Stupid New Florida Law

[Guest MrRant]

WOW

[Guest Kotzenjunge]

I can't help but feel that was directed at me. I actually end up being a moderate myself, because I find parts of liberalism and conservatism to both be appealing. For instance, I advocate defense spending, but not at the considerable expense of other, perhaps more needful sectors.

 

I won't comment on the tagline thing. I'm still going to keep using it, because it was never meant to be funny. Somehow people thought I was trying to get it over as a catchphrase.

 

And I only hate Christians who try to push it on me. The ones who go about their business and don't try to bother me with it are fine, because I don't bother anyone with my lack of affection with it. When someone says how they're going to save me is when it gets ugly.

 

I'm neither liberal nor conservative becuase I really don't want to embrace a complete set of ideals and then discount the other side because they disagree with me. If the Republicans come up with something good, I'll support it, the same as Democrats. I will admit that I am more of a Democrat because I have a houseful of Republicans who constantly push conservative values on me, but they're usually the sillier ones, like from before my own mother was born. I just find having an open mind to be much more enjoyable, and I've found that neither liberals or conservatives have much of an open mind.

 

Whatever, rip me apart, I don't care. I have beliefs and ideals believe me, I just lack the ability to properly verbalize them.

 

Fo sheez,

Kotzenjunge

[Guest Some Guy]

For the record I was kidding about killing all Democrats, hence the . Now cutting out their voice baxes and prohibiting them from voting is another story, but I wouldn't kill them. I like my sister and Grandmother afterall.

[Guest Cancer Marney]

I won't comment on the tagline thing. I'm still going to keep using it

This is a forum for serious discussion, not taglines. Keep the General Chat crap in General Chat.

 

I really don't want to embrace a complete set of ideals and then discount the other side because they disagree with me.

The implication being, presumably, that I do just that. Wrong. I disagree sharply with the Republican party line on abortion (too intolerant), on school vouchers (too weak-kneed), on guns (way too tolerant), and on welfare reform (too weak-kneed again). It's just that the Republicans are much, much better on the whole than the Democrats, and therefore I will vote for Republicans and I will do so proudly.

 

Whatever, rip me apart, I don't care. I have beliefs and ideals believe me, I just lack the ability to properly verbalize them.

Oh, I believe you. Everyone has beliefs, even Mongoloids and drunks. But if you don't acquire "the ability to properly verbalize," your beliefs, you'll never be able to defend or examine them in heated debate, you'll never understand how our democracy functions, and you'll never grow and you'll never learn.

 

"The unexamined life is not worth living."

- Plato, Apologia

[Guest Kotzenjunge]

Goddammit, I'm NOT TARGETING ANYONE!!!! However, I don't really appreciate the implication that I don't deserve to be here or even exist in this country because I haven't learned how to put forth my ideas yet.

 

Forget it, I'm reminded of why I try and avoid this forum. Before it's assumed that I'm too weak-minded to keep up, it's because people get ripped to shreds and unfairly judged for no reason other than opening their mouths.

 

Fo fucking sheez thank you very much,

Kotzenjunge

 

(Don't bother typing up a dissection, I won't be back here to read it)

[Guest Cancer Marney]

Goddammit, I'm NOT TARGETING ANYONE!!!!

You should be. Nonconfrontational cowardice is not a virtue. Politics are partisan and passionate; that's the way they always will be, and that's the way they should be. This country is founded on tension, despite what liberals would have you believe, not weak-minded can't-we-all-just-get-along feel-good bullshit. When you stand up for what you really think is right, whatever your beliefs, whether you're right or wrong, you're standing up for everything America means.

There is tension between the legislature and the executive. Between the judiciary and the executive. The legislature and the judiciary. Always. There should be equal tension in political discourse.

 

Genuine conflict is a white-hot furnace that burns away falsehoods and allows people to see the truth. Political gamesmanship chips away at the foundations of the furnace, making polling data more important than principles. That is no way for a representative democratic republic to function.

 

There is no excuse for not understanding this after eight years of President Clinton.

