Weekend Open Mic

Let’s get the weekend rolling on a good note!  Feel free to bring forward any discussions that you would like to continue.  Bottom Line and Todd are having a fun one.  We have a rogue cop in Liberal land that is hunting the LAPD (Did I mention that the cop was a Liberal?)  There is also a bad winter storm going to hit the New England area and bury Boston and some other cities.  Good Luck to all those folks,  Stay Safe if you’re in the path.

Advertisements

Comments

  1. gmanfortruth says:

    @JAC, Re: Anonymous. You stated:

    They are MORONS.
    More over, they are ARROGANT MORONS.
    In the name of transparency they will destroy transparency and freedom on the internet.

    Did you ever consider that “they” are from the government wanting to do the very things you say they will destroy? Just sayin 😉

    • Just A Citizen says:

      gman

      Actually, I have considered that. And I have not discarded it all together, although it seems less likely that a group funded by powerful people via back channels.

  2. gmanfortruth says:

    @Todd, Your a funny guy, but I see your point that governments have always seemed to exist. Those same governments, for the most part, are also responsible for the slaughter and murder of countless innocents over the course of history. Governments have always forced their will upon the masses, and always to the detriment of liberty and peace.

    Instead of arguing about all this, maybe we can agree on a form of some kind of “government” that can’t do this. 😉

    • Bottom Line says:

      He doesn’t come here to try to look for win/win solutions.

      He is a troll.

      • Well, looks like that conversation you guys were just starting to have-probably just ended.

      • Wow – high praise…high praise indeed.

        Is this the best you can do?

        I’ll go back to my original question that started this “discussion”:

        Any chance you’ll ever grow-up and act like an adult?

    • Gman,
      You’re right, government are responsible for the slaughter and murder of countless innocents over the course of history. But those governments were made up of people – you can’t separate the two. So people were also responsible for the slaughter.

      But you ignore the countless innocents that have been saved by governments over the course of history. Black Flag has pointed out several times that poverty, starvation, famine, and suffering have been the “norm” thru out most of human history. It’s only in the last 50-100 years that we’ve overcome that – the same period of the “terrible-progressive-onslaught-of-big-government” that you guys always complain about…

      Something to think about!!

      • gmanfortruth says:

        Now that you feel better, can we get to this?

        Instead of arguing about all this, maybe we can agree on a form of some kind of “government” that can’t do this. 😉

  3. gmanfortruth says:
  4. gmanfortruth says:
    • Just A Citizen says:

      It is actually becoming a mainstream media comment.

      Which means that it has REAL potential.

      The latest scuttle butt is that the Govt will propose Govt Retirement accounts to protect us all from the risks of the EVIL CAPITALIST MARKET.

      There will be incentives to get you to “voluntarily” roll your 401K and IRA’s into the new Fed Retirement Account.

  5. gmanfortruth says:

    Why I don’t pay attention to the MSM very much. http://personalliberty.com/2013/02/08/media-ignore-alleged-liberal-murderer/

    Not that it should matter, but most of the mass murderers in the past years have been proven to be Liberals, despite the media trying to claim otherwise. Remember our little chat about the Gabby Gifford’s shooting? The media made fools of those who believed them. Maybe one day they will figure out that the problem isn’t guns, it’s Liberals 😆

    • gmanfortruth says:

      Chris Dorner is the former LAPD officer that is being sought as a suspect in a triple homicide. He posted a manifesto online… Much of it, the media does not want you to know. Here’s a list of just some of what the media doesn’t want you to know about Dorner:

      He was pro gun control
      He loves Piers Morgan
      He fawned over Barack Obama
      He wants Hillary in 2016
      He wants Wayne LaPierre to watch his family die
      He is a big fan of MSNBC and CNN
      He wished that Trayvon had smashed George Zimmerman’s skull

      Read more: http://clashdaily.com/2013/02/breaking-joe-the-plumber-slams-medias-cover-up-of-leftist-cop-killer/#ixzz2KJWXHD9S

      • Okay, this guy is a liberal. Any update on if they are any closer to finding and stopping him from killing people?

        • gmanfortruth says:

          No Ma’am, nothing yet. I have a feeling he set his truck on fire and had another car in waiting. He may be laying low, waiting for complacency to set in. He is well trained, if he sticks to his training, he will do some serious damage. If he allows his emotions to lead him, he will make a mistake.

          A secret about gunfighting. The one who isn’t nervous, wins. Who do you think is nervous in this situation?

          • Anyone who has any sense of self preservation or in other words, anyone who is sane. But your right this guy is very dangerous-and he may even be a tool to show the liberals hypocrisy but he certainly shouldn’t be respected.

            • gmanfortruth says:

              he certainly shouldn’t be respected. He will be by those who hate the cops, the Rodney Kings of LA.

        • No and there won’t be any. Domer will be monitoring TV/radio, police scanners, etc. Would bet if they get a hot lead, they will use cell phones so he can’t monitor them. If/when he’s caught, I will be it’s a civilian tip that gets him, not police search tactics. Uniformed officers & marked cars can be evaded, you can’t hid from every civilian if you go out in public.

          • He certainly has skills that make him extra dangerous. I just hope he is stopped soon.

            I also hope his accusations are looked at seriously-I suspect most of us figure there is truth in his words-even if he has lost his mind.

    • Just A Citizen says:

      Gman

      I don’t think they were found to be “liberal’ in any political sense.

      They were more UNDECIDED or NON PARTISAN if you will.

      This latest is entirely a different matter, however.

  6. gmanfortruth says:

    TERRORIST ACTIVITY HAS CAUSED THE DEMOCRATS TO TAKE MEASURES IN ORDER TO PROTECT THEIR CANDIDATE FOR THE 2016 PRESIDENCY.

    FOR SECURITY REASONS, THEY HAVE SUGGESTED THAT HILLARY HAVE A MUSLIM NAME.

    SO FROM NOW ON, PLEASE REFER TO HER BY HER NEW MUSLIM NAME:

    “SELDOM BIN LAYED”

  7. On Monday, NBC published a Department of Justice memo that lays out the Obama administration’s framework for determining when it’s lawful for President Obama to order the assassination of a U.S. citizen.

    Basically, the president can assassinate you if “an informed, high-level” administration official has determined that (1) you are a senior figure in either al-Qaida or “an associated force”; (2) you pose a threat to the United States; and (3) capturing you wouldn’t be feasible. The memo goes on to explain that the president can order your assassination without “clear evidence that a specific attack on U.S. persons and interests will take place in the immediate future.”

    Below are some tips for how to decrease your odds of being assassinated by President Obama.

    1.) Don’t be accused of terrorism

    This is easier said than done. The federal government has a track record of falsely accusing people of terrorism.

    Because due process isn’t necessarily extended to accused terrorists, it’s important not to be accused of terrorism in the first place. We recommend the following precautions: steer clear of mosques; make sure your fingerprints don’t match those of actual terrorists (and if they do, consider having them surgically altered); don’t annoy flight attendants; don’t operate websites that terrorists might post on; don’t wear a keffiyeh; and don’t travel to the Middle East or South Asia unless doing so is absolutely necessary.

    2.) Make sure you’re always somewhere where you can easily be captured

    One of the vaguest parts of the DOJ memo is the passage about when it’s feasible to capture a suspect. After discussing various relevant factors, the memo simply notes that “feasibility would be a highly fact-specific and potentially time-sensitive inquiry.”

