07 Aug 2014, 12:59 pm
sly279 wrote:
couldnt be that the word is just offensive and considered a curse word. most women do not like the word used around them. I don't like using or hearing offensive words or phrases. if somone is offended by the word Ni*** does that mean they are one and are just covering for it. 
Could be but probably not. PW is in an entirely different class of offensiveness than the N word. I'm not going to keep splitting hairs over this, either.
Kraichgauer
Veteran
Joined: 12 Apr 2010
Gender: Male
Posts: 49,751
Location: Spokane area, Washington state.
07 Aug 2014, 1:57 pm
Raptor wrote:
Hope you didnt thnk I forgot about you. 
Again I'll walk you through this;
1. Jim wasn't an anti-gunner when he got shot in the head.
2. Jim suffered long term brain damage that left him in a mentally weakened state.
3. Sarah was an ardent anti gunner before all this happened.
Now add them up.
Kraichgauer wrote:
Again, and again, I did this thread to commemorate Brady's passing.
You chose to make it into a lightning rod and it became a lightning rod the instant you clicked on Submit. Don't go blaming be because I happen to be a lightning bolt. Quote:
And how do you know Brady didn't change his opinions because of his near death experience? Traumatic experiences change people all the time.
Again I'll walk you through this;
1. Jim wasn't an anti-gunner when he got shot in the head.
2. Jim suffered long term brain damage that left him in a mentally weakened state.
3. Sarah was an ardent anti gunner before all this happened.
Now add them up.
Quote:
Ask anyone who's had to deal with you on WP. 
Hey, I'm only Raptorish in PPR and PPR junior (News and Current Events) and that's in response to present or past kookiness from liberals. Biggest difference is that when liberals do it it's freedom of speech but when I do it it's labeled trolling or bullying.Again, getting shot in the head is impetus to make one change one's viewpoints, weakened mental state or not. What, you think conservatives like Brady have to stick to a certain set of unchanging, written in stone ideals, regardless to changing circumstance? Human beings don't do that. Did you ever consider the fact that maybe he had come to believe his wife was right because of what had happened?
And as far as Brady's movement still being alive, but Reagan's having ended with his presidency - untrue, Reagan has been mythologized and turned into a demigod by the far right. His ideals of limited government have morphed into the Randian nightmare of Teabaggerism. To quote the German born playwright Berthold Brecht: "The bastard is dead, but the b***h that gave birth to him is still in heat."
07 Aug 2014, 4:01 pm
Kraichgauer wrote:
Again, getting shot in the head is impetus to make one change one's viewpoints, weakened mental state or not.
Depends on the person. The effect any misfortune has on a person depends on the individual. Again, a weakened mental state combined with living with a vociferous significant other half with preordained beliefs that could be related (honestly or not) to the injured party?s misfortune can obviously be a contributor. We?ll never know for certain how Brady got from point A to point B in his beliefs but I think my theory has considerable merit. I think at this time we?ve covered Jim Brady?s misfortune and his resulting changed views on the matter of gun control enough to call it as complete as it can be for all practical purposes. Quote:
What, you think conservatives like Brady have to stick to a certain set of unchanging, written in stone ideals, regardless to changing circumstance? Human beings don't do that. Did you ever consider the fact that maybe he had come to believe his wife was right because of what had happened?
Read what I said above. /\
Quote:
And as far as Brady's movement still being alive, but Reagan's having ended with his presidency - untrue, Reagan has been mythologized and turned into a demigod by the far right. His ideals of limited government have morphed into the Randian nightmare of Teabaggerism. To quote the German born playwright Berthold Brecht: "The bastard is dead, but the b***h that gave birth to him is still in heat."
Sweet, turning your anti-gun thread into an anti-Reagan thread after the man has been out of office for 25 years and dead for 10. Then all too predictably you rush from there right into old Ayn Rand, who has been dead for over 30 years. Who?s next, Julius Caesar?
