Middle east outcome

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by SmokinDVM

The highlighted statement has me very worried.
What about being treated "unfairly", I'll use that here to replace "violate my rights", by those in power, in the pursuit of what they feel are in their OWN best interests?

And, where you waggle it, as long as it's covered with something, is your RIGHT. I won't pay much attention, cause I ain't shopping. Maybe those guys that can't look away, and that it makes soo nervous, need to take a deep reflective look at themselves? :smiley2:

---

As well you should be worried. People have been worried about the same thing to some degree since time immemorial. It's getting better though. You primarily get fined for indiscetions these days and not put in the stocks in town square to be pelted by rotten vegetables or worse. You seem to take the fact that I accept it, as me condoning it. That's not the case. I simply accept that it will happen to some extent. If the incident is severe enough to warrant it, I will fight it. I am a simple family man. Only one person who can't afford to be the revolutionary. Now, can I be part of a group cause that will help where it matters? Of course I can! A much more effective use of my time and money than drinking a few beers, putting on a G-string, and imitating a cheerleading squad.

I disagree about the right to "waggle". Waggling my dick in public without repercussion is NOT my right. I'm sure I could come up with innumerable laws and ordinances from various cultures to support that. What do you use to support your point of view that you have the right to run around naked, except your opinion?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Kenyth

A much more effective use of my time and money than drinking a few beers, putting on a G-string, and imitating a cheerleading squad.

---

Guess I should just cross you off my Halloween party list, then... :smiley2:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by SuperChuck

Guess I should just cross you off my Halloween party list, then... :smiley2:

---

For you SC, I'll make an exception! Do you like black or pink lace better? I'm warning you, I don't wax the bikini line! :smiley3:

I don't recall talking about anyone being nude, not that there's anything wrong with that, in public. Scantily clad, yes, but not nude.

Last I checked, it wasn't illegal to be seen in a swimming suit, well, maybe in the south, and some of those can be very revealing.

That's part of the rub, here in the U.S., it's OK to glorify violence, but a little nudity, or some sinful sex, and the shit hits the fan.

People need to grow up, and get a perspective about what's really important.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by SmokinDVM

I don't recall talking about anyone being nude, not that there's anything wrong with that, in public. Scantily clad, yes, but not nude.

Last I checked, it wasn't illegal to be seen in a swimming suit, well, maybe in the south, and some of those can be very revealing.

That's part of the rub, here in the U.S., it's OK to glorify violence, but a little nudity, or some sinful sex, and the shit hits the fan.

People need to grow up, and get a perspective about what's really important.

---

Gender correct bathing suit= OK (In an area where shirt and shoes are not required apparel)

Underwear or nude= arrested

Non-gender correct bathing suit= Gray area. You'd have to check the laws. A judge would have to interpret them.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by SmokinDVM

They should be arrested, IF THEY ARE ACTUALLY DOING SOMETHING ILLEGAL. I doubt most of these people were.

---

That would imply you don't know, "doubting" most of these people were... I wouldn't want to bank on it. That's an awfully dangerous limb to be hanging out on...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ggiese

That would imply you don't know, "doubting" most of these people were... I wouldn't want to bank on it. That's an awfully dangerous limb to be hanging out on...

---

OK, how about this...

All eye-witness accounts of the incidents described NO ILLEGAL ACTIVITIES. LEO gets involved simply because they either personally don't like the people, or have been told to aggressively suppress them.
Either way, they should get some extra jack-boot wax out of the deal, if nothing else.

If they did nothing illegal, broke no ordnance, and were arrested or detained anyway, let them take it to court.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Kenyth

If they did nothing illegal, broke no ordnance, and were arrested or detained anyway, let them take it to court.

---

I sure hope they don't get an "activist" judge. :smiley2:

It seems to liberalism is just an attempt to make reckless or bad behavior accepable and to use the constitution as they see fit.

Barry...The typical liberal... Reminds me of a small child that gets caught misbehaving and will say or do anything to justify what he has done.

cigar no baka is dead on in his comment about Barry. Barry is more interested in being arrogant than trying to get his point across...In reality he has no point...Only hostility toward anyone that chooses to debate him.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by cigarsarge

It seems to liberalism is just an attempt to make reckless or bad behavior accepable and to use the constitution as they see fit.

Barry...The typical liberal... Reminds me of a small child that gets caught misbehaving and will say or do anything to justify what he has done.

cigar no baka is dead on in his comment about Barry. Barry is more interested in being arrogant than trying to get his point across...In reality he has no point...Only hostility toward anyone that chooses to debate him.

---

:smiley36: :smiley36:

Talk about childish. :smiley24:

Typical neocon. When you can't think of any more idiotic rationalizations for stupid actions, you cry "whiney liberal", or arrogant, or you whine how the liberals just hate all the time. BULLSHIT!