    The key here is to avoid remote areas. If you’re traveling in a foreign country, stay at brand-name hotels in major cities or near major highways. Marriott and Hyatt hotels are often surprisingly affordable, especially if you travel during off-peak seasons. Avoid countries with underdeveloped infrastructure that could make it difficult or time-consuming for authorities to reach you. Also, consider the number of flights in and out of the city or area you’re visiting. The busiest commercial airports outside of the U.S. are in Beijing, London, and Tokyo.

    3.) Avoid visiting Pakistan, Afghanistan and Yemen altogether

    President Obama has already accidentally assassinated at least one U.S. citizen: Abdulrahman al-Awlaki, a Denver teenager who was living in Yemen. At the time Robert Gibbs, President Obama’s then-spokesman, explained that it was al-Awlaki’s father’s fault for taking his son to a country that is a frequent target of U.S. drone strikes. Don’t make the same mistake.

    4.) If you are a terrorist, don’t get promoted

    It’s unclear whether President Obama can assassinate low-level or mid-level terrorists, but he can definitely assassinate senior-level ones. So if you’re a mid-level terrorist, tell your boss that you’re comfortable with your current responsibilities and aren’t interested in a promotion.

    Read more: http://dailycaller.com/2013/02/06/the-daily-callers-guide-to-avoiding-drone-strikes/#ixzz2KJdpKJWV

  8. G: Many revolutions come from the left …. 🙂

    Maybe the rogue cop has a point?

    • Piers Morgan serves hypocrisy piping hot and delicious
      Rick Moran

      I can’t write this without giggling like a 12 year old school girl. As all of you know, CNN’s Piers Morgan has been on a gun grabbing crusade since the tragedy at Sandy Hook. He has shamlessly stood atop the dead bodies of little children to make a political cause out of gun control. And he has done it with the most extraordinary sanctimony and moral preening imaginable.

      Now comes the case of the rogue LA police officer, Chris Dorner, whose obscene “manifesto” praises media elites, Hillary Clinton, Barack Obama, gun control efforts – and Piers Morgan.

      Jim Treacher:

      Apparently it’s different this time, for some reason. Jared Loughner never so much as uttered Sarah Palin’s name before his shooting spree, whereas Dorner specifically praised Morgan. Yet Morgan bears none of the responsibility he placed on Palin.

      Odd, innit?

      Allahpundit:

      The left, needless to say, is blameless for Dorner’s actions. Also needless to say, if his manifesto had extolled gun rights and called Obama “a vile and inhumane piece of sh*t” instead of Wayne LaPierre, this would be a five-alarm media inferno floating on a sea of sweaty rhetoric about The Conservative Movement turning to madness over gun control. The goal, as it was with Palin and as it always, always, always is in a situation like this, would be to cow law-abiding people on the right into softening their opposition to liberal policies or else be accused of complicity in some random crank’s bloodletting. It’s just a nastier version of Obama bringing kids up onstage when he signed those executive memos on guns last month: Instead of O implicitly accusing conservatives of being accomplices to murder, the immediate aftermath of a prominent act of violence tends to bring accusations that are more explicit. But when, as today, the facts don’t lend themselves easily to a “right-wing apocalypse” narrative, then suddenly all of the grander meaning in the killer’s political sympathies melts away. The double standard has become so obvious and so grotesque that I doubt most media liberals would even deny it anymore when challenged on it. It’s unmistakable and indefensible and they know it.

      And what is Morgan’s response? He tweets:

      The LA cop-killer murder spree has nothing to do with politics and everything to do with deranged criminality. I hope they catch him asap.

      My first reaction was to giggle. It really is kind of funny that someone lacks any self-awareness at all. We have to call it hypocrisy because there’s no other way to describe it, but what’s jaw droppingly shocking is that Morgan is so blithely unaware of it – clueless, totally.

      I will excerpt a bit of Ace’s post, deserving to be read in its entirety.

      This is the underlying assumption that they simply will not confess, for if they did confess it, it would be game over for them. All of their conclusions — all of their bias, all of their double-standards — flow from this premise, which they will not admit, but will only dance around.

      The premise is simply that liberal speech is much more valuable than conservative speech and this is of course because liberal politics are much more valuable than conservative ones.

      Once you accept this premise — liberal speech is high value, conservative speech is very low value — then you can see that all the conclusions make logical sense (although the syllogism remains invalid, as it’s based on a false premise).

      Of course there is distinction between how we treat liberal and conservative speech — just as there is distinction between how we treat jewels and how we treat human waste! One is precious and one is refuse; of course the two are treated differently!

      Of course, having vastly different levels of value, one might be worth a certain toll in human lives, and of course the other one would not be!

      They won’t say this.

      But this is our fault — because we don’t ask them.

      If we asked them, they would say it was a “trap” and wouldn’t answer. Just like asking a liberal about limits on the Constitution – they clam up and accuse you of trying to trick them.

      All we can do is, in our own small way, point to their hypocrisy and call them out for it. It won’t shame them. But it will let them know that they aren’t fooling anybody.

      Read more: http://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2013/02/piers_morgan_serves_hypocrisy_piping_hot_and_delicious.html#ixzz2KJk3yhq6
      Follow us: @AmericanThinker on Twitter | AmericanThinker on Facebook

    • gmanfortruth says:

      Charlie, maybe he does have a point. I never said he didn’t. He feels screwed by the system, like many people do. That doesn’t mean one has to kill innocent people. 🙄

      • LA police dept. has one of the longest histories of corruption in the US. He could be 100% correct in his allegations against them & them trashing his law enforcement career would have also ruined his military career. But even if he is correct on his charges, he has insured they will never be brought to justice. His crimes are so horrible no one will pay any attention to a police officer kicking a dirt-bag.

        He is not seeking justice or reform, he’s out for revenge. An eye for an eye is justice, he’s exacting a heart and a head for the eye. Murdering an innocent daughter to punish the father. True justice would have been collecting evidence and exposing LAPD corruption. If his training officer kicked a prisoner once, I bet she would do so again. Catch it on camera, show it one the news & he’s vindicated and a hero. Sad he chose to fight evil with evil….

  9. Stupid is as stupid does……..Leon Panetta being questioned on Benghazi. When asked by Senator McCain on who was in charge of the Banghazi problem…. Panetta’s response….”what exactly do you mean, in charge”………

  10. New proposed gun legislation in California. Background checks on all ammo purchases. Total ban on all semi-autos that have detachable magazines! The latter I believe includes confiscation. These hooples have never seen how fast you can drop an 8 shot en-bloc clip in a Garand, nor a stripper clip in an SKS.

    • I’m seriously beginning to think that our problem isn’t so much the Federal government as it is California.

      • gmanfortruth says:

        Our problem is Liberalism. It’s a mental condition that needs treatment 🙂

        • Perhaps but you gotta admit no matter the idea-it is California that always takes them to the really, really extreme.

        • Just A Citizen says:

          Wait a damn minute.

          I am a LIBERAL!!!

          Oh wait, maybe you DO have a point.

          • Liberals were guys like Walter Mondale, Nelson Rockefeller, Dan Moynihan and Hubert Humphrey. Hell, even Jimmy Carter was a LIBERAL. these guys are radicals, They follow the playbook written in the late ’60’s.

            Just for the hell of it, if you examine the issues of John F. Kennedy’s 1960 campaign and compare them to the issues of his brother Robert in ’68, you will see the huge changes that occurred. We are not quite there yet but after a few more years of Obama and his chosen successor Cuomo Jr., Robert Kennedy will start looking like Barry Goldwater!

