Pittsburgh Pirates: Another nutjob goes off... - Pittsburgh Pirates

Jump to content

  • 351 Pages +
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
  • Last »
  • You cannot start a new topic
  • You cannot reply to this topic

Another nutjob goes off... The end of the world as we know it... Rate Topic: ***-- 4 Votes

#41 User is offline   DanPotashtic 

  • Most Important
  • PipPipPip
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 7,353
  • Joined: 17-November 08
  • Gender:Male

Posted 24 August 2012 - 04:59 PM

View PostDale Berra, on 24 August 2012 - 04:16 PM, said:

This thread has been hijacked beyond belief. Too bad, becauase there would actually be a lot of thread-relevant stuff to talk about today, like the New York Times' decision to run a graphic photo of this morning's victim on the front page of their website:

http://www.theatlant...wsworthy/56186/

I saw another graphic street-level shot from Reuters. But you know... Obama sucks... Romney sucks... carry on.

Don't conversations on the Internet and in real life as well end up going in directions not intended?
0

#42 User is offline   bucsbriana 

  • Bench Manager
  • PipPipPip
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 5,295
  • Joined: 26-February 09
  • Gender:Female
  • Location:Pittsburgh

Posted 24 August 2012 - 05:07 PM

View Postmonarch0, on 24 August 2012 - 05:04 PM, said:



You should not attack the rich, but aspire to be them. That is one of the founding principles.



Just curious - do you actually read what you write?
0

#43 Guest_u0007890_*

  • Group: Guests

Posted 24 August 2012 - 05:09 PM

You know what is nuts? The fact that 228 is only two lanes all the way through Seven Fields. Have Romney fix that and I'll be impressed.
1

#44 User is offline   oblongatta 

  • Supreme Overlord of the Universe
  • PipPipPipPip
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 15,395
  • Joined: 17-November 08
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:a bar
  • Interests:Whisper Fighting

Posted 24 August 2012 - 05:24 PM

View PostDale Berra, on 24 August 2012 - 04:16 PM, said:

This thread has been hijacked beyond belief. Too bad, becauase there would actually be a lot of thread-relevant stuff to talk about today, like the New York Times' decision to run a graphic photo of this morning's victim on the front page of their website:

http://www.theatlant...wsworthy/56186/

I saw another graphic street-level shot from Reuters. But you know... Obama sucks... Romney sucks... carry on.

neat. the blood looks a little too fake though, they probably should have mixed in some burnt sienna
You're pretty on the inside,
That's better than not pretty at all,
You're pretty on the inside,
Too bad I'm an outside kinda pretty guy.
0

#45 User is offline   v2burghboy 

  • Manager
  • PipPipPipPip
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 15,265
  • Joined: 24-February 09
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Pittsburgh

Posted 24 August 2012 - 05:33 PM

View Postmonarch0, on 24 August 2012 - 05:04 PM, said:

If the majority of Americans feel that way on November 6, our country has truly reached a precipice that will lead to the end of the country.


If Obama wins the election, will you move out of the country to, say, China, where you'll be blocked from visiting this message board?
1

#46 User is offline   Martini 

  • I'd Raged Have Lomo
  • PipPipPipPip
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 10,146
  • Joined: 17-November 08
  • Gender:Male

Posted 24 August 2012 - 05:40 PM

View Postoblongatta, on 24 August 2012 - 05:24 PM, said:

neat. the blood looks a little too fake though, they probably should have mixed in some burnt sienna

The blood is obviously very highly (digitally) saturated. This shit just diminishes the photo and the photographer's credibility, IMO. Not even saying the photographer did the manipulating - almost certainly the paper's editor, but it calls the entire photo into question.
Get it?
0

#47 User is offline   bucsbriana 

  • Bench Manager
  • PipPipPip
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 5,295
  • Joined: 26-February 09
  • Gender:Female
  • Location:Pittsburgh

Posted 24 August 2012 - 05:45 PM

View Postmonarch0, on 24 August 2012 - 05:09 PM, said:

Try reading something other than Cosmo Bree. Like the Federalist Papers. Then you can comment.



Wow, the Federalist papers! You must be really smart. I mean really, really smart.

I'm going to vote for Romney now.

Thank you.
0

#48 Guest_defdog_*

  • Group: Guests

Posted 24 August 2012 - 06:58 PM

Obama needs to invest in R&D. This is not fucking small enough to read Monarch's posts:

Posted Image
-1

#49 User is offline   DanPotashtic 

  • Most Important
  • PipPipPip
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 7,353
  • Joined: 17-November 08
  • Gender:Male

Posted 24 August 2012 - 07:39 PM

View Postmonarch0, on 24 August 2012 - 05:04 PM, said:

First there is a huge difference in your first paragraph. Legacy costs are crippling the government. They should be reduced at every reasonable opportunity and the private sector and people themselves should account for their future, not the government.

