What happened to all our lib friends?

COG (by the way are you Spacely or Cogswell?) that is exactly my point. JG sorry, JD asked on page one, where we went. This forum is about hobbying. The Sandbox has been used for about two years now as a ever increasing "Rant and Cursebox" against our political opposites. What is the point anymore? It bores me. It bores a boatload of other people.

We are in Kansas and Missouri. Surprise! Lots of conservatives.

I get tired of the same old tired arguments and don't participate much anymore, because no one LISTENS. We all just preach, and pontificate, and mock, and get mad. What's the point of posting anymore? Am I going to get you or JD or Fritz or anyone who is conservative to listen? Maybe

You want to know what I think? I think the modern conservative movement vilifies. That's all it does. Comes out with a "you are trying to make socialists of us all" or "you are not a true American" or "you hate your country" for every position a liberal takes.
No new ideas from ya'll either. Not one. Deregulate, and its not enough. Need more. Lower taxes during two concurrent wars and the deficit booms and the economy doesn't show much bounce except for the richest. Hell, didn't lower them enough.

Judas Priest, as my Mom used to say.

Again. Where did we go? We got bored and left you guys to your own devices, because a lot, maybe not all, but a lot of the posters here just do not post without vilification. It's tiresome....Aggh. I have become tired of talking about being tired.
Anyway Samantha Silver, otherwise known as Karen Fisher is gonna be in town 8-8 thru 8-10. Porn star, provider, has her own web site. Knock out if you like the milfs. See pic below. No I'm not a pimp, but if I were, boy could I do worse! Originally Posted by Bartman1963

Amen brother Bart, I to have grown weary of the Sandbox, and yes I know I used to be one of the instigators, debators and have had more than my share of arguments, but there is not meeting in the middle, no compromise, its either this way or nothing at all. Nothing is changing, and nothing is going to as long as we the American public keep voting in party blocks, you know this president was a dem so next election everyone vote for a republican and vise versa. The country is just swinging from one extreme to the other and nothing changes.

As a conservative I think with my brain and not my heart. I would appreciate a cogent argument about almost anything. Can you tell me that people like CDN or C2B have ever tried logic and facts? I have never seen it. Admittedly I have only been here a couple of months but very few here have tried and they were almost always conservatives. The two aforementioned people are about adhominem attacks and then people respond in kind. When they lack the firepower to defend then they get really vicious.
Let me ask Bartman, would you be willing to start a thread about something really serious and if anyone launches a profane, demeaning, or illogical rant would you join a call for their dismissal from this board for a time?

I can demonstrate from the first three respones by libs on this thread; C2B posted something that really didn't make sense (and I wasn't the only one who thought so) so I posted something about the importance of punctuation. He didn't understand so I had to explain.
Then DD came in defending C2B with an attack and demeaning comments. This was followed by CDN with a rant, an adhominem attack, and illogical insults.

They refused to just answer the question without going negative. I was really curious to where they had been hiding. They let the opportunity pass to explain so we are right back to where we started. I'll be looking forward to Bartman's post about a serious intellectual subject.

Jd would you like to read what I think?

I think we should end both parties and fire anybody over 40. I think anybody that has links to anybody who has been in power over 40 years should be fired. Things only change truly when old ideas die.

Simple you can't teach a old dog new tricks, or you can't turn a ho into a house wife. The two party thing is only here for us the masses outside of power to debate and fight over which side they want to win. It's the same old thing divide and conqure while the kings and queens do what they want any way.

The tea party might do some good if they were their own party and not just angry stepsons of the repubs. If they stood on their own two feet. But right now they just provide the old guard cover to do what they want any. Its a smart move let the masses entertain themselves fighting over the tea party, while we the old guard steal the ball.

Galt; you are the living personification of the Axis of Evil. Sybil, 3 faces of Eve.

You deserve a white feather and in my opinion you will always be a militant navy cook that likes to talk tough but is nothing but a yellow coward.

HOWEVER poorly I think of you and what a miserable subhuman mo fo you are;

"From this day forward I will fight no more forever."

Ciao

Good first step, cheaper. I disagree with the 40 year age limit, but hey, throw the bums out, all 537 of them!!!

Scorpio thought the 40 thing would make both sides happy it even limits Obama lol

As a conservative I think with my brain and not my heart. I would appreciate a cogent argument about almost anything. Can you tell me that people like CDN or C2B have ever tried logic and facts? I have never seen it. Admittedly I have only been here a couple of months but very few here have tried and they were almost always conservatives. The two aforementioned people are about adhominem attacks and then people respond in kind. When they lack the firepower to defend then they get really vicious.
Let me ask Bartman, would you be willing to start a thread about something really serious and if anyone launches a profane, demeaning, or illogical rant would you join a call for their dismissal from this board for a time?

