Mccain Picks hott slut as running mate
[views:66993][posts:259]_________________________________________
[Sep 3,2008 10:57am - Conservationist ""]
I think she's referring to the use of attributions to the Creator, God, etc. in public discourse:
http://www.canadafreepress.com/2005/hagan113005.htm
Many of us would rather it go.
[Sep 3,2008 11:49am - FuckIsMySignature ""]
HAHAHA ICY HOT STUNTAZ!!!!
[Sep 3,2008 12:47pm - Yeti ""]
Conservationist said:And their oldest convergence, National Socialism.
say what you will about the tenets of National Socialism dude, at least its an ethos.
[Sep 3,2008 2:22pm - Conservationist ""]
cool mustaches++
[Sep 3,2008 3:34pm - largefreakatzero ""]
the_reverend said:I <3 the internet >
[img]
I would only hope this photo opportunity was followed by the dumb broad with the gun shooting the 2 retards then taking her own life. Why are these people alive...
[Sep 3,2008 5:57pm - Conservationist ""]
Because EVERYONE IS EQUAL and they have a RIGHT TO LIFE.
lol
[Sep 3,2008 6:02pm - READ ""]
so who here is voting mccain?
[Sep 3,2008 7:28pm - Conservationist ""]
Voting Paul or Kucinich here. Fuck 'em!
[Sep 3,2008 7:40pm - FuckIsMySignature ""]
vote with a bullet
[Sep 3,2008 8:03pm - ellesarusrex ""]
all of alaskan politicians are corrupt scumbags and im sick of hearing about this bitches desperate housewives pregnancy scandal and her 17 yr old daughter whoring out retarded children.
[Sep 3,2008 9:10pm - mortalis ""]
bennyhillifier
lol
[Sep 3,2008 10:18pm - ellesarusrex ""]
HAHAHAHAHAHAHA stoked on that
[Sep 3,2008 11:46pm - the_reverend ""]
way to embed.
I'm voting viccodin.
[Sep 4,2008 8:05am - thuringwethil ""]
anyone hear her speech at the RNC?
pass.
[Sep 4,2008 8:19am - Mycroft ""]
zyklon said:I fucking hate her now, she's a hunter.......
YO WHAT U GOT AGAINST HUNTERS! i've been upland bird and waterfowl hunting since i was a tot. Grew up with labs but own a deutsch drahthaar (bad ass german dog) and I'm a :gun: nut and into thrash. i thought there were a few bird huntin' guys on here!
anyway this dame is a MILF everyone says but I don't see that. Maybe...
[Sep 4,2008 8:39am - oscarct ""]
thuringwethil said:anyone hear her speech at the RNC?
pass.
not interested in anything she or mccain have to say. I was getting a semi watching it thouygh
[Sep 4,2008 9:26am - largefreakatzero ""]
Mycroft said:
zyklon said:I fucking hate her now, she's a hunter.......
YO WHAT U GOT AGAINST HUNTERS! i've been upland bird and waterfowl hunting since i was a tot. Grew up with labs but own a deutsch drahthaar (bad ass german dog) and I'm a :gun: nut and into thrash. i thought there were a few bird huntin' guys on here!
anyway this dame is a MILF everyone says but I don't see that. Maybe...
This kid hates hunters. He posted some bullshit in one of my threads too.
I hate Palin, but not because she's a hunter, because she's a right-to-life Christian freak.
[Sep 4,2008 9:27am - largefreakatzero ""]
thuringwethil said:anyone hear her speech at the RNC?
pass.
RNC = Biggest. Collection. of Creeps. Ever.
Fuck all these clowns, I'm voting for Barr.
[Sep 4,2008 9:27am - oscarct ""]
no more abortion
[Sep 4,2008 12:39pm - FuckIsMySignature ""]
worst speech ever. her voice is annoying and all she did was talk about her stupid family followed by a barage of anti-obama retoric (sp?). Not one mention about the republican agenda or how they are planning to fix this countries screwed up economy.
[Sep 4,2008 1:12pm - Conservationist ""]
largefreakatzero said:I hate Palin, but not because she's a hunter, because she's a right-to-life Christian freak.
It would be a shame if trivial issues like abortion and drugs defined a political future that is much broader.
[Sep 4,2008 1:16pm - anonymous ""]
not trivial if you, like half the population, happen to have a uterus
[Sep 4,2008 1:20pm - READ ""]
I wouldnt trust her as vice president or president if something were to happen to mccain. I also wouldnt trust her to make me fucking lunch. This Lady is the devil in womens clothing. All she did was talk shit in a demeaning way that made me want to watch her hang herself on stage. If they get in office I want to find who voted for them and GAS those people.