            A warning though to the Colonel. Watch out for those folks you guys are trying to lure from California. Those turkeys are exactly like the turkeys NJ got from NY. After they are finished screwing up one state to the point where even they can’t live there, they drift off into another and start the process all over again. NJ used to be a blue/red state, is not anymore. Ask conservative Coloradians what’s been going on there with the California refugees. they are screwing the palce up big time! Remember, the thing about big time liberals is they are stupid and they vote. They also have absolutely no clue that their party was hijacked.

  11. gmanfortruth says:

    Just for D13 🙂

    A young Texan grew up wanting to be a lawman.
    He grew up big, 6′ 2″, strong as a longhorn and fast as mustang.
    He could shoot a bottle cap tossed in the air at 40 paces.
    When he finally came of age, he applied to where he had only
    dreamed of working: the West Texas Sheriff’s Department.

    After a series of tests and interviews, the Chief Deputy finally
    called him into his office for the young man’s last interview.
    The Chief Deputy said, “You’re a big strong kid and you can really shoot.
    So far your qualifications all look good, but we have, what you might call,
    an “Attitude Suitability Test”, that you must take before you can be accepted.
    We just don’t let anyone carry our badge, son.”
    Then, sliding a service pistol and a box of ammo across the desk, the Chief said,
    “Take this pistol and go out and shoot:
    six illegal aliens,
    six lawyers,
    six meth dealers,
    six Muslim extremists,
    six Democrats,
    and a rabbit.”
    “Why the rabbit?”
    queried the applicant.
    “You pass,” said the Chief Deputy.
    “When can you start?”

  12. Speaking of California-Algebra, besides basic math, algebra is the one math class I took in school that I actually used on a regular basis after I graduated. If I needed an answer, using the principals of algebra would lead me to the answer, and this is what they want to cut.

    California no longer requiring eighth graders to take Algebra
    2:22 AM 02/08/2013
    Robby Soave
    Reporter, The Daily Caller News Foundation

    California will no longer require eighth-graders to take algebra — a move that is line with the Common Core standards being adopted by most states, but that may leave students unprepared for college.

    Last month, California formally shifted to the Common Core mathematics standards, which recommend that students delay taking algebra if they aren’t ready for it. Previously, algebra class was a requirement for all eighth-graders in the state.
    Ads by Google

    Don’t Buy An Annuity…Until You Watch This Video Report! Top Annuity Flaws* – Warning http://www.SeniorAnnuityAlert.com
    Looking For Coffee Beans?Sign-Up For a Free Trial of Tonx! Try a Free Trial & Free Delivery. http://www.tonx.org/FreeTrial

    The Common Core State Standards Initiative, which is sponsored by the National Governor’s Association, is an effort to unify diverse state education curricula. Forty-five other states and the District of Columbia have signed on so far.

    But some education experts worry that the change will further damage struggling students’ college chances, since early proficiency in Algebra I is an excellent predictor of college graduation, according to the Mercury News.

    Black and Latino students in California are significantly more likely to fail eighth-grade algebra, and 80 percent of those who fail it once will fail it again when they take it in high school.

    A study published by the Lawyers’ Committee for Civil Rights of the San Francisco Bay Area claims that some minority students who score well enough to place into advanced math classes are often mistakenly held back.

    “School districts have been disproportionately requiring minority students to repeat Algebra I even after they scored proficient or advanced on the Algebra I California standardized tests,” said Kimberly Thomas Rapp, executive director of the committee, in an interview with The Daily Caller News Foundation.

    The new standard is a step back for California, and may leave students, particularly minority and low-income students, unprepared for college, said Rapp.

    “Back in ‘97 when the state went to a standard that expected students to take Algebra 1 in the eighth grade, that was really about looking forward to college competitiveness and preparing our public school students to be ready to compete to access college systems after high school,” she said. “The reality is what we’re now doing is lowering the standards.”

    Instead, Rapp proposed that California schools improve the mathematics curriculum for students in the fifth, sixth and seventh grades, so that they are better prepared for Algebra I in eighth grade.

    The Council of Chief State School Officers, which set the Common Core standards, did not respond to a request for comment.

    Read more: http://dailycaller.com/2013/02/08/california-no-longer-requiring-eighth-graders-to-take-algebra/#ixzz2KJyilMq8

    • For some strange reason, my 8th grade did not offer any Algebra, not even an intro back in ’60. I got to High School at a loss. The kid who got the gold medal in math at graduation later received the lowest score ever in the 11th year math regents exam at Manhattan Prep, 45. Not to worry, I redeemed myself in summer school with the help of a great teacher but forever after, I avoided math classes like the plague.

      Make them take it! Fail now or fail (much more spectacularly) later.

  13. I am sure glad that Iran is a peaceful country not complicit in Yemen……..we intercepted an arms shipment from Syria to Yemen from Iran, complete with silencers, IED, shoulder fired anti-aircraft with Chinese infrared technology, silenced Iranian machine guns, and Iranian made GPS radios.

    But, I know this must be wrong because A-Jad says so.

  14. They’ll never, ever survive when the everything comes crashing down. No sense of self-preservation whatsoever. What’s that saying…”fool me once…..”

    http://newyork.cbslocal.com/2013/02/07/shades-of-sandy-drivers-face-long-lines-at-gas-stations-before-blizzard/

    • gmanfortruth says:

      Since weather is a big subject of news this weekend, maybe this stuff may interest you.
      http://aircrap.org/evergreen-aviation-admits-to-chemtrail-contracts-with-usaf/33619/

      • Just A Citizen says:

        The name of this organization seem appropriate.

      • I don’t buy it. Lasers to decompose O2 to 2x O which then combines with H2 to form water in the upper atmosphere? Where did the H2 come from? A laser wavelength would need to be tuned to a O2 transition that would lead to dissociation. This is not easy. It would also need to penetrate into the atmosphere for a significant distance again not easy if it is being strongly absorbed by O2. Then you would need sufficiently many or high enough power to actually change a massive system such as the local atmosphere. Just creating the water vapor is not sufficient. Clouds need to form and this takes dust or ions to initiate. A jet plane in the upper atmosphere generates a significant water vapor trail that would be much greater than that be generated by a laser. The vapor trail that we see is often ice crystals since it is freezing cold at high altitudes.

        • gmanfortruth says:

          Sorry to disappoint ya T-Ray, the govt has already said they spend 5 billion a year on chem trailing! Ya need to keep up with the times my friend, your getting behind 🙂

          • I’ve been called an old fuddy-duddy before. I know how much energy has gone into making lasers powerful enough to shoot down a missile. Changing the weather with lasers just seems like a stretch to me.

          • I also know that the VLF electromagnetic systems that have been deployed are for communicating with submerged subs.

        • T-Ray,
          You need to stop confusing Gman with facts. It gets in the way of his “government is out to get us” theories…

          • gmanfortruth says:

            Todd, Do not worry, you are not on their list. You are safe. the grocery stores will always be full when you arrive, the gas stations will always have cheap gas and you will be free to continue on in life with no problems at all. 🙂

  15. gmanfortruth says:

    Awful quiet today! Want to talk about the Sandy hook conspiracy 🙄 OR, maybe something else like alien invasions and UFO’s 😆

    • Bottom Line says:

      What are you thinkin’ G man?

      You know there is no conspiracy. Everything is exactly as we are told.

      lol.

      • gmanfortruth says:

        Why of course it is. Just ask Todd 😆

        • Bottom Line says:

          Todd gives me a headache trying to sort out his mess of an argument.

          • gmanfortruth says:

            That’s called “attacking the messenger” because the message is far to complicated for an IT guy 🙂

          • All you have to do it provide one valid example to support your argument…or it that too intellectually challenging for you?

