define you Far Left clowns?
I find it strange that liberals have this mantra about "Far Right" and
"Religious Right," but we never hear about "Far Left" or "Religious
Left," i.e. professional Jesus hating atheists?
You clearly drink the Far Left Kool Aid, because you insist that anyone
and everyone who disagrees with you is a racist, but is your love of this
reverse racism our only clue to your Far Leftness?
Was JFK Far Left? How about LBJ - or Harry Truman, for that matter?
Is Mitt Romney one of them there "Far Right Religious Righters?"
How about John McCain? Is he a Far Right or a Right Democrat?
It's really hard to define all these liberal labels...they keep changing
as the days pass.
Were you always Hard Left, or were you Middle once?
--
Enjoy Internet Privacy And Anonymity: http://hidemyass.com/vpn/r6995:5/
Loathing of the religious right becomes an end in itself, a consuming
passion. Liberals denouce Christian conservatives for being moralistic,
for imposing their morality on others, for not separating morality from
politics, and for bringing religious zeal to public life--and then work
themselves into a frothing frenzy of righteous, moralistic zeal over
their own moral excellence for being so rational, calm, and detached.
One is reminded of the sadistic moralists from Dickens novels, who latch
on to the idea that whipping is good for the child, so they can beat the
news:K7adnf8ebrEfOCbM...@giganews.com:
>> circus acts that the Far Right goes in order to justify their
people are?
For that matter, how do we define you Far Left clowns?
I find it strange that liberals have this mantra about "Far Right" and
"Religious Right," but we never hear about "Far Left" or "Religious
Left," i.e. professional Jesus hating atheists?
You clearly drink the Far Left Kool Aid, because you insist that anyone
and everyone who disagrees with you is a racist, but is your love of this
reverse racism our only clue to your Far Leftness?
Was JFK Far Left? How about LBJ - or Harry Truman, for that matter?
Is Mitt Romney one of them there "Far Right Religious Righters?"
How about John McCain? Is he a Far Right or a Right Democrat?
It's really hard to define all these liberal labels...they keep changing
as the days pass.
Were you always Hard Left, or were you Middle once?
--
Enjoy Internet Privacy And Anonymity: http://hidemyass.com/vpn/r6995:5/
Loathing of the religious right becomes an end in itself, a consuming
passion. Liberals denouce Christian conservatives for being moralistic,
for imposing their morality on others, for not separating morality from
politics, and for bringing religious zeal to public life--and then work
themselves into a frothing frenzy of righteous, moralistic zeal over
their own moral excellence for being so rational, calm, and detached.
One is reminded of the sadistic moralists from Dickens novels, who latch
on to the idea that whipping is good for the child, so they can beat the
Neolibertarian
Jun 14, 2013, 11:19:38 PM6/14/13
to
In article <kpduia$j7v$1...@dont-email.me>, "NotMe" <m...@privacy.net>
wrote:
Of course.
Those actions are a result of...lack of sympathy with the woman's
plight? Perhaps, but not likely.
FWIU, it's most likely under-reported because of the shame and
embarrassment experienced by the victim.
Besides, how many women would have more than one occasion to report a
rape? If they've never reported a rape to the authorities before, how
would they know what actions to expect?
> Just look at the problems the DoD is facing.
That has everything to do with putting very young men at the height of
their sexuality together with very young women at the height of their
sexuality and sexual attractiveness out in the field for weeks and
months, or on the same ship for weeks and months.
There's absolutely no surprise whatsoever to anyone about "the problems
the DoD is facing."
You ignore human nature at your peril.
He said, she said.
Silly, I know, but there was a time everyone knew better than to allow
unescorted females to travel about, especially at night. There was a
time when unchaperoned females would never think of attending social
gatherings involving young single men who would be highly inebriated.
Yes, yes, I know that the Jurassic Age is over, and that every time the
wizard monkeys engineer societal change it's always for the "better."
Still, as dense as I am, all I can see is the trade offs, and no net
benefits.
wrote:
Those actions are a result of...lack of sympathy with the woman's
plight? Perhaps, but not likely.
FWIU, it's most likely under-reported because of the shame and
embarrassment experienced by the victim.
Besides, how many women would have more than one occasion to report a
rape? If they've never reported a rape to the authorities before, how
would they know what actions to expect?
> Just look at the problems the DoD is facing.
their sexuality together with very young women at the height of their
sexuality and sexual attractiveness out in the field for weeks and
months, or on the same ship for weeks and months.
There's absolutely no surprise whatsoever to anyone about "the problems
the DoD is facing."
You ignore human nature at your peril.
>
> I work as a guardian ad litum in family court and with the foster program.
> In my experience with the system 1 in 10 rapes are reported. When they are
> even fewer are prosecuted.
Collection of DNA evidence is no help in conviction, of course.
> I work as a guardian ad litum in family court and with the foster program.
> In my experience with the system 1 in 10 rapes are reported. When they are
> even fewer are prosecuted.
He said, she said.
Silly, I know, but there was a time everyone knew better than to allow
unescorted females to travel about, especially at night. There was a
time when unchaperoned females would never think of attending social
gatherings involving young single men who would be highly inebriated.
Yes, yes, I know that the Jurassic Age is over, and that every time the
wizard monkeys engineer societal change it's always for the "better."
Still, as dense as I am, all I can see is the trade offs, and no net
benefits.
Neolibertarian
Jun 14, 2013, 11:20:47 PM6/14/13
to
In article <kpdknq$b60$1...@dont-email.me>, "NotMe" <m...@privacy.net>
Still, you're not willing to hazard an educated guess?
Message has been deleted
Neolibertarian
Jun 15, 2013, 7:21:41 AM6/15/13
to
In article <usrnr8pbejv7hu67q...@4ax.com>,
Yoor...@Jurgis.net wrote:
> On Fri, 14 Jun 2013 22:19:38 -0500, Neolibertarian
> <cogn...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> >
> >That has everything to do with putting very young men at the height of
> >their sexuality together with very young women at the height of their
> >sexuality and sexual attractiveness out in the field for weeks and
> >months, or on the same ship for weeks and months
>
> Ah--does that go for public schools, public edifices, beaches, etc
> where boys and girls are "at the height of their sexuality"?
In public schools until 12th grade, theoretically boys and girls are
constantly chaperoned. They certainly don't live together in close
proximity 24/7. And, of course, the mix of the sexes is roughly 50-50.
Coed dorms in college are a really, really bad idea, but at least the
mix is still 50-50. Coed dorms are going to produce lots and lots of
otherwise easily avoidable problems, but not the same species of
problems found in a coed military.
> Doesn't the same proscriptions that are applied to every environment
> where "sexually active" men/women are together---work the same in the
> Military?
There's no privacy aboard a ship. There's no privacy in a bivouac.
Soldiers and sailors eat, shit, shower and shave together every day. In
full view of each other at all times. They'll sometimes even sleep
huddled together like puppies in a cold foxhole at night.
You obviously haven't thought this through, or you wouldn't have asked
such a vapid question.
Yoor...@Jurgis.net wrote:
> On Fri, 14 Jun 2013 22:19:38 -0500, Neolibertarian
> <cogn...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> >
> >That has everything to do with putting very young men at the height of
> >their sexuality together with very young women at the height of their
> >sexuality and sexual attractiveness out in the field for weeks and
> >months, or on the same ship for weeks and months
>
> where boys and girls are "at the height of their sexuality"?
In public schools until 12th grade, theoretically boys and girls are
constantly chaperoned. They certainly don't live together in close
proximity 24/7. And, of course, the mix of the sexes is roughly 50-50.
Coed dorms in college are a really, really bad idea, but at least the
mix is still 50-50. Coed dorms are going to produce lots and lots of
otherwise easily avoidable problems, but not the same species of
problems found in a coed military.
> Doesn't the same proscriptions that are applied to every environment
> where "sexually active" men/women are together---work the same in the
> Military?
There's no privacy aboard a ship. There's no privacy in a bivouac.
Soldiers and sailors eat, shit, shower and shave together every day. In
full view of each other at all times. They'll sometimes even sleep
huddled together like puppies in a cold foxhole at night.
You obviously haven't thought this through, or you wouldn't have asked
such a vapid question.
NotMe
Jun 15, 2013, 7:27:02 PM6/15/13
to
news:kpgm98$uvl$2...@dont-email.me...
(Un) Educated guesses are what started this tread. More of the same won't
add to the credibility of the debate.
add to the credibility of the debate.
Bill Graham
Jun 15, 2013, 10:14:28 PM6/15/13
to
besides, "huddling together in foxholes". I saw a darkened room where mixed
sex "soldiers" watching TV screens, took off drones, serched for enemy
caravans, and blew them out of existence, then brougnt the drones back home
and landed they. All from this room which was a very long way from the
action. It was as if they were playing some x-box game.....
Neolibertarian
Jun 16, 2013, 8:21:00 AM6/16/13
to
In article <kpit93$l34$1...@dont-email.me>, "NotMe" <m...@privacy.net>
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/11376648
A study of 221 women who were attempting to conceive, from any one
incident of intercourse the chances are about 3.1% for successful
fertilization.
http://www.demographic-research.org/volumes/vol3/5/3-5.pdf
The chances are about 5% for successful fertilization from any one
incident of intercourse for women between 12-45, which takes into
account various stages of the menstrual cycle.
An educated guess would place the incidents of rapes resulting in
pregnancy between 3-5%.
Representative Franks, the idiot populist-bureaucrat in question, was
specifically discussing abortion after 20 weeks of pregnancy. At that
point, he claims, there is virtually no compelling reason for allowing a
"rape or incest exception."
http://tinyurl.com/kqhjjk7
Duh.
A study of 221 women who were attempting to conceive, from any one
incident of intercourse the chances are about 3.1% for successful
fertilization.
http://www.demographic-research.org/volumes/vol3/5/3-5.pdf
The chances are about 5% for successful fertilization from any one
incident of intercourse for women between 12-45, which takes into
account various stages of the menstrual cycle.
An educated guess would place the incidents of rapes resulting in
pregnancy between 3-5%.
Representative Franks, the idiot populist-bureaucrat in question, was
specifically discussing abortion after 20 weeks of pregnancy. At that
point, he claims, there is virtually no compelling reason for allowing a
"rape or incest exception."
http://tinyurl.com/kqhjjk7
Duh.
Neolibertarian
Jun 16, 2013, 8:37:33 AM6/16/13
to
In article <VdKdnRaLuf0agiDM...@giganews.com>,
If you're a male between the ages of 17-28, or you can still remember
being a male between the ages of 17-28, you can't convince me that, even
in a room where soldiers are killing enemies on tv monitors, that having
an attractive female of or about the same age group in the room isn't
distracting.
Of course it's distracting. I'm 56, and it's STILL distracting, and I
hope that never changes.
In the corporate world, this distraction can usually be considered a
wash. The distraction, the various negative effects on office morale the
opposite sex may bring can be offset by several factors, not the least
of which are the skills and abilities the persons of opposite sex may
bring to the table.
But the purpose of a corporation is completely different from the
purpose of the military.
And war is not conducted from inside a room full of tv monitors.
being a male between the ages of 17-28, you can't convince me that, even
in a room where soldiers are killing enemies on tv monitors, that having
an attractive female of or about the same age group in the room isn't
distracting.
Of course it's distracting. I'm 56, and it's STILL distracting, and I
hope that never changes.
In the corporate world, this distraction can usually be considered a
wash. The distraction, the various negative effects on office morale the
opposite sex may bring can be offset by several factors, not the least
of which are the skills and abilities the persons of opposite sex may
bring to the table.
But the purpose of a corporation is completely different from the
purpose of the military.
And war is not conducted from inside a room full of tv monitors.
BeamMeUpScotty
Jun 16, 2013, 12:28:57 PM6/16/13
to
so what if you're getting a blow JOB in the closet when your buddies are
yelling for some heavy support. You'll get to it, Clinton eventually
won his war between his blow Jobs.
Message has been deleted
Message has been deleted
Scout
Jun 16, 2013, 4:54:48 PM6/16/13
to
news:kpkb96$egf$1...@dont-email.me...
Let's just put it this way. Your argument also applies fully to gays in the
military as well.
They would be just as distracted in a fully male military as well.
No, there are going to be distractions, my issue is can that person
physically and mentally fulfill the necessary requirements for the job. If
that means picking up your 200 pound team mate can carrying them to
safety...then you need to be able to do so. If you job is flying a fighter,
then you need to be able to take the vertigo, g forces, and make the snap
judgements necessary for that job. If you can't....then you don't need to be
in that job. Military or civilian. Personally, I think we should simply make
our military fully co-ed. Sleep together, eat together, shower together,
etc. If you can't handle it then you're in the wrong job.
military as well.
They would be just as distracted in a fully male military as well.
No, there are going to be distractions, my issue is can that person
physically and mentally fulfill the necessary requirements for the job. If
that means picking up your 200 pound team mate can carrying them to
safety...then you need to be able to do so. If you job is flying a fighter,
then you need to be able to take the vertigo, g forces, and make the snap
judgements necessary for that job. If you can't....then you don't need to be
in that job. Military or civilian. Personally, I think we should simply make
our military fully co-ed. Sleep together, eat together, shower together,
etc. If you can't handle it then you're in the wrong job.
