Seriously, explain Democrats to me?
- Thread starter DasBoot
- Start date
- Status
MeekAndMild
New member
Back to the prime question of the thread this is the explanation of Democratic politicians. Its all about the money. http://birmingham.bizjournals.com/birmingham/stories/2006/06/26/daily20.html
Big Ruger,
Former Congressman DeLay is under indictment for violating Texas penal code ss 15.02; criminal conspiracy, which is a felony.
Rep. McKinney, OTOH, is not under indictment for anything.
Are we seriously supposed to consider her guilty while considering him innocent?
AFA your other question, put it in a new thread and we can discuss it.
MeekAndMild,
Well of course
.... but that kinda goes without saying for both parties.
Former Congressman DeLay is under indictment for violating Texas penal code ss 15.02; criminal conspiracy, which is a felony.
Rep. McKinney, OTOH, is not under indictment for anything.
Are we seriously supposed to consider her guilty while considering him innocent?
AFA your other question, put it in a new thread and we can discuss it.
MeekAndMild,
Well of course
.... but that kinda goes without saying for both parties.Harry Callahan
New member
Earnest T Bass and DasBoot, you guys have pretty much summed up what my feelings are too. VERY well said. If you're ever in the Chicagoland area let me know. We have to go out for a beer. No carry though. Remember this is the People's Republic of Illinois and Blago is our Chairman
.
.You're on Harry!
But the last time I was in downtown Chicago, I made the rounds of several music/pool spots and woke up in a strange apt with an equally strange young....er...."lady"!
But that's another story and another lifetime ago!!!
Ya know, It's been fascinating watching this thread develop and there have been very valid points made by all.
My only point in starting it was because, at least to my eyes and ears, whenever.....no.....more often than not......when I hear/see something that just rubs against what I think most people would consider right & decent, it seems to be from someone on "the Left".
When I see these punks throwing rocks/bottles at police at any given event, I REALLY don't think they are Republican.
(That's what my "green haired kid" example alluded to)
I spent years hanging out in New York's East Village and had everyday, close up experiences with every possible permutation of the the "druggie/mohawked/nose pierced/anti America/anti capitalism/ loser/ whack job you could imagine.
Without fail, to a man, they considered themselves either Democrat, Socialist, Communist or any combination thereof.
But NEVER Republican.
At that time, with my braided hair to my ass, multiple earings and Harley, you would've thought the same of me if we didn't speak!!
If you ask "Do you think America is the best country in the world?"
I doubt very strongly you would find a Republican that would hesitate in the least to answer in the affirmative.
Every Democrat aquaintence I have EVER asked that question to had to pause and think before either saying "NO" or "Yes" with a big "BUT" after it!!
Of course America isn't perfect, but for God's sake, should you REALLY have to THINK about it before answering????
Again, when someone does something that's just plain wrong, it's the Democrats I always seem to hear trying to make some sort of excuse for the behavior.
Again......Clinton & Lewinsky.
CHEATING ON YOUR SPOUSE AND HAVING SEX IN THE WHITE HOUSE ARE JUST PLAIN WRONG!!!!!
Not just morally but it could put the president in a comprimising position (no pun intended).
If he hadv'e been man enough to just say..."Yeah, I did it.
It was a moment of weakness and I regret it terribly" I would at least respect the man and let the issue die there.
But the Dems saw NOTHING wrong with it!!!!!
Only here did I hear Dem finally admit it was wrong.
The act itself just shows a lack of character and lack of respect for the sanctity of the ofice AND the building itself.
McKinney hitting a cop.
Again, I didn't hear ONE Dem say it was wrong!
It's almost like they just refuse to make any judgemaents on people's behaviour and believe it or not, THERE IS BEHAVIOUR THAT IS JUST PLAIN WRONG!
Look at Marion Barry, mayor of Washing DC.
Caught, ON VIDEO, in a hotel rm w/a hooker and smoking crack!
SMOKING CRACK!!!
THE DEMS VOTED HIM BACK IN!!!!!!!
Am I missing something?????????
A Dem/ liberal stand is, and you've read it here and heard it throughout the Clinton mess, "Personal behaviour doesn't matter" or "What you do in your private life is irrelevant to your job &/or position".