            • Oh man, lets look at the differences in our basic believes here-I agree with you Todd that we need a government to help create a civil society. But I agree with Bottomline and G that government has grown to a size that makes freedom a dream that doesn’t exist anymore. And it is growing to the point of no return.

  16. gmanfortruth says:

    Rogue cop no longer on Bear Mtn. I didn’t think so, but they are still looking. Just updated on TV

    • gmanfortruth says:

      WOW, All non govt traffic to be banned in Mass.

      • I had just moved into an apartment in Acton, MA in Feb. ’78 the weekend before the big blizzard. Started work Monday and left work about 3 pm because of the storm. Took 2.5 hrs to go 13 mi. Driving in the snow was not a problem, it was the traffic. It snowed most of the night and we had 30-36″ on the ground the next a.m. The state closed all the roads. Since I had just moved in, I had not stocked the cupboards and had only enough food in the house for a day or two. We shoveled out the apartment complex on Tuesday, but the roads remained closed. On Wed. I walked about 2 mi. to the package store and got some grub and beer. Thursday afternoon I drove to the closest grocery store and got some food even though it was illegal to drive. The roads were well plowed. They did not open the roads to the public until Sat. There was no reason to have kept them closed in our local area that long. The whole thing was blown out of proportion. I see they have not learned. Snow in New England is common. They know how to handle it. It is the media that blows it out of proportion to sell their product. Massive over use of superlatives.

  17. Bottom Line says:
  18. None of this waterboarding stuff, where they come out alive and we possibly might get some intel. No, don’t do that. Inhumane, blah, blah, blah.

    Just drone ’em!

    http://www.realclearpolitics.com/video/2013/02/07/brennan_waterboarding_is_reprehensible_and_should_have_been_banned.html

  19. Bottom Line,

    You say that rules don’t have to violate, but your only example – theft – is so simple – by your own admission – that it is not a valid example. Do you have any examples of rules that are pertinent to modern society and don’t violate?

    Where does it state or require people to be violated?

    Not all rules violate, but when you get to a complex and crowded society, someone is going to object to most rules.

    “No, you have it backwards. It’s not that “people cannot live without being forced into following rules” ”

    Where did I state this?

    You said that right above:

    You continue to challenge the idea that people cannot live without being forced into following rules that are in contrast with respect for basic human rights. So long as society rejects such an idea, it cannot exist.

    I will argue that it is human nature to seek out a way to get along, and that overgrown out of control coercive government is a failed attempt to do so. Our society is a good example.

    But you provide nothing as an alternative.

    ”If there are countless examples, why would it take you hours of research?

    (Seriously? Are you drunk?)

    Because there are many. If you have 500K beans, why would it take more than a day to count them?

    “You expect me to do the hours of research to prove your point? ”

    You are the one that originally asked for examples. If you are so curious, why can’t you look for yourself.

    ” To back up your assumptions with facts. ”

    You mean to do the research you are unwilling to do to answer your own inquiry.

    A long time ago, USWeapon set out some rules for SUFA (yes “rules” – the HORROR!). One of those was “you can make any argument you want, but you have to back it up with facts.”

    But instead, you use straw-man tactics. I didn’t ask you the list all 500k examples, just one or two. It is your responsibility to back-up your arguments with facts.

    It is not research I am unwilling to do to answer my own inquiry.

    It is research you’re unwilling to do to back-up your arguments with facts.

    You MIGHT be a smart guy, but you’re intellectually lazy. You’re not willing to put forth the effort to use whatever intellect you have.

    If I cared to take the time to do so, I can clearly and concisely demonstrate how almost every single one of your points is as such.

    Once again, your intellectual laziness shines thru. Not willing to put forth the effort…

    It is actually getting ridiculous, and I don’t think anyone is falling for it.

    The only ridiculous thing is your constant intellectual laziness – and I agree no one is falling for it.

  20. Bottom Line,

    Again, you use straw man tactics by insinuating that government is necessary to have a technologically advanced/modern standard of living.

    Try again.

    There are no straw-man tactics – or any insinuation – in my comments. The fact is these tribes live in huts, are hunter/gatherers, have no internet and no GUNS, and they use spears.

    The straw-man tactics are yours – avoiding the issue by attacking me.

    Obviously the only argument you have.

  21. Bottom Line says:

    ” You say that rules don’t have to violate, but your only example – theft – is so simple – by your own admission – that it is not a valid example. Do you have any examples of rules that are pertinent to modern society and don’t violate? ”

    Pigs do not fly, Todd. Claiming as such is completely ridiculous.

    ” Not all rules violate, but when you get to a complex and crowded society, someone is going to object to most rules. ”

    The manufacturer is indeed responsible if it knowingly uses an aircraft that is unsafe.

    ” You said that right above: ”

    You’re an asshole.

    ” A long time ago, USWeapon set out some rules for SUFA (yes “rules” – the HORROR!). One of those was “you can make any argument you want, but you have to back it up with facts.”

    But instead, you use straw-man tactics. I didn’t ask you the list all 500k examples, just one or two. It is your responsibility to back-up your arguments with facts. ”

    Are you kidding me? Latex paint dries MUCH faster than oil based paints.

    Oil based paint usually takes a day to dry, while latex can dry in as fast as 20 minutes depending on conditions.

    ” It is not research I am unwilling to do to answer my own inquiry.

    It is research you’re unwilling to do to back-up your arguments with facts.

    You MIGHT be a smart guy, but you’re intellectually lazy. You’re not willing to put forth the effort to use whatever intellect you have.”

    Orange juice is delicious.

    ” Once again, your intellectual laziness shines thru. Not willing to put forth the effort…”

    No, Todd, …you have it backward. Gravity pulls things TOWARD an object…like Earth.

    ” There are no straw-man tactics – or any insinuation – in my comments. The fact is these tribes live in huts, are hunter/gatherers, have no internet and no GUNS, and they use spears. ”

    Yes, I like Britney Spears. I don’t know her, but she seems like a nice person.

    ” The straw-man tactics are yours – avoiding the issue by attacking me.

    Obviously the only argument you have.”

    I do not, asshole.

    lol

    • Bottom Line,

      Latex paint dries MUCH faster than oil based paints.

      Oil based paint usually takes a day to dry, while latex can dry in as fast as 20 minutes depending on conditions.

      Yes, it’s probably best you stick to a subject like this – that you have a marginal understand of…

      You’re an asshole.

      More “high praise”…

      Thus I cannot justify taking the time to debate anything with you as it is pointless.

      ‘pointless’ again? Nah, just more intellectually challenging than you’re up too…

      I’m still waiting for an answer to this:

      Any chance you’ll ever grow-up and act like an adult?

  22. gmanfortruth says:

    (PUNXSUTAWNEY, PA) —Less than a week after declaring he did not see his shadow but did see four more years of an Obama in office, Punxsutawney Phil, the famed weather-forecasting groundhog of Punxsutawney, Pennsylvania, has been found dead in the town’s square. Adding to the shock and tragedy of Punxsutawney Phil’s death is its apparent cause:suicide, and the reason behind it

    Authorities say the prognosticating rodent took his own life over night, just hours after predicting an early spring last Saturday morning along with four more years of Obama in the White House. Said a sobbing Punxsutawney Police Chief Thomas N. Fedigan Jr. to reporters, Sunday, “It appears Phil, our beloved groundhog, took his own life by a single gunshot to his temple. A nine-millimeter handgun was found next to him …There are no signs of foul play. A suicide note has also been found scratched into a wooden light pole near Phil.”

