Final post, hit me with some more *'s and CAPS LOCK later if you want. The cookie you spoke of is all yours.
I disagreed with you and challenged your statements. No shouting, no swearing, no caps lock, no accusations of persecution, no "shut the f- up".
You could have chosen to respond in kind and try to strengthen your position but no - we get the same old hummer-brand abuse and profanity and paranoia. The same tiresome crap that's had you warned, banned (at least once) and warned repeatedly, even in threads that weren't about politics or other touchy issues. It's pathetic & pitiful and now I remember why I took a long break from posting on this forum (because you're not the only one). It was pretty naive of me to think you could actually have an adult conversation. I truly regret engaging you again as it's reminded me what little self-control and what a laughably short fuse you have.
I have in the past strongly disagreed with you. I've often thought your opinions are poorly expressed, half-baked, copy+pasted & badly thought-out; that your conduct to many other people besides me has frequently been immature, insulting and disrespectful (evidenced by at least one ban that I know of); that your reactions to being challenged or disagreed with have frequently been way out of proportion and that your claims of persecution by some forum members are verging on irrational & paranoid ... but I don't think you're an idiot.
I can't speak for everyone else though.
Ah, old "Cartman" hummer's back. Best BAAAAAAWWW I've seen from you in a while. Great to have you back.
I can't believe how personally you take this shit! Grownups can converse, believe it or not, without throwing their toys out of the cot at the slightest hint of disagreement. If you have trouble forming an argument, backing up your statements or supporting your opinions (or even resisting the urge to cast CAPS LOCK OF FURY when you meet a contrary opinion), simple: don't involve yourself in a grownup conversation.
The irony here is that you didn't actually look like an idiot at all until the above post.
If you want to make yourself part of the discussion and make broad statements without backing them up and then bail from the discussion at the first hint of a challenge, go ahead.
I completely understand - I used to "accidentally" knock the chessboard over when my brother was about to get me in checkmate. When I was six.
Followed by...
Using your own argument (such as it is), the burden of proof is now on you to "prove" how "most people" think. I won't hold my breath.
Racism - a discrimination based solely on race - whether it's acted upon or not is illogical, prejudicial, irrational, unfounded and has no basis in fact. These attributes make racism an untenable and unsupportable position. Which makes racism "wrong" in the sense that it's not correct. The racist holds in his mind a mistaken belief that his race is superior to others. This is not right. This is wrong. Incorrect. Unfair. Unjust. Unethical.
Seriously, do I really need to explain why racism is wrong to someone who lives in a country that, for four centuries, used to abduct & trade other humans like they were ****ing farm animals because they were seen as inferior savages? A country that denied them the right to vote & marry interracially & mingle with white people on buses and in schools, all within living memory?
Spot on booster, the GOP knew that all they had to do was just present the idea (via CNN & Fox) that Obama might have been a muslim because they knew precisely what the reaction would be amongst the more mentally retarded members of their voting base who think that "muslim" automatically means "evil". We had that incident at a McCain rally when some lackwitted woman stood up and started bollocking on about Obama being an Arab like it was some kind of horrible thing, like being a Slytherin or a Cardassian (doesn't she know how close in bed the US and the Saudis are? No, because she probably reads as many newspapers as Sarah Palin) and McCain had to snatch the microphone back to shut her up! He had to resort to defending his freaking opponent! Although, he then said "He's not an Arab, he's a good man" which didn't sound all that great. But that muslim/Arab stuff, those racist redneck ****s on youtube and that geriatric failtard with his monkey dolls were all indicative of the kind of 'fear & loathing & lies' campaign the GOP ran and who they targeted. Spiteful, dishonest, insulting to the intelligence and ultimately counter-productive. If the Republicans want to salvage their once-proud party, I hope some asses are getting kicked out the door. They've been pandering to the loony brigade for far too long - this is the party of Abraham Lincoln, the great emancipator, for crying out loud. He'd be horrified to see what's become of his baby, held in thrall to the Religious Right whack-jobs - I think steam would totally shoot out the top of his enormous hat.
...and with that, Kev joined the BNP and grew a tiny moustache.
...and with that, Kev joined the BNP and grew a tiny moustache.
Last edited by Hankstar, .
Presented without comment:
The gameplay movies on youtube look pretty sweet. I love a good zombie game, so I'll be looking out for this one (i.e. waiting for a mate to buy it so I can test it properly 
).