Look, Obama is raising taxes. He is and always has been a tax and spend liberal. Obamacare showed he loves raising taxes. They will continue to go up across the board under him. You're delusional if you think otherwise.

And all politicians are rich. Did you vote for Kerry? Why was it ok that the democrats had a super rich candidate in 2004? This idea of attacking the rich is a cancer in our society. You should not attack the rich, but aspire to be them. That is one of the founding principles. This idea of a welfare state is so contrary to American ideals, and it is no surprise that it is killing our country from within. Romney is not going to use power to keep the boot on the poor man. That is just crazy rhetoric. He is going to put the economic conditions back in place so anyone can be rich and successful if they work hard enough. It's called capitalism. Right now our anti-capitalist president has made it almost impossible to start a new business. Instead, he has subsidized being poor and encouraged it. He does not want the poor to rise up, he wants to expand the federal dole so people depend on the government for income and they will vote to keep their free checks coming. That is Obama in a nutshell and why it is just disturbing that such an anti-American was ever put in the White House. The people in the room when the Consitution was signed would have fought to the death to keep such a destructive person out of office, and youre claiming he is a better alternative just because the other guy has been successful. It's madness that anyone would feel that way. If the majority of Americans feel that way on November 6, our country has truly reached a precipice that will lead to the end of the country.

I wish I had the energy right now to respond to your argument. All I will tell you right now is that I did not vote for Kerry in 2004, I voted for Bush. I will probably respond to you sometime tomorrow when I feel like turning my brain back on.
0

#50 User is offline   Gideon Clarke 

  • GAY 4 CUTCH!!!
  • PipPipPip
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 8,395
  • Joined: 10-April 12
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Right Behind You
  • Interests:Bisexual for Kate Upton

Posted 24 August 2012 - 07:40 PM

I'm torn on the "how Americans are supposed to feel about rich people" thing. On the one hand, I wobble between Libertarian and Insane Platform Independent. On the other hand, I have a wide interpretation of the phrase "pursuit of happiness" and hate people who narrowly interpret it as "pursuit of money." Basically, I can't stand people who care a whole ton about money. They bug me personally. But I find two guys having sex disgusting, and there's no way in hell I would make it illegal, so I believe ambition/greed should be legal too.

I'd vote for a rich libertarian over a poor statist, but this election is a strong economic statist who's weak on civil liberties vs. a civil statist who will undoubtedly follow in the Republican tradition of corporate welfare to the hilt, and I tend to care more about my civil liberties than my economic ones.

Anyway, with Ron Paul running and the outcome in my state certain anyway, I don't have to decide which of these assholes to vote for, just which one I want to win. It's a tough call.

View Postmonarch0, on 24 August 2012 - 05:09 PM, said:

Try reading something other than Cosmo Bree. Like the Federalist Papers. Then you can comment.


View Postbucsbriana, on 24 August 2012 - 05:45 PM, said:

Wow, the Federalist papers! You must be really smart. I mean really, really smart.

I'm going to vote for Romney now.

Thank you.

Yeah, that was sexist and uncalled for, wasn't it?

Try reading something other than Baseball America.....(kidding. Everyone read the Federalist papers in high school.)
"You know, I wish I could go back in time and kick the shit out of the idiot who decided to make kickers part of football."

-Coach Marty Daniels
2

#51 User is offline   PSU4Lyfe 

  • Veteran Manager
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 41,837
  • Joined: 16-November 08
  • Gender:Male

Posted 24 August 2012 - 07:40 PM

View PostWinters in Holland, on 24 August 2012 - 08:02 AM, said:

You can't be serious. Do you see how much further below the line the red bars are than the blue bars?

I believe the key tipping point is when a country's debt exceeds its GDP. And I'm pretty sure we're to that point with Obama now.



Regardless of party, it looks like Clinton has the only bars above the line. How far they are doesn't seem to matter as far as I can tell.

So if you base your opinion on these bars alone, you want him back I assume?
Disclaimer: This post in no way supports nor defends the signing of Rod Barajas.
0

#52 Guest_Nickflair04_*

  • Group: Guests

Posted 24 August 2012 - 07:41 PM

I found this interesting...

http://factcheck.org...le-tax-promise/
0

#53 User is offline   bucsbriana 

  • Bench Manager
  • PipPipPip
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 5,295
  • Joined: 26-February 09
  • Gender:Female
  • Location:Pittsburgh

Posted 24 August 2012 - 07:49 PM

View PostNickflair04, on 24 August 2012 - 07:41 PM, said:

I found this interesting...




