Hey libs, I want a divorce...
Printed From: Tippmann Paintball
Category: News And Views
Forum Name: Thoughts and Opinions
Forum Description: Got something you need to say?
URL: http://www.tippmannsports.com/forum/wwf77a/forum_posts.asp?TID=180946
Printed Date: 28 December 2025 at 1:33am
Software Version: Web Wiz Forums 12.04 - http://www.webwizforums.com
Topic: Hey libs, I want a divorce...
Posted By: FreeEnterprise
Subject: Hey libs, I want a divorce...
Date Posted: 24 March 2009 at 9:55am
|
Dear American liberals, leftists, social progressives, socialists, Marxists and Obama supporters, et al: We have stuck together since the late 1950's, but the whole of this latest election process has made me realize that I want a divorce. I know we tolerated each other for many years for the sake of future generations, but sadly, this relationship has run its course. Our two ideological sides of America cannot and will not ever agree on what is right so let's just end it on friendly terms. We can smile and chalk it up to irreconcilable differences and go our own way. Here is a model separation agreement: Our two groups can equitably divide up the country by landmass each taking a portion.. That will be the difficult part, but I am sure our two sides can come to a friendly agreement. After that, it should be relatively easy! Our respective representatives can effortlessly divide other assets since both sides have such distinct and disparate tastes. We don't like redistributive taxes so you can keep them. You are welcome to the liberal judges and the ACLU. Since you hate guns and war, we'll take our firearms, the cops, the NRA and the military. You can keep Oprah, Michael Moore and Rosie O'Donnell (You are, however, responsible for finding a bio-diesel vehicle big enough to move all three of them). We'll keep the capitalism, greedy corporations, pharmaceutical companies, Wal-Mart and Wall Street. You can have your beloved homeless, homeboys, hippies and illegal aliens. We'll keep the hot Alaskan hockey moms, greedy CEO's and rednecks. We'll keep the Bibles and give you NBC and Hollywood. You can make nice with Iran and Palestine and we'll retain the right to invade and hammer places that threaten us. You can have the pea ceniks and war protesters. When our allies or our way of life are under assault, we'll help provide them security. We'll keep our Judeo-Christian values.. You are welcome to Islam, Scientology, Humanism and Shirley McClain. You can also have the U.N.. But we will no longer be paying the bill. We'll keep the SUVs, pickup trucks and oversized luxury cars. You can take every Subaru station wagon you can find. You can give everyone healthcare if you can find any practicing doctors. We'll continue to believe healthcare is a luxury and not a right. We'll keep The Battle Hymn of the Republic and the National Anthem. I'm sure you'll be happy to substitute Imagine, I'd Like to Teach the World to Sing, Kum Ba Ya or We Are the World. We'll practice trickle down economics and you can give trickle up poverty your best shot. Since it often so offends you, we'll keep our history, our name and our flag. Would you agree to this? If so, please pass it along to other like minded liberal and conservative patriots and if you do not agree, just hit delete. In the spirit of friendly parting, I'll bet you ANWAR which one of us will need whose help in 15 years.. Sincerely, John J. Wall Law Student and an American P.S. Also, please take Barbara Streisand & Jane Fonda with you. ------------- They tremble at my name... 
|
Replies:
Posted By: mbro
Date Posted: 24 March 2009 at 10:08am
|
Yep, clearly America is split evenly between only two sides. I for one welcome the simplicity it brings to your arguments. ------------- 
Don't blame me, I voted for Kodos. |
Posted By: jmac3
Date Posted: 24 March 2009 at 10:10am
------------- Que pasa? 
|
Posted By: pb125
Date Posted: 24 March 2009 at 11:33am
|
Go change your Depends or something.
------------- 
|
Posted By: oldsoldier
Date Posted: 24 March 2009 at 11:41am
|
Excellant document from a Law Student. And I am willing to bet free health care that his proffesor only gave it a "c" because it did not agree with current popular belief. It would be an interesting experiment if a "Confederacy" again used it's rights based on constitutional law to secession from the "Union" based on the above standards, who would survive and thrive in today's world. Remmember by the definition of the times we were a group of 13 states (read as countries) who agreed to form a "Union" for mutual defense. Each had it's own currency, governments, and you were not an "American" you were a "Virginian", or "New Yorker". South Carolina was well within its rights based on the Declaration of Independance, and used Constitutional Law to seceed from the "Union" based on "irreconcilable differences".
But to many of the "sheeple" here, the intent of the original quoted writing is above their indoctronated education level or understanding. ------------- 
|
Posted By: agentwhale007
Date Posted: 24 March 2009 at 11:53am
|
That is a whole lot of wharbbl. |
Posted By: Eville
Date Posted: 24 March 2009 at 11:53am
 |
Posted By: Skillet42565
Date Posted: 24 March 2009 at 11:54am
|
Whats wrong with Islam and Scientology that you guys don't want it? DAGGUM MUSLIMS KURRUPTIN THE YOUTH WITH THERE TERRORIST WAYS ------------- 
|
Posted By: agentwhale007
Date Posted: 24 March 2009 at 12:04pm
|
Collecting my thoughts on this thread: I find it slightly ironic that the neo-conservative base, which called for American-unification post Sept. 11, has now gone full tilt into separation mode. Slightly indicative of what you actually care about more, country or ideology. If we are going to do a theoretical split though, then why not divide it via political affiliation. The red, conservative welfare queens can have their own land. Consistently, the red states draw more funding, while the blue states put in. If you want to play this whole "We are the strong ones of society" thing, at least go by the numbers.  |
Posted By: Tolgak
Date Posted: 24 March 2009 at 12:05pm
|
I was waiting for someone else to be serious with this so I can put in a serious response. To the author of that letter and all who support him: If you want all that crap, take it. It was non-religious practices and the sciences that your people discredit that have lead to the success of modern medicine. It was Calculus that lead to many discoveries about the universe that you also discredit in favor of nonsense. Since you hate all the things you say you hate, and Calculus was developed by people in those groups, we'll take that too. So it would be mighty hypocritical of you to have anything of engineering value. You can leave your guns at the border, thanks. It was freedom from religion that has lead us to the progress that we have today. In history, it was always the most religious societies that were oppressive. You can take your fundamentalist Christianity and shove it. We may not have utopia, but at least we don't care to live in the dark ages that you propose for yourself. ------------- 
|
Posted By: Benjichang
Date Posted: 24 March 2009 at 12:06pm
|
BUT U LIBRALS WHINED ABOUT BUSH HE WAS A GOOD PRESIDENT NOW ITS OUR TURN QQQQQQQQ
-------------  irc.esper.net #paintball |
Posted By: Monk
Date Posted: 24 March 2009 at 12:22pm
| lol. I kinda read that thing as a bash on both sides. The whole "letter" was a farce on both sides. |
Posted By: Peter Parker
Date Posted: 24 March 2009 at 12:33pm
|
I can't believe I am actually responding to this (especially since Whale stole my intended response), but I am wondering what will happen with the Obama-supporting greedy firearms-company CEO under this division? He seems a bit stuck.
