King of America - Page 6

OnyxCougar · 06-03-2004, 09:07 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by jdbutler

*Excuse me while I snipe a raghead to get UT his Dinar*

Racist anyone?

Troubleshooter · 06-03-2004, 09:09 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by OnyxCougar
Racist anyone?

Not necessarily.

jdbutler · 06-03-2004, 09:18 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by OnyxCougar

Racist anyone?

When it comes to those murdering bastards from the "Religion of Peace" you're goddamn right I am, and proud of it! Let the sand scratching sons-o-bitches put on a uniform and quit hiding behind women and scoolchildren and let's get this shit over with.

Bleeding heart / let's just get along liberal, anyone?

OnyxCougar · 06-03-2004, 09:37 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by jdbutler

When it comes to those murdering bastards from the "Religion of Peace" you're goddamn right I am, and proud of it! Let the sand scratching sons-o-bitches put on a uniform and quit hiding behind women and scoolchildren and let's get this shit over with.

Bleeding heart / let's just get along liberal, anyone?

I don't have a problem with you disliking cowardly militants. I don't have a problem with you disliking the war, and the cost to the nations involved. I *do* however, have a problem with characterizing MILLIONS of innocent people based upon those (relatively) few extremists.

That is racism. And not something to be proud of.

I'm not a bleeding heart or "just get along liberal". I dislike the terrorists as much as you do. But I have ALOT of muslim and some sikh friends (you know, the people who wear turbans) that dislike the terrorists as much as you and I do. And it pisses me off when you lump everyone together as ragheads.

What ethnicity are you so I can call you a racial epithet? So I can racial profile you, and lump you in with all the others like you...oh wait....

Fucking dumbass. That crosses all the skin tones....

lookout123 · 06-03-2004, 09:48 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by jdbutler

Who said anything about volunteering? This country should emulate the Israeli's...Mandatory training for everyone to become a citizen/soldier and serve thier country for 2 years.

To all of the young liberals lurking...I do believe the draft will be reinstated after the elections no matter who wins as our military is stretched too thin and enlilstment and reinlistment numbers are dwindling. Drop down and gimme 20, Private Rueda!

1) as someone who has been in the military for the last 12 years (USAF, USAFR, ANG) seriously, no draft, if you want them in some sort of civilian, social-service capacity - i'm ok with that. but the leadership in the miiltary still remembers the quality degradation due to soldiers who didn't want to be there. the draft is not advocated by any career member of the armed services, that i know of.

2) as far as i know the enlistment quotas are still being met ahead of schedule. i haven't looked up the numbers but i am in regular contact with a handful of recruiters. the only complaint that i have seen is that the quotas aren't allowing for enough growth to keep up with the growing demands. there are more people that are not re-enlisting, but that is true anytime there is a heavy deployment schedule while there are jobs in the civilian community.

jdbutler · 06-03-2004, 10:08 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by OnyxCougar

I don't have a problem with you disliking cowardly militants. I don't have a problem with you disliking the war, and the cost to the nations involved. I *do* however, have a problem with characterizing MILLIONS of innocent people based upon those (relatively) few extremists.

That is racism. And not something to be proud of.

I'm not a bleeding heart or "just get along liberal". I dislike the terrorists as much as you do. But I have ALOT of muslim and some sikh friends (you know, the people who wear turbans) that dislike the terrorists as much as you and I do. And it pisses me off when you lump everyone together as ragheads.

What ethnicity are you so I can call you a racial epithet? So I can racial profile you, and lump you in with all the others like you...oh wait....

Fucking dumbass. That crosses all the skin tones....

Relatively few extremists??? Try taking your kid to see the teaching of the Koran in a Wahabist mosque. They make the Nazi Brownshirts look like social workers.

What ethnicity am I? Proud to be a third generation American combat veteran, thank you, and willing to go again if needed to defend your right to practice your beliefs.

When and if your "ALOT of Muslim friends" gain an upper hand in this war, you and your infidel friends will be the next heads on the Islamic chopping block, ala Nick Berg.

Skunks · 06-03-2004, 07:59 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Troubleshooter

Most people aren't qualified to drive. Why would we give them carte blanche to vote as well?

Sorry, I'm really not tops on voting theory.

