What's new
By:
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.

Married? Again?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Priceless
  • Start date Start date
Re: Married? Again?

Priceless said:
modern Republicans have been on the forefront of the Civil Rights debate.
Click to expand...

There must be something wrong with my textbooks. They all say that Strom Thurmond, George Wallace, and Lester Maddox were Democrats. You better contact the publishers right away to get that corrected.

Beyond that, what does the Republican Party have to do with conservative principles? All politicians are opportunists who will say or do whatever they deem necessary to get (re-)elected (with a very few notable exceptions). "Principled politician" is an oxymoron.

Finally, I've never once claimed to be a Progressive. Liberals believed in individual liberty and free markets. Progressives never have, going back to Woodrow Wilson. Centralized command and control and compulsory programs have been part of the playbook for over 100 years now. Liberals and Progressives were not at all the same.
 
Last edited:
Bob Gray said:
Yah, if only they'd developed a time warp to travel back to the 60s and join the fight. Shame on them for failing to do so.
Click to expand...

Pretending that the gay rights movement is not a civil rights issue isnt exactly helping your argument that the modern religious right is not espousing bigotry.
 
FreshFish said:
There must be something wrong with my textbooks. They all say that Strom Thurmond, George Wallace, and Lester Maddox were Democrats.
Click to expand...

Ah yes, conflating party alignment pre-GOP Southern strategy with today's alignment post-said strategy. What a novel argument.

The original House version of the Civil Rights Act:

Southern Democrats: 7–87 * (7–93%)
Southern Republicans: 0–10 * (0–100%)
Northern Democrats: 145–9 * (94–6%)
Northern Republicans: 138–24 * (85–15%)
The Senate version:

Southern Democrats: 1–20 * (5–95%) (only Ralph Yarborough of Texas voted in favor)
Southern Republicans: 0–1 * (0–100%) (John Tower of Texas)
Northern Democrats: 45–1 * (98–2%) (only Robert Byrd of West Virginia voted against)
Northern Republicans: 27–5 * (84–16%
 
Last edited:
Re: Married? Again?

Ah, now I'm getting nostalgic for those enlightened debates from elementary school,

"so what if my 'side' is bad? Your side is even worse!" :D
 
Re: Married? Again?

FreshFish said:
Ah, now I'm getting nostalgic for those enlightened debates from elementary school,

"so what if my 'side' is bad? Your side is even worse!" :D
Click to expand...

You were operating at a pretty high level. I was still comparing Dads and dogs.

Through middle school.
 
Re: Married? Again?

FreshFish said:
All children, from a young age, will say "Mommy / Daddy, I want to do it myself!"
-- The Conservative parent thinks "good".
Click to expand...


Priceless said:
"You may only be 5, but Fishy says you're ready to do it yourself, so here are the keys. Drive safely. Be home by 10."
Click to expand...

Hmm...so, while a Conservative might think something but not necessarily say it out loud, to a Progressive there is no difference between thinking and talking??

I suppose that's because your thoughts are always so pure that there is no reason ever to filter them?
 
Re: Married? Again?

FreshFish said:
Hmm...so, while a Conservative might think something but not necessarily say it out loud, to a Progressive there is no difference between thinking and talking??

I suppose that's because your thoughts are always so pure that there is no reason ever to filter them?
Click to expand...

Wow. I had no idea you were this anal.
 
Re: Married? Again?

Have you guys really degenerated to the level of barely pubescent males so that I will feel comfortable? Having to deal with a teenage son, this makes me feel right at home. NOt that I want to be there....
 
Re: Married? Again?

Priceless said:
Wow. I had no idea you were this anal.
Click to expand...

in logic, if a statement is true, then the contrapositive must also be true.

The contrapositive of your statement is "Wow, I [Priceless] am not as careful in my thinking as you [ff] are." Amusingly, it is you who implied this, not me. (you basically said that I make distinctions you'd overlook when you say you are not as anal as I am.*).

Welcome to the human race:

Loads of research bears out what we instinctively recognize: human beings have a strong tendency to be sloppy thinkers.
Click to expand...






* there is a pun here on "anal eyes" somehow.
 
Last edited:
FreshFish said:
in logic, if a statement is true, then the contrapositive must also be true.

The contrapositive of your statement is "Wow, I [Priceless] am not as careful in my thinking as you [ff] are." Amusingly, it is you who implied this, not me. (you basically said that I make distinctions you'd overlook when you say you are not as anal as I am.*).

Welcome to the human race:



* there is a pun here on "anal eyes" somehow.
Click to expand...

Hearing this amount of pretentiousness coming from someone who didn't understand the basic mathematical logic behind lotteries is astounding. It becomes ever more likely you are the poster formerly known as Kepler.
 
Re: Married? Again?

unofan said:
Hearing this amount of pretentiousness coming from some who didn't understand the basic mathematical logic behind lotteries is astounding. It becomes ever more likely you are the poster formerly known as Kepler.
Click to expand...

Please, Kepler was an Ivy Leaguer. It's practically a law that if you attended an Ivy League school, you must mention it as much as possible. :p
 
FadeToBlack&Gold said:
Please, Kepler was an Ivy Leaguer. It's practically a law that if you attended an Ivy League school, you must mention it as much as possible. :p
Click to expand...

I take it I'm the exception that proves the rule? (And I went to a real one, not that pseudo-public SUNY-Ithaca one).
 
Re: Married? Again?

unofan said:
Hearing this amount of pretentiousness coming from someone who didn't understand the basic mathematical logic behind lotteries is astounding. It becomes ever more likely you are the poster formerly known as Kepler.
Click to expand...

I'm pretty sure that Kepler is still active on the D-1 side, at least during the season he was.
 
Re: Married? Again?

FreshFish said:
in logic, if a statement is true, then the contrapositive must also be true.

The contrapositive of your statement is "Wow, I [Priceless] am not as careful in my thinking as you [ff] are." Amusingly, it is you who implied this, not me. (you basically said that I make distinctions you'd overlook when you say you are not as anal as I am.*).

Welcome to the human race:








* there is a pun here on "anal eyes" somehow.
Click to expand...
Like I said...anal.
 
Re: Married? Again?

unofan said:
Hearing this amount of pretentiousness coming from someone who didn't understand the basic mathematical logic behind lotteries is astounding. It becomes ever more likely you are the poster formerly known as Kepler.
Click to expand...

You whining about pretentiousness might be the funniest thing I've ever seen on here.
 
Re: Married? Again?

YOu guys are still at this :rolleyes: isn't there some sort of thread where people shiz on each other on purpose? There used to be
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top