My Operai've told people i'm not antisocial and this test proves it.
Friday, October 21, 2011 12:22:19 AM
| Personality Disorder Test Results
|
Personality Test by SimilarMinds.com
Personality Test by SimilarMinds.com
If we didn't already know it...
Sunday, August 21, 2011 2:22:41 AM
Further proof that Rick Perry is completely fucking insane.
http://news.yahoo.com/blogs/ticket/seven-ways-rick-perry-wants-change-constitution-131634517.html
this was the complete e-mail sent to me by my friend, who happens to be a moderate democrat. if he's sending me stuff like that about any republican, you know this guy has no shot.
so me being the open liberal i am, responded:
if you will allow me a point-by-point rebuttal:
1. yes, they are. it's called an IMPEACHMENT hearing. petition your representative to get articles of impeachment against judges who are performing bad behavior. let's start with 3 on the scotus bench right now- thomas, roberts, and alito.
2. congress should ignore all laws scotus says are unconstitutional. scotus does not have the power to rule any law unconstitutional. and also using this logic i would most likely have nothing higher than a middle school education because of segregationist laws.
3. of course he hates the federal income tax. federal income helps poor people by providing education, pell grants, and programs that feed people and keep them safe and healthy. can't have the pleibs improving themselves.
4. senators were appointed by state legislators and governors. ie. RICH PEOPLE. rich people who are not held responsible to the common people (hey wait, didn't he just complain about judges not being held accountable to the people? my head hurts...)
5. in a balanced budget incomes must equal expenditures. so that means the government can predict the future? there will be no terr-uh-ist attacts in a given year? no natural disasters? no unnatural disasters? no worthwhile innovations? balanced budget amendments also preclude the government saving. most states which have a bba balance their budgets by taking from pension funds or education or infrastructure improvements and pay off debts and shred the social services net.
6. why? to protect marriage? you can protect marriage by passing a constitutional amendment banning DIVORCE in all 50 states. besides such an amendment violates the equal protection clause in the constitution. can one part of the constitution contradict itself? how would a judge rule on that? one could rule based on the 14th amendment and another on this proposed amendment. in the meantime, don't like gay marriage, don't want gay marriage, DON'T GET A GAY MARRIAGE.
7. abortions should be illegal even when the conception was made because of rape or incest. pro life, right? so let's make sure everyone can afford to go to the doctor, and provide food and shelter for those in need, and end pointless wars of conquest and...oh wait. those are also anti business propositions as well. never mind. well let's promote sex education and provide birth cont...oh wait. teenagers don't need to know about sex until they get married. abstinence is key. just ask sarah palin, 2 time grandmother out of wedlock.
i did that point by point cold stopping at each bullet point and not reading the article straight through once with the busch series failing at montreal on in front of me. (note: the race was hilarious. it's just proof that busch/nationwide series cars and flat roadcourses with hairpin turns at both ends of the track don't mix.)
people have said perry is just like bush, except less charming and less intelligent.
bush was charming and intelligent?
media gets their scalp, weiner resigns
Friday, June 17, 2011 3:47:06 AM
anthony weiner resigned today. he shouldn't have, at least for reasons the media blasted at the american people today, and yesterday, and everyday for the last few weeks.
i think it is a sad, rather pathetic commentary on the media in this country. consider:
in 1998 democratic president bill clinton lied about getting a blow job in the oval office. he was later impeached. the charges of impeachment were led by one newt gingrich, the republican speaker of the house who at the end of the days the trial was going on was having an affair with current mrs. gingrich no. 3 while still married to mrs. gingrich no. 2.
in 2002 republican president george w. bush lied about there being yellow cake uranium in iraq, as well as there being weapons of mass destruction in that country. it has been 10 years since that time period where we still have a military presence in iraq. the democratic party came into power in 2006. impeachment was taken off the table. no investigations were made into the actions of the bush administration during the conflict in the multiple theatres of the middle east where billions of dollars were wasted and our soldiers were killed due to embarrassingly poor construction of soldiers barracks and embarassingly poor equipment given to our soldiers, and embarassingly poor quality food and water.
republican senators david vitter (la) and john ensign (nv), both proclaimed fambly val-uuz republicans, each had real life illegal sex scandals, vitter who hired a prositiute (while married) and ensign blackmailed the wife of a staffer and had his (ensign) parents pay her off. vitter was re-elected to the senate. ensign has just resigned within the last 2 months. no not because he disgraced himsef, but so the senate ethics committee reports on his actions would not be revealed, and the senate would not remove him from his office.
the one thing to note: without exception, the media hounded the disgraced democrats for their actions, actions which harmed no one and were not illegal. scandalous yes. against the law, no. but the media seemed to let the issues surrounding the republicans skate with very little mention and barely covered.
i ask the question again: WHAT LIBERAL MEDIA?
oh by the way, the media decided to blow up coverage of a press conference (or rather a lightly covered, barely reported on gathering in front of those with press credentials, microphones, and a camera, all one of those people) of nancy pelosi excoriating john boehner and the house republicans for not focusing on jobs creation in order to cover the non-story that was the anthony weiner resignation press conference.
this country is run by morAns who elect morAns and are told by the morAns in the media that jobs don't deserve coverage but a not-even-sex scandal needs wall-to-wall coverage.
my country sucks.
i think it is a sad, rather pathetic commentary on the media in this country. consider:
in 1998 democratic president bill clinton lied about getting a blow job in the oval office. he was later impeached. the charges of impeachment were led by one newt gingrich, the republican speaker of the house who at the end of the days the trial was going on was having an affair with current mrs. gingrich no. 3 while still married to mrs. gingrich no. 2.
in 2002 republican president george w. bush lied about there being yellow cake uranium in iraq, as well as there being weapons of mass destruction in that country. it has been 10 years since that time period where we still have a military presence in iraq. the democratic party came into power in 2006. impeachment was taken off the table. no investigations were made into the actions of the bush administration during the conflict in the multiple theatres of the middle east where billions of dollars were wasted and our soldiers were killed due to embarrassingly poor construction of soldiers barracks and embarassingly poor equipment given to our soldiers, and embarassingly poor quality food and water.
republican senators david vitter (la) and john ensign (nv), both proclaimed fambly val-uuz republicans, each had real life illegal sex scandals, vitter who hired a prositiute (while married) and ensign blackmailed the wife of a staffer and had his (ensign) parents pay her off. vitter was re-elected to the senate. ensign has just resigned within the last 2 months. no not because he disgraced himsef, but so the senate ethics committee reports on his actions would not be revealed, and the senate would not remove him from his office.
