Holly??? Have you decided to once again start hitting the bottle again??? Are you personally with Sugarshack?? Stay away....Stay far far away from him!! He gets the good stuff!!!
On Sat, May 2, 2009 at 9:27 PM, Hollywood <[email protected]>wrote: > > VT, > > They like to start fights they don't have the cajones, or brains, to > finish. > > On May 1, 1:06 pm, VT VirtualTruth <[email protected]> wrote: > > I have also noticed they rarely hang around long, but always > > seem to believe they 'won' the debate. > > > > On Apr 30, 8:29 pm, Hollywood <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > > > > > Where'd you boys run off to? I'm just getting warmed up here. > > > > > On Apr 30, 12:23 pm, Hollywood <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > > dick, > > > > > > I repeat. Feel free to dispute any specific statement i made in > > > > response to Jim W.'s post. What terminology did I use that you do not > > > > understand? Neither one of you have attempted to define modern > > > > liberalism, you've only attempted to blame just about every modern > > > > problem on it's existence. > > > > I personally prefer John F. Kennedy's definition but will use the > > > > Merriam-Webster Collegiate Dictionary, as that is what I have on > hand. > > > > I'm posting only that portion of the definition as regards to > politics > > > > > > "a political philosophy based on belief in progress, the essential > > > > goodness of the human race,the autonomy of the indivisual and > standing > > > > for the protection of political and civil liberties". > > > > > > Both conservative and liberal are simply convient labels used in an > > > > attempt to demonized political/social ideaology opponents. It's more > a > > > > matter of degrees, of direction, than something fixed and definite. I > > > > have what might be considered liberal views on some issues, > > > > conservative on others. My ACLU membership card rests in my wallet > > > > quite comfortably next to my CCW permit and my NRA membership card. > > > > Someone does not approve, wishes to label me one or the other? Tough > > > > shit. > > > > > > On Apr 30, 11:56 am, dick thompson <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > > > If you are not using the definitions and assumptions of the author, > then > > > > > you need to define your terms. Otherwise there is no way to > understand > > > > > what you mean by your terminology. If you are going to defend it, > what > > > > > exactly are you defending? There is a huge difference between > classical > > > > > liberalism and the modern liberals in this country. In fact, the > > > > > conservatives are closer to classical liberalism than the modern > > > > > liberals are. > > > > > > > Hollywood wrote: > > > > > > dick, > > > > > > > > Read my post more carefully. Feel free to dispute any specific > > > > > > statement I made. > > > > > > I didn't attempt to define modern liberalism, now did I? I never > > > > > > declared i even had a Messiah, did I? I'm supossed to debate > based on > > > > > > YOUR unsupported definitions and assumptions? Not likely. LOL! > > > > > > > > On Apr 30, 11:11 am, dick thompson <[email protected]> > wrote: > > > > > > > >> You gotta do a whole lot better than that if you want to defend > > > > > >> liberalism. What has modern liberalism as defined by you > Messiah got > > > > > >> to offer that we should really want? > > > > > > > >> Hollywood wrote: > > > > > > > >>> Jim W, > > > > > > > >>> Ok, put on a fresh pot of Dunkin' Donuts coffee. Since it's > raining > > > > > >>> here in the STL and my LSC is in the shop, I'll waste time > addressing > > > > > >>> your latest bullshit. > > > > > > > >>> First, your very thread title is bull. ANYTHING can be > defended. Hell, > > > > > >>> some people will defend the assertion the earth is flat or that > the > > > > > >>> holocaust of WWII never happened or that the British royal > family are > > > > > >>> actually reptilian aliens, etc. etc. What you should have said > was > > > > > >>> that liberalism could not be SUCCESIVELY defended. > > > > > > > >>> Of course first you would have to be able to clearly define > exactly > > > > > >>> what "modern liberalism" is. Other than any social/political > view you > > > > > >>> didn't like. Also, just who would be the judge that modern > liberalism > > > > > >>> has been sucessfully, or unsucessfully, defended? You, Travis, > who? > > > > > >>> Basically your entire "challenge" is simply a personal > anti-liberal > > > > > >>> rant that you try to frame in such a manner that, in your mind > at > > > > > >>> least, you can't possibly lose if one looks at it as a > challenge and > > > > > >>> not just another political/social rant. I'll adress some of > your > > > > > >>> "points" until such time as i get bored or my car is finished, > > > > > >>> whichever comes first. > > > > > > > >>> <<<Liberalism has no basis in fact, sanity, etc. etc>>>> > > > > > >>> A personal opinion. You haven't even defined liberalism much > less > > > > > >>> offered any objective evidence to prove your statement. > > > > > > > >>> <<<The entire based on emotions crap>>>> > > > > > >>> Bullshit. Your rants are as emotional as anything I've ever > seen. > > > > > >>> Hatred, fear and greed are emotions same as love and/or > compassion. > > > > > > > >>> <<<<Everthing from poverty to teen-age pregnancy is the fault > of > > > > > >>> liberals>>> > > > > > >>> More horseshit. You offer no proof of that. You fail to take > any > > > > > >>> notice of any factors such as changes in the economy, society, > > > > > >>> medicine, anything. You just curl up in the fetal position, > stick your > > > > > >>> thumb in your mouth