You know what else is interesting? The federalist papers. I'm just sort of pissed at myself for not reading them first before I saw the movie.

And oblongatta, don't worry - I am not going to tell you how the federalist papers end so as to spoil the reading.
0

#54 Guest_Nickflair04_*

  • Group: Guests

Posted 24 August 2012 - 07:50 PM

View PostGideon Clarke, on 24 August 2012 - 07:40 PM, said:

I tend to care more about my civil liberties than my economic ones.


This is me, too.
0

#55 Guest_Nickflair04_*

  • Group: Guests

Posted 24 August 2012 - 07:51 PM

View Postbucsbriana, on 24 August 2012 - 07:49 PM, said:

You know what else is interesting? The federalist papers. I'm just sort of pissed at myself for not reading them first before I saw the movie.

And oblongatta, don't worry - I am not going to tell you how the federalist papers end so as to spoil the reading.


I prefer Flute Prospectus.
0

#56 User is online   Dale Berra's Nose 

  • Pitching Coach
  • PipPipPip
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 9,391
  • Joined: 24-November 08

Posted 24 August 2012 - 08:05 PM

This thread needs Aso to save it.
IS THIS THE GAME THREAD???
0

#57 User is offline   Gideon Clarke 

  • GAY 4 CUTCH!!!
  • PipPipPip
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 8,395
  • Joined: 10-April 12
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Right Behind You
  • Interests:Bisexual for Kate Upton

Posted 24 August 2012 - 08:06 PM

View Postmonarch0, on 24 August 2012 - 07:58 PM, said:

At a certain point, economic problems become an infringement on your civil liberties though. We are facing that prospect in the very near future if our debt and monetary policy are not addressed immediately. Your money will be worthless and taxes will skyrocket if these problems are not addresssed. And Romney is not going to conduct more corporate welfare. In fact, he is running against corporate welfare. Its right in his platform on his website. Obama is probably the worst offender of corporate welfare in history, and certainy has spent the most money on it. Republicans have made many mistakes in the past in this area (primarily BushII), but Romney wants to get rid of government subsidies across the board. I hope he is successful at doing so and his efforts are not bogged down by lobbies.

Campaign platforms are what a candidate believes (or what a candidate believes will get him elected). A President's actions in office are determined by his party's agenda and what he can get done in the legislative climate. The mainstream of the Republican party favors corporate welfare because it favors corporate donors. I do not believe Romney will end subsidies or even make any move to do so.

Obama went nuts with the subsidies as part of the stimulus. He's an economic statist. I'm not disputing that point.

Inflation and high taxes are a bad combination, but I'm not sure how that's an infringement on my civil liberties.
"You know, I wish I could go back in time and kick the shit out of the idiot who decided to make kickers part of football."

-Coach Marty Daniels
0

#58 User is offline   DanPotashtic 

  • Most Important
  • PipPipPip
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 7,353
  • Joined: 17-November 08
  • Gender:Male

Posted 24 August 2012 - 08:06 PM

View Postmonarch0, on 24 August 2012 - 07:58 PM, said:

At a certain point, economic problems become an infringement on your civil liberties though. We are facing that prospect in the very near future if our debt and monetary policy are not addressed immediately. Your money will be worthless and taxes will skyrocket if these problems are not addresssed. And Romney is not going to conduct more corporate welfare. In fact, he is running against corporate welfare. Its right in his platform on his website. Obama is probably the worst offender of corporate welfare in history, and certainy has spent the most money on it. Republicans have made many mistakes in the past in this area (primarily BushII), but Romney wants to get rid of government subsidies across the board. I hope he is successful at doing so and his efforts are not bogged down by lobbies.

Once again, I'll respond in full to you tomorrow, but isn't spending billions on defense corporate welfare? Giving my tax money to the government so they can create weapons of mass destruction is an infringement on my civil liberties.
1

#59 User is offline   PF82 

  • no-talent goon
  • PipPipPipPip
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 19,092
  • Joined: 17-November 08
  • Gender:Not Telling
  • Location:The Danger Zone

Posted 24 August 2012 - 08:08 PM

View Postbucsbriana, on 24 August 2012 - 07:49 PM, said:

You know what else is interesting? The federalist papers. I'm just sort of pissed at myself for not reading them first before I saw the movie.


I'm pissed they had Hamilton shoot first in the movie.
"I have to admit
I thought I was shock proof"
0

#60 Guest_defdog_*

  • Group: Guests

Posted 24 August 2012 - 08:09 PM

Without all that money going straight to Halliburton, how would Dick Cheney be able to afford those robot hearts ?
0

Share this topic:


  • 351 Pages +
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
  • Last »
  • You cannot start a new topic
  • You cannot reply to this topic