the one thing to note: without exception, the media hounded the disgraced democrats for their actions, actions which harmed no one and were not illegal. scandalous yes. against the law, no. but the media seemed to let the issues surrounding the republicans skate with very little mention and barely covered.
i ask the question again: WHAT LIBERAL MEDIA?
oh by the way, the media decided to blow up coverage of a press conference (or rather a lightly covered, barely reported on gathering in front of those with press credentials, microphones, and a camera, all one of those people) of nancy pelosi excoriating john boehner and the house republicans for not focusing on jobs creation in order to cover the non-story that was the anthony weiner resignation press conference.
this country is run by morAns who elect morAns and are told by the morAns in the media that jobs don't deserve coverage but a not-even-sex scandal needs wall-to-wall coverage.
my country sucks.
there is NO SUCH THING as a liberal media
Wednesday, June 15, 2011 10:19:19 PM
need an example? heather via crooks and liars gives you one.
now ask yourself this: if the media were so liberal as conservative idiots claim that it is, why is the so called liberal fox news going to be hounding one of the most liberal members in congress until he quits? wouldn't they be hounding the fambly val-uuz republicans up until the point where they are unseated or resign?
the media is not liberal. it is just as corporatist as the republican party is and go out of their way to not cover anything that matters to the average american but goes way over the top for news about idiot celebrities and pointless crap like american karaoke.
now ask yourself this: if the media were so liberal as conservative idiots claim that it is, why is the so called liberal fox news going to be hounding one of the most liberal members in congress until he quits? wouldn't they be hounding the fambly val-uuz republicans up until the point where they are unseated or resign?
the media is not liberal. it is just as corporatist as the republican party is and go out of their way to not cover anything that matters to the average american but goes way over the top for news about idiot celebrities and pointless crap like american karaoke.
republicans are strong on terror and national security
Thursday, June 9, 2011 5:47:19 PM
...so much so that they have caved to their nra masters and refuse to close a loophole in current law that allows for anyone to go to a gun show and purchase weapons. as long as the cash is good, anyone, even those with mental illness diagnosed or otherwise, can go to a gun show, purchase a large number of weapons and there would be no questions asked. anyone. including the terrorists. even the foreign ones. one member of al qaida (american by birth) even said as much:
so according to the republicans, we don't need better regulations of our food, air, and drinking water, we don't need to improve our infrastructure, we don't need to make a serious investment into alternative renewable energy, but we do need to let people buy their semi-automatics, and large calibre round firearms (including those that are powerful enough to pierce the body armor of our police forces), and we need to make sure that wars in iraq, pakistan, and afghanistan continue. because we all know that our fighting, occupying and killing innocent civilians in places where they already don't like us creating more terrorists to fight keeps us safe.
Muslims in the West have to remember that they are perfectly placed to play an important and decisive part in the jihad against the Zionists and crusaders and to do major damage to the enemies of Islam, waging war on their religion, sacred places and things and brethren.
This is a golden opportunity and a blessing from, Allah, subhanahu wa ta’ala, and a way to show one’s appreciation and thanks for this blessing is to rush to discharge one’s duty to his ummah and fight on its behalf with everything at his desposal. And in the West, you’ve got a lot at your disposal. Let’s take America as an example.
America is absolutely awash with easily obtainable firearms. You can go down to a gun show at the local convention center and come away with a fully automatic assault rifle, without a background check, and most likely without having to show an identification card. So what are you waiting for?
so according to the republicans, we don't need better regulations of our food, air, and drinking water, we don't need to improve our infrastructure, we don't need to make a serious investment into alternative renewable energy, but we do need to let people buy their semi-automatics, and large calibre round firearms (including those that are powerful enough to pierce the body armor of our police forces), and we need to make sure that wars in iraq, pakistan, and afghanistan continue. because we all know that our fighting, occupying and killing innocent civilians in places where they already don't like us creating more terrorists to fight keeps us safe.
the definition of a dick move
Wednesday, June 8, 2011 2:17:25 AM
for the entirety of last week (may 29-june 4) i was on the first of my guaranteed (for now) two week paid vacations. and i actually went somewhere this year. but i didn't leave until wednsday the first. and i am also the one who does the end of month inventory count at work. that entails counting all the paper, food, and condiments that are used basically everyday at the restaurant. in other words, i came in on my vacation to help out when i did not have to. work by the way knew that i was not leaving until wednsday but logistically it worked out better for me to take the week, but not come back until tuesday. monday night if it was an extreme emergency. before i left, i checked my schedule for the week i came back. my first day was tuesday 4pm-close (roughly 1230 am). keep this in mind.
so me and my college roomie/co-driver/friend i've known since middle school and i go drive off on vacation, a 2-day travel for a 3 day race weekend at historic watkins glen international. there was a one day stopover in cleveland going to and coming back from the track. we had a good time, although my legs were sore from the standing around done most of the time. we only stayed in one part of the track that had grandstands, that would be the grandstands at turn 10, the final left turn before the pit straight. most of our stay we hung out at thebus stop inner loop which has no permanent structure. the problems didn't start until we were coming back home. from cleveland specifically.
i wake up at about 830 in the morning on my own (ie no alarm). we hit the road at around 1020. at 1030 i get a call from work asking me to come in and close that night. so to recap so far, on my last official day of vacation i have been asked to come in and close. i say i can get there by 5 traffic notwithstanding. cleveland is about 5 hours from louisville. they say 6, i say no problem. because of construction in ohio and in gallatin county, kentucky (specifically the i-71 south interchange from i-75 which required a detour a bit further south on 75 on a righteous twisty driving road i would love to drive on again) i didn't get home until 540. and because of where my roomie lives, it was easier for us to go to my house, transfer his stuff to my car, drop off the rental car and then drive to his house. which is 20 minutes away in ideal traffic. we didn't leave the rental place until 6 or so because there was only one functional computer terminal. when we got back on the road it was 610. then we hit the traffic of people going home from work in jefferson county to the only major non interstate road to spencer county where my guy lives. it just happens to be 2 lanes and over a bridge. the state will never widen that road, and not because it has no money. widening that road helps louisville, and the state can't help louisville in any way at all because the state hates louisville. but i digress.
while stuck in traffic i get a call from work that they have no receipt paper left (did i forget to mention i also do the truck orders too? aparantly work forgot that i would not be doing truck orders on vacation. we get trucks on mondays and fridays. so no one had ordered tape paper by sunday for delivery on monday. the day was currently at the time MONDAY.) so after i drop off my friend, i go to one of our other stores, get 10 rolls, get gas for my own car, and go to work. i finally show up at somewhere around 730.