 

I don't really appreciate the implication that I don't deserve to be here or even exist in this country because I haven't learned how to put forth my ideas yet

That is precisely the point. Unless you're willing to try and fail you never can learn. If you're this intent on winning, if you're this insecure, if your ego is really this fragile, you will never gain the experience necessary to do anything worthwhile with your life.

 

Forget it, I'm reminded of why I try and avoid this forum... it's because people get ripped to shreds and unfairly judged for no reason other than opening their mouths

People get ripped to shreds when they refuse to defend themselves or when they are incapable of defending themselves. They always have. They always shall.

It's not enough to whine that you're being "unfairly judged." You're unfairly judged every moment of your fucking life. So am I. So is everyone. Get over it and act like a man instead of a petulant two year-old. There's a real world out there, and if you curl up and whimper every time it slaps you, it'll stomp on your skull. Be grateful you're getting a taste of it here, where it's safe.

 

Don't bother typing up a dissection, I won't be back here to read it

As if I care.

[Guest EricMM]

I guess I'll jump in...

 

they're more concerned about teachers keeping their jobs than they are about teachers doing their jobs

Nah I'd rather see the latter. I don't like to see Trashmen ignoring trash in cans, or Doctors allowing people to suffer. Bad teachers are a waste of kid's time...

 

they preach multicultural values

Yeah that's true. We'd like to be seen as multicultural and not racist. Two wrongs don't make a right etc... But I don't think you'll find many Dems willing to "embrace our Al-Quada brothers," so please don't imply it

 

they hate Christianity

Not at all

 

they cut defence and intelligence budgets as a matter of course

Many democrats feel that money spent on the military would be better off in the long run being put into bettering schools, the environment etc.

 

their economic and social policies border on Socialism, sometimes from the other side

You mean like welfare etc.? Many poor people need help or they will be forever poor.

 

they champion scum who murder police officers and imagine that makes them enlightened and brave

Maybe posters in the local Co-Op say that but none of my liberal friends...

 

they still refuse to enforce our terribly inadequate immigration laws, let alone strengthen them

I don't understand this. I've heard people saying that we should run massive Amnesties, allowing all illegal immigrants to become legal, but that's just punishing the people who took the time to do it legally. And it's dangerous.

 

they constantly advocate appeasement, both of tyrants and welfare addicts

Regarding which tyrants? I guess Hussein? I don't agree with appeasement of him at all.

 

they hilariously claim our justice system should be redesigned to rehabilitate rather than punish

I feel that people who get arrested for a few crimes (like drug use) would be better helped be constructive members of our society by therapy then spending damaging time in jail. But there's no such thing as stabbing therapy, rapist therapy. I emphasize FEW.

 

they're liars, hypocrites, and crybabies who demand the freedom to slander their opponents yet scream bloody murder when they're called on the carpet

Nobody wants to be called names. Republicans WISH they had the media on their side like we do.

 

they love to raise taxes

*looks at pay check* HELL NO. While the money does have to come from somewhere, I'd rather just allocate it better. America wastes lots of money every year on stupid projects, people, etc. But I guess corruption is part of all cultures, we just have the least, considering everyone in America answers to someone. What's the term, pork bellies? I'm totally not saying military spending is bad, I think that there is lots of wasted money. I'm not saying I'd be good at making the govt. more efficent, but I certainly don't want to raise taxes either.

 

 

I just feel that you're painting with a too-broad-brush. Maybe I'm the exception, but I make my political choices based on how I feel, not party affiliation. It's weird when on the news a dem will agree with me on one thing (because he's right) then disagree with me on another thing (because he's wrong, and the republican agreed with me). It seems like noone has free will in Political arenas.

[Guest danielisthor]

they're more concerned about teachers keeping their jobs than they are about teachers doing their jobs

Nah I'd rather see the latter.  I don't like to see Trashmen ignoring trash in cans, or Doctors allowing people to suffer.   Bad teachers are a waste of kid's time...

 

Actually its also a waste of taxpayers money.