(oh yeah - he got fired. problem fixed.) ------------- "E Pluribus Unum" does not mean "Every man for himself". Pop Quiz: What do all the Framers of the Constitution have in common? |
Posted By: oldsoldier
Date Posted: 24 March 2009 at 12:35pm
|
Could we not consider that once a secession occurs, and the dependance on Washington is severed we have an open immagration period where those in the Red States who are in the 1-3rd generation of the dependant class can immagrate to the "promised land", that would transfer the dependance on Federal Taxes to the states who prefer a dependant class.
Once the dependant classes move from the red states to the blue based on thier need for Federal assistance, the Red States would be more financially stable not having a dependant class draining the tax coffers. Based on the industrial vs agricultural base still present once the Red States become self sufficient and a tax haven for industry a welcomed migration of industry will begin, and employment and tax revenues will increase, and the reversal of fortune will begin as the current Blue states will become over taxed, under employed, dependant states. There is a book out stating that the South is still paying for the War of Secession by being punished by the North, has some merit, but a lot of it is a little over the top. I really do believe that if the Red States can relieve themselves of the Federal programs of dependance they can be financially solvent as the dependant class moves to the Blue State to continue thier current lifestyle of dependance. -------------
|
Posted By: agentwhale007
Date Posted: 24 March 2009 at 12:40pm
So the red states being more reliant on Federal aid is actually because of secret dependent-lifestyle-blue-state folk hiding out within the state and not the mismanagement at the local level, and certainly not the slight possibility that socially conservative policy does not equal good economic policy. Gotcha. |
oldsoldier wrote:Posted By: oldsoldier
Date Posted: 24 March 2009 at 12:57pm
|
No, it is because of the industrial vs agricultural bases. Many corperations have thier offices in the Blue States yet had thier manufacturing in the less labor cost south. (Cannon Towels for example). Then moved the factories overseas, hense more unemployment in the Red States, more dependance, while little or no financial effect in the Blue States, and complaints about more money needed to support the red states. The Red States are not totally innocent in thier creation of a dependance class, but many Federal assistance programs foster that behavior instead of forcing the dependant to become self sufficient.
My contention is that once a secession takes place and the primary hard core dependant class moves to the Blue States, and industry returns to the more tax lenient Red States, employment will increase and a change of behavior will result as jobs become readily available, and profit margins increase as the tax rate on bussiness is no longer opressive to support a dependant class. There will always be the "hard core" dependant in any culture, we just tend to manufacture our dependant class for political gain. The War on Poverty, began in 1964 with Johnson's Great Society, should have been over long before Reagan, so explain to me what happened since the House of Representatives who control the purse strings have been the domain of the Democrat majority for all but 6 years of the war. -------------
|
Posted By: Benjichang
Date Posted: 24 March 2009 at 12:59pm
|
OS, I like how you say "once a secession takes place" instead of "if".
------------- irc.esper.net #paintball |
Posted By: Skillet42565
Date Posted: 24 March 2009 at 1:01pm
|
THE SOUTH WILL RISE AGAIN!
-------------
|
Posted By: Monk
Date Posted: 24 March 2009 at 1:28pm
More like the midwest will rise up... piss and moan for the next 4 years then sit back down. |
Posted By: Peter Parker
Date Posted: 24 March 2009 at 2:35pm
|
OS - really? Because here in the upper Midwest (mostly blue-state-ish), vast numbers of jobs have been shipped overseas over the last few decades. With the exception of Michigan (thanks, Big Three) we are all prosperous economies with low unemployement.
Could it be that our more aggressive social programs actually worked? Us capitalist types like to take action and take responsibility for our past and future. Or you could just blame it on the gubment, I guess. ------------- "E Pluribus Unum" does not mean "Every man for himself". Pop Quiz: What do all the Framers of the Constitution have in common? |
Posted By: IMPULS3.
Date Posted: 24 March 2009 at 2:41pm
|
Posted By: oldsoldier
Date Posted: 24 March 2009 at 3:05pm
|
I do believe that there will be a form of secession. The nation is severally divided, the east and west coasts, then the middle. If the electoral college goes and the east and west picks the leadership and the middle is ignored, there is the potential right there. The experiment in rugged individualism is failing, and more and more are becoming dependant on the less and less. The 51/49% arguement has serious merit and consequences. Why are we prepared to punish one sector of elitists i.e. CEO's of bussiness, but will not hold the CEO's of the nation i.e. the Congress to the same standard. The corruption waste and "bonuses" in the form of lobbyist monies make being in Congress more corrupt and criminal than being in the private sector.