It's my understanding that the difference between an electoral college (voting system?) and a popular vote is that in the former, the votes for a region are pooled together. That is, the person with the majority of votes in a specific state gets all of the votes for that state. In states that are heavily dominated by a certain political leaning, this causes problems; the lone dissenter's vote is only considered within a smaller context than is (I'd imagine) technologically necessary.

What's the link between changing how votes are counted and giving anybody carte blanche to do anything?

Troubleshooter · 06-03-2004, 09:38 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Skunks
What's the link between changing how votes are counted and giving anybody carte blanche to do anything?

Anytime someone mentions a popular vote I automatically visualize the worst scenario of every vote counted with no boundaries.

elSicomoro · 06-03-2004, 09:45 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Troubleshooter
Anytime someone mentions a popular vote I automatically visualize the worst scenario of every vote counted with no boundaries.

Which is?

Troubleshooter · 06-03-2004, 09:51 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by sycamore

Which is?

Like I said, no boundaries, or more accurately, no districting of any sort.

For instance, in a presidential election, it would take away a portion of the block voting power of states.

Skunks · 06-03-2004, 09:57 PM

I always thought that was the general principle of democracy -- that everybody (within very broad guidelines, such as 'over age 18') gets to vote.

I'll concede that it could suck (a lot of people are pretty fucking dumb). But if the really-fucking-dumb people start organizing stupid-committes to force their dumb on us, we smart people can always slaughter a new indigenous society.

Who's up for New Zealand?

elSicomoro · 06-03-2004, 10:02 PM

Sorry, TS...I didn't realize that that was the scenario.

But how much power does a state really have anyway?

Here's how presidential politics works now: the nominees focus on the most populous and battleground states.

Here's how presidential politics will work without the EC: the nominees will focus on the most populous and battleground areas.

IOW, not much will change, IMO.

Troubleshooter · 06-03-2004, 10:03 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Skunks
I always thought that was the general principle of democracy -- that everybody (within very broad guidelines, such as 'over age 18') gets to vote.

I'll concede that it could suck (a lot of people are pretty fucking dumb). But if the really-fucking-dumb people start organizing stupid-committes to force their dumb on us, we smart people can always slaughter a new indigenous society.

Who's up for New Zealand?

As much as subjugating another inferior race might appeal to me, I'm happy here.

An idea that just occured to me:

Let everybody vote, but only count the ones of citizens who meet a certain set of, as yet undetermined, standards.

Troubleshooter · 06-03-2004, 10:09 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by sycamore
Sorry, TS...I didn't realize that that was the scenario.

But how much power does a state really have anyway?

Here's how presidential politics works now: the nominees focus on the most populous and battleground states.

Here's how presidential politics will work without the EC: the nominees will focus on the most populous and battleground areas.

IOW, not much will change, IMO.

It's a little bigger than just presidential elections. That was just one example.

State blocks of votes give regions a way to muster votes to handle regional issues.

Without a state, what need is there for legislators? As appealing as that idea may be, the state is an intermediary between the top and the bottom.

elSicomoro · 06-03-2004, 10:12 PM

I have no desire to get rid of states...I only wish to see the end of the EC.

06-03-2004, 09:57 PM	#86
Skunks I thought I changed this. Join Date: Nov 2002 Location: western nowhere, ny Posts: 412	I always thought that was the general principle of democracy -- that everybody (within very broad guidelines, such as 'over age 18') gets to vote. I'll concede that it could suck (a lot of people are pretty fucking dumb). But if the really-fucking-dumb people start organizing stupid-committes to force their dumb on us, we smart people can always slaughter a new indigenous society. Who's up for New Zealand?

06-03-2004, 10:02 PM	#87
elSicomoro Person who doesn't update the user title Join Date: Jan 2001 Posts: 12,486	Sorry, TS...I didn't realize that that was the scenario. But how much power does a state really have anyway? Here's how presidential politics works now: the nominees focus on the most populous and battleground states. Here's how presidential politics will work without the EC: the nominees will focus on the most populous and battleground areas. IOW, not much will change, IMO.

06-03-2004, 10:12 PM	#90
elSicomoro Person who doesn't update the user title Join Date: Jan 2001 Posts: 12,486	I have no desire to get rid of states...I only wish to see the end of the EC.

Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)