patrick.net

Where the Conservatives WIN? They appeal to baser emotions and instincts. Particularly hate, fear, sometimes envy.

Logic and reason are overestimated for their impact in the US population, and they know this.

Whats really hysterical is who really owned the slaves. You would think something was up. They play with that stupidty till the day is stupid

Division. People fall for it every time.

See you don't deal with your neighbors like that or people around you for the most part it's highly unatural to have the kind of conflict going on.

Very true it's all drama acted out by some really slick con's. It's more of a confidence game than one might think. Who your favorite is. Who you follow into some corner and sit there waiting for something to be done or untill its your turn. See they pick when even someone that learns by absorbing sponge style gets that. See they caluculate the divsion. Mathmatically. It seems to work for them. People get caught up. You would be suprised at some of the staging though.

Like Ron Paul. I said it before. When they need it they whip it out. See. The only mistake they made with some of these was make commented websites. Web sites like these are like an oasis. I wouldn't put anything on his website or wait for him to make a move. Just ain't gonna happen they would say. See. You want some kind of rights good luck. They will play you out all day long.

Not only that the really scary part is the orginzations THEY RECOMMEND. By either promoting the orginzations in some way. Are either filled with these elites who have nothing better to do (its fun for them). Or monitored. So it's kind of like inviting a gorillia to dinner. Way to dangerous. If you get way too far out for them.

I have to admit, Artimus, your writing style is really hard to follow. There be tons of vague all up in that. You use a lot of pronouns with no clear referents.

tomoeDave says

* “If they oppose Affirmative Action: LABEL them a racist.” Many racists oppose affirmative action, so it might actually be fair to say in some cases.

What information do you have that varifies your claim. What exactly do you mean by "many?" Do you have a percentage in mind? If so, what do you have to back up your claim?

tomoeDave says

* “If they criticize unfettered social spending: accuse them of hating the poor.” Again, IF you hate the poor, you’re going to oppose nearly any social spending.

How many people do you know that "hate the poor" purely on the basis that they are poor? Sounds like you are citing a pretty sick, and fortunately, very small minority in order to make your point.

tomoeDave says

* “If they oppose homosexual marriage: LABEL them homophobic.” The overlap between homophobes and those who oppose homosexual marriage is pretty good, I’d bet.

Don't bet, unless you like losing. I don't know a single person in my sphere that is "homophobic," and yet, they oppose homosexual marriage on moral grounds. "Homophobia" is just an invention by the left to label, and by doing so, attempt to silence opposition to what is commonly referred to as the "gay agenda."

how many times must one be part of a male+male sodomifucation to know if they are 100% homo or just perved? Is once enough? Is thinking about it enough? Can a person be a sodomite without another sodomite? These are just questions I have.

I may be homophobic ... and many many other phobics. For example, I am lazyophobic .. and they are "just born that way" (or chose to smoke dope and that made them lazy-er) ... and I'm "judging them" based on my view of productive ... be being around lazy people bothers me, and lazy people are not good for a healthy society IMO .... fair example?

RayAmerica says

. I don’t know a single person in my sphere that is “homophobic,”

How many people in your sphere are gay? How many gays in long term relationships are in your sphere? Have you told them about your opposition to allowing them getting married, and are they in agreement?

Being in San Francisco, I have several friends that are gay, most in long term relationships. Not many from around here, and most of my gay friends are from "Red States" actually. And do you know why so many come to San Francisco? It's because they got sick of having to hide, and deal with the scorn the faced in their communities. If that's not homophobia, I don't know what is.

Bap33 says

I may be homophobic … and many many other phobics. For example, I am lazyophobic .. and they are “just born that way” (or chose to smoke dope and that made them lazy-er) …

Obviously a dope smoker is not born that way. Being gay is not a choice. Sure, you can be celibate by choice, but the attraction to the same sex is not a choice. In fact there is strong evidence that in some cases it happens during processes in the womb.