Bill Graham
Jun 16, 2013, 6:28:37 PM6/16/13
to
all women to a kitchen somewhere in the Midwest, however. I worked at a job
where men and women operated a huge multi million dollar high energy
research machine. We were not any different in our ability to operate the
machine, and the difference in sex dodn't bother us at all. We even used the
same foul language and laughed at the same dirty jokes. It wouldn;t have
mattered to us if we were killing enemy combatants or operating a physics
machine. Why would you want to prevent women from doing a useful job that
they both want to do and are educated to do?
BeamMeUpScotty
Jun 16, 2013, 6:38:36 PM6/16/13
to
It is probably more efficient and less costly.
Once you have what works you can repeat it over and over at base after
base with fewer variables to screw up the outcome. Remember the KISS
acronym (KEEP IT SIMPLE STUPID).
Unless there is a huge benefit to having Gays and Women then remember
the military is for security, NOT for equal opportunity employment.
Getting off mission is dangerous NOT to our freedoms but to our
Security, because we all understand the military was never meant to be a
pillar of freedom in America it simply protects our freedoms.
*Rumination*
#46 - Welcome to Socialism, where mediocrity is the highest achievement
possible.
Neolibertarian
Jun 16, 2013, 7:07:55 PM6/16/13
to
In article <COOdnVcBitKEoSPM...@giganews.com>,
> It is not an excuse for relegating
> all women to a kitchen somewhere in the Midwest, however.
That's a pretty silly straw woman argument.
> I worked at a job
> where men and women operated a huge multi million dollar high energy
> research machine.
That's not even close to the military's mission.
> We were not any different in our ability to operate the
> machine, and the difference in sex dodn't bother us at all. We even used the
> same foul language and laughed at the same dirty jokes.
Friend, just because you didn' get slapped with sexual harassment suits
doesn't mean that the above behavior wouldn't have fully warranted it.
> It wouldn;t have
> mattered to us if we were killing enemy combatants or operating a physics
> machine.
That's what you say...now.
> Why would you want to prevent women from doing a useful job that
> they both want to do and are educated to do?
Women are far too important to my civilization to risk their lives for
so little.
You aren't acquainted with real, total war, and let's hope you never do
become acquainted with it.
"Bill Graham" <we...@comcast.net> wrote:
> >
> > In the corporate world, this distraction can usually be considered a
> > wash. The distraction, the various negative effects on office morale
> > the opposite sex may bring can be offset by several factors, not the
> > least of which are the skills and abilities the persons of opposite
> > sex may bring to the table.
> >
> > But the purpose of a corporation is completely different from the
> > purpose of the military.
> >
> > And war is not conducted from inside a room full of tv monitors.
>
> But a little distraction can't be helped.
Distractions get you killed in war.
> >
> > In the corporate world, this distraction can usually be considered a
> > wash. The distraction, the various negative effects on office morale
> > the opposite sex may bring can be offset by several factors, not the
> > least of which are the skills and abilities the persons of opposite
> > sex may bring to the table.
> >
> > But the purpose of a corporation is completely different from the
> > purpose of the military.
> >
> > And war is not conducted from inside a room full of tv monitors.
>
> But a little distraction can't be helped.
> It is not an excuse for relegating
> all women to a kitchen somewhere in the Midwest, however.
> I worked at a job
> where men and women operated a huge multi million dollar high energy
> research machine.
> We were not any different in our ability to operate the
> machine, and the difference in sex dodn't bother us at all. We even used the
> same foul language and laughed at the same dirty jokes.
doesn't mean that the above behavior wouldn't have fully warranted it.
> It wouldn;t have
> mattered to us if we were killing enemy combatants or operating a physics
> machine.
> Why would you want to prevent women from doing a useful job that
> they both want to do and are educated to do?
so little.
You aren't acquainted with real, total war, and let's hope you never do
become acquainted with it.
Neolibertarian
Jun 16, 2013, 7:20:41 PM6/16/13
to
In article <kpl8dg$dc6$1...@dont-email.me>,
Of course it does.
> my issue is can that person
> physically and mentally fulfill the necessary requirements for the job. If
> that means picking up your 200 pound team mate can carrying them to
> safety...then you need to be able to do so.
Well, there's that, but then everyone tells us there are other jobs in
the military.
> If you job is flying a fighter,
> then you need to be able to take the vertigo, g forces, and make the snap
> judgements necessary for that job.
Women are naturally (on average) superior to men in that instance. Their
reaction times are slightly better too. There's a case to be made that
women have superior decision making abilities in air combat situations
as well.
> If you can't....then you don't need to be
> in that job. Military or civilian. Personally, I think we should simply make
> our military fully co-ed. Sleep together, eat together, shower together,
> etc. If you can't handle it then you're in the wrong job.
That's never, ever, ever, ever been the point.
Besides, it's easy to predict the outcome: an utterly unsurprising raise
in sexual harassment cases, sexual assaults and rapes.
Have you ever trained a dog to allow you to place raw meat on his nose,
and then not to eat it until you give him the command?
Why put a human male through that? Because you don't mind risking a
woman's life?
If you don't mind risking a woman's life, then you don't have a
civilization.
>
> They would be just as distracted in a fully male military as well.
>
> No, there are going to be distractions
They needn't be institutionalized distractions.
> They would be just as distracted in a fully male military as well.
>
> No, there are going to be distractions
> my issue is can that person
> physically and mentally fulfill the necessary requirements for the job. If
> that means picking up your 200 pound team mate can carrying them to
> safety...then you need to be able to do so.
the military.
> If you job is flying a fighter,
> then you need to be able to take the vertigo, g forces, and make the snap
> judgements necessary for that job.
reaction times are slightly better too. There's a case to be made that
women have superior decision making abilities in air combat situations
as well.
> If you can't....then you don't need to be
> in that job. Military or civilian. Personally, I think we should simply make
> our military fully co-ed. Sleep together, eat together, shower together,
> etc. If you can't handle it then you're in the wrong job.
Besides, it's easy to predict the outcome: an utterly unsurprising raise
in sexual harassment cases, sexual assaults and rapes.
Have you ever trained a dog to allow you to place raw meat on his nose,
and then not to eat it until you give him the command?
Why put a human male through that? Because you don't mind risking a
woman's life?
If you don't mind risking a woman's life, then you don't have a
civilization.
Neolibertarian
Jun 16, 2013, 7:31:51 PM6/16/13
to
In article <ketrr8p3co54e7tlg...@4ax.com>,
Yoor...@Jurgis.net wrote:
> On Sun, 16 Jun 2013 07:37:33 -0500, Neolibertarian
> <cogn...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> >
> >If you're a male between the ages of 17-28, or you can still remember
> >being a male between the ages of 17-28, you can't convince me that, even
> >in a room where soldiers are killing enemies on tv monitors, that having
> >an attractive female of or about the same age group in the room isn't
> >distracting.
>
> Being "distracted" doesn't require action.
It does when you're 18. Believe it or not, not all males at that age or
later are all that adept at understanding women in general, let alone
the signals one might display in any given situation. Misinterpretation
is an always present hazard.
Women at 18 are hardly much better at interpreting the signals and
displays of males, either.
It's a lot to ask of both sexes. Especially when there's absolutely no
compelling reason to introduce those burdens upon men who are already
burdened enough.
>
> Taking "action" requires penalties----harsh ones.
Just ask Julian Assange.
>
> The opposite of present military policy
>
> There isn;t 2 separate citizen groups in america-
This may come as a shock, but there are, in fact, two sexes.
Your social engineering doesn't seem capable of eliminating those
differences.
For instance, a civilization is far more dependent upon women than it is
men.
Men are expendable, women are not.
Yoor...@Jurgis.net wrote:
> On Sun, 16 Jun 2013 07:37:33 -0500, Neolibertarian
> <cogn...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> >
> >If you're a male between the ages of 17-28, or you can still remember
> >being a male between the ages of 17-28, you can't convince me that, even
> >in a room where soldiers are killing enemies on tv monitors, that having
> >an attractive female of or about the same age group in the room isn't
> >distracting.
>
It does when you're 18. Believe it or not, not all males at that age or
later are all that adept at understanding women in general, let alone
the signals one might display in any given situation. Misinterpretation
is an always present hazard.
Women at 18 are hardly much better at interpreting the signals and
displays of males, either.
It's a lot to ask of both sexes. Especially when there's absolutely no
compelling reason to introduce those burdens upon men who are already
burdened enough.
>
> Taking "action" requires penalties----harsh ones.
Just ask Julian Assange.
>
> The opposite of present military policy
>
> There isn;t 2 separate citizen groups in america-
This may come as a shock, but there are, in fact, two sexes.
Your social engineering doesn't seem capable of eliminating those
differences.
For instance, a civilization is far more dependent upon women than it is
men.
Men are expendable, women are not.
Neolibertarian
Jun 16, 2013, 7:36:50 PM6/16/13
to
In article <ultrr89dsr62nu9ih...@4ax.com>,
Yoor...@Jurgis.net wrote:
> On Sun, 16 Jun 2013 12:28:57 -0400, BeamMeUpScotty
> <ThenDestro...@blackhole.nebulax.com> wrote:
>
> >killing people all day gets tedious so you need some distractions....
> >so what if you're getting a blow JOB in the closet when your buddies are
> >yelling for some heavy support. You'll get to it, Clinton eventually
> >won his war between his blow Jobs.
>
> Since a blowjob had nothing to do with any government related
> issue---what's your point?
>
> Oh---sorry
>
> You fuckwits still can't believe you got that shoved up your ass too,
> right?
>
> Re-living the shame of being whipped requires you to remember it year
> after year.
>
> GOOD !!
If the man I hire to run my company is diddling the help in the closet
while he's on the clock, he's fired.
End of story.
I might not have any animosity towards him; I may not even be making a
moral judgement concerning his reckless, unwise actions.
It's nothing personal. Even if he "can still get his job done," be that
it may be, there's lots of bright, hardworking candidates who'd LOVE to
have the job, and who would be serious enough not do anything as utterly
stupid.
Yoor...@Jurgis.net wrote:
> On Sun, 16 Jun 2013 12:28:57 -0400, BeamMeUpScotty
> <ThenDestro...@blackhole.nebulax.com> wrote:
>
> >killing people all day gets tedious so you need some distractions....
> >so what if you're getting a blow JOB in the closet when your buddies are
> >yelling for some heavy support. You'll get to it, Clinton eventually
> >won his war between his blow Jobs.
>
> issue---what's your point?
>
> Oh---sorry
>
> You fuckwits still can't believe you got that shoved up your ass too,
> right?
>
> Re-living the shame of being whipped requires you to remember it year
> after year.
>
> GOOD !!
If the man I hire to run my company is diddling the help in the closet
while he's on the clock, he's fired.
End of story.
I might not have any animosity towards him; I may not even be making a
moral judgement concerning his reckless, unwise actions.
It's nothing personal. Even if he "can still get his job done," be that
it may be, there's lots of bright, hardworking candidates who'd LOVE to
have the job, and who would be serious enough not do anything as utterly
stupid.
Nickname unavailable
Jun 16, 2013, 8:01:08 PM6/16/13
to
> > <b38938b8-e5d1-4043-a954-75ad04d3c...@b4g2000yql.googlegroups.com>,
> house. Don't just blame someone else and pretend that your own hands are
> clean.
why can't "CONSERVATIVES" understand that rape is a crime. i do
believe "CONSERVATIVES" are incapable of know right from wrong. you
are not a constitutionalist, you rank up there with marvin the
martian, a true dimwit.
> > "Ramon F. Herrera" <ra...@conexus.net> wrote:
>
> >> Are Conservatives biologically incapable of LEARNING???
>
> >> The funniest aspect is how their system of beliefs id based on White
> >> Supremacists and yet they are evolutionarily INFERIOR.
>
>
> >> Are Conservatives biologically incapable of LEARNING???
>
> >> The funniest aspect is how their system of beliefs id based on White
> >> Supremacists and yet they are evolutionarily INFERIOR.
>
> >> -Ramon
>
> >> --------------------------------------------
>
> >> Dear Ramon F --
>
>
> >> --------------------------------------------
>
> >> Dear Ramon F --
>
> >> As a woman in politics, nothing makes me angrier than when
> >> Republicans make up outrageous claims to take away women's rights.
>
> >> Republicans make up outrageous claims to take away women's rights.
>
> > Laugh . . . laugh . . . laugh. Dear, it's the the Democrats who make
> > outrageous claims.
>
> > snicker
>
> When I read the Constitution, I see nothing that distinguishes "women" from
> "men" in it. So, the only laws against women that are on the books must have
> been made since the constitution, and are probably unconstitutional in
> nature. As a libertarian and a constitutionaslist, I am against any such
> laws. Affirmative action, for example is such a law. (if it is a law at all)
> If it is just a recommended practice, it is still basically unconstitutional
> in nature. If you want to stop discrimination, then start with your own
> > outrageous claims.
>
> > snicker
>
> When I read the Constitution, I see nothing that distinguishes "women" from
> "men" in it. So, the only laws against women that are on the books must have
> been made since the constitution, and are probably unconstitutional in
> nature. As a libertarian and a constitutionaslist, I am against any such
> laws. Affirmative action, for example is such a law. (if it is a law at all)
> If it is just a recommended practice, it is still basically unconstitutional
> house. Don't just blame someone else and pretend that your own hands are
> clean.
why can't "CONSERVATIVES" understand that rape is a crime. i do
believe "CONSERVATIVES" are incapable of know right from wrong. you
are not a constitutionalist, you rank up there with marvin the
martian, a true dimwit.
