PDA

View Full Version : Curious about the average age on this forum



Redrose
06-20-2014, 08:53 PM
Someone mentioned the average age on here was 75. I don't see that. Would you consider posting your age. I've already told, I'm 65.

Bob
06-20-2014, 08:57 PM
I was 75 until you asked. August I will be 76. LOL

Chris
06-20-2014, 08:57 PM
If we drew a bell curve it would be positively skewed toward yutes I think.

Spectre
06-20-2014, 09:02 PM
If we drew a bell curve it would be positively skewed toward yutes I think.

Oh, shit yes, you got THAT one right!:laugh:

It's painfully, embarrassingly obvious!

http://www.dumbestgeneration.com/images/179_CoverArt.jpg (http://www.google.ca/url?sa=i&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=images&cd=&cad=rja&uact=8&docid=Y79YRyuvZ7l27M&tbnid=O-XaBfIBsyahxM:&ved=0CAUQjRw&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.dumbestgeneration.com%2Fhome. html&ei=r-ekU9zEAdWqyATY0oGYBw&bvm=bv.69411363,d.aWw&psig=AFQjCNFMWYf3Pfl5y57zCwng4qRDgIUB2A&ust=1403402526507483)

The Xl
06-20-2014, 09:02 PM
25

Chris
06-20-2014, 09:06 PM
Oh, shit yes, you got THAT one right!:laugh:

It's painfully, embarrassingly obvious!

http://www.dumbestgeneration.com/images/179_CoverArt.jpg (http://www.google.ca/url?sa=i&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=images&cd=&cad=rja&uact=8&docid=Y79YRyuvZ7l27M&tbnid=O-XaBfIBsyahxM:&ved=0CAUQjRw&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.dumbestgeneration.com%2Fhome. html&ei=r-ekU9zEAdWqyATY0oGYBw&bvm=bv.69411363,d.aWw&psig=AFQjCNFMWYf3Pfl5y57zCwng4qRDgIUB2A&ust=1403402526507483)


I disagree with your estimation of yutes. I see a lot of hope there. I hope they figure it out better than us old fogies have.

Spectre
06-20-2014, 09:07 PM
I disagree with your estimation of yutes. I see a lot of hope there. I hope they figure it out better than us old fogies have.

From your lips to God's ear, but I'm not holding my breath.

Dr. Who
06-20-2014, 09:08 PM
59 on the 25th.

Spectre
06-20-2014, 09:10 PM
54

Mister D
06-20-2014, 09:15 PM
38

hanger4
06-20-2014, 09:18 PM
60 this past May

zelmo1234
06-20-2014, 09:21 PM
48 ?But I am feeling younger everyday!

Refugee
06-20-2014, 09:41 PM
A young looking 59.

Don
06-20-2014, 10:20 PM
64

Bob
06-20-2014, 10:22 PM
OK Chris ... you commented

no age yet

Libhater
06-20-2014, 10:30 PM
64 and sleeping with an 18-y-o babe.

Bob
06-20-2014, 10:31 PM
64 and sleeping with an 18-y-o babe.

Why?

Spectre
06-20-2014, 10:33 PM
64 and sleeping with an 18-y-o babe.

A crack habit will make some women do anything...just yanking ya, Lib!:laugh:

A good friend of mine is my age and having a very passionate fling with a 29 year old.

TheInternet
06-20-2014, 10:34 PM
Why?

Why? WHY??


Wow.



Anyway, I'm 29.

Libhater
06-20-2014, 10:48 PM
Why?

Because I can.

momsapplepie
06-20-2014, 10:54 PM
Just turned 54 two weeks ago.

sachem
06-20-2014, 10:55 PM
64 and sleeping with an 18-y-o babe.That is pretty old bacon.

https://encrypted-tbn1.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcQmq0Da-8ovRFnbInLFEJK0uZzv97gY5RGmSt0CZTj_94fv5Z1uCw

Bob
06-20-2014, 11:07 PM
Because I can.

I have had my share of those too. Not lately, but for many years.

Why?

My best one was 34. I was then 50.

Back then, one mom told her (19 and super hot) that she was happy I was banging the daughter. Because I had substance.

Anyway, i think she only wanted our ages. Best of all to you both.

Guerilla
06-20-2014, 11:16 PM
18

A poll probably would've been good for this

Chris
06-20-2014, 11:17 PM
OK Chris ... you commented

no age yet


I forgot.

Redrose
06-20-2014, 11:22 PM
When I got divorced I was 40, a young looking 40, but still 40. A great looking guy I worked with asked me out. We dated about a month. I ended it. He was 26. Mind boggling boring. OMG intellectually we had nothing in common. Conversation was cars, sports. OMG Sex was miserable too surprisingly. Well I got that out of my system, 14 years was too much of a difference. My husband now is 6 years younger but looks older. Relationships should be more than sex.

Perianne
06-20-2014, 11:25 PM
56

Peter1469
06-21-2014, 04:38 AM
44

GrassrootsConservative
06-21-2014, 04:38 AM
23

1751_Texan
06-21-2014, 04:47 AM
Because I can.

I hope y'all are in a committed hetrosexual marriage...none of that liberal "bionking for fun and ruining America's values and morals" nonsense.

midcan5
06-21-2014, 06:27 AM
[Thoughts partially posed by 'Freedom Coalition's “Road to the Majority” conference' and its bashing of our president and its overall uselessness given the real world. When all you do is find fault what is it you do.]




Glancing through this list of ages and marital status and masculine attempts at a Viagra induced youth it got me thinking. Funny how men cling to youth. I thought righties were all stable, happily married and well adjusted? Seems not. Divorce is failure, don't get me wrong I realize the whys, but I still find it fascinating the image opposed to the reality. Is it simply human nature cannot look in the mirror and must then desire control over the other? The right is always right and must condemn our more secular society, our personal freedoms, even our President but maybe a reality mirror would show them just a bit of tolerance towards another, he without sin... Oh and we are in our sixties and married longer than ....


"Dad could talk about peace and love out loud to the world, but he could never show it to the people who supposedly meant the most to him: his wife and son. How can you talk about peace and love and have a family in bits and pieces - no communication, adultery, divorce? You can't do it, not if you're being true and honest with yourself." Julian Lennon


"I hate failure and that divorce was a Number One failure in my eyes. It was the worst period of my life. Neither Desi nor I have been the same since, physically or mentally." Lucille Ball


"My parents' divorce left me with a lot of sadness and pain and acting, and especially humour, was my way of dealing with all that." Jennifer Aniston

zelmo1234
06-21-2014, 06:32 AM
It is funny, my first wife was 6 years older, and the Red head is 11 years younger!

But on a maturity level they are about the same. both very intelligent, motivated, Very, very Strong and beautiful Women! I have been blessed to know them both!

But my friends give me the cradle robber from time to time!

donttread
06-21-2014, 06:36 AM
Someone mentioned the average age on here was 75. I don't see that. Would you consider posting your age. I've already told, I'm 65.


54 soon to be 55

zelmo1234
06-21-2014, 06:41 AM
[Thoughts partially posed by 'Freedom Coalition's “Road to the Majority” conference' and its bashing of our president and its overall uselessness given the real world. When all you do is find fault what is it you do.]

Glancing through this list of ages and marital status and masculine attempts at a Viagra induced youth it got me thinking. Funny how men cling to youth. I thought righties were all stable, happily married and well adjusted? Seems not. Divorce is failure, don't get me wrong I realize the whys, but I still find it fascinating the image opposed to the reality. Is it simply human nature cannot look in the mirror and must then desire control over the other? The right is always right and must condemn our more secular society, our personal freedoms, even our President but maybe a reality mirror would show them just a bit of tolerance towards another, he without sin... Oh and we are in our sixties and married longer than ....

"Dad could talk about peace and love out loud to the world, but he could never show it to the people who supposedly meant the most to him: his wife and son. How can you talk about peace and love and have a family in bits and pieces - no communication, adultery, divorce? You can't do it, not if you're being true and honest with yourself." Julian Lennon

"I hate failure and that divorce was a Number One failure in my eyes. It was the worst period of my life. Neither Desi nor I have been the same since, physically or mentally." Lucille Ball

"My parents' divorce left me with a lot of sadness and pain and acting, and especially humour, was my way of dealing with all that." Jennifer Aniston

ONE OF YOUR BEST POSTS!

And absolutely correct! The destruction of the family knows no party and even those with religious beliefs are only slightly better at keeping a marriage together! Many broken homes have terrible relationships and this is Very hard on the children

And while I was very young and very liberal when I got divorced, it would not have mattered if I was conservative, while I called myself a Christian I was not a practicing Christian, and don't think that if I had been the only one attending Church it would have helped either, though I wonder if both of us were as committed in the Church as we are today if it would have worked!

But I pride myself on not becoming bitter and hateful in the divorce process, and the fact that our Son can say to everyone. My parents are divorced and still friends!

That being Said Midcan is 100% correct, until America starts to work on the broken family weather you are liberal, conservative, communists or Fascist? It will not begin to turn the situation around

Libhater
06-21-2014, 07:08 AM
ONE OF YOUR BEST POSTS!

And absolutely correct! The destruction of the family knows no party and even those with religious beliefs are only slightly better at keeping a marriage together! Many broken homes have terrible relationships and this is Very hard on the children

And while I was very young and very liberal when I got divorced, it would not have mattered if I was conservative, while I called myself a Christian I was not a practicing Christian, and don't think that if I had been the only one attending Church it would have helped either, though I wonder if both of us were as committed in the Church as we are today if it would have worked!

But I pride myself on not becoming bitter and hateful in the divorce process, and the fact that our Son can say to everyone. My parents are divorced and still friends!

That being Said Midcan is 100% correct, until America starts to work on the broken family weather you are liberal, conservative, communists or Fascist? It will not begin to turn the situation around

For the most part I too agree with you and Midlin on this issue, and I have also had shaky scruples and a rather dysfunctional upbringing when it comes to the moralizing thingy because I was young impressionable and somewhat of a class clown be it in the classroom or in the detention hall. But I think the point or perhaps the difference in the political aspect of this moral/righteousness issue for me is when and or how we as adults teach our young-ins right from wrong and moral vs immoral. I still think a good old Conservative teaching is or has a far better value system for our children than does the anything goes (tolerance at all cost) secular mindset of the leftist agenda.

Max Rockatansky
06-21-2014, 07:13 AM
Why?

Note he said "sleeping with". Having a nurse sleeping in the chair next to your bed constitutes "sleeping with". :)

58 years young.

IMPress Polly
06-21-2014, 07:30 AM
I'm 29 and capable of finding love (and sex) within my own generation.

Anyway, including my age, KC's (since it's stated in his profile), and all those posted on this thread, the average age here so far is 47, but the median age (i.e. the age of the typical PF member) is 54. So much for Spectre's theory that most people here are under 30! He himself is exactly the age of the typical PF member, according to current data. It's also worth saying that, according to our current data, the majority the PF membership belongs to the same generation: 12 out of 21 PF members who have disclosed their ages so far are between 54 and 65 years old. There are also six of us under the age of 30, so that's the second most common age group here.

The average PF member is well above America's national median age of 38.

(Just edited to include Max.)

Chris
06-21-2014, 07:35 AM
I'm 29 and capable of finding love (and sex) within my own generation.

Anyway, including my age, KC's (since it's stated in his profile), and all those posted on this thread, the average age here so far is 45, but the median age (i.e. the age of the typical PF member) is between 48 and 54. The median age is flexible since an even number of people have revealed their age so far, but it's fair to round up because fully the majority (11 out of the 20) of those who've disclosed their ages so far are 54 or older. So much for Spectre's theory that most people here are under 30! He himself is exactly the age of the typical PF member, according to current data. It's also worth saying that, according to our current data, half the PF membership belongs to the same generation an even half of those who have disclosed their ages so far are between 54 and 65 years old. There are also six of us under the age of 30, so that's the second most common age group here.