[Sep 4,2008 1:30pm - Conservationist ""]
anonymous said:not trivial if you, like half the population, happen to have a uterus
No, trivial.
If the country fucks up in direction, you pay a bigger price.
Yes, it'd be nice, but in the meantime, you try not to fuck up and get pregnant. If you do, off to Mexico. Oh well.
It'd be nice to have legal drugs, too, but it's not an issue that should DECIDE THE FUTURE OF THE WHOLE COUNTRY, don't you think?
[Sep 4,2008 6:25pm - the_reverend ""]
some how the "best and brightest" loved her speech. proving once again that they are neither.
[Sep 4,2008 7:54pm - Hoser ""]
It was a great speech, sorry nerds. And Rudy's stab at Biden was hilarious.
And to the anti-hunter....you can be responsible for cleaning up the bodies of all of the animals that would die of starvation and CWD if it weren't for ethical hunting in this country.
Hunters do more for conservation than every anti-hunting group in this country COMBINED.
[Sep 4,2008 7:57pm - the_reverend ""]
Hoser said:It was a great speech, sorry nerds.Proving once again that hoser is neither the best nor the brightest.
Unless her speech was "time for this boat anchor to cook some dinner" she lost.
[Sep 4,2008 8:07pm - thuringwethil ""]
Her speech had well delivered theatrics, I just happen to disagree with the radical religious right wing. They want to take all of your freedom away. Metal included.
[Sep 4,2008 8:08pm - thuringwethil ""]
If she becomes president I'm crawling under a boulder.
[Sep 4,2008 8:11pm - the_reverend ""]
she might make sure that something lives in your virginer, but she won't tax it.
[Sep 4,2008 8:14pm - the_reverend ""]
[img]
[Sep 4,2008 8:44pm - mortalis ""]
she energized the base, sure, but i'd be surprised if she brings over any undecided voters with her words. more jingoistic, nationalistic bullshit from the fringe right. i like how kerry took the wind out of those attacks with his remarks on patriotism in his speech, but he didn't have a speech according to the media.
and why the fuck do people want an average joe like themselves to have the hardest job in the country/world? i want my president to be elite, to be better than me.
[Sep 4,2008 8:49pm - Hoser ""]
thuringwethil said:Her speech had well delivered theatrics, I just happen to disagree with the radical religious right wing. They want to take all of your freedom away. Metal included.
Let's not forget Tipper Gore, nerds.
[Sep 4,2008 8:50pm - Hoser ""]
That's what I love about you Dems....you hear only what you want to hear, and forget only what you want to forget. I get a kick outta you guys!!! *lightly punches Dem pal on shoulder*
[Sep 4,2008 9:15pm - FuckIsMySignature ""]
the_reverend said:[img]
I tell you hwhattt thats the damn truth right there :duffbeer:
[Sep 4,2008 9:28pm - the_reverend ""]
It will be hilarious when one of her daughters fuck a black dude and they sweep the abortion under the table.
[Sep 4,2008 9:56pm - Conservationist ""]
thuringwethil said:Her speech had well delivered theatrics, I just happen to disagree with the radical religious right wing. They want to take all of your freedom away. Metal included.
And the left wing doesn't?
Ruby Ridge and Waco.
[Sep 4,2008 10:04pm - nick327 ""]
Metal (or whatever art form is the target this week) will always be attacked by both parties to gain political favor with the "protect the children" crowd. This is NOT a problem with only the right wing.
In the end, nothing ever comes of it, nothing ever will. Your freedom to listen to any type of music isn't in any danger in this country.
[Sep 4,2008 10:21pm - the_reverend ""]
tell that to a child rape rapcore band.
[Sep 4,2008 11:44pm - Dankill ""]
No one likes metal
We need a strictly pro-Metal party.
[Sep 5,2008 12:42am - pam ""]
Murph said:
Conservationist said:
pam said:I was saying it was hilarious because her mother wants all forms of birth control banned and touts her perfect family moral family values bullshit like a fucking badge.
So if your kid screws up, it was because you were a hypocrite?
Really, it doesn't matter much to me, but if you're about to tote policies that enforce a "Christian" sense of lifestyle, having your unwed teenage daughter be pregnant is not exactly the best PR. In a liberal sense it could be an application for 'incredible' family strength and devotion to 'progressive' parenting, however, in Palin's case it's a blemish. She's not being hypocritical because her daughter made a choice outside of her supposed rearing, but rather her daughter made a choice that does not coincide with her beliefs. Most of the time that wouldn't matter, unless the person promulgating such beliefs is allowing them to consciously affect one of the largest political arenas in the world.