make note- i have NOT returned home yet for the second time to unpack or anything. i have a second set of clothes i keep in the trunk for emergencies. i show up to work in brown cargo pants, brown/black running shoes and work shirt. me having to come in on short notice like that is a jerk move. but this is the definition of a dick move.
i look at my schedule thinking i come in tomorrow at 4 and do what it said previously. i look at the crew schedule so i know who is there that monday night and who would be that tuesday night, when i see they have me scheduled for 8 AM the next day. so i call to get a clarification of my schedule. the info i get: i come in tomorrow morning, i need to be there by 9, off wednsday, work thursday, friday, and saturday. why so early today?
the managers were going to holiday world. they were meeting up at work at 9. and by managers, i mean four midday managers, two managers in training, and 4 crew people. all of which work primarily between 11 a and 3 p. and school had let out thursday.
everyone who worked today primarily worked 2nd shift, but they went through lunch with not a whole lot of lunchtime experienced help available with one manager on site when it would be busy simply because school had just let out. i knew that it would be busy during lunch the first few weeks simply because school had let out. and it was not raining. i was dead man walking.
i was quadruply upset:
1. i was working a morning directly after closing. i ask for 12 hours between shifts and i ask not to work mornings. the fog doesn't lift for me until 11am, even if i wake up at 7 for a 9 am shift when i go to bed at 11pm the previous night. i don't do mornings. and it was very busy when i walked in at 930 today.
2. i was managing alone during lunch. we NEVER have one manager during lunch. the only time only one manager is needed for lunch is when there is 5 inches of snow on the ground with the other restaurants in the area still open.
3. i worked a day i didn't really have to while on official vacation and i work 5 days when i get back, not 4. and especally after running a midday shift pretty much by myself with key people not really used to the pace of lunchtime rushes. today was not their fault. i told them as much and they could see the problems of today without me having to say anything to them.
4. the thing that makes me the most mad, i wasn't asked if i wanted to go to holiday world. i would have declined, because i don't really do amusement parks, but the fact that i was not asked this year (and i wasn't asked last year or the year before, but i went 3 years ago) pisses me off the most. i wasn't asked before i went on vacation, i had no idea they were leaving the day after i got back from vacation and one of the people who went was supposed to work that day during the time i needed this person and this person was a literal last-second addition to the travelling group who did not leave until 1130 am or so.
actually, this isn't the definition of a dick move, it is rather the definition of a take a crap on you move. i got not much sleep last night, got fried during the day working 2 or 3 positions at a time and i still haven't unpacked yet, simply because i have no energy for it now. maybe tomorrow.
so me and my college roomie/co-driver/friend i've known since middle school and i go drive off on vacation, a 2-day travel for a 3 day race weekend at historic watkins glen international. there was a one day stopover in cleveland going to and coming back from the track. we had a good time, although my legs were sore from the standing around done most of the time. we only stayed in one part of the track that had grandstands, that would be the grandstands at turn 10, the final left turn before the pit straight. most of our stay we hung out at the
i wake up at about 830 in the morning on my own (ie no alarm). we hit the road at around 1020. at 1030 i get a call from work asking me to come in and close that night. so to recap so far, on my last official day of vacation i have been asked to come in and close. i say i can get there by 5 traffic notwithstanding. cleveland is about 5 hours from louisville. they say 6, i say no problem. because of construction in ohio and in gallatin county, kentucky (specifically the i-71 south interchange from i-75 which required a detour a bit further south on 75 on a righteous twisty driving road i would love to drive on again) i didn't get home until 540. and because of where my roomie lives, it was easier for us to go to my house, transfer his stuff to my car, drop off the rental car and then drive to his house. which is 20 minutes away in ideal traffic. we didn't leave the rental place until 6 or so because there was only one functional computer terminal. when we got back on the road it was 610. then we hit the traffic of people going home from work in jefferson county to the only major non interstate road to spencer county where my guy lives. it just happens to be 2 lanes and over a bridge. the state will never widen that road, and not because it has no money. widening that road helps louisville, and the state can't help louisville in any way at all because the state hates louisville. but i digress.
while stuck in traffic i get a call from work that they have no receipt paper left (did i forget to mention i also do the truck orders too? aparantly work forgot that i would not be doing truck orders on vacation. we get trucks on mondays and fridays. so no one had ordered tape paper by sunday for delivery on monday. the day was currently at the time MONDAY.) so after i drop off my friend, i go to one of our other stores, get 10 rolls, get gas for my own car, and go to work. i finally show up at somewhere around 730.
make note- i have NOT returned home yet for the second time to unpack or anything. i have a second set of clothes i keep in the trunk for emergencies. i show up to work in brown cargo pants, brown/black running shoes and work shirt. me having to come in on short notice like that is a jerk move. but this is the definition of a dick move.
i look at my schedule thinking i come in tomorrow at 4 and do what it said previously. i look at the crew schedule so i know who is there that monday night and who would be that tuesday night, when i see they have me scheduled for 8 AM the next day. so i call to get a clarification of my schedule. the info i get: i come in tomorrow morning, i need to be there by 9, off wednsday, work thursday, friday, and saturday. why so early today?
the managers were going to holiday world. they were meeting up at work at 9. and by managers, i mean four midday managers, two managers in training, and 4 crew people. all of which work primarily between 11 a and 3 p. and school had let out thursday.
everyone who worked today primarily worked 2nd shift, but they went through lunch with not a whole lot of lunchtime experienced help available with one manager on site when it would be busy simply because school had just let out. i knew that it would be busy during lunch the first few weeks simply because school had let out. and it was not raining. i was dead man walking.
i was quadruply upset:
1. i was working a morning directly after closing. i ask for 12 hours between shifts and i ask not to work mornings. the fog doesn't lift for me until 11am, even if i wake up at 7 for a 9 am shift when i go to bed at 11pm the previous night. i don't do mornings. and it was very busy when i walked in at 930 today.
2. i was managing alone during lunch. we NEVER have one manager during lunch. the only time only one manager is needed for lunch is when there is 5 inches of snow on the ground with the other restaurants in the area still open.
3. i worked a day i didn't really have to while on official vacation and i work 5 days when i get back, not 4. and especally after running a midday shift pretty much by myself with key people not really used to the pace of lunchtime rushes. today was not their fault. i told them as much and they could see the problems of today without me having to say anything to them.