Too small a sample.

IMPress Polly
06-21-2014, 07:38 AM
I just edited to include Max. Anyway, add your age, Chris, and the sample size will be one member larger. :wink: Instead of just complaining, why not contribute?

KC
06-21-2014, 07:46 AM
21

zelmo1234
06-21-2014, 07:47 AM
I'm 29 and capable of finding love (and sex) within my own generation.

Anyway, including my age, KC's (since it's stated in his profile), and all those posted on this thread, the average age here so far is 47, but the median age (i.e. the age of the typical PF member) is 54. So much for Spectre's theory that most people here are under 30! He himself is exactly the age of the typical PF member, according to current data. It's also worth saying that, according to our current data, the majority the PF membership belongs to the same generation: 12 out of 21 PF members who have disclosed their ages so far are between 54 and 65 years old. There are also six of us under the age of 30, so that's the second most common age group here.

The average PF member is well above America's national median age of 38.

(Just edited to include Max.)

Yes but the youth has not weighed in yet, Thing of Codes group, that is all going to be in the 25 range. if not younger, Montoya, Exotix All I betting are very young

Glad to know about you being able to find love in your own Generation! That would seem to work out the best I would guess.

My suggestion is to find love! Real and lasting heart felt love, and that means keeping things out of the bedroom for at least 6 months.

I think that this is another reason that so many marriages fall to pieces, sex becomes the basis and you don't get to know the real person until it is too late

Chris
06-21-2014, 07:52 AM
I just edited to include Max. Anyway, add your age, Chris, and the sample size will be one member larger. :wink: Instead of just complaining, why not contribute?

I pointed out the fault in your sampling, polly.

I'm older than most, just barely younger than a few.

zelmo1234
06-21-2014, 07:54 AM
I pointed out the fault in your sampling, polly.

I'm older than most, just barely younger than a few.

Don't be a pussy, tell us how old you are , ya! old fart!

sachem
06-21-2014, 07:54 AM
57.

Libhater
06-21-2014, 08:05 AM
I hope y'all are in a committed hetrosexual marriage...none of that liberal "bionking for fun and ruining America's values and morals" nonsense.

LOL! Thanks for my morning belly laugh.

KC
06-21-2014, 08:06 AM
Too small a sample.

It's not too small a sample if you change the wording. The average age of people who have posted in this thread is X. Whether this thread is a good representation of tPF is uncertain.

Chris
06-21-2014, 08:07 AM
It's not too small a sample if you change the wording. The average age of people who have posted in this thread is X. Whether this thread is a good representation of tPF is uncertain.

Right, my point. See zelmo's explanation.

Chris
06-21-2014, 08:08 AM
Don't be a pussy, tell us how old you are , ya! old fart!

63

Libhater
06-21-2014, 08:10 AM
Note he said "sleeping with". Having a nurse sleeping in the chair next to your bed constitutes "sleeping with". :)

58 years young.

Yeah, I pay the nurse to keep tabs on the functionality of my sleep apnea (CPAP) machine and to help fine tune my prostate (junk) problem when she sees that I'm in distress.

Mainecoons
06-21-2014, 08:18 AM
69, 70 on October 22.

Common Sense
06-21-2014, 09:09 AM
41...


I was being sarcastic when I said the average age was 75. It's probably closer to 50. ;)

lynn
06-21-2014, 09:20 AM
I am 51.

Spectre
06-21-2014, 09:31 AM
Glad to know about you being able to find love in your own Generation! That would seem to work out the best I would guess.



Love and attraction has absolutely ZERO to do with age, race, economic condition, or social status.

The Film 'Harold and Maude' is an extreme example, but it applies here.

Love is too irrational and unpredictable a force to artificially confine it in that way.

Some of the most stunning and desirable women I know are in their 50s.

Private Pickle
06-21-2014, 09:43 AM
41

IMPress Polly
06-21-2014, 10:00 AM
Zelmo wrote:
Yes but the youth has not weighed in yet, Thing of Codes group, that is all going to be in the 25 range. if not younger, Montoya, Exotix All I betting are very young

We'll see! (Maybe.) Six more people have posted their ages since I last wrote earlier this morning, but so far the median age hasn't changed: it remains 54. It may fluctuate a little as more members post their ages, but I think it's basically stable at this point.


Glad to know about you being able to find love in your own Generation! That would seem to work out the best I would guess.

In my personal opinion, those who stray outside their generation (as in outside a 12-year age range) on the young side tend to have certain very obvious motives for doing so that have nothing to do with love and often involves cheating on someone you're already involved with. And those that get involved with people more than 12 years their senior also tend to have ulterior motives (like money) in my observation. Genuine affection I think is most likely to occur when one sticks to their own generation.


My suggestion is to find love! Real and lasting heart felt love, and that means keeping things out of the bedroom for at least 6 months.

I think that this is another reason that so many marriages fall to pieces, sex becomes the basis and you don't get to know the real person until it is too late

You know, there's actually a scientific basis for something a little bit like the idea you posit. Dr. Wendy Walsh's very interesting book The 30-Day Love Detox provides strong evidence that living together for at least 30 days before having sex increases the duration of relationships considerably. I recommend taking a read to it if you get the chance.

DigitalBluster
06-21-2014, 11:36 AM
You might get a larger sample by adding an anonymous poll.

Perianne
06-21-2014, 11:39 AM
You might get a larger sample by adding an anonymous poll.

The polling system only allows something like eight options, so it would have to be something like:

0-20
21-30
31-40
41-50
51-60
61-70
71+

PolWatch
06-21-2014, 12:02 PM
70 next month...married 40 years to same man who is 4 weeks younger than I. Guess that really messes up the ideal of stability/morality belonging to only those of conservative leaning.

Captain Obvious
06-21-2014, 12:04 PM
69, 70 on October 22.

Never too old for 69

Captain Obvious
06-21-2014, 12:06 PM
46

My from-the-hip guess based on the responses is the average age is probably in the mid to upper 40's

DigitalBluster
06-21-2014, 12:11 PM
The polling system only allows something like eight options, so it would have to be something like:

0-20
21-30
31-40
41-50
51-60
61-70
71+

Which seems useful to me. *shrug*

Perianne
06-21-2014, 12:12 PM
Which seems useful to me. *shrug*
DigitalBluster, start the thread. I will participate.

DigitalBluster
06-21-2014, 12:17 PM
DigitalBluster, start the thread. I will participate.

Eh, I'd rather not be the one to start it. It would give the impression that I care more than I do.

Perianne
06-21-2014, 12:17 PM
Eh, I'd rather not be the one to start it. It would give the impression that I care more than I do.

lol, okay. I was just trying to help.

Bob
06-21-2014, 12:38 PM
We'll see! (Maybe.) Six more people have posted their ages since I last wrote earlier this morning, but so far the median age hasn't changed: it remains 54. It may fluctuate a little as more members post their ages, but I think it's basically stable at this point.
In my personal opinion, those who stray outside their generation (as in outside a 12-year age range) on the young side tend to have certain very obvious motives for doing so that have nothing to do with love and often involves cheating on someone you're already involved with. And those that get involved with people more than 12 years their senior also tend to have ulterior motives (like money) in my observation. Genuine affection I think is most likely to occur when one sticks to their own generation.

You know, there's actually a scientific basis for something a little bit like the idea you posit. Dr. Wendy Walsh's very interesting book The 30-Day Love Detox provides strong evidence that living together for at least 30 days before having sex increases the duration of relationships considerably. I recommend taking a read to it if you get the chance.

I am no expert on great marriages. I have no doubt made every error one can make.

Sex first or later?

We have @Redrose (http://thepoliticalforums.com/member.php?u=1123) story of virgin marriage then abuse by husband.

Presents one type of case.

I was no virgin. I married women with kids. I happen to love kids. They fulfil life. Ask most grandparents.

I see kids at church and they are adorable. Fine parents too from the looks of it.

Anyway, from what little I know, it seems that if parents can teach kids how to value adult relationships, by good examples, that helps a lot. Kids learn by hearing language and learn acts by seeing acts. If parents are awesome, chances are kids will want the same thing.

But just seeing is not enough. My parents never argued that I recall. Maybe they did but if so, it was somewhere else.

It is a chain of events. Now, the mate you date. That person has a family. She and he ought to study the other's family. However true this is, I don't believe kids are trained to be careful and closely examine much of anything.

Question is. Can marriage chances be improved?

Well, probably.

HOW?

My hunch is changing our culture to be like those cultures where divorce and abusive marriages is unheard of.

Is there such a place? We can't use India as the model. We know of abuse there.

After my divorce, my problem is that the women I dated kept having affairs with other men and I am super nice to women. The women were not all alike. I know some will claim I must be lousy in bed. My last steady girlfriend actually told her best friend she should bed me since I am awesome. From girl to girl. I heard this from the friend. Did we bed each other? Well, no. We have not even dated. My last GF is AGAIN married. Being married is no guarantee she won't cheat. She has cheating in her DNA.

Her favorite place to have sex is anywhere. Really, it does not matter to her where she is.

Alyosha
06-21-2014, 12:40 PM
There are 5 (28-33) year olds that are not represented in these figures. Not sure why age matters outside of sex, I feel like it will be used to tell people "younger" that they're not old enough to know x,y,z.

IMPress Polly
06-21-2014, 12:54 PM
We'll see. Two more additions since my last entry here and the median age remains unchanged again: with 29 PF members posting their ages, we're still at a median age of 54.

Venus
06-21-2014, 02:28 PM
50

Bob
06-21-2014, 02:47 PM
There are 5 (28-33) year olds that are not represented in these figures. Not sure why age matters outside of sex, I feel like it will be used to tell people "younger" that they're not old enough to know x,y,z.

Why does it matter for sex?

A lot of ladies get to experience the actually experienced. :evil:

Perianne
06-21-2014, 02:49 PM
Why does it matter for sex?

A lot of ladies get to experience the actually experienced. :evil:

It matters that someone is at least 18 years old.

Cthulhu
06-21-2014, 02:57 PM
Age is irrelevant for one who is eternal.

'...without beginning of days or end of years...'

Kalkin
06-21-2014, 03:16 PM
the average age here so far is 47,

My age is average, but it is contradicted by my above average intellect, talent, humor, and humility.

Bob
06-21-2014, 03:20 PM
It matters that someone is at least 18 years old.

What about if she turns 18 during sex? Perianne

sachem
06-21-2014, 03:23 PM
Age is irrelevant for one who is eternal.

'...without beginning of days or end of years...'Touching. How old are you?

The Sage of Main Street
06-21-2014, 03:29 PM
25 No. If you were 25, your poster name would be XXV.

Guerilla
06-21-2014, 03:30 PM
It matters that someone is at least 18 years old.

As far as I'm concerned, people who think that way aren't even worth their shitty opinion.

In my experience lots of "adults" can act like ignorant children, and some young people turn out way more responsible and mature than their elders. Age can say a lot, or it could be completely irrelevant. Safest to assume the latter.

Perianne
06-21-2014, 03:43 PM
As far as I'm concerned, people who think that way aren't even worth their shitty opinion.

In my experience lots of "adults" can act like ignorant children, and some young people turn out way more responsible and mature than their elders. Age can say a lot, or it could be completely irrelevant. Safest to assume the latter.

....

Bob
06-21-2014, 03:55 PM
As far as I'm concerned, people who think that way aren't even worth their shitty opinion.

In my experience lots of "adults" can act like ignorant children, and some young people turn out way more responsible and mature than their elders. Age can say a lot, or it could be completely irrelevant. Safest to assume the latter.

In a population of one million

By far, there are FAR more adults that act like adults and
Most kids act like kids.

When one finds a kid that acts like an adult, they become famous.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=c6X88a0ssms

Spectre
06-21-2014, 03:58 PM
Age is irrelevant for one who is eternal.

'...without beginning of days or end of years...'