Did you ever stop for just a moment to think that maybe Randism or Reaganism (or whatever) are only other schools of political thought and not a product of the devil or deliberate hard heartedness?
Kraichgauer
Veteran
Joined: 12 Apr 2010
Gender: Male
Posts: 49,751
Location: Spokane area, Washington state.
07 Aug 2014, 6:47 pm
Raptor wrote:
Kraichgauer wrote:
Again, getting shot in the head is impetus to make one change one's viewpoints, weakened mental state or not.
Depends on the person. The effect any misfortune has on a person depends on the individual. Again, a weakened mental state combined with living with a vociferous significant other half with preordained beliefs that could be related (honestly or not) to the injured party?s misfortune can obviously be a contributor. We?ll never know for certain how Brady got from point A to point B in his beliefs but I think my theory has considerable merit. I think at this time we?ve covered Jim Brady?s misfortune and his resulting changed views on the matter of gun control enough to call it as complete as it can be for all practical purposes. Quote:
What, you think conservatives like Brady have to stick to a certain set of unchanging, written in stone ideals, regardless to changing circumstance? Human beings don't do that. Did you ever consider the fact that maybe he had come to believe his wife was right because of what had happened?
Read what I said above. /\
Quote:
And as far as Brady's movement still being alive, but Reagan's having ended with his presidency - untrue, Reagan has been mythologized and turned into a demigod by the far right. His ideals of limited government have morphed into the Randian nightmare of Teabaggerism. To quote the German born playwright Berthold Brecht: "The bastard is dead, but the b***h that gave birth to him is still in heat."
Sweet, turning your anti-gun thread into an anti-Reagan thread after the man has been out of office for 25 years and dead for 10. Then all too predictably you rush from there right into old Ayn Rand, who has been dead for over 30 years. Who?s next, Julius Caesar?
Did you ever stop for just a moment to think that maybe Randism or Reaganism (or whatever) are only other schools of political thought and not a product of the devil or deliberate hard heartedness?
I don't know what you want from me concerning Brady, save to capitulate to you - which is not going to happen.
As for bringing Reagan up - I used him as an example of who was really manipulated by an evil hag of a wife.
And yes, Reaganism and Randism are the opposite side of the political spectrum. But that doesn't mean their adherents aren't hardhearted when it comes to the needy, because they are.
07 Aug 2014, 7:18 pm
Kraichgauer wrote:
I don't know what you want from me concerning Brady, save to capitulate to you - which is not going to happen.
As previously stated, I'm done with the Brady part of this so whatever.....Quote:
As for bringing Reagan up - I used him as an example of who was really manipulated by an evil hag of a wife.
I've not made an indepth study of the man or his wife but do you honestly expect me to believe that she was genuinely evil? Quote:
And yes, Reaganism and Randism are the opposite side of the political spectrum. But that doesn't mean their adherents aren't hardhearted when it comes to the needy, because they are.
Yep, a hand up instead of a handout is definitely evil and hard hearted. (< insert sarcasm and an eye roller)
Especially so in the eyes of the needy who are determined to needlessly stay that way at the expense of others.
Kraichgauer
Veteran
Joined: 12 Apr 2010
Gender: Male
Posts: 49,751
Location: Spokane area, Washington state.
07 Aug 2014, 10:02 pm
Raptor wrote:
Kraichgauer wrote:
I don't know what you want from me concerning Brady, save to capitulate to you - which is not going to happen.
As previously stated, I'm done with the Brady part of this so whatever.....Quote:
As for bringing Reagan up - I used him as an example of who was really manipulated by an evil hag of a wife.
I've not made an indepth study of the man or his wife but do you honestly expect me to believe that she was genuinely evil? Quote:
And yes, Reaganism and Randism are the opposite side of the political spectrum. But that doesn't mean their adherents aren't hardhearted when it comes to the needy, because they are.
Yep, a hand up instead of a handout is definitely evil and hard hearted. (< insert sarcasm and an eye roller)Especially so in the eyes of the needy who are determined to needlessly stay that way at the expense of others.