Nickname unavailable
Jun 16, 2013, 8:02:20 PM6/16/13
to
On Jun 13, 11:16 pm, "Bill Graham" <w...@comcast.net> wrote:
> BeamMeUpScotty wrote:
> > On 6/13/2013 10:15 PM, NotMe wrote:
> >> "Harold Burton" <hal.i.bur...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
> >>news:hal.i.burton-05AA...@d90-136-209-74.cust.tele2.de...
> >>> In article <kpbc12$o6...@dont-email.me>, "NotMe" <m...@privacy.net>
> >>> wrote:
>
> >>>> "Neolibertarian" <cognac...@gmail.com> wrote in message
> >>>>news:kpb7qi$73b$3...@dont-email.me...
> > allows for so many rapes?
>
> > This means that Abortions are a band-aid that hide the problem so that
> > you don't have to cut government programs that enhances the
> > opportunity for rapes resulting in pregnancy.
>
> > Cure the disease rather than relieving the symptoms.
>
> The problem is, anyone can take advantage of the "cure". A woman can get an
> abortion wheather she was raped or not. And today, they even day after drugs
> that will terminate pregnancies immediately after the fact. AQnd, even as we
> speak, opther drug companies are coming up with newer, cheaper, and more
> effective ones. Soon, they will be for sale at candy counter check-out lines
> just like the candy bars that they sell right now, and for much the same
> price. So you are pissing against a gale, and soon it will become a
> typhoon......
you can always move to countries were the women know their place,
they wear burka's.
> BeamMeUpScotty wrote:
> > On 6/13/2013 10:15 PM, NotMe wrote:
> >> "Harold Burton" <hal.i.bur...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
> >>news:hal.i.burton-05AA...@d90-136-209-74.cust.tele2.de...
> >>> In article <kpbc12$o6...@dont-email.me>, "NotMe" <m...@privacy.net>
> >>> wrote:
>
> >>>> "Neolibertarian" <cognac...@gmail.com> wrote in message
> >>>>news:kpb7qi$73b$3...@dont-email.me...
> >>>>> In article
> >>>>> <b38938b8-e5d1-4043-a954-75ad04d3c...@b4g2000yql.googlegroups.com>,
> >>>>> "Ramon F. Herrera" <ra...@conexus.net> wrote:
>
> >>>>>> Are Conservatives biologically incapable of LEARNING???
>
> >>>>>> The funniest aspect is how their system of beliefs id based on
> >>>>>> White Supremacists and yet they are evolutionarily INFERIOR.
>
> >>>>> <b38938b8-e5d1-4043-a954-75ad04d3c...@b4g2000yql.googlegroups.com>,
> >>>>> "Ramon F. Herrera" <ra...@conexus.net> wrote:
>
> >>>>>> Are Conservatives biologically incapable of LEARNING???
>
> >>>>>> The funniest aspect is how their system of beliefs id based on
> >>>>>> White Supremacists and yet they are evolutionarily INFERIOR.
>
> >>>>> Ramon and H.L. Mencken, two of Mendels' Peas in a Pod.
>
>
> >>>>>> As a woman in politics, nothing makes me angrier than when
> >>>>>> Republicans make up outrageous claims to take away women's
> >>>>>> rights.
>
> >>>>>> Republicans make up outrageous claims to take away women's
> >>>>>> rights.
>
> >>>>> This should make us care...why again?
>
> >>>>>> Here's what just happened: The House Judiciary Committee -- full
> >>>>>> of Republican men -- voted to dramatically restrict women's
> >>>>>> access to reproductive health care.
>
> >>>>> No it didn't, you hysterical loon.
>
> >>>>>> Trent Franks, the author of the extreme measure, said that there
> >>>>>> should be NO exceptions for victims of rape and incest because
> >>>>>> "the incidence of rape resulting in pregnancy are very low."
>
> >>>>>> This isn't just a reprehensible and utterly false claim. It's
> >>>>>> dangerous.
>
> >>>>> Statistics and data would easily discredit the white Republican
> >>>>> mens' claim.
>
> >>>>> How many cases of pregnancies resulting from rapes are there?
>
>
> >>>>>> Here's what just happened: The House Judiciary Committee -- full
> >>>>>> of Republican men -- voted to dramatically restrict women's
> >>>>>> access to reproductive health care.
>
> >>>>> No it didn't, you hysterical loon.
>
> >>>>>> Trent Franks, the author of the extreme measure, said that there
> >>>>>> should be NO exceptions for victims of rape and incest because
> >>>>>> "the incidence of rape resulting in pregnancy are very low."
>
> >>>>>> This isn't just a reprehensible and utterly false claim. It's
> >>>>>> dangerous.
>
> >>>>> Statistics and data would easily discredit the white Republican
> >>>>> mens' claim.
>
> >>>>> How many cases of pregnancies resulting from rapes are there?
>
> >>>> Hard to say . . .
>
> >>> So you agree, there's no proof to discredit the claim "the
>
> >>> incidence of rape resulting in pregnancy are very low."
>
>
> >> Conclusion not supported by facts. Historically rape has been way
> >> under reported in part due to the actions of those to whom the rape
> >> is reported. Just look at the problems the DoD is facing.
> >> under reported in part due to the actions of those to whom the rape
>
> >> I work as a guardian ad litum in family court and with the foster
> >> program. In my experience with the system 1 in 10 rapes are
> >> reported. When they are even fewer are prosecuted.
>
> > So the problem isn't Republicans but it's the Government system that
> >> I work as a guardian ad litum in family court and with the foster
> >> program. In my experience with the system 1 in 10 rapes are
> >> reported. When they are even fewer are prosecuted.
>
> > allows for so many rapes?
>
> > This means that Abortions are a band-aid that hide the problem so that
> > you don't have to cut government programs that enhances the
> > opportunity for rapes resulting in pregnancy.
>
> > Cure the disease rather than relieving the symptoms.
>
> The problem is, anyone can take advantage of the "cure". A woman can get an
> abortion wheather she was raped or not. And today, they even day after drugs
> that will terminate pregnancies immediately after the fact. AQnd, even as we
> speak, opther drug companies are coming up with newer, cheaper, and more
> effective ones. Soon, they will be for sale at candy counter check-out lines
> just like the candy bars that they sell right now, and for much the same
> price. So you are pissing against a gale, and soon it will become a
> typhoon......
you can always move to countries were the women know their place,
they wear burka's.
Nickname unavailable
Jun 16, 2013, 8:03:53 PM6/16/13
to
Bill Graham
Jun 16, 2013, 9:07:55 PM6/16/13
to
equal work effectively in the society. Its OK for us men to kill the enemy,
but if women do it, it isn't somehow, "Ladylike". Even if they do it from
5000 miles away through a computer terminal. Why is this? Do you think they
won;t get into heaven because of their participation in this work? Is heaven
populated by mostly women because the warlike men all ended up in hell? And
if so, why would it matter? Do souls have sex? I claim thswt if cilling the
enemy is beneficial to men in our society, then it should also be equally
beneficial to the women. So they have the same responsibility to participate
in the effort. But then, I am an atheist, so I donlt believe in either
heaven or hell.
Bill Graham
Jun 16, 2013, 9:13:36 PM6/16/13
to
obsolete. Drones and other robots will do all the actual fighting for us,
and it won't matter who gives them their instructions, women or men.
Personally, I see nothing wrong with this. "They also serve who only stand
and wait", has become, "They also serve who only operate a computer
console."
deadrat
Jun 16, 2013, 9:44:05 PM6/16/13
to
worry their pretty little heads about things they don't understand.
>
> You aren't acquainted with real, total war, and let's hope you never do
> become acquainted with it.
Anyone can play Patton in cyberspace.
> You aren't acquainted with real, total war, and let's hope you never do
> become acquainted with it.
>
>
Scout
Jun 16, 2013, 10:15:56 PM6/16/13
to
news:kplgv0$h2t$2...@dont-email.me...
Sorry, but life is full of distractions. If you can't keep your mind on the
job whether it's a woman beside you or your friend telling you a joke, then
you shouldn't be in that job.
You're just looking for excuses to support a conclusion you've already
decided on.
Sorry, but women can, do and should serve in the military.......as long as
that individual is able to fulfill the requirements of their position, be it
intel analysis, combat fighter pilot, or grunt. No different requirements
for men or women, only those necessary for the job. If your job requires you
to take a 70 pound pack and do a 45 mile hike in a certain period of
time...THAT'S the goal you have to meet. If you can't, then you're not
qualified for that job.
If you can't keep your mind on the job regardless of any sort of
distractions when lives are at risk....then you're not right for that job. I
don't care if you're piloting a drone on a combat mission, patching an
artery or calling in a fire mission. If a person of the opposite sex in the
nude should start trying to make out with you, or a general is yelling in
your ear, or you found out the night before that your spouse is screwing
everything on two legs....then you should STILL be able to do your job.
Otherwise, get yourself a job where your inability to avoid distractions
won't get people killed.
If simply having a female beside you is enough to distract you....then you
clearly shouldn't be in a job where you have to remain focused, and I don't
care what that job is, civilian or military.
>> my issue is can that person
>> physically and mentally fulfill the necessary requirements for the job.
>> If
>> that means picking up your 200 pound team mate can carrying them to
>> safety...then you need to be able to do so.
>
> Well, there's that, but then everyone tells us there are other jobs in
> the military.
There are. I understand that women often make better pilots, they are
typically better at team work, concentration, multitasking, handling large
amounts of incoming information, etc
The question is do they have what it takes to fill the position? If they do,
then they should be able to. If they don't then they shouldn't be allowed
to. However, all this has to be determined on an individual basis.
>> If you job is flying a fighter,
>> then you need to be able to take the vertigo, g forces, and make the snap
>> judgements necessary for that job.
>
> Women are naturally (on average) superior to men in that instance. Their
> reaction times are slightly better too. There's a case to be made that
> women have superior decision making abilities in air combat situations
> as well.
Yep, on the flip side, most women would have a heck of a time doing what is
required of your average ground pounding grunt, but some could and if they
can they should be able to do so.
>> If you can't....then you don't need to be
>> in that job. Military or civilian. Personally, I think we should simply
>> make
>> our military fully co-ed. Sleep together, eat together, shower together,
>> etc. If you can't handle it then you're in the wrong job.
>
> That's never, ever, ever, ever been the point.
Ah, but it should. Duplication of facilities increases the logistical
burdens, decreases utilization ratios, and results in issues when it does
drop in the pot and you can't go behind a tree because you're too shy to
expose yourself to those around you. Now, in ground based permanent
facilities I think we should continue, but at the very least ALL boot camp
should be fully coed, and you demonstrate you can function in that
environment should it become necessary because your pretty little base as
been bombed flat and you have to start sharing the showers.
> Besides, it's easy to predict the outcome: an utterly unsurprising raise
> in sexual harassment cases, sexual assaults and rapes.
Yep, and those that can't control themselves need to be quickly eliminated
from the service.
> Have you ever trained a dog to allow you to place raw meat on his nose,
> and then not to eat it until you give him the command?
Yes.
> Why put a human male through that?
Because it's a job requirement.
> Because you don't mind risking a
> woman's life?
Why should I? You don't mind risking a man's life, do you?
Because, she may well have to deal with this risk if captured by the enemy.
If she can't accept the risk then she's in the wrong occupation.
> If you don't mind risking a woman's life, then you don't have a
> civilization.
Sorry, I don't see how allowing people to do what they are capable of, and
willing to do, means a lack of civilization.
I would tend to view the reverse to be uncivilized.
job whether it's a woman beside you or your friend telling you a joke, then
you shouldn't be in that job.
You're just looking for excuses to support a conclusion you've already
decided on.
Sorry, but women can, do and should serve in the military.......as long as
that individual is able to fulfill the requirements of their position, be it
intel analysis, combat fighter pilot, or grunt. No different requirements
for men or women, only those necessary for the job. If your job requires you
to take a 70 pound pack and do a 45 mile hike in a certain period of
time...THAT'S the goal you have to meet. If you can't, then you're not
qualified for that job.
If you can't keep your mind on the job regardless of any sort of
distractions when lives are at risk....then you're not right for that job. I
don't care if you're piloting a drone on a combat mission, patching an
artery or calling in a fire mission. If a person of the opposite sex in the
nude should start trying to make out with you, or a general is yelling in
your ear, or you found out the night before that your spouse is screwing
everything on two legs....then you should STILL be able to do your job.
Otherwise, get yourself a job where your inability to avoid distractions
won't get people killed.
If simply having a female beside you is enough to distract you....then you
clearly shouldn't be in a job where you have to remain focused, and I don't
care what that job is, civilian or military.
>> my issue is can that person
>> physically and mentally fulfill the necessary requirements for the job.
>> If
>> that means picking up your 200 pound team mate can carrying them to
>> safety...then you need to be able to do so.
>
> Well, there's that, but then everyone tells us there are other jobs in
> the military.
typically better at team work, concentration, multitasking, handling large
amounts of incoming information, etc
The question is do they have what it takes to fill the position? If they do,
then they should be able to. If they don't then they shouldn't be allowed
to. However, all this has to be determined on an individual basis.
>> If you job is flying a fighter,
>> then you need to be able to take the vertigo, g forces, and make the snap
>> judgements necessary for that job.
