Poor Dick Cheney
-
Yeah... "people", you can't live with them... you can't kill them. Life must really suck for you Stan. :rose:
"Christianity is not about tolerance"
Stan Shannon in the Soap BoxThats because you're a f****ing leftist idiot.
Stan Shannon in the SoapboxAnd you worthless bastards are proud of that. You assholes just suck.
Stan Shannon in the SoapboxBeing classy is for losers.
Stan Shannon in the Soapboxa coalition of hispanics, blacks, and white leftists.
Stan Shannon in the SoapboxHispanic isn't a race
Stan Shannon in the Soapboxled mike
led mike wrote:
you can't kill them
The left seems to disagree with you on this point...
-
You don't seem to be very tolerant of Cheney's beliefs...
He can do or say whatever he likes, I'm not stopping him.
-
led mike wrote:
you can't kill them
The left seems to disagree with you on this point...
-
He can do or say whatever he likes, I'm not stopping him.
Just criticizing his position as intolerant which, frankly, is the very definition of intolerance.
-
oilFactotum wrote:
A victory? I wouldn't call it a victory, but I do find humor in the irony of the 2nd in command of an administration that condemns gays and their relationships having such a public gay daughter having a baby in a committed relationship.
Irony denotes the unexpected. There is nothing unexpected about the current generation's disregard for morality. Rather, it is symbolic of our society's decline.
Red Stateler wrote:
There is nothing unexpected about the current generation's disregard for morality. Rather, it is symbolic of our society's decline.
What is fascinating is that if you go back and read historical literature, the right has claimed that society is in the midst of unprecedented moral decline for about as long as they've existed.
Christian Graus - Microsoft MVP - C++ Metal Musings - Rex and my new metal blog
-
Just criticizing his position as intolerant which, frankly, is the very definition of intolerance.
Wow, that is so relativistic. You really must be one of those "leftists" you always go on about. :laugh::laugh:
-
Yeah, because right-wingers don't support the death penalty or anything like that.
____________________________________________________ If at first you don't succeed, skydiving might not be for you.
The right generally supports the death penalty for those who deprive others of life as the preferred method of justice for taking life (while the left opposes "punishment" for taking life and endorses "rehabilitation"). The left unwaiveringly supports the death of innocent babies. The end.
-
Wow, that is so relativistic. You really must be one of those "leftists" you always go on about. :laugh::laugh:
oilFactotum wrote:
Wow, that is so relativistic. You really must be one of those "leftists" you always go on about.
I know you won't get it, because you've demonstrated a complete lack of mental capacity to do so, but I'm a glutton for pain... My statement did not endorse the hypocritical and ill-thought-out position on "tolerance" held by the left. Rather, I was pointing out the fact that its an inherently hypocritical position which you have adopted without actually thinking it through. It also wasn't "relativistic" as it didn't assume that our respective positions on "tolerance" were both correct. Rather, it just pointed out the fact that your position is hypocritical.
-
you wrote: "Yes, as long as he keeps his unspeakably immoralities in the closet who are we to care? Now, thats what I call social progress!" You're the only one I've seen that describes Cheney as "unspeakably immoral" in regards to his relationship with his daughter. So you find it terrible that he would be criticized if he were to call his daughter a faggot in public? And you think that any criticism for this remark would be completely unwarrented? you said: "Tell that to George Allen or Rush Limbaugh or me for that matter. All branded with the scarlet 'R'." This cult of victimology that some of you consertives go on about is just pathetic!
oilFactotum wrote:
victimology
The study of victims? :confused: Don't you mean "victimization"?
-
Red Stateler wrote:
There is nothing unexpected about the current generation's disregard for morality. Rather, it is symbolic of our society's decline.
What is fascinating is that if you go back and read historical literature, the right has claimed that society is in the midst of unprecedented moral decline for about as long as they've existed.
Christian Graus - Microsoft MVP - C++ Metal Musings - Rex and my new metal blog
Christian Graus wrote:
What is fascinating is that if you go back and read historical literature, the right has claimed that society is in the midst of unprecedented moral decline for about as long as they've existed.
The "right" hasn't existed throughout history. Rather, I think you're referring to moral authorities (like various churches) pointing out moral failings, which have existed throughout history. What we have on our hands is relatively (but not completely) historically unique. It's not about actual individual moral failings (as that's expected and will endure through any civilization), but rather the movement to accept moral failings as virtue...To redefine wrong to be right...To prevent those moral authorities from asserting immorality.