Bap33 says

how many times must one be part of a male+male sodomifucation to know if they are 100% homo or just perved? Is once enough? Is thinking about it enough? Can a person be a sodomite without another sodomite? These are just questions I have.

How about lezbos, Bap? What's your bigoted judgement about them?

Have you every thought what it would be like to be a gay person in this country?

Probably not.

While I don't have any gay friends there are gay people in my extended family.

Almost everybody in this country has gay people -- sodomites and carpet-munchers -- in their extended family, which is hopefully why your silly conservative bigotry is coming to the end of its days here.

Thanks for showing how conservatives simply lack any degree of empathy for their fellow man.

MarkInSF says

And do you know why so many come to San Francisco? It’s because they got sick of having to hide, and deal with the scorn the faced in their communities. If that’s not homophobia, I don’t know what is

They migrate to San Fran Freako because they are encouraged to live the lifestyle, as illustrated in what I believe is called the Castro Street Festival, where sodomy is practiced right out in the open. If that isn't sick and perverted, what is?

RayAmerica says

MarkInSF says

And do you know why so many come to San Francisco? It’s because they got sick of having to hide, and deal with the scorn the faced in their communities. If that’s not homophobia, I don’t know what is

They migrate to San Fran Freako because they are encouraged to live the lifestyle, as illustrated in what I believe is called the Castro Street Festival, where sodomy is practiced right out in the open. If that isn’t sick and perverted, what is?

Sorry, you don't know what you are talking about. Castro Street Fair (and Gay Pride as well) is totally family friendly. Here is a video:
http://www.sfgam.com/15/index.php?option=com_seyret&view=video&id=13&videotitle=Castro+Street+Fair+2008&Itemid=13

Someone might get drunk and whip their shirt off, but I'm afraid thats it. You might be thinking of Folsom Street Fair, but thats a BDSM event, not even strictly gay.

bdrasin says

You might be thinking of Folsom Street Fair, but thats a BDSM event, not even strictly gay

Thank you for correcting me. That's the one I meant. There was some Catholic organization awhile back that posted photos of the perversion that goes on at this "festival," some of it in plain view of young children. They did this in order to expose what the mainstream media refuses to report. Nancy Pelosi even got in on the act referring to it as an "interesting example of diversity" and other such nonsense.

Do two wrongs now make a right?

Does anyone know how to contact the Warlock Charlie Sheen? I think he should be invited to this forum in order to express what liberalism means to him. I know he sends a lot of letters to Dear Leader Obama in an advisory capacity, to which it appears Dear Leader is listening intently, but I think it would be nice if he would take the time to articulate his liberal views here as well. If you know him (and I'm sure some of you do), send a shout out to Charlie and tell him to visit Patrick.net. Thank you.

Braaaaahh!! this is funny stuff...

RayAmerica, you show an absolute lack of ability to communicate and understand. First, I have indeed met homophobes and people who hate the poor and racists who don't like affirmative action. So it's not "betting." No, I don't have percentages, but I don't need a SPECIFIC PERCENTAGE to back up my claim that SOME exist.

But again, you miss my larger point: your main complaint is that one very VALID label is used in an over-general way. AND I agree with you. BUT this is a very weak answer to the "Rottweilers of the Right" argument that outright fabrications and tricks are used by conservatives - tricks and lies that have NO basis in reality, vs...."okay, maybe we called you a homophobe, sorry, I had a hard time telling you apart from the big gaggle of homophobes you run with...and you seem to like homophobic policies...one has to wonder."

Oh, and by the way, "homophobia" is not made-up bullcrap. Perhaps not a psychiatric ailment, no, but there are clearly people out there who are afraid of homosexuality, especially their own. Personal experience, buddy.

Divide by 2. Anyway. If you want a good laugh go to CNN money. Look for the article. HOW CHEAP HOUSES SPELL BAD NEWS. Watch them wind their way through a ton of their crap. The headline is hysterically funny though. I don't get it maybe they do on Mars. Like I say if you got forecloused on in a 200k loan and could get it for 75k tommorow or something even better. Their greed is way beyond.