4. the thing that makes me the most mad, i wasn't asked if i wanted to go to holiday world. i would have declined, because i don't really do amusement parks, but the fact that i was not asked this year (and i wasn't asked last year or the year before, but i went 3 years ago) pisses me off the most. i wasn't asked before i went on vacation, i had no idea they were leaving the day after i got back from vacation and one of the people who went was supposed to work that day during the time i needed this person and this person was a literal last-second addition to the travelling group who did not leave until 1130 am or so.
actually, this isn't the definition of a dick move, it is rather the definition of a take a crap on you move. i got not much sleep last night, got fried during the day working 2 or 3 positions at a time and i still haven't unpacked yet, simply because i have no energy for it now. maybe tomorrow.
you say happy easter, i say...
Sunday, April 24, 2011 7:16:51 PM
(the following is from april 3, 2010. i felt a repost is necessary. and to avoid confusion, this opinion applies only to PUBLIC postings. facebook posts and e-mails are private affairs and i have no problems with that)
so, you know, tomorrow is easter. whatever. i really don't care about that. this isn't going to be about the pagan-cum-christian holiday.
it's going to be about the people.
you know who you are. the ones who say happy easter and expect to get some sort of kudos for wishing other people a happy easter. so i say to you, a big wet sloppy fuck you.
i hate these people who assume that just because you happen to be black, or white, or american, you happen to be a follower of some guy who more than likely didn't exist and subscribe to the theory of said same guy rising from the dead after 3 days.
oh, wait those are pagans. my bad. apologies to the pagans out there who have had their religion mischaracterized, defamed, degraded over the yearscenturies and then taken over, adapted, and rewritten into christian dogma and mythology. you don't deserve scorn. nearly everyone hates you. they hate atheists more than you. so as a fellow member of an oppressed group of americans, i'm not directing any scorn at you. its these fucking sunday christians who fucking piss me off.
christian privilege is a fucking disgrace and these people who get real offended that YOU aren't a christian. i've been around some message boards. and right around this time of year you see the "he is risen" posts, and the replies under that with the religious undertones. i'm sorry but i have a major major problem here. if a muslim were to do the same thing, during ramadan or any of their other holidays the outrage would be everywhere. same thing if its rosh hashanna or yom kippur for jews. and what about wishing everyone a happy solstice for the pagans?
see my point? it is completely hypocritical for christians to openly outwardly proclaim their religious holidays but then express outrage when someone of another religion expresses the same thing towards them. tell you what, i'll stop bitching about christian privilege when i see three different television commercials advertising religious products that aren't christian. and if i come across one product of islamic religious purposes i'll quit then.
good luck if that happens.
i would say the vast majority of my friends and the people i know are religious. i can name 2 others who are atheist. all of them are the type of people that keep their religion a private affair between them and their god. all of them know i'm an atheist and not a single one of them ever try to push their beliefs on me, and i respect that. but these chest beating i'm christian and i got mine so screw you and everyone else despite going against everything that my supposed god said we should treat people christians, please fuck off and die.
so, you know, tomorrow is easter. whatever. i really don't care about that. this isn't going to be about the pagan-cum-christian holiday.
it's going to be about the people.
you know who you are. the ones who say happy easter and expect to get some sort of kudos for wishing other people a happy easter. so i say to you, a big wet sloppy fuck you.
i hate these people who assume that just because you happen to be black, or white, or american, you happen to be a follower of some guy who more than likely didn't exist and subscribe to the theory of said same guy rising from the dead after 3 days.
oh, wait those are pagans. my bad. apologies to the pagans out there who have had their religion mischaracterized, defamed, degraded over the yearscenturies and then taken over, adapted, and rewritten into christian dogma and mythology. you don't deserve scorn. nearly everyone hates you. they hate atheists more than you. so as a fellow member of an oppressed group of americans, i'm not directing any scorn at you. its these fucking sunday christians who fucking piss me off.
christian privilege is a fucking disgrace and these people who get real offended that YOU aren't a christian. i've been around some message boards. and right around this time of year you see the "he is risen" posts, and the replies under that with the religious undertones. i'm sorry but i have a major major problem here. if a muslim were to do the same thing, during ramadan or any of their other holidays the outrage would be everywhere. same thing if its rosh hashanna or yom kippur for jews. and what about wishing everyone a happy solstice for the pagans?
see my point? it is completely hypocritical for christians to openly outwardly proclaim their religious holidays but then express outrage when someone of another religion expresses the same thing towards them. tell you what, i'll stop bitching about christian privilege when i see three different television commercials advertising religious products that aren't christian. and if i come across one product of islamic religious purposes i'll quit then.
good luck if that happens.
i would say the vast majority of my friends and the people i know are religious. i can name 2 others who are atheist. all of them are the type of people that keep their religion a private affair between them and their god. all of them know i'm an atheist and not a single one of them ever try to push their beliefs on me, and i respect that. but these chest beating i'm christian and i got mine so screw you and everyone else despite going against everything that my supposed god said we should treat people christians, please fuck off and die.
play grand theft auto? like deer hunter? own an android? download dog wars.
Sunday, April 24, 2011 5:11:03 AM
yes, its a dog fighting game. i do not support or condone dog fighting.
no i am not kidding. no it is not a contradictory position.
if anyone has read my blog posts, all five of you, you probably could guess i'm not big on censorship and i hate a double standard. some guy has released a dog fighting app on the android market and quite a few people have gone apoplectic over it. it has hit the 50,000 download mark not because its a quality game (it is a beta and by all reports isn't very polished and definitely not finished) but because people have to download it to comment on it. quite a few are rather amusing:
-samantha
--jennifer
--Dennis
--chris
gee, chris, hypocrite much? it isn't just the idiots on the android market getting all upset about this. android blog editors have seemingly lost their minds as well:
--Phil Nickinson
the reason most of the people chose an android handset was to get away from the authoritarian top-down edicts from the egomaniac named jobs in cupertino, california. so now this guy (who i freely admit does not speak for every android blog on the internets) wants google to adopt apple like policies and pull this app, an app which does not violate one of google's developer terms of service, to go as far as to arbitrarily make one up just to get it pulled? i think that all of the different bible apps listed are offensive. should i start some sort of revolution based on false outrage to get this done? or should i do what i normally do and just ignore them and not download them? i would have never downloaded the game before people made a big deal out of nothing. i only downloaded the app afterward, even though i will never run it because it will piss people off enough to make steam come out of their ears.