 

 

 

they preach multicultural values

Yeah that's true.  We'd like to be seen as multicultural and not racist.  Two wrongs don't make a right etc...  But I don't think you'll find many Dems willing to "embrace our Al-Quada brothers," so please don't imply it

 

 

We live in America, the goal of this country is that everybody is an American, not and afro-american, spanish-american, etc. etc. It is that kind of sentiment that keeps people from becoming just an American. I don't go around saying i am a Russian-American and my girlfriend doesn't go around saying she's a 3/4 Welsh 1/4 Italian American.

 

 

 

they hate Christianity

Not at all

 

Agreed

 

 

they cut defence and intelligence budgets as a matter of course

Many democrats feel that money spent on the military would be better off in the long run being put into bettering schools, the environment etc.

 

The PROTECTION of the United States and its citizens is the first priority of the government. While Reagan was building up the military in the 80's after a downsize from the Carter administration, Senators Gore, Kennedy, Daschle and Gephardt led the charge on a Nuclear Freeze.

 

 

they still refuse to enforce our terribly inadequate immigration laws, let alone strengthen them

I don't understand this.  I've heard people saying that we should run massive Amnesties, allowing all illegal immigrants to become legal, but that's just punishing the people who took the time to do it legally.  And it's dangerous

 

 

When Clinton/Gore took the White House in 1993 there were 3.4million illegal aliens in the US by Census count. That's a very high number. By the 2000 Census that number jumped to 8.7million. 30,823 were from Iran, and 59,623 from other Islamic countries including Afghanistan. An estimated 2 million foreign citizens illegally overstay their visas every year.

(figures are taken from Sean Hannity's new book, Let Freedom Ring). The US employs 1 boarder Patrol Person per every 24 Miles. On the Canadian and Mexican borders. I agree with O'Reilly when he says the US Military should be patrolling the boarder. But here are some direct quotes about illegal immagrants:

 

"The majority Republican Party, is basically anti-civil rights, anti-immigrant, anti-woman and anti-worker." - Senator Ted Kennedy

 

"The Republican leadership in Congress, has spent the last six years blocking bills, stopping progress, strenghtening the anti-immigrant forces in the culture, and in the country." - House Minority Leader Dick Gephardt

 

"a wave of scapegoating is sweeping the country and that just like under Hitler, peole say they don't mean to blame any particular individuals or groups, but in the U.S. those groups always turn out to be minorities andimmigrants."- Charlie Rangel, House Democrat

 

 

 

they still refuse to enforce our terribly inadequate immigration laws, let alone strengthen them

I don't understand this.  I've heard people saying that we should run massive Amnesties, allowing all illegal immigrants to become legal, but that's just punishing the people who took the time to do it legally.  And it's dangerous

 

 

Actually many liberal groups out there actually thing that rapist and child molesters can be rehabilitated.

 

 

 

their economic and social policies border on Socialism, sometimes from the other side

 

You mean like welfare etc.? Many poor people need help or they will be forever poor.

 

The reason there was welfare reform, started by the Republican run Congress and not by Clinton as the media likes to portray was instigated because nobody was getting off Welfare. They got on, they stayed on. They didn't go out and find jobs because if they did, they got kicked off the program, because the moment they started making an income, whether or not it was enough to sustain a family, they would immediately be making "too much money" and no longer needed Government help.

 

Let me go on to say, that the welfare system was abused by alot of the people on it. My previous job, i worked for a national rent to own company, I used to cash welfare checks so that people could pay their monthly rent on Big screen telivisions, bedroom sets, living room sets, entertainment systems, etc. etc. Those are not items nor ideals for which the system was created. It was suppose to go to feed your family and house them.

[Guest Mystery Eskimo]

By the 2000 Census that number jumped to 8.7million.

Wow, how do none of them get caught?!

 

I find the whole immigration thing a little worrying.

In Britain we have a similarly loose system. I'm all for helping refugees and all for people wanting to improve their lives but there have to be lines drawn and it dosn't seem to be happening.

 

David Blunkett got into trouble (again!) for suggesting Kosovan and Afghanistani men in Britain should go back home to help re-build their countries after the countries had been freed.

Overaction to statements like this - and Blunkett's words in another thread here - really annoys me.