).Palin went back to Main Street. It's over 
I love how so many Americans are under the impression their political system actually has a left wing. Barry O is a centrist - he and the Dems are only left-wing in comparison to the Republican party, who are so far right these days that it doesn't surprise me that people think anyone who opposes them is a big ol' Commie. Though the Reps, with their 700 billion dollar bank bailout, currently resemble a big ol' bunch of corporate socialists. You'd think if they were real capitalists they'd just say "Oh well, that's capitalism for you. Survival of the fittest! You got greedy, fouled up & lost the lot. Good luck to you at the soup kitchen." But no - they're saying "Aw, sucks to be you. Here, have several gazillion dollars - buy yourself a nice new yacht-copter."
For now.
Last edited by Hankstar, .
That's the thing, I agree entirely with you and I don't actually think that a "no politics" policy would be a good thing. It was a hypothetical based on Vic's response to the Prop 8 thread, as if to say "well, if these threads piss you off you so much, why not do something about it pre-emptively, or even earlier within the thread itself, instead of just locking it, getting snarky and threatening to ban everyone?" I simply don't think the lock or the flaming we all got was justified. Tightening up the moderation would be a good start if it's actually such a huge problem (also, not reading those controversial threads would have the same effect). You're right, most of us who get involved in these things are adult enough to carry on without acting like halfwits. Mostly...most of the time...
Curiously, this thread remains open despite the obvious kickings being dealt, the stark differences in opinions and despite the "usual suspects" being involved. Also curiously, some people here are (still) allowed to start pointless threads in this section on whatever the hell the voices in their heads say to them, which consistently degenerate ... but I only skim those so they don't bother me.
I sympathise with said kahuna, but like I said, OT sections get Off Topic rather rapidly. If you don't actually, explicitly say to people "don't mention the war", they'll inevitably bloody well mention the war and not everyone agrees on the bloody war do they?
There was a just a perfect storm of politics recently, what with Barry O making the podium and bringing murderous neo-con cocktwuntery & yeehaw anti-learnin' to a close and the very divisive Prop 8 getting passed in Ahnuld-land. "President Idol" contests and referenda on gay marriage don't happen every day and both things naturally inspire strong opinions. I just don't think Vic's lock, or the rant, were entirely necessary. Though he was spot on with the "usual suspects" accusation.
Let us continue talk of the dowry via PMs, my betrothed. Our parents will need to discuss cows and microwave ovens and soft furnishings as well.
There was a just a perfect storm of politics recently, what with Barry O making the podium and bringing murderous neo-con cocktwuntery & yeehaw anti-learnin' to a close and the very divisive Prop 8 getting passed in Ahnuld-land. "President Idol" contests and referenda on gay marriage don't happen every day and both things naturally inspire strong opinions. I just don't think Vic's lock, or the rant, were entirely necessary. Though he was spot on with the "usual suspects" accusation.
Let us continue talk of the dowry via PMs, my betrothed. Our parents will need to discuss cows and microwave ovens and soft furnishings as well.
That's the kind of tough talk that makes me want to gay-marry you, you horrid little twunt
Then I suggest a "no-politics, no religion" rule. Works great for other forums where it's been implemented. In my experience you can't trust people not to bring that stuff up in an OT section unless you explicitly ask them not to. Obviously both topics give rise to strong (and strongly voiced) opinions which inevitably clash like Spartans and Persians.
In before Victor locks this one just like the Prop 8 thread...
Why bother having an off-topic area at all if off-topic discussions you don't like get shat on? How about locking threads before they get to page 6 or 7 or to 300+ replies? Or having mods do it? Or appointing more mods and updating the rules so threads like that get locked straight away? Noone makes you read that shit but if it's taking up space, say so and don't be so bloody petulant.
Meh
Whatever devs, it's your sandbox. The intertubes aint a democracy after all.
Why bother having an off-topic area at all if off-topic discussions you don't like get shat on? How about locking threads before they get to page 6 or 7 or to 300+ replies? Or having mods do it? Or appointing more mods and updating the rules so threads like that get locked straight away? Noone makes you read that shit but if it's taking up space, say so and don't be so bloody petulant.
Meh
Whatever devs, it's your sandbox. The intertubes aint a democracy after all.
Last edited by Hankstar, .
McCain's voting record was around 95% pro-Bush in the last couple of years. Some maverick.
How's the kool-aid taste?