I can demonstrate from the first three respones by libs on this thread; C2B posted something that really didn't make sense (and I wasn't the only one who thought so) so I posted something about the importance of punctuation. He didn't understand so I had to explain.

Then DD came in defending C2B with an attack and demeaning comments. This was followed by CDN with a rant, an adhominem attack, and illogical insults.

They refused to just answer the question without going negative. I was really curious to where they had been hiding. They let the opportunity pass to explain so we are right back to where we started. I'll be looking forward to Bartman's post about a serious intellectual subject. Originally Posted by JD Barleycorn

Are you for real, please indicate where I am attacking you and demeaning you in this response which was my first one in this thread. Once again you change the truth to fit your needs. Also I believe I have answered your question you might see it I changed the color to make it easy for you.

"Leave cheaper alone! As for your question, I have been busy at work as usually happens when you come back from vacation. Secondly, whats the point its just the same old drivel rehashed over and over and over again. Political debate did not just start when you got here JD and anyone with a brain new that this debt ceiling bullshit would run up to the last second and then a bullshit plan would be passed and both sides would claim victory blah, blah, blah.................... "

Yeah, you're right, DD. It was a safe vote for them. I thought I saw a glimmer of integrity, but it was just a scratch in my screen.

I VILLIFY YOU ALL! Btw, what does "villify" mean?

DD, do you believe EVERYTHING you read? I didn't know you were so literal. Okay, I will try to remember to be VERY specific (you must be great to have a conversation with). Yes, you did answer the question (which was where were you?) but then I said "without going negative". I don't think you can say you didn't go negative can you?

Give credit to C2B he tried but he made a few mistakes. That is not an insult but a statement of fact. There has been a great deal of polling about the Tea Party and 19% of the respondents say that they are democrats. Many more are independents and a plurality identify themselves as GOP. So when you say that the Tea Party is a stepchild of the GOP you are buying into propaganda. I was at one the first Tea Party gatherings a couple of years ago and a GOP politician was shouted off stage when he tried to lie to the crowd. Like a conservative voter a Tea Party voter has to look at the GOP for representation as there are no conservatives in the democratic party since Zell Miller was expelled. To think that the GOP owns the Tea Party after what happened this last week is slightly crazy.

For the record, the Tea Party did not like this deal, did not vote for this deal, and said that the stock market would react negatively. They were right. Reid, Pelosi, Obama, McConnell, and Boehner were wrong.

DD, do you believe EVERYTHING you read? I didn't know you were so literal. Okay, I will try to remember to be VERY specific (you must be great to have a conversation with). Yes, you did answer the question (which was where were you?) but then I said "without going negative". I don't think you can say you didn't go negative can you?

Give credit to C2B he tried but he made a few mistakes. That is not an insult but a statement of fact. There has been a great deal of polling about the Tea Party and 19% of the respondents say that they are democrats. Many more are independents and a plurality identify themselves as GOP. So when you say that the Tea Party is a stepchild of the GOP you are buying into propaganda. I was at one the first Tea Party gatherings a couple of years ago and a GOP politician was shouted off stage when he tried to lie to the crowd. Like a conservative voter a Tea Party voter has to look at the GOP for representation as there are no conservatives in the democratic party since Zell Miller was expelled. To think that the GOP owns the Tea Party after what happened this last week is slightly crazy.

For the record, the Tea Party did not like this deal, did not vote for this deal, and said that the stock market would react negatively. They were right. Reid, Pelosi, Obama, McConnell, and Boehner were wrong. Originally Posted by JD Barleycorn

Actually, I didnt go negative towards you, I expressed an opinion about the back and forth in congress, and yes I do take words literally, because words have meaning. You should know this. When you point out my post as being attacking and demeaning, what am I suppose to believe. are you saying that you write in a code and the words you use dont mean what they mean. Furthermore, dont claim I am doing something unless I am. I also dont believe everything, but you cited me as an example and there is no inturprtation other than what you have written. Dont try to play this off, just admit you messed up. There is no opition to go anything but negative if there is no positivity in the subject matter and in the case of our government there is not. You will know without a doubt when I got negative on you.

By the way, unless you know Cheapers history and just want to be a butt then you might want to back off a little.