Palin should come under criticism here not because of her daughter's pregnancy, but because that pregnancy invalidates her platform, ie strong 'moral' education SHOULD lead to 'better' sexual, hence pre-parental choice.
There's no need to be linear in our thinking here: it's not Palin's deal her daughter is pregnant, her daughter fucked the guy. It is a reminder, however, that people make choices and to be so doctrinal about such decisions is novelty. Shit happens, why not be liberal in such a sense and make things easier, not harder.
Exactly. Beautifully put.
[Sep 5,2008 1:32am - menstrual_sweatpants_disco ""]
[img]
[Sep 5,2008 1:52am - Hungtableed ""]
Murph said:
Conservationist said:
Murph said:
Conservationist said:
Minds are mostly deterministic; see THE BLANK SLATE by STEVEN PINKER. You are your abilities, and those determine most of your outlook.
Further, I'm aware that for most situations, there is one good approach with some variations; anything else is pretense.
For this reason, I see that people are inherently divided by their degree of realism and that for the most part, it is inherent.
I am not speaking of states superceding Federal law, as one might have to do in order to secede from the nation.
I am speaking of states' rights applying in scope, so that certain laws (abortion, gun control, drugs, etc) could be seen as within the realm of the state and not the federation.
This was how America was originally designed, 1776-1789, and it works best when there is no consensus and there's unlikely to be one.
(Not to split hairs, but this is actually a separate issue from ethnonationalism. The reasons for ethnonationalism are many; I'm talking here about the divisions within the electorate as a whole, and I believe it would also apply to an all-white or all-black electorate in America, and so on. The word PARASITE is not used to refer to a specific genetic group, just people who behave like parasites. I think we all know them and realize they are not limited to any one ethnic group, although some will argue they occur in different percentages in different ethnic groups; my argument is that PARASITISM occurs as a psychology and that nations are healthier without much of it.)
I will look into the book by Pinker, but to say 'You are your abilities' is not fact, but thesis, as ranging someone's abilities is a matter of outside perspective, not introspection. My point was not against the realm of causation, but rather that the combination of more possible outlooks serves to allow the construction of ideas, and the synthesis of those ideas (such as the formulas we are using to create this argument, and the materials used to create opinions).
Determinism is a doctrine, not some infallible principle. I think it is safe to say anomalies exist, as you open up to by stating that one's abilities determine MOST of a person's outlook. Another part of a person's outlook is their rearing, another instance in life where a certain type of childhood does not always produce the expected product. Perhaps here I could inject a bit of breadth and social responsibility into your point of there being usually 'one good approach' with some variations' when confronting an issue. Even if your point is true, those making the decisions, along with their consideration of those the decisions affect are the basic tenets of human interaction and responsibility. Here is where the theory of determinism holds ground, as the causes to all human issues does in some way affect all humans, no matter how miniscule it might be.
I agree people are divided by their different sense of what is real, however, Zilboorg points out 'The sense of reality is not the static result of a certain psychological developmental process but is fluid and changeable.' If it was not, people would not have a sense of idealism, which affects one's choices (in my case, one might say a sense of 'nostalgic escapism.') Differing senses of realism in society push forward new ideas, new modes, and drive forms of expression. Even if our sense of reality is inherent, isn't it possible the admiration or condemnation of someone else's might affect our own?
To put it flatly, our sense of the 'state' is not the same as it was when the country was formed. These states were instrumental in serving one goal (albeit somewhat sub-conciously) which was to bring forth differing ideals, and through the interaction of this multinational congregation, we formed a federation to serve each person equally. The state is a conduit of the federation, not an undermining body. The United States is an experiment in breaking the barriers that you for some reason feel so akin to, which are band/tribal in theme.
America lived from 1776-1787 under the Articles of Confederation. Let's be realistic, they were too weak. The reason? Their divisiveness.
To say parasites are found less in conservative areas is to state that conservatism usually isn't a parasite itself. It is subjective. We are all dregs in our own way. As you stated before, people are divided due to their sense of realism, which here would place the function of parasite to mean something to you, and something else to another. If we are surrounding ourselves with only those akin to us, WE WILL DIE OUT. It is the ability to see our opposite and live with it that strengthens our own perceptions.
Satre pined to create his Existentialist credo as the answer to many of the 'extreme issues' Marxism, through its tenets of materialism and determinism, could not. Yet, as we progress through the works, we see that Existenialism at its reduction was a 'parasite' of Marxism. Interesting.
sprinkle some fries on those CUPCAKES.