 

Politcal correctness is just crazy here. Spotted Dick (you have this in America, right?) has only just been renamed as such in a major supermarket after a couple of years as "Spotted Richard".

[Guest Cancer Marney]

I guess I'll jump in... I just feel that you're painting with a too-broad-brush.

Eric, that was the point. My post was a characterisation of particular attitudes which are both typical of liberals and which piss me off. Of course each and every characterisation doesn't apply to all liberals.

 

I feel that people who get arrested for a few crimes (like drug use) would be better helped be constructive members of our society by therapy then spending damaging time in jail

There's another point on which I'm out of step with the party line. I want full legalisation of any and all drugs. I don't use them myself; I just think it's a waste of taxpayer money to try to stop some idiot from abusing his body. That's not the job of the federal or state government.

 

Republicans WISH they had the media on their side like we do.

At least you're admitting it. Most of the time the liberals don't even admit there's a bias in the mainstream media. But yes, there is; and no, I for one don't wish the bias went the other way, because I'm more interested in honest political discourse than in being fawningly misrepresented and having those who oppose me in good faith demonised and slandered.

 

I certainly don't want to raise taxes either.

Again, you're the exception. This is one of the fundamental differences between the GOP and the Democrats. We cut taxes; Democrats raise them. It has less to do with economics than with philosophy.

[Guest Cancer Marney]

By the 2000 Census that number jumped to 8.7million.

Wow, how do none of them get caught?!

We could catch them all easily. It's just that the liberals are so caught up in their tolerant multicultural masturbatory fantasies that they have conniptions if we try to prosecute or deport them. Even proposals to enforce laws that are already on the books bring shrill cries of "racism."

[Guest Mystery Eskimo]

So how left-wing is the Democratic party in America? Is it THAT liberal?

 

To be honest, I didn't think you had many liberals in the US.

[Guest Cancer Marney]

Oh, you'd be surprised. Yes, the Democratic party is extremely liberal; the claims of newfound centrism are pure bullshit. Look behind the curtain and they really haven't changed at all. They still want to socialise health care; they still oppose education reform; they still advocate multiculturalism, for crying out loud - the most vile and insiduous philosophy in a whole host of disgusting philosophies. Clinton never changed the underlying platform. He was just exceptionally skilled at selling it.

[Guest Mystery Eskimo]

That's interesting. Sounds like they're more left-wing than any of the three main parties here.

 

Although no party here would propose privatising the NHS and 'multi-culturalism' is still seen as a positive buzz word. So maybe I'm talking crap.

[Guest Cancer Marney]

You are. Our liberals are still less left-wing than yours, but that's just because we as a country are far less left-wing than any country in Europe.

It doesn't mean they're any better; it just means they're not as important in the hierarchy of the bottomless pit, from which arises a smoke, as the smoke of a great furnace; and the sun and the air are darkened by reason of the smoke of the pit.

[Guest Edwin MacPhisto]

I find it hard to put myself on a party line because I have gripes with policies on either side, big time. I consider myself of a "liberal" mindset, I suppose, but all this liberal PC bullshit drives me nuts. All I'd really like to see is some worthwhile education reform and some concerted attempts to raise the standard of living and education among minorities, rather than try to cut it off too late with the idiocy of affirmative action and welfare.

 

The biggest problem with leftist democratic thinking is that the problem-solving process goes a little something like this:

 

1) Identify problem.

2) Totally misinterpret source of problem.

3) Waste my money in attempting to buy the problem a new scarf rather than cut it off at its knees.

 

On the other, I disagree with the inflexibility of many Republican policies; the little baby bleeding-heart in me wishes for a liiiiiittle more leniency, I suppose. What it boils down is this: in philosophy, I like the Democratic intention. In execution, considering my status as an upper middle class white male, I definitely smile in the Republican direction.

 

All in all I just try to look at the candidate, and hope that they're not too terribly ingrained in party ideals, but not too removed from them either. A single visionary is great, but he's not gonna get anywhere without one of the two parties behind him...