'That is not dead which can eternal lie;
And with strange aeons, even death may die'

sachem
06-21-2014, 03:58 PM
As far as I'm concerned, people who think that way aren't even worth their shitty opinion.

In my experience lots of "adults" can act like ignorant children, and some young people turn out way more responsible and mature than their elders. Age can say a lot, or it could be completely irrelevant. Safest to assume the latter.Yeah, on places like this many adults do tend to act like children. It is a release of sorts. Anonymity will do that to you.

Common Sense
06-21-2014, 03:59 PM
Yeah, on places like this many adults do tend to act like children. It is a release of sorts. Anonymity will do that to you.

...I know you are but what am I?

sachem
06-21-2014, 04:02 PM
...I know you are but what am I?I'm reporting you!!! :p

Common Sense
06-21-2014, 04:03 PM
I'm reporting you!!! :p

Call America. No one cares!!! ;)

Bob
06-21-2014, 04:03 PM
I'm reporting you!!! :p

Cool

I reported you. :kick:

Common Sense
06-21-2014, 04:05 PM
I'm reporting all of you...


















...to Homeland security.

Bob
06-21-2014, 04:07 PM
Yeah, on places like this many adults do tend to act like children. It is a release of sorts. Anonymity will do that to you.

I know your precise name and your precise address and your precise phone number.


scroll down










Well, my quota of lies per day is just 1.

sachem
06-21-2014, 04:09 PM
Call America. No one cares!!! ;)Ain't that the truth. :D

Guerilla
06-21-2014, 04:16 PM
In a population of one million

By far, there are FAR more adults that act like adults and
Most kids act like kids.

When one finds a kid that acts like an adult, they become famous.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=c6X88a0ssms

I'll have to agree that there are trends that you can use to evaluate overall populations. But when someone uses those trends to judge the individual, then it is stupid. As I said, it could matter or it could be irrelevant, safest to assume the latter when dealing with the individual, if nothing else to avoid looking arrogant or detatched.

Mister D
06-21-2014, 04:19 PM
I'll have to agree that there are trends that you can use to evaluate overall populations. But when someone uses those trends to judge the individual, then it is stupid. As I said, it could matter or it could be irrelevant, safest to assume the latter when dealing with the individual, if nothing else to avoid looking arrogant or detatched.

You need a avatar.

Bob
06-21-2014, 04:19 PM
I'll have to agree that there are trends that you can use to evaluate overall populations. But when someone uses those trends to judge the individual, then it is stupid. As I said, it could matter or it could be irrelevant, safest to assume the latter when dealing with the individual, if nothing else to avoid looking arrogant or detatched.

I don't believe in judging posters.

Sorry, I have not met them.

Even when I meet people, seldom is it my job to judge them. Guerilla

Bob
06-21-2014, 04:23 PM
You need a avatar.

How about Gas Monkey?

8019

Mister D
06-21-2014, 04:24 PM
How about Gas Monkey?

8019

not weird ones like bob's.

DigitalBluster
06-21-2014, 04:33 PM
By far, there are FAR more adults that act like adults and
Most kids act like kids.

When one finds a kid that acts like an adult, they become famous.

That's a good observation.

And on the other hand, when one finds an adult that acts like a kid, they become politicians (http://crossfire.blogs.cnn.com/2013/09/30/poll-politicians-acting-like-children/) (you can skip ahead to 2:24).

Dr. Who
06-21-2014, 04:40 PM
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/thumb/2/2a/Guerrillagames.svg/200px-Guerrillagames.svg.png

Bob
06-21-2014, 04:44 PM
not weird ones like bob's.

That is real and yes, it is very weird.

Guerilla
06-21-2014, 05:02 PM
You need a avatar.

Tell me about it. I don't know who to put as my avatar though, everyone elses seems to fit them so well. Plus I don't know how to actually change my avatar, and didn't care enough to figure out how to...sooo..

Mister D
06-21-2014, 05:04 PM
Tell me about it. I don't know who to put as my avatar though, everyone elses seems to fit them so well. Plus I don't know how to actually change my avatar, and didn't care enough to figure out how to...sooo..

Easy. Click on settings. Menu on left.

Guerilla
06-21-2014, 05:08 PM
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/thumb/2/2a/Guerrillagames.svg/200px-Guerrillagames.svg.png

At least it makes sense lol bob

Dr. Who
06-21-2014, 05:16 PM
At least it makes sense lol bob
When you chose the alias guerilla, what did it mean to you? Alternatively your avatar can be someone who you admire, something that you admire or represent and idea that you admire. I can add your avatar if you want one, just post the image. People like to identify a member with an image.

Cthulhu
06-21-2014, 05:20 PM
Touching. How old are you?

As old as everybody else here. Even if they don't believe it.

Guerilla
06-21-2014, 05:36 PM
When you chose the alias guerilla, what did it mean to you? Alternatively your avatar can be someone who you admire, something that you admire or represent and idea that you admire. I can add your avatar if you want one, just post the image. People like to identify a member with an image.

I was using it to mean someone who perseveres with passion, even against overwhelming odds or force, for what they believe in. I still mean it as that.

I see this not just in guerillas like che guevara, that most people think of, but of people like Nikola Tesla. I admire him most of all.

If I find a cool avatar I'll message it to you, or possibly figure it out myself. Thanks doc.

Max Rockatansky
06-21-2014, 05:55 PM
Love and attraction has absolutely ZERO to do with age, race, economic condition, or social status.

The Film 'Harold and Maude' is an extreme example, but it applies here.

Love is too irrational and unpredictable a force to artificially confine it in that way.

Some of the most stunning and desirable women I know are in their 50s.

I have always been attracted to women my own age or slightly older and agree with much of what you said.

Youth has, at best, beauty, but older women can have not only beauty, but intelligence, experience and engaging personalities. A man who is only interested in sex and not the relationship with a woman is not only missing the best parts, but is ignorant in the extreme.

Perianne
06-21-2014, 06:03 PM
...older women can have not only beauty, but intelligence, experience and engaging personalities.

It's as if you were speaking of me personally. :)

Archer0915
06-21-2014, 06:06 PM
I am, my shit still works and I have met few half my age that could out think, fight or fuck me... And 1/2 my age is considered prime.

darroll
06-21-2014, 07:04 PM
8022

I'm 70. Was in and out of Vietnam several times. I worked on the scatter radio and the crypto machines.

Alyosha
06-21-2014, 07:13 PM
I was using it to mean someone who perseveres with passion, even against overwhelming odds or force, for what they believe in. I still mean it as that.

I see this not just in guerillas like che guevara, that most people think of, but of people like Nikola Tesla. I admire him most of all.

If I find a cool avatar I'll message it to you, or possibly figure it out myself. Thanks doc.

Tesla was amazing. Why not him?

Dark Mistress
06-21-2014, 07:13 PM
I am 27. :grin:

Ethereal
06-21-2014, 07:21 PM
Love and attraction has absolutely ZERO to do with age...

Love is too irrational and unpredictable a force to artificially confine it in that way.

You the spokesperson for NAMBLA now?

sachem
06-21-2014, 07:21 PM
I'm 70. Was in and out of Vietnam several times. I worked on the scatter radio and the crypto machines and the Dco's..
8021Geez, you are old.

The Xl
06-21-2014, 07:28 PM
Geez, you are old.

Oh no you didn't

The Xl
06-21-2014, 07:29 PM
64 and sleeping with an 18-y-o babe.

How was the Justin Beiber concert?

Guerilla
06-21-2014, 07:29 PM
Tesla was amazing. Why not him?

Can't argue with those facts.

Did it work? :D

edit-hell ya

Alyosha
06-21-2014, 07:30 PM
You the spokesperson for NAMBLA now?

http://media.giphy.com/media/xya3wUDzVRbHy/giphy.gif


Ohhh, that was harsh.

The Xl
06-21-2014, 07:31 PM
Oh shit, Guerilla finally got an avatar. Shit gon get real

Alyosha
06-21-2014, 07:32 PM
Oh shit, Guerilla finally got an avatar. Shit gon get real

I love guerilla. Glad he's on.

darroll
06-21-2014, 07:32 PM
Geez, you are old.Thanks,
You make me feel warm and fuzzy headed. lol

The Xl
06-21-2014, 07:33 PM
I love guerilla. Glad he's on.

That dude is smart as fuck, and he's 18, which makes him a whippersnaper, to a 25 year old like me anyway.

Get off my lawn

Ethereal
06-21-2014, 07:33 PM
Ohhh, that was harsh.

Hey, I learned from the best...

http://thepoliticalforums.com/threads/27005-Anarcho-Libertarians-Have-Another-Hero-and-Role-Model
http://thepoliticalforums.com/threads/26892-Just-Anarchists-Planning-to-Have-Fun-at-the-World-Cup

Bob
06-21-2014, 07:35 PM
At least it makes sense lol bob

Mine was not supposed to make sense. It was supposed to be humorous.

Alyosha
06-21-2014, 07:37 PM
Hey, I learned from the best...

http://thepoliticalforums.com/threads/27005-Anarcho-Libertarians-Have-Another-Hero-and-Role-Model
http://thepoliticalforums.com/threads/26892-Just-Anarchists-Planning-to-Have-Fun-at-the-World-Cup


Ohhh, :( Spectre

http://31.media.tumblr.com/cb70a69b81e645768d916c45c334629b/tumblr_mna17w3wVg1spey9uo1_500.gif

Alyosha
06-21-2014, 07:37 PM
Hey, I learned from the best...

http://thepoliticalforums.com/threads/27005-Anarcho-Libertarians-Have-Another-Hero-and-Role-Model
http://thepoliticalforums.com/threads/26892-Just-Anarchists-Planning-to-Have-Fun-at-the-World-Cup


Ohhh, :( Spectre

http://31.media.tumblr.com/cb70a69b81e645768d916c45c334629b/tumblr_mna17w3wVg1spey9uo1_500.gif

Bob
06-21-2014, 07:40 PM
Tesla was amazing. Why not him?

Yeah

Che Guevara?????????????? Hell no
Tesla Hell yes

Spectre
06-21-2014, 07:41 PM
Hey, I learned from the best...

http://thepoliticalforums.com/threads/27005-Anarcho-Libertarians-Have-Another-Hero-and-Role-Model
http://thepoliticalforums.com/threads/26892-Just-Anarchists-Planning-to-Have-Fun-at-the-World-Cup

It's always nice to see that I leave deep, lasting impressions in my wake...:biglaugh:

Some wounds take a while to heal, eh Ethereal?:smiley:

The Xl
06-21-2014, 07:41 PM
Lol how did I miss those gems from Spectre?

I may have to reconsider this social Darwinism thing....

Bob
06-21-2014, 07:44 PM
8022

I'm 70. Was in and out of Vietnam several times. I worked on the scatter radio and the crypto machines.

We had crypto in our HQ and HQ building. (Germany) The guys working there kept the door locked so we could not simply walk in on them. I had a Warrant Officer W-4 work for me at my real estate company and he had the highest secret clearance available. He explained that top secret is not the highest class of secret. He also worked the highest secret group in the SF Bay area and retired as a W-4.

Spectre
06-21-2014, 07:46 PM
All we need is to get del here now, and we'll have just about everyone whose scalps I've taken for trophies.

http://johnbennett.outlawpoetry.com/files/2013/10/scalp.jpg (http://www.google.ca/url?sa=i&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=images&cd=&cad=rja&uact=8&docid=XMsAwdKwz-tAUM&tbnid=A9kG4zK4w_j1eM:&ved=0CAUQjRw&url=http%3A%2F%2Fjohnbennett.outlawpoetry.com%2F20 13%2F06%2F22%2Fjohn-bennett-taking-scalp%2F&ei=biemU7D9J4mHyASOjYGwAg&bvm=bv.69411363,d.aWw&psig=AFQjCNE5i1LurbkN6EpHyjjmz7-DLh1u8Q&ust=1403484384600272)

Cthulhu
06-21-2014, 07:47 PM
It's always nice to see that I leave deep, lasting impressions in my wake...:biglaugh:

Some wounds take a while to heal, eh Ethereal?:smiley:

I love it how quite possibly the most deluded simpletons convince themselves they have outwitted true genius.