people may say that it glorifies dog fighting. well, mortal kombat glorifies pysical violence. grand theft auto glorifies beating hookers, shooting cops, stealing cars, and blowing shit up real good. deer hunter glorifies shooting innocent animals for reasons other than self defense and sustenance. pokemon is a training manual of capturing cute animals and facing them off against other cute animals to train them to get stronger and more powerful to beat other cute animals. socom advocates modern day warfare against other human beings.
think about that for a second. it is perfectly okay to shoot other human beings or beat their ass into a bloody pulp (literally)or have sex with a prostitute, kill her, and steal her money, and it is absolutely fine for a cute cuddly animal to beat up on another cute cuddly animal in a freaking kids game, but it is wrong and immoral and unethical for a game with an adult 18+ rating that no one is being forced to download to exist because it's all about dog fighting.
someone convince me why it is okay for those games to be around but not this one. don't want to be a hypocrite, don't complain about this game without raising holy hell about other games as well.
this is a GAME. it is not reality. some children are better discerning games from reality better than most adults.
oh, and because phil declined to add a dowload link, i'll provide one.
click here to download
no i am not kidding. no it is not a contradictory position.
if anyone has read my blog posts, all five of you, you probably could guess i'm not big on censorship and i hate a double standard. some guy has released a dog fighting app on the android market and quite a few people have gone apoplectic over it. it has hit the 50,000 download mark not because its a quality game (it is a beta and by all reports isn't very polished and definitely not finished) but because people have to download it to comment on it. quite a few are rather amusing:
This is horrible.i have two pitbulls and they are the sweetest dogs I would never dream of fighting them this needs to be taken off the market now
-samantha
Everyday millions of people like myself help to end suffering of abused and mistreated animals and to market a game such as DogWars shows Google and Andriod does not have a conciliatory outlook on the general populous beliefs. To condone such a game that goes against every law currently trying to passed in animals rights is just plain sickening! Shame on Andriod and Google, it should behoove them to remove Dogwars. I'm ashamed i own an Andriod phone and will not speak highly of it again until game is pulled
--jennifer
Disgusting game concept for the simple of mind.
--Dennis
This is just sick. I love the GTA games and have garden of weeden but I wont stand for violence involving kids or animals. Please dont install this
--chris
gee, chris, hypocrite much? it isn't just the idiots on the android market getting all upset about this. android blog editors have seemingly lost their minds as well:
We're not sure if the 50,000-250,000 download mark is because people downloaded the free beta just to leave 1-star comments (let's hope so), or if it's really that popular (let's hope not). But we do know this: If we were Google, we'd probably find some sort of term of use that Kage Games has broken -- or invent a new one -- and fast, and get this sort of thing out of the Market.
--Phil Nickinson
the reason most of the people chose an android handset was to get away from the authoritarian top-down edicts from the egomaniac named jobs in cupertino, california. so now this guy (who i freely admit does not speak for every android blog on the internets) wants google to adopt apple like policies and pull this app, an app which does not violate one of google's developer terms of service, to go as far as to arbitrarily make one up just to get it pulled? i think that all of the different bible apps listed are offensive. should i start some sort of revolution based on false outrage to get this done? or should i do what i normally do and just ignore them and not download them? i would have never downloaded the game before people made a big deal out of nothing. i only downloaded the app afterward, even though i will never run it because it will piss people off enough to make steam come out of their ears.
people may say that it glorifies dog fighting. well, mortal kombat glorifies pysical violence. grand theft auto glorifies beating hookers, shooting cops, stealing cars, and blowing shit up real good. deer hunter glorifies shooting innocent animals for reasons other than self defense and sustenance. pokemon is a training manual of capturing cute animals and facing them off against other cute animals to train them to get stronger and more powerful to beat other cute animals. socom advocates modern day warfare against other human beings.
think about that for a second. it is perfectly okay to shoot other human beings or beat their ass into a bloody pulp (literally)or have sex with a prostitute, kill her, and steal her money, and it is absolutely fine for a cute cuddly animal to beat up on another cute cuddly animal in a freaking kids game, but it is wrong and immoral and unethical for a game with an adult 18+ rating that no one is being forced to download to exist because it's all about dog fighting.
someone convince me why it is okay for those games to be around but not this one. don't want to be a hypocrite, don't complain about this game without raising holy hell about other games as well.
this is a GAME. it is not reality. some children are better discerning games from reality better than most adults.
oh, and because phil declined to add a dowload link, i'll provide one.
click here to download
my views on religion
Sunday, April 17, 2011 12:09:15 AM
i was asked by a cousin of my religious views. specifically if i still did not believe in (christian) god. i got her message overnight. i read it 15 minutes before i had to go to work, so i had been thinking about this for more than 6 hours.
it is definitely not all of what i believe, but it is what i came up with after sitting down and typing for a few hours. any longer and it would be a 7 or 8 page report on what exactly i believe.
oh yeah, the blog subtitle? i mean that.
---
ok, here is my answer.
short answer- no i do not believe in god.
longer answer- i don't believe in the need for a god. i am comfortable in my decisions and i can live with the consequences either way. and why would i need to believe in a deity to do the right thing? why not just do the right thing because its the right thing? my moral sense is not in question here either. you don't need religion to be moral or religion to get morals. if this was the case, then the catholic church, one of the richest (and corrupt organizations in the world) would have made real reparations for knowingly enabling priests and others in that church to diddle little boys. or for denying the holocaust while it happened. or the crusades. i will not or cannot speak for you, but any organization which belittles and condemns women just for being female should not have any authority on what women can or cannot do. food for thought- there are more female residents of this house than there are in all of vatican city.
but that is just the catholics. i could go on about baptists or southern baptists too. megachurches are nothing more than a "my god is bigger than your god" contest. these pastors who claim to have the ear of god ask and beg for offerings from people who really can't afford to give offerings, all the while driving around in expensive automobiles with expensive suits flying around in private jets. plus in the (bully) pulpit they advocate not for ensuring that a community takes care of those who can't afford to, not for any sort of social justice, but that the gays are what is bringing down the country and they gays should be denied all sorts of rights, rights which black people were given first by constitutional mandate in 1865, and then codified into law in 1965. and it still isn't equal yet. what offends me is the jimmy swaggarts and jim bakkers and ted haggards of the world- pastors who advocate all sorts of moral policies because "gawd says its wrong", get caught doing those same actions, apologize, resume preaching those same policies, and keep doing the same things that got them in trouble in the first place. to be christian means that you follow this (no offense here) bullshit? no thank you.