    Clawed into the light post next to Phil’s frozen corpse were Phil’s last poetic and cryptic writs: “A thousand more years of winter to Obama’s mere four. I saw what I saw yesterday, thus can carry on no more!”

    “This is a truly sad day,” Chief Fedigan said, “not only for Punxsutawney, but lovers of Groundhog Day everywhere, for the whole nation.”

    Last Saturday’s Groundhog Day was the first time Phil had been out of his burrow since the November 6th election, thus learning of a second Obama term for the first time. And apparently, according to the deceased marmot, seeing four more years of Obama in office was enough to send the long assumed apolitical hermit over the edge. Although Phil still remained composed and conducted his duties as usual throughout the 127-year-old ceremony Saturday, seeing an early Spring, he never let on to the turmoil brewing within him after also seeing a President Obama in year 2017.

    Stunned Punxsutawney residents stood around the crime scene as Phil’s furry body was scooped up with a shovel and taken to the county coroner for an autopsy, although his cause of death is palpable. Many cried and hugged each other, completely in shock, while others wiped tears reservedly, simply saying they were surprised at the famous hog’s drastic actions. “I knew Phil wasn’t an Obama fan,” said Ron Plaucha, this year’s presenter and handler of Punxsutawney Phil, “but I didn’t think he would be this upset over (Obama’s) reelection. Oh, dear Lord! No!”

    State and local investigators have been searching Phil’s reclusive burrow in Punxsutawney’s Gobbler’s Knob since his stiff 8-pound body was discovered around 6:30 Sunday morning. Authorities have made no official statements on what they have uncovered in Phil’s den, but sources close to the investigation report the wall’s of the famous woodchuck’s lair to be covered in dreary articles about America’s foreign policies, economy and society since 2009. Another and much more lengthy suicide note was reportedly found next to an empty bottle of Jim Beam and Xanax, to which the buck-toothed rodent was rumored to be addicted.

    An anonymous source within Punxsutawney’s formidable 11-member police force told Duh Progressive Sunday, “We can’t say much detail, but there is another (suicide) note. (Phil) talks a lot about America’s stagnant economy … mentions 50-million people on food stamps, massive layoffs, unsustainable spending … ‘takers’ versus ‘makers’ … cheapest cost of Obamacare being $20,000 per family … giving weapons to radical Muslim regimes … a ‘President Barack O-Boo-Boo’ — referencing TLC’s “Honey Boo-Boo” — … a whole nation turning into some morbid ‘techno-driven pop collectivist cult’ … Yep, seems Phil wrote a lot of depressing stuff before offing himself.”

    End of Groundhog Day Spawns Day of Irony

    As America is now left grappling with Phil’s politically inspired suicide, some longtime opponents of the buck-toothed-dwelling groundhog are actually applauding his demise. Said documentary film maker and political activist Michael Moore to reporters Sunday, “Punxsutawney ‘the punk’ Phil never mentioned global warming or racism or capitalist greed or the war on women in his predictions. Not once — once! — in his hundred-year existence did Phil mention the plight of Native Americans, or gays, or minorities. I’m glad he’s dead!”

    MSNBC’s Sunday news anchor, Alex Witt, also lauded Punxsutawney Phil’s suicide, stating: “If anyone …particularly some giant gerbil whose only talent was predicting six weeks of weather is really that insecure to kill itself over who the president is, then he probably should.”

    Added Witt, “Perhaps fellow Obama-haters should follow Punkawhoever Phil’s lead. Really, do us all a favor and end yourselves.”

    Back in Punxsutawney, however, Moore and Witt’s comforting words are lost on a town not only devastated by the loss of their famous furry soothsayer, but also their only source of notoriety, thus tourism, thus income.

    Mayor Jim “Snake” Wehrle (yes, we know: what the mayor of a town like Punxsutawney is doing with the nickname “Snake” is just as baffling to us, too), told the AP that due to Phil’s death, Punxsutawney could lose nearly half its jobs, ironically adding another possible 3,000 people to the skyrocketing welfare rolls Phil allegedly raged about in his secluded den of despair.

    “But (Obama) isn’t the only person Phil said he was upset about seeing for four more years of,” claimed the anonymous source from Punxsutawney’s police department to Duh Progressive, glancing about nervously. “It seems Phil also wrote: ‘Unfortunately I also cannot see Michael Moore not blowing his brains out within the next four years, either. All the more reason I should now. I’m sorry, cursed humanity! Goodbye and good riddance.’ … Creepy, huh?”

    Read more: http://clashdaily.com/2013/02/tragedy-groundhog-days-punxsutawney-phil-sees-four-more-years-of-obama-shoots-himself/#ixzz2KLdgxMqP

  23. Bottom Line says:

    Todd,

    You obviously either do not understand what a straw man argument is, or you are deliberately doing so as to obfuscate. It is as if it is the only thing you know how to do other than use personal attacks.

    Thus I cannot justify taking the time to debate anything with you as it is pointless.

    I may as well have fun with it and mock you, or make a completely nonsensical argument…or simply ignore you.

    • Todd, I didn’t follow this argument from start to finish, but fear not (from what I’ve read) … it’s the only argument to be made from the right sometimes; your (my) arguments are nonsensical and have no credibility. I usually point to the number of people engaging in this wonderfully artciulated absurd arguments from the right and am next told, not only do I have no credibility, I can’t see all the other right wing nutjobs 🙂 following in silence.

      Just have fun, wingies … but seriously, your constant harping on nonsensical arguments is getting really old … 🙂

      • gmanfortruth says:

        Which argument is that Chuckie, that we choose freedom over slavery? That we are enlightened instead of being the same useful idiots that helped Stalin take power and kill millions of his own people? COME ON MAN! Wake the hell Up, Brother! 🙂

        • G! I meant to right “Just having fun wingies” but forgot the “ing” … oy vey.

          Stalin? Really? Do Native Americans count as “Americans”? Just asking … 🙂

      • Hey Charlie,
        Just more “par for the course” here at SUFA. They’re tripping over their own “logic”…cause – you know – they’re really smart – they keep telling me that…

        • Who is smart-well that is a good question-but I must wonder and ask-we talk so much about freedom-which is an American staple-but when does the liberal answer the question-when is too much government -too much. When do we hit the point where freedom is lost.

          • I think it’s a matter of perspective, VH (when freedom is lost). To anarchists it’s lost soon as you have any form of government/social contract (to include the police). To Tea Partiers it might be when safety nets are created or sustained … to more reasonable minds (also subject to definition/interpreation – reasonable is), it might be when civil rights are being violated. And there’s hypocrisy on both sides of the argument, I think. What I find hard to understand on the right is this claim about being anti-corporation while crying for a free market (or more free market) … see the beer issue raised the other day. Remove the regulations and bada-boom, bada-bing, it’s a monopoly overnight. Anarcists say “Good for them.” True liberals say, “Bullshit. Pay the workers an equal share of what they produce and not wages.” All a matter of perception … but if you think big money is having a rough time in America, sorella are you mistaken. Notice who’s having the rough time … and do you really think it’s because of government interference? This government has always been serving big money. Remove it and big money will put another one in its place. Which came first, the chicken or the egg? The corrupt or the corruptors? Again, all a matter of perspective.

            • gmanfortruth says:

              Charlie, You are not the Pinko Commie monster that you think you are. You can be a rational thinker who wants freedom just as much as anyone. Our country, as you basically have said, is not a free market country. Seems much more fascist each day as government gets deeper and deeper involved. We both know that the banksters are in charge, they own government. With that in mind, let’s work from there, not on arguing existing problems, but solutions. We should start on how to end the corruption. Then what?

