Home |
Search |
Today's Posts |
|
Metalworking (rec.crafts.metalworking) Discuss various aspects of working with metal, such as machining, welding, metal joining, screwing, casting, hardening/tempering, blacksmithing/forging, spinning and hammer work, sheet metal work. |
Reply |
|
LinkBack | Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#1
|
|||
|
|||
OT - A test for Gunner & Stu & crew
|
#2
|
|||
|
|||
For the record...I scored: "Der Resistance", or the group that would oppose
Hitler. What you fail to realize Cliff, is that you and the party you choose to side with are the new "Nazi's". You, more than likely, have a set of utopian ideals, which are in their most simplistic form admirable; however; with control of the media, attempts at gun control, and "indoctrination camps" innocently labeled as public schools, it is you and your associates who in fact are most closely aligned with a Germany leading up to WWII. Most "Conservatives" are not interested in imperialism, but are willing to go bring radicals into check when they threaten the welfare of our country. Most "liberals" are "Ideal Imperialist", and viewing their actions given current world situations, are not only not willing to bring radicals into check to save their own country, but are in fact, as Michael Savage so oddly points out, "The Enemy Within", bent on the destruction of America. Singing "Cum By Yah", interspersed with "I hate Bush", all the while high-fiving each other each time new rights are established for homosexuals, abortion, or illegal aliens is not really a platform that is going to carry a lot of weight with the majority of Americans. |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
|
#4
|
|||
|
|||
On Fri, 26 Aug 2005 13:49:43 +0000, Jim Newell wrote:
For the record...I scored: "Der Resistance", or the group that would oppose Hitler. What you fail to realize Cliff, is that you and the party you choose to side with are the new "Nazi's". You, more than likely, have a set of utopian ideals, which are in their most simplistic form admirable; however; with control of the media, attempts at gun control, and "indoctrination camps" innocently labeled as public schools, it is you and your associates who in fact are most closely aligned with a Germany leading up to WWII. Most "Conservatives" are not interested in imperialism, but are willing to go bring radicals into check when they threaten the welfare of our country. Most "liberals" are "Ideal Imperialist", and viewing their actions given current world situations, are not only not willing to bring radicals into check to save their own country, but are in fact, as Michael Savage so oddly points out, "The Enemy Within", bent on the destruction of America. Singing "Cum By Yah", interspersed with "I hate Bush", all the while high-fiving each other each time new rights are established for homosexuals, abortion, or illegal aliens is not really a platform that is going to carry a lot of weight with the majority of Americans. Each of you see the other as the Nazi. Real patriots see you both as Nazi's willing to subjugate the individual to the power of the state. Both programs are authoritarian, Bush/neocon and the socialists. Both use the inherent coercive power of the state to force individuals into heavily restricted lifestyles. The radical left wants a nanny-state while the radical right wants a christian-state. The majority of us reject both as we see that both lead to an authoritarian/dicatatorial society at extreme odds to our charter. -- Regards, Curly ------------------------------------------------------------------------ http://curlysurmudgeon.com/blog/ ------------------------------------------------------------------------ |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
In rec.crafts.metalworking Curly Surmudgeon wrote:
Each of you see the other as the Nazi. Real patriots see you both as Nazi's willing to subjugate the individual to the power of the state. Both programs are authoritarian, Bush/neocon and the socialists. Both use the inherent coercive power of the state to force individuals into heavily restricted lifestyles. The radical left wants a nanny-state while the radical right wants a christian-state. The majority of us reject both as we see that both lead to an authoritarian/dicatatorial society at extreme odds to our charter. -- Regards, Curly I'd be an expat. I'm with curly. Call me an atheist Libertarian patriot. Jeff |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
Jeff Dantzler wrote:
In rec.crafts.metalworking Curly Surmudgeon wrote: Each of you see the other as the Nazi. Real patriots see you both as Nazi's willing to subjugate the individual to the power of the state. Both programs are authoritarian, Bush/neocon and the socialists. Both use the inherent coercive power of the state to force individuals into heavily restricted lifestyles. The radical left wants a nanny-state while the radical right wants a christian-state. The majority of us reject both as we see that both lead to an authoritarian/dicatatorial society at extreme odds to our charter. -- Regards, Curly I'd be an expat. Me, too. I'm with curly. Call me an atheist Libertarian patriot. Same again. |
#7
|
|||
|
|||
"Cliff" wrote in message ... http://www.okcupid.com/tests/take?te...20579094199926 -- Cliff "The Everyday German" John |
#8
|
|||
|
|||
On 26 Aug 2005 12:09:00 -0700, "Rudy Canoza"
wrote: Jeff Dantzler wrote: In rec.crafts.metalworking Curly Surmudgeon wrote: Each of you see the other as the Nazi. Real patriots see you both as Nazi's willing to subjugate the individual to the power of the state. Both programs are authoritarian, Bush/neocon and the socialists. Both use the inherent coercive power of the state to force individuals into heavily restricted lifestyles. The radical left wants a nanny-state while the radical right wants a christian-state. The majority of us reject both as we see that both lead to an authoritarian/dicatatorial society at extreme odds to our charter. -- Regards, Curly I'd be an expat. Me, too. Ooh, ooh. Me, too. I'm with curly. Call me an atheist Libertarian patriot. Same again. We part company here. Sorta. Sue |
#9
|
|||
|
|||
On Sat, 27 Aug 2005 00:39:06 +0000, Sue wrote:
-------------snip----------- I'm with curly. Call me an atheist Libertarian patriot. Same again. We part company here. Sorta. That's ok, I won't hold it against you. grin Truly. Having independent thinkers critique and challange is a delight for it forces me to rethink my positions and deductions. The main difference from 'us' and 'them' is that anarcho-libertarians have no desire to force our lifestyle or mores on another being while both the religious-right and socialist-left demand that we genuflect to their rigid thinking. Only the brain-dead sycophants deserve rebuke, not those who disagree based upon reason rather than reflex. Sue -- Regards, Curly ------------------------------------------------------------------------ http://curlysurmudgeon.com/blog/ ------------------------------------------------------------------------ |