We will not see a secession in my lifetime, or even in the next generation, but it will come, as sooner or later the rugged individualists still left will say enough is enough from DC and seceed. Several states have already contemplated this issue in one form or another, so it is not a unique idea. Currently the government threatening to sieze control of bussinesses even not on the "bailout" list should be frightening for anyone who is a student of history. Being an American and entitled to my opinion, I believe that this administration will be even more devious and corrupt than the last, for the agenda is a total dismantling of anything not in agreement with a pure yes I will say it, "liberal" agenda. I still can not believe that the appointment of a tax cheat to Secretary of the Treasury did not even raise an eyebrow from the left, but if McCain did the same thing the hue and cry would have been deafening. -------------
|
Posted By: GI JOES SON
Date Posted: 24 March 2009 at 3:08pm
|
i really don't believe the country will split in a form of secession, unless of course people decide to ignore that part of the constitution, but i guess im not one to talk with the whole 6th amendment issue in the other thread... either way another reason would be that each state is split in some cases, and states that support their political backs can usually be found near each other, its not all connected like the south and the north was during the civil war |
Posted By: Destruction
Date Posted: 24 March 2009 at 3:35pm
|
If you don't like America, you can get the hell out. ------------- u dont know what to do ur getting mottor boatted Men are from Magmar, women are from Venusaur. |
Posted By: agentwhale007
Date Posted: 24 March 2009 at 3:38pm
I recall your thread about medical care for veterans. How much rugged individualism is involved in that? |
Posted By: FreeEnterprise
Date Posted: 24 March 2009 at 3:40pm
Thats the problem... I love America.
I don't want it to "change"... into europe... ------------- They tremble at my name...
|
Posted By: Destruction
Date Posted: 24 March 2009 at 3:58pm
All this talk about breaking apart the US doesn't really exemplify your supposed love for America. It's like cutting off a loved one's arms and legs to show you love them. Doesn't really make sense. ------------- u dont know what to do ur getting mottor boatted Men are from Magmar, women are from Venusaur. |
Posted By: High Voltage
Date Posted: 24 March 2009 at 4:14pm
------------- 
|
Posted By: ParielIsBack
Date Posted: 24 March 2009 at 4:17pm
You need to get out of the house more. And learn to spell "severely". There's a dictionary on the internet, only a few clicks away. Use it. *EDIT* Also, where do I file for forum divorce from FE? If the country's getting a divorce, I should be able to get rid of him somehow, right? *SUPER EDIT* Also, why did Impulse not write anything? Post whore.  ------------- BU Engineering 2012 |
Posted By: oldsoldier
Date Posted: 24 March 2009 at 5:23pm
|
Agentwhale- As a condition of my service to the country was the contractural agreement that for a set period of service I recieve certian benifits. Another condition of that contract was that if I were wounded or injured based on that service I would recieve compensation for that injury, and a percentage of my medical care based on the percentage scale of my injuries.
I continued to work even with my VA service connected medical conditions long after I could of sat back and just collected. Now I no longer have that option being 100% disabled based on my military service. That is the differance, I chose my career and the risks involved, and continued that career well aware of the potential. Choosing a rugged occupation, based on my individualism in the face of the times, when it was not a popular career, and too easy to avoid military service, like so many did. I do not sit back and demand benifits, and payments just based on "I deserve them", I earned them. If we did not have the rugged individualism during the founding and just took the easy road, we would still be English citizens, and with no civilization past the Appilacheans, since the risks were too great for many to take if we needed to do it today. Real easy to be the "spelling nazi" isn't it, ParielIsBack, since you seldom have anything significant to contribute. -------------
|
Posted By: Peter Parker
Date Posted: 24 March 2009 at 5:34pm
|
OS - you were offered the choice between military service and prison. Those were the risks and rewards you were choosing between. Let's not get too carried away with your noble choice of a rugged profession.
------------- "E Pluribus Unum" does not mean "Every man for himself". Pop Quiz: What do all the Framers of the Constitution have in common? |
Posted By: Eville
Date Posted: 24 March 2009 at 5:41pm
oh snap |
Posted By: agentwhale007
Date Posted: 24 March 2009 at 5:41pm
So you obviously have the same sort of feeling for, let's say, an artist, or an author, or a musician, who chooses their own path...
Wait what? |
Posted By: Uncle Rudder
Date Posted: 24 March 2009 at 5:49pm
|
My state is green does that mean I voted for Nader? ------------- 
|
Posted By: oldsoldier
Date Posted: 24 March 2009 at 5:50pm
|
Yes, it was a judiciary decesion based on my youth, but the re-enlistments never were, nor were the high risk service schools, or volunteering for deployment in several interesting places, doing interesting things. Too bad that option is no longer offered, could save many more or today's youth in simular situations that I faced. Now, I do believe an Airborne Ranger having served in three conflicts on the front lines, is a little bit more of a rugged career path than an artist, or an author, or a musician, who chooses their own path.
"Twas the worst of time, twas the best of times..." and I will never regret a minute of it. -------------
|
Posted By: Mack
Date Posted: 24 March 2009 at 6:06pm
Whether this statement has any basis in fact I don't know; what I do know is that their are many veterans who made the decision to serve based upon reasons that had nothing to do with fear of incarceration. Certain guarantees were made to those veterans and those promises should be kept. In fact, I would go so far as to say that such promises should be kept no matter what their reason for pursuing a career was. ------------- 
|
Posted By: agentwhale007
Date Posted: 24 March 2009 at 6:15pm
But that is still a dependency. Which goes back to the main point. How is that not being one of the evil dependent folk that OS trashed. |
Posted By: oldsoldier
Date Posted: 24 March 2009 at 6:17pm
|
Yes, I was arrested, and in the practice of the time I was offered the "option" of military service with no criminal record of the procedings, or 3-5 years in the NYS Department of Corrections, a record and all the other problems following through life. That part of my life is history, and my decesion was the best I ever made. I grew up, faced the world, and was a leader all before I was 21. Again I wish that same options were available to many of today's youth in trouble for minor offenses, could and would save many from a life of misery, and possibly as in my case lead to a rewarding career, or the minimum a skill. -------------
|
Posted By: oldsoldier
Date Posted: 24 March 2009 at 6:22pm
|
It is not a dependancy, it is a compensation for services performed, there is a distinct difference. When you accept employment your compensation package is not just the weekly paycheck, it is the package that you and the employer agree on. The US Government offered a compensation package to every veteran from 1776 to today, and many continue under the compensation package long after thier actual service has terminated honorably. Got to read the fine print, and pick your career carefully. -------------
|
Posted By: Peter Parker
Date Posted: 24 March 2009 at 7:02pm
|
The point here is that OS likes to go off about individualism, about not relying on the government to take care of you, about how we are capitalist and not socialist, and so forth - when in fact he has spend his entire life in the loving embrace of big brother. He has never faced the cold realities of capitalism. He has never had to risk it all to move his family in pursuit of a new job, or face total loss of income and healthcare if his job performance was sub-par.