-
oilFactotum wrote:
In fact, you don't know that he doesn't chastise her in private.
Yes, as long as he keeps his unspeakably immoralities in the closet who are we to care? Now, thats what I call social progress!
oilFactotum wrote:
I'm sure Cheney is quaking in his boots at the prospect
As am I.
oilFactotum wrote:
No more scarlet letters, no more burning at the stake - what a sorry state of affairs.
Tell that to George Allen or Rush Limbaugh or me for that matter. All branded with the scarlet 'R'.
A virtual fence for the virtual borders of a virtual nation.
Stan Shannon wrote:
Tell that to George Allen
You aren't from VA by chance, are you Stan? It was a shame he lost the election ... Webb is an arrogant prick ... :(
If you decide to become a software engineer, you are signing up to have a 1/2" piece of silicon tell you exactly how stupid you really are for 8 hours a day, 5 days a week Zac
-
Stan Shannon wrote:
for fear of being publically attacked for having 'immoral' thoughts
Why worry about immoral thoughts? Cheney is guilty of overt immoral actions by robbing the public coffers blind to reward his friends and eventually line his own pockets.
The evolution of the human genome is too important to be left to chance.
Tim Craig wrote:
Why worry about immoral thoughts? Cheney is guilty of overt immoral actions by robbing the public coffers blind to reward his friends and eventually line his own pockets.
That is just the definition of "politician".
If you decide to become a software engineer, you are signing up to have a 1/2" piece of silicon tell you exactly how stupid you really are for 8 hours a day, 5 days a week Zac
-
Christian Graus wrote:
What is fascinating is that if you go back and read historical literature, the right has claimed that society is in the midst of unprecedented moral decline for about as long as they've existed.
The "right" hasn't existed throughout history. Rather, I think you're referring to moral authorities (like various churches) pointing out moral failings, which have existed throughout history. What we have on our hands is relatively (but not completely) historically unique. It's not about actual individual moral failings (as that's expected and will endure through any civilization), but rather the movement to accept moral failings as virtue...To redefine wrong to be right...To prevent those moral authorities from asserting immorality.
Red Stateler wrote:
What we have on our hands is relatively (but not completely) historically unique.
Yeah, they say that, too.
Christian Graus - C++ MVP 'Why don't we jump on a fad that hasn't already been widely discredited ?' - Dilbert
-
oilFactotum wrote:
'Conservative calls Mary Cheney's pregnancy "unconscionable." ' :laugh:
Children out of wedlock are funny! teeheehee!!!
Red Stateler wrote:
Children out of wedlock are funny! teeheehee!!!
Careful, you are treading on thin ice with this line of discussion ...
If you decide to become a software engineer, you are signing up to have a 1/2" piece of silicon tell you exactly how stupid you really are for 8 hours a day, 5 days a week Zac
-
Red Stateler wrote:
What we have on our hands is relatively (but not completely) historically unique.
Yeah, they say that, too.
Christian Graus - C++ MVP 'Why don't we jump on a fad that hasn't already been widely discredited ?' - Dilbert
Way to ignore the flaws in your statement. :rolleyes:
-
you wrote: "Yes, as long as he keeps his unspeakably immoralities in the closet who are we to care? Now, thats what I call social progress!" You're the only one I've seen that describes Cheney as "unspeakably immoral" in regards to his relationship with his daughter. So you find it terrible that he would be criticized if he were to call his daughter a faggot in public? And you think that any criticism for this remark would be completely unwarrented? you said: "Tell that to George Allen or Rush Limbaugh or me for that matter. All branded with the scarlet 'R'." This cult of victimology that some of you consertives go on about is just pathetic!
oilFactotum wrote:
So you find it terrible that he would be criticized if he were to call his daughter a faggot in public? And you think that any criticism for this remark would be completely unwarrented?
It is a simple issue, but I'm not surprised you fail to appreciate it. We live in a society in which some forms of expression are socially unacceptable and are surpressed by institutionalized authoritarianism. If you wish to believe that a society that condemns and ostracizes those who express moral revulsion at homosexuality is an improvement over one that formally did the same to homosexuality itself, thats your right. I believe it represents the same basic social phenomenon. It is merely a different, more pervasive, focused and well organized moral authority than we have had in the past.
oilFactotum wrote:
This cult of victimology that some of you consertives go on about is just pathetic!