this in fact has been the thing that really bothered me about the entire religion thing anyway when dealing with people. (i gots some issues with the deity as well, but i'm not going to go there unless you want me to.) if you follow this god person you should be trying to emulate his/her/its actions. that 8 and 9 year old kids could say they have accepted god into their lives in sunday school and then turn around and act as if they have no sense makes no sense. i say that not as a 27 year old saying that 8 and 9 year old kids don't really know what choices they are making and what they are getting themselves into, but as someone who was 8 and 9 years old sitting in sunday school and watching this happen. do you know what it is like when the sunday school teacher tells the others in the class that corey, who has not accepted christ into his life, is setting an example for them and that they, as those who have joined the church, should be setting an example for me? or that sunday school teachers have told me that they would have failed as teachers if they didn't get me to join by the time i had to move on?
is there a god? i don't know. i see no evidence that there is one. and if there is evidence for god or a god, this being knows what evidence it would take to convince me. i am agnostic on that issue. do i believe in the christian god? no. i am an atheist on that issue. do you believe in zeus, vishna, odin, thor, quetzalcoatl, or kukulkán? i doubt it. the difference between someone who holds the same views of gods as i do and your typical christian is that one in my position is just as atheist as a christian is towards all gods but one. who is to say that the muslims were the ones who got it right? or the jews? or the buddhists? it is not my place to say who is right or what is right.
this is why even though i hold no religious views, i do not (repeat I DO NOT) discourage anyone else from holding religious views, just as long as those views don't affect my life. i don't care if you feel compelled to pray prostrating yourself 5 times a day. i don't care if you feel compelled to confess to a pastor for your sins. i don't care if you feel compelled to wake up early in the morning and spend hours upon hours praising your god. really i don't. if it makes you happy and at peace, i am happy for you. i am however insulted and upset by people who insinuate that because i'm not religious (and when they say this, its code for christian) i have no moral authority or that i am inherantly evil because of this same lack of religion. i am no saying you are saying this, but i have been in places where it has been said, like at a secular awards banquet where religion was not ever brought up.
what does upset me is when religious people try to force their views on other people, including those who may not hold the same religious views through government. no alcohol sales on sunday is wrong. censorship of content is wrong. issuing license plates with "in god we trust" is wrong (while we're at it, get it off the currency and "under god" out of the pledge. they were put there during the red scare of the 1950s because people were afraid of the "godless commie bastards" infultrating the country and the government. its similar to the muslim scare going on right now with the anti-sharia laws springing up across the nation) i don't like pushy people irrespective of religion.
so that's a little of what i think, by far this is not a complete picture.
it is definitely not all of what i believe, but it is what i came up with after sitting down and typing for a few hours. any longer and it would be a 7 or 8 page report on what exactly i believe.
oh yeah, the blog subtitle? i mean that.
---
ok, here is my answer.
short answer- no i do not believe in god.
longer answer- i don't believe in the need for a god. i am comfortable in my decisions and i can live with the consequences either way. and why would i need to believe in a deity to do the right thing? why not just do the right thing because its the right thing? my moral sense is not in question here either. you don't need religion to be moral or religion to get morals. if this was the case, then the catholic church, one of the richest (and corrupt organizations in the world) would have made real reparations for knowingly enabling priests and others in that church to diddle little boys. or for denying the holocaust while it happened. or the crusades. i will not or cannot speak for you, but any organization which belittles and condemns women just for being female should not have any authority on what women can or cannot do. food for thought- there are more female residents of this house than there are in all of vatican city.
but that is just the catholics. i could go on about baptists or southern baptists too. megachurches are nothing more than a "my god is bigger than your god" contest. these pastors who claim to have the ear of god ask and beg for offerings from people who really can't afford to give offerings, all the while driving around in expensive automobiles with expensive suits flying around in private jets. plus in the (bully) pulpit they advocate not for ensuring that a community takes care of those who can't afford to, not for any sort of social justice, but that the gays are what is bringing down the country and they gays should be denied all sorts of rights, rights which black people were given first by constitutional mandate in 1865, and then codified into law in 1965. and it still isn't equal yet. what offends me is the jimmy swaggarts and jim bakkers and ted haggards of the world- pastors who advocate all sorts of moral policies because "gawd says its wrong", get caught doing those same actions, apologize, resume preaching those same policies, and keep doing the same things that got them in trouble in the first place. to be christian means that you follow this (no offense here) bullshit? no thank you.
this in fact has been the thing that really bothered me about the entire religion thing anyway when dealing with people. (i gots some issues with the deity as well, but i'm not going to go there unless you want me to.) if you follow this god person you should be trying to emulate his/her/its actions. that 8 and 9 year old kids could say they have accepted god into their lives in sunday school and then turn around and act as if they have no sense makes no sense. i say that not as a 27 year old saying that 8 and 9 year old kids don't really know what choices they are making and what they are getting themselves into, but as someone who was 8 and 9 years old sitting in sunday school and watching this happen. do you know what it is like when the sunday school teacher tells the others in the class that corey, who has not accepted christ into his life, is setting an example for them and that they, as those who have joined the church, should be setting an example for me? or that sunday school teachers have told me that they would have failed as teachers if they didn't get me to join by the time i had to move on?
is there a god? i don't know. i see no evidence that there is one. and if there is evidence for god or a god, this being knows what evidence it would take to convince me. i am agnostic on that issue. do i believe in the christian god? no. i am an atheist on that issue. do you believe in zeus, vishna, odin, thor, quetzalcoatl, or kukulkán? i doubt it. the difference between someone who holds the same views of gods as i do and your typical christian is that one in my position is just as atheist as a christian is towards all gods but one. who is to say that the muslims were the ones who got it right? or the jews? or the buddhists? it is not my place to say who is right or what is right.
this is why even though i hold no religious views, i do not (repeat I DO NOT) discourage anyone else from holding religious views, just as long as those views don't affect my life. i don't care if you feel compelled to pray prostrating yourself 5 times a day. i don't care if you feel compelled to confess to a pastor for your sins. i don't care if you feel compelled to wake up early in the morning and spend hours upon hours praising your god. really i don't. if it makes you happy and at peace, i am happy for you. i am however insulted and upset by people who insinuate that because i'm not religious (and when they say this, its code for christian) i have no moral authority or that i am inherantly evil because of this same lack of religion. i am no saying you are saying this, but i have been in places where it has been said, like at a secular awards banquet where religion was not ever brought up.
what does upset me is when religious people try to force their views on other people, including those who may not hold the same religious views through government. no alcohol sales on sunday is wrong. censorship of content is wrong. issuing license plates with "in god we trust" is wrong (while we're at it, get it off the currency and "under god" out of the pledge. they were put there during the red scare of the 1950s because people were afraid of the "godless commie bastards" infultrating the country and the government. its similar to the muslim scare going on right now with the anti-sharia laws springing up across the nation) i don't like pushy people irrespective of religion.
so that's a little of what i think, by far this is not a complete picture.
taxes: we need to raise them. for EVERYBODY.
