The GOP Presidential Race = Reality TV Stars and $

Atavachron wrote: Not at all, I think both drugs and prostitution should be legal

Oh well OK then.

The Dark Elf wrote: CCVP wrote: The Dark Elf wrote: CCVP wrote:  Hmm, I guess a guerrilla military leader really gets elected because of being trustworthy and of principle, even if he attacked the enemy in the night of Christmas eve, a date that even WW1 respected and stopped the battles during it.   Your distortions sound more like Anti-American bias rather than having any historical foundation whatsoever. George Washington was noted to be a very principled and trustworthy individual -- that he sought liberty from a repressive regime does not change his principles. Washington was also religiously tolerant, and like Jefferson was a Deist, not a Christian; therefore, the surprise attack on the Hessian contingent at Trenton was a masterful bit of strategy.   As far as WWI, you really have your facts skewed. The truces that occurred along the front during Christmas were not official but spontaneous among many dead tired and homesick soldiers on both sides. As the war progressed, these unofficial truces became more sporadic. The desolation of "no-man's land", and the abject futility of trench war in WWI were what drove these unofficial truces. In WWII, the Nazis thought nothing of conducting major attacks at Bastogne during Christmas. Prior to WWI, the lack of battles during the holiday season had less to do with religious commemoration than war being "out of season" during December. Major troop movements were literally impossible in the middle of winter, and any winter manuevers were considered dangerous (Napoleon's retreat from Moscow is a notable example).   Coming from Brazil, a country known for political instability, military dictatorships and the overthrow of democratically elected governments, you have some gall denigrating Washington who, after two terms as president, actually turned down another term in office, as he believed holding the office any further ran counter to the premise of a constitutional democracy. That's something Brazil didn't learn until 1994. But hey, it's always easier to criticize someone else than checking for skeletons in your own closet.   LOL, talk about cult of personality in the land of the "free".   You made statements that were factually incorrect. I merely pointed out your biased rhetoric, So "LOL" on your profound lack of historical perspective.

I'm just impressed at how mad you are about this. And I'm not even biased at all, that is exactly how Washington waged a war against a vastly superior and overall better preppared army.

Besides, lack of historical perspective? Are you really serious about this?

well I smoke pot and it didn't lead to crack or prostitution.. though I must say moonlighting as a gigolo doesn't sound half-bad--  I'd need a good Heidi Fleiss-like pimp though, hard to find I imagine

Atavachron wrote: well I smoke pot and it didn't lead to crack or prostitution.. though I must say moonlighting as a gigolo doesn't sound half-bad--  I'd need a good Heidi Fleiss-like pimp though, hard to find I imagine

I'm too uggo to be a prostitute. I'd have to find the really desperate market, which I suppose means I could charge more.

The T wrote: I don't see how not liking abortion is mysoginistic...

T, you obviously missed my point. Are you even faintly aware of the trauma a rape victim goes thorough? The suffering and utter embarrassment of having to come forward and then be subjected to a trial where the opposing attorney tries to paint you not as a victim , but as "asking for it"? And then you expect a rape victim, after going through that hell, to also go through a nine month pregnancy (at a physical danger to herself), and every day have to be reminded of the crime? I am rather amazed that you haven't put yourself in the woman's shoes. You were being completely unfair and actually cruel.

The Dark Elf wrote: The T wrote: I don't see how not liking abortion is mysoginistic... T, you obviously missed my point. Are you even faintly aware of the trauma a rape victim goes thorough? The suffering and utter embarrassment of having to come forward and then be subjected to a trial where the opposing attorney tries to paint you not as a victim , but as "asking for it"? And then you expect a rape victim, after going through that hell, to also go through a nine month pregnancy (at a physical danger to herself), and every day have to be reminded of the crime? I am rather amazed that you haven't put yourself in the woman's shoes. You were being completely unfair and actually cruel.

Yes, rape cases in the US (and I assume elsewhere) are horrible bullsh*t. But if you believe that a fetus is a person the rape victim argument is trivial: killing an innocent person is far more cruel. Being against abortion except in cases of rape and incest makes no logical sense whatsoever, but for some reason it seems to be prevalent, I assume because people's brains shut off when confronted with emotional issues. Pro-lifers are usually called misogynists by feminists/pro-choice advocates to try to get them to shut up, but it's still not a good debating topic. 

The Dark Elf wrote: obviously have no children of your own.

This is, and always will be, the most bullsh*t, patronizing appeal to emotion that can ever be said in an internet argument. No I don't have children, but that doesn't mean (exaggerating here I know you have not said this) your plan to execute everyone on the sex offender list has any basis in reason and you shouldn't be flaunting your refusal to move behind raw emotion. 

And damn it, how the hell did I get baited into writing this post, much less in a thread about the GOP Primary?


Edited by Henry Plainview - May 29 2011 at 00:13

The Dark Elf wrote: The T wrote: I don't see how not liking abortion is mysoginistic... T, you obviously missed my point. Are you even faintly aware of the trauma a rape victim goes thorough? The suffering and utter embarrassment of having to come forward and then be subjected to a trial where the opposing attorney tries to paint you not as a victim , but as "asking for it"? And then you expect a rape victim, after going through that hell, to also go through a nine month pregnancy (at a physical danger to herself), and every day have to be reminded of the crime? I am rather amazed that you haven't put yourself in the woman's shoes. You were being completely unfair and actually cruel.

I recognize my post was hastily done and I sounded bad. Of course rape is the most extreme situation and it needs much more thought than what I just put into it. But I still think there's need for further analysis of the issue. Anyway, I apologize too.

The T wrote: The Dark Elf wrote: The T wrote: I don't see how not liking abortion is mysoginistic... T, you obviously missed my point. Are you even faintly aware of the trauma a rape victim goes thorough? The suffering and utter embarrassment of having to come forward and then be subjected to a trial where the opposing attorney tries to paint you not as a victim , but as "asking for it"? And then you expect a rape victim, after going through that hell, to also go through a nine month pregnancy (at a physical danger to herself), and every day have to be reminded of the crime? I am rather amazed that you haven't put yourself in the woman's shoes. You were being completely unfair and actually cruel. I recognize my post was hastily done and I sounded bad. Of course rape is the most extreme situation and it needs much more thought than what I just put into it. But I still think there's need for further analysis of the issue. Anyway, I apologize too.

Henry Plainview wrote: The Dark Elf wrote: obviously have no children of your own. This is, and always will be, the most bullsh*t, patronizing appeal to emotion that can ever be said in an internet argument. No I don't have children, but that doesn't mean (exaggerating here I know you have not said this) your plan to execute everyone on the sex offender list has any basis in reason and you shouldn't be flaunting your refusal to move behind raw emotion...

Henry Plainview wrote: The Dark Elf wrote: Henry Plainview wrote: The Dark Elf wrote: obviously have no children of your own. This is, and always will be, the most bullsh*t, patronizing appeal to emotion that can ever be said in an internet argument. No I don't have children, but that doesn't mean (exaggerating here I know you have not said this) your plan to execute everyone on the sex offender list has any basis in reason and you shouldn't be flaunting your refusal to move behind raw emotion... No you don't have children, and neither are you a woman. But you think you can make decisions for them based on what? Some clever little internet article or wikipedia? Whatever. I can put myself in the shoes of other parents having to live such a nightmare, and no, I can't maintain a cold, clinical outlook on the matter. I would not force such hell on anyone, but for someone like you, it's obviously a simple legal matter and you wipe your hands of it. I'm not deciding anything for anyone, I have no power over anything. But emotion has no place in the law. Emotions make us do stupid things.

Like argue on the internet.