That mindset was aptly displayed by GoSlash27.
Now, I'm sure Slash is a very nice guy.
But he would still patronise a mechanic, who he knew was a pedophile, because the guy is a good mechanic.
WHo amongst you would help support such a person knowing what he does.
You might keep YOUR kids away, but what about someone elses?
The lowest form of filth in our society should be, at the least, shunned and ostricised, not "accepted" because he is good with a wrench, or a guitar, or funny, etc, etc, etc.
Where is the outrage or disgust?
Or even the acknowledgement of wrong doing?
Again, the sense of "moral equivelancy"......nothing is really wrong.
Anyway, if I'm way off base here, I'd love to hear why.
And AGAIN, I DON'T THINK REPUBLICANS ARE ANGELS EITHER!!
Later!
And just so you know where I'm coming from, I'll put my past drug use, illicit activities and "bedding down of women" up against any 5 of you! I wasn't a choir boy in my past life!!
But the last time I was in downtown Chicago, I made the rounds of several music/pool spots and woke up in a strange apt with an equally strange young....er...."lady"!
But that's another story and another lifetime ago!!!
Ya know, It's been fascinating watching this thread develop and there have been very valid points made by all.
My only point in starting it was because, at least to my eyes and ears, whenever.....no.....more often than not......when I hear/see something that just rubs against what I think most people would consider right & decent, it seems to be from someone on "the Left".
When I see these punks throwing rocks/bottles at police at any given event, I REALLY don't think they are Republican.
(That's what my "green haired kid" example alluded to)
I spent years hanging out in New York's East Village and had everyday, close up experiences with every possible permutation of the the "druggie/mohawked/nose pierced/anti America/anti capitalism/ loser/ whack job you could imagine.
Without fail, to a man, they considered themselves either Democrat, Socialist, Communist or any combination thereof.
But NEVER Republican.
At that time, with my braided hair to my ass, multiple earings and Harley, you would've thought the same of me if we didn't speak!!
If you ask "Do you think America is the best country in the world?"
I doubt very strongly you would find a Republican that would hesitate in the least to answer in the affirmative.
Every Democrat aquaintence I have EVER asked that question to had to pause and think before either saying "NO" or "Yes" with a big "BUT" after it!!
Of course America isn't perfect, but for God's sake, should you REALLY have to THINK about it before answering????
Again, when someone does something that's just plain wrong, it's the Democrats I always seem to hear trying to make some sort of excuse for the behavior.
Again......Clinton & Lewinsky.
CHEATING ON YOUR SPOUSE AND HAVING SEX IN THE WHITE HOUSE ARE JUST PLAIN WRONG!!!!!
Not just morally but it could put the president in a comprimising position (no pun intended).
If he hadv'e been man enough to just say..."Yeah, I did it.
It was a moment of weakness and I regret it terribly" I would at least respect the man and let the issue die there.
But the Dems saw NOTHING wrong with it!!!!!
Only here did I hear Dem finally admit it was wrong.
The act itself just shows a lack of character and lack of respect for the sanctity of the ofice AND the building itself.
McKinney hitting a cop.
Again, I didn't hear ONE Dem say it was wrong!
It's almost like they just refuse to make any judgemaents on people's behaviour and believe it or not, THERE IS BEHAVIOUR THAT IS JUST PLAIN WRONG!
Look at Marion Barry, mayor of Washing DC.
Caught, ON VIDEO, in a hotel rm w/a hooker and smoking crack!
SMOKING CRACK!!!
THE DEMS VOTED HIM BACK IN!!!!!!!
Am I missing something?????????
A Dem/ liberal stand is, and you've read it here and heard it throughout the Clinton mess, "Personal behaviour doesn't matter" or "What you do in your private life is irrelevant to your job &/or position".
That mindset was aptly displayed by GoSlash27.
Now, I'm sure Slash is a very nice guy.
But he would still patronise a mechanic, who he knew was a pedophile, because the guy is a good mechanic.
WHo amongst you would help support such a person knowing what he does.
You might keep YOUR kids away, but what about someone elses?
The lowest form of filth in our society should be, at the least, shunned and ostricised, not "accepted" because he is good with a wrench, or a guitar, or funny, etc, etc, etc.
Where is the outrage or disgust?