#10
|
|||
|
|||
On Fri, 26 Aug 2005 18:08:00 -0700, Curly Surmudgeon
wrote: On Sat, 27 Aug 2005 00:39:06 +0000, Sue wrote: -------------snip----------- I'm with curly. Call me an atheist Libertarian patriot. Same again. We part company here. Sorta. That's ok, I won't hold it against you. grin Truly. Having independent thinkers critique and challange is a delight for it forces me to rethink my positions and deductions. The main difference from 'us' and 'them' is that anarcho-libertarians have no desire to force our lifestyle or mores on another being while both the religious-right and socialist-left demand that we genuflect to their rigid thinking. I like neither side. I suppose I'm mostly libertarian but with a heart. That's a tough spot to be in. ( There's some saying about being young and thinking with ones heart and growing up and thinking with one mind. I'm still waiting to grow up. Religion - chicken hearted agnostic. When I was in my 30s I finally got baptized (Episcopalian) although my heart wasn't really into it. I was pretty broke - couldn't afford life, health or car insurance. Religion insurance was free. I don't want to argue with anyone about any of this and mean no offense to anyone. Thanks anyway. Sue Only the brain-dead sycophants deserve rebuke, not those who disagree based upon reason rather than reflex. Sue -- Regards, Curly ------------------------------------------------------------------------ http://curlysurmudgeon.com/blog/ ------------------------------------------------------------------------ |
#11
|
|||
|
|||
"Curly Surmudgeon" wrote in message ... On Sat, 27 Aug 2005 00:39:06 +0000, Sue wrote: -------------snip----------- snip The main difference from 'us' and 'them' is that anarcho-libertarians have no desire to force our lifestyle or mores on another being while both the religious-right Sue -- Regards, Curly ------------------------------------------------------------------------ http://curlysurmudgeon.com/blog/ ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Used to be right, like left is left, but now is religious right. John |
#13
|
|||
|
|||
"Jim Newell" wrote in message
... For the record...I scored: "Der Resistance", or the group that would oppose Hitler. Same here. |
#14
|
|||
|
|||
On Fri, 26 Aug 2005 20:43:06 -0500, "John Scheldroup"
wrote: "Curly Surmudgeon" wrote in message ... On Sat, 27 Aug 2005 00:39:06 +0000, Sue wrote: -------------snip----------- snip The main difference from 'us' and 'them' is that anarcho-libertarians have no desire to force our lifestyle or mores on another being while both the religious-right Sue -- Regards, Curly ------------------------------------------------------------------------ http://curlysurmudgeon.com/blog/ ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Used to be right, like left is left, but now is religious right. John See boogymen under your bed too John? The Religious Right is a tiny minorty of the Right and has little or no power to do much of anything. Its only used as a paper tiger to scare Liberals and the mind numbed drones on the Left. If they had any power at all..think abortion would be legal anywhere? Gunner |
#15
|
|||
|
|||
On Fri, 26 Aug 2005 17:13:08 -0500, wrote:
On Fri, 26 Aug 2005 05:36:37 -0400, Cliff wrote: http://www.okcupid.com/tests/take?te...20579094199926 Me: The Expatriate Achtung! You are 23% brainwashworthy, 31% antitolerant, and 23% blindly patriotic Rick Bowen Texas State Rifle Association Life Member lex talionis. To confound the Libs reading this..I also scored as Expatriate. Gunner |
#16
|
|||
|
|||
On Sat, 27 Aug 2005 07:49:34 GMT, Gunner Asch
wrote: To confound the Libs reading this..I also scored as Expatriate. Moved to Germany, eh? -- Cliff |
#17
|
|||
|
|||
On Fri, 26 Aug 2005 18:08:00 -0700, Curly Surmudgeon
wrote: both the religious-right and socialist-left demand that we genuflect to their rigid thinking. So true. I see them both as brain-damaged control freaks, driven to imprison others by force in the same mental straitjackets they wear by choice. The Left takes control...we get Vietnam. The Right takes control...we get Iraq. Despite the feeble, often fabricated public excuses for such wars, it really boils down to an attitude of "We're gonna make YOU be just like US whether you like it or not". Bully, bribe, and beat 'em into conformity and obedience, and they'll be grateful junior Americanoids someday. Too bad that notion keeps failing expensively. The loony right and loony left--Tweedledum and Tweedledee. -- Thomas "Driven by fear, we have succumbed to the age-old temptation to sacrifice liberty on the pretense of obtaining security. Love of security, unfortu- nately, all too often vanquishes love of liberty." Rep. Ron Paul, R-TX |
#18
|
|||
|
|||
On Sat, 27 Aug 2005 12:07:45 GMT, Thomas Nulla
wrote: The Left takes control...we get Vietnam. ?? -- Cliff |
#19
|
|||
|
|||
To confound the Libs reading this..I also scored as Expatriate. Gunner That's confounding all right, because from your positions taken here you are obviously an extreme conservative, authoritarian, martinet. All of which coincide with following Nazism or some other extreme form of governing. Which just goes to show that either the test isn't all that accurate or someone is dishonest. Hawke |
#20
|
|||
|
|||
On Sat, 27 Aug 2005 21:08:31 GMT, Strabo
wrote: "atheist" is inconsistent with libertarian. You can be an agnostic and a libertarian but atheists claim an unprovable knowledge (the non-existence of a god). http://www.lp.org/article_103.shtml [ "The libertarian philosophy has been around from the time God gave Moses the Ten Commandments ... ] -- Cliff |
#21
|
|||
|
|||
"Hawke" wrote:
To confound the Libs reading this..I also scored as Expatriate. Gunner That's confounding all right, because from your positions taken here you are obviously an extreme conservative, authoritarian, martinet. All of which coincide with following Nazism or some other extreme form of governing. Which just goes to show that either the test isn't all that accurate or someone is dishonest. Hawke I scored higher than 0% on brainwashworthy higher than 85% on antitolerant higher than 28% on patriotic Please tell me what this means. Do I have to leave the US? Will Gunner be my roomate? Tell the truth now, I'll know if you're lieing. Gio |
