That might just be an over-exaggeration of his delusions. :D

Yes, that’s why I can read what you have written. Do you not understand what illiterate actually means?

Thanks, keep playing with yourself.

Because you’re not competent? Yeah, I noticed.

Again, not proving anything.

No, you proved that you are mentally deficient all on yor own… LOL

Yes, O’Reilly calls himself an independent, and others with controversial speech label themselves “independent.”

Except that O’Reilly is a registered Republicans and when I lived in California, I registered as an Independent years ago, before it was the trendy thing to do. In Georgia, I don’t have to claim a party.

The “independent” declaration is tiresome from a number of clear far-right/left posters here. The itemized views are what count.

To you that’s all that counts. To me, the fact that I vote across party lines is what counts. That’s the definition of Independent silly.

I’m a stern Republican, but not a “neocon” as you regularly spout.

The only people left defending the Bushites are neocons.

No, I’m not unsettled. I have nothing to worry about since you’ve proven not a thing here. I may as well talk to the ceiling for credible information.

LOL. You said you were going to post proof of your assertions, and hours later – NOTHING> You must be talking about yourself here, because I don’t post without having first done my homework to know that my opinions are based on facts. Try it.

I need to know what these “asinine” things were I supposedly said.

If you cannot discern from the nonsense you’ve posted in this thread, then I cannot help you. But you can help yourself by becoming informed from non-biased sources.

The “publishing history books” question was irrelevant and odd, as well.
Comment by RamboTroll — June 22, 2007 @ 5:20 pm

Only if you’re stupid. Are you saying that you are stupid RT? Well, admitting a problem is the first step in solving it… Good luck with that.

Funny that they don’t make that information easy to find, huh? Why do you think that is? Hmmm?

Thru several years and styles of pdfs provided off the link

Sure…

And for someone who thinks people should be allowed to believe, you sure seem to have a bone to pick with Christians.

They have a right to believe. They don’t have a right to force their beliefs on others, this country, or suppress others form speaking out against the dangers in what theybelief when forced on others or our country. Big difference. Not surprising anymore that you can’t see the difference. Typical conservative absolutism…

Don’t forget Chelsea Clinton. Or any of the other politicians’ kids who supported the Iraqi occupation.

I didn’t. This was addressed a long time ago and couple time ssince. Grow an attention span… Sheesh.

What about them? Some of the politicians have children serving. Bush even insulted one of them a few months ago by accident.

What about them? No one was criticizing them…

The rich are a smaller % of the population, of course there is going to be less of them. What matters is the ratio compared to the general populace and other industries.

Yes, ratios IS the point… Catch up.

I couldn’t find anything that backed you up if that’s what you meant. And what your provided was unrelated to the general thrust of the conversation.

Then you’re not as bright as I’d given you credit for being….

The reason you can’t readily find it is because: “The Department of Defense (DOD) does not track family income data for recruits, and there are no individual income data for enlistees. Military service is the first full-time job for most of them.”

http://www.uslaboragainstwar.org/article.php?id=3412

“As the United States engages in its first major land war in a decade, the soldiers, sailors, pilots and others who are risking, and now giving, their lives in Iraq represent a slice of a broad swath of American society but by no means all of it.

Of the 28 servicemen killed who have been identified so far, 20 were white, 5 black, 3 Hispanic; proportions that neatly mirror those of the military as a whole. But just one was from a well-to-do family, and with the exception of a Naval Academy alumnus, just one had graduated from an elite college or university.

A survey of the American military’s endlessly compiled and analyzed demographics paints a picture of a fighting force that is anything but a cross section of America. With minorities overrepresented and the wealthy and the underclass essentially absent, with political conservatism ascendant in the officer corps and Northeasterners fading from the ranks, America’s 1.4 million-strong military seems to resemble the makeup of a two-year commuter or trade school outside Birmingham or Biloxi far more than that of a ghetto or barrio or four-year university in Boston.”

Happy now that I did your homework for you? Jesus Christ – you cons are annoying.

Holy cow, you do understand and use logic, but apparently only when it helps you. Your right, my bad, here’s one of the links I used Now if you could just apply that logical thinking to your own posts, you’ll see the gaping holes in your arguments, and possibly even fill them in with supporting evidence.