How sanctimonious of you.
A virtual fence for the virtual borders of a virtual nation.
-
oilFactotum wrote:
Wow, that is so relativistic. You really must be one of those "leftists" you always go on about.
I know you won't get it, because you've demonstrated a complete lack of mental capacity to do so, but I'm a glutton for pain... My statement did not endorse the hypocritical and ill-thought-out position on "tolerance" held by the left. Rather, I was pointing out the fact that its an inherently hypocritical position which you have adopted without actually thinking it through. It also wasn't "relativistic" as it didn't assume that our respective positions on "tolerance" were both correct. Rather, it just pointed out the fact that your position is hypocritical.
Wow, you held out for two entire posts before descending into childish insults. You should be so proud!
Red Stateler wrote:
which you have adopted
What position have I adopted? Ah, yes "the hypocritical and ill-thought-out position on "tolerance" held by the left" Whatever that is.:rolleyes:
-
oilFactotum wrote:
So you find it terrible that he would be criticized if he were to call his daughter a faggot in public? And you think that any criticism for this remark would be completely unwarrented?
It is a simple issue, but I'm not surprised you fail to appreciate it. We live in a society in which some forms of expression are socially unacceptable and are surpressed by institutionalized authoritarianism. If you wish to believe that a society that condemns and ostracizes those who express moral revulsion at homosexuality is an improvement over one that formally did the same to homosexuality itself, thats your right. I believe it represents the same basic social phenomenon. It is merely a different, more pervasive, focused and well organized moral authority than we have had in the past.
oilFactotum wrote:
This cult of victimology that some of you consertives go on about is just pathetic!
How sanctimonious of you.
A virtual fence for the virtual borders of a virtual nation.
Stan Shannon wrote:
you wish to believe that a society that condemns and ostracizes those who express moral revulsion at homosexuality is an improvement over one that formally did the same to homosexuality itself
Oh, right. I forgot about all those crimes against gay-bashers. How they get fired from their job, kicked out of the military, beaten by cops and the like.
Stan Shannon wrote:
How sanctimonious of you.
:laugh:
-
Stan Shannon wrote:
Tell that to George Allen
You aren't from VA by chance, are you Stan? It was a shame he lost the election ... Webb is an arrogant prick ... :(
If you decide to become a software engineer, you are signing up to have a 1/2" piece of silicon tell you exactly how stupid you really are for 8 hours a day, 5 days a week Zac
Zac Howland wrote:
You aren't from VA by chance, are you Stan?
Never been there. But George Allen was a good man whoes political career was destroyed by a new age secular priesthood. I wish I could have voted for him.
Zac Howland wrote:
Webb is an arrogant prick
Maybe. But I actually like Webb. I find myself hoping that the dems might have poisoned their own agenda by recruiting conservatives like him into their party. I don't think a civil war between this new crop of conservative democrats and the radical leftists who are in charge of the party is entirely possible down the road. It might well turn out to be a godsend for the conservative movement.
A virtual fence for the virtual borders of a virtual nation.
-
Zac Howland wrote:
You aren't from VA by chance, are you Stan?
Never been there. But George Allen was a good man whoes political career was destroyed by a new age secular priesthood. I wish I could have voted for him.
Zac Howland wrote:
Webb is an arrogant prick
Maybe. But I actually like Webb. I find myself hoping that the dems might have poisoned their own agenda by recruiting conservatives like him into their party. I don't think a civil war between this new crop of conservative democrats and the radical leftists who are in charge of the party is entirely possible down the road. It might well turn out to be a godsend for the conservative movement.
A virtual fence for the virtual borders of a virtual nation.
Stan Shannon wrote:
But George Allen was a good man
I wouldn't go THAT far. He was the better of the two politicians running in this election ... lets just stick with that.
Stan Shannon wrote:
Maybe. But I actually like Webb.
Webb's attitude is the major problem I have with him. He is a guy with slightly above average intelligence who thinks he is smarter than anyone else, and takes extra effort to try to show that. He also has some interesting views on social areas that I'm not too fond of ... but at least he is conservative when it comes to financial issues. That was the only area of this election that was win-win on.
If you decide to become a software engineer, you are signing up to have a 1/2" piece of silicon tell you exactly how stupid you really are for 8 hours a day, 5 days a week Zac