Noone with half a brain thinks Obama is the left-wing messiah and will ride in on his magic broom and clean everything up nice & tidy. He's more a centrist than a lefty (there really isn't much of a true left in the US) and his changes won't be as huge and sweeping and castle-crumbling as the paranoid far-right seem to think. But he does seem to give a shit about people and he's actually able to speak coherently and finish a sentence without smirking like some moonshine swillin' shit-kicker. Sure, millions are taking a chance on the guy. Millions took a chance on Bush - twice - and look where it got them. Maybe everyone just thought about their vote a bit longer this time.
But if you think McCain/Palin would've been any different to Team Bush's unmitigated 8-year cluster**** you're as deluded as you seem to think everyone else is. If McCain's judgement allowed him to pick a bimbo like Palin to be second in command, then that simply is not judgement that can be trusted in any kind of crisis. But, on the other hand, if he allowed other people in his party to nominate her for VP it doesn't show a great deal of integrity or guts on his part. There are a lot of other things that lost this election for McCain, but that's a major part of it.
How's the kool-aid taste?
Noone with half a brain thinks Obama is the left-wing messiah and will ride in on his magic broom and clean everything up nice & tidy. He's more a centrist than a lefty (there really isn't much of a true left in the US) and his changes won't be as huge and sweeping and castle-crumbling as the paranoid far-right seem to think. But he does seem to give a shit about people and he's actually able to speak coherently and finish a sentence without smirking like some moonshine swillin' shit-kicker. Sure, millions are taking a chance on the guy. Millions took a chance on Bush - twice - and look where it got them. Maybe everyone just thought about their vote a bit longer this time.
But if you think McCain/Palin would've been any different to Team Bush's unmitigated 8-year cluster**** you're as deluded as you seem to think everyone else is. If McCain's judgement allowed him to pick a bimbo like Palin to be second in command, then that simply is not judgement that can be trusted in any kind of crisis. But, on the other hand, if he allowed other people in his party to nominate her for VP it doesn't show a great deal of integrity or guts on his part. There are a lot of other things that lost this election for McCain, but that's a major part of it.
Your implication is explicit - allow gay people equality & pretty soon every "non-traditional" relationship will want it. It's irrelevant. The topic of this thread - Prop 8 - is about two people and whether they should be allowed to marry. I'm not imposing limits. Those are simply the terms of this discussion.
Morality to me is a question of harm: will Action A harm be beneficial, neutral or harmful? If it's harmful, examine the probable outcomes and legislate accordingly. It's a question of common sense and most laws in free societies are based on common sense.
And morality applies to homosexuality in exactly what way? Are all gays immoral, simply because they're gay or is there another point in there somewhere? What exactly do gay people do that harms others?
So, "we've always done it this way" is cause to keep it that way, with no room for discussion? Conservatism in a nutshell. Unfortunately, "USA society" is also easy prey to scare campaigns that equate homosexuality with paedophilia, "the gay agenda's desire to teach gayness in schools" and all manner of other egregious lies, which must have influenced some peoples' votes. Had they had the truth available to them and not cheap fear-mongering, they may have voted differently. 52-48% is hardly a landslide.
Fine then, they're ignorant bigots too. I do find it curious that so much support for Prop 8, from Mormons and other groups of religious hatemongers, came from outside California. I wonder exactly what they gain by fighting equality in another state...
I'm still waiting for a logical reason why gay people shouldn't have the same rights as me. That's all I want. "Tradition" just won't cut it. It used to be traditional to hang black people at picnics. It's still traditional (and religiously justified) in some primitive societies to bury women up to the waist and stone to death if they're victims of rape. Tradition, in and of itself, is no argument.
I don't know how to respond to that. Apart from calling it what it is: a completely false analogy. And a stack of fried bullshit. Sane people don't go around calling themselves black if they're not. Sane people don't call themselves liberals if they're paranoid abstinence-only halfwits. As for this assertion that gay marriage tarnishes the sanctity of straight marriage - my god, you do read some wacko crap don't you...
Bullshit piled on top of bullshit. The only "agenda" gay people have is for equality - just like the feminists and the civil rights movement. The merits of affirmative action are still up for debate but that's not what gay people want. They want a fair goddam go, like anyone else on their street or their suburb. They don't want privilege at the expense of other people - that's exactly what they're fighting against!
Gay don't ****ing well want "special treatment". For chrissake, they want EQUAL treatment, the same as their neighbours. They don't want extra. It's the "Yes on Prop 8" punks that want special treatment - special rights over and above gay people.