You’re being ridiculous. You said you couldn’t get the information, but now you’ve jumped to conclusions? Sheesh…

“It’s just not fair that the people that we ask to fight our wars are people who join the military because of economic conditions, because they have fewer options,” said Representative Charles B. Rangel, a Democrat from Manhattan and a Korean War veteran who is calling for restoring the draft.

Some scholars have noted that since the draft was abolished in 1973, the country has begun developing what could be called a warrior class or caste, often perpetuating itself from father or uncle to son or niece, whose political and cultural attitudes do not reflect the diversity found in civilian society potentially foreshadowing a social schism between those who fight and those who ask them to.”

No, you used hyperbole and anecdotal evidence.

No, I used critical thinking skills. You cons need everything handed to you on a silver platter. No wonder you are collectively so ignorant. Read on your own, go beyond the first two links Google presents you, and start connecting the dots.

Consider it rejected

I already did. It required effort.

As far as I recall, I have yet to build a strawman, I’ve only been tearing yours down.
Comment by squegeebooo — June 22, 2007 @ 4:10 pm

You’ve built several. I even pointed them out.

I don’t build strawmen. I don’t have to. Reality has a liberal bias after all…

https://answers.google.com/answers/threadview?id=401227

which would be fine if we lived in a democracy not a republic

But that’s hardly an example of a top-down bureaucracy, interfering in states’ rights. It’s more an example of democracy in action, since it would take a majority of states who agreed that regulating the age to 21 was what they wanted, to push for legislative, and ultimately administrative change. If a majority had opposed it, we both know it would never have been enacted..

You consider it incoherent and “pointless” because you seem to be illiterate.

“How totally hypocritical to tell me I can’t judge them (which I wasn’t actually doing), while you are judging me. LOL.”

Thanks, keep playing with yourself.

“Grow a brain cell – your one is lonely.”

Again, not proving anything.

“I’m not a Democrat. I’m. unlike you, and Independent. I just don’t see any Republicans worth defending these days… Sad. I used to be one. But you neocons have ruined what Lincoln used to represent.”

Yes, O’Reilly calls himself an independent, and others with controversial speech label themselves “independent.” The “independent” declaration is tiresome from a number of clear far-right/left posters here. The itemized views are what count. I’m a stern Republican, but not a “neocon” as you regularly spout.

“Now your pissy because I can thinking quickly? LOL that’s rich. Grow a third brain cell and you might developsome critical thinking skills and learn how yourself.”

No, I’m not unsettled. I have nothing to worry about since you’ve proven not a thing here. I may as well talk to the ceiling for credible information.

I need to know what these “asinine” things were I supposedly said. The “publishing history books” question was irrelevant and odd, as well.

Sure it can, you get enough local pressure in a few states to change their system, then they go up to the federal level and figure out ways to turn the screws on all the other states.

How about pistol permits, a lot of states you have to be 21 to get one, but you can shoot a pistol in the military, or own a shotgun or assult rifle at a much younger age.

Theres all sorts of crazy laws that don’t make any real sense. NY state finally got rid of it’s ban on liquor sales on Sunday, and it’s ban on beer sales before noon on Sunday just this year. It’s amazing what the Puritans and/or nanny-staters can do when they get organized.

And Flaco has delusions of adequacy.

Comment by Tundra —

And many states did just that, prior to being held hostage to federal highway funding. If you hadn’t noticed, some of those states had previously decided 21 was the proper drinking age – and yet they were ok with allowing the federal government to send these 18 year-old “adults” into battle, knowing that they couldn’t be trusted to operate a motor vehicle without succumbing to the lure of drunk driving in such numbers that they presented a hazzard to public safety. So which is it? An overbearing federal govenment, interfereing with states’ rights, and over-rulling local officials – or local political pressure to keep their streets safe from post-adolescent drunk drivers, which then coelesced into a federal standard? It can’t be both.

(NPD), Narcissistic personality disorder is characterized by extreme focus on oneself, and is a maladaptive, rigid, and persistent condition that may cause significant distress and functional impairment.

If I understand it correctly (because it’s not happening to me) some people have been unable to see updates unless they post a comment, so who knows if you’ll even see this one. Although I’ve heard FireFox(me) and Safari users haven’t had this issue.