#22
|
|||
|
|||
On Sat, 27 Aug 2005 15:04:32 -0700, "Hawke"
wrote: To confound the Libs reading this..I also scored as Expatriate. Gunner That's confounding all right, because from your positions taken here you are obviously an extreme conservative, authoritarian, martinet. All of which coincide with following Nazism or some other extreme form of governing. Which just goes to show that either the test isn't all that accurate or someone is dishonest. Hawke Actually Leftist Drone..Im none of that. I do support the war, and I do hold Leftists like you in utter contempt. Not because of the party line, as Im a Republitarian, but because of the necessity of the war, and the long standing actions and agendas of the Left. I dont have to be a cop to hate child molesters. I dont have to be a Christian (and Im not) to support some concepts of morality. You on the other hand..have a Talking Points fax line from the DNC plugged into that half empty gourd you call a skull. Gunner "Pax Americana is a philosophy. Hardly an empire. Making sure other people play nice and dont kill each other (and us) off in job lots is hardly empire building, particularly when you give them self determination under "play nice" rules. Think of it as having your older brother knock the **** out of you for torturing the cat." Gunner |
#23
|
|||
|
|||
On Sat, 27 Aug 2005 17:33:11 -0400, Cliff wrote:
On Sat, 27 Aug 2005 12:07:45 GMT, Thomas Nulla wrote: The Left takes control...we get Vietnam. ?? Take a look at the social programs of the "Great Society"...far more welfare-statist than any other period save perhaps the economic crisis of the Depression. Enormous deficits to pay for them as well as the escalating Vietnam War. The same unwillingness to admit the bankruptcy of existing policies both domestic and foreign we have today. -- Thomas "Driven by fear, we have succumbed to the age-old temptation to sacrifice liberty on the pretense of obtaining security. Love of security, unfortu- nately, all too often vanquishes love of liberty." Rep. Ron Paul, R-TX |
#24
|
|||
|
|||
|
#25
|
|||
|
|||
On Sat, 27 Aug 2005 21:08:31 +0000, Strabo wrote:
In OT - A test for Gunner & Stu & crew on Fri, 26 Aug 2005 18:57:42 -0000, by Jeff Dantzler, we read: In rec.crafts.metalworking Curly Surmudgeon wrote: Each of you see the other as the Nazi. Real patriots see you both as Nazi's willing to subjugate the individual to the power of the state. Both programs are authoritarian, Bush/neocon and the socialists. Both use the inherent coercive power of the state to force individuals into heavily restricted lifestyles. The radical left wants a nanny-state while the radical right wants a christian-state. The majority of us reject both as we see that both lead to an authoritarian/dicatatorial society at extreme odds to our charter. -- Regards, Curly I'd be an expat. I'm with curly. Call me an atheist Libertarian patriot. "atheist" is inconsistent with libertarian. You can be an agnostic and a libertarian but atheists claim an unprovable knowledge (the non-existence of a god). Evidently you don't comprehend atheism. Most atheists just don't give a **** about god one way or the other. While agnostics stumble and religionists fiddle with their rosaries we are busy with life. Neither God nor religion are required for libertarianism. Silly concept actually. -- Regards, Curly ------------------------------------------------------------------------ http://curlysurmudgeon.com/blog/ ------------------------------------------------------------------------ |
#26
|
|||
|
|||
On Sun, 28 Aug 2005 01:30:58 +0000, Thomas Nulla wrote:
On Sat, 27 Aug 2005 17:33:11 -0400, Cliff wrote: On Sat, 27 Aug 2005 12:07:45 GMT, Thomas Nulla wrote: The Left takes control...we get Vietnam. ?? Take a look at the social programs of the "Great Society"...far more welfare-statist than any other period save perhaps the economic crisis of the Depression. Enormous deficits to pay for them as well as the escalating Vietnam War. The same unwillingness to admit the bankruptcy of existing policies both domestic and foreign we have today. Agreed except that their is on period in American history that is more repressive than the Vietnam era, right now. The christian-wacko-right has done more to destroy and negate our liberties than any time in our history. Both parties are but opposite sides of the same authoritarian coin. Both want your money, they only differ on what they'll spend it for. -- Regards, Curly ------------------------------------------------------------------------ http://curlysurmudgeon.com/blog/ ------------------------------------------------------------------------ |
#27
|
|||
|
|||
On Sat, 27 Aug 2005 21:18:34 -0700, Curly Surmudgeon
wrote: Agreed except that their is on period in American history that is more repressive than the Vietnam era, right now. The christian-wacko-right has done more to destroy and negate our liberties than any time in our history. ROFLMAO!!!!!!!!!! You are extremely history challenged. Recent graduate of Liberal Outcome Based educational system..right? Perhaps you should do a bit more research on FDR, Manzanar, etc etc Then toss in Contelpro, and Draft Riots during your research. Need help? Id be glad to provide some links for you..just so you dont look like so much the Buffoon. Im embaressed for you. Gunner "Pax Americana is a philosophy. Hardly an empire. Making sure other people play nice and dont kill each other (and us) off in job lots is hardly empire building, particularly when you give them self determination under "play nice" rules. Think of it as having your older brother knock the **** out of you for torturing the cat." Gunner |
#28
|
|||
|
|||
Gunner Asch wrote in
: On Sat, 27 Aug 2005 17:40:23 -0500, wrote: On Sat, 27 Aug 2005 15:04:32 -0700, "Hawke" wrote: To confound the Libs reading this..I also scored as Expatriate. Gunner That's confounding all right, because from your positions taken here you are obviously an extreme conservative, authoritarian, martinet. All of which coincide with following Nazism or some other extreme form of governing. Which just goes to show that either the test isn't all that accurate or someone is dishonest. Hawke Did you take the test? Rick Bowen Texas State Rifle Association Life Member lex talionis. He hasnt been told to do so yet by his controllers in the DNC. Now, that was funny! LOL Bing |
#29
|
|||
|
|||
for the record I scored as an expatriate