This is iconic of a fool who doesn't know he has been beaten because he simply cannot feel pain.

Ethereal
06-21-2014, 07:47 PM
It's always nice to see that I leave deep, lasting impressions in my wake...:biglaugh:

Some wounds take a while to heal, eh Ethereal?:smiley:

Why don't you expound more on your theories about romantic love with no age restrictions. Freudian slip?

The Xl
06-21-2014, 07:48 PM
Well, if you declare victory, it MUST mean you won.....right?

sachem
06-21-2014, 07:49 PM
All we need is to get del here now, and we'll have just about everyone whose scalps I've taken for trophies.

http://johnbennett.outlawpoetry.com/files/2013/10/scalp.jpg (http://www.google.ca/url?sa=i&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=images&cd=&cad=rja&uact=8&docid=XMsAwdKwz-tAUM&tbnid=A9kG4zK4w_j1eM:&ved=0CAUQjRw&url=http%3A%2F%2Fjohnbennett.outlawpoetry.com%2F20 13%2F06%2F22%2Fjohn-bennett-taking-scalp%2F&ei=biemU7D9J4mHyASOjYGwAg&bvm=bv.69411363,d.aWw&psig=AFQjCNE5i1LurbkN6EpHyjjmz7-DLh1u8Q&ust=1403484384600272)Hush.

darroll
06-21-2014, 07:51 PM
We had crypto in our HQ and HQ building. (Germany) The guys working there kept the door locked so we could not simply walk in on them. I had a Warrant Officer W-4 work for me at my real estate company and he had the highest secret clearance available. He explained that top secret is not the highest class of secret. He also worked the highest secret group in the SF Bay area and retired as a W-4.
They were always warning us about our toys (Government) life in prison, etc.
I came home and someone wrote an article about how it works. I didn't dare to even discuss that.
I don't know if that was Walker or who? that told the world how it works.

Alyosha
06-21-2014, 07:58 PM
It's always nice to see that I leave deep, lasting impressions in my wake...:biglaugh:

Some wounds take a while to heal, eh Ethereal?:smiley:

http://media.tumblr.com/tumblr_m2aid1d7xU1qa4nyw.gif

del
06-21-2014, 08:20 PM
All we need is to get del here now, and we'll have just about everyone whose scalps I've taken for trophies.

http://johnbennett.outlawpoetry.com/files/2013/10/scalp.jpg (http://www.google.ca/url?sa=i&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=images&cd=&cad=rja&uact=8&docid=XMsAwdKwz-tAUM&tbnid=A9kG4zK4w_j1eM:&ved=0CAUQjRw&url=http%3A%2F%2Fjohnbennett.outlawpoetry.com%2F20 13%2F06%2F22%2Fjohn-bennett-taking-scalp%2F&ei=biemU7D9J4mHyASOjYGwAg&bvm=bv.69411363,d.aWw&psig=AFQjCNE5i1LurbkN6EpHyjjmz7-DLh1u8Q&ust=1403484384600272)


8023

Chris
06-21-2014, 08:30 PM
24˘ stamps, my god but you must be old!

Peter1469
06-21-2014, 08:33 PM
Stamps? What are those?

J/k, but I use like a dozen a year at most. This is the 21st century after all.

del
06-21-2014, 08:34 PM
24˘ stamps, my god but you must be old!

the inverted jenny is worth roughly $1MM

don't get out much, do you?

Chris
06-21-2014, 08:36 PM
the inverted jenny is worth roughly $1MM

don't get out much, do you?


Roman numerals, now I know you're old as dirt.

Dr. Who
06-21-2014, 09:31 PM
Stamps? What are those?

J/k, but I use like a dozen a year at most. This is the 21st century after all.
I only use them for greeting cards.

Peter1469
06-21-2014, 09:52 PM
I only use them for greeting cards.

I don't have anyone to greet.

I only use them for hospital bills these days.

Perianne
06-21-2014, 09:53 PM
I only use them for hospital bills these days.

They probably charged you more because you were a bad patient. :)

Dr. Who
06-21-2014, 09:58 PM
I don't have anyone to greet.

I only use them for hospital bills these days.
You can't pay them through the bank - online?

Peter1469
06-21-2014, 09:58 PM
That is ok. I feel bad about that.


They probably charged you more because you were a bad patient. :)

Perianne
06-21-2014, 09:59 PM
That is ok. I feel bad about that.

Don't. I was just kidding with you. I have seen many patients react badly to medications. It is not their fault and we don't hold it against them.

Peter1469
06-21-2014, 10:03 PM
I always get most if not all of the side effects from meds. That is why I hate to take them. And it is why I don't go to the doctor until it is probably really late.


Don't. I was just kidding with you. I have seen many patients react badly to medications. It is not their fault and we don't hold it against them.

Spectre
06-21-2014, 10:11 PM
8023THAT stamp is one I wish i had: it's worth a shitload of money!

Bob
06-21-2014, 10:14 PM
http://thepoliticalforums.com/images/misc/quote_icon.png Originally Posted by Bob http://thepoliticalforums.com/images/buttons/viewpost-right.png (http://thepoliticalforums.com/showthread.php?p=660811#post660811)
We had crypto in our HQ and HQ building. (Germany) The guys working there kept the door locked so we could not simply walk in on them. I had a Warrant Officer W-4 work for me at my real estate company and he had the highest secret clearance available. He explained that top secret is not the highest class of secret. He also worked the highest secret group in the SF Bay area and retired as a W-4.


They were always warning us about our toys (Government) life in prison, etc.
I came home and someone wrote an article about how it works. I didn't dare to even discuss that.
I don't know if that was Walker or who? that told the world how it works.

I can't recall if I saw inside the Crypto Room or not, but it is possible. As the Company Commanders Clerk, I saw a lot in HQ that the rest did not see.

Elmer whom worked for me and I chatted up things he knew vs what I knew yet I did not try to get him to expose secrets. For instance, I knew that in Korea, we got near nuclear war. The North was told, no shit, that they would be nuked the instant they crossed the border. Those days one could do that. I knew it because I knew an E-9 well enough who served on the Nimitz and served with the Admiral that said it and he happened to be in the same room when it was said. He told me things about the Nimitz that I can't repeat here.

Elmer worked close to the Ames labs in Mountain View and I did not want to put him into an uneasy spot by trying to get things from him. I knew it was too important and not that I had to know stuff. Just going into our war room in Germany was not for the regular guys. I actually never went in though it would be easy for me to have done so. I saw inside and really had no interest.

darroll
06-21-2014, 11:30 PM
I can't recall if I saw inside the Crypto Room or not, but it is possible. As the Company Commanders Clerk, I saw a lot in HQ that the rest did not see.

Elmer whom worked for me and I chatted up things he knew vs what I knew yet I did not try to get him to expose secrets. For instance, I knew that in Korea, we got near nuclear war. The North was told, no shit, that they would be nuked the instant they crossed the border. Those days one could do that. I knew it because I knew an E-9 well enough who served on the Nimitz and served with the Admiral that said it and he happened to be in the same room when it was said. He told me things about the Nimitz that I can't repeat here.

Elmer worked close to the Ames labs in Mountain View and I did not want to put him into an uneasy spot by trying to get things from him. I knew it was too important and not that I had to know stuff. Just going into our war room in Germany was not for the regular guys. I actually never went in though it would be easy for me to have done so. I saw inside and really had no interest.
The crypto was a pain in the ass. I would go to send a mess, push the p key about a bizillion times and he would finally ask what did I want. I had to make a ticker tape and some klutz would step on it and I then had to make another. We finally went to the cards (with the dashes all over the card)
What got me was a twix from the world (US) that said I love you. How in hell they they get that mess thru? It could of been code but i doubt it.

sachem
06-22-2014, 12:16 AM
Stamps? What are those?

J/k, but I use like a dozen a year at most. This is the 21st century after all.It's nice to get snail mail. I enjoy sending cards. And receiving them.

Adelaide
06-22-2014, 12:28 AM
I am 25 this year.

Libhater
06-22-2014, 05:35 AM
I'm not making this a blanket statement by any means, but doesn't it seem that the younger people here tend to possess a leftist ideology as to where the older more experienced and more savvy generation tend to be Conservative minded?

GrassrootsConservative
06-22-2014, 05:37 AM
I'm not making this a blanket statement by any means, but doesn't it seem that the younger people here tend to possess a leftist ideology as to where the older more experienced and more savvy generation tend to be Conservative minded?

With some exceptions, yes. :grin:

I must be an early bird.

Max Rockatansky
06-22-2014, 05:44 AM
I'm not making this a blanket statement by any means, but doesn't it seem that the younger people here tend to possess a leftist ideology as to where the older more experienced and more savvy generation tend to be Conservative minded?

That's the general trend. The Hippies and idealists of the 60s became the greedy, more conservative motherfuckers of the "Me Decade" in the 80s. I have little doubt the 20somethings on this thread will become their fathers and mothers by their 40s.

Peter1469
06-22-2014, 07:40 AM
It's nice to get snail mail. I enjoy sending cards. And receiving them.

Not me. :smiley:

Peter1469
06-22-2014, 07:41 AM
I'm not making this a blanket statement by any means, but doesn't it seem that the younger people here tend to possess a leftist ideology as to where the older more experienced and more savvy generation tend to be Conservative minded?

A good chunk of the younger members are libertarians. Further right than conservatives, on an economic scale.

sachem
06-22-2014, 08:39 AM
Not me. :smiley:So it seems.

Libhater
06-22-2014, 09:10 AM
A good chuck of the younger members are libertarians. Further right than conservatives, on an economic scale.

But much further 'LEFT' on the foreign affairs scale much like that of a non-interventionist like a Ron Paul for example. Further right than some Republicans on an economic scale perhaps, but not further right than we Conservatives on that same economic scale.

Peter1469
06-22-2014, 09:19 AM
But much further 'LEFT' on the foreign affairs scale much like that of a non-interventionist like a Ron Paul for example. Further right than some Republicans on an economic scale perhaps, but not further right than we Conservatives on that same economic scale.

Not left in the sense of government expenditures.

Lots of NECONs claim fiscal responsibility and less government. Except when it comes to foriegn policy. But nobody ever accused NECONs of being intellectually consistent.

Alyosha
06-22-2014, 09:45 AM
That's the general trend. The Hippies and idealists of the 60s became the greedy, more conservative motherfuckers of the "Me Decade" in the 80s. I have little doubt the 20somethings on this thread will become their fathers and mothers by their 40s.

People say this but it doesn't explain why everyone in Congress almost is over 50 and there are still two parties and two base ideologies. It's just something people say when they're older to shut up people who are younger.

If not, explain Harry Reid, Pelosie, Feinstein, Paul, etc.

Max Rockatansky
06-22-2014, 11:40 AM
People say this but it doesn't explain why everyone in Congress almost is over 50 and there are still two parties and two base ideologies. It's just something people say when they're older to shut up people who are younger.

If not, explain Harry Reid, Pelosie, Feinstein, Paul, etc.Simple; there's a difference between being an idealist and Left-Wing Authoritarian. How many 20something Limousine Liberals do you know? I'm guessing a lot fewer than "over 50".

Idealism vs Realism doesn't necessarily go hand in hand with Left vs. Right.

The Xl
06-22-2014, 12:00 PM
But much further 'LEFT' on the foreign affairs scale much like that of a non-interventionist like a Ron Paul for example. Further right than some Republicans on an economic scale perhaps, but not further right than we Conservatives on that same economic scale.

God forbid we're ideologically consistent on the small government scale.

Alyosha
06-22-2014, 12:47 PM
Simple; there's a difference between being an idealist and Left-Wing Authoritarian. How many 20something Limousine Liberals do you know? I'm guessing a lot fewer than "over 50".