The childish, whiney, thin skinned babies are the neocons. Examples provided above.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by cigarsarge

It seems to liberalism is just an attempt to make reckless or bad behavior accepable and to use the constitution as they see fit.

Barry...The typical liberal... Reminds me of a small child that gets caught misbehaving and will say or do anything to justify what he has done.

cigar no baka is dead on in his comment about Barry. Barry is more interested in being arrogant than trying to get his point across...In reality he has no point...Only hostility toward anyone that chooses to debate him.

---

Amen brother, amen!!

baka...you are a hateful prick...you deserve shrub...

I wish I could figure out what liberalism and conservatism are.

I consider myself pretty liberal. To me, that means I'm concerned with the rights of people and I'm open to new ideas. By my definition, I see a lot of republicans as liberal. There are many republicans I admire and some I've voted for.

I actually enjoy a balanced government. I like to see a Congress majority of one party and a President from the other.

Well, anyway. Does anyone have a good definition of liberalism and conservativism that doesn't involve "liberals are crybaby pantywaists" or "conservatives are nazi jackasses"?

I'm also curious why more liberals seem to post during the day and more conservatives tend to post in the evening... :smiley1:

Or is it that there are more moderates during the day?

I think liberalism tends to be more socialist. They would like to see the govt. support the population. It also appears to me that no one is apparently responsible for anything they do. If you do something wrong, or don't succeed, or something is hard, then it must be because of some external force as opposed to your own actions.

Conservatism appears to me to be about going out in life and making bucks for yourself, and maybe stepping on a few pee-ons in the process. I don't think conservatism in itself has anything to do with religion, but it makes sense that a religious person may tend to be more conservative.

As far as politics goes, that is just a matter of saying the right things to the people above you in order to advance yourself.

Most importantly, who gives a shit? I mean, you think what you think. I doubt anyone is entirely on one side or the other on every issue. In this thread, I am probably labeled as a conservative, because my views on terrorism and criminals tend to align on that side. But if we are talking about science, drugs, or abortion I would probably seem liberal to a lot.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by WhiteWidow

Most importantly, who gives a shit? I mean, you think what you think. I doubt anyone is entirely on one side or the other on every issue. In this thread, I am probably labeled as a conservative, because my views on terrorism and criminals tend to align on that side. But if we are talking about science, drugs, or abortion I would probably seem liberal to a lot.

---

Yeah, that's what I think is kind of funny about the whole issue...

You mentioned liberals as being more "government as mommy". While I consider myself pretty liberal, I'm also pretty capitalist. I'm opposed to things like a welfare state and social security (I fall in the middle on healthcare).

It seems like there are several viewpoints glommed into these two categories. If I were a hardliner on drugs, but a capitalist, would I have to flip a coin? :smiley1:

http://www.pages.drexel.edu/~garfinkm/Spectrum.gif

From Wikipedia...

Quote:

---

Multiplicity of interpretation of the left-right axis

There are various different opinions about what is actually being measured along this axis, and lines often blur among parties. For more detail see the main article Left-Right politics:

* Equality of outcome (left) versus equality of right (right).
* Redistribution of wealth and income (left), or acceptance of inequalities as a result of the free market (right).
* Whether the government's policy on the economy should be interventionist (left) or laissez-faire (right).
* Support for widened lifestyle choices (left), or support for traditional values (right).
* Whether the state should prioritise equality (left) or liberty (right). Both the left and the right tend to speak in favor of both equality and liberty - but they have different interpretations.
* Whether human nature is more malleable (left) or intrinsic (right).
* Whether the government should promote secularism (left) or religious morality (right).
* Collectivism (left) versus individualism (right).
* Support for internationalism (left), or national interest (right).

These definitions are further blurred by the difference in practice of left and right policies, for example the "leftist" nationalism of Latin America, the "rightist" corporate protectionist policies of the United States, and the individualist philosophy of ideologies like anarcho-capitalism.

---

This really is a fascinating study - politics. I recently had to take a course, to complete my degree, in US Politics. We studied all of the various areas of the political spectrum in the US Democratic system... And while it may seem to be a pretty wide range of views between the Democrats and Republicans, Liberals vs. Conservatives, "Righties" vs. "Lefties", the truth of the matter is - we are actually much closer in overall philosophy between the two sides than some of the other political systems in the world out there ...

I believe that's why our political system is so successful. We really aren't that far apart, but it does keep a good balance on the overall democratic system by having disagreement - a way or process to address our grievances openly, disagree on the issues, and in the end really not be that far apart (compromise is always fairly close at hand)...

I wouldn't cease to function if another Democratic president were in office - anymore than the Democrats are washed up with Bush in office. He's only got a coupla more years and it's time for him to move on. Just like the span Clinton was in office...