How far did you look?
Thru several years and styles of pdfs provided off the link

First of all, I’m allowed to believe that.
Belief doesn’t make it correct. And for someone who thinks people should be allowed to believe, you sure seem to have a bone to pick with Christians.

Don’t forget Chelsea Clinton. Or any of the other politicians’ kids who supported the Iraqi occupation.
What about them? Some of the politicians have children serving. Bush even insulted one of them a few months ago by accident.

My point – not many…
The rich are a smaller % of the population, of course there is going to be less of them. What matters is the ratio compared to the general populace and other industries.

Stop exaggerating. This is ridiculous. You own Google – you can’t go find what you’re looking for yourself? If what I provide isn’t adequate to yor standards, sir, then by all means – go find it yourself. I’m not your personal rover.
I couldn’t find anything that backed you up if that’s what you meant. And what your provided was unrelated to the general thrust of the conversation.

No you didn’t – not by your standards.
Holy cow, you do understand and use logic, but apparently only when it helps you. Your right, my bad, here’s one of the links I used Now if you could just apply that logical thinking to your own posts, you’ll see the gaping holes in your arguments, and possibly even fill them in with supporting evidence.

This is silly and annoying.
Yes it is.

I made my case.
No, you used hyperbole and anecdotal evidence.

You are free to reject it, I don’t care.
Consider it rejected

Just stop building strawmen to impress your new trolls friends.
As far as I recall, I have yet to build a strawman, I’ve only been tearing yours down.

I did.

The one you gave had gender and race breakdown, nothing about income and/or poverty levels. Making it a useless link for this converstation.

How far did you look?

Pat Tillman was doing all right before he joined the military. (I know, Afghanistan, not Iraq, but the right time frame, and he was active combat duty) Additionally, all the generals and higher level officers make a decent bank, although I don’t know if that fits in your definition of ‘wealthy’ or just upper middle class.

My point – not many…

No, no you haven’t. All you’ve ever stated is that you don’t think it’s fair that there is more poor people in the military than rich people, and that it some how invalidates the war and the military in general, using solely the Bush twins as an example.

First of all, I’m allowed to believe that.

Secondly, I did make the argument on several levels.

Don’t forget Chelsea Clinton. Or any of the other politicians’ kids who supported the Iraqi occupation.

I can’t get into any more detail about the flaws in your position, because thats as far as your willing to go. You have provided no facts, besides the racial and gender breakdown (once again, not any kind of income/poverty breakdown) and even that took multiple times of me asking to get.

Stop exaggerating. This is ridiculous. You own Google – you can’t go find what you’re looking for yourself? If what I provide isn’t adequate to yor standards, sir, then by all means – go find it yourself. I’m not your personal rover.

Well I provided facts on who started the Vietnam war. But then you just called me biased and ignorant.
Comment by squegeebooo — June 22, 2007 @ 1:41 pm

No you didn’t – not by your standards.

This is silly and annoying. I made my case. You are free to reject it, I don’t care. Just stop building strawmen to impress your new trolls friends. They get all excited and start masturbating in public again.

I can’t let it go? LOL. I made one remark today and this is about your 10th rant on the matter. Why so touchy? Why the need to surpress my right to freedom of speech? Sounds like I’ve hit a nerve…

Well, I promise you Jason, I will say as much as I like on the matter and if you don’t like it, then it is you who has to deal with it. Not my problem you can’t handle the criticism.

No offense, but your constant anti-religion bashing on every single thread could be miscontrued as a cry for help.

Not on every thread, so, so much for your little theory.

Seriously, you’d be annoyed if a Jehova’s Witness came on here and preached on every single thread
You’re almost an anti-Jehova’s witness. Or can we call you a ATHIEST WITNESS?

Not really. It’s you guys who can’t handle the fact that I point out the gaping holes in your ideology. Why is that? And instead of debating me on them, you make it personal and try to insult me. It just makes me all the more determined to talk about it…

give it a rest, sister. Not everyone wants to hear your Bible trashing day in and day out.Now, go feed your cats!
Comment by Venusly Valiante — June 22, 2007 @ 12:51 pm

No. Deal with it. Sheesh…

So now we all know what’s wrong with Flaco.

Sorry, radical lefty, I don’t take assertions from people who protest for a living.
Comment by RamboTroll — June 22, 2007 @ 12:35 pm

Take assertions? Dude you’re bizarre.