Idealism vs Realism doesn't necessarily go hand in hand with Left vs. Right.

What you call idealism is only a belief whose time has not yet come. It was idealistic to think man could walk on the moon at one point.

The Xl
06-22-2014, 12:54 PM
Every noteworthy advance in humanity started out as "idealism" at a point in time.

The Sage of Main Street
06-22-2014, 01:47 PM
We had crypto in our HQ and HQ building. (Germany) The guys working there kept the door locked so we could not simply walk in on them. I had a Warrant Officer W-4 work for me at my real estate company and he had the highest secret clearance available. He explained that top secret is not the highest class of secret. He also worked the highest secret group in the SF Bay area and retired as a W-4.


They were always warning us about our toys (Government) life in prison, etc.
I came home and someone wrote an article about how it works. I didn't dare to even discuss that.
I don't know if that was Walker or who? that told the world how it works. I scored 152 on the military's intelligence test (GCT), so they should have assigned me to Intelligence but didn't. That attitude indicates why we lost in Vietnam.

Mankind better wake up to how dependent we are on High IQs. They created all the world's wealth and everything that prevents us from living like animals. If we don't start treating them like we treat superior athletes from childhood on, we will lose to the Low IQs and evolve backwards.

The Sage of Main Street
06-22-2014, 01:56 PM
A good chuck of the younger members are libertarians. Further right than conservatives, on an economic scale.A prep school Born to Rule fad, just like the Leftist hippie fad their ilk had in the 60s. Spoiled, they are conceited and think that any pipedream that pops into their head must be brilliant.

Archer0915
06-22-2014, 01:57 PM
I scored 152 on the military's intelligence test (GCT), so they should have assigned me to Intelligence but didn't. That attitude indicates why we lost in Vietnam.

Mankind better wake up to how dependent we are on High IQs. They created all the world's wealth and everything that prevents us from living like animals. If we don't start treating them like we treat superior athletes from childhood on, we will lose to the Low IQs and evolve backwards.

And you point is moot! Progressives want everyone to be equal. I feel it coming... The handicapper General will make the smart stupid because the stupid refuse to get smart. The wealthy will be brought down... The strong will be weakened.

Alyosha
06-22-2014, 02:20 PM
A prep school Born to Rule fad, just like the Leftist hippie fad their ilk had in the 60s. Spoiled, they are conceited and think that any pipedream that pops into their head must be brilliant.

Except none of us except one, to remain nameless, were born above the lower economic scale. Once again, you're wrong and prejudiced.

The Xl
06-22-2014, 02:21 PM
Yes, sage, their are variables outside of intelligence that lead to wealth, but not all of those variables are due to privilege.

What would you do about those other variables?

Alyosha
06-22-2014, 02:23 PM
Yes, sage, their are variables outside of intelligence that lead to wealth, but not all of those variables are due to privilege.

What would you do about those other variables?

It depends on what race they are? If the athlete is black, they don't deserve the money. If they're Jewish and play basketball they do. :laugh:

The Xl
06-22-2014, 02:26 PM
It depends on what race they are? If the athlete is black, they don't deserve the money. If they're Jewish and play basketball they do. :laugh:

Omri Casspi for MVP.

#JokeOnlyIUnderstand

IMPress Polly
06-22-2014, 02:29 PM
All your base are belong to us! :wink:

The Xl
06-22-2014, 02:31 PM
All your base are belong to us! :wink:

stahp with yer videogame references, whippersnapper

Libhater
06-22-2014, 02:37 PM
I scored 152 on the military's intelligence test (GCT), so they should have assigned me to Intelligence but didn't. That attitude indicates why we lost in Vietnam.


Nice try at revisionist history, but the real reason(s) we lost in Vietnam were a combination of many things where two of them stand out the most. First, the Democratically led congress refused to see eye to eye on allowing/giving Nixon the go-ahead to bomb the shit out of the Ho Chi Minh trail as it being the main transportation route for not only the VC, but for all of their weaponry to infiltrate through South Vietnam all the way to Saigon. Second, the uproar and the dissention back at home by all of the leftist drop outs, AWOLers, draft dodgers, peaceniks, hippies, anti war ralliers and radicals and a willing congress to spread the anti war dissent made the job of engineering a war on foreign soil all but impossible. For them to apppoint you a leftist to the intelligence agency during that time would have perhaps made our loss even quicker than it already was.

The Xl
06-22-2014, 02:39 PM
We lost Vietnam the second we decided to go in their. Not to mention, all the countless soldiers that were forcibly conscripted and essentially murdered by our government over a staged false flag

Alyosha
06-22-2014, 02:39 PM
Charles Manson was smart and from the 60's, too, just like Sage.

The Xl
06-22-2014, 02:40 PM
Charles Manson was smart and from the 60's, too, just like Sage.

Manson was smart, sage isn't. He can't string a coherent thought together, and all of his thoughts and ramblings massively contradict the other.

Both are fucking nuts, though.

Alyosha
06-22-2014, 02:42 PM
Since this is the thread where the oldies have been telling the youngins how dating below your age r awesome...

http://dlisted.com/tag/hot_slut_of_the_day/page/2/

http://i.dlisted.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/06/hsotdmegacougar2014.jpg


Marjorie McCool, the 91-year-old great grandmother and grand dame of the cougars who is getting herself some 31-year-old dick!

When Marjorie McCool takes her daily dose of Celebrex, Boniva and Centrum Silver, she takes it the way all of us should take our meds, she crushes it over the peen of her 31-year-old boy toy and licks it right off. Marjorie is spending the “needs the help of a safety support bar to get off the toilet” phase of her life breaking her hip while riding her 31-year-old boyfriend Kyle Jones of Pittsburgh. Kyle Jones is a self-proclaimed Cougar Champion who is single-handedly helping to keep KY in business since he only bones hot ladies old enough to be his memaw. Kyle tells Barcroft (via The Daily Mail (http://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/article-2649429/Some-guys-prefer-blondes-brunettes-I-like-old-ladies-Extreme-toyboy-31-takes-91-year-old-girlfriend-home-meet-mother.html)) that when he was just a youngin, he knew he didn’t want to be with girls his own age. Some dudes get the tingles in their peen tips from looking at blondes, Kyle gets the tingle in his peen tip from watching the Golden Girls.


Kyle and Great Granny McCool started dating after they met in 2009 at her job and he asked for her number. (Side note: Working in her 90s and getting that 30-something dick? Great Granny McCool is about that “age ain’t nothing but a number” life.) After Kyle figured out how to dial Hazelwood 615 on a modern phone, the two got together and she’s been rubbing her seasoned golden prune poon on him ever since. Great Granny McCool was single for 37 years until Kyle awakened her dusty, dormant flower and now she can’t get enough. Caution: Prepare to cringe like you’ve never cringed before:

“Sometimes I feel like he’s another son, until we hop in bed and I feel different. The physical side of our relationship is wonderful. I amaze myself, he amazes me. There’s nothing better. I wear sexy outfits to bed. I try to keep my bra on though because I don’t have much left.”
Kyle isn’t a one-granny fucker kind of cougar cub. Kyle is also dating 68-year-old great grandma Anna Roland after meeting on a dating site (GGILF-Date.com, anyone?). Anna says that she was suspicious of Kyle’s motives at first since she’s more than twice his age, but after meeting him (and his peen) she realized that he’s genuine (aka granny got dickmatized). Kyle says that he’s not a gold digging life insurance chaser and he doesn’t date grannies to get a piece of their social security check. He just loves grannies, because they’re more mature (that’s the understatement of the century) than girls his age.

The Xl
06-22-2014, 02:45 PM
My eyes. Give them back. That was criminal, Alyosha

On the dating matter, 10 years either way is fine, assuming the younger party is at least 18. Dinosaurs like Libhater dating 18 year olds is just weird. To each his own, though

The Xl
06-22-2014, 02:46 PM
The commentary in the article is fucking hilarious.

Mister D
06-22-2014, 02:47 PM
ugh

Libhater
06-22-2014, 02:49 PM
My eyes. Give them back. That was criminal, Alyosha

On the dating matter, 10 years either way is fine, assuming the younger party is at least 18. Dinosaurs like Libhater dating 18 year olds is just weird. To each his own, though

What I find weird is that someone has a problem with me getting laid while they themselves are missing all the fun with their own pathetic sexless lives.

Alyosha
06-22-2014, 02:51 PM
What I find weird is that someone has a problem with me getting laid while they themselves are missing all the fun with their own pathetic sexless lives.

Hey, it's your money. I don't have a problem with the sex industry. As long as she's legal, amirite?

Libhater
06-22-2014, 03:02 PM
Hey, it's your money. I don't have a problem with the sex industry. As long as she's legal, amirite?

No problem with the money aspect of dating since I've always had this chivalrous attitude about it being the man's obligation and or desire to pay for all the meals, trips and or our sexual liaisons be they at a hotel or in a fully equipped bonded cell replete with whips and chains etc.

Peter1469
06-22-2014, 03:02 PM
Hey, it's your money. I don't have a problem with the sex industry. As long as she's legal, amirite?

That is what I was thinking.... Or the modern version of mail order.....

The Xl
06-22-2014, 04:08 PM
What I find weird is that someone has a problem with me getting laid while they themselves are missing all the fun with their own pathetic sexless lives.

Get laid bro, do you. Nobody is stopping you, certainly not me.

Shit is weird by my book, but it's your life, you shouldn't give a fuck what I think. Merely an observation.

Libhater
06-22-2014, 04:37 PM
Get laid bro, do you. Nobody is stopping you, certainly not me.

Shit is weird by my book, but it's your life, you shouldn't give a fuck what I think. Merely an observation.

Just my subjective observation, but I don't think there are too many here who give a fuck of what you think.

The Xl
06-22-2014, 04:38 PM
Just my subjective observation, but I don't think there are too many here who give a fuck of what you think.

The number is probably higher for me than it is for you, I'd say. 2000 thanks says I'm doing at least alright, more or less.

Just another observation.

IMPress Polly
06-22-2014, 05:57 PM
A survey from last year found that, among those under 30 (much unlike their elders), 46% said they'd prefer socialism to capitalism vs. 42% who said they preferred capitalism. It's just one way of illustrating that yeah, there is a left-leaning tendency among today's American youth. People here have compared this to the '60s youth movements. Here's the difference: those were mostly middle class white kids. OF COURSE they wound up back in the ideological fold! These, however, are mostly poor and working class kids, almost half of whom are Asian American, Latinos, and African Americans. There is a structural basis for them to be economic leftists, in other words (different class, different heritages), so don't expect that orientation to change until their conditions do.

The middle class white kids of today are indeed ideological libertarians though. But that's a shrinking group.

Libhater
06-22-2014, 06:22 PM
Get laid bro, do you. Nobody is stopping you, certainly not me.

Shit is weird by my book, but it's your life, you shouldn't give a fuck what I think. Merely an observation.

Just my subjective observation, but I don't think there are too many here who give a fuck of what you think.

Max Rockatansky
06-22-2014, 06:43 PM
What you call idealism is only a belief whose time has not yet come. It was idealistic to think man could walk on the moon at one point.

Sometimes that is true. It's also idealistic that the Earth is hollow, that Mars had canals and that Phrenology was a science.

When the 20somethings here mature and gain more experience, they'll be able to see the difference between ideas and reality.