>
> Women are naturally (on average) superior to men in that instance. Their
> reaction times are slightly better too. There's a case to be made that
> women have superior decision making abilities in air combat situations
> as well.
required of your average ground pounding grunt, but some could and if they
can they should be able to do so.
>> If you can't....then you don't need to be
>> in that job. Military or civilian. Personally, I think we should simply
>> make
>> our military fully co-ed. Sleep together, eat together, shower together,
>> etc. If you can't handle it then you're in the wrong job.
>
> That's never, ever, ever, ever been the point.
burdens, decreases utilization ratios, and results in issues when it does
drop in the pot and you can't go behind a tree because you're too shy to
expose yourself to those around you. Now, in ground based permanent
facilities I think we should continue, but at the very least ALL boot camp
should be fully coed, and you demonstrate you can function in that
environment should it become necessary because your pretty little base as
been bombed flat and you have to start sharing the showers.
> Besides, it's easy to predict the outcome: an utterly unsurprising raise
> in sexual harassment cases, sexual assaults and rapes.
from the service.
> Have you ever trained a dog to allow you to place raw meat on his nose,
> and then not to eat it until you give him the command?
> Why put a human male through that?
> Because you don't mind risking a
> woman's life?
Because, she may well have to deal with this risk if captured by the enemy.
If she can't accept the risk then she's in the wrong occupation.
> If you don't mind risking a woman's life, then you don't have a
> civilization.
willing to do, means a lack of civilization.
I would tend to view the reverse to be uncivilized.
Neolibertarian
Jun 16, 2013, 10:20:56 PM6/16/13
to
In article <OuCdnZ0-9OtZ_yPM...@giganews.com>,
You'll never come to the point when you can conduct a war by drones.
That's not what's happening to today, and you're completely
misinterpreting the trend.
The trend in military history is quite clear.
That's not what's happening to today, and you're completely
misinterpreting the trend.
The trend in military history is quite clear.
Neolibertarian
Jun 16, 2013, 10:26:39 PM6/16/13
to
In article <JvKdnbguupR79CPM...@giganews.com>,
No one claimed anyone didn't understand, goofy, except you.
They removed logic from the curriculum at your peril.
Women have different roles in human society than men. Pretending
otherwise is dangerous on a whole host of levels.
It may not be "fair," whatever that means, but men are expendable to
civilization, women are not.
They removed logic from the curriculum at your peril.
Women have different roles in human society than men. Pretending
otherwise is dangerous on a whole host of levels.
It may not be "fair," whatever that means, but men are expendable to
civilization, women are not.
Scout
Jun 16, 2013, 10:29:49 PM6/16/13
to
news:kplhjt$h2t$3...@dont-email.me...
> Women at 18 are hardly much better at interpreting the signals and
> displays of males, either.
And yet, you think it's ok for men and women to work together in any other
occupation.
> It's a lot to ask of both sexes
Not really. Rather it's a result of our rather sick social concepts on
nudity, sex and even relationships.
> Especially when there's absolutely no
> compelling reason to introduce those burdens upon men who are already
> burdened enough.
Ah, so we should discriminate against women because you think men shouldn't
be asked to keep it in their pants at work?
>>
>> Taking "action" requires penalties----harsh ones.
>
> Just ask Julian Assange.
>>
>> The opposite of present military policy
>>
>> There isn;t 2 separate citizen groups in america-
>
> This may come as a shock, but there are, in fact, two sexes.
>
> Your social engineering doesn't seem capable of eliminating those
> differences.
I will simply ask you to contrast two things.
Your typical European beach in the summer vs your typical American beach in
the summer.
Now, which indicates a greater inability of men and women to deal with each
other without being distracted by sex?
Maybe we need some social engineering to combat the silly Puritanism about
nudity.
> In article <ketrr8p3co54e7tlg...@4ax.com>,
> Yoor...@Jurgis.net wrote:
>
>> On Sun, 16 Jun 2013 07:37:33 -0500, Neolibertarian
>> <cogn...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> >
>> >If you're a male between the ages of 17-28, or you can still remember
>> >being a male between the ages of 17-28, you can't convince me that, even
>> >in a room where soldiers are killing enemies on tv monitors, that having
>> >an attractive female of or about the same age group in the room isn't
>> >distracting.
>>
>> Being "distracted" doesn't require action.
>
> It does when you're 18. Believe it or not, not all males at that age or
> later are all that adept at understanding women in general, let alone
> the signals one might display in any given situation. Misinterpretation
> is an always present hazard.
Then such men should be paid off and told to find another job.
> Yoor...@Jurgis.net wrote:
>
>> On Sun, 16 Jun 2013 07:37:33 -0500, Neolibertarian
>> <cogn...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> >
>> >If you're a male between the ages of 17-28, or you can still remember
>> >being a male between the ages of 17-28, you can't convince me that, even
>> >in a room where soldiers are killing enemies on tv monitors, that having
>> >an attractive female of or about the same age group in the room isn't
>> >distracting.
>>
>> Being "distracted" doesn't require action.
>
> It does when you're 18. Believe it or not, not all males at that age or
> later are all that adept at understanding women in general, let alone
> the signals one might display in any given situation. Misinterpretation
> is an always present hazard.
> Women at 18 are hardly much better at interpreting the signals and
> displays of males, either.
occupation.
> It's a lot to ask of both sexes
nudity, sex and even relationships.
> Especially when there's absolutely no
> compelling reason to introduce those burdens upon men who are already
> burdened enough.
be asked to keep it in their pants at work?
>>
>> Taking "action" requires penalties----harsh ones.
>
> Just ask Julian Assange.
>>
>> The opposite of present military policy
>>
>> There isn;t 2 separate citizen groups in america-
>
> This may come as a shock, but there are, in fact, two sexes.
>
> Your social engineering doesn't seem capable of eliminating those
> differences.
Your typical European beach in the summer vs your typical American beach in
the summer.
Now, which indicates a greater inability of men and women to deal with each
other without being distracted by sex?
Maybe we need some social engineering to combat the silly Puritanism about
nudity.
Neolibertarian
Jun 16, 2013, 10:44:59 PM6/16/13
to
In article <u72dnffmuqLz_CPM...@giganews.com>,
No one is referring to abilities except you.
> Its OK for us men to kill the enemy,
> but if women do it, it isn't somehow, "Ladylike".
Killing is only half the equation of war, friend.
> Even if they do it from
> 5000 miles away through a computer terminal.
That's not war. It's not even the future of war.
> Why is this? Do you think they
> won;t get into heaven because of their participation in this work? Is heaven
> populated by mostly women because the warlike men all ended up in hell? And
> if so, why would it matter? Do souls have sex? I claim thswt if cilling the
> enemy is beneficial to men in our society, then it should also be equally
> beneficial to the women. So they have the same responsibility to participate
> in the effort. But then, I am an atheist, so I donlt believe in either
> heaven or hell.
You're an idiot, and I say that with all due respect.
You don't know what war is.
After WWI, France was near collapse. Of all the costs paid by all the
nations during that conflict, France had borne the greatest cost and
suffered the harshest sacrifices.
The rotting corpses of almost an entire generation lay dead in the mud
of Flanders in 1918. After the war, there were virtually no Frenchmen
left of military age. Of those Frenchmen between the ages of 18 and 35,
all were either dead, or their bodies horribly deformed and broken.
Demographers estimated that it should take at least four generations for
France to restore itself to pre-war population levels.
And yet in fact, it only took one generation for France to /surpass/ its
pre-war population levels.
Can you guess why?
> Its OK for us men to kill the enemy,
> but if women do it, it isn't somehow, "Ladylike".
> Even if they do it from
> 5000 miles away through a computer terminal.
> Why is this? Do you think they
> won;t get into heaven because of their participation in this work? Is heaven
> populated by mostly women because the warlike men all ended up in hell? And
> if so, why would it matter? Do souls have sex? I claim thswt if cilling the
> enemy is beneficial to men in our society, then it should also be equally
> beneficial to the women. So they have the same responsibility to participate
> in the effort. But then, I am an atheist, so I donlt believe in either
> heaven or hell.
You don't know what war is.
After WWI, France was near collapse. Of all the costs paid by all the
nations during that conflict, France had borne the greatest cost and
suffered the harshest sacrifices.
The rotting corpses of almost an entire generation lay dead in the mud
of Flanders in 1918. After the war, there were virtually no Frenchmen
left of military age. Of those Frenchmen between the ages of 18 and 35,
all were either dead, or their bodies horribly deformed and broken.
Demographers estimated that it should take at least four generations for
France to restore itself to pre-war population levels.
And yet in fact, it only took one generation for France to /surpass/ its
pre-war population levels.
Can you guess why?
deadrat
Jun 16, 2013, 10:53:26 PM6/16/13
to
think women are so important to civilization that they need to be
protected by men from making individual choices that are reserved for men.
Women love to hear men deciding on what's "fair" for "civilization."
That's because they know that they can't make up their minds for
themselves without putting "civilization" in peril.
Please, please keep making this argument until they understand. My
guess is that they'll understand so clearly that you'll want to repeal
the 19th Amendment.
Harold Burton
Jun 16, 2013, 10:56:54 PM6/16/13
to
In article <kplht8$h2t$4...@dont-email.me>,
hahahahahaha. Like you own a company. What BS, but feel free to tell
us what company you "own"
Leftard rule #1: lie, lie again, then lie about lying
Hahahahahahahahahahaahahahaha
Neolibertarian <cogn...@gmail.com> wrote:
> In article <ultrr89dsr62nu9ih...@4ax.com>,
> Yoor...@Jurgis.net wrote:
>
> > On Sun, 16 Jun 2013 12:28:57 -0400, BeamMeUpScotty
> > <ThenDestro...@blackhole.nebulax.com> wrote:
> >
> > >killing people all day gets tedious so you need some distractions....
> > >so what if you're getting a blow JOB in the closet when your buddies are
> > >yelling for some heavy support. You'll get to it, Clinton eventually
> > >won his war between his blow Jobs.
> >
> > Since a blowjob had nothing to do with any government related
> > issue---what's your point?
> >
> > Oh---sorry
> >
> > You fuckwits still can't believe you got that shoved up your ass too,
> > right?
> >
> > Re-living the shame of being whipped requires you to remember it year
> > after year.
> >
> > GOOD !!
>
> If the man I hire to run my company . . .
> In article <ultrr89dsr62nu9ih...@4ax.com>,
> Yoor...@Jurgis.net wrote:
>
> > On Sun, 16 Jun 2013 12:28:57 -0400, BeamMeUpScotty
> > <ThenDestro...@blackhole.nebulax.com> wrote:
> >
> > >killing people all day gets tedious so you need some distractions....
> > >so what if you're getting a blow JOB in the closet when your buddies are
> > >yelling for some heavy support. You'll get to it, Clinton eventually
> > >won his war between his blow Jobs.
> >
> > Since a blowjob had nothing to do with any government related
> > issue---what's your point?
> >
> > Oh---sorry
> >
> > You fuckwits still can't believe you got that shoved up your ass too,
> > right?
> >
> > Re-living the shame of being whipped requires you to remember it year
> > after year.
> >
> > GOOD !!
>
hahahahahaha. Like you own a company. What BS, but feel free to tell
us what company you "own"
Leftard rule #1: lie, lie again, then lie about lying
Hahahahahahahahahahaahahahaha
Harold Burton
Jun 16, 2013, 11:00:00 PM6/16/13
to
In article
<6e1dcfc4-b898-425e...@v2g2000yqa.googlegroups.com>,
snicker
<6e1dcfc4-b898-425e...@v2g2000yqa.googlegroups.com>,
Nickname unavailable <video61%tcq...@gtempaccount.com> wrote:
> why can't "CONSERVATIVES" understand that rape is a crime
Same reason Bill Clinton couldn't?
> why can't "CONSERVATIVES" understand that rape is a crime
snicker
Harold Burton
Jun 16, 2013, 11:01:46 PM6/16/13
to
In article
<d3369b93-1a38-433e...@o8g2000yqa.googlegroups.com>,
for them.
<d3369b93-1a38-433e...@o8g2000yqa.googlegroups.com>,
Nickname unavailable <video61%tcq...@gtempaccount.com> wrote:
> move to northern idaho, you will find lots of like mined people:)))
yeah, we're always in search of "like mined" people. But ya gotta dig
> move to northern idaho, you will find lots of like mined people:)))
for them.
Harold Burton
Jun 16, 2013, 11:07:10 PM6/16/13
to
Scout
Jun 16, 2013, 11:39:29 PM6/16/13
to
news:kplsu1$aks$1...@dont-email.me...
Well you certainly don't want to talk about abilities or it might undermine
your whole sexist argument.
>> Its OK for us men to kill the enemy,
>> but if women do it, it isn't somehow, "Ladylike".
>
> Killing is only half the equation of war, friend.
So what part do you consider unladylike?
>> Even if they do it from
>> 5000 miles away through a computer terminal.
>
> That's not war. It's not even the future of war.
Really? Drones aren't in the future of war?
Then why are they being used in that role?
So what you're telling us is that woman should stay home and make baby.
Is that about it?
your whole sexist argument.
>> Its OK for us men to kill the enemy,
>> but if women do it, it isn't somehow, "Ladylike".
>
> Killing is only half the equation of war, friend.
>> Even if they do it from
>> 5000 miles away through a computer terminal.
>
> That's not war. It's not even the future of war.
Then why are they being used in that role?
Is that about it?
Bill Graham
Jun 17, 2013, 1:03:50 AM6/17/13
to
a way of life. You are going to have a hell of a time stopping them, so you
better get used to it.