  24. gmanfortruth says:

    Imagine if a Tea Party member had written a hate-filled manifesto, killed three people, gone on the run, and then declared “asymmetrical warfare” against a major police department while threatening to slaughter entire families – do you think the mainstream media would be interested in what that manifesto had to say about such an individual’s political beliefs?

    Without a doubt, the press would be affording obsessive coverage to the fact that this cop killer was a dangerous right-wing extremist, a violent domestic terrorist whose behavior vindicated all those warnings from the federal government about how “liberty lovers” need to be surveilled and silenced.

    What if this same individual had expressed vehement support for the second amendment in this very same manifesto? His savage actions would be a poster child for the urgent need to enforce strict gun control measures in the name of public safety.

    What if this same individual had expressed support for Congressman Ron Paul? His brutal triple homicide would be instantly exploited to demonize Paul supporters as crazed, unstable lunatics.

    Now compare that likely reaction to how the media responded to the story of Christopher Dorner, the individual currently the target of a huge LAPD manhunt following a double homicide last weekend and the fatal shooting of a police officer yesterday morning.

    ABC News reported the lurid details of Dorner’s Facebook manifesto, how he promised “high action of violence,” how he vowed to “bring unconventional and asymmetrical warfare to those in LAPD uniform whether on or off duty,” how he would “utilize every bit of small arms training, demolition ordnance, and survival training” in order to target LAPD officers and their families.

    However, the news network chose to leave out some pretty significant parts of Dorner’s rant that would have undoubtedly been highlighted if the alleged killer’s political persuasion had been different.

    Dorner is an Obama-supporting, gun control advocating, NRA hating, Piers Morgan loving, big government liberal – and that’s why you aren’t hearing about his political bent from any of the network news outlets.

    http://www.prisonplanet.com/media-censors-obamanoid-cop-killers-manifesto.html

    Imagine all this? Remember the Gifford’s shooting? Where are all the Liberal’s? Silent, that’s where. Not a peep! Maybe they should be reminded of this event, over and over and over anytime they talk gun control. They say gun control, we say Chris Dorner, end of discussion! 🙂

  25. gmanfortruth says:

    Rules of engagement to remember, lesson #1

    In today’s environment, most enemy combatants may be wearing a bullet proof vest, aim low, it’s hard to shoot accurately when in extreme pain because one’s testicles are no longer attached!

  26. gmanfortruth says:

    Rules of engagement to remember, lesson #2

    Heavy weapons first, keep them down, target officers (sorry Colonel) next!

  27. Haha wow, did this place ever turn into an echo chamber. Well it was fun while it lasted eh?

  28. Bottom Line says:

    Todd says:
    February 5, 2013 at 2:33 pm

    The requirement/fine starts in 2014. Someone isn’t being honest here.

    Bottom Line says:
    February 5, 2013 at 3:18 pm – I find myself rather annoyed by your use of the word “requirement”

    There is no such requirement. Nope, just some assholes thinking they have a right to tell people what to do because of some bullshit written on paper.

    NO ONE HAS A RIGHT TO USE COERCION TO STEAL FROM YOU OR TELL YOU WHAT TO BUY. <——period

    (okay Todd, this is where it originally started. You made a statement that it was "required", which annoyed me as it was an 'as if' statement..as if because it is law, it is okay to violate rights, that it is okay to steal as a punishment for not being obedient and accepting being forced to buy a service. I responded with a correction taking human rights into account.)

    Todd says:
    February 5, 2013 at 5:46 pm Any chance you’ll ever grow-up, act like an adult, and realize this is the definition of “society”? "

    (your response was an insinuation that I am immature. Now, this was a straw-man argument right from the get-go. The claim was respect for rights, not about maturity. A logical response would have been to argue that government has a right to force you, followed by supporting your claim with reason or at least a reasonable philosophical premise.)

    February 5, 2013 at 6:09 pm- BL – "Todd,

    I hardly consider violating others as ‘mature’.

    Any chance that you will ever understand the principles of free will, and basic human rights?

    What gives you or anyone the right to force another to do as you say? Paper and ink? Can you come up with something better?

    Is there any chance you will stop confusing coercion and force with the concept of being civilized?

    Is there any chance that you will ever understand the fundamental difference between right/wrong?

    Is there any chance you will ever present something other than a straw man argument to demonstrate your point?

    Is there ever a chance that you will learn to actually formulate a legitimate logical argument instead of resorting to personal insults? "

    ( I immediately recognized the straw man tactic and noted that it is not about maturity and tried to redirect the debate back to it's original premise of rights by asking you in your obviously familiar antagonistic question form, pointing out your obvious confusion and/or obfuscation )

    Todd says:
    February 5, 2013 at 11:45 pm

    Oh yeah, cause you’re all about free will and basic human rights, right? Except when it affects you. Then you’re happy to use “paper & ink” to enforce some imaginary line in the sand to define who can move where and compete with you for painting jobs.

    If you want to pretend to be all high-and-mighty, you need to be more consistent.

    Bottom Line says:
    February 6, 2013 at 8:12 am

    Todd,

    You obviously haven’t been paying close enough attention to notice that not only have I publicly admitted to being wrong about immigration issues, but have taken a stance that is a COMPLETE REVERSAL of my original position, …adamantly arguing at length in favor of no borders whatsoever…here and elsewhere..

    As for the Myers/Briggs thing, I was simply pointing out differences in the way people think in response to G. If you care to re-read the above post you will notice that. Don’t take it as a cut or an attempt to claim superiority, because it was simply not intended as such.

    Over the last several years here at SUFA, I’ve taken notice of your sensitive ego and ability to understand things in the realm of human compassion. To be honest, I wish I were as capable.

    And just because we are better suited at one thing or another doesn’t necessarily mean that it is where we end up, which, I may argue, is a major inefficiency within modern society.

    Now, would you like to drop the straw-man tactic and get back to the original premise with regard to human rights, or just drop it altogether?

    ( Your response was to again use a straw man argument of making it about borders without demonstrating the relationship to the logic/mechanics/principles of rights, and in combination with an incorrect accusation of my view of said borders. You also accused me of acting "all high and mighty", another personal attack, instead of just simply demonstrating a counter claim of how government has a right to use coercion/theft as a means of punishing one for not obeying a law that forces you to buy a product. Then, you actually, in your own inconsistency, accuse me of being inconsistent. This where I again counter your claims by first correcting your false accusations of my view about borders by reminding you of my change from my originally ignorant position several years ago. I tried to also remind you that my statements with regard to the Myers/Briggs test was not an attempt to attack your sensitive ego…which was already pretty clear in the text that you apparently ignored. I was trying to take the high road by admitting I was wrong with respect to borders as well as avoiding allowing you to use ego as yet ANOTHER straw man obfuscation. Then, I AGAIN tried to redirect the debate back to it's original context by suggesting that we argue the ORIGINAL premise of the principles of basic human rights. And after noticing so many attempts at obfuscation I decided that perhaps the debate was going nowhere but rather into a chaotic mess, that you are obviously not getting it, and that perhaps you needed an 'out', I suggested that we 'just drop it altogether')

    —————— In The Next Article Comment Section ——————

    Todd says:
    February 7, 2013 at 6:36 pm

    Bottom Line;

    "Now, would you like to drop the straw-man tactic and get back to the original premise with regard to human rights, or just drop it altogether?"

    Sure – as long as you drop your straw-tactics as well.