Yes, OS' job was dangerous, and he volunteered for particularly dangerous elements. But he has a guaranteed income for life, and guaranteed healthcare for life, with government backing. That is a far better retirement package than any capitalist employee gets after forty years, let alone twenty. And during active service, OS had the benefit of basically being guaranteed continued employment, with no fear of getting fired or laid off. Coal miners also have very dangerous jobs, and they also thought they had lifelong benefits - until their employers went out of business. Then they got laid off with no benefits or prospects. Others work their whole lives in constant fear of getting laid off, knowing that they will have to relocate their families if that happens, and also knowing that they cannot afford to move. OS has never had to make a choice between sticking with the current ok job, or risk everything you have in pursuit of a better job, because he could always fall back on those lifetime benefits. He has lived his life with a financial safety net most Americans never see. The truth is that OS may be the forumer here LEAST qualified to talk about taking major life decisions in a capitalist environment, because the truth is that OS has been living in a socialist world since he was a kid. The truth is that OS is a felon who somehow still sees fit to lecture us on proper behavior and rugged individualism, and on "reading the fine print." ------------- "E Pluribus Unum" does not mean "Every man for himself". Pop Quiz: What do all the Framers of the Constitution have in common? |
Posted By: choopie911
Date Posted: 24 March 2009 at 7:18pm
| I could hug you Peter Parker. I wish I could have put it so well, but its very very true. |
Posted By: oldsoldier
Date Posted: 24 March 2009 at 8:52pm
|
Wrong again Peter. With each re-enlistment had to decide between a low paying military job or a potential of a higher paying civilian sector job. With each minimal payraise had to decide on which bills took priority, and which were put off till next paycheck. With each PCS move had to find homes and recon schools, neighborhoods, etc. When going overseas had to decide on American housing or live on the economy. Divorced twice, raised 5 kids in the military, almost caught in the downsizing prior to Reagan, went through several promotion slow downs where I sat on rank and pay longer than most being combat arms. Long single deployments overseas, long seperations from family, and all the stress associated with that. And finally coming out after 23 years with the only "marketable skill" of mercenary, so had to relearn a civilian job. Police Officer, Federal Marshal, Truck Driver, Truck Dispatcher, Safety Supervisor, owner operator truck driver(ever try running a small bussiness in todays tax enviornment), then stroke 1, then stroke 2 and here I am, disabled but not regreting one decesion made. How much easier is your life Peter? And how much of a burden have I been on society? The military is not "Big Brother" many of the decesions you make determine your career, we were not little autobots, you made it or not based on yes your own personal rugged individualism on where you wanted to be and how fast did you want tot get there. -------------
|
Posted By: Mack
Date Posted: 02 April 2009 at 1:30pm
-------------
|
Posted By: FreeEnterprise
Date Posted: 02 April 2009 at 1:43pm
|
"Obama".
Very true Mack. I agree with your statements.
I meant to post on this thread, but forgot, since I read it on my blackberry over a weekend.
Bruce, I am shocked at the way you attacked OS in this thread. Very disappointing, as you and I have gone back and forth many times. But to go after a guy about his childhood, which was many many years ago is pretty bad. I guess since you have no skeletons in your closet (yeah right, no wonder you keep your identity so secret), you feel comfortable with that kind of behavior. But, it is wrong, and makes you sound like many of the whiny namecallers on this site...
Man up, and apologize. ------------- They tremble at my name...