If you don't understand someone hey. Like I say if your different. The real thing is most people on the streets get along. They really do no one shouts hey you nasty liberal in Wal-mart at you. Life just isn't like that. That's reality. Like I say El Grecko divides its what he does. I stay away from violent people. Always have always will.

There are some great U-tubes on California. Look at California depression. Vacant malls etc. I would like to see more about that. So would a whole lot of people. They documented Detroit fairly good. I don't see why you would live in a tent city near Sacramento. When you could move out into the countryside where no one is.

MarkInSF says

Obviously a dope smoker is not born that way.

I disagree. A person with the lack of intellect, or the "follower" personality, or whatever other mental or physical trait is required to be a dope smoker, comes to life already set up that way. Dope smokers were born to be dope smokers. And the same can be said of baby rapists and sodomites and regular sexual perverts ...... each was wired that way in the womb. How can that not be true?

@Troy - I didn't write anything that matches your attack on me. My best guess is you mis-read what I wrote. I did not say anything negative about sodomites. Do I get a free pass if I know a sodomite or have a family member that practices deviant sex?

Bap33 says

MarkInSF says

Obviously a dope smoker is not born that way.

I disagree. A person with the lack of intellect, or the “follower” personality, or whatever other mental or physical trait is required to be a dope smoker, comes to life already set up that way. Dope smokers were born to be dope smokers. And the same can be said of baby rapists and sodomites and regular sexual perverts …… each was wired that way in the womb. How can that not be true?
@Troy - I didn’t write anything that matches your attack on me. My best guess is you mis-read what I wrote. I did not say anything negative about sodomites. Do I get a free pass if I know a sodomite or have a family member that practices deviant sex?

Welcome to my ignore file. Those "deviants" happen to be friends, co-workers and family members to some of us. I don't have time for bigots.

PJ O'Rourke on liberals:

http://tinyurl.com/6xz9sfx

"The principal feature of contemporary American liberalism is sanctimoniousness. By loudly denouncing all bad things - war and hunger and date rape - liberals testify to their own terrific goodness.

The second item in the liberal creed, after self-righteousness, is unaccountability. Liberals have invented whole college majors - psychology, sociology, women's studies - to prove that nothing is anybody's fault. No one is fond of taking responsibility for his actions, but consider how much you'd have to hate free will to come up with a political platform that advocates killing unborn babies but not convicted murderers."

O'Rourke is of Irish descent. I wonder if he's ever dared to run the gauntlet in oppressive and bigoted England. I suppose if he ever did he'd come back a progressive.

tomoeDave says

RayAmerica, you show an absolute lack of ability to communicate and understand. First, I have indeed met homophobes and people who hate the poor and racists who don’t like affirmative action.

We all live in, in relative terms, fairly small spheres. The fact that you have "indeed met homophobes, etc." does not constitute a majority. It may in your mind, but in real terms it doesn't. Furthermore, I don't know of anyone, outside of the crazies now and then expressing themselves on the net, that come right out and say "I'm a racist ... I hate poor people ... I'm a homophobe, etc." So how it is that you are able to determine that people that oppose affirmative action, homosexual marriage, give away social programs, are what you claim them to be is a huge stretch on your part. Also, I find it amazing, that liberals have this unique ability to look inside a person and determine what is in their heart.

Bap33 says

I may be homophobic … and many many other phobics. For example, I am lazyophobic .. and they are “just born that way” (or chose to smoke dope and that made them lazy-er) … and I’m “judging them” based on my view of productive … be being around lazy people bothers me, and lazy people are not good for a healthy society IMO …. fair example?

After many debates with you I too have become Lazyophobic. Seriously, we have to get all these lazy people off my motherlovin tax money because I just paid an additional 2k to the IRS after claiming ZERO motherlovin exemptions all year long. Let those bastards starve on a deserted island for all I give a darn. Ted Williams can be their leader.