Or even the acknowledgement of wrong doing?
Again, the sense of "moral equivelancy"......nothing is really wrong.
Anyway, if I'm way off base here, I'd love to hear why.
And AGAIN, I DON'T THINK REPUBLICANS ARE ANGELS EITHER!!
Later!
And just so you know where I'm coming from, I'll put my past drug use, illicit activities and "bedding down of women" up against any 5 of you! I wasn't a choir boy in my past life!!
Last edited:
Well, welcome back
Perhaps you misunderstand my position or perhaps I haven't made it clear. Let me clarify:
You said "pedophile", not "child molester". Pedophile implies that he has a sexual attraction to pre-pubescent children but does not necessarily act upon it. "child molester" implies that he either currently acts upon it or has in the past.
Which are we talking about?
If someone is breaking the law in such a fashion I will not hesitate to notify the authorities. *BUT* it is incumbent upon them to enforce the laws, not me. They are the ones best suited to determine a suitable punishment, not me.
Reminds me of a joke that explains my position in these matters quite aptly:
Little Billy was sitting on a park bench eating candy bars. An old man was watching him scarf down candy bar after candy bar after candy bar after....
Finally, after the sixth one he says "You know, eating all that candy is really bad for you. It rots your teeth, gives you acne, and leads to ADD and health problems later in life".
Billy ponders this and says "Oh yeah, well...my grandpa lived to be a hundred and seven!"
The man looks puzzled. "Did he eat six candy bars in a row?"
"No. He minded his own (*&^(ing business!"
That's my beef with folks like yourself: You think your morality gives you license to intrude into other people's affairs. What's worse, you want to get the Federal government involved as well.
Here's a tip: Mind your own business. I'll mind mine. And we don't have to get the government involved until our behavior starts affecting each other.
This is what 'freedom' is all about.
Perhaps you misunderstand my position or perhaps I haven't made it clear. Let me clarify:
You said "pedophile", not "child molester". Pedophile implies that he has a sexual attraction to pre-pubescent children but does not necessarily act upon it. "child molester" implies that he either currently acts upon it or has in the past.
Which are we talking about?
If someone is breaking the law in such a fashion I will not hesitate to notify the authorities. *BUT* it is incumbent upon them to enforce the laws, not me. They are the ones best suited to determine a suitable punishment, not me.
Reminds me of a joke that explains my position in these matters quite aptly:
Little Billy was sitting on a park bench eating candy bars. An old man was watching him scarf down candy bar after candy bar after candy bar after....
Finally, after the sixth one he says "You know, eating all that candy is really bad for you. It rots your teeth, gives you acne, and leads to ADD and health problems later in life".
Billy ponders this and says "Oh yeah, well...my grandpa lived to be a hundred and seven!"
The man looks puzzled. "Did he eat six candy bars in a row?"
"No. He minded his own (*&^(ing business!"
That's my beef with folks like yourself: You think your morality gives you license to intrude into other people's affairs. What's worse, you want to get the Federal government involved as well.
Here's a tip: Mind your own business. I'll mind mine. And we don't have to get the government involved until our behavior starts affecting each other.
This is what 'freedom' is all about.
Encyclopedia Britannica:
"also spelled Paedophilia, psychosexual disorder in which an adult's arousal and sexual gratification occur primarily through sexual contact with prepubescent children. The typical pedophile is unable to find satisfaction in an adult sexual relationship and may have low self-esteem, seeing sexual activity with a child as less threatening than that with an adult".
Slash, what a pathetic attempt to wiggle out of it!!
Most people understand it to mean a child molester!
Nice to know you STILL have no problem patronising such a person.
So again, if you KNEW he ONLY desired young children but never touched, you would have no problem letting him babysit your kids??
Where did I say I would "intrude" into anyones affairs.
If howevwer, those "affairs" have a direct negative impact on my life, family or country, you're damned right I'll interfere!
Man! You just keep reinforcing my entire point!
The Dem/liberal mindset...."I can do whatever I want and it has nothing to do with you".
Again, EVERYTHING is acceptable, NOTHING is wrong, I have no right to say anything to you OR make a judgement of you.
Think of that next time you pass a parent smacking the living CRAP out of their 4yr old.
Or some bum is beating up his wife/girlfriend.