Message has been deleted
deadrat
Jun 17, 2013, 1:38:06 AM6/17/13
to
Frenchmen died in World War I. When the war started, there were 8.7M
men of military age (20-50). Maybe 6M men between 20 and 40. 8.5M men
of military age served. You do the math.
> After the war, there were virtually no Frenchmen left of military age.
there were no Frenchmen of military left on armistice day. Over 300K
French baby boys were born in 1900. A small fraction of them died
during the war, few as military casualties, and the survivors turned 18
when World War I ended. The census of 1930 shows over 200K Frenchmen
for each year of military age during the war.
Go here:
http://www.usc.edu/schools/business/FBE/seminars/papers/M_3-2-12_VANDENBROUCKE.pdf
> Of those Frenchmen between the ages of 18 and 35,
> all were either dead, or their bodies horribly deformed and broken.
<snip/>
deadrat
Jun 17, 2013, 1:51:42 AM6/17/13
to
that he wouldn't take no for an answer.
Bill Graham
Jun 17, 2013, 2:09:24 AM6/17/13
to
have said never in the past, and have since been proven wrong. Several of
them have said it to me, and I have seen them proved wrong in my lifetime.
And I am talking about physicists and pepople with PhD's.
Bill Graham
Jun 17, 2013, 2:14:10 AM6/17/13
to
change and seem to be willing to take their chances in a, "man's world". And
I, for one, say "Go get 'em, baby!"
Bill Graham
Jun 17, 2013, 2:22:45 AM6/17/13
to
modern military? For one thing, they already are, and there is nothing you
can do about it, so you are pissing against a very strong wind which is fast
becoming a gale.
Bill Graham
Jun 17, 2013, 2:25:27 AM6/17/13
to
rape than liberals. I doubt if the police ask whether a convicted rapist is
a conservative or a liberal. Why would or should they care?
Bill Graham
Jun 17, 2013, 2:28:58 AM6/17/13
to
as are the men. After all, it doesn't take a hell of a lot of strength to
fire a gun, and their eyesight is just as good. Why would anyone think they
are less capable than men at it?
Joe Cooper
Jun 17, 2013, 12:43:42 PM6/17/13
to
Nickname unavailable <video61%tcq...@gtempaccount.com> wrote in
news:6e1dcfc4-b898-425e...@v2g2000yqa.googlegroups.com:
> why can't "CONSERVATIVES" understand that rape is a crime. i do
> believe "CONSERVATIVES" are incapable of know right from wrong. you
> are not a constitutionalist, you rank up there with marvin the
> martian, a true dimwit.
I am a conservative, and rape is indeed a crime, but thanks for playing.
--
Enjoy Internet Privacy And Anonymity: http://hidemyass.com/vpn/r6995:5/
Loathing of the religious right becomes an end in itself, a consuming
passion. Liberals denouce Christian conservatives for being moralistic,
for imposing their morality on others, for not separating morality from
politics, and for bringing religious zeal to public life--and then work
themselves into a frothing frenzy of righteous, moralistic zeal over
their own moral excellence for being so rational, calm, and detached.
One is reminded of the sadistic moralists from Dickens novels, who latch
on to the idea that whipping is good for the child, so they can beat the
news:6e1dcfc4-b898-425e...@v2g2000yqa.googlegroups.com:
> why can't "CONSERVATIVES" understand that rape is a crime. i do
> believe "CONSERVATIVES" are incapable of know right from wrong. you
> are not a constitutionalist, you rank up there with marvin the
> martian, a true dimwit.
I am a conservative, and rape is indeed a crime, but thanks for playing.
--
Enjoy Internet Privacy And Anonymity: http://hidemyass.com/vpn/r6995:5/
Loathing of the religious right becomes an end in itself, a consuming
passion. Liberals denouce Christian conservatives for being moralistic,
for imposing their morality on others, for not separating morality from
politics, and for bringing religious zeal to public life--and then work
themselves into a frothing frenzy of righteous, moralistic zeal over
their own moral excellence for being so rational, calm, and detached.
One is reminded of the sadistic moralists from Dickens novels, who latch
on to the idea that whipping is good for the child, so they can beat the
BeamMeUpScotty
Jun 17, 2013, 3:46:30 PM6/17/13
to
>>>>>> In article <COOdnVcBitKEoSPM...@giganews.com>,
>>>>>> "Bill Graham" <we...@comcast.net> wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> In the corporate world, this distraction can usually be
>>>>>>>> considered a wash. The distraction, the various negative
>>>>>>>> effects on office morale the opposite sex may bring can be
>>>>>>>> offset by several factors, not the least of which are the
>>>>>>>> skills and abilities the persons of opposite sex may bring to
>>>>>>>> the table.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> But the purpose of a corporation is completely different from
>>>>>>>> the purpose of the military.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> And war is not conducted from inside a room full of tv monitors.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> But a little distraction can't be helped.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Distractions get you killed in war.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> It is not an excuse for relegating
>>>>>>> all women to a kitchen somewhere in the Midwest, however.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> That's a pretty silly straw woman argument.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I worked at a job
>>>>>>> where men and women operated a huge multi million dollar high
>>>>>>> energy research machine.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> That's not even close to the military's mission.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> We were not any different in our ability to operate the
>>>>>>> machine, and the difference in sex dodn't bother us at all. We
>>>>>>> even used the
>>>>>>> same foul language and laughed at the same dirty jokes.
Did she pee in a jar inside that tank or was she stopping for direction
and a piss break?
BeamMeUpScotty
Jun 17, 2013, 3:50:12 PM6/17/13
to
they report them to the IRS where the Conservatives can really be in
trouble.
BeamMeUpScotty
Jun 17, 2013, 3:51:04 PM6/17/13
to
Harold Burton
Jun 17, 2013, 5:30:03 PM6/17/13
to
deadrat
Jun 17, 2013, 6:13:28 PM6/17/13
to
Broaddrick has actually accused Clinton of raping her. Twenty years
after it supposedly happened, and given the passage of time, she
couldn't remember the day, month, or year in which it happened.
Of course, her only sworn testimony, given in an affidavit, says the
opposite.
She does have five people who claim that Broaddrick told them about the
rape at the time. Two of these are sisters, whose father was killed by
a man whose sentence Clinton commuted. And one was her husband, with
whom she was having an affair at the time.
Boraddrick says that Clinton gave her a bad bit on the lip, but her
husband at the time (the guy she was cheating on) says he doesn't
remember any such injury.
But, yeah, it's actually an accusation.
Message has been deleted
Harold Burton
Jun 17, 2013, 9:59:23 PM6/17/13
to
In article <oe5vr819e1jiectf7...@4ax.com>,
Yoor...@Jurgis.net wrote:
> On Mon, 17 Jun 2013 15:50:12 -0400, BeamMeUpScotty
> <ThenDestro...@blackhole.nebulax.com> wrote:
>
> >> I haven't seen any statistics that show Conservatives are more likely to
> >> rape than liberals. I doubt if the police ask whether a convicted rapist
> >> is a conservative or a liberal. Why would or should they care?
> >
> >
> >If they are a Conservative then the Liberal Union police get a bounty if
> >they report them to the IRS where the Conservatives can really be in
> >trouble.
> >
>
> Conservatives, by their idiotic beliefs and shitty "principles"---tend
> to blow pieces of themselves to shreds.
Just like DemocRATs.
snicker
Yoor...@Jurgis.net wrote:
> On Mon, 17 Jun 2013 15:50:12 -0400, BeamMeUpScotty
> <ThenDestro...@blackhole.nebulax.com> wrote:
>
> >> I haven't seen any statistics that show Conservatives are more likely to
> >> rape than liberals. I doubt if the police ask whether a convicted rapist
> >> is a conservative or a liberal. Why would or should they care?
> >
> >
> >If they are a Conservative then the Liberal Union police get a bounty if
> >they report them to the IRS where the Conservatives can really be in
> >trouble.
> >
>
> to blow pieces of themselves to shreds.
Just like DemocRATs.
snicker
Harold Burton
Jun 17, 2013, 10:01:24 PM6/17/13
to
In article <ydKdnWyZFKyVFyLM...@giganews.com>,
just like Anita Hill.
snicker
deadrat <a...@b.com> wrote:
> On 6/17/13 4:30 PM, Harold Burton wrote:
> > In article <hZqdnc6zSZVzPiPM...@giganews.com>,
> > deadrat <a...@b.com> wrote:
> >
> >> On 6/16/13 10:00 PM, Harold Burton wrote:
> >>> In article
> >>> <6e1dcfc4-b898-425e...@v2g2000yqa.googlegroups.com>,
> >>> Nickname unavailable <video61%tcq...@gtempaccount.com> wrote:
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>> why can't "CONSERVATIVES" understand that rape is a crime
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> Same reason Bill Clinton couldn't?
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> snicker
> >>
> >> Clinton may have been a horndog but there's never been an accusation
> >> that he wouldn't take no for an answer.
> >
> >
> > Juanita Broaddrick
>
> Yeah, I'm gonna have to go with an "I stand corrected" here because
> Broaddrick has actually accused Clinton of raping her. Twenty years
> after it supposedly happened . . .
> On 6/17/13 4:30 PM, Harold Burton wrote:
> > In article <hZqdnc6zSZVzPiPM...@giganews.com>,
> > deadrat <a...@b.com> wrote:
> >
> >> On 6/16/13 10:00 PM, Harold Burton wrote:
> >>> In article
> >>> <6e1dcfc4-b898-425e...@v2g2000yqa.googlegroups.com>,
> >>> Nickname unavailable <video61%tcq...@gtempaccount.com> wrote:
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>> why can't "CONSERVATIVES" understand that rape is a crime
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> Same reason Bill Clinton couldn't?
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> snicker
> >>
> >> Clinton may have been a horndog but there's never been an accusation
> >> that he wouldn't take no for an answer.
> >
> >
> > Juanita Broaddrick
>
> Yeah, I'm gonna have to go with an "I stand corrected" here because
> Broaddrick has actually accused Clinton of raping her. Twenty years
just like Anita Hill.
snicker
deadrat
Jun 17, 2013, 10:07:51 PM6/17/13
to
harassed, not raped. The only sworn testimony from Juanita Broaddrick
is that she wasn't raped.
So, no, not just like Anita Hill.
Bill Graham
Jun 18, 2013, 12:20:07 AM6/18/13
to
they work together very well, wwithout interferences caused by their
sexuality. In any case, you are setting yourself up for a lot of problems.
Women will do the jobs they are capable of, and want to do, and you aren't
going to stop it now.
Greegor
Jun 18, 2013, 12:23:23 AM6/18/13
to
BG > Its been my experience that when
BG > men and women conspire to get a job done,
Conspire?
BG > men and women conspire to get a job done,
Conspire?
Bill Graham
Jun 18, 2013, 12:23:29 AM6/18/13
to
world, most everyone is important to the society.
BeamMeUpScotty
Jun 18, 2013, 12:27:09 AM6/18/13
to
trust government.
BeamMeUpScotty
Jun 18, 2013, 12:29:30 AM6/18/13
to
We can work on it together or I can do it myself and get it done.
Nickname unavailable
Jun 18, 2013, 12:51:35 AM6/18/13
to
On Jun 16, 9:53 pm, deadrat <a...@b.com> wrote:
> On 6/16/13 9:26 PM, Neolibertarian wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> > In article <JvKdnbguupR79CPMnZ2dnUVZ_t6dn...@giganews.com>,
> >>> In article <COOdnVcBitKEoSPMnZ2dnUVZ5hadn...@giganews.com>,
noticing. lets hope they keep it up.
we are watching not only a demographic change, but a change related to
education: the party of rape and fetal ultrasounds, does not look to
good to the educated: virginia, a case study of red turning blue:)))
http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2013-06-18/virginia-losing-republican-grip-of-old-with-new-voters.html?cmpid=yhoo
Virginia Losing Republican Grip of Old With New Voters
By Michael Tackett - Jun 17, 2013 7:00 PM CT
The downtown in Leesburg, Virginia, offers a portrait of attachment to
the past. Federal-style buildings line the streets, and the courthouse
square features both a plaque commemorating a reading in 1776 of the
Declaration of Independence and a statute honoring Confederate
soldiers.
The picture is misleading.
The Loudoun County Courthouse stands in Leesburg, Virginia. Areas like
Leesburg used to be seen as discrete communities rather than part of a
larger metropolitan area, and the politics were predictably
Republican. Photographer: Tracy A. Woodward/The Washington Post via
Getty Images
Virginia's Lieutenant Governor Bill Bolling, a Republican who said his
party is becoming "too ideological" and stayed out the governor's race
because of that, said Republicans are on the wrong side of change.
Photographer: Alex Wong/Getty Images
A more accurate rendering reveals a downtown that gives way to
suburban growth that has made Loudoun County the wealthiest in the
U.S. Technology companies, many with ties to the federal government,
and other businesses fueled by the development have stoked an economy
attracting higher educated workers and minority populations that have
soared since 1990 -- a five-fold increase of Hispanics and seven times
the number of Asians.
Located 40 miles from Washington, D.C, Loudoun County is now
considered by White House officials to be one of the best bellwethers
for presidential elections. President Barack Obama won there in 2008,
the first Democrat to do so since Lyndon Johnson in 1964, and again in
2012, victories that signaled how shifting economic and population
trends are refashioning the politics of Virginia and the nation.