|
Posted By: agentwhale007
Date Posted: 02 April 2009 at 1:49pm
|
He didn't say anything that didn't need to be said. OS has flat-out lied and lectured on this forum for a long time. It was nice to see the lies called out. |
Posted By: ParielIsBack
Date Posted: 02 April 2009 at 2:18pm
|
I don't understand where your sense of entitlement comes from, OS. Now, I fully realize that you served our country honorably, and that is certainly something to be proud of. But in terms of your actual placement in our capitalistic society, you fit in here: -Unskilled, uneducated enlisted soldier -Few (if any, judging on the sources of income you mention on here) investments, and therefore complete reliance on the government for all your needs at this point. The US government, at the federal and state levels, has certainly created a major problem with the benefits they hand out. But, just like any other company, they should be forced to fix their problems, not just ignore them and increasing the amount they demand from taxpayers. When a legitimate company collapses (as the federal government, based on its tax returns, should have quite a while ago), investors and employees of that company lose everything. The fact that federal employees are so shielded from the economic consequences of their actions is stupid -- just like your decision to stick with a clearly dead-end career for the majority of your life. *EDIT* My point here is not to bash OS specifically, and I apologize if it comes off that way. His situation is simply an example of the way the federal government uses people, and throws them away, and the US taxpayer foots the bill. It's idiotic, especially when looking at the massive bloat of military expenditure and ridiculous job security given to government workers. An effective worker is a worker who feels pressure to perform at their best every day. Some people may not like that -- great, they can go back to making minimum wage while the people who work hard get the good jobs. That's why I decided to be an engineer, and I see kids pursuing liberal arts degrees who are spending $200k and have no clue what to do with their life. That's the kind of society we should not be fostering. /rant-thing ------------- BU Engineering 2012 |
Posted By: Mack
Date Posted: 02 April 2009 at 4:17pm
While it doesn't quite fit with the posts I applied to above, I wanted to add a few thoughts on the military retirement/benefit system for those who may not understand the thinking behind it:
-------------
|
Posted By: ParielIsBack
Date Posted: 02 April 2009 at 4:29pm
|
Because we can't make the military smaller...oh, wait. Yes, we can! The point is, where is the US government's greater obligation? The taxpayers, or it's workers? I think that the private citizens of this country have every right to demand a government that runs itself at least half as well as their businesses are required to. Also, you've taken my point about pressure in the workplace totally wrong: the government creates an environment where it is much harder to lose your job than it is to advance upwards. People will absolutely work harder for greater rewards, and the point is that the system used by the federal and local governments in our country doesn't establish those rewards -- it just keeps giving. This is a complete generalization, but unfortunately it has to be. You say that the government is "taking over healthcare". Genius. Jumping on FE's boat now? It's clear there will still be a private health care system far into the future. That system will certainly be responsible for mine. Are you pointing out that OS is only now pursuing education that would have benefited him 30+ years ago when he should have been trying to enter and advance a career? My point stands. ------------- BU Engineering 2012 |
Posted By: Mack
Date Posted: 02 April 2009 at 6:41pm
-------------
|
Posted By: ParielIsBack
Date Posted: 02 April 2009 at 9:01pm
I won't disagree that the government has a contractual obligation to pay for OS's medical care. That's clear. But, frankly, if our government can't make ends meet, there is no reason for them to keep screwing the taxpayers -- just like if a company goes under because of bad management. We'll get screwed more than enough if it goes under, which is why it's key that the government turns around the deficit. Sometimes you can't be fair to everyone. ------------- BU Engineering 2012 |
Posted By: Brian Fellows
Date Posted: 03 April 2009 at 4:54am
| Has anyone really been far even as decided to use even go want to do look more like? |
Posted By: oldsoldier
Date Posted: 03 April 2009 at 9:10am
|
Addressing the education part- I have found as many other veterans that our life experiences in the military have given us an education equal to or exceeding current college courses. For example I was required to take public speaking in college, I was more prepared and practiced than any of the young people in the class, where many actually feared to stand in front of the class and give a two minute speech. Preparing lectures and Task, Condition, Standard training plans for soldiers was actually more involved than the preparation of many college level subjects. Leadership, the ability to balance risk verse benifit decesion, again was a skill learned in the military, where the average college student must be led, and have a "study guide" for any task assigned, the textbook and personal notes are not enough. Stress and procrastination, the last minute rush to complete an assignment the day before, after knowing for at least 6 weeks prior, is something foriegn to the line of thinking of many veterans in college, the mission ethic we have for the most part does not allow for that kind of behavior. Youth is a great thing, why did the WW2 generation do so well in college after the war, there was a sense of purpose and maturity in the veterans who went to war, and took the challenge of college as another mission to be accomplished.
My retirement from the military was based on hitting that wall where at E-8 the possibility of reaqching E-9 was doubtfull based on my rogue attitude, instead of the standard peacetime look pretty must work standard. After Desert Storm and the nickle and dime bravo sierra returning after our return to the states, I took the stance I will no longer participate and had the ability to retire and I did. Now I recieve 100% VA disability, no longer collect a military retirement based on my 100% rating. As for my enterence into the military, that era had a comman practice of offering military service as an alternative to mature up upon any legal problems. I do not have a record, I am not a "felon", and I matured and benifited from the expierience. The glass room that many of you throw rocks at me from is again a sign of the times and of youth and I understand having been there. My political views are differant than many here based on a world view, having seen the evils of man, and do have a set of beliefs based on that expierience. "Desention is the greatest form of patriotism" Harold Zinn, applies to both sides of the eisle. I do not dislike Obama as a person, his policies and ideas are what I disagree with, as many of you in a quite differant light, showed a personal dislike for Bush, as well as his policies, and ideas. This forum is a form of entertainment for all, and many here find the personal attack mode a normal function when and if they disagree with the postings. I have been called worse so any insult is balanced with the individual posting, so "It don't mean nothin" so I ignore it. Yes I have a lot of time on my hands, but I do try to make the most of my disability. I am trying to get my NE teaching certificate, and if allowed to work in any form plan on being a substitute teacher in the inner city schools of Omaha, or Lincoln. I again personally hate being a burden on society and have a form of guilt on recieving the benifits I do and not still contributing to society. I have a mission orientated mindset, I will finish college and get the degree, even if I can do nothing more than hang the diploma on the wall, but again it is a mission I will accomplish. Am I a AH as many of you believe, those who know me and have played the game with me know differant, and know my personna. I love to teach, and instruct, I gave classes on sniping at TWC's, shared my skills on a battlefield with anyone who played alongside me, led or advised those who led at many games, and still love to be around young players now in the airsoft community that has replaced paintball in popularity in the OmaLincoln area. I also volunteer as an instructor and OPFOR for the IA/NE National Guard, sharing information and skills not taught anymore, but canand does help. Ask the young forumer who went to the 173rd and dropped into Afghanistan, many of our discussions on the forum helped him in his "adventures" in Afghanistan. So I don't care on the personal attacks, will continue to see this forum as entertainment, and will drive on. Am I entitled, or a "ignorant soldier" who could not make it in the civilian world, I do believe I have made out better than many of my contemporaries from my youth, and thier college degrees and my life expieriences are about equal. Application over therory, a debate of the style of education. Done with rant........no let the fun begin again from the usual suspects |
Posted By: ParielIsBack
Date Posted: 03 April 2009 at 10:24am
I actually tried to read that sentence.