also, I think the test is crap anyway, it's got some bias towards what the left seems to *think* of the right, but is sterotyped. for example question 14 needs to have more "groups" listed, such as "white americans", "christians" "baptists" "conservative talk show hosts" "Neocons" and also.. like question 15 and 16 ,. well bush is currently president, what if hilliary was president? that would radically alter a lot of views on that question depending on your political leanings I noticed I haven't seen anyone from the Left post their results, maybe I didn't look hard enough, or maybe they scored too high on the brainwashing susceptiablity and are embarrased I think the Libs are genuinuly confused as to why all the right wingers *Didn't* score as Nazi's. It just shows more of a lack of understanding on their part ****** shu *another atheist libertarian* and Evil Capitalist Business Owner (ALECBO) |
#30
|
|||
|
|||
"Strabo" wrote in message ... In OT - A test for Gunner & Stu & crew on Sun, 28 Aug 2005 14:29:32 -0500, by shu, we read: for the record I scored as an expatriate also, I think the test is crap anyway, it's got some bias towards what the left seems to *think* of the right, but is sterotyped. for example question 14 needs to have more "groups" listed, such as "white americans", "christians" "baptists" "conservative talk show hosts" "Neocons" and also.. like question 15 and 16 ,. well bush is currently president, what if hilliary was president? that would radically alter a lot of views on that question depending on your political leanings I noticed I haven't seen anyone from the Left post their results, maybe I didn't look hard enough, or maybe they scored too high on the brainwashing susceptiablity and are embarrased I think the Libs are genuinuly confused as to why all the right wingers *Didn't* score as Nazi's. It just shows more of a lack of understanding on their part Or, "I think the test is crap anyway." Reminds me of the 'Hitler versus Stalin' dilemma. Anyone attracted to either the Republican or Democratic political party ideology is a socialist. Whether one tests as a democratic socialist as opposed to a national socialist, is immaterial. Neither qualifies as a proponent of the Declaration of Independence. ****** shu *another atheist libertarian* A logical impossibility. no A libertarian is inner directed and rational. He understands that there not a way to disprove god and he is comfortable with this reality. you have a different defintion of athiest. let me explain you are litterally correct. there is no way to disprove god. but this is because there is no way to disprove a negative, the burden of Proof for the existance of god is on those who believe in god. it is NOT upto me to disprove the existance of god as an atheist, the case for the existance of god to me has not been made to my satisfaction. furthermore, as an atheist, religion, and god are inventions of man. it is Rational, and comfortable for me to live with that reality. an Angostic is uncomfortable, they aren't sure there is a god, or not, they may or may not think god has been Proven to exist. I contend that it is Irrational to not accept certain realities (and this is a problem with a lot of philosophy classes) for example... someone may say . "prove this chair existspoints to a chair The proof of the existance of the chair, is in the chair itself, the chair exists.. Just because. it is Irrational to get into lengthy debates about "what is existance" or "define chair" or "is it just a Preception that it's there." etc in order to progress we have to define certain things about how our universe works. the Chair exists, and based on Previous experience, it's unlikely to spontaniously stop existing, or turn into a glass of wine. the ability to prove and disprove ideas is in the realm of science. While our Senses can be fooled. generally under such conditions we are aware of it, and can devise logical tests to miniumize errors in our preception, optical illusions for example, where you precieve lines that are all wavy, but are really straight, you can take a Straight edge, which we Reasonably assume to be straight, and measure it against the "wavy" lines it is a Philosophy to Invent and debate ideas that cannot be proved Or disproved, while they may be interesting mental exercises, they are ultimately futile.. The debate itself is futile, the only winning move is not to play. IMO liberalism itself seems to be mired in this philosophical outlook on things, it's part of the reason that arguing with a liberal tends to lead to obfuscation on the liberals part. they Invent ideas that aren't rational, and are very hard to disprove.. they create serious allegations that are fabrications based on shakey evidence at best. in this way liberalism itself seems to be more religious in nature then reality based. IMO. an angostic is still in philosophy class, doing a futile irrational debate... the chair May or May not exist..Oooo Spooky.. the atheist has been there, done that.. and is moving on to more important matters that dont' involve superstition. so no, i dont' think it's a logical impossiblity, or irrational to be an atheist libertarian. perhaps you don't really understand what it means to be an atheist. ********* shu and Evil Capitalist Business Owner (ALECBO) |
#31
|
|||
|
|||
That's confounding all right, because from your positions taken here you are obviously an extreme conservative, authoritarian, martinet. All of which coincide with following Nazism or some other extreme form of governing. Which just goes to show that either the test isn't all that accurate or someone is dishonest. Hawke Actually Leftist Drone..Im none of that. I do support the war, Let's stop here and look at the first thing you wrote. You begin with your normal insult and then go on to verify what we already know. You admit it, you are for war; Big Surprise! That's what I have said all along. You are always for every war so long as a Republican president is behind it. The only wars you ever are against are the ones a Democrat instigates. Since we have had a predominance of Republican presidents in the last 50 years that means you are virtually always on the side advocating war. That is what the evidence shows. You can deny it all you want but your ilk always find the case for war strong enough to start attacking someone, somewhere. Normal people don't find war nearly as necessary as your kind do. Oh, and any objective analysis of your postings clearly demonstrates that you do indeed have extreme right wing conservative views, you are authoritarian, and are a total martinet. and I do hold Leftists like you in utter contempt. From what I've seen you hold everyone that doesn't agree with your whacked out Republican ideology in contempt. You're a my way or the highway kind of person (read that as