Hey, it doesn't effect you ....right?
And the the 2 teachers, gay or straight, having sex in an empty classroom.
Hey, no kids are there and besides, it's none of your business.
Or the teachers recently on trial for having "consensual" sex with their students.
They did nothing wrong.
Not your concern.....right?
And with regards to your joke, it's nice to know that if you see someone doing something potentially harmful to themselves, you'll just ignore it.
Are you saying it was nobodies business that the "married" mayor of DC was smoking crack w/ a hooker.
Do you REALLY think that someone of that character is an upstanding person in all the other areas of his life?
What if it wasn't the Feds, but his political enemies, that got the video?
You don't think his "personal behaviour" put him in a position to be blackmailed?
Maybe push through some legislation harmful to the public but profitable to his enemies?
Think "Cheating Presidents" here and the possibilities take on new significance.
You're obviously comfortable in your beliefs in this area.
And it's much easier going through life if you believe
I'd rather live in a world where there are some rules and regulations and where people ARE confronted when they do something antithetical to the common good.
Otherwise, anarchy would reign.
I thought I explained myself quite clearly in my previous post.
If you don't get my drift now, you never will.
I've said all I can say on this.
Later!
"also spelled Paedophilia, psychosexual disorder in which an adult's arousal and sexual gratification occur primarily through sexual contact with prepubescent children. The typical pedophile is unable to find satisfaction in an adult sexual relationship and may have low self-esteem, seeing sexual activity with a child as less threatening than that with an adult".
Slash, what a pathetic attempt to wiggle out of it!!
Most people understand it to mean a child molester!
Nice to know you STILL have no problem patronising such a person.
So again, if you KNEW he ONLY desired young children but never touched, you would have no problem letting him babysit your kids??
Where did I say I would "intrude" into anyones affairs.
If howevwer, those "affairs" have a direct negative impact on my life, family or country, you're damned right I'll interfere!
And where did you get THAT from???
Man! You just keep reinforcing my entire point!
The Dem/liberal mindset...."I can do whatever I want and it has nothing to do with you".
Again, EVERYTHING is acceptable, NOTHING is wrong, I have no right to say anything to you OR make a judgement of you.
Think of that next time you pass a parent smacking the living CRAP out of their 4yr old.
Or some bum is beating up his wife/girlfriend.
Hey, it doesn't effect you ....right?
And the the 2 teachers, gay or straight, having sex in an empty classroom.
Hey, no kids are there and besides, it's none of your business.
Or the teachers recently on trial for having "consensual" sex with their students.
They did nothing wrong.
Not your concern.....right?
And with regards to your joke, it's nice to know that if you see someone doing something potentially harmful to themselves, you'll just ignore it.
Are you saying it was nobodies business that the "married" mayor of DC was smoking crack w/ a hooker.
Do you REALLY think that someone of that character is an upstanding person in all the other areas of his life?
What if it wasn't the Feds, but his political enemies, that got the video?
You don't think his "personal behaviour" put him in a position to be blackmailed?
Maybe push through some legislation harmful to the public but profitable to his enemies?
Think "Cheating Presidents" here and the possibilities take on new significance.
You're obviously comfortable in your beliefs in this area.
And it's much easier going through life if you believe
makes for a carefree little existence.
I'd rather live in a world where there are some rules and regulations and where people ARE confronted when they do something antithetical to the common good.
Otherwise, anarchy would reign.
I thought I explained myself quite clearly in my previous post.
If you don't get my drift now, you never will.
I've said all I can say on this.
Later!
You mean most people who can't grasp the difference between a psychological disorder and a criminal act. It's much like assuming that just because someone owns a gun someone is a murderer. A person's thoughts are none of your business.
The problem is that you feel you have the authority to define what is the common good. Perhaps you'd rather live in a world where a man's thoughts are enough to jail him but I prefer freedom.
Heh....gone again.
Didn't I already answer this question?
Who died and made you the morality Gestapo?
We're never going to see eye to eye on this. You're socially conservative and I'm socially libertarian.
I believe that 'to each his own' is a fundamentally good way to live in a society where that behavior doesn't affect others. Where it does, the conflict should be resolved at the lowest form of government through our legal system.