 

Edit: And I forgot to mention the issue of this post that brought me here--another thing that makes me go, "sigh, stupid stupid" is that the democrats in the southeast corner of my state seem to have a ridiculous time voting, as this heading set up. Honestly, who thought it was a good idea to remedy 2000's polling problem with COMPLICATED VOTING COMPUTERS THAT NOBODY RUNNING THE POLLS KNEW HOW TO WORK? Sigh. I *love* counter-intuition.

[Guest Mystery Eskimo]

Our liberals are still less left-wing than yours, but that's just because we as a country are far less left-wing than any country in Europe.

Yeah, that's what I thought.

 

It's probably your impressivley vitriolic attack on Democrats made me think they were more left-wing.

[Guest Some Guy]

I feel that people who get arrested for a few crimes (like drug use) would be better helped be constructive members of our society by therapy then spending damaging time in jail

There's another point on which I'm out of step with the party line. I want full legalisation of any and all drugs. I don't use them myself; I just think it's a waste of taxpayer money to try to stop some idiot from abusing his body. That's not the job of the federal or state government.

 

Legalizing drugs would also be a way to raise tax money and provide an oppurtunity to cut Fed and State income tax for everybody. With the insanely discriminatory taxation of cigarette smokers, one would think that the Gov't would want to tax the shit out of drugs as well.

But I'd bet the left would impose such high taxes that the junkies would be able to get better prices on the streets.

[Guest danielisthor]

By the 2000 Census that number jumped to 8.7million.

Wow, how do none of them get caught?!

We could catch them all easily. It's just that the liberals are so caught up in their tolerant multicultural masturbatory fantasies that they have conniptions if we try to prosecute or deport them. Even proposals to enforce laws that are already on the books bring shrill cries of "racism."

i left the book at home, but i believe that the INS deports only 80,000 illegals a year.

[Guest Cancer Marney]

That sounds pretty high to me. It's more like 50k, if that.

[Guest danielisthor]

That sounds pretty high to me. It's more like 50k, if that.

another reason to love my girlfriend.

 

 

Daniel Sutherland for the NY Times in 1994- "several million immigrants currently living in this country should be deported (having entered the United States illegally or violated the terms of their visas). Of these, an estimated 200,000 have been convicted of criminal acts while in the country. Yet the INS deports only about 40,000 people every year."

 

 

The Gerneral Accoutning Office (GOA) in 2000. "finding in reports released in 1995,1997,1998, and 1999 (all Clinton/Gore years thank you very much) that the program needs vast improvemnets."

 

Sutherland from above report from the GOA - "First, because its agents(INS) seldom visit local jails, the INS fails to recognize many criminal aliens eligible for deportation. Second, on those rare occasions when the agents do visit jails, they make little effort to identify immigrants. The GAO found that the INS only identified 64percent of them. That means that more than seven thousand felons were released back into society.

 

 

Washington Post noted in 1998 that the Clinton-Gore administration "pushed the INS to speed up the citizenship process before the last (1996) presidential election, only to prompt a congressional investigation into why at least 6,000 immigrants with criminal backgrounds were granted U.S. citizenship."

[Guest MrRant]

My opinion is that if you are here illegally then you should get thrown out on your ass as there are plenty of people who are trying to get here legally.

 

Go through the process and you are more then welcome to the country.

[Guest Cancer Marney]

Forgot to address this earlier, but better late than never.

 

Liberals as a group absolutely do hate Christianity. When was the last time you saw a liberal newspaper or a liberal politician denouncing dung-splattered depictions of Mary or crucifixes suspended in urine as sacrilege? On the contrary, they fight tooth and nail to defend such things as perfectly acceptable, even valuable art. And God forbid a conservative Christian politician (or other public figure) criticise such obscenities: immediately, he's pilloried and mocked as a gap-toothed redneck from the Bible belt who thinks the Second Amendment is more important than the First.

Yet say one word about Islam's militarism, its demand for total conquest (literally, by force) of the entire world and the conversion or extermination of all unbelievers, its explicit espousal of treachery, or the fact that Mohammed was (in his own words) demonically possessed, and a paedophile to boot, and you're labelled a right-wing hate-mongering racist. What happened to freedom of speech? - and where are these brave defenders of religious tolerance and cultural sensitivity when Christian symbols are attacked, defaced, and desecrated?