That is actually the most rational thing I've ever heard from you OS. Alright, I'll buy it. ------------- BU Engineering 2012 |
Posted By: FreeEnterprise
Date Posted: 03 April 2009 at 10:41am
|
bruce should still apologize... and the mods should change his post, since he is not a felon. ------------- They tremble at my name...
|
Posted By: ParielIsBack
Date Posted: 03 April 2009 at 10:51am
|
It's the internet. It was practically invented for people to make claims. This one may be an exaggeration, but his point stands. OS committed a felony -- he just so happened to get it erased from his criminal record. That doesn't mean it never happened. ------------- BU Engineering 2012 |
Posted By: Mack
Date Posted: 03 April 2009 at 11:33am
Having friends/family in Omaha, this sounds more dangerous than most of the other places you've been.
So did I. It made my head hurt.
Actually, it does. The court decided that when they offered OS the deal and he took it. This is just as applicable as the daily plea bargains that reduce charges in our justice system. Insisting otherwise seems hypocritical unless someone is arguing that perhaps we should just go with public opinion as a replacement for our justice system. Everyone knows that President Clinton was guilty, but he was acquitted by the Senate during the impeachment. Using the previous logic, he should have been removed from office anyway. Edit: After rereading the previous posts, I'm still not sure about your stance on nationalized health care. The parts that confuse me will be added below:
If the government is so inefficient, why do you want them running health care; if, that is indeed, your position. Also, if you support it so much, why wouldn't you be willing to use it? -------------
|
Posted By: ParielIsBack
Date Posted: 03 April 2009 at 12:47pm
He's not being sent to prison for this crime. It's simply being acknowledged here that it did, in fact, happen. I, for one, have no criminal record whatsoever -- but I know I have broken the law. I seriously doubt you could find anyone who hasn't. The point is that whether or not the justice system writes it down or not, it still reflects on OS's decision making and moral character at that time.
I don't support it "so much". I do support it -- because no one has put forth a better plan. If you believe that capitalism provides a fair playing ground for everyone, you might as well stop reading here. As a member of the upper-middle/upper class, I expect to be making enough money to invest in luxuries, which certainly includes the best health care I can get. That said, I think health care for everyone in this country is absolutely key to quality of life, and our overall economic success. I'm more than willing to entrust that to the federal government because of it's scope. As we've seen in Iraq, trusting that entirely to private companies is probably a horrible idea. I'm willing to take small steps; yes, the system may be mismanaged and inefficient, but it will still provide services. It's clear that government reform is going to take some sort of major incident (I can't even imagine what), and I just don't think that the level of waste at this moment necessitates that. And, frankly, I have a far bigger problem with the 50% of our budget being spent on weapons and the military. We'd save ourselves a lot more money by not waging war in other countries than we would by not implementing nationalized health care. ------------- BU Engineering 2012 |
Posted By: oldsoldier
Date Posted: 03 April 2009 at 1:30pm
|
Where do we get 50% of the national budget being spent on the military?
The United States spends 4.06% of its GDP on its military (considering only basic Department of Defense budget spending, while complete military spending is higher by more than 50% due to additional DoD funding and funding of other federal military departments), more than France's 2.6% and less than Saudi Arabia's 10%.[7] This is historically low for the United States since it peaked in 1944 at 37.8% of GDP (it reached the lowest point of 3.0% in 1999-2001). Even during the peak of the Vietnam War the percentage reached a high of 9.4% in 1968. So if we raise the 4.06% by 50% we get a military budget of 6.09% of the total US GDP spent on the military. |
Posted By: Peter Parker
Date Posted: 03 April 2009 at 1:40pm
I agree that 50% is a bit out of whack - but OS, if you are going to copy and paste from Wikipedia, you ought to at least include the parts of the article that point out that nuclear weapons research and the Iraq/Afghanistan wars are NOT included in that figure. According to your Wikipedia article, the total defense spending is about twice that, or $1,000,000,000,000 per year. See tallen's thread for an illustration of that number. Or you can just think of it as the annual bailout. ------------- "E Pluribus Unum" does not mean "Every man for himself". Pop Quiz: What do all the Framers of the Constitution have in common? |
Posted By: ParielIsBack
Date Posted: 03 April 2009 at 1:52pm
GDP is unimportant here -- no one except the government finances our military. I was wrong though -- http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_federal_budget,_2008 - Wikipedia says that it is in fact only 21% of our budget. I am, apparently, very confused about numbers. I believe I was thinking about http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/world/spending.htm - this statistic, which is that we spend something like 50% of the world's military expenditure. Either way, our direct spending on the military last year:
A 40-60% cut in the military budget, and a balanced budget being passed by Congress every year, would let us pay off our $10 trillion national debt in about 30-40 years (calculated from a budget of $600 billion). That may just mean it can only be the tip of the iceberg in terms of cuts, but that's outside the scope of this argument. Also, please cite your sources, OS. It's clear you pulled all your numbers from Wikipedia, and you're writing as if they are your own. As a fellow student, I expect you understand the importance of recognizing when work is someone else's. I welcome corrections, but they're far more useful when they come from a source. ------------- BU Engineering 2012 |
Posted By: Mack
Date Posted: 03 April 2009 at 2:09pm
It I agree, it did happen, as did the instances that you speak of regarding yourself. But, the way that system works means that OS, like you, does not have a criminal record. This makes Peter's name calling in this case inaccurate (which was my original point). If, you wish to ignore the lack of a court record, then we must equally ignore your lack of a court record and determine that you are a felon as well. (Or, depending upon the severity of your crimes, a misdemeanorer.*) I also agree that it "reflects on OS's decision making and moral character at that time." What it does not reflect on is his decision making and moral character at this time as Peter alleged in the post that got me started on this issue. (Unless of course we've decided that no one can ever change which then raises questions about our current President and his association with terrorists** and racists***.) * It's a new Mcword, get over it. **William Ayers ***Reverend Wright -------------
|
Posted By: ParielIsBack
Date Posted: 03 April 2009 at 3:18pm
|
You really like the idea of cut and dried, don't you? Also, there's a difference between myself and OS no matter what: I didn't get caught. *EDIT* Said OJ Simpson. Oops, spoke too soon. ------------- BU Engineering 2012 |
Posted By: Mack
Date Posted: 03 April 2009 at 3:21pm
So . . . it's okay to break the law as long as you don't get caught? -------------
|
Posted By: jmac3
Date Posted: 03 April 2009 at 5:19pm
I think the point is that the only reason OS "volunteered" for military duty was because was offered the choice to have his slate clean and serve the country, or have a criminal record. I am not saying that OS wouldn't have joined the military anyway as I don't his mindset, and I am not saying he is a bad person for committing a crime. All I am saying is that his choice was between being labeled a criminal and a getting a job. ------------- Que pasa?