You clearly do not subscribe to this notion, so we have no common ground to work from.
Didn't I already answer this question?
Uhh...by messing with his livelihood? You *did* imply that depriving such a person of his means of income was *my* moral obligation, didn't you?
Who died and made you the morality Gestapo?
I can't answer that question without broaching topics strictly forbidden on this board.
And you just keep reinforcing mine. It's people like me that make you vote Republican. It's people like you that make me vote Democrat.
We're never going to see eye to eye on this. You're socially conservative and I'm socially libertarian.
I believe that 'to each his own' is a fundamentally good way to live in a society where that behavior doesn't affect others. Where it does, the conflict should be resolved at the lowest form of government through our legal system.
You clearly do not subscribe to this notion, so we have no common ground to work from.
Didn't leave yet!
Slash, You said you would patronise a pedophile, who, according to 'your" definition, hadn't actually molested a child.
And you would keep your kids away from him, but you WOULD let him work on your tranny.
Do I remember this correctly?
Assuming I do, you take umbrage at my "messing with his livlihood" BECAUSE he is a pedophile.
Do I have that correct?
Do you NOT think you have SOME level of obligation to your neighbors, their kids and, on a grander scale, the preseverence of a decent society, by NOT making it easier for this person to live in your area.
You honestly feel that as a member of this society, you have absolutely no obligation to see to it that you do not aid and assist somone with a yearning for small children?
If discouraging them nonviolently through not patronising them is considered, by you, to be part of
Just your usage of the term demonstrates where you're at!
Just admit you made it up!
Redworm, your comfortable with someone that ONLY thinks about raping children babysit YOUR kids?!?!?
You and Slash will find plenty of cheap ones in the prison system.
Or maybe you guys think that way yourselves!
Is that where this "United Pedophilic Front" is coming from?
I suppose you both donate to NAMBLA also!
They have a right to exist too, don't they?
Off topic, but indicative of the "anything goes" liberal mindset.
Slash, You said you would patronise a pedophile, who, according to 'your" definition, hadn't actually molested a child.
And you would keep your kids away from him, but you WOULD let him work on your tranny.
Do I remember this correctly?
Assuming I do, you take umbrage at my "messing with his livlihood" BECAUSE he is a pedophile.
Do I have that correct?
Do you NOT think you have SOME level of obligation to your neighbors, their kids and, on a grander scale, the preseverence of a decent society, by NOT making it easier for this person to live in your area.
You honestly feel that as a member of this society, you have absolutely no obligation to see to it that you do not aid and assist somone with a yearning for small children?
If discouraging them nonviolently through not patronising them is considered, by you, to be part of
than so be it.
Just your usage of the term demonstrates where you're at!
Just admit you made it up!
Redworm, your comfortable with someone that ONLY thinks about raping children babysit YOUR kids?!?!?
You and Slash will find plenty of cheap ones in the prison system.
Or maybe you guys think that way yourselves!
Is that where this "United Pedophilic Front" is coming from?
I suppose you both donate to NAMBLA also!
They have a right to exist too, don't they?
Off topic, but indicative of the "anything goes" liberal mindset.
OK....I get your point.
But I venture to say, when someone uses the word "pedophile" or the word is used to describe someone in the media..."the long time pedophile.....etc", it is USUALLY construed to mean someone that IS a child molester.
The varied nuances of the term are not considered.
"psychosexual disorder in which an adult's arousal and sexual gratification occur primarily through sexual contact with prepubescent children."
This illustrates what I'm saying.
We are straying a bit, but it still deals with the perception of "right & wrong".
I'll ask this of both you and Slash.
We all agree on the sanctity of a persons thoughts, do we not?
That being said, would either of you let someone babysit your child(ren) REGARDLESS of the fact that YOU KNEW (they admitted it to you in bar one night) they had pedophilic tendencies?
But I venture to say, when someone uses the word "pedophile" or the word is used to describe someone in the media..."the long time pedophile.....etc", it is USUALLY construed to mean someone that IS a child molester.
The varied nuances of the term are not considered.
"psychosexual disorder in which an adult's arousal and sexual gratification occur primarily through sexual contact with prepubescent children."
This illustrates what I'm saying.
We are straying a bit, but it still deals with the perception of "right & wrong".