Side story; Without going into details of the human brain, Thomas Edison would tap into his creative, right-brain by dozing in a large chair with an outstretched hand holding a palm-sized rock over a pail. As he began the transition to sleep, his hand would relax dropping the stone and waking him up. He'd write down whatever was on his mind at the time. Hundreds of ideas. Only a fraction came to fruition, but ideas are good, yes. To assert that all ideas are good is silly, immature and, IMHO, irrational thinking.

http://www.unexplainedstuff.com/Mysteries-of-the-Mind/Dreams-Creative-and-lucid-dreaming.html

http://www.world-of-lucid-dreaming.com/famous-lucid-dreamers.html

Alyosha
06-22-2014, 06:45 PM
A survey from last year found that, among those under 30 (much unlike their elders), 46% said they'd prefer socialism to capitalism vs. 42% who said they preferred capitalism. It's just one way of illustrating that yeah, there is a left-leaning tendency among today's American youth. People here have compared this to the '60s youth movements. Here's the difference: those were mostly middle class white kids. OF COURSE they wound up back in the ideological fold! These, however, are mostly poor and working class kids, almost half of whom are Asian American, Latinos, and African Americans. There is a structural basis for them to be economic leftists, in other words (different class, different heritages), so don't expect that orientation to change until their conditions do.

The middle class white kids of today are indeed ideological libertarians though. But that's a shrinking group.

I'd be interested in seeing the study and study questions if you will, sweetie. (Buttering Polly up to read my novel). :D

Alyosha
06-22-2014, 06:46 PM
Sometimes that is true. It's also idealistic that the Earth is hollow, that Mars had canals and that Phrenology was a science.

When the 20somethings here mature and gain more experience, they'll be able to see the difference between ideas and reality.

Side story; Without going into details of the human brain, Thomas Edison would tap into his creative, right-brain by dozing in a large chair with an outstretched hand holding a palm-sized rock over a pail. As he began the transition to sleep, his hand would relax dropping the stone and waking him up. He'd write down whatever was on his mind at the time. Hundreds of ideas. Only a fraction came to fruition, but ideas are good, yes. To assert that all ideas are good is silly, immature and, IMHO, irrational thinking.

http://www.unexplainedstuff.com/Mysteries-of-the-Mind/Dreams-Creative-and-lucid-dreaming.html

http://www.world-of-lucid-dreaming.com/famous-lucid-dreamers.html

I'm not really sure what that has to do with what I've said, but thanks for the links. They're interesting. Again, Ron Paul is old as dirt and is a libertarian still, all of the Mises guys are libertarians still, and Pelosie and Boxer are ancient and still radical.

Anyway.

Cthulhu
06-23-2014, 06:51 AM
My eyes. Give them back. That was criminal, Alyosha

On the dating matter, 10 years either way is fine, assuming the younger party is at least 18. Dinosaurs like Libhater dating 18 year olds is just weird. To each his own, though

What has been seen, cannot be unseen. But damn if I won't try - pass the drill and bit so I can bore the images from my mind...

strollingbonez
06-23-2014, 06:54 AM
61 tomorrow.....and it sure the hell beats the alternative

The Sage of Main Street
06-23-2014, 10:12 AM
there is a left-leaning tendency among today's American youth. People here have compared this to the '60s youth movements. Here's the difference: those were mostly middle class white kids. OF COURSE they wound up back in the ideological fold! These, however, are mostly poor and working class kids, almost half of whom are Asian American, Latinos, and African Americans. There is a structural basis for them to be economic leftists, in other words (different class, different heritages), so don't expect that orientation to change until their conditions do.

The middle class white kids of today are indeed ideological libertarians though. But that's a shrinking group. It is misleading to call the upper-class spoiled snob hippy/yuppy/preppy alliance "middle class." I can only identify highly paid union workers and owners of small stores as possibly "middle class."

It is equally and suspiciously misleading to mix in the feral races with dispossessed Whites and designate them as the same category. Tom Watson tried that, saw it was wrong, and saw the light. Even Marx called the genetically uncivilized the lumpenproletariat: the poor who deserve to be poor.

However, I must add that MLK, if he had been sincere instead of a tool of the Hate Whitey upper class, should have demanded tripling of the wages of the jobs Blacks are fit for instead of the solidary-disrupting Affirmative Action for the jobs only Whites are fit for.

Adelaide
06-23-2014, 10:31 AM
I don't believe my opinions are going to change drastically as I age - maybe on issues pertaining to age, like CPP (Canadian Pension Plan) and long-term care, family planning maybe though I won't be having kids, but overall, I've formed most of my opinions based on a complex process of experiences, education, extensive reading, religion, so forth. I'm sure that I'll have new experiences and that I'll change a bit, but my opinion on social issues is not going to change, and I think if anything that my view on economics will change the most and probably not much. I say I'm a socialist in an ideal world, but for the most part I support a mixed economy and am a cautious fiscal conservative. I believe strongly in government accountability.

Will I ever vote Conservative up here? Federally? Could happen. Provincially? Guaranteed never to happen. But I don't believe I'll ever officially stop being a member of the centre-left Liberals at both levels unless they really degrade over time, (for Americans: I can be a party member and vote differently). In terms of US politics, I'm more likely to agree with the libertarian crowd than either the Democrat or Republican crowds. If I were American, I'd have voted for Nader 2004, Obama 2008, Jill Stein 2012... and who knows 2016.

Mister D
06-23-2014, 10:33 AM
I think a predisposition prevails in most folks.

Adelaide
06-23-2014, 10:48 AM
I think a predisposition prevails in most folks.

I'm not going to turn into super-Conservatives like my parents and grandparent(s), if that's what you mean? I'm the rebound hippy baby. If I don't remain a Liberal our dinner conversations would be so boring so I have a table obligation. ;)

Plus, Liberal leader Trudeau is so attractive and he beat the snot out of Brazeau in a charity boxing match, (Senator who abused funds and sexually assaulted someone). I simply can't not support him. (I'm joking)

Libhater
06-23-2014, 10:56 AM
If I were American, I'd have voted for Nader 2004, Obama 2008, Jill Stein 2012... and who knows 2016.

It wouldn't be that hard for you to slip into America across the border without having to become a citizen. If you do come be sure to stop in Chicago where the office to the CPUSA (Communist Party USA) headquarters are located so that you can pick up your membership card there with no problem. If they run out of hammer & sickle cards, you could always contact the spokesperson for the commie party (Jill Stein) to see if she has an extra one lying around just for you.

Adelaide
06-23-2014, 11:11 AM
It wouldn't be that hard for you to slip into America across the border without having to become a citizen. If you do come be sure to stop in Chicago where the office to the CPUSA (Communist Party USA) headquarters are located so that you can pick up your membership card there with no problem. If they run out of hammer & sickle cards, you could always contact the spokesperson for the commie party (Jill Stein) to see if she has an extra one lying around just for you.

You probably don't even know her position on issues. Anyways, I forgot, you know everything and you're always right.

Mister D
06-23-2014, 11:12 AM
I'm not going to turn into super-Conservatives like my parents and grandparent(s), if that's what you mean? I'm the rebound hippy baby. If I don't remain a Liberal our dinner conversations would be so boring so I have a table obligation. ;)

Plus, Liberal leader Trudeau is so attractive and he beat the snot out of Brazeau in a charity boxing match, (Senator who abused funds and sexually assaulted someone). I simply can't not support him. (I'm joking)

Do Canadians use "liberal" the same way Americans do (i.e. interchangeably with progressive)? Anyway, yeah, that's what I'm saying.

Adelaide
06-23-2014, 11:20 AM
Do Canadians use "liberal" the same way Americans do (i.e. interchangeably with progressive)? Anyway, yeah, that's what I'm saying.

Yes and no. We have actual Liberal and Conservative Parties, but someone could be very liberal/progressive and be a member of the NDP or vote NDP, (social democrats) or Green. Generally, anyone who is conservative votes Conservative. Whereas liberals could vote for any party, including the Conservative Party because it's not too far right and they're pretty good with a budget. Here is how the parties sort of breakdown:

Conservative party of Canada: Centre-right (probably closer to US Dems, with a bit of Republican in them)
Liberal Party of Canada: Centre-left
New Democratic Party: Left
Green Party of Canada: Economically right, socially and environmentally left
Bloc Quebecois: Crazy, technically centre-left

Matty
06-23-2014, 11:25 AM
Yes and no. We have actual Liberal and Conservative Parties, but someone could be very liberal/progressive and be a member of the NDP or vote NDP, (social democrats) or Green. Generally, anyone who is conservative votes Conservative. Whereas liberals could vote for any party, including the Conservative Party because it's not too far right and they're pretty good with a budget. Here is how the parties sort of breakdown:

Conservative party of Canada: Centre-right (probably closer to US Dems, with a bit of Republican in them)
Liberal Party of Canada: Centre-left
New Democratic Party: Left
Green Party of Canada: Economically right, socially and environmentally left
Bloc Quebecois: Crazy, technically centre-left


What is the party platform of conservatives in Canada?

Libhater
06-23-2014, 11:27 AM
You probably don't even know her position on issues. Anyways, I forgot, you know everything and you're always right.

Oh I know her position on the issues all right since I'm a former New Englander myself. But perhaps you could convince me that she's not this dye-in-the-wool socialist.

Adelaide
06-23-2014, 11:31 AM
What is the party platform of conservatives in Canada?

Here is the complete platform:
http://www.conservative.ca/media/2012/06/ConservativePlatform2011_ENs.pdf

Here is an easier way to look at it that isn't a PDF:
http://www.conservative.ca/?page_id=44

Here are their key goals right now:

The “Here for Canada” plan focuses on five key priorities:



Creating jobs through training, trade and low taxes.
Supporting families through our Family Tax Cut and more support for seniors and caregivers.
Eliminating the deficit by 2014-2015 by controlling spending and cutting waste.
Making our streets safe through new laws to protect children and the elderly.



Standing on guard for Canada by investing in the development of Canada’s North, cracking down on human smuggling and strengthening the Canadian Armed Forces.



A major divergence from US conservatives is that ours will not reopen the abortion or same-sex debate even though they have the power to eliminate both. We have no laws surrounding abortion, same-sex marriage has been legal for years. The Conservatives don't want to go against the wishes of Canadians, or jeopardize their seats which they would if they touched either issue.

IMPress Polly
06-23-2014, 03:47 PM
Alyosha wrote:
I'd be interested in seeing the study and study questions if you will, sweetie. (Buttering Polly up to read my novel). :D

I know there's a more recent poll on this somewhere, but I'm having a hard time finding it. Well anyway, here's a summary of the 2011 poll on the subject vis-a-vis the youth (http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/12/29/young-people-socialism_n_1175218.html). (This version asked people whether they had a favorable view of range of terms: socialism, capitalism, liberal, conservative, progressive, libertarian, etc.) More recent polls show comparable results among the youth. If you're into all the details, here's Pew's official summation of their findings, complete with lots of charts and so forth (http://www.people-press.org/2011/12/28/little-change-in-publics-response-to-capitalism-socialism/?src=prc-headline).

Things weren't this way before the 2008 crash. The crash (and I'll add, the Occupy movement of 2011 as well) have done a lot to change the views of the youth on economics, however, and there doesn't appear to be any movement back in the direction going on.

And I'm good for checking out the novel. :smiley:

IMPress Polly
06-23-2014, 04:39 PM
Adelaide wrote:
I don't believe my opinions are going to change drastically as I age - maybe on issues pertaining to age, like CPP (Canadian Pension Plan) and long-term care, family planning maybe though I won't be having kids, but overall, I've formed most of my opinions based on a complex process of experiences, education, extensive reading, religion, so forth. I'm sure that I'll have new experiences and that I'll change a bit, but my opinion on social issues is not going to change, and I think if anything that my view on economics will change the most and probably not much. I say I'm a socialist in an ideal world, but for the most part I support a mixed economy and am a cautious fiscal conservative. I believe strongly in government accountability.

Will I ever vote Conservative up here? Federally? Could happen. Provincially? Guaranteed never to happen. But I don't believe I'll ever officially stop being a member of the centre-left Liberals at both levels unless they really degrade over time, (for Americans: I can be a party member and vote differently). In terms of US politics, I'm more likely to agree with the libertarian crowd than either the Democrat or Republican crowds. If I were American, I'd have voted for Nader 2004, Obama 2008, Jill Stein 2012... and who knows 2016.