|
Posted By: Mack
Date Posted: 03 April 2009 at 5:50pm
This is very true . . . and all I am saying is that by virtue of that choice, he is not a felon. (And* if it was anyone else on the forum** I wouldn't be the only one pointing this out.) *Yeah, I started a sentence with "and." Go tell the Grammar Police. **With the possible exceptions of FE and Linus. -------------
|
Posted By: jmac3
Date Posted: 03 April 2009 at 6:09pm
|
Couldn't we technically day his military service was his sentence? I think so. Kind of like community service, in Detroit. ------------- Que pasa?
|
Posted By: Mack
Date Posted: 03 April 2009 at 6:32pm
|
I don't know, could we technically say the President hangs around with racists and terrorists?
-------------
|
Posted By: Eville
Date Posted: 03 April 2009 at 6:33pm
| Can we just give FE the damn divorce and move on to other people? |
Posted By: Mack
Date Posted: 03 April 2009 at 6:34pm
|
Now what fun would that be?
-------------
|
Posted By: oldsoldier
Date Posted: 05 April 2009 at 10:50am
| ParielIsBack, Yes, I should have cited Wiki, as a base reference, as inaccurate as Wiki can be, but just in a hurry. As intricate as any government information, finding an exact percentage of military expendature would be a needle in a haystack adventure with any numbers found as credable as the source. Wiki is not allowed as a cited source at SCC, I just hope other schools have the same policy. |
Posted By: ParielIsBack
Date Posted: 05 April 2009 at 11:11am
Oh, please. The day of "Wikipedia is not a source" has passed -- it is just as acceptable as The Encyclopaedia Brittanica now. Furthermore, just click on the citations if you don't believe the article. And if Wiki is such a bad source, why are you using it? The federal budget is released every year, and some parts of it are very clear. We spent at least $600 billion on the military last year.
Were you trying to prove my point? See the first sentence of the post you quoted. No one's judging me for the crimes I didn't get caught doing. Except maybe the people who were there at the time, doing them with me. But considering that my total crimes only involve traffic violations, I'm pretty sure you can't claim I'm a felon. ------------- BU Engineering 2012 |
Posted By: Reb Cpl
Date Posted: 05 April 2009 at 11:25am
lol ------------- ? |
Posted By: Benjichang
Date Posted: 05 April 2009 at 11:35am
|
I've seen serious studies that have concluded that wikipedia has less errors per article than Brittanica. Personally, I see nothing wrong with using wikipedia as a source in discussions like this, especially well-referenced articles.
------------- irc.esper.net #paintball |
Posted By: Mack
Date Posted: 05 April 2009 at 12:41pm
Benji is correct; unfortunately, the education community has generally not yet caught up with this fact.
-------------
|
Posted By: ParielIsBack
Date Posted: 05 April 2009 at 1:22pm
So, would you agree, or disagree with jmac's point?
------------- BU Engineering 2012 |
Posted By: mbro
Date Posted: 05 April 2009 at 1:35pm
-------------
Don't blame me, I voted for Kodos. |
Posted By: ParielIsBack
Date Posted: 05 April 2009 at 2:09pm
|
Probably for content, rather than respectability, though.
------------- BU Engineering 2012 |
Posted By: Reb Cpl
Date Posted: 05 April 2009 at 4:44pm
If content is laughable, where does respectability come from? ------------- ? |
Posted By: ParielIsBack
Date Posted: 05 April 2009 at 6:08pm
No, you're misunderstanding me. Encyclopedia articles are just overviews, hence the reasons they're not used for research papers. Wikipedia offers far more in-depth articles or links to sources which let you evaluate a lot more information. *EDIT* I guess that didn't really explain it either. I'm assuming that mbro would be laughed at not because of the quality of the encyclopedia, but the fact the he even used an encyclopedia. ------------- BU Engineering 2012 |
Posted By: Benjichang
Date Posted: 05 April 2009 at 6:18pm
|
In most college classes, any kind of research paper must be cited with articles from scholarly (peer-edited) journal articles.
------------- irc.esper.net #paintball |
Posted By: Mack
Date Posted: 05 April 2009 at 6:31pm
Given OS's input into this discussion, I believe jmac's statement to be accurate. Note that nowhere in it does he refer to OS as a felon. -------------
|
Posted By: ParielIsBack
Date Posted: 05 April 2009 at 6:54pm
We can debate semantics all day, but in the end it comes down to this: -OS committed a felony -OS joined the military in exchange for not going to jail We're talking about a teenager/young adult who joined the military out of necessity, not civic duty. We're also so far from where we started we might as well have had this argument while driving on the highway.
