Constructive gadfly
Published on November 16, 2004 By stevendedalus In Politics

Seventy percent of the populace believed Iraq had direct ties to Al Qaeda;

A third believed weapons of mass destruction were found in Iraq;

The war in Afghanistan in all intents and purposes is over;

Fallujah was the only pocket of insurgency remaining;

Moral issues are more important than terrorism;

Gays’ incursion upon marriage is an intent to upstage American lifestyle;

Those with “safe” jobs don’t think outsourcing is a problem;

Hollywood is the root of all sins;

Urbanites, unions, and Dixie Chicks are the new axis of evil;

Embryonic stem cells will be thawed for insemination;

Abortion is premeditated murder;

A woman’s choice is but a nagging vestige of women’s liberation;

A president who thinks too much necessarily lacks resolve;

A president who takes us to war— provided he’s a Republican — has resolve;

Those who do not attend church frequently have no concept of morality;

Tax cuts for the wealthy are essential for a thriving economy;

Though we are a Christian nation, others should be secular;

Keeping insurance companies happy is more important than universal health care;

Malpractice is simply an occupational hazard;

AK47s are essential to hunting because there are many animals that are too damned elusive;

To Christianize public institutions is the way of the Lord;

Massachusetts is for losers;

Bruce Springsteen is no longer boss.

Tort reform is essential to save business and health providers [less than 2% of costs];

Building new prisons is more important than repairing schools.

A president who never makes a mistake is preferable to a nuanced flip-flopper.


Comments (Page 3)
4 Pages1 2 3 4 
on Nov 25, 2004
I'm quite certain your resident "butt-head" is quite fine, in good shape, and plotting to over-throw any conservative quite soon...



Nice to see that community spirit is alive and well at JU!

on Nov 25, 2004
I love you guys.......oh screw you guys - Eric Cartman
on Nov 27, 2004
That does a much better job of making your point.
You're much too kind, Texaii.
They belong to the owner of the company, it's the company's money paying the salaries not yours or mine. It's also the company paying the benefits.
You have been seriously brainwashed. And hunters get them anyway. AK47 is semi-automatic but with a thirty round cartridge clip and a heavy trigger finger it might just as well be fully automatic. 
on Nov 27, 2004
I am a Republican, Christian, with a strong concept of morality that does not attend any church frequently or infrequently.
THen, I trust, you are resentful of the Christian Right that thinks only church goers have a high degree of morality.


No, actually, I am not resentful of the Christian Right! First, I reserve "resent" for those that have personnally hurt me. Second, I have never seen the "Christian Right" state that only church-goers have a high degree of morality. Third, even if they did, their statement doesn't affect or hurt me in the slightest.

on Nov 27, 2004

Reply #34 By: stevendedalus - 11/27/2004 1:09:54 AM
You have been seriously brainwashed. And hunters get them anyway. AK47 is semi-automatic but with a thirty round cartridge clip and a heavy trigger finger it might just as well be fully automatic.


You are the one who is brainwashed my good man! Check the link

Link

The real AK-47 is NOT a semi automatic weapon, it's full auto So my statement stands.


The weapon was developed for motorized infantry, adopted for service with the Soviet Army in 1949 and designated the AK-47. It was not provided with a bayonet.

Characteristics Caliber, mm 7.62

Cartridge 7.62x39

Sighting radius, mm 378

Length, overal, mm 870

Barrel Length, mm 415

Magazine capacity, rds 30

Sighting range, m 800

Weight w/empty magazine, g 4300

Weight w/loaded magazine, g 4876

Rate of fire, rds/min 600

Muzzle velocity, m/s 700

Killing range, m 1500

Rifling Grooves 4

Rifled Bore, mm 378



Now there *is* a civilian version and they are generally known as AK-47's but truth be told they are not AK-47's


.

You shouldn't pass this misinformation along. You *can't* even own an AK-47! A true AK is an automatic firearm and as such is not legal to own. Not unless you have some serious permits from BATF!


on Nov 27, 2004

Reply #34 By: stevendedalus - 11/27/2004 1:09:54 AM
You have been seriously brainwashed. And hunters get them anyway. AK47 is semi-automatic but with a thirty round cartridge clip and a heavy trigger finger it might just as well be fully automatic.


You are the one who is brainwashed my good man! Check the link

Link

The real AK-47 is NOT a semi automatic weapon, it's full auto So my statement stands.