All facts are theses, by this definition, because undiscovered correlative facts could change their meanings
" the combination of more possible outlooks serves to allow the construction of ideas" -- yet you assume each of those are distinct ideas, and that they are not self-serving. Are humans not on the whole self-serving? And of 10,000 men, do you not find four or five ideas repeated in different form?
Determinism is a doctrine, but so is its opposite. And if we admit that both predetermined capabilities (nature) and learned capabilities (nurture) influence a person, cannot we reverse your argument and say that there is no proof anomalies are only anomalies, and that if most people follow the pattern of nature being MORE IMPORTANT THAN nurture, that it is the guiding principle here?
Name exceptions, if you would, otherwise... I sense fantasy on the wing, and recommend you read Pinker. First, intelligence is wholly heritable, barring negative events. It cannot be improved. With education it can be guided, but a 105 never outpaces a 125 on the IQ scale. So we can see the trend goes in one way but not the other.
"Zilboorg points out 'The sense of reality is not the static result of a certain psychological developmental process but is fluid and changeable.' If it was not, people would not have a sense of idealism" -- no agreement here whatsoever, as it does not account for people being hardwired toward that idealism, or that idealism being a compensative factor (cognitive dissonance). Differing senses of realism -- but there is one reality -- so you are saying that people being in error contributes somehow to discourse? Really? Only if one does not ever want to arrive at an answer, an event feared only by those who are afraid of what that answer means FOR THEM PERSONALLY.
As to your points about the division of states, consider this: right now, the country is vastly divided. No one side wins for long. Who loses? The people, as they have inconsistent leadership that spends more time infighting than addressing actual issues. A sign of a declining civilization... the original ideas of confederation, based on the 13 colonies, would free successful areas from obligation to other areas, and vice versa. It would be no more divisive than now because the opinions of individuals would remain the same, so would the division in society.
"To say parasites are found less in conservative areas is to state that conservatism usually isn't a parasite itself. It is subjective. We are all dregs in our own way. As you stated before, people are divided due to their sense of realism, which here would place the function of parasite to mean something to you, and something else to another. " -- ah, a semantic argument! To say the word parasite means one thing to someone, and another to something else, does not change the DEFINITION OF PARASITE, only the term used to refer to it. We can play word games all day long.
Why do conservative areas have fewer parasites? Because they are less concerned with inequality, and so do not support as many parasites. Compare the midwest to the coasts.
"If we are surrounding ourselves with only those akin to us, WE WILL DIE OUT. It is the ability to see our opposite and live with it that strengthens our own perceptions." -- this doesn't follow. If we are surrounded by those near us, AND WE ARE REALISTIC, we have no need for these partially realistic delusional perspectives you speak so highly of.
Marxism is a distillation of Hegelianism, or the idea that through conflict we arrive at a higher form of socialization. Well, let's see... planet in ruins, still constant conflict, nuclear proliferation, pollution, less literacy and more people... I think Hegelianism has failed. Other than our technology, are we better off or worse off than in the past?
We will die out, I'd argue, if we cannot find reality and agree on it, which does not mean that every perspective can be considered equally.
This has been your most forced post yet.
Intelligence may be inheritable, but to strip away the potential for advancement for a single mind at any time is a waste of what it is to be human, which, barring INJURY OR DISEASE is a constant POTENTIAL for growth. It might seem fitting to be cynical, but it is in no way close to reality. Some people born into considerably low-functioning, low-stimulus environments go on to live lives of incredible intellect and cognitive function. Your NATURE vs. NURTURE argument follows trend in situations most often when the standard of living in a particular area matches the education provided to those in the area ie. the ability to 'move up' correlates to the position deemed at birth or through economic status during the formative years. It is impossible to deem 'anomalies' just 'anomalies' because those anomalies produce the results that move the margins and shift perceived life expectancies past perceived limits. They are useful to actuaries, perhaps, but in real life, your hunches are just that: hunches.
I never consider that all ideas are constructive, yet it is impossible to be exacting when dealing with influence in the structure of the human mind and its ingenuity. Why play safe and categorically say that within a certain group of people, only this permutation of ideas can be created, deemed to be of only so much worth? Why is it that 4-5 ideas so similar mean less? Perhaps that is an indication of an idea holding more weight that 4-5 answers of vastly different properties? WHY BE SO EXACTING?