If calling Nancy Reagan evil is overstating things, then so is calling Mrs. Brady evil.
And it's easy to dismiss the needy as taking at the expense of others. Might help if there were good paying jobs they could get - and better yet, employers who would be willing to hire people without job experience.
07 Aug 2014, 10:36 pm
Kraichgauer wrote:
If calling Nancy Reagan evil is overstating things, then so is calling Mrs. Brady evil.
Honestly, I don't know enough about Nancy or Sarah to say with any honesty which one I think is more evil.
I think it's safe to say that both are opportunists. Personally, I think the first lady (ALL first ladies) should keep to themselves whilst their husbands hold office. I could care less what they do, what they think, and they definitely should not have their own staff.
The Reagans are gone from the Whitehouse, period, and to keep harping on their legacy of evil or whatever is a show of desperation I'm glad I don't suffer from.
The Sarah Brady gang is still in full swing trying to dupe people into believing that an inanimate object is responsible for deaths and taking control of people's minds. Thier membership is but a fraction of that of the NRA, so that says a lot about their success.
Quote:
And it's easy to dismiss the needy as taking at the expense of others.
No, I think you know I'm talking about those who won't give it an honest try even in the best of economic times.
Quote:
Might help if there were good paying jobs they could get - and better yet, employers who would be willing to hire people without job experience.
Mmm hmmm..... and if we were up to our gills in good paying jobs and all living the good life on this side of the Pacific the left would complain about American greed (nothing new there) and how we greedy Americans are depriving those poor Chinese and Vietnamese of jobs by hogging them all over here. I know and you know that's exactly what we'd be hearing.
07 Aug 2014, 11:53 pm
Kraichgauer
Veteran
Joined: 12 Apr 2010
Gender: Male
Posts: 49,751
Location: Spokane area, Washington state.
08 Aug 2014, 12:04 am
Raptor wrote:
Kraichgauer wrote:
If calling Nancy Reagan evil is overstating things, then so is calling Mrs. Brady evil.
Honestly, I don't know enough about Nancy or Sarah to say with any honesty which one I think is more evil.
I think it's safe to say that both are opportunists. Personally, I think the first lady (ALL first ladies) should keep to themselves whilst their husbands hold office. I could care less what they do, what they think, and they definitely should not have their own staff.
The Reagans are gone from the Whitehouse, period, and to keep harping on their legacy of evil or whatever is a show of desperation I'm glad I don't suffer from.
The Sarah Brady gang is still in full swing trying to dupe people into believing that an inanimate object is responsible for deaths and taking control of people's minds. Thier membership is but a fraction of that of the NRA, so that says a lot about their success.
Quote:
And it's easy to dismiss the needy as taking at the expense of others.
No, I think you know I'm talking about those who won't give it an honest try even in the best of economic times.
Quote:
Might help if there were good paying jobs they could get - and better yet, employers who would be willing to hire people without job experience.
Mmm hmmm..... and if we were up to our gills in good paying jobs and all living the good life on this side of the Pacific the left would complain about American greed (nothing new there) and how we greedy Americans are depriving those poor Chinese and Vietnamese of jobs by hogging them all over here. I know and you know that's exactly what we'd be hearing.
We agree about the role of First Ladies - - though I do condone their roles in charities, promoting fitness, fighting illegal drugs, etc.
As for the legitimately needy vs. the undeserving - conservatives have a way of including everyone receiving help in the undeserving camp.
And regarding liberals complaining how Americans would be hogging too many jobs at the expense of Chinese and third world workers - wanna bet?
Kraichgauer
Veteran
Joined: 12 Apr 2010
Gender: Male
Posts: 49,751
Location: Spokane area, Washington state.
08 Aug 2014, 12:08 am
08 Aug 2014, 9:20 am
08 Aug 2014, 9:35 am
Kraichgauer wrote:
We agree about the role of First Ladies - - though I do condone their roles in charities, promoting fitness, fighting illegal drugs, etc.