I think the term "progressive" might be a more fully description of your views to judge by the way you'd propose to vote. "Libertarian" is a term that most often is used to describe one's cultural views and thus can be either left wing or right wing (much like its logical extreme, anarchism). The voting pattern you describe though overall tends in a specifically left wing direction, so I think "progressive" would be a more precise description. Just as a thought. Getting nitpicky. :tongue:

Anyway, while the voting pattern you propose is pretty much ideologically consistent (the exception being Obama), I observe that you'd propose to vote with two different strategies based on country: On the one hand, you yourself vote pragmatically, for major-party candidates. On the other hand, you propose that Americans should vote mostly for what here are fringe candidates with no chance of winning. Total ideological consistency yields some interesting contradictions like that.

As for me, I tend to be more consistently a pragmatic voter. Not totally. It's not about winning for its own sake for me, but winning does matter to yours truly. Victories increase the morale of the victorious side and thus help shift the political center of gravity in this or that overall direction. I might have voted for Perot in the '90s and Nader in 2000 had I been eligible back then, but really today we're clearly back to a rigidly two-party framework in this country. I'll vote for more solid leftists when and where they have a chance of winning. I voted for Sanders (independent socialist) for U.S. Senate in 2012 and Obama for president. Those are, ideologically speaking, two very different candidates! The consistency between my votes lies in denying Republicans (which for me means the worst of all options) victory. Sanders and Obama were both viable candidates: Sanders is viable at the state level here in Vermont, while Obama is as good as you can do (from my political perspective) nationally at this time.

Chris
06-23-2014, 04:54 PM
I think the term "progressive" might be a more fully description of your views to judge by the way you'd propose to vote. "Libertarian" is a term that most often is used to describe one's cultural views and thus can be either left wing or right wing (much like its logical extreme, anarchism). The voting pattern you describe though overall tends in a specifically left wing direction, so I think "progressive" would be a more precise description. Just as a thought. Getting nitpicky. :tongue:

....


Progressive implies you believe that for social issues there are rational solutions that can be centrally planned and implemented. Libertarian implies you don't believe in that but in leaving people responsible to pursue their own happiness.

KC
06-23-2014, 04:59 PM
Victories increase the morale of the victorious side and thus help shift the political center of gravity in this or that overall direction.

In the long run, however, does this hold true? Obama's 2008 victory only boosted the left for a short period. I would say his victory has done more to rally conservatives, and especially further right leaning conservatives, than lefties.

Chris
06-23-2014, 05:03 PM
In the long run, however, does this hold true? Obama's 2008 victory only boosted the left for a short period. I would say his victory has done more to rally conservatives, and especially further right leaning conservatives, than lefties.


Agree, power shifts back and forth, left, right, left, right...

http://snag.gy/fWri8.jpg


Now if there was a lick of difference between them....

Newpublius
06-23-2014, 05:42 PM
41, but am proud to say that I was asked at my 20 year college reunion, "Are you a student here?" -- it would've been more of a compliment if it had actually been a student, but I'll take it!

Dr. Who
06-23-2014, 05:54 PM
61 tomorrow.....and it sure the hell beats the alternative
Happy Birthday bones! I'll be 59 years young on Wednesday. :laugh:

Adelaide
06-23-2014, 06:03 PM
I think the term "progressive" might be a more fully description of your views to judge by the way you'd propose to vote. "Libertarian" is a term that most often is used to describe one's cultural views and thus can be either left wing or right wing (much like its logical extreme, anarchism). The voting pattern you describe though overall tends in a specifically left wing direction, so I think "progressive" would be a more precise description. Just as a thought. Getting nitpicky. :tongue:

Anyway, while the voting pattern you propose is pretty much ideologically consistent (the exception being Obama), I observe that you'd propose to vote with two different strategies based on country: On the one hand, you yourself vote pragmatically, for major-party candidates. On the other hand, you propose that Americans should vote mostly for what here are fringe candidates with no chance of winning. Total ideological consistency yields some interesting contradictions like that.

As for me, I tend to be more consistently a pragmatic voter. Not totally. It's not about winning for its own sake for me, but winning does matter to yours truly. Victories increase the morale of the victorious side and thus help shift the political center of gravity in this or that overall direction. I might have voted for Perot in the '90s and Nader in 2000 had I been eligible back then, but really today we're clearly back to a rigidly two-party framework in this country. I'll vote for more solid leftists when and where they have a chance of winning. I voted for Sanders (independent socialist) for U.S. Senate in 2012 and Obama for president. Those are, ideologically speaking, two very different candidates! The consistency between my votes lies in denying Republicans (which for me means the worst of all options) victory. Sanders and Obama were both viable candidates: Sanders is viable at the state level here in Vermont, while Obama is as good as you can do (from my political perspective) nationally at this time.

I was set to scratch my vote this past election (provincial) for "none of the above" but last minute (as in standing in line) decided I needed to vote Liberal to ensure a Conservative did not win my riding. Generally, though, when it comes to federal elections I don't really always know who I'm going to vote for, even as a Liberal, and have voted strategically once out of three elections (we had two non-confidence votes, otherwise I would have only been old enough for two elections federally). In the future I might vote NDP or I might even vote Conservative... or I might vote Green. Really, the Green Party is right up my alley in terms of my views and what I'd like but their candidates never seem prepared enough for the election, nonetheless to help run a government. The person who runs in my riding is also woefully uninspiring. I felt differently about Jill Stein but obviously could not vote in an American election.

The reason I say that I am probably most like a libertarian, even if I am very left-wing, is because I really think the US should deal with things on a state or more local basis, that individuals should have more choice in making decisions that I don't believe the US or state governments have a right to make for them, and other things along those lines. In Canada, it's different how we do things and the libertarianism idea isn't really applicable to me except on a couple issues because I respect our constitution and the powers of government. In Canada, I'm probably best described yes as a progressive liberal or social democrat.

Ransom
06-23-2014, 06:23 PM
In the long run, however, does this hold true? Obama's 2008 victory only boosted the left for a short period. I would say his victory has done more to rally conservatives, and especially further right leaning conservatives, than lefties.

I concur. Obama has done more for this Republican Party than any Republican I can name. Opposition to his policies has created a groundswell against him, but he did have us on the ropes, KC. A Democrat Congress and President. EPA standards, Stimulus, Obamacare, lack of entitlement, foreign, or energy policies....his failures more than his victories put Republicans back on their feet.....and we even landed a haymaker in Nov 2010 to change the reality of the political ring. You make a great point.

Ransom
06-23-2014, 06:26 PM
I was set to scratch my vote this past election (provincial) for "none of the above" but last minute (as in standing in line) decided I needed to vote Liberal to ensure a Conservative did not win my riding. Generally, though, when it comes to federal elections I don't really always know who I'm going to vote for, even as a Liberal, and have voted strategically once out of three elections (we had two non-confidence votes, otherwise I would have only been old enough for two elections federally). In the future I might vote NDP or I might even vote Conservative... or I might vote Green. Really, the Green Party is right up my alley in terms of my views and what I'd like but their candidates never seem prepared enough for the election, nonetheless to help run a government. The person who runs in my riding is also woefully uninspiring. I felt differently about Jill Stein but obviously could not vote in an American election.

The reason I say that I am probably most like a libertarian, even if I am very left-wing, is because I really think the US should deal with things on a state or more local basis, that individuals should have more choice in making decisions that I don't believe the US or state governments have a right to make for them, and other things along those lines. In Canada, it's different how we do things and the libertarianism idea isn't really applicable to me except on a couple issues because I respect our constitution and the powers of government. In Canada, I'm probably best described yes as a progressive liberal or social democrat.

But, you support a socialist government health care system.....correct? So.....individuals should have more choice......you concur?

Chris
06-23-2014, 06:31 PM
But, you support a socialist government health care system.....correct? So.....individuals should have more choice......you concur?

In its defense, it's socialized, not socialistic, ransom, and it's controlled at the provincial level, not the federal. Generally speaking, CA adheres to federalism more than the US does.

Ransom
06-23-2014, 07:00 PM
The individuals should have more choice in making decisions the federal or state government shouldn't be making was the sentence I focused on.

Chris
06-23-2014, 07:05 PM
The individuals should have more choice in making decisions the federal or state government shouldn't be making was the sentence I focused on.

OK, now carry that argument to its logical conclusion and you arrive at anarchism. But you're a neocon statist, go figure.

Adelaide
06-23-2014, 09:29 PM
But, you support a socialist government health care system.....correct? So.....individuals should have more choice......you concur?

Individuals can opt out. There's choice.

Matty
06-23-2014, 09:35 PM
Individuals can opt out. There's choice.
Can they opt their tax dollars out too?

Chris
06-23-2014, 09:51 PM
Can they opt their tax dollars out too?

I think it's that they can opt for private care, but still pay taxes for public care.

Matty
06-23-2014, 10:01 PM
I think it's that they can opt for private care, but still pay taxes for public care.
Well since most people live on limited funds and cannot afford to pay both they really don't have a choice.

Adelaide
06-23-2014, 10:04 PM
Can they opt their tax dollars out too?

For health insurance, yes. You pay X amount based on your salary, and I imagine they would get additional money back.

Chris
06-23-2014, 10:22 PM
For health insurance, yes. You pay X amount based on your salary, and I imagine they would get additional money back.

Interesting, must be something new, but, yes, you can opt out, for example, http://www.health.gov.bc.ca/msp/infoben/electoptout.pdf.

We should follow CA!

Redrose
06-23-2014, 11:12 PM
Since this is the thread where the oldies have been telling the youngins how dating below your age r awesome...

http://dlisted.com/tag/hot_slut_of_the_day/page/2/

http://i.dlisted.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/06/hsotdmegacougar2014.jpg
That's sick. Remember Anna Nicole Smith and that old rich geezer. Yuk! There isn't enough money in the world for that. Double yuk!!

Perianne
06-24-2014, 12:32 AM
That's sick. Remember Anna Nicole Smith and that old rich geezer. Yuk! There isn't enough money in the world for that. Double yuk!!

Since being single again, I have dated from 21 to mid-seventies.

IMPress Polly
06-24-2014, 06:56 AM
Adelaide wrote:
I was set to scratch my vote this past election (provincial) for "none of the above" but last minute (as in standing in line) decided I needed to vote Liberal to ensure a Conservative did not win my riding. Generally, though, when it comes to federal elections I don't really always know who I'm going to vote for, even as a Liberal, and have voted strategically once out of three elections (we had two non-confidence votes, otherwise I would have only been old enough for two elections federally). In the future I might vote NDP or I might even vote Conservative... or I might vote Green. Really, the Green Party is right up my alley in terms of my views and what I'd like but their candidates never seem prepared enough for the election, nonetheless to help run a government. The person who runs in my riding is also woefully uninspiring. I felt differently about Jill Stein but obviously could not vote in an American election.

My boyfriend is Canadian (specifically British Columbian) and he votes for the New Democrats. I think I probably would too if I were Canadian. It's not that I exactly think even they are flawless or totally consistent with my worldview in general, but that that would constitute a principled progressive vote that would generally be practical. After all, as I understand it, the NDP is now Canada's main opposition party to the dominant Conservatives as of the most recent national election cycle, with the once-dominant Liberal Party now being relegated to a third party status. This development makes the ideological lines of Canadian politics clearer: The main and essential political divide in the country is between the (main) party of organized labor (the New Democrats) and the (main) party of organized capital (the Conservatives). Such a principled divide would be impossible here in the United States because we practically don't have organized labor anymore here. That's why, beyond the obvious moral reasons, it's so important for American progressives to support the rapidly-growing movement in this country to unionize the working poor: precisely in order to change that situation and render the existence of a genuine party of labor in this country possible. It's to that end that I find myself today involved in materially assisting strike committees in New York and elsewhere.