“We are seeing a solidly red state turn blue,” said Dustin Cable, a
demographer at the University of Virginia’s Weldon Cooper Center for
Public Service in Charlottesville. “Virginia is really ground zero for
a lot of what we see at the national level.”
Varying Forces
The forces of change in Virginia vary from that in other states where
shifting partisan preferences are driven by Hispanic population
growth. That’s because the Old Dominion is also seeing a rise in Asian
voters and in the number of residents with masters or doctorate
degrees. In the recent presidential and U.S. Senate races in the
state, Democrats also have been successful in winning over suburban
independent women and younger voters in the suburbs outside of
Washington.
Democrats have won because of the combination of the demographic
changes and the policy positions taken by Republicans on issues such
as immigration and abortion rights.
“It’s not just the change in demographics, it is the changing issue
matrix the party has decided to embrace,” said Tom Davis, a former
Republican congressman who represented counties in northern Virginia.
“The social and cultural agenda of the party does not play to these
educated people.”
Fetal Ultrasounds
On abortion, the state legislature stirred a national uproar in 2012
before amending a proposal that would have required doctors to do an
invasive transvaginal ultrasound before the procedure.
“If we are going to be the party of fetal ultrasound, then we are
going to have problems,” said Lieutenant Governor Bill Bolling, a
Republican, in an interview in his office in the capital of Richmond.
Republicans still control the state-level politics, holding majorities
in the legislature along with several county boards, including all
nine members in Loudoun County.
That power will be tested in November in the governor’s race between
Republican Ken Cuccinelli, the state attorney general, and Terry
McAuliffe, the former chairman of the Democratic National Committee.
Democrats have won seven of 10 of the top races -- president, governor
or U.S. Senator -- since 2001.
Bolling, who said his party is becoming “too ideological” and stayed
out the governor’s race because of that, said his partisan allies are
on the wrong side of change.
Republican Challenge
“One of the challenges the Republican Party faces in Virginia and a
lot of other swing states is how do we remain a conservative party but
still be able to appeal to these changing demographic patterns,”
Bolling said.
“I am a Republican. I am very concerned about the direction of the
Republican Party but I believe in the Republican Party. But I’m not a
happy Republican,” he said.
Growth among minorities is forecast to continue in Loudoun, to 16.7
percent by 2020 from 2.5 percent in 1990, according to University of
Virginia demographers. In adjacent Prince William County, the numbers
rise to almost 24.3 percent from 4.5 percent during the same period.
The Asian population in Loudoun is expected to rise to 17 percent in
2020 from 2.3 percent in 1990; in Prince William, to 9 percent from
2.9 percent.
“Very recently, we have seen a suburbanization of Hispanics and
Hispanic population growth,” Cable said. “The GOP might have a better
chance of appealing to these groups in the future, but in the next
four years to eight years it is going to benefit the Democratic Party
more.”
My Way
Bolling said his colleagues have done a poor job appealing to these
emerging voters, and instead have retreated into a party where “you
are persona non grata unless you agree with them 100 percent of the
way, 100 percent of the time. We’ve got to move beyond that.”
He declined a gubernatorial run after the state party decided to
nominate its candidate at a convention rather than in a primary,
ensuring that its most ideological partisans dominated the process.
“The organizational structure was taken over by the Tea Party groups
and Ron Paul types. They have taken the party in a direction that is
very troubling to me,” said Bolling, in a reference to the former
Texas U.S. House representative who sought the Republican presidential
nomination in 2008 and 2012.
Turnout Matters
Still, Bolling said, if turnout matches historical averages for a
governor’s race, Cuccinelli has a good chance of winning. In 2012, 3.8
million votes were cast in the presidential race, compared to 1.98
million in the last governor’s race, in 2009.
If it approaches the 75 percent level of a presidential year, Bolling
said, “McAuliffe would win in a landslide.”
The Virginia calendar for electing its statewide officials in odd-
numbered years that virtually ensures lower turnout than in
presidential or midterm elections was a product of the Democratic
organization put together by former governor and U.S. Senator Harry
Byrd, who was known for saying his state should offer “massive
resistance” to the desegregation of public schools.
Such themes as attacking government spending, which Republicans have
used to win over voters elsewhere, don’t resonate as much in northern
Virginia because both private and public employers rely on federal
spending. So far, mandatory budget cuts that began this year have done
little to harm the local economy.
Local Economy
“It is doing remarkably well in spite of the federal slowdown,” said
Stephen Fuller, director of the Center for Regional Analysis at
Fairfax, Virginia-based George Mason University. “The suburbs are
holding up better than I would have anticipated.”
Fuller said that in the eight Virginia counties closest to Washington,
the unemployment rate is 4 percent, compared to 7.5 percent
nationally. Among those eight counties, five are ranked in the top 10
wealthiest in the U.S.
In Loudoun, the median home price in May was $425,000, up 5 percent
from a year ago, according to Long & Foster Real Estate Inc. The
county, which is home to Dulles International Airport, is also a draw
for such technology companies as Orbital Sciences Corp. (ORB),
Raytheon Co. (RTN) and AOL Inc. (AOL) Obama carried Loudoun over
Republican Mitt Romney, 52 percent to 47 percent.
Loudoun and the other seven jurisdictions close to Washington all are
now trending Democratic, even as the state’s more rural areas are
becoming more Republican, said John McGlennon, chairman of the
government department at the University of William & Mary in
Williamsburg, Va.
Loudoun’s support for Obama ran counter to the national trend that
showed Romney winning among voters with incomes over $100,000, 54
percent to 44 percent, according to exit polls.
Educated Voters
“Democrats have been growing support among those with more than a
college education. The proportion of folks with post-graduate degrees
in Virginia is higher than the nation as a whole. That group has moved
most strongly for Democrats,” said McGlennon.
Areas such as Leesburg used to be seen as discrete communities rather
than part of larger metropolitan area, and the politics were
predictably Republican.
Immigrants from a generation ago might have come to these communities
for a job related to agriculture. Now they come to work in health
care, hospitality and consumer services -- along with technology --
changing housing patterns and incomes from those who came before. They
are also increasingly the target of voter registration efforts,
particularly among Democrats.
Davis, who was elected to the U.S. House in 1994 and served until
2008, said he has watched Democrats gain strength in the state’s most
populous region, as his own party has clung to issues he said are out
of step with voters.
“The answer is great candidates can make a difference, but the party
is not interested in great candidates,” he said.
> On 6/16/13 9:26 PM, Neolibertarian wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> > In article <JvKdnbguupR79CPMnZ2dnUVZ_t6dn...@giganews.com>,
> >>> In article <COOdnVcBitKEoSPMnZ2dnUVZ5hadn...@giganews.com>,
> >>> "Bill Graham" <w...@comcast.net> wrote:
>
> >>>>> In the corporate world, this distraction can usually be considered a
> >>>>> wash. The distraction, the various negative effects on office morale
> >>>>> the opposite sex may bring can be offset by several factors, not the
> >>>>> least of which are the skills and abilities the persons of opposite
> >>>>> sex may bring to the table.
>
> >>>>> But the purpose of a corporation is completely different from the
> >>>>> purpose of the military.
>
> >>>>> And war is not conducted from inside a room full of tv monitors.
>
> >>>> But a little distraction can't be helped.
>
> >>> Distractions get you killed in war.
>
> >>>> It is not an excuse for relegating
> >>>> all women to a kitchen somewhere in the Midwest, however.
>
> >>> That's a pretty silly straw woman argument.
>
> >>>> I worked at a job
> >>>> where men and women operated a huge multi million dollar high energy
> >>>> research machine.
>
> >>> That's not even close to the military's mission.
>
> >>>> We were not any different in our ability to operate the
> >>>> machine, and the difference in sex dodn't bother us at all. We even used
> >>>> the
> >>>> same foul language and laughed at the same dirty jokes.
>
>
> >>>>> In the corporate world, this distraction can usually be considered a
> >>>>> wash. The distraction, the various negative effects on office morale
> >>>>> the opposite sex may bring can be offset by several factors, not the
> >>>>> least of which are the skills and abilities the persons of opposite
> >>>>> sex may bring to the table.
>
> >>>>> But the purpose of a corporation is completely different from the
> >>>>> purpose of the military.
>
> >>>>> And war is not conducted from inside a room full of tv monitors.
>
> >>>> But a little distraction can't be helped.
>
> >>> Distractions get you killed in war.
>
> >>>> It is not an excuse for relegating
> >>>> all women to a kitchen somewhere in the Midwest, however.
>
> >>> That's a pretty silly straw woman argument.
>
> >>>> I worked at a job
> >>>> where men and women operated a huge multi million dollar high energy
> >>>> research machine.
>
> >>> That's not even close to the military's mission.
>
> >>>> We were not any different in our ability to operate the
> >>>> machine, and the difference in sex dodn't bother us at all. We even used
> >>>> the
> >>>> same foul language and laughed at the same dirty jokes.
>
> >>> Friend, just because you didn' get slapped with sexual harassment suits
> >>> doesn't mean that the above behavior wouldn't have fully warranted it.
>
> >>>> It wouldn;t have
> >>>> mattered to us if we were killing enemy combatants or operating a physics
> >>>> machine.
>
> >>> That's what you say...now.
>
> >>>> Why would you want to prevent women from doing a useful job that
> >>>> they both want to do and are educated to do?
>
> >>> Women are far too important to my civilization to risk their lives for
> >>> so little.
>
> >> Please keep telling women how precious they are and how they shouldn't
> >> worry their pretty little heads about things they don't understand.
>
> > No one claimed anyone didn't understand, goofy, except you.
>
> > They removed logic from the curriculum at your peril.
>
> > Women have different roles in human society than men. Pretending
> > otherwise is dangerous on a whole host of levels.
>
> > It may not be "fair," whatever that means, but men are expendable to
> > civilization, women are not.
>
> >>> doesn't mean that the above behavior wouldn't have fully warranted it.
>
> >>>> It wouldn;t have
> >>>> mattered to us if we were killing enemy combatants or operating a physics
> >>>> machine.
>
> >>> That's what you say...now.
>
> >>>> Why would you want to prevent women from doing a useful job that
> >>>> they both want to do and are educated to do?
>
> >>> Women are far too important to my civilization to risk their lives for
> >>> so little.
>
> >> Please keep telling women how precious they are and how they shouldn't
> >> worry their pretty little heads about things they don't understand.
>
> > No one claimed anyone didn't understand, goofy, except you.
>
> > They removed logic from the curriculum at your peril.
>
> > Women have different roles in human society than men. Pretending
> > otherwise is dangerous on a whole host of levels.
>
> > It may not be "fair," whatever that means, but men are expendable to
> > civilization, women are not.
>
> Please, please keep advancing this argument. Women love to hear how men
> think women are so important to civilization that they need to be
> protected by men from making individual choices that are reserved for men.
>
> Women love to hear men deciding on what's "fair" for "civilization."
> That's because they know that they can't make up their minds for
> themselves without putting "civilization" in peril.
>
> Please, please keep making this argument until they understand. My
> guess is that they'll understand so clearly that you'll want to repeal
> the 19th Amendment.
yep, as they double down on rape and ultrasounds, the educated are
> think women are so important to civilization that they need to be
> protected by men from making individual choices that are reserved for men.
>
> Women love to hear men deciding on what's "fair" for "civilization."
> That's because they know that they can't make up their minds for
> themselves without putting "civilization" in peril.
>
> Please, please keep making this argument until they understand. My
> guess is that they'll understand so clearly that you'll want to repeal
> the 19th Amendment.
noticing. lets hope they keep it up.
we are watching not only a demographic change, but a change related to
education: the party of rape and fetal ultrasounds, does not look to
good to the educated: virginia, a case study of red turning blue:)))
http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2013-06-18/virginia-losing-republican-grip-of-old-with-new-voters.html?cmpid=yhoo
Virginia Losing Republican Grip of Old With New Voters
By Michael Tackett - Jun 17, 2013 7:00 PM CT
The downtown in Leesburg, Virginia, offers a portrait of attachment to
the past. Federal-style buildings line the streets, and the courthouse
square features both a plaque commemorating a reading in 1776 of the
Declaration of Independence and a statute honoring Confederate
soldiers.
The picture is misleading.
The Loudoun County Courthouse stands in Leesburg, Virginia. Areas like
Leesburg used to be seen as discrete communities rather than part of a
larger metropolitan area, and the politics were predictably
Republican. Photographer: Tracy A. Woodward/The Washington Post via
Getty Images
Virginia's Lieutenant Governor Bill Bolling, a Republican who said his
party is becoming "too ideological" and stayed out the governor's race
because of that, said Republicans are on the wrong side of change.
Photographer: Alex Wong/Getty Images
A more accurate rendering reveals a downtown that gives way to
suburban growth that has made Loudoun County the wealthiest in the
U.S. Technology companies, many with ties to the federal government,
and other businesses fueled by the development have stoked an economy
attracting higher educated workers and minority populations that have
soared since 1990 -- a five-fold increase of Hispanics and seven times
the number of Asians.
Located 40 miles from Washington, D.C, Loudoun County is now
considered by White House officials to be one of the best bellwethers
for presidential elections. President Barack Obama won there in 2008,
the first Democrat to do so since Lyndon Johnson in 1964, and again in
2012, victories that signaled how shifting economic and population
trends are refashioning the politics of Virginia and the nation.