Then we don't agree. When we elect a president we should get the president not his old lady. It shouldn't be a package deal and the first lady should be seen and not heard. If they're going to do charity work then they do it on their own without making an international dog and pony show out of it. This means democrats and republicans alike.
Quote:
As for the legitimately needy vs. the undeserving - conservatives have a way of including everyone receiving help in the undeserving camp.
Hyperbole
Quote:
And regarding liberals complaining how Americans would be hogging too many jobs at the expense of Chinese and third world workers - wanna bet?
Part of the modus operandi of the left is to resent earned income, criticize America, and put foreigners first. Right now we're living in high times for the left with so many Americans on relief and looking to the gubmint for help, lowered world image, and those horrid big corporations with factories across the pond where they're destroying someone else's environment and making wage slaves out of them. They just don't dare say it out loud.
Kraichgauer
Veteran
Joined: 12 Apr 2010
Gender: Male
Posts: 49,751
Location: Spokane area, Washington state.
08 Aug 2014, 10:05 am
Raptor wrote:
Kraichgauer wrote:
We agree about the role of First Ladies - - though I do condone their roles in charities, promoting fitness, fighting illegal drugs, etc.
Then we don't agree. When we elect a president we should get the president not his old lady. It shouldn't be a package deal and the first lady should be seen and not heard. If they're going to do charity work then they do it on their own without making an international dog and pony show out of it. This means democrats and republicans alike.
Quote:
As for the legitimately needy vs. the undeserving - conservatives have a way of including everyone receiving help in the undeserving camp.
Hyperbole
Quote:
And regarding liberals complaining how Americans would be hogging too many jobs at the expense of Chinese and third world workers - wanna bet?
Part of the modus operandi of the left is to resent earned income, criticize America, and put foreigners first. Right now we're living in high times for the left with so many Americans on relief and looking to the gubmint for help, lowered world image, and those horrid big corporations with factories across the pond where they're destroying someone else's environment and making wage slaves out of them. They just don't dare say it out loud.
No, that's the right's imagined image of the left criticizing American wealth. And there's a huge difference between attacking American business overseas for using sweatshops and paying slave wages - if not depending on slavery all together - and wanting the best for American workers.
08 Aug 2014, 10:24 am
/\ But it's okay for you and your kind to broad brush the right as evil and hardhearted, eh?
Give hyperbole, receive hyperbole.....
Kraichgauer
Veteran
Joined: 12 Apr 2010
Gender: Male
Posts: 49,751
Location: Spokane area, Washington state.
08 Aug 2014, 11:26 am
Raptor wrote:
/\ But it's okay for you and your kind to broad brush the right as evil and hardhearted, eh?
Give hyperbole, receive hyperbole.....
Give hyperbole, receive hyperbole.....
When I hear the right calling social security a Ponzi scheme, gleefully reports on the coming demise of Medicare and Medicaid, calls the President the Antichrist for wanting to extend medical benefits to the needy, and wants to cut food stamps and other aspects of the social safety net while increasing tax cuts for the wealthy, it's sort of hard not to feel they're not hardhearted.
08 Aug 2014, 1:10 pm
Kraichgauer wrote:
Raptor wrote:
/\ But it's okay for you and your kind to broad brush the right as evil and hardhearted, eh?
Give hyperbole, receive hyperbole.....
Give hyperbole, receive hyperbole.....
When I hear the right calling social security a Ponzi scheme, gleefully reports on the coming demise of Medicare and Medicaid, calls the President the Antichrist for wanting to extend medical benefits to the needy, and wants to cut food stamps and other aspects of the social safety net while increasing tax cuts for the wealthy, it's sort of hard not to feel they're not hardhearted.
The right as an entire entity or just a fringe of it?
I'll call a pig's ass pork when I see it even if it's a right wing inspired scheme or notion. I've gone bipartisan here more than once while you have doggedly stuck to the party line, right or wrong.