    Let’s deal in the real world. You don’t like the US Government – or government in general. So name the society – the time/place – where, in your opinion – the principles of free will and basic human rights, the concept of being civilized, and the fundamental difference between right/wrong were best adhered too.

    (Okay, first, you falsely accuse me of straw man tactics in spite of my repeated attempts of the exact opposite, be it that I made a few CLEAR AND DIRECT attempts to argue the original premise of the principles of rights. Then you AGAIN attempt to obfuscate with yet ANOTHER obfuscation of first insinuating that I am not arguing within the realm of the real world and then by asking for an example of a society that exists without violating rights…instead of simply continuing where the debate went awry and demonstrating how government has the right to force you to buy a product and punishing you with theft via coercion.)

    Bottom Line says:
    February 7, 2013 at 9:10 pm

    Todd,

    Understand that I am not what you may consider antisocial. I have no problem with people organizing and forming rules to have some sort of order. I rather like order, although I do understand chaos quite well.

    My issue is when people use coercion/force to encroach upon the rights of others. It is at which point that a person or group of people decide they know what is best for others and force it upon them that I have issue with.

    In the real world, people have God given basic natural inalienable rights that should be respected.

    Just for the sake of clarity, I will simplify and explain exactly where I am coming from.

    I think the line is drawn in the difference between minding your own business, and minding the business of others. If they are not somehow encroaching upon your rights, you have no business minding their business.

    Live your life, and allow others to live theirs. Live and let live…very very simple. Why is it that so many have such a hard time with this?

    You continue to challenge the idea that people cannot live without being forced into following rules that are in contrast with respect for basic human rights. So long as society rejects such an idea, it cannot exist.

    If you care to read throughout history, you can see for yourself there are countless examples of what you are asking of me. I suppose I could humor you and go on a research fit for hours digging up specific examples of such, …but why should I?

    Is it so hard for you to understand the concept of minding your own business?

    Further,…

    A straw-man argument is when you argue a different premise or logic than what was originally posited by your opponent.

    For example, if I argue that apples are red, and you respond with oranges are not red, You have presented a straw man argument.

    Another example would be if I were to argue that apples are red and you respond with apples are delicious.

    The original argument was that apples are red, thus anything other than arguing the color of apples is a straw man.

    A legitimate counter claim would be to say that not all apples are red as some are green.

    (First, as to establish clarity, I explain in more precise terms where my position is with regard to rules/government as it relates to the concept of human rights…Followed by a simplified explanation, for your benefit, as to demonstrate an example of how it works. Then, for even more clarity as to avoid further use of obfuscation, to rid you of excuse of ignorance, I attempt to allow you an explanation in terms a child can understand, a simple definition and examples of exactly what a straw man argument is)

    Todd says:
    February 7, 2013 at 11:48 pm

    Bottom Line,

    I have no problem with people organizing and forming rules to have some sort of order.

    But the minute someone does that, they will infringe on someone else.

    (You start by attempting to demonstrate how rules and coercion/force are inseparable)

    My issue is when people use coercion/force to encroach upon the rights of others. It is at which point that a person or group of people decide they know what is best for others and force it upon them that I have issue with.

    If you “organize and form rules”, you’re going to infringe on someone else. It’s just a fact – someone isn’t going to like the rules…

    ( You continue in the same attempt. A falsehood, a notion that it is fact, apparently without ever considering otherwise)

    I think the line is drawn in the difference between minding your own business, and minding the business of others.

    If you’re going to mind your own business, why do you needs rules?

    ( a clear and unwitting admission of my point)

    By definition rules are “a principle or regulation governing conduct, action, procedure, arrangement, etc.: the rules of chess.”

    The “rules of chess” is a good examples. If you and I are going to play chess, we have to agree to and follow the rules. Otherwise, on my first move, my Queen will jump across the board and take out your King. I win! If you try to “force” the rules on me, you’re encroach upon my “right” to play “chess” anyway I want too…

    You continue to challenge the idea that people cannot live without being forced into following rules that are in contrast with respect for basic human rights. So long as society rejects such an idea, it cannot exist.

    No, you have it backwards. It’s not that “people cannot live without being forced into following rules”, it’s that people choose to create rules to help maintain order in society. It doesn’t matter what I want or what you want, someone will create rules (government). It’s human nature.

    If you care to read throughout history, you can see for yourself there are countless examples of what you are asking of me. I suppose I could humor you and go on a research fit for hours digging up specific examples of such

    If there are countless examples, why would it take you hours of research? You expect me to do the hours of research to prove your point?

    …but why should I?

    To back up your assumptions with facts.

    Is it so hard for you to understand the concept of minding your own business?

    No, I do it all the time. How about you? You seem to want to force your version of “society” on everyone else.

    A straw-man argument…

    Yes, I’m familiar with the straw-man argument. It’s a common “tool” here to change the direction of a discussion.

    Bottom Line says:
    February 8, 2013 at 9:00 am

    Todd,

    ” I have no problem with people organizing and forming rules to have some sort of order. ”
    ” But the minute someone does that, they will infringe on someone else. ”

    You incorrectly suggest that rules violate, when they do not have to. There are such things mutually beneficial rules. An example would be a rule against theft, because theft is a violation of property rights. Everyone has property rights, thus everyone benefits equally by a rule against violating property rights.

    But everyone understands that theft is wrong, and thus a rule against it is, arguably, unnecessary. I cite my personal favorite, “The Golden Rule”

    ” If you’re going to mind your own business, why do you needs rules? ”

    EXACTLY!

    I’m impressed, Todd. I think you’re actually starting to get it.

    ” By definition rules are “a principle or regulation governing conduct, action, procedure, arrangement, etc ”

    Where does it state or require people to be violated?

    ” If you and I are going to play chess, we have to agree to and follow the rules. ”

    Yes. We do so because it is mutually beneficial to have rules that make it a logical challenge as our mutual goal is to have a challenging game.

    “No, you have it backwards. It’s not that “people cannot live without being forced into following rules” ”

    Where did I state this?

    ” …it’s that people choose to create rules to help maintain order in society. ”

    Yes. And if you care to reference above, you will see that I stated that ” I have no problem with people organizing and forming rules to have some sort of order. ”

    ” It doesn’t matter what I want or what you want, someone will create rules (government). It’s human nature. ”

    Then what is the point? Are you suggesting that life is about obedience to rules that violate us?

    I will argue that it is human nature to seek out a way to get along, and that overgrown out of control coercive government is a failed attempt to do so. Our society is a good example.

    ” If there are countless examples, why would it take you hours of research?

    (Seriously? Are you drunk?)

    Because there are many. If you have 500K beans, why would it take more than a day to count them?

    “You expect me to do the hours of research to prove your point? ”

    You are the one that originally asked for examples. If you are so curious, why can’t you look for yourself.

    ” To back up your assumptions with facts. ”

    You mean to do the research you are unwilling to do to answer your own inquiry.

    ” No, I do it all the time. How about you? You seem to want to force your version of “society” on everyone else. ”

    Really? Lol. You apparently are ignorant of the definition of coercive force and confuse it with logical pleas to try to convince others that coercion is unnecessary. Re-read above and you will notice that.

    ” Yes, I’m familiar with the straw-man argument. It’s a common “tool” here to change the direction of a discussion. ”

    Indeed you are, as you are the one that consistently uses a straw man tactic. If I cared to take the time to do so, I can clearly and concisely demonstrate how almost every single one of your points is as such. It is actually getting ridiculous, and I don’t think anyone is falling for it.