“We are seeing a solidly red state turn blue,” said Dustin Cable, a
demographer at the University of Virginia’s Weldon Cooper Center for
Public Service in Charlottesville. “Virginia is really ground zero for
a lot of what we see at the national level.”
Varying Forces
The forces of change in Virginia vary from that in other states where
shifting partisan preferences are driven by Hispanic population
growth. That’s because the Old Dominion is also seeing a rise in Asian
voters and in the number of residents with masters or doctorate
degrees. In the recent presidential and U.S. Senate races in the
state, Democrats also have been successful in winning over suburban
independent women and younger voters in the suburbs outside of
Washington.
Democrats have won because of the combination of the demographic
changes and the policy positions taken by Republicans on issues such
as immigration and abortion rights.
“It’s not just the change in demographics, it is the changing issue
matrix the party has decided to embrace,” said Tom Davis, a former
Republican congressman who represented counties in northern Virginia.
“The social and cultural agenda of the party does not play to these
educated people.”
Fetal Ultrasounds
On abortion, the state legislature stirred a national uproar in 2012
before amending a proposal that would have required doctors to do an
invasive transvaginal ultrasound before the procedure.
“If we are going to be the party of fetal ultrasound, then we are
going to have problems,” said Lieutenant Governor Bill Bolling, a
Republican, in an interview in his office in the capital of Richmond.
Republicans still control the state-level politics, holding majorities
in the legislature along with several county boards, including all
nine members in Loudoun County.
That power will be tested in November in the governor’s race between
Republican Ken Cuccinelli, the state attorney general, and Terry
McAuliffe, the former chairman of the Democratic National Committee.
Democrats have won seven of 10 of the top races -- president, governor
or U.S. Senator -- since 2001.
Bolling, who said his party is becoming “too ideological” and stayed
out the governor’s race because of that, said his partisan allies are
on the wrong side of change.
Republican Challenge
“One of the challenges the Republican Party faces in Virginia and a
lot of other swing states is how do we remain a conservative party but
still be able to appeal to these changing demographic patterns,”
Bolling said.
“I am a Republican. I am very concerned about the direction of the
Republican Party but I believe in the Republican Party. But I’m not a
happy Republican,” he said.
Growth among minorities is forecast to continue in Loudoun, to 16.7
percent by 2020 from 2.5 percent in 1990, according to University of
Virginia demographers. In adjacent Prince William County, the numbers
rise to almost 24.3 percent from 4.5 percent during the same period.
The Asian population in Loudoun is expected to rise to 17 percent in
2020 from 2.3 percent in 1990; in Prince William, to 9 percent from
2.9 percent.
“Very recently, we have seen a suburbanization of Hispanics and
Hispanic population growth,” Cable said. “The GOP might have a better
chance of appealing to these groups in the future, but in the next
four years to eight years it is going to benefit the Democratic Party
more.”
My Way
Bolling said his colleagues have done a poor job appealing to these
emerging voters, and instead have retreated into a party where “you
are persona non grata unless you agree with them 100 percent of the
way, 100 percent of the time. We’ve got to move beyond that.”
He declined a gubernatorial run after the state party decided to
nominate its candidate at a convention rather than in a primary,
ensuring that its most ideological partisans dominated the process.
“The organizational structure was taken over by the Tea Party groups
and Ron Paul types. They have taken the party in a direction that is
very troubling to me,” said Bolling, in a reference to the former
Texas U.S. House representative who sought the Republican presidential
nomination in 2008 and 2012.
Turnout Matters
Still, Bolling said, if turnout matches historical averages for a
governor’s race, Cuccinelli has a good chance of winning. In 2012, 3.8
million votes were cast in the presidential race, compared to 1.98
million in the last governor’s race, in 2009.
If it approaches the 75 percent level of a presidential year, Bolling
said, “McAuliffe would win in a landslide.”
The Virginia calendar for electing its statewide officials in odd-
numbered years that virtually ensures lower turnout than in
presidential or midterm elections was a product of the Democratic
organization put together by former governor and U.S. Senator Harry
Byrd, who was known for saying his state should offer “massive
resistance” to the desegregation of public schools.
Such themes as attacking government spending, which Republicans have
used to win over voters elsewhere, don’t resonate as much in northern
Virginia because both private and public employers rely on federal
spending. So far, mandatory budget cuts that began this year have done
little to harm the local economy.
Local Economy
“It is doing remarkably well in spite of the federal slowdown,” said
Stephen Fuller, director of the Center for Regional Analysis at
Fairfax, Virginia-based George Mason University. “The suburbs are
holding up better than I would have anticipated.”
Fuller said that in the eight Virginia counties closest to Washington,
the unemployment rate is 4 percent, compared to 7.5 percent
nationally. Among those eight counties, five are ranked in the top 10
wealthiest in the U.S.
In Loudoun, the median home price in May was $425,000, up 5 percent
from a year ago, according to Long & Foster Real Estate Inc. The
county, which is home to Dulles International Airport, is also a draw
for such technology companies as Orbital Sciences Corp. (ORB),
Raytheon Co. (RTN) and AOL Inc. (AOL) Obama carried Loudoun over
Republican Mitt Romney, 52 percent to 47 percent.
Loudoun and the other seven jurisdictions close to Washington all are
now trending Democratic, even as the state’s more rural areas are
becoming more Republican, said John McGlennon, chairman of the
government department at the University of William & Mary in
Williamsburg, Va.
Loudoun’s support for Obama ran counter to the national trend that
showed Romney winning among voters with incomes over $100,000, 54
percent to 44 percent, according to exit polls.
Educated Voters
“Democrats have been growing support among those with more than a
college education. The proportion of folks with post-graduate degrees
in Virginia is higher than the nation as a whole. That group has moved
most strongly for Democrats,” said McGlennon.
Areas such as Leesburg used to be seen as discrete communities rather
than part of larger metropolitan area, and the politics were
predictably Republican.
Immigrants from a generation ago might have come to these communities
for a job related to agriculture. Now they come to work in health
care, hospitality and consumer services -- along with technology --
changing housing patterns and incomes from those who came before. They
are also increasingly the target of voter registration efforts,
particularly among Democrats.
Davis, who was elected to the U.S. House in 1994 and served until
2008, said he has watched Democrats gain strength in the state’s most
populous region, as his own party has clung to issues he said are out
of step with voters.
“The answer is great candidates can make a difference, but the party
is not interested in great candidates,” he said.
Nickname unavailable
Jun 18, 2013, 12:52:19 AM6/18/13
to
On Jun 16, 9:56 pm, Harold Burton <hal.i.bur...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> In article <kplht8$h2...@dont-email.me>,
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> Neolibertarian <cognac...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > In article <ultrr89dsr62nu9ih5bt4pdqmbg64ik...@4ax.com>,
> > Yoorg...@Jurgis.net wrote:
>
> > > On Sun, 16 Jun 2013 12:28:57 -0400, BeamMeUpScotty
> > > <ThenDestroyEveryth...@blackhole.nebulax.com> wrote:
>
> > > >killing people all day gets tedious so you need some distractions....
> > > >so what if you're getting a blow JOB in the closet when your buddies are
> > > >yelling for some heavy support. You'll get to it, Clinton eventually
> > > >won his war between his blow Jobs.
>
> > > Since a blowjob had nothing to do with any government related
> > > issue---what's your point?
>
> > > Oh---sorry
>
> > > You fuckwits still can't believe you got that shoved up your ass too,
> > > right?
>
> > > Re-living the shame of being whipped requires you to remember it year
> > > after year.
>
> > > GOOD !!
>
> > If the man I hire to run my company . . .
>
> hahahahahaha. Like you own a company. What BS, but feel free to tell
> us what company you "own"
>
> Leftard rule #1: lie, lie again, then lie about lying
>
> Hahahahahahahahahahaahahahaha
when are you going to apologize for calling our WWII vets war
criminals.
https://groups.google.com/group/alt.politics.economics/browse_thread/thread/8455997cbba5630d/e891055dbf97c108?hl=en&q=Harold+Burton++world+war+two&lnk=ol&
Harold Burton
View profile
More options May 19, 8:14 pm
In article
<90d4c035-5a00-4dc5-b0c5-3b981dc6d...@s9g2000pbc.googlegroups.com>,
Bret Cahill <BretCah...@peoplepc.com> wrote:
- Show quoted text -
Well doh. Democrat FDR proved that in the 40s when he firebombed
thousands of innocent women and children in Dresden, Tokyo and
numerous
other cities.
snicker
you were responded to promptly by a patriot.
https://groups.google.com/group/alt.politics.economics/browse_thread/thread/8455997cbba5630d/b08042a9da25f19f?hl=en&q=Harold+Burton++world+war+two&lnk=nl&
While It's ALWAYS DISconcerting To Encounter a HOPELESS IGNORAMUS,
it is Conversely, a GREAT PLEASURE To Illustrate - And Hopefully
DISSIPATE - The HARM of The DEPENDABLY, Self-Serving, Fact-
INTOLERANT, Delusional And INTRACTABLE IGNORANCE of such Notable
RighTARDS as "Harold Burton"...
THUS: The Rationale For AND Decision To Bomb [FIRST With High-
Explosives, THEN With Incendiaries] Dresden [Among OTHER High-Value
Targets] Was a - Waaaaait Forrr Iiiiiit - *British* Undertaking...
FDR's Involvement being Limited To his Administration's LONG-Standing
Acquiescence To Placing [American] Eighth Air Force assets At The
Disposal Of British Air Marshalls... As Would Be Expected Of a GOOD
War-Time Ally...
ERGO: *The British* Bombed Dresden [Among OTHER High-Value
Targets] employing Combined Military Assets of British and American
Forces... The *British* FIRST Low-Level Attacking at *Night*, Per
British Strategy; American Forces [Under *British* Command] High-
Level Attacking by Next Daylight...
ERGO - The Sequel: CONTRARY To Harold The RighTARD's HOPELESSLY
IGNORANT And Self-Serving, Ignoramus-Speak Blather, FDR had LITTLE OR
NOTHING To Do With The Bombing Of Dresden and Most Likely, Wasn't
Even Aware that The British High Command had Determined To Bomb
Several East German Cities, In Aid Of The Burgeoning Russian
Advance...
even after knowing the slaughter of americans in the Philippines,
and all of the other atrocities commited by them, they would have to
be worn down, as they tried to do to us.
and here is your response, you defended the nazis, and now you defend
the imperialists japanese.
https://groups.google.com/group/alt.politics.economics/browse_thread/thread/8455997cbba5630d/b08042a9da25f19f?hl=en&q=Harold+Burton++world+war+two&lnk=nl&
The CiC takes ultimate responsibility for what our armed services do.
The buck stopped at FDR's desk.
> . . . .and Most Likely, Wasn't Even
> Aware that The British High Command had Determined To Bomb Several
> East German Cities, In Aid Of The Burgeoning Russian Advance...
Hahahahahahahahahaha. Now THAT's even funnier.
I also notice you did your best to ignore the firebombing of
Tokyo . . . and Osaka . . . and Kobe . . . and Fukuoka . . . and,
oh hell just check out http://www.ditext.com/japan/napalm.html. How
are you going to blame that on the Brits?
then i demanded a apology,
https://groups.google.com/group/alt.politics.economics/browse_thread/thread/8455997cbba5630d/b08042a9da25f19f?hl=en&q=Harold+Burton++world+war+two&lnk=nl&
and he owes WWII vets a apology.
you said,
Just as you owe sentient beings an apology
Hahahahahahahahahahah
you sir are not only a liar, but a unpatriotic one at that.
and you added this recently
https://groups.google.com/group/alt.politics.economics/browse_thread/thread/3803f1d64d8e4b45/5d73a1560313be84?hl=en&
. . . and deliberately targeting and murdering civilians.
snicker
> In article <kplht8$h2...@dont-email.me>,
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> Neolibertarian <cognac...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > In article <ultrr89dsr62nu9ih5bt4pdqmbg64ik...@4ax.com>,
> > Yoorg...@Jurgis.net wrote:
>
> > > On Sun, 16 Jun 2013 12:28:57 -0400, BeamMeUpScotty
> > > <ThenDestroyEveryth...@blackhole.nebulax.com> wrote:
>
> > > >killing people all day gets tedious so you need some distractions....
> > > >so what if you're getting a blow JOB in the closet when your buddies are
> > > >yelling for some heavy support. You'll get to it, Clinton eventually
> > > >won his war between his blow Jobs.
>
> > > Since a blowjob had nothing to do with any government related
> > > issue---what's your point?
>
> > > Oh---sorry
>
> > > You fuckwits still can't believe you got that shoved up your ass too,
> > > right?
>
> > > Re-living the shame of being whipped requires you to remember it year
> > > after year.
>
> > > GOOD !!
>
> > If the man I hire to run my company . . .