You have to stop regurgitating these half-baked GOP talking points and think for yourself. With your laughable analogies and misunderstanding of feminism and the civil rights movement you come off like a borderline racist and a mysogynist as well as a homophobe and it's goddam pitiful...
I'm still waiting for a logical reason to ban gay people from marrying each other. Not one homophobe has even approached logic in this thread yet.
There's no Gay Agenda. There's a desire for equality and there's a bigoted, paranoid opposition who like to play the victim. Also, goddam pitiful.
Becky beat me to the punch in responding to this, but here are my two cents anyway: a man marrying a man or a woman marrying a woman won't lead to people marrying children or fourteen other people, except of course in the case of the FLDS Mormon church who were indeed responsible for a lot of the out-of-state funding for the Yes on 8 campaign. This was about TWO ADULTS being able to marry each other and nothing more. This slippery slope bullshit is a red herring.
Last edited by Hankstar, .
The right to call your union a "marriage" and have it legally recognised as such is - well, was - a tangible right. Ostensibly allowing everyone the same spousal rights while denying one group of people the right to actually be married, in name and by law, is the very definition of discrimination. It's excluding a portion of the population from rights & privileges enjoyed by the rest of that population based on a narrow set of criteria. If this was happening to Jews, black people or Catholics or fat people or people with fake boobs you can bet your arse it'd be called discrimination by everyone and their dog. But it's not - it's happening to gay people, so that seems to make it ok. Obviously they're not a big enough voting bloc to warrant actually listening to them and treating them like human beings (yet).
"Separate but equal" does not equal "equal". Separate is still separate. Like I said before, the anti-equality crew are only delaying the inevitable. This crap won't last forever - in CA or in any other state - so enjoy it while you can.
And there you have it, viewers: a primary motivation to ban gay marriage. Call it a "civil union" or some such doublespeak bullshit - anything beside "marriage" - and bang! Another birthright gets trampled. Of course, plenty of straight people don't get married for various reasons, and they're getting royally shafted by this redneck bullshit too.
Common sense prevails. Nice one Colorado.
For the small number of friends of mine who live there, it's beautiful and fantastic but also frequently embarrassing and frustrating.
Being Australian, it was designed precisely for a big heavy engine, and it's an LS1 - the LS2 (I believe) is 6 litres and you can find it in some of the new HSV range. It's just that it's very easy to get a 5.7 V8 up to 300hp (plus, apart from hp, it's rubber-boiling V8 torque that Aussies love :nod. Once you have 300hp straight out of the box, a few tweaks can make it beyond ridiculous. Hello LX8 :up:
Anyway, I hear the new Elfin T5 Clubman is a much nicer weapon...
. Once you have 300hp straight out of the box, a few tweaks can make it beyond ridiculous. Hello LX8 :up:Anyway, I hear the new Elfin T5 Clubman is a much nicer weapon...
Yeah, Caters are ok, but ...
Elfin MS8 please. Oh, what's that? I can have a 300hp 5.7L V8 in it? Golly! Sure, twist my arm
Elfin MS8 please. Oh, what's that? I can have a 300hp 5.7L V8 in it? Golly! Sure, twist my arm
My great-grandfather was a lighthorseman in the Middle East WWI, my grandfather & great-uncle served in the RAAF in WWII & my uncle drove tanks in Vietnam. Between them, they knew - and they taught me - the difference between necessary military action and a pointless, thankless waste of lives. They also taught me the difference between patriotism (love for country) and blind nationalism (unquestioning support for a government). It's because of their experiences, and those of their friends, that I'm glad I left the RAAF while still a cadet and now work for the Red Cross.
Don't confuse opposition to a war with disloyalty to the poor brave bastards who have to fight it.
Damn. Prop 8 wins by a narrow margin - this time. Next time this issue comes up it'll be defeated - soundly - and then maybe the fundie hick sons of bitches can concentrate their effort & money on something that actually matters. Like, I dunno, teaching kids that Noah had dinosaurs on the ****ing Ark or whatever other fairytales they've got in their arsenal.
Becky, the Straight White Christian Arsehole Agenda(tm) may have won this round but, despite my disgust, I know it will come to nothing. Progression is inevitable and one day LBGT people will be able to marry each other without a single hurdle, no matter how many ignorant, paranoid, halfwitted bastards wish to cling to their stagnant, anti-human "morality".
Until then: screw you California, I (and much of the world) expected better.
But on the other hand ... go Barry O!
FGED GREDG RDFGDR GSFDG