 

I guess it's nice to see that the left's found at least one religion it can embrace and defend so wholeheartedly. I could wish they'd chosen one which wasn't shared by the overwhelming majority of terrorists, but then, that would be a little naive... I'm sure that's what made it attractive to them in the first place. Liberals are never happier than when they're attacking America's past or destroying her future.

[Guest DrTom]

What happened to freedom of speech?

They do things like that all the time. Liberals love using the First Amendment to attack people and positions, but when the tables are turned, they break out the labels and cry about how mean and unfair everyone is. Speak out against a liberal or one of their pet projects, and you're one of the following: a hate-monger, a bigot, a racist, a sexist, a homophobe, a right-winger, a gun nut, a Fundamenalist, a radical, or an extremist. When they really get to frothing at the mouth, they even mix and match: you might be a Fundamentalist right-wing racist gun nut.

 

It would be funny if it weren't so blatantly pathetic.

[Guest Tyler McClelland]

For the record, I'm a liberal Roman Catholic.

 

I don't hate Catholics. Thanks for saying I do, though.

[Guest Cancer Marney]

I'm a liberal Roman Catholic. I don't hate Catholics. Thanks for saying I do, though.

Liberals as a group absolutely do hate Christianity. [emphasis added for the benefit of the ignorant]

More precisely, you're either an illiterate liberal Roman Catholic, or you're a dishonest liberal Roman Catholic indulging in the ever-popular liberal pastime of building and attacking absurd straw men.

Having fun?

[Guest Agent of Oblivion]

Where's the dung-spattered pictures of Mary and crosses suspended in piss? I have a weird fascination for sacrilegious art.

 

I wouldn't call myself liberal or conservative, per se, more because I don't really care about that sort of crap. Stick with the constitution, separate church and state, legalize pot, defend yourself at all times, and be excellent to each other. Call me whichever group that fits into.

[Guest Cancer Marney]

Find them yourself. If you must.

[Guest big Dante Cruz]

This has been addressed, but I absolutely HATE PC. I quite frankly am glad I don't live in California, for instance, or else I'd probably be in prison for aggravated assault.

 

Some people in this country are so tied up in being "diverse" and "mulitcultural" that, as has been said, if you stand up and say: "Hi, my name is Dan and I'm a white Christan" then you're immediately the worst thing this side of... not Hitler, he was psychologically sick... not Hussien, he's misunderstood... not bin Laden, he's defending his religion... ah what the heck, George W. Bush.

 

People in this country can get worked up about running a veggie hot dog in a joke race in Brewer Stadium and still blast people in the population for having majority beliefs. Let me put this real clear for everyone to see:

 

I am very much a Christian.

 

I could be called a fundamentalist, but I believe in the seperation of church and state in order to preserve the rights of everyone.

 

Nowhere in any law, Constitution or Bill of Rights do you have the right not to be offended. If you're offended, too bad. I don't care if Jesse Jackson kicks down my door because I offended someone, this is America and I have the right to make the criticisms I see fit.

 

Nowhere in the said locations does it say that a capitalist democracy has to enforce the equality of everyone. You want equality? Go be a communist. Democracy is about freedom.

[Guest EricMM]

Many liberals subscribe to the theory that it's okay to insult the majority, but it's not okay to insult the little guy.

 

Thus, in America, it's ok to do bad things to Christianity, white people, males (although that's not really a MAJORITY per se), um capitalists, etc. BUT if you're trying to do bad things to minorities, and you're NOT a minority, then you're a bad bad person.

 

Hypocracy? Fuck yeah. Wrong? Yes, but less so. It is wrong, don't get me wrong. But I agree that if the majority is picking on a minority, the minority will be helpless to stop it, whereas if someone is picking on the majority they are being "brave"? Something like that.

 

I don't think that double standards are very good for people at all, they breed discontent. That's why I'm against racism, and racist policies like racial profiling.

 

Although... the recent about of pure pure racism from fundamentalist Islamists is really making me change my views.