I'll ask this of both you and Slash.
We all agree on the sanctity of a persons thoughts, do we not?
That being said, would either of you let someone babysit your child(ren) REGARDLESS of the fact that YOU KNEW (they admitted it to you in bar one night) they had pedophilic tendencies?
U.S.SFC_RET
New member
I am a moderate Republican who is leaning to Libertarian.
The primary difference between a Democrat Today and a Republican Today is how they garner votes. Democrats excel at capturing the hidden vote. The minority vote. The gay vote. The indian vote. The inner city vote. The Labor Vote and the non mainstream vote.
The Republican garner votes from the majority, mainstrean, values christian, business owning, hardworking blue collar nonunion and Degreed citizen.
The Democrats generally do well at spending at the inner city level and taking care of programs like "midnight basketball" and generally do worse at foreign policy than Republicans at the national level do.
Again the difference is how the two parties like to tax and spend the money. Democrats will raise taxes on who they deem is rich and that is anyone who is not poor. " doesn't chase away the vote for them when the traditionally poor doesnt get taxed"
Democrats love to spend on the poor because it brings in the votes to keep them in power.
Modern Democrats who seek a high level of office will prostitute themselves for the sake of power by saying come one and come all and literally throw their values to the sideline in the process. Gays and lesbians. "Janet Reno"
Republicans won't prostitute their values as a general rule.
The primary difference between a Democrat Today and a Republican Today is how they garner votes. Democrats excel at capturing the hidden vote. The minority vote. The gay vote. The indian vote. The inner city vote. The Labor Vote and the non mainstream vote.
The Republican garner votes from the majority, mainstrean, values christian, business owning, hardworking blue collar nonunion and Degreed citizen.
The Democrats generally do well at spending at the inner city level and taking care of programs like "midnight basketball" and generally do worse at foreign policy than Republicans at the national level do.
Again the difference is how the two parties like to tax and spend the money. Democrats will raise taxes on who they deem is rich and that is anyone who is not poor. " doesn't chase away the vote for them when the traditionally poor doesnt get taxed"
Democrats love to spend on the poor because it brings in the votes to keep them in power.
Modern Democrats who seek a high level of office will prostitute themselves for the sake of power by saying come one and come all and literally throw their values to the sideline in the process. Gays and lesbians. "Janet Reno"
Republicans won't prostitute their values as a general rule.
US,
Welcome to the discussion!
It is exactly those "values" that I am trying to get at here.
To have values, there must be recognition of right and wrong.
The Dems/libs seem to disavow any such concepts when it suits them.
So Slash, you would NOT let him babysit your children.
Very good!
But aren't you then "messing with his livlihood" by denying him a means of making himself some money?
Are you now a part of the "morality Gestapo" you spoke of.
So "personal behaviour" isn't ALWAYS so personal, is it?
A fine example of "left wing" hypocrisy!
Oh, I forgot...your a Libertarian!
Welcome to the discussion!
It is exactly those "values" that I am trying to get at here.
To have values, there must be recognition of right and wrong.
The Dems/libs seem to disavow any such concepts when it suits them.
While not to the same degree, there are PLENTY of whores in the Repeblican pary, I'm sure.
So Slash, you would NOT let him babysit your children.
Very good!
But aren't you then "messing with his livlihood" by denying him a means of making himself some money?
Are you now a part of the "morality Gestapo" you spoke of.
So "personal behaviour" isn't ALWAYS so personal, is it?
A fine example of "left wing" hypocrisy!
Oh, I forgot...your a Libertarian!
No.....I'm....protecting....my....children.....from....a....potentially....bad......situation.
Did I not make it clear enough? So long as a person's proclivities *do not* affect their job, it's none of my business. Very clearly in this hypothetical case his attraction to children would not affect his performance in an auto shop but it would affect his performance as a babysitter.
There's a difference, but you've made it abundantly clear you don't grasp the concept. I don't know how else to get the point across short of drawing you a picture.
You see no ethical difference between the law punishing unacceptable behavior and taking it upon yourself to punish behavior that you find unacceptable. Or even worse, saving people from themselves.
Give it up. You're never going to understand the concept of social libertarianism, thus you're never going to understand the concept of liberalism.
Join the Republican party and get on with your life.