    ( I think this leg of our debate is somewhat self explanatory. I suppose I could nitpick, but it was actually starting to form into some kind of reasonable point/counterpoint format in spite of your apparent confusion and continued attempts to obfuscate)

    Bottom Line says:
    February 8, 2013 at 9:06 am

    Todd,

    Again, you use straw man tactics by insinuating that government is necessary to have a technologically advanced/modern standard of living.

    Try again.

    ( I again recognize your use of a false premise without backing it up with reason and attempt to point it out to you in hopes that you will see your flawed reasoning and actually correct yourself so that we may have some sort of reasonable debate)

    Bottom Line says:
    February 8, 2013 at 9:19 am

    Todd,

    Further,…

    I have come to the conclusion that you are either …

    A – as intelligent as you claim to be, fully aware of what a straw man argument is, and intentionally using the tactic as an attempt to obfuscate.

    …or…

    B – just plain stupid

    I am inclined to go with the former, which, of course, prompts me to wonder ‘why?’

    Is it possible that you are one of those paid plants assigned to sabotage conservative blogs as mentioned in the article that G posted?

    ( After taking a few minutes to reflect on our previous correspondence,[note the time stamps], I gave you the benefit of the doubt with regard to your intellect, and had come to the conclusion as clearly stated, be it that you have no interest in reasonable debate, but rather are attempting to obfuscate. I further inquire your reasoning for doing as such by asking if there is some ulterior motive such as that you are being paid)

    Bottom Line says:
    February 8, 2013 at 6:08 pm

    ” You say that rules don’t have to violate, but your only example – theft – is so simple – by your own admission – that it is not a valid example. Do you have any examples of rules that are pertinent to modern society and don’t violate? ”

    Pigs do not fly, Todd. Claiming as such is completely ridiculous.

    ” Not all rules violate, but when you get to a complex and crowded society, someone is going to object to most rules. ”

    The manufacturer is indeed responsible if it knowingly uses an aircraft that is unsafe.

    ” You said that right above: ”

    You’re an asshole.

    ” A long time ago, USWeapon set out some rules for SUFA (yes “rules” – the HORROR!). One of those was “you can make any argument you want, but you have to back it up with facts.”

    But instead, you use straw-man tactics. I didn’t ask you the list all 500k examples, just one or two. It is your responsibility to back-up your arguments with facts. ”

    Are you kidding me? Latex paint dries MUCH faster than oil based paints.

    Oil based paint usually takes a day to dry, while latex can dry in as fast as 20 minutes depending on conditions.

    ” It is not research I am unwilling to do to answer my own inquiry.

    It is research you’re unwilling to do to back-up your arguments with facts.

    You MIGHT be a smart guy, but you’re intellectually lazy. You’re not willing to put forth the effort to use whatever intellect you have.”

    Orange juice is delicious.

    ” Once again, your intellectual laziness shines thru. Not willing to put forth the effort…”

    No, Todd, …you have it backward. Gravity pulls things TOWARD an object…like Earth.

    ” There are no straw-man tactics – or any insinuation – in my comments. The fact is these tribes live in huts, are hunter/gatherers, have no internet and no GUNS, and they use spears. ”

    Yes, I like Britney Spears. I don’t know her, but she seems like a nice person.

    ” The straw-man tactics are yours – avoiding the issue by attacking me.

    Obviously the only argument you have.”

    I do not, asshole.

    lol

    ( After realizing that our debate was, at best, moving slow, or more accurately to state, that it is nonsensical chaotic mush as for your inability to properly reason, I decided to imitate you in hopes that it would bring about self reflection as to your debating 'style', that it may prompt you to realize what you are actually doing. That is what this was about.)

    Todd says:
    February 9, 2013 at 2:03 am

    Bottom Line,

    Latex paint dries MUCH faster than oil based paints.

    Oil based paint usually takes a day to dry, while latex can dry in as fast as 20 minutes depending on conditions.

    Yes, it’s probably best you stick to a subject like this – that you have a marginal understand of…

    You’re an asshole.

    More “high praise”…

    Thus I cannot justify taking the time to debate anything with you as it is pointless.

    ‘pointless’ again? Nah, just more intellectually challenging than you’re up too…

    I’m still waiting for an answer to this:

    Any chance you’ll ever grow-up and act like an adult?

    ( clearly, at this point we are 'debating' in a format you are more comfortable with and accustomed to, be it personal attacks, obfuscation and nonsensical BS)

    If you like, I suppose when I have more time, I can make an even more in-depth analysis…but I think you get the point…or I at least hope you do.

    Now, with all that said/demonstrated, is there any chance that you can either…

    A – Actually counter the ORIGINAL claim of mine by clearly and concisely demonstrating how and why government or any other entity has a right to forcefully coerce you into buying a product, or stealing from you via the same means as a way of punishing you for disobedience…

    …or…

    B – Dropping it altogether as it is a waste of time to attempt to debate in a completely obfuscational and nonsensical straw man fashion, as it gets us absolutely nowhere.

    ??????

    • BL
      I don’t think USW’s rules include backing a statement with references or sources. It is frequently requested but not a rule. No one has to prove God or Unicorns exist to have an opinion about them. Having sources for what you base your thoughts on does help prove your case in the court of public opinion. There is a rule on personal attacks. Sometime’s I think Todd comes here just to poke at us & try to stir us up. Mission accomplished Todd.

      BL, any more articles coming from you?

  29. Dear Todd,

    I think some people loose interest in SUFA when it gets petty with personal attacks and sarcasm. “grow up & act like an adult?” You expect that to inspire a meaningful exchange of ideals? You want to use the Flagster where it suits you but skip over his conclusion is ALL government must be eliminated for true freedom and prosperity. I have talked with USW about our liberal posters and wondered why they have never written an article. He said he’s reached out several times but no takers. You are a great writer, well informed & opinionated. But you never have put an ideal out there first, have you? So much safer & easier to sit back and bash our offerings. You boldly go nowhere.

    How about some insight to you thoughts? As a liberal, how do you think Obama’s foreign policy is working? Is the world safer/better where he’s been active?
    Egypt?
    Libya?
    Syria?
    Iran?
    Russia?
    China?
    Still think he’s a better choice than Romney? And what about the economy? Gas is expected to have a new “norm” of around $3.75 a gal. Part of this is because of currency devaluation, part is reduced demand worldwide. Food prices are also rising 20-25%, impacting the poor & middle class hardest. Is this what you want? Obama seems happy with everything except those damned Repugs won’t let him spend enough. So how about you, our sometime “Defender-in-Chief”, are you happy with Obama’s work?

    Todd says:
    February 8, 2013 at 5:33 pm
    Wow – high praise…high praise indeed.

    Is this the best you can do?

    I’ll go back to my original question that started this “discussion”:

    Any chance you’ll ever grow-up and act like an adult?

    Reply
    Todd says:
    February 8, 2013 at 5:29 pm
    Gman,
    You’re right, government are responsible for the slaughter and murder of countless innocents over the course of history. But those governments were made up of people – you can’t separate the two. So people were also responsible for the slaughter.

    But you ignore the countless innocents that have been saved by governments over the course of history. Black Flag has pointed out several times that poverty, starvation, famine, and suffering have been the “norm” thru out most of human history. It’s only in the last 50-100 years that we’ve overcome that – the same period of the “terrible-progressive-onslaught-of-big-government” that you guys always complain about…

    Something to think about!!

    Reply
    gmanfortruth says:
    February 8, 2013 at 5:46 pm
    Now that you feel better, can we get to this?

    Instead of arguing about all this, maybe we can agree on a form of some kind of “government” that can’t do this.

%d bloggers like this: