dxmnkd316
Lucia Apologist
Re: 2012 Presidential Election - The Day after the Aftermath...
You want to provide some sources for those statistics?
You want to provide some sources for those statistics?
USCHO Fan Forum
This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!
-
The USCHO Fan Forum has migrated to a new plaform, xenForo. Most of the function of the forum should work in familiar ways. Please note that you can switch between light and dark modes by clicking on the gear icon in the upper right of the main menu bar. We are hoping that this new platform will prove to be faster and more reliable. Please feel free to explore its features.
2012 Presidential Election - The Day after the Aftermath...
- Thread starter joecct
- Start date
- Status
Re: 2012 Presidential Election - The Day after the Aftermath...
................
Do you have a point, stance or anything?
................
Do you have a point, stance or anything?
Re: 2012 Presidential Election - The Day after the Aftermath...
Well, yeah. Otherwise, you end up like this guy.
Opie my understanding is the age of consent is 16 in most places not named "Kentucky" (where its like 12, nice conservative values they have there). Again, thinking back to an incident from over 20 years ago, I don't recall anything criminal about his behavior.
Geezer, you seem butthurt over recent events, like libs wiping their arse with conservatism in yet another election. The idea that psycho's choose gun free zones for their attacks is stupid. Psychos choose places where a lot of people congregate and aren't expecting to be part of a shooting rampage. A long time ago somebody went nuts in a McDonalds near San Diego. McDonalds isn't designated a gun free zone to my knowledge, but its a place where a lot of people congregate. Same with a school or movie theatre.
So I'll ask again, why is crime so rampant in "gun culture" states like Texas while its relatively low in places like Massachusetts with stronger gun laws?
mookie1995
there's a good buck in that racket.
Re: 2012 Presidential Election - The Day after the Aftermath...
evil crimes in MA are undertaken with guns that shoot different bullets
evil crimes in MA are undertaken with guns that shoot different bullets
Re: 2012 Presidential Election - The Day after the Aftermath...
Let's get this straight. You approve of a Democrat congressman having sex with a 17-year old page (or at least don't condemn it)? But you condemn a Republican congressman for not having sex with a congressional page? Studds is your hero because he wasn't a hypocrite about being a child molester? I'm assume you had the same point of view for Clarence Thomas' alleged "sexual harrassment" of a middle aged woman with a JD from Yale. No? I'm shocked, shocked.
Let's get this straight. You approve of a Democrat congressman having sex with a 17-year old page (or at least don't condemn it)? But you condemn a Republican congressman for not having sex with a congressional page? Studds is your hero because he wasn't a hypocrite about being a child molester? I'm assume you had the same point of view for Clarence Thomas' alleged "sexual harrassment" of a middle aged woman with a JD from Yale. No? I'm shocked, shocked.
Ummm...Opie, this one is a stretch even for you. I expressed my condemnation for Studds' actions in the only way that I could that would actually affect the man. I voted against him when given the chance. As a rule people usually don't vote against politicians they consider to be heros, or at least I don't. You on the other hand labeled the guy a felon, which would have necessitated his removal from Congress. That didn't happen because while I agree the guy was wrong to be banging his congressional pages, its not criminal to the best of my knowledge.
Foley's actions WERE criminal because the pages at the male dorm did not consent to him showing up wanting to play grab @ ss with them. Maybe you don't mind actions like that, but it seems they did as nobody welcomed him with open arms. The criminality here lies solely in consensual vs non consensual. If you can't differentiate between the two you're going to have big problems.
Clarence Thomas most likey made lude comments to Anita Hill IMHO. What I don't recall but I'm sure you can enlighted me about is what she did about it at the time. If she didn't complain or sue, then the guy's an oaf but it doesn't disqualify him from serving. His light legal record, lack of experience, and status as the worst judge on the court are what disqualifies him. Funny how people like you will scream minority preference when someone like Sotomayer gets nominated, but are quiet as a mouse over Thomas who wouldn't even had been considered by Bush I were it not for his race.
walrus
Wind up workin' in a gas station
Re: 2012 Presidential Election - The Day after the Aftermath...
How many of the gun crimes in Texas involve illegals?
Re: 2012 Presidential Election - The Day after the Aftermath...
I'm afraid you can't have it both ways. What you said then was something about Studds losing his effectiveness in Congress. What you're suggesting now is that you condemned his behavior. You just failed to mention it. In one breath you suggest Studds' behavior was not illegal "to the best of my knowledge." In the next, you suggest Foley's behavior absolutely was illegal. By what standard? IIRC he was on the committee that was responsible for managing the pages (not, I think, a coincidence). And so, showing up at their residence doesn't seem to be a prima facie crime, no matter what was on his mind.
You've got a finely tuned hypocrisyometer when it comes to conservative Republicans, but it seems to fail you when it comes to your own attitudes. Studds was rendered "ineffective" and so you voted against him. Even though he actually had sex with a 17-year old page. Foley had no sexual contact with any page, ever. He seemed to be using pages as a sort of a recuiting pool for "later." Smelly, ugly and we're well rid of him. But there's no evidence he ever touched any page, with or without consent. However,in Roverville, showing up and "wanting" to play grab a*s with pages is the same as actually cornholing pages. Is that it, Bunky? You, sir, are as much of a hypocrite as any you blather about. And dishonest about it, too.
Libstains call Clarence Thomas the worst justice on the Supreme Court. Other, more balanced legal analysts, have exposed that as a crock. And Anita Hill, who was allegedly the "victim" of Thomas' "lewd" talk, followed him around from agency to agency. It's a bit of a stretch, don't you think, to portray a lady with a JD from one of America's most prestigious law schools as some sort of helpless female flower, who "don't know nothin' 'bout filin' no sexual harrassment complaints." The two of 'em were working at the EEOC at the time.