Thursday, April 7, 2011 5:28:11 AM
Why hasn't anyone even considered RAISING taxes? According to the financial newspaper of record to the world, the London Financial Times, the country can afford from top to bottom a 5% raise in taxes. All of this cutting leaves the country in worse position when we can't pay to improve ourselves through infrastructure or preventative health care. And why are we cutting the things that protect the least among us anyway? That's un-Christian for an alleged Christian Nation. I know we should at least do that, and I am an open un-apologetic baby eating atheist.
People forget that Bill Clinton raised taxes and he managed to balance a budget and leave a surplus when he left office. Something that makes you think, eh? One president raises taxes and the people prosper and the economy booms and he has a surplus. Another president cuts taxes and we get plunged into one of the worst depressions in history with deficits the human mind struggles to contemplate. I really fail to understand why people hate paying taxes when they get the benefits of those taxes back in investments in the country and community. I especially fail to see why these same people advocate multinational small businesses being allowed to pay less in taxes than they do when they buy a cheeseburger and get several billion dollars back in tax giveaways. Or for hedge fund managers who pay at most 15% of the first $150,000 or so (that number could be wrong) in taxes and nothing else afterwards. Or for other people to pay no tax on dividends, which is their only income.
The state and country do have a tax problem. We aren't paying enough of it. And this is from someone who made before taxes less than $16,000. The country isn't broke. The country has most of its cash locked up into 400 families who don't spend that money on anything and still want more money. And the sad part is they are using idiots, fools, and political opportunists to work against the interests of these same idiots, fools, and political opportunists.
And David Williams (err- Burkesville, KY Senate Majority leader who hasn't met a tax cut he doesn't like or program he wants to cut except those that benefit him or the nonexistant rich people in his district or very poor state for that matter) is all three.
People forget that Bill Clinton raised taxes and he managed to balance a budget and leave a surplus when he left office. Something that makes you think, eh? One president raises taxes and the people prosper and the economy booms and he has a surplus. Another president cuts taxes and we get plunged into one of the worst depressions in history with deficits the human mind struggles to contemplate. I really fail to understand why people hate paying taxes when they get the benefits of those taxes back in investments in the country and community. I especially fail to see why these same people advocate multinational small businesses being allowed to pay less in taxes than they do when they buy a cheeseburger and get several billion dollars back in tax giveaways. Or for hedge fund managers who pay at most 15% of the first $150,000 or so (that number could be wrong) in taxes and nothing else afterwards. Or for other people to pay no tax on dividends, which is their only income.
The state and country do have a tax problem. We aren't paying enough of it. And this is from someone who made before taxes less than $16,000. The country isn't broke. The country has most of its cash locked up into 400 families who don't spend that money on anything and still want more money. And the sad part is they are using idiots, fools, and political opportunists to work against the interests of these same idiots, fools, and political opportunists.
And David Williams (err- Burkesville, KY Senate Majority leader who hasn't met a tax cut he doesn't like or program he wants to cut except those that benefit him or the nonexistant rich people in his district or very poor state for that matter) is all three.
reason 48375 of why i refuse to register as a democrat in kentucky
Tuesday, March 1, 2011 6:33:57 PM
sickening.
I find it interesting/disturbing that DEMOCRATS killed this bill. I thought Democrats want as many people to vote as possible. If a Republican killed this bill I would not have been surprised. Typically Republicans go well out of their way to disenfranchise as many people as possible. What is shocking is that A) a REPUBLICAN sponsored the bill, B) a REPUBLICAN listened to his real, average citizen, constituents, and C) he's going to bring the bill up next session. If Jimmy Higdon doesn't to too much wingnutty stuff, I may just exclude him from any Republican excoriating.
The Democrats need to stop worrying about outside influences (read: Republicans in independent clothing) monkeying with their primaries. Not only would Democrats in independent clothing be able to monkey with Republican primaries, the Kentucky Democratic Party does an excellent job of picking some truly epic candidates. And by epic, I mean some of the worst possible.
Since primaries are paid for by state tax dollars, can I request that my portion of state tax that fund them be refunded back to me because I am disenfranchised from picking who I can vote for in November? It is sickening that a minority of the electorate will select the candidate for the general. That's not democracy. And to those who say join a party, I say no. No way in hell I register as a Democrat in this state. They are clearly corporatists and the ones outside of Jefferson (and probably Fayette) County are this short of being Republicans. Plus the KDP is run by a bunch of good-ol-boy, backroom dealing provincialists led by someone who regularly gave to Republican candidates. If that is what it takes to be a Kentucky Democrat, you can take it and shove it up your rear ends.
I find it interesting/disturbing that DEMOCRATS killed this bill. I thought Democrats want as many people to vote as possible. If a Republican killed this bill I would not have been surprised. Typically Republicans go well out of their way to disenfranchise as many people as possible. What is shocking is that A) a REPUBLICAN sponsored the bill, B) a REPUBLICAN listened to his real, average citizen, constituents, and C) he's going to bring the bill up next session. If Jimmy Higdon doesn't to too much wingnutty stuff, I may just exclude him from any Republican excoriating.
The Democrats need to stop worrying about outside influences (read: Republicans in independent clothing) monkeying with their primaries. Not only would Democrats in independent clothing be able to monkey with Republican primaries, the Kentucky Democratic Party does an excellent job of picking some truly epic candidates. And by epic, I mean some of the worst possible.