Nice try Slash!
But you're STILL making a moral judgement on the person based on what he does privately.
He hasn't actually DONE anything!
You never addressed this question:
What a stand up guy!
So it doesn't matter WHAT I do.
In Slash' world, as long as it doesn't effect the job I'm doing, Slash is gonna give me a pass!!
If I'm sleeping with your best friends wife, you won't give him a heads up as long as I can still do a job for you, right?
What a pal!
With friends like you.......etc!
Even if it doesn't effect my job, is there ANYTHING you think is wrong enough to warrant not using me?
To a Lib(ertarian):barf: , I guess not!
Redworm, where'd ya go????
But you're STILL making a moral judgement on the person based on what he does privately.
He hasn't actually DONE anything!
You never addressed this question:
Turning a blind eye to that which you know is wrong!!
What a stand up guy!
So it doesn't matter WHAT I do.
In Slash' world, as long as it doesn't effect the job I'm doing, Slash is gonna give me a pass!!
If I'm sleeping with your best friends wife, you won't give him a heads up as long as I can still do a job for you, right?
What a pal!
With friends like you.......etc!
Even if it doesn't effect my job, is there ANYTHING you think is wrong enough to warrant not using me?
To a Lib(ertarian):barf: , I guess not!
Redworm, where'd ya go????
MeekAndMild
New member
To be fair in the last 30 years I have met two chronic seriously mentally ill/seriously addicted persons who claimed to be Republican. Both were elderly men living in institutions and only let their orientation slip out after they got to know me for a number of years. The mental illness/substance abuse community is nearly entirely Democrat, but there are a very few isolated Republicans.
Das Boot and Slash: I'll bet either of you a thousand dollars that within 20 years the pedophiles or whatever you want to call them will win legal and cultural acceptance unless this nation has a sharp turn back to conservative values and unless we throw the left entirely out of our political arena. Within 20 years you'll see open "dating" between adults and children as well as a host of other perversions too sordid to discuss here. :barf:
Of course in 20 years the thousand bucks will only be worth a dime in today's money because all the politicians today spend like drunken Democrats.
I hear ya M&M!
And you can bet another grand on the fact that there will be those(on the Left maybe? ) that will think as Slash and his ilk do.......it doesn't matter what a person does or how they really think, as long as it doesn't effect me and/or comprimises their job skills.
Just look the other way.
And take a WILD guess....What political direction will the pedophile defenders lean in???
Don't know who said it, but it's SO true:to paraphrase...
Character DOES matter.
And character is what you do when you know no one is watching.
To a great extent, I agree with Slash.
But his premise presupposes that all the "other" people that you're ignoring are good, decent human beings.
Of course, now someone will say "Who are you to force YOUR idea of decency on others?"
Without going into a thousand different examples, who can argue that there are certain behaviours that are, and are not, acceptable in a civilised society.
There are those that couldn't care less about society.
Why do you think there are signs on public transportation warning against spitting, playing the radio, etc.
Like it or not, some things are just plain wrong.
And if you do it in front of me, you'll hear about it.
The Libs will just look the other way( unless of course the problem moves next door to them! Watch how fast their stripes change THEN!!!
And you can bet another grand on the fact that there will be those(on the Left maybe?
) that will think as Slash and his ilk do.......it doesn't matter what a person does or how they really think, as long as it doesn't effect me and/or comprimises their job skills.Just look the other way.
And take a WILD guess....What political direction will the pedophile defenders lean in???
Don't know who said it, but it's SO true:to paraphrase...
or do nothing. Something like that.
Character DOES matter.
And character is what you do when you know no one is watching.
To a great extent, I agree with Slash.
But his premise presupposes that all the "other" people that you're ignoring are good, decent human beings.
Of course, now someone will say "Who are you to force YOUR idea of decency on others?"
Without going into a thousand different examples, who can argue that there are certain behaviours that are, and are not, acceptable in a civilised society.
There are those that couldn't care less about society.
Why do you think there are signs on public transportation warning against spitting, playing the radio, etc.
Like it or not, some things are just plain wrong.
And if you do it in front of me, you'll hear about it.
The Libs will just look the other way( unless of course the problem moves next door to them! Watch how fast their stripes change THEN!!!
- Status