authoritarian). You also continue to call anyone who opposes your right wing philosophy a "leftist" including me even thought I am a registered independent and in no way support everything on the left wing. Not because of the party line, as Im a Republitarian, but because of the necessity of the war, and the long standing actions and agendas of the Left. That's the point isn't it? People like you always come down on the side of seeing war as the only course of action. To you war is a necessity but other less emotional people see it as a last resort only, and would never resort to war nearly as quickly as you would. Throughout history war mongers have always seen going to war as necessary when more reasonable people don't. Unfortunately, it's the rest of the people that have to pay for your "necessities". I dont have to be a cop to hate child molesters. I dont have to be a Christian (and Im not) to support some concepts of morality. Simply irrelevant. You on the other hand..have a Talking Points fax line from the DNC plugged into that half empty gourd you call a skull. As is your habit, you end with your usual insult once again showing your ignorance and lack of originality. The other thing is that your head has to be as dense as granite, because no matter how many times you hear it you still keep perpetuating the myth that everyone you disagree with is getting their ideas from the DNC. I'm sure that the reason you think that is because the reality is it's Republicans, which you admitted to being, who are known for their adherence to top down hierarchy and like-minded thinking. It's also people like you who blindly parrot every line uttered by the likes of Sean Vanity and Rush Bimbo. I'm not a Democrat. I don't know how many times you have to be told that before you get it into your tiny brain, but I'm not going to waste time on someone as slow on the uptake as you are. You are a Republican and in my book that's about the worst insult I can think of to call someone. What you and your cronies need to understand is that you are members of the far right, not the middle. To you everyone to your left is a liberal. It simply isn't so. It's just that from your far out perspective the middle seems way to the left. To those of us in the middle the people to our left are liberals but your kind are just so far to the right you can't even see the forest for the trees, which is why you only get along with others that are just like you are. One other thing, all you far righties are always super patriotic war freaks and you are a shining example of that fact. The majority of Americans are not, so it's you all that's out of step not me and the rest of the people who oppose the Bush Administration's foolhardy policies. Too bad you'll never get that even though it's a fact. Hawke |
#32
|
|||
|
|||
On Sun, 28 Aug 2005 20:23:43 -0500, "shu" wrote:
"Strabo" wrote in message .. . In OT - A test for Gunner & Stu & crew on Sun, 28 Aug 2005 14:29:32 -0500, by shu, we read: for the record I scored as an expatriate also, I think the test is crap anyway, it's got some bias towards what the left seems to *think* of the right, but is sterotyped. for example question 14 needs to have more "groups" listed, such as "white americans", "christians" "baptists" "conservative talk show hosts" "Neocons" and also.. like question 15 and 16 ,. well bush is currently president, what if hilliary was president? that would radically alter a lot of views on that question depending on your political leanings I noticed I haven't seen anyone from the Left post their results, maybe I didn't look hard enough, or maybe they scored too high on the brainwashing susceptiablity and are embarrased I think the Libs are genuinuly confused as to why all the right wingers *Didn't* score as Nazi's. It just shows more of a lack of understanding on their part Or, "I think the test is crap anyway." Reminds me of the 'Hitler versus Stalin' dilemma. Anyone attracted to either the Republican or Democratic political party ideology is a socialist. Whether one tests as a democratic socialist as opposed to a national socialist, is immaterial. Neither qualifies as a proponent of the Declaration of Independence. ****** shu *another atheist libertarian* A logical impossibility. no A libertarian is inner directed and rational. He understands that there not a way to disprove god and he is comfortable with this reality. you have a different defintion of athiest. let me explain you are litterally correct. there is no way to disprove god. but this is because there is no way to disprove a negative, the burden of Proof for the existance of god is on those who believe in god. it is NOT upto me to disprove the existance of god as an atheist, the case for the existance of god to me has not been made to my satisfaction. furthermore, as an atheist, religion, and god are inventions of man. it is Rational, and comfortable for me to live with that reality. an Angostic is uncomfortable, they aren't sure there is a god, or not, they may or may not think god has been Proven to exist. I contend that it is Irrational to not accept certain realities (and this is a problem with a lot of philosophy classes) for example... someone may say . "prove this chair existspoints to a chair The proof of the existance of the chair, is in the chair itself, the chair exists.. Just because. it is Irrational to get into lengthy debates about "what is existance" or "define chair" or "is it just a Preception that it's there." etc in order to progress we have to define certain things about how our universe works. the Chair exists, and based on Previous experience, it's unlikely to spontaniously stop existing, or turn into a glass of wine. the ability to prove and disprove ideas is in the realm of science. While our Senses can be fooled. generally under such conditions we are aware of it, and can devise logical tests to miniumize errors in our preception, optical illusions for example, where you precieve lines that are all wavy, but are really straight, you can take a Straight edge, which we Reasonably assume to be straight, and measure it against the "wavy" lines it is a Philosophy to Invent and debate ideas that cannot be proved Or disproved, while they may be interesting mental exercises, they are ultimately futile.. The debate itself is futile, the only winning move is not to play. IMO liberalism itself seems to be mired in this philosophical outlook on things, it's part of the reason that arguing with a liberal tends to lead to obfuscation on the liberals part. they Invent ideas that aren't rational, and are very hard to disprove.. they create serious allegations that are fabrications based on shakey evidence at best. in this way liberalism itself seems to be more religious in nature then reality based. IMO. an angostic is still in philosophy class, doing a futile irrational debate... the chair May or May not exist..Oooo Spooky.. the atheist has been there, done that.. and is moving on to more important matters that dont' involve superstition. so no, i dont' think it's a logical impossiblity, or irrational to be an atheist libertarian. perhaps you don't really understand what it means to be an atheist. ********* shu and Evil Capitalist Business Owner (ALECBO) Meet Shu. This example of a post is very deceptive indeed. She sounds almost rational G. -- Cliff |