and mumble "anything I don't like is the > fault of > > > > > >>> liberals". > > > > > > > >>> <<<Our founders were conservative>>> > > > > > >>> FUNNY bullshit. I thought you wanted to talk about modern > liberalism. > > > > > >>> NOW you want to talk about 18th century > liberalism/conservatism? > > > > > >>> NOTHING has changed since 1775? George Washington & crew were > wild- > > > > > >>> eyed flaming liberals. Just ask King George of England. In an > age when > > > > > >>> kings ruled most countries (mandated by God they claimed) what > could > > > > > >>> have been a more liberal and revolutionary concept than the > premise > > > > > >>> that ordinary citizens had a right to rule themselves, to write > their > > > > > >>> own laws? No taxation without fair representation? In a world > where > > > > > >>> you coughed up whatever the fuck the King TOLD you to pay? > Liberal > > > > > >>> nonesense! No state-approved religion such as the Church of > England, > > > > > >>> worship as you please? More liberal nonesense. People should > worship > > > > > >>> who and how they are told to by the state. > > > > > >>> Need i continue? > > > > > > > >>> <<<the energy crisis is the fault of liberals>>> > > > > > >>> Ahh, the constant conservative cry "they won't let us do what > we WANT > > > > > >>> to!" You want to build a oil refiney or a coal fired facility? > Obey > > > > > >>> the fucking environmental laws/regulations and have at it. What > you > > > > > >>> mean to say is that certain industries to not want to incur the > > > > > >>> expense of obeying the laws/regs. For example, If i want to > build an > > > > > >>> addittion to my freakin' house there are certain laws. regs and > codes > > > > > >>> i must obey. If i don't want to obey them i can't build it. if > i want > > > > > >>> to spend the money to obey those regs and codes i can. > According to > > > > > >>> the "law of supply and demand" when a commidity become scare > it's > > > > > >>> value or price goes up. If I'm a international oil company why > the > > > > > >>> fuck would I want there to be MORE oil in the world and > possibly drive > > > > > >>> down my own profits? Which makes me more money? Selling 10 > gallons at > > > > > >>> $1 each or 3 gallons at $4.10 each? AND I use up less of my > product! > > > > > >>> Easier to say the bad old environmentalists just won't LET me. > > > > > >>> For years our basic energy policy has been to use up evertone > else's > > > > > >>> oil FIRST with the long term goal being to make sure the last > feakin' > > > > > >>> barrel of oil on earth is on American soil. Besides there is no > such > > > > > >>> thing as "American owned oil". the oil belongs to the > international > > > > > >>> oil company that buys the lease, brings it up, etc. They will > sell it > > > > > >>> to whomever offers the best price, China, Japan whomever. "Our" > oil > > > > > >>> does not exist, unless of course we nationalize it like Mexico > and > > > > > >>> many other countries. Don't you believe in capitalism amd > private > > > > > >>> property? > > > > > > > >>>>>> racism, abortion, gay marriage, etc.>>> > > > > > > > >>> You got to be kidding me. Leftists "created" catagorizing > people into > > > > > >>> groups? No one noticed people were different untill liberal > pointed it > > > > > >>> out? Gay marriage? Why not? Why should only straight people be > > > > > >>> miserable? What effect does gay people getting married have to > do with > > > > > >>> your marriage? A non-issue that both sides are over-reacting > > > > > >>> to.Abortion? You don't approve, your particular religion does > not > > > > > >>> approve? So don't have one. The Supreme Court has the job and > duty of > > > > > >>> deciding what is constituional and what is not. Not you. I > think that > > > > > >>> is why they are called the "Supreme" court. look up the word. > > > > > > > >>> <<<<Foubder were conservative, etc>>> > > > > > >>> Already addressed that particular piece of horseshit. > > > > > > > >>> The rest of your post is simple whining and bitching and it's > > > > > >>> "everyone's fault other than mine". > > > > > >>> I do admire your skill at writing and expressing yourself. You > really > > > > > >>> should put it to better and more productive use. It's not HOW > you say > > > > > >>> things it's WHAT you say. You can take a steaming pile of > horseshit, > > > > > >>> put whipped cream on it with a cherry on top, put it in a nice > gift > > > > > >>> box with a silk bow and when you unwrap it it's STILL just a > steaming > > > > > >>> pile of fucking horseshit. Write some more, I'll be happy to > unwrap it > > > > > >>> for you. > > > > > > > >>> Nothing has been solved other than my killing time waiting for > my car > > > > > >>> to be finished. Have a nice day. > > > > > > > >>> On Apr 30, 8:23 am, Hollywood <[email protected]> > wrote: > > > > > > > >>>> Jim W. > > > > > > > >>>> I did not attack the messenger. In fact I complimented the > messenger > > > > > >>>> on his writing skills I attacked the message as bullshit. Your > simply > > > > > >>>> too dullwitted to understand the difference. Your problem is > that you > > > > > >>>> are a writer of a conservative political blog. Generally your > blog is > > > > > >>>> only read by > > > > ... > > > > read more ยป- Hide quoted text - > > > > - Show quoted text - > > > --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups. For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum * Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/ * It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls. * Read the latest breaking news, and more. -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