A 105 never outpaces a 125 on the scale? So the higher an IQ score the better quality of life someone can have? There is no need for an intelligent answer here because no matter how a person scores on a HUMAN test administered to measure PERCEIVED intelligence, to negate free choice in the destiny of any individual is to deny what is essentially human: some may be provided with a natural advantage, but it is to the individual to use that in a way that prospers. A 105 could lead a much more fulfilling life than a 125 if the 125 makes choices that do not fit with the normative being of society.
Someone being in error does account to discourse. While perhaps a bit cheeky for argumentative purposes, it is impossible to grasp the most normative behaviors without studying their most deviant possibilities. No single person's mind is able to comprehend all things in the most sound of ways, as the mathematics just weigh too heavy in the favor of error.
Your points about confederation are simply personal taste, and favor nothing of reality. Your point of inconsistent leadership is laughable, as having 13 states within a single nation with as much power as you propose would lead to 13 individual voices of (hopefully) equal power and might? Oh, that's right, some states who 'have it right' should not have to worry about those 'in the wrong.' There is no textbook that can solve the issues we have, which is why, as a united nation we use the platofrms of states to present problems which, as a whole, can be used to advance each state in its own way. WHERE'S THE FLEXIBILITY? And to be so wry as to say my parasitic point was a semantic argument means you've never studied a language outside of your native tongue: a perceived 'universal' definition of a word does not exist! In some biological cases a parasite can be something wholly negative or wholly necessary (japanese beetle vs. caituru fish). The definition of parasite is an arbitrary title: to place so much upon a perceived meaning is too rigid.
Also, I'm am neither a Marxist or neo-Marxist, so there is no need to fret. Your incredulous attitude toward my want for differing views is just too shortsighted: of course not every point-of-view holds the same weight, but that's not what I'm proposing. The fact is, there is not much we can do to affect the fact that no matter how streamlined and uniform our education system could possibly be, some people will believe and act just how the feel necessary, even in some cases completely in the face of convention and rationality. But we cannot cut those people off from ourselves. Discourse, now as much as ever before, keeps ourselves relevant. Every aspect of life, from humor to politics deals with cultural relevance. I just do not see how your ideas of separatism could at all benefit our way of life: you must realize no matter how we try only a fraction of the population could even participate in the argument we're having. There are only so many biological factors one can process in order to understand people until we being to realize that some people just choose to function at a certain level.
You guys really care that much?
[Sep 5,2008 1:53am - Hungtableed ""]
...Someone post more sh000ped nudes of this slut.
[Sep 5,2008 7:56am - thuringwethil ""]
Conservationist said:
thuringwethil said:Her speech had well delivered theatrics, I just happen to disagree with the radical religious right wing. They want to take all of your freedom away. Metal included.
And the left wing doesn't?
Ruby Ridge and Waco.
I don't wholly trust the left, either.
Either extreme is baaaaaaad news. I learned my lesson from my Dad (who turned out to be a spy during the Spanish Civil War)
AND from Orwell's parable "Animal Farm"
[Sep 5,2008 8:01am - thuringwethil ""]
Hoser said:That's what I love about you Dems....you hear only what you want to hear, and forget only what you want to forget. I get a kick outta you guys!!! *lightly punches Dem pal on shoulder*
that's a problem with ANYONE involved in politics. We're just a bunch of tribes. Everyone thinks their way is the only way.
Mind you, I'm not decrying it, I acknowledge our nature. Problem is we almost never DEBATE. oh well
this Presidential race is gonna be interesting at least :ralphie:
[Sep 5,2008 10:20am - Conservationist ""]
thuringwethil said:that's a problem with ANYONE involved in politics. We're just a bunch of tribes.
This is a fairly mature statement, in my view, and one that's taboo if you really look into what's being said, but one of the more realistic things said here.
I don't think any one tribe should subsidize another, and then the problem will be solved. Don't you?
http://www.anus.com/etc/texas
[Sep 5,2008 10:22am - Conservationist ""]
Hungtableed said:You guys really care that much?
What Murph and I have is special. You're just jealous.
LOL YES I care that much. Future of the country affects all of us indirectly but inevitably.
Future of humanity... well, fuck, who wouldn't rather be part of a succeeding species than one that's stagnant? Let's explore the stars, rape baby jesus, invent even better symphonies, have cooler wars, etc.
[Sep 5,2008 12:06pm - READ ""]
That waco shit was well deserved on that asshole David koresh. He was a fucking child molester piece of shit. Ruby ridge is a different story.
[Sep 5,2008 11:15pm - Conservationist ""]
Military force against civilians? Shoot first, then massacre?
Agreed on Ruby Ridge.