#33
|
|||
|
|||
On Sun, 28 Aug 2005 20:14:41 -0400, JohnM wrote:
Cliff wrote: On Sat, 27 Aug 2005 21:45:50 -0400, JohnM wrote: Actually, when I listen to commercial radio (rarely) I listen to a local public radio station, mostly for the jazz. That may induce brain rot ....... sounds like many machines about to go crash ..... Damn, cliff, what an ignorant statement to make. I'd expect that from dan, maybe, but I really didn't expect it from you.. Sure, you can find some Jazz that sounds a bit crashy, or more than a bit- it's a pretty wide field.. but that's just an unbelievable thing to say. Idiot. John I always want to go see what's wrong ..... -- Cliff |
#34
|
|||
|
|||
On Sun, 28 Aug 2005 14:29:32 -0500, "shu" wrote:
and also.. like question 15 and 16 ,. well bush is currently president, what if hilliary was president? that would radically alter a lot of views on that question depending on your political leanings I noticed I haven't seen anyone from the Left post their results, maybe I didn't look hard enough, or maybe they scored too high on the brainwashing susceptiablity and are embarrased I think the Libs are genuinuly confused as to why all the right wingers *Didn't* score as Nazi's. It just shows more of a lack of understanding on their part Heh...for the most part..the Libs are utterly clueless. Which is regularly demonstrated by their posts on politics, and why the publics shift to electing Republican politicians is so completely misunderstood by them. They babble on and on about Bush being Selected not elected..yet totally ignore the fact that Congress now has a significant Republican Majority after 40 yrs of Dem control and more and more Governors and state politicians are being elected Republicans. They (Libs) are both clueless and in denial Gunner |
#35
|
|||
|
|||
In article you wrote:
"atheist" is inconsistent with libertarian. You can be an agnostic and a libertarian but atheists claim an unprovable knowledge (the non-existence of a god). I disagree and look forward to you expanding on why your statement is valid. Atheism is characterized by an absence of belief in the existence of gods. I don't have to claim that no god exists to be an atheist. From lp.org: "What is a Libertarian? Libertarians believe that you have the right to live your life as you wish, without the government interfering -- as long as you dont violate the rights of others. Politically, this means Libertarians favor rolling back the size and cost of government, and eliminating laws that stifle the economy and control peoples personal choices." Note no mention of "god" in the above statement. Libertarians could give a **** whether you believe in god or not - that's your business! I'll clarify my position a bit. By trade I am a biochemist, a scientist. I believe in things because their existance has been demonstrated in a rational fashion by myself or others. I am a Libertarian before all else. My atheism grew out of my distaste for folks who would push their beliefs upon some one else. Kind of like you telling me I can't be an atheist and a Libertarian at the same time... Jeff |
#36
|
|||
|
|||
Strabo wrote:
"atheist" is inconsistent with libertarian. You can be an agnostic and a libertarian but atheists claim an unprovable knowledge (the non-existence of a god). I'm almost embarrassed to waste even a minute on this; but... The idea that an atheist (or anybody else) needs to "prove" some kind of non-existence is one of the most ridiculous and destructive non-ideas that's ever polluted human minds. Proof is affirmative. It only works on things that actually do exist. To attempt to twist it around and prove a negative - ANY negative, is to admit that you don't have a clue about what proof is, about how logic works, or about which end of you is your head and which is your ass. Here's a simple test: Can you prove that there's not a 16 foot tall, purple, fire breathing dragon standing right behind you, right this minute, about to bite your ass off? No, you can't. Looking behind you doen't work. The dragon might have moved as you turned your head. Or it might be an invisible dragon. Reaching out to feel around for it won't work, either. Dragons are very quick and clever. (Prove that they're not!) Did you look all over the room, under the desk, and behind the file cabinet? That's not proof of anything. It only means that you didn't find the dragon. It doesn't prove anything about whether the dragon actually exists. You say you're still alive, so there must not be any real danger? Not yet. But what about thirty seconds from now? Nobody else you know has ever seen a dragon? That only means you're hanging around with reallly unobservant people. Try all you like, twist yourself into knots. You can't PROVE that the dragon isn't there. Not in the true sense of a proof. All you can do is hope that there's no dragon, for the moment. Here's a better example. I accuse you of committing a horible crime. Can you prove that you didn't? No, don't ask what crime I'm talking about. I think you know. Can you prove that you don't? No, I'm not going to tell you when the crime was committed, or who the victim was. I'm sure you already know all that, and you can't prove the non-existence of such knowledge. And, if you want non-existence to be proveable, then the burden of proof is on you, since you CLAIM you don't know what I'm talking about, and that you didn't do anything wrong. Want to know how important it is to understand the true meaning of proof, and the reason WHY non-existence should NEVER be required to prove itself? It's because if we thought any other way, you'd be guilty until proven innocent - every single time anybody accused you of anything. Like most brain-lazy people, you accept the vitally important, life-saving protections earned for you by people who actually USE their minds; but you don't bother to care how or why they protect you, or what would happen to you if they didn't. If you ask an atheist to prove the non-existence of gods, then be prepared for someone, someday, to ask you to prove your innnocence in a crime you've never heard of. You'll deserve that, and all that follows. You asked for it. Rational people understand that emotions, beliefs, and even superstitions, are a part of human life. We live with them. But when you start pretending that you know the rules about what we can or can't believe, or start imagining that your own beliefs are somehow special or priviledged, and that you have scientific or logical justification for your self-deception, then you deserve to have your ass bitten off by dragons. You can believe whatever myths and stories you like; but don't pretend that you're doing anything else, unless you're prepared to learn what "proof" really is, and how it works, and then to use it to prove the existence of superghosts in the sky. KG |