The weapon was developed for motorized infantry, adopted for service with the Soviet Army in 1949 and designated the AK-47. It was not provided with a bayonet.

Characteristics Caliber, mm 7.62

Cartridge 7.62x39

Sighting radius, mm 378

Length, overal, mm 870

Barrel Length, mm 415

Magazine capacity, rds 30

Sighting range, m 800

Weight w/empty magazine, g 4300

Weight w/loaded magazine, g 4876

Rate of fire, rds/min 600

Muzzle velocity, m/s 700

Killing range, m 1500

Rifling Grooves 4

Rifled Bore, mm 378



Now there *is* a civilian version and they are generally known as AK-47's but truth be told they are not AK-47's


.

You shouldn't pass this misinformation along. You *can't* even own an AK-47! A true AK is an automatic firearm and as such is not legal to own. Not unless you have some serious permits from BATF!


I have proof to backup what I'm saying....Do you?
on Nov 29, 2004
What you are saying, then, is that I should have placed and asterisk next to AK47[*]? ... Whatever, in my book it doesn't hold a candle to the old Browning Automatic Rifle. As for brainwashing, you seem to think that the employer possesses divine right.
on Nov 29, 2004

Reply #38 By: stevendedalus - 11/29/2004 1:47:53 AM
What you are saying, then, is that I should have placed and asterisk next to AK47[*]? ... Whatever, in my book it doesn't hold a candle to the old Browning Automatic Rifle. As for brainwashing, you seem to think that the employer possesses divine right.


No an AK-47 can never hold a candle to a BAR. And no the employer holds no *divine* right. But without the employer there would be *no* job and/or *no* paycheck now would there? So again I must ask just who does the job belong to?
on Nov 30, 2004
The job belongs to the village.
on Nov 30, 2004
Reply #40 By: stevendedalus - 11/30/2004 1:36:48 AM
The job belongs to the village.


Sorry but that dog don't hunt.

without the employer there would be *no* job and/or *no* paycheck now would there?


Since it's the employers money paying for the job, legally the job belongs to the employer. Not the government or anyone else for that matter.
When the government starts paying the salary for the job *then* it belongs to the government.
on Nov 30, 2004
hehe - it's funny that you are being pedantic about a gun... kind of nails stevendedalus' point home.

I kind of had sick laughter coming from those statements... the first 5 had me falling of my chair... and then I realised it wasn't a joke, and then that Australia is almost as faaaarked.

I am an island
on Dec 03, 2004
Thanks, Muggaz, for jabbing drmiler's sophistry.
on Dec 03, 2004
Do you really believe these stereotypes you have presented? The people I know "on the other side" from your viewpoints don't believe these things.

I suppose it is easier to demonize people who don't agree with you if you claim all of them are stupid by painting an image with these broad statements. If these statements were true of all the people you are attributing them to, then they would be very easy to hate. Too bad it is nothing more than your personal claim. I don't know how this can not come off to your supporters as anything more than a biased characterization. I guess they want to believe it too.
on Dec 03, 2004
Bah, both sides do this sort of 'glossing over' of the other's ideas.

Bush supporters are moronic, fascist, nazis

Kerry supporters are tree-hugging, flip-flopping, wussies who want to make the usa the UN's bitch.

There are examples of both (KKK and PETA), but neither are indicative of their respective party platforms.
The problem is that each party has let the bulk of their members be painted with such broad strokes, and has let the other side get away with it. That is a big reason Kerry lost, because he allowed himself to be painted as an indecisive waffler during the election. He focused so much on his pointless and irrelevant military record that he totally forgot the contemporary issues and made no effort to assert himself. This, plus his tendancy to make contradictory statements later (I believe in a woman's right to an abortion, but I believe life begins at conception), were probably the two most political major factors in his defeat.

His most powerful non-political factor?
The fact that Christians who may or may not have been supportive of Bush or Kerry were mobilized due to a supermajority disagreeing with the concept of abortion while simultaneously believing in Bush's 'moral values.'
on Dec 03, 2004
Bah, both sides do this sort of 'glossing over' of the other's ideas.


I agree this happens, but I don't think saying "both sides do it" is a free pass for everyone to keep doing it. I try not to do it personally and try to point it out when it happens. We can't control what "everyone on both sides" does, but we can control what we do and try to bring some honesty to the small area around us.
4 Pages1 2 3 4