Since primaries are paid for by state tax dollars, can I request that my portion of state tax that fund them be refunded back to me because I am disenfranchised from picking who I can vote for in November? It is sickening that a minority of the electorate will select the candidate for the general. That's not democracy. And to those who say join a party, I say no. No way in hell I register as a Democrat in this state. They are clearly corporatists and the ones outside of Jefferson (and probably Fayette) County are this short of being Republicans. Plus the KDP is run by a bunch of good-ol-boy, backroom dealing provincialists led by someone who regularly gave to Republican candidates. If that is what it takes to be a Kentucky Democrat, you can take it and shove it up your rear ends.
what a verizon iphone 4 changes
Friday, January 14, 2011 9:13:57 AM
nothing. not a damn thing. at the end of 2010, more people were using an android device than one running apple's iphone firmware.
a lot of tech/phone geeks are confused. they are conflating too much information thinking that because the iphone is now on verizon, android sales are going to flatline. so at&t smartphones are mostly iphones. i'm not surprised. when you have an exclusive contract with a company that produces one phone a year i would push and feature that phone as well.
keep in mind that there are just about somewhere north of 1 million iphones on t-mobile too, and their android phone sales haven't dropped off any. some were purchased from at&t customers. some were bought directly from apple. it is not an easy thing to do to get it on t-mobile's network, but it is possible. and those who want it bad enough will do whatever it takes to do that. and despite that, android handsets have not dropped off.
what verizon is doing is going for that easy dollar. they know people are frustrated with at&t's network. and they know that there are enough of a cult of mac people that would dump their defective iphone for one that would work properly when you held it naturally. i would bet that most of their iphone buyers are former at&t customers. and if they would be willing to buy a new phone entirely, and in some cases pay the ETF to do it, they would be willing to shell out some serious cash to spend on that precious iphone.
meanwhile it (still) has no 4g antenna. and that's always been verizon's dig at at&t. their network is better. well if they really wanted a phone to blow at&t away on their 4g network, guess what. that's an ANDROID phone. even now with this it still has the inherant CDMA problem of not being able to use voice and data at the same time. i don't see the iphone taking off just because it is on another carrier, this one especially. i also don't think that things are being compared correctly. the real battle is os vs. os. like i said in another post, if apple sold 5 million iphone 4s, lg, sony, samsung, acer, motorola, htc, and dell could sell 1 million of one of their offerings and outsell anything apple could do. apple is going to lose this race to android due to numbers. there is only one piece of phone hardware that runs apple's iphone firmware where there are hundreds of phones that run android. canalys is right when they say fragmentation isn't an issue here. more people are using an android device than they are an iphone device.
apple wouldn't have been in this mess if they produced more than one design of iphone like samsung and their galaxy s line. you don't think an iphone nano or an iphone with a physical keyboard wouldn't have sold? their one phone a year cycle they have locked themselves in and are dedicated to is going to kill them in the long run. android devices are getting better faster with a smaller development cycle than apple and android's software is steadily improving. you could have an iphone available for all 4 carriers and i don't think it would matter much. apple's near insane seek of control of the iphone, even when it is in possession of a customer is going to eventually have them losing the mobile wars.
i say all of this actively using an iphone and an android device. i do have an anti apple bias, but only due to a dissatisfaction of using itunes and the inability to customize the graphical interface of my device without jailbreaking which apple has tried and failed miserably to curb. and i still want the iphone on t-mobile, although i am 99% confident i would never get one. i like my vibrant. i don't need any special software to get it to do what i want it to do. and it doesn't have steve jobs insane control of what i want on it.
a lot of tech/phone geeks are confused. they are conflating too much information thinking that because the iphone is now on verizon, android sales are going to flatline. so at&t smartphones are mostly iphones. i'm not surprised. when you have an exclusive contract with a company that produces one phone a year i would push and feature that phone as well.
keep in mind that there are just about somewhere north of 1 million iphones on t-mobile too, and their android phone sales haven't dropped off any. some were purchased from at&t customers. some were bought directly from apple. it is not an easy thing to do to get it on t-mobile's network, but it is possible. and those who want it bad enough will do whatever it takes to do that. and despite that, android handsets have not dropped off.
what verizon is doing is going for that easy dollar. they know people are frustrated with at&t's network. and they know that there are enough of a cult of mac people that would dump their defective iphone for one that would work properly when you held it naturally. i would bet that most of their iphone buyers are former at&t customers. and if they would be willing to buy a new phone entirely, and in some cases pay the ETF to do it, they would be willing to shell out some serious cash to spend on that precious iphone.
meanwhile it (still) has no 4g antenna. and that's always been verizon's dig at at&t. their network is better. well if they really wanted a phone to blow at&t away on their 4g network, guess what. that's an ANDROID phone. even now with this it still has the inherant CDMA problem of not being able to use voice and data at the same time. i don't see the iphone taking off just because it is on another carrier, this one especially. i also don't think that things are being compared correctly. the real battle is os vs. os. like i said in another post, if apple sold 5 million iphone 4s, lg, sony, samsung, acer, motorola, htc, and dell could sell 1 million of one of their offerings and outsell anything apple could do. apple is going to lose this race to android due to numbers. there is only one piece of phone hardware that runs apple's iphone firmware where there are hundreds of phones that run android. canalys is right when they say fragmentation isn't an issue here. more people are using an android device than they are an iphone device.
apple wouldn't have been in this mess if they produced more than one design of iphone like samsung and their galaxy s line. you don't think an iphone nano or an iphone with a physical keyboard wouldn't have sold? their one phone a year cycle they have locked themselves in and are dedicated to is going to kill them in the long run. android devices are getting better faster with a smaller development cycle than apple and android's software is steadily improving. you could have an iphone available for all 4 carriers and i don't think it would matter much. apple's near insane seek of control of the iphone, even when it is in possession of a customer is going to eventually have them losing the mobile wars.
i say all of this actively using an iphone and an android device. i do have an anti apple bias, but only due to a dissatisfaction of using itunes and the inability to customize the graphical interface of my device without jailbreaking which apple has tried and failed miserably to curb. and i still want the iphone on t-mobile, although i am 99% confident i would never get one. i like my vibrant. i don't need any special software to get it to do what i want it to do. and it doesn't have steve jobs insane control of what i want on it.
republicans are the party of rational common sense solutions to our nation's problems
Wednesday, January 12, 2011 10:40:05 PM
republicans are the party of rational common sense solutions to our nation's problems my first crosspost. it takes elements of a couple posts here already along with posts from other forums plus some additional thoughts on the matter. really, the language has got to stop and i wish the right wing would stop pretending their hands are completely clean, stop grandstanding, and move to the center to actually solve problems than score cheap political points they won't do anything with other than funnel money to their corporate masters and jobs out of the country.
ctk
Friends (2)
| S | M | T | W | T | F | S |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
 January 2012March 2012
| ||||||
| 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | |||
| 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 |
| 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 | 16 | 17 | 18 |
| 19 | 20 | 21 | 22 | 23 | 24 | 25 |
| 26 | 27 | 28 | 29 | |||