Anyone not sane enough to want to work for their economic opportunity is not my kind of American.

Clarence 13X says

Debating with Shrek and Ray America is very difficult as each fails to acknowledge the lack of sympathy coming from the right wing.

Specifically, what "lack of sympathy" are you referring to?

Clarence 13X says

that is why I stopped coming here to debate

Sorry to add you to the list of extremists (on one issue) I won't debate, when I see the ridiculous generalizations you have been making in other threads about unions.

Bap33 says

I disagree. A person with the lack of intellect, or the “follower” personality, or whatever other mental or physical trait is required to be a dope smoker, comes to life already set up that way. Dope smokers were born to be dope smokers. And the same can be said of baby rapists and sodomites and regular sexual perverts …… each was wired that way in the womb. How can that not be true?

Bap, perhaps you're thinking of addicts when you disparage dope smokers and label them as lacking intellect or being a follower. Famous dope smokers include:

The Governator, Arnold
Bing Crosby
Bill Gates
Carl Sagan
Conan O'Brien
Dan Quayle
Diego Rivera
elliemae
Frances Ford Coppella
George Bush
George Washington
Thomas Jefferson
Ten oz Trout
Andrew Jackson
James Monroe
Zachary Taylor

and many more. Most of these people wouldn't be labeled as followers (although dear sweet elliemae's been called many things). I would postulate that dope smokers weren't born to be dope smokers, they were born to be people.

As were gays. ;)

marcus says

Sorry to add you to the list of extremists (on one issue) I won’t debate, when I see the ridiculous generalizations you have been making in other threads about unions.

Clarence: Congratulations are in order sir! You have made the vaunted list of those that have been "deleted" by Marcus. No better compliment can be paid, well sort of. If you continue in your non rubber stamp ways of expressing yourself (also known as free speech), you'll also be added to the "deleted" list by any number of non-thinkers in this forum, in which case, you will receive compliments in the multiples. Again, congratulations and keep up the good work.

I wonder if transvestites were born "that way" too? Were the prisoners that entered prison straight, and became involved in homosexuality while in prison "born that way too?" How convenient it is to blame your deviant behavior on being “born that way.”

RayAmerica says

13X

REPUBS have always looked out for the top 1% and simply pissed on the poor. They have NEVER shown no empathy, sympathy for the plight of poor people. If I were to ask you to name one piece of legislation drafted by REPUBS aimed at improving the plight of poor people you would not be able to do it...I have tried many times. Since the passing of the Emancipation Proclimation REPUBS have done very little in support of Voting Rights Acts, Civil Rights of 64, etc. due to the fact that their constituency is made up of those who are against social progress. The Civil Rights act of 64 sent 25% of the Democratic party to the Republican party based on the benefit the bill gave to blacks.

Most Republicans are fine with leaving others (Blacks, Poor, Women, etc.) out of social progress, where as most Democrats want to include too many (Lazy, Un-educated, etc.) that dont deserve to be included in the social progress.

We need to find middle ground to where we can have social welfare for those that need it and keep the lazy folks off the system.

marcus says

Clarence 13X says

that is why I stopped coming here to debate

Sorry to add you to the list of extremists (on one issue) I won’t debate, when I see the ridiculous generalizations you have been making in other threads about unions.

I am not extreme on these issues, some comments have convinced me that the Wiscon REPUBS gave tax breaks to the top 1% and then stripped unions of their power. On that issue I have changed course a bit, however, I know from experience that unions thwart corporations from making progress and protect employees that should not be protected.

This does a disservice to them as it puts their policies in a bad light with those of us who have to manage these employees.

RayAmerica says

marcus says

Sorry to add you to the list of extremists (on one issue) I won’t debate, when I see the ridiculous generalizations you have been making in other threads about unions.