Or a similarly respectable source, which includes more than a few websites, books, etc. The problem with encyclopedias is not their quality, but their depth. Also, research papers FTL. Been working on one all day. I have probably 30 tabs open from Early English Books Online and Journal-Storage. Way to put off writing the last four pages till the last day. ------------- BU Engineering 2012 |
Posted By: Peter Parker
Date Posted: 05 April 2009 at 7:06pm
|
I must admit that I am somewhat fascinated by this fascination with the use of "felon."
Also surprised at how wrong you all are.
OS is a felon. Period. It is simple. He committed a serious crime. He was not convicted, but he did commit a felony nonetheless. That makes him a felon. Period, end of discussion.
Mack appears to be suggesting that the lack of a criminal record is meaningful - he suggests that this is the correct interpretation in part because OS is not suffering the long-term consequences usually associated with felons, such as job applications, firearms ownership, or voting. This is also incorrect.
When filling out government forms, they will not ask "are you a felon?' but will instead ask "have you been convicted of a felony?" (some forms no doubt do it incorrectly, but that is just that - incorrect)
As a matter of semantics, the phrase Mack is looking for is "convicted felon," which is entirely different from "felon." A felon is somebody who has committed a felony, a convicted felon is somebody who has been convicted of a felony.
By Mack's theory, "convicted felon" would be redundant. I encourage you all to google "convicted felon" to discover that many people do in fact not think this is redundant. "Convicted felon" is a commonly used term, and for good reason.
Moreover, even if I were mistaken semantically (which I am not), and OS was not a felon, technically speaking, that would still be completely irrelevant, and the point in my post would stand anyway.
Regardless of any legal consequences, the admitted truth is that OS committed a serious crime. Given OS' age and situation, I find it unlikely that the felony in question was fraud, which pretty much leaves crimes of violence and theft. I think we can assume it wasn't murder or rape, since he was offered the military out, so that brings us down to felony assault/battery, B&E, grand theft auto, robbery, or drug-dealing (and a few other bad acts).
None of those are pleasant acts, and OS is morally responsible for that act, regardless of whether he was convicted. Morally speaking, there is no difference between OS and the guy serving 3-5 in Riker's for assault with a deadly weapon. I find it surprising that Mack, of all people, is getting hung up on a legal technicality (and incorrectly at that) rather than focusing on the moral reality.
The moral reality is that OS is a felon. He committed a serious crime. A felony. He avoided conviction only by a technicality only available to a few people during a short period in history. Had he committed that same crime ten years earlier or later, we would now be a convicted felon. And as my point was a matter or moral judgment, my point stands undisputed.
------------- "E Pluribus Unum" does not mean "Every man for himself". Pop Quiz: What do all the Framers of the Constitution have in common? |
Posted By: oldsoldier
Date Posted: 05 April 2009 at 7:24pm
|
It was actually being caught in a car parts strip shop during a raid, and being the lowest possible denominator in the DA's selection of charges put me in the position I was in. Before trial the offer was made for military service in lieu of court trial and possible conviction. Simular to a plea bargain popular today, the military option was available in that era. Since I was only charged, not tried, and not convicted of any crime, I do not have a criminal record. I was considered a volunteer and not a draftee, and after my initial period I did re-enlist finding the line of work I was in rewarding and a personal choice from that point on till retirement.
I am just a guilty as all the pot smokers, and other "criminals" here on the forum, the sole qualifying difference is I was caught, the moral judgement difference is minimal between myself and many here. We all decided through free will to commit illegal acts, and today if any of you get caught you will have fewer oprions than I did. Morality is a strange thing, I could and did take human lives sanctioned by the government for a short period of time, then I no longer could, so the morality of my taking of life could also be questioned, as I could have claimed concientious objector status and not taken a life. Morality is a very difficult thing to pin point from a legal position. |
Posted By: Tolgak
Date Posted: 05 April 2009 at 7:30pm
I'm not asking for names or specifics or anything. I just want to know how you found out he committed some sort of crime and what made you look it up (if OS didn't flat-out tell us). -------------
|
Posted By: Peter Parker
Date Posted: 05 April 2009 at 7:31pm
And thank you for illustrating perfectly the exact hypocrisy that led to my earlier posts in this thread.
------------- "E Pluribus Unum" does not mean "Every man for himself". Pop Quiz: What do all the Framers of the Constitution have in common? |
Posted By: ParielIsBack
Date Posted: 05 April 2009 at 7:58pm
I was wondering when this was going to come up.
Clearly, because no one except you is capable of making a logical argument.
That's a vast generalization. Repaying your crimes with military service has historical precedent in many countries around the globe.
Exactly. ------------- BU Engineering 2012 |
Posted By: Peter Parker
Date Posted: 05 April 2009 at 9:12pm
Poorly stated on my part. You are clearly correct - my point was more narrowly focused on the present time and place. As I stated later, this option was not available to people just like OS, but only a few years older or younger.
He happened to commit his crime during a fairly narrow timeslice of modern US history when this particular option was available. This does not make him any less morally culpable than today's chop-shoppers.
------------- "E Pluribus Unum" does not mean "Every man for himself". Pop Quiz: What do all the Framers of the Constitution have in common? |
Posted By: Bolt3
Date Posted: 06 May 2009 at 5:25pm
|
Wow, I just read that entire letter. If you honestly would like to do that, you are the definition of a fascist. It's called democracy, and you're confusing this new reign of tyranny with losing. It's not tyranny, you just lost. Welcome to my past 8 years. My family and I didn't want half of our tax dollars spent on a war, but we still paid and didn't teabag anyone about it. And you shouldn't either. You can't live in a society and expect to pay for only things you want. Edit: I have no idea how I had this page even opened. Posted without checking the date. ------------- <Removed sig for violation of Clause 4 of the New Sig Rules> |
Posted By: ParielIsBack
Date Posted: 06 May 2009 at 5:26pm
|
Holy month-old resurrection.
------------- BU Engineering 2012 |
Posted By: choopie911
Date Posted: 06 May 2009 at 5:32pm
Stop being so logical and rational. Doesn't sit well with the extremists. |