>
> hahahahahaha. Like you own a company. What BS, but feel free to tell
> us what company you "own"
>
> Leftard rule #1: lie, lie again, then lie about lying
>
> Hahahahahahahahahahaahahahaha
when are you going to apologize for calling our WWII vets war
criminals.
https://groups.google.com/group/alt.politics.economics/browse_thread/thread/8455997cbba5630d/e891055dbf97c108?hl=en&q=Harold+Burton++world+war+two&lnk=ol&
Harold Burton
View profile
More options May 19, 8:14 pm
In article
<90d4c035-5a00-4dc5-b0c5-3b981dc6d...@s9g2000pbc.googlegroups.com>,
Bret Cahill <BretCah...@peoplepc.com> wrote:
- Show quoted text -
Well doh. Democrat FDR proved that in the 40s when he firebombed
thousands of innocent women and children in Dresden, Tokyo and
numerous
other cities.
snicker
you were responded to promptly by a patriot.
https://groups.google.com/group/alt.politics.economics/browse_thread/thread/8455997cbba5630d/b08042a9da25f19f?hl=en&q=Harold+Burton++world+war+two&lnk=nl&
While It's ALWAYS DISconcerting To Encounter a HOPELESS IGNORAMUS,
it is Conversely, a GREAT PLEASURE To Illustrate - And Hopefully
DISSIPATE - The HARM of The DEPENDABLY, Self-Serving, Fact-
INTOLERANT, Delusional And INTRACTABLE IGNORANCE of such Notable
RighTARDS as "Harold Burton"...
THUS: The Rationale For AND Decision To Bomb [FIRST With High-
Explosives, THEN With Incendiaries] Dresden [Among OTHER High-Value
Targets] Was a - Waaaaait Forrr Iiiiiit - *British* Undertaking...
FDR's Involvement being Limited To his Administration's LONG-Standing
Acquiescence To Placing [American] Eighth Air Force assets At The
Disposal Of British Air Marshalls... As Would Be Expected Of a GOOD
War-Time Ally...
ERGO: *The British* Bombed Dresden [Among OTHER High-Value
Targets] employing Combined Military Assets of British and American
Forces... The *British* FIRST Low-Level Attacking at *Night*, Per
British Strategy; American Forces [Under *British* Command] High-
Level Attacking by Next Daylight...
ERGO - The Sequel: CONTRARY To Harold The RighTARD's HOPELESSLY
IGNORANT And Self-Serving, Ignoramus-Speak Blather, FDR had LITTLE OR
NOTHING To Do With The Bombing Of Dresden and Most Likely, Wasn't
Even Aware that The British High Command had Determined To Bomb
Several East German Cities, In Aid Of The Burgeoning Russian
Advance...
even after knowing the slaughter of americans in the Philippines,
and all of the other atrocities commited by them, they would have to
be worn down, as they tried to do to us.
and here is your response, you defended the nazis, and now you defend
the imperialists japanese.
https://groups.google.com/group/alt.politics.economics/browse_thread/thread/8455997cbba5630d/b08042a9da25f19f?hl=en&q=Harold+Burton++world+war+two&lnk=nl&
The CiC takes ultimate responsibility for what our armed services do.
The buck stopped at FDR's desk.
> . . . .and Most Likely, Wasn't Even
> Aware that The British High Command had Determined To Bomb Several
> East German Cities, In Aid Of The Burgeoning Russian Advance...
Hahahahahahahahahaha. Now THAT's even funnier.
I also notice you did your best to ignore the firebombing of
Tokyo . . . and Osaka . . . and Kobe . . . and Fukuoka . . . and,
oh hell just check out http://www.ditext.com/japan/napalm.html. How
are you going to blame that on the Brits?
then i demanded a apology,
https://groups.google.com/group/alt.politics.economics/browse_thread/thread/8455997cbba5630d/b08042a9da25f19f?hl=en&q=Harold+Burton++world+war+two&lnk=nl&
and he owes WWII vets a apology.
you said,
Just as you owe sentient beings an apology
Hahahahahahahahahahah
you sir are not only a liar, but a unpatriotic one at that.
and you added this recently
https://groups.google.com/group/alt.politics.economics/browse_thread/thread/3803f1d64d8e4b45/5d73a1560313be84?hl=en&
. . . and deliberately targeting and murdering civilians.
snicker
Nickname unavailable
Jun 18, 2013, 12:52:47 AM6/18/13
to
> <6e1dcfc4-b898-425e-b955-e7b97969d...@v2g2000yqa.googlegroups.com>,
> Nickname unavailable <video61%tcq....@gtempaccount.com> wrote:
>
> > why can't "CONSERVATIVES" understand that rape is a crime
>
> Same reason Bill Clinton couldn't?
>
> snicker
clinton raped monica?
>
> > why can't "CONSERVATIVES" understand that rape is a crime
>
> Same reason Bill Clinton couldn't?
>
> snicker
Nickname unavailable
Jun 18, 2013, 12:53:45 AM6/18/13
to
> <d3369b93-1a38-433e-a323-7a334d591...@o8g2000yqa.googlegroups.com>,
> Nickname unavailable <video61%tcq....@gtempaccount.com> wrote:
>
> > move to northern idaho, you will find lots of like mined people:)))
>
> yeah, we're always in search of "like mined" people. But ya gotta dig
> for them.
>
> Laugh . . . laugh . . . laugh
they think america was on the wrong side of WWII, like you, like
minded:))))
> Nickname unavailable <video61%tcq....@gtempaccount.com> wrote:
>
> > move to northern idaho, you will find lots of like mined people:)))
>
> yeah, we're always in search of "like mined" people. But ya gotta dig
> for them.
>
> Laugh . . . laugh . . . laugh
they think america was on the wrong side of WWII, like you, like
minded:))))
Greegor
Jun 18, 2013, 1:09:43 AM6/18/13
to
BMUS > I would have said we're all expendable
BMUS > to society, which is why we can't
BMUS > trust government.
The first part is not much different from
what the socialist founding fathers of
social work in the early USA actually
did say!
I vaguely recall that there were some
old US high court rulings that said
some really rotten stuff was OK
because of society's need for
workers and soldiers.
I don't remember if they approved of
rape or what the idiocy was, but the
imperative about workers and soldiers
was stunningly Nazi like.
But don't forget that that while Eugenics
was invented in England, several
US industrialists paid money to spread
it around the world, noteably to Germany.
Before WW2 Hitler actually wrote of his
admiration for US Eugenicists.
They may have actually picked up the
Hackencruz from US socialists.
Science and technology became
like a huge cult RELIGION in that era,
and the Nazi's idolized the USA
on that score. Eugenics still
lives on when ""social workers"" have
anything to say about the sex lives
of retarded or psychiatric "clients".
I used to hear stories about how
the Nazis and the USA were so
extremely different from each other,
but as time has marched on this
myth has worn very thin.
The USA was not as extremely
different from Nazi Germany as
USA citizens have deluded ourselves
into thinking.
The story of that shipload of Jews
that we turned away during the war
reveals an awful lot about our true character.
After the war, most Americans viewed
the war with an aire of superiority
as if we were so very different from
those bad Nazi's.
The Nazi's even had a famous Judge,
Roland Friesler, who was an impeccable
legal mind, a world class "jurist" yet he
was downright enthusiastic about sending
thousands to death camps.
He dotted his i's and crossed his t's
in perfect legal form! A perfect bureaucrat!
Had a bomb not fallen on his head
I suppose the USA would be more familiar
with him from the Nuremberg trials,
or the mystery stories from
Brazil or Argentina.
BMUS > to society, which is why we can't
BMUS > trust government.
The first part is not much different from
what the socialist founding fathers of
social work in the early USA actually
did say!
I vaguely recall that there were some
old US high court rulings that said
some really rotten stuff was OK
because of society's need for
workers and soldiers.
I don't remember if they approved of
rape or what the idiocy was, but the
imperative about workers and soldiers
was stunningly Nazi like.
But don't forget that that while Eugenics
was invented in England, several
US industrialists paid money to spread
it around the world, noteably to Germany.
Before WW2 Hitler actually wrote of his
admiration for US Eugenicists.
They may have actually picked up the
Hackencruz from US socialists.
Science and technology became
like a huge cult RELIGION in that era,
and the Nazi's idolized the USA
on that score. Eugenics still
lives on when ""social workers"" have
anything to say about the sex lives
of retarded or psychiatric "clients".
I used to hear stories about how
the Nazis and the USA were so
extremely different from each other,
but as time has marched on this
myth has worn very thin.
The USA was not as extremely
different from Nazi Germany as
USA citizens have deluded ourselves
into thinking.
The story of that shipload of Jews
that we turned away during the war
reveals an awful lot about our true character.
After the war, most Americans viewed
the war with an aire of superiority
as if we were so very different from
those bad Nazi's.
The Nazi's even had a famous Judge,
Roland Friesler, who was an impeccable
legal mind, a world class "jurist" yet he
was downright enthusiastic about sending
thousands to death camps.
He dotted his i's and crossed his t's
in perfect legal form! A perfect bureaucrat!
Had a bomb not fallen on his head
I suppose the USA would be more familiar
with him from the Nuremberg trials,
or the mystery stories from
Brazil or Argentina.
Bill Graham
Jun 18, 2013, 1:30:56 AM6/18/13
to
deserving of any special priviledges based on theiur sex alone.
Harold Burton
Jun 18, 2013, 7:57:15 AM6/18/13
to
BeamMeUpScotty
Jun 18, 2013, 11:22:03 AM6/18/13
to
I can't say equal because they can be used for more than pumping out kids.
Joe Cooper
Jun 18, 2013, 3:27:44 PM6/18/13
to
Nickname unavailable <video61%tcq...@gtempaccount.com> wrote in
news:c45a61a5-2474-41a8...@v17g2000vba.googlegroups.com:
> clinton raped monica?
Clinton, according to Juanita Broaddrick, raped her.
He was also accused of raping Elizabeth Ward Gracen, and of sexual
harrassment in the Paula Jones suit.
Where there's smoke...
"I am merely pointing out that President Obama has been going about the
business of demonizing his political enemies, and then hiring thugs to
destroy them without regard to the law, in precisely the same way that
Hitler and his fascists did it in Germany. This isn't an accusation;
it's an observation." (Herb Mayer)
Neolibertarian
Jun 18, 2013, 8:37:56 PM6/18/13
to
In article <xLCdnUvjmpVYfSLM...@giganews.com>,
First of all, your "thousand years" misses the mark by almost a thousand
years.
We know for certain that English-speaking Judeao-Christian society was
still founded on the principle of "women and children first" just 100
years ago. For instance, every account from the sinking of the Titanic
(1912) speaks clear and convincing evidence of the priorities ingrained
in all of those 2,228 people, from first class to steerage.
Today, were we to suffer another Titanic tragedy, you seem to be saying
that women would be on their own, just like everyone else.
And that this sophisticated and enlightened precept would not have any
measurable consequences.
> In the modern
> world, most everyone is important to the society.
I firmly grasp you're being sincere when you claim that, but for the
life of me, I can't imagine upon what you'd base such a notion.
--
Neolibertarian
"Global Warming: It ain't the heat, it's the stupidity."
"Bill Graham" <we...@comcast.net> wrote:
> >>> Women have different roles in human society than men. Pretending
> >>> otherwise is dangerous on a whole host of levels.
> >>>
> >>> It may not be "fair," whatever that means, but men are expendable to
> >>> civilization, women are not.
>
>
> The society over a thousand years ago perhaps, but not today.
Today...what? You're more enlightened? You've beaten nature?
> >>> Women have different roles in human society than men. Pretending
> >>> otherwise is dangerous on a whole host of levels.
> >>>
> >>> It may not be "fair," whatever that means, but men are expendable to
> >>> civilization, women are not.
>
>
> The society over a thousand years ago perhaps, but not today.
First of all, your "thousand years" misses the mark by almost a thousand
years.
We know for certain that English-speaking Judeao-Christian society was
still founded on the principle of "women and children first" just 100
years ago. For instance, every account from the sinking of the Titanic
(1912) speaks clear and convincing evidence of the priorities ingrained
in all of those 2,228 people, from first class to steerage.
Today, were we to suffer another Titanic tragedy, you seem to be saying
that women would be on their own, just like everyone else.
And that this sophisticated and enlightened precept would not have any
measurable consequences.
> In the modern
> world, most everyone is important to the society.
life of me, I can't imagine upon what you'd base such a notion.
--
Neolibertarian
"Global Warming: It ain't the heat, it's the stupidity."
Neolibertarian
Jun 18, 2013, 8:42:14 PM6/18/13
to
In article <aK-dndiMhK4JbSLM...@giganews.com>,
universe.
You may vehemently disagree, but it's almost certain the main precept
behind your statement is: racial survival is no longer a priority for
you.
> Women have no reason to expect themselves to be
> deserving of any special priviledges based on theiur sex alone.
You've obviously never lived with a woman through nine months of
pregnancy, have you?
"Bill Graham" <we...@comcast.net> wrote:
> >>
> >>
> >> The society over a thousand years ago perhaps, but not today. In the
> >> modern world, most everyone is important to the society.
> >
> > I would have said we're all expendable to society, which is why we
> > can't trust government.
>
> But, equally expendable.
That will never be true, until you first change the nature of the
> >>
> >>
> >> The society over a thousand years ago perhaps, but not today. In the
> >> modern world, most everyone is important to the society.
> >
> > I would have said we're all expendable to society, which is why we
> > can't trust government.
>
> But, equally expendable.
universe.
You may vehemently disagree, but it's almost certain the main precept
behind your statement is: racial survival is no longer a priority for
you.
> Women have no reason to expect themselves to be
> deserving of any special priviledges based on theiur sex alone.
pregnancy, have you?
Harold Burton
Jun 18, 2013, 10:12:05 PM6/18/13
to
In article <eIGdnVDDbaFqXSLM...@giganews.com>,
Er, rat, leftard rule #1: lie, lie again, then lie about lying.
snicker
snicker
It is loading more messages.
0 new messages