Clarence: Congratulations are in order sir! You have made the vaunted list of those that have been “deleted” by Marcus. No better compliment can be paid, well sort of. If you continue in your non rubber stamp ways of expressing yourself (also known as free speech), you’ll also be added to the “deleted” list by any number of non-thinkers in this forum, in which case, you will receive compliments in the multiples. Again, congratulations and keep up the good work.

If you, BAP33 and SHREK are right wing then I am middle ground, slight left....that may not sit well with Marcus on some issues where I go right. He obviously thinks unions are necessary and was put off by my remarks that they are no longer needed. Seeing that only 7% of private companies are unionized compared to 40% of state/federal employees I say that we dont need unions to disrupt the workflow of our government. I worked for both state/federal agencies and I do know that the union employees were paid top dollar and were braggarts about how much they had in their pensions. This is disrespectful seeing that most of their pensions are paid for by my tax dollars.

No one should be able to put in 8.5%, have the state put in another 8.5% and the fed put in another 2% then retire at 55 on my tax dollars....not even baby boomers on social security get that priveledge. Plus, seeing that most union employees at the state are paid 20% over what market rates dictate, they are raping the American tax payer.

Clarence 13X says

No one should be able to put in 8.5%, have the state put in another 8.5% and the fed put in another 2% then retire at 55 on my tax dollars….n

I'm still waiting for Marcus to explain why it's O.K. for CA state/local government employees have a retirement plan that guarantees their contributions, and the contributions of their government employers, will double in 10 years at tax payer guaranteed rate of return of 7-8%, when mere taxpayers don't get to buy into the same plan. Or how how they can even make such a guarantee with a straight face.

He's got a Masters degree in Math, so I'm sure he knows the answer, but he's yet to express his opinion on the matter.

MarkInSF says

I’m still waiting for Marcus to explain why it’s O.K. for CA state/local government employees have a retirement plan that guarantees their contributions, and the contributions of their government employers, will double in 10 years at tax payer guaranteed rate of return of 7-8%, when mere taxpayers don’t get to buy into the same plan.

It's hard to respond to an over simplified and false statement. Nothing is guaranteed. I fully expect my contributions to go up, fairly soon, and the state's too. It's a pension fund calstrs, you can research it if you want to understand better.

But the taxpayers aren't guaranteeing as much as you say.

Here's a guarantee. If the managers of the fund were to perform too poorly, and the fund didn't perform well enough for a long enough period of time, our benefits would be reduced. California's perpetual state of extreme deficit pretty much guarantees that.

The real cost of the pension plan, versus social security, is less than you make it out to be. Our pension is a benefit that costs the district and the state a total of maybe 5% of my salary more than if they were instead using social security.

By the way Calstrs has gotten an average rate of return of 7 or 8 percent for the past couple decades. But as I said, nothing is guaranteed.

marcus says

But the taxpayers aren’t guaranteeing as much as you say.

Yes they are. Define "defined benefit". The pension benefits of those nearing retirement, or already there based on assumptions of high investment returns, are already 100% Gold-Plated tax-payer guaranteed. Any additional contributions to the fund for anybody less than 10 years from retirement are almost irrelevant.

It's the younger staff that will bear the brunt of an increase in contributions. The public workers that already took advantage of boom times, and got politicians to lock in 100% tax payer guaranteed gains for them, will be laughing to the bank for decades.

marcus says

By the way Calstrs has gotten an average rate of return of 7 or 8 percent for the past couple decades. But as I said, nothing is guaranteed.

Yeah, well, if I had invested in a home in the Bay Area for the last few decades I could have pulled that off as well. When you have a multi-decade credit inflation, it's hard to not lose. But, do the math. Home prices can't double every 10 years in real terms unless the the economy does as well. Not unless you believe in magic. All investment returns above the growth in the overall economy are zero-sum, and frankly I don't appreciate a class of people that has legislated themselves to be on the positive side of zero.