In terms of the level of workforce organization, Canada today is about where America was 40 years ago: about 27% of the Canadian workforce consists of union members today. It's about 11% here in the United States today, and only a minority of America's few remaining union workers are employed in the private sector (i.e. in a situation to directly confront the forces of capital). If things continue the way they're currently going though, eventually you'll be where we are. For this reason, it's important to support the party of labor politically, I believe, or eventually you won't have one. The NDP will morph into another party of capital of survival necessity (like the Democrats have here) because it won't be getting any significant funds from organized labor anymore. Of course I don't live there, so I can't really know all the details of the situation, but that's just the general impression that I get.


The reason I say that I am probably most like a libertarian, even if I am very left-wing, is because I really think the US should deal with things on a state or more local basis, that individuals should have more choice in making decisions that I don't believe the US or state governments have a right to make for them, and other things along those lines. In Canada, it's different how we do things and the libertarianism idea isn't really applicable to me except on a couple issues because I respect our constitution and the powers of government. In Canada, I'm probably best described yes as a progressive liberal or social democrat.

I'm sorry, but I'm not voting for Rand Paul. I kind of like the existence of the minimum wage, child labor laws, the Environmental Protection Agency, public education, the Affordable Care Act, Medicare, Social Security, etc. etc. :wink: Without economic security, freedom is impossible in my view. You cannot feel free absent freedom from necessity, I believe. Ask the poor if they feel free.

All of this is not to mention that I like my reproductive rights and support gay rights, much unlike Mr. Paul and at least half of his supporters. (I know what you're thinking, but don't be silly: You can't expect a self-respecting libertarian to support social liberty for women or gay people, but only for themselves!)

Codename Section
06-24-2014, 07:01 AM
Rand Paul has said about both abortion and gay marriage that he personally doesn't agree with it, but he's fine with whatever states choose. I'm not seeing the problem with that. I think abortion is the taking of a life, too, but I'm not going to approve of federal laws against it. I don't understand gay marriage, but I don't have to understand it to say that they are taxpayers who should have the right to government services.

So if I were president nothing would really change in either of those cases.

strollingbonez
06-24-2014, 07:23 AM
today i am 61

Alyosha
06-24-2014, 07:26 AM
today i am 61

Happy Birthday. :)

del
06-24-2014, 07:30 AM
today i am 61

happy birthday, bones!


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xrCMlSWlDX8

IMPress Polly
06-24-2014, 07:31 AM
KC wrote:
In the long run, however, does this hold true? Obama's 2008 victory only boosted the left for a short period. I would say his victory has done more to rally conservatives, and especially further right leaning conservatives, than lefties.

No, generally those morale boosts only last for about six months. But it's a valuable six months when things are mostly likely to get done. Voting isn't my main political activity. I'm more of what you might call a lifestyle activist. I'm simply pointing out that election results matter in terms of helping or hurting actual causes; in terms of where the balance of energy winds up falling in a given period.

In terms of long-term electoral trends, generally I'd say that the political structure of the country has us destined for approximate policy stagnation for the rest of the decade. But in the 2020s and 2030s the demographic composition of the country will have shifted sufficiently to give the Democrats a definite advantage, even in what today are a number of solidly Republican states like Texas. If current trends continue, eventually our politics as a nation will look like California's do today, where Democrats hold 70% of public offices. To prevent such a development, the main thing the Republicans need to do is get on board with immigration reform, lest they continue to bleed what little remaining Latino support they've got. But as we've seen recently, as much appears unlikely. Hardcore nativist sentiments definitely prevail in the GOP. As long as it's only Democrats who do anything to pursue the Latino vote, Latinos will keep voting more and more lopsidedly for Democrats. The GOP needs to revisit the Bush formula on immigration to win presidential elections again. Seriously. Bush won in 2004. He wouldn't have though without getting like 44% of the Latino vote. Latinos are the most nearly rightist of America's various minority groups overall. (Seriously: most black people and Asian Americans are borderline socialist, ideologically speaking; especially the women, and particularly the younger ones. There's no hope for the GOP there. They'd have to fundamentally alter their whole politics from right-leaning to left-leaning in order to win over many of those groups.) Alienating them (Latinos) is a bad idea, strategically speaking, especially since they'll continue to grow as a percentage of the total population.

Besides demographics, there are lots of other ways that the balance of public opinion can and will be made to shift in a more leftward direction in future decades, like a fiscal catastrophe that provokes waves of budget such as you see today in southern Europe. Such developments have revived radical left wing sentiments there. The bottom line though is this: the next generation of Americans, which will look very different from earlier generations, is the first one in our history that's projected to wind up poorer than their elders. They're also projected to have a shorter average life span. That's what's producing a growing demand, particularly among the youth, for economic security and yes some wealth redistribution.

IMPress Polly
06-24-2014, 07:31 AM
Happy Birthday strollingbonez! :smiley:

Codename Section
06-24-2014, 07:35 AM
today i am 61

May you have Popeyes for dinner and the calories never register. Happy Birthday!

IMPress Polly
06-24-2014, 07:50 AM
Codename Section wrote:
Rand Paul has said about both abortion and gay marriage that he personally doesn't agree with it, but he's fine with whatever states choose. I'm not seeing the problem with that. I think abortion is the taking of a life, too, but I'm not going to approve of federal laws against it. I don't understand gay marriage, but I don't have to understand it to say that they are taxpayers who should have the right to government services.

So if I were president nothing would really change in either of those cases.

No. It's incorrect to say that that "nothing would change". Abortion is currently legal at the federal level, which means that no state is allowed to ban it. The policy Rand Paul prescribes therefore objectively corresponds to a major increase in abortion restrictions, as it would allow states to outlaw abortion entirely. From there, the next logical step along the same trajectory is a federal ban, and that's exactly what would be subsequently pursued.

And as to gay rights, all the Democratic Party candidates who have been mentioned as likely to run for the presidency in 2016 support legalizing same-sex marriage at the federal level, i.e. prohibiting states from banning it.

In both cases, it's the Democrats who take what is objectively the more pro-liberty stance. "State's rights" I find to be pretty much just an excuse for taking reactionary positions that have become unpopular nationally.

Spectre
06-24-2014, 08:20 AM
A person who is for abortion on demand I have always regarded as essentially Fascist. Protecting those who cannot protect themselves, being the voice fir the voiceless is one if the highest aspirations a human being can have.

It's not a coincidence that societies that have widespread abortion eventually acquire euthanasia for the elderly, and then extend that, as in many European nations, to voluntary state-supplied death for whomever wants it on the flimsiest grounds.

Progressivism is a culture deeply destructive of human dignity and happiness. It is ultimately a culture based on nihilism and death, because there is nothing else underlying it.

Chris
06-24-2014, 08:44 AM
No. It's incorrect to say that that "nothing would change". Abortion is currently legal at the federal level, which means that no state is allowed to ban it. The policy Rand Paul prescribes therefore objectively corresponds to a major increase in abortion restrictions, as it would allow states to outlaw abortion entirely. From there, the next logical step along the same trajectory is a federal ban, and that's exactly what would be subsequently pursued.

And as to gay rights, all the Democratic Party candidates who have been mentioned as likely to run for the presidency in 2016 support legalizing same-sex marriage at the federal level, i.e. prohibiting states from banning it.

In both cases, it's the Democrats who take what is objectively the more pro-liberty stance. "State's rights" I find to be pretty much just an excuse for taking reactionary positions that have become unpopular nationally.


Which makes you a statist as most Marxists are solely concerned about your own personal welfare but not anyone else's.

Spectre
06-24-2014, 08:50 AM
Which makes you a statist as most Marxists are solely concerned about your own personal welfare but not anyone else's.

Kinda obvious a Marxist would be a statist. And a very authoritarian kind of statist at that.

Codename Section
06-24-2014, 08:53 AM
No. It's incorrect to say that that "nothing would change". Abortion is currently legal at the federal level, which means that no state is allowed to ban it. The policy Rand Paul prescribes therefore objectively corresponds to a major increase in abortion restrictions, as it would allow states to outlaw abortion entirely. From there, the next logical step along the same trajectory is a federal ban, and that's exactly what would be subsequently pursued.

The president can't ban abortion unless well, I guess these days the president can do anything, but he wasn't supposed to be able to. Anyway, look at the polling on it. There aren't very many states that would ban it and those that would have states right next door, and the US mail service to provide medical abortions via the RU 486 pill.




And as to gay rights, all the Democratic Party candidates who have been mentioned as likely to run for the presidency in 2016 support legalizing same-sex marriage at the federal level, i.e. prohibiting states from banning it.


And? Why should any government have a position on marriage?



In both cases, it's the Democrats who take what is objectively the more pro-liberty stance. "State's rights" I find to be pretty much just an excuse for taking reactionary positions that have become unpopular nationally.

Yeh but you're wrong. :D

Chris
06-24-2014, 08:59 AM
Kinda obvious a Marxist would be a statist. And a very authoritarian kind of statist at that.

Yet she claims not to be.

Spectre
06-24-2014, 08:59 AM
No, generally those morale boosts only last for about six months. But it's a valuable six months when things are mostly likely to get done. Voting isn't my main political activity. I'm more of what you might call a lifestyle activist. I'm simply pointing out that election results matter in terms of helping or hurting actual causes; in terms of where the balance of energy winds up falling in a given period.

In terms of long-term electoral trends, generally I'd say that the political structure of the country has us destined for approximate policy stagnation for the rest of the decade. But in the 2020s and 2030s the demographic composition of the country will have shifted sufficiently to give the Democrats a definite advantage, even in what today are a number of solidly Republican states like Texas. If current trends continue, eventually our politics as a nation will look like California's do today, where Democrats hold 70% of public offices. To prevent such a development, the main thing the Republicans need to do is get on board with immigration reform, lest they continue to bleed what little remaining Latino support they've got. But as we've seen recently, as much appears unlikely. Hardcore nativist sentiments definitely prevail in the GOP. As long as it's only Democrats who do anything to pursue the Latino vote, Latinos will keep voting more and more lopsidedly for Democrats. The GOP needs to revisit the Bush formula on immigration to win presidential elections again. Seriously. Bush won in 2004. He wouldn't have though without getting like 44% of the Latino vote. Latinos are the most nearly rightist of America's various minority groups overall. (Seriously: most black people and Asian Americans are borderline socialist, ideologically speaking; especially the women, and particularly the younger ones. There's no hope for the GOP there. They'd have to fundamentally alter their whole politics from right-leaning to left-leaning in order to win over many of those groups.) Alienating them (Latinos) is a bad idea, strategically speaking, especially since they'll continue to grow as a percentage of the total population.

Besides demographics, there are lots of other ways that the balance of public opinion can and will be made to shift in a more leftward direction in future decades, like a fiscal catastrophe that provokes waves of budget such as you see today in southern Europe. Such developments have revived radical left wing sentiments there. The bottom line though is this: the next generation of Americans, which will look very different from earlier generations, is the first one in our history that's projected to wind up poorer than their elders. They're also projected to have a shorter average life span. That's what's producing a growing demand, particularly among the youth, for economic security and yes some wealth redistribution.

'Hair of the dog that bit you' doesn't really work when it comes to economics [not sure it actually works when it comes to hangovers either].

If a conditon of desperate decline and spiraling poverty and misery is being caused by the application of socialist policies, as in Europe and America, for example, and a generation arises that will be poorer and live more limited and diminished lives as a result of this, you don't heal the victim of this poisoing by applying more toxins to the patient. THAT will cause the victims of socialism to spiral downward ever faster with less and less chance of climbing out of their black hole.

What the generation that is now sitting in their parents' basement as their 30th year approaches needs to do is to rediscover the values and practices of their ancestors, they need to rediscover the nuts and bolts of capitalism and entreprenuership and and liberty.

FIRST stop the bleeding [ie, end socialism]

THEN sew up and bind the wound and begin the healing [ie, start practicing genuine capitalism again].

Spectre
06-24-2014, 09:01 AM
Yet she claims not to be.

She is a comically confused, kinda bright, young woman that has some maturing, reading and growing up to do.