Always attack. Always argue tu quoqe. Always change the subject.
I'm afraid you can't have it both ways. What you said then was something about Studds losing his effectiveness in Congress. What you're suggesting now is that you condemned his behavior. You just failed to mention it. In one breath you suggest Studds' behavior was not illegal "to the best of my knowledge." In the next, you suggest Foley's behavior absolutely was illegal. By what standard? IIRC he was on the committee that was responsible for managing the pages (not, I think, a coincidence). And so, showing up at their residence doesn't seem to be a prima facie crime, no matter what was on his mind.
You've got a finely tuned hypocrisyometer when it comes to conservative Republicans, but it seems to fail you when it comes to your own attitudes. Studds was rendered "ineffective" and so you voted against him. Even though he actually had sex with a 17-year old page. Foley had no sexual contact with any page, ever. He seemed to be using pages as a sort of a recuiting pool for "later." Smelly, ugly and we're well rid of him. But there's no evidence he ever touched any page, with or without consent. However,in Roverville, showing up and "wanting" to play grab a*s with pages is the same as actually cornholing pages. Is that it, Bunky? You, sir, are as much of a hypocrite as any you blather about. And dishonest about it, too.
Libstains call Clarence Thomas the worst justice on the Supreme Court. Other, more balanced legal analysts, have exposed that as a crock. And Anita Hill, who was allegedly the "victim" of Thomas' "lewd" talk, followed him around from agency to agency. It's a bit of a stretch, don't you think, to portray a lady with a JD from one of America's most prestigious law schools as some sort of helpless female flower, who "don't know nothin' 'bout filin' no sexual harrassment complaints." The two of 'em were working at the EEOC at the time.
Always attack. Always argue tu quoqe. Always change the subject.
Last edited:
Re: 2012 Presidential Election - The Day after the Aftermath...
Before, I thought you were just acting like the stupidest pinheaded moron in the four county area. I'm starting to believe you really are the stupidest person I've ever heard of, based on your inability to grasp a very simple point. This might be an easier way for you to get your pinhead around it: Do more shootings happen in fast food restaurants, of which we have more of and are more often crowded, but the patrons may or may not be armed; or in schools, of which we have less and are populated by crowds only from 7-3, but where there is a virtual guarantee of no opposition to the killing? There is one right answer, and it's not spinnable. It's a simple matter of counting.
Class, who can help Rover out? Is there a higher chance of a mass shooting in schools (hint:yes) or McDonalds restaurants (where Rover's career peaked out behind the deep fryer but are actually much safer than his tiny fevered brain imagines)?
Wow. I must be getting older, I have a hard time suffering fools anymore. These are the kind of people we have making our fries nowadays. NO sense at all.
Before, I thought you were just acting like the stupidest pinheaded moron in the four county area. I'm starting to believe you really are the stupidest person I've ever heard of, based on your inability to grasp a very simple point. This might be an easier way for you to get your pinhead around it: Do more shootings happen in fast food restaurants, of which we have more of and are more often crowded, but the patrons may or may not be armed; or in schools, of which we have less and are populated by crowds only from 7-3, but where there is a virtual guarantee of no opposition to the killing? There is one right answer, and it's not spinnable. It's a simple matter of counting.
Class, who can help Rover out? Is there a higher chance of a mass shooting in schools (hint:yes) or McDonalds restaurants (where Rover's career peaked out behind the deep fryer but are actually much safer than his tiny fevered brain imagines)?
Wow. I must be getting older, I have a hard time suffering fools anymore. These are the kind of people we have making our fries nowadays. NO sense at all.
unofan
Well-known member
Re: 2012 Presidential Election - The Day after the Aftermath...
To blindly dismiss guns as a contributing factor is equally as dishonest.
To blindly dismiss guns as a contributing factor is equally as dishonest.
dxmnkd316
Lucia Apologist
Re: 2012 Presidential Election - The Day after the Aftermath...
I agree. Find me a post where I said or even indicted anything but this.
I agree. Find me a post where I said or even indicted anything but this.
mookie1995
there's a good buck in that racket.
Re: 2012 Presidential Election - The Day after the Aftermath...
everyone killed with a gun is shot with a gun. yup.
let's look at priceless' last example, the ny fireman shooter. what did he share? the guy had already served (?) 17 yrs for killing his grandma, with a hammer.
so what is the problem here?
everyone killed with a gun is shot with a gun. yup.
let's look at priceless' last example, the ny fireman shooter. what did he share? the guy had already served (?) 17 yrs for killing his grandma, with a hammer.
so what is the problem here?
walrus
Wind up workin' in a gas station
mookie1995
there's a good buck in that racket.
Re: 2012 Presidential Election - The Day after the Aftermath...
he can and has killed with a hammer. i would be able to kill an entire room of kindiegarders with a hammer, five minutes tops.
no, i don't think that's the problem
he can and has killed with a hammer. i would be able to kill an entire room of kindiegarders with a hammer, five minutes tops.
no, i don't think that's the problem
dxmnkd316
Lucia Apologist
Re: 2012 Presidential Election - The Day after the Aftermath...
This post reminded me of this:
http://www.mcsweeneys.net/articles/...-olds-i-could-beat-up-before-they-overtook-me
This post reminded me of this:
http://www.mcsweeneys.net/articles/...-olds-i-could-beat-up-before-they-overtook-me
walrus
Wind up workin' in a gas station
Re: 2012 Presidential Election - The Day after the Aftermath...
It was an assault rifle
- Status