#37
|
|||
|
|||
On Mon, 29 Aug 2005 14:33:47 -0400, Kirk Gordon
wrote: You can believe whatever myths and stories you like; but don't pretend that you're doing anything else, unless you're prepared to learn what "proof" really is, and how it works, and then to use it to prove the existence of superghosts in the sky. KG Heh.... http://www.rense.com/general32/del.htm Chuckle.... http://forums.philosophyforums.com/thread/3151 Gunner |
#38
|
|||
|
|||
On Mon, 29 Aug 2005 15:45:46 GMT, Gunner
wrote: Heh...for the most part..the Libs are utterly clueless. Found those "WMDs" yet? Which is regularly demonstrated by their posts on politics, Found those "WMDs" yet? and why the publics shift to electing Republican politicians Found those "WMDs" yet? is so completely misunderstood by them. CLUE: Herr shrubbie is LESS popular now than Clinton was at his *least popular*. Found those "WMDs" yet? They babble on and on about Bush being Selected not elected.. Not that it bothers you that he lost the popular vote. yet totally ignore the fact that Congress now has a significant Republican Majority Found those "WMDs" yet? after 40 yrs of Dem control and more and more Governors and state politicians are being elected Republicans. What were they in the first place? They (Libs) are both clueless and in denial Found those "WMDs" yet? He's embarassed. AND in denial. -- Cliff |
#39
|
|||
|
|||
On Mon, 29 Aug 2005 16:32:07 GMT, Gunner
wrote: On Sun, 28 Aug 2005 23:01:32 -0700, "Hawke" wrote: That's confounding all right, because from your positions taken here you are obviously an extreme conservative, authoritarian, martinet. All of which coincide with following Nazism or some other extreme form of governing. Which just goes to show that either the test isn't all that accurate or someone is dishonest. Hawke Actually Leftist Drone..Im none of that. I do support the war, Let's stop here and look at the first thing you wrote. You begin with your normal insult Which is absolutly correct. You ARE a Leftist Drone. IOW NOT a gun-toting crazy living in a bunker atop the San Andreas and eating kibble? and then go on to verify what we already know. You admit it, you are for war; For "war"? Not necessarily. And a proud member of THE WAR party. This one, yes indeed. Another false assumption from the mind of a Leftist Drone. Ask him about Vietnam. He may well recall Lt. Calley & Mei Lei ..... Big Surprise! That's what I have said all along. You are always for every war so long as a Republican president is behind it. Still more mindless drone false assumptions. Which other Republican war have I been in favor of? Gee, now he admits that the republicans are terrorists. Take your time, use as much white space as necessary. I'm thinking that he's out of toilet paper for his outhouse again. The only wars you ever are against are the ones a Democrat instigates. Which ones were those? I was quite in favor of the Vietnam war, a Democrats war. ?? HUH? Not the way it was ultimately fought, having been one of the voluntary participants (twice) He had fun. The little kids did not. Since we have had a predominance of Republican presidents in the last 50 years that means you are virtually always on the side advocating war. Oddly enough..its been the Democrats who have started all those wars..and a Republcan which finished em for the majority. Wingers love to lie. That is what the evidence shows. You can deny it all you want but your ilk always find the case for war strong enough to start attacking someone, somewhere. Sure you are not in deep denial? Found those "WMDs" yet? As was pointed out to you..its been the Dems that seem to start the majority of wars. THE WAR party with THE WAR President? Normal people don't find war nearly as necessary as your kind do. So you are admitting Dems are not normal? The Lithium must be running low again. Oh, and any objective analysis of your postings clearly demonstrates that you do indeed have extreme right wing conservative views, you are authoritarian, and are a total martinet. Another mindless drone fatally flawed assumption. Found those "WMDs" yet? Gads man..you prove my claim with ever line you post. Found those "WMDs" yet? How could I, a rabid survivalist, be an authoritarian and a martinet? Evern my Nym indicates the opposite. You are thinking of that Nazi? and I do hold Leftists like you in utter contempt. From what I've seen you hold everyone that doesn't agree with your whacked out Republican ideology in contempt. More insults, more fatally flawed Mindless Drone assumptions based on fatally flawed claimes. Found those "WMDs" yet? You're a my way or the highway kind of person (read that as authoritarian). You also continue to call anyone who opposes your right wing philosophy a "leftist" including me even thought I am a registered independent and in no way support everything on the left wing. Chuckle if it has stripes, hooves and roams the plains in Africa..its still a Zebra, no matter if you call it a lounge chair or not. Found those "WMDs" yet? Not because of the party line, as Im a Republitarian, but because of the necessity of the war, and the long standing actions and agendas of the Left. That's the point isn't it? People like you always come down on the side of seeing war as the only course of action. To you war is a necessity but other less emotional people see it as a last resort only, and would never resort to war nearly as quickly as you would. Throughout history war mongers have always seen going to war as necessary when more reasonable people don't. Unfortunately, it's the rest of the people that have to pay for your "necessities". More reasonable people? Found those "WMDs" yet? Again, you base your claims on Mindless Drone fatally flawed claims. Found those "WMDs" yet? You? Reasonable? Hardly. Found those "WMDs" yet? I dont have to be a cop to hate child molesters. I dont have to be a Christian (and Im not) to support some concepts of morality. Simply irrelevant. Deep dnial on your part again. Found those "WMDs" yet? If it doesnt fit your world view, Found those "WMDs" yet? no matter how relevant or accurate..you dismiss it. Found those "WMDs" yet? You on the other hand..have a Talking Points fax line from the DNC plugged into that half empty gourd you call a skull. As is your habit, you end with your usual insult once again showing your ignorance and lack of originality. The other thing is that your head has to be as dense as granite, because no matter how many times you hear it you still keep perpetuating the myth that everyone you disagree with is getting their ideas from the DNC. I'm sure that the reason you think that is because the reality is it's Republicans, which you admitted to being, who are known for their adherence to top down hierarchy and like-minded thinking. It's also people like you who blindly parrot every line uttered by the likes of Sean Vanity and Rush Bimbo. I'm not a Democrat. I don't know how many times you have to be told that before you get it into your tiny brain, but I'm not going to waste time on someone as slow on the uptake as you are. You are a Republican and in my book that's about the worst insult I can think of to call someone. Actually, Im a registered Libertarian. Perhaps also a registered Communist & Democrat G. What you and your cronies need to understand is that you are members of the far right, not the middle. To you everyone to your left is a liberal. It simply isn't so. It's just that from your far out perspective the middle seems way to the left. To those of us in the middle the people to our left are liberals but your kind are just so far to the right you can't even see the forest for the trees, which is why you only get along with others that are just like you are. One other thing, all you far righties are always super patriotic war freaks and you are a shining example of that fact. The majority of Americans are not, so it's you all that's out of step not me and the rest of the people who oppose the Bush Administration's foolhardy policies. Too bad you'll never get that even though it's a fact. Hawke Snicker...so you are claiming to be "in the middle"? Found those "WMDs" yet? More mindless drone drivel. Found those "WMDs" yet? Gunner Found those "WMDs" yet? -- Cliff |
#40
|
|||
|
|||
On Mon, 29 Aug 2005 14:33:47 -0400, Kirk Gordon
wrote: Strabo wrote: "atheist" is inconsistent with libertarian. You can be an agnostic and a libertarian but atheists claim an unprovable knowledge (the non-existence of a god). I'm almost embarrassed to waste even a minute on this; but... The idea that an atheist (or anybody else) needs to "prove" some kind of non-existence is one of the most ridiculous and destructive non-ideas that's ever polluted human minds. Proof is affirmative. It only works on things that actually do exist. To attempt to twist it around and prove a negative - ANY negative, is to admit that you don't have a clue about what proof is, about how logic works, or about which end of you is your head and which is your ass. Here's a simple test: Can you prove that there's not a 16 foot tall, purple, fire breathing dragon standing right behind you, right this minute, about to bite your ass off? No, you can't. Looking behind you doen't work. The dragon might have moved as you turned your head. Or it might be an invisible dragon. Reaching out to feel around for it won't work, either. Dragons are very quick and clever. (Prove that they're not!) Did you look all over the room, under the desk, and behind the file cabinet? That's not proof of anything. It only means that you didn't find the dragon. It doesn't prove anything about whether the dragon actually exists. You say you're still alive, so there must not be any real danger? Not yet. But what about thirty seconds from now? Nobody else you know has ever seen a dragon? That only means you're hanging around with reallly unobservant people. Try all you like, twist yourself into knots. You can't PROVE that the dragon isn't there. Not in the true sense of a proof. All you can do is hope that there's no dragon, for the moment. Here's a better example. I accuse you of committing a horible crime. Can you prove that you didn't? No, don't ask what crime I'm talking about. I think you know. Can you prove that you don't? No, I'm not going to tell you when the crime was committed, or who the victim was. I'm sure you already know all that, and you can't prove the non-existence of such knowledge. And, if you want non-existence to be proveable, then the burden of proof is on you, since you CLAIM you don't know what I'm talking about, and that you didn't do anything wrong. Want to know how important it is to understand the true meaning of proof, and the reason WHY non-existence should NEVER be required to prove itself? It's because if we thought any other way, you'd be guilty until proven innocent - every single time anybody accused you of anything. Like most brain-lazy people, you accept the vitally important, life-saving protections earned for you by people who actually USE their minds; but you don't bother to care how or why they protect you, or what would happen to you if they didn't. If you ask an atheist to prove the non-existence of gods, then be prepared for someone, someday, to ask you to prove your innnocence in a crime you've never heard of. You'll deserve that, and all that follows. You asked for it. Rational people understand that emotions, beliefs, and even superstitions, are a part of human life. We live with them. But when you start pretending that you know the rules about what we can or can't believe, or start imagining that your own beliefs are somehow special or priviledged, and that you have scientific or logical justification for your self-deception, then you deserve to have your ass bitten off by dragons. You can believe whatever myths and stories you like; but don't pretend that you're doing anything else, unless you're prepared to learn what "proof" really is, and how it works, and then to use it to prove the existence of superghosts in the sky. KG Some might "argue" .... -- Cliff |
Reply |
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Forum | |||
Resetting controller on Ariston dishwasher | Home Ownership | |||
Repair Service for Test & Measurement Equipment | Electronics Repair | |||
Repair Service for Test & Measurement Equipment | Electronics Repair | |||
test for Jimbo | Metalworking | |||
Possible Condensation Solution? - Test Data | Woodworking |