Yeah, you're right, DD. It was a safe vote for them. I thought I saw a glimmer of integrity, but it was just a scratch in my screen.

I VILLIFY YOU ALL! Btw, what does "villify" mean? Originally Posted by CuteOldGuy

COG villify means "to give all those whom you villify $200.00 cash". Pay up buddy. No checks please

COG Lol man. You know what it means.

What has happened to politics is unfortunate. It is getting worse, not better, when the head of Americans for tax reform brags that his goal is a permanent Republican majority, and that if a Democrat were elected President "we would make it impossible for him to govern as a Democrat." It is a sign that the mainstream view is devolving into demagoguery. We are becoming less "constructively pragmatic" and ever more "destructively pragmatic". As Americans we face severe crisis in the years to come. We will only overcome them with our collective strength.

What are we going to do about our crumbling infrastructure? Roads that go unpaved. Bridges that are many many years past their safe age. Railroads that helped us become an industrial society have been allowed to age to the point they are technologically inferior to any of our international competition. Aging or non existent public transportation. Pollution in the aquifer. The reappearance of dust storms over major cities. A power grid that if attacked successfully in ten key places could leave 70 percent of the US population without power for months remains largely unprotected. An aging workforce that will soon reach retirement age. Who will fund their continuing Medicare and Social Security payments? If not who, then how? Consumption of foreign oil continues at levels that should cause all of us grave issues over our national security.
Unprotected ports. Borders that shouldn't be sealed but should be heavily secured to prevent drugs and terrorists from coming in. Too many people in prison.

The list goes on and on. But our conversations always go one direction.
" I think we should do this and this."
"That's all your ilk does is spend taxpayer money."
"And all you guys do is eat dick in Minneapolis Airport bathrooms."
"Really, well you should read Ayn Rand you communist."
"Facist punk"
"Obama's Bitch."

Not helpful in the least guys. We should quit it, and work, or at least talk about real common ground for the good of our one and only country not our separate competing ideologies.

Bart, yes I know what it means. In response to your post, I would say "Set priorities." In your business or family, if expenses or desires exceed the resources, you decide what is most important. A lot of what the federal government does would be better handled at the state, local or individual level. The Feds have a guiding document outlining the priorities, it's called the "Constitution."

DD, I hereby unvillify you and anyone else who has read, or will read that post. I feel better now.

What's this "constitution"?

Seriously though, your answer to my post was very broad. I'd like your opinion on some things. Giving the states responsibility for certain things back is one thing the Federal Government could do to lower the tax burden. But giving the states responsibility for their own highways and bridges is going to lead to some really shitty highways and bridges in a whole lot of states. Some states simply can't do it. The ones with low populations but wide open spaces like...Kansas for instance, would have to raise the taxes here a great deal to cover something like that. Wouldn't we just be shifting the burden from one form of Government to another? In this example isn't it best to leave the taxes needed to take care of highways in one great big bowl everyone shares rather than 50 much smaller and very unequal bowls?
With all due respect let me ask you a specific question. Lets assume for the sake of argument that the tea parties position on federal enforcement of hate crimes is best left to the states. Would that not lead to very different versions of what is criminal and what is not in various states? How would we manage those differences? Those hate crime laws are meant to protect the few. What if a majority vote in lets say Alabama allowed that something outrageously heinous was legal in their view. Say burning a cross in a black or jewish mans yard? How would that be handled if the Feds were stripped of authority to do something about it? Wouldn't that put us right back in the 1930's?

For that matter, we can take this example further and ask what if we just let the states handle and punish all criminal matters that the constitution doesn't specifically mention? In that world would you support getting rid of the Justice Dept, and the FBI, ATF, DEA and all the other law enforcement agencies of the Federal Government?

Obviously those are just a few very simplified examples. But there are many others that can be discussed. And in my opinion, people with differences, do not get to the solutions needed, by trying to divide, and sow fear, and or make the other side out to be trying to destroy our way of life. Tell enough people that a group of folks is trying to destroy your way of life, and someone in that audience is going to be just mad enough or just crazy enough to do something violent about it.

That's why people like Anne Coulter and Glen Beck make me ill. They take their money, but take no responsibility at all for the hate that their words inspire.

I view the Constitution as a living thing, adapting to new times and new views. A great many of the laws and restrictions placed by the Federal Government are in place because the States asked them to do it. They either didn't have the money or didn't have the laws in place locally to do it. Other laws were passed because of horrendous abuses that led to tragedy which states and localities through corruption or simply not caring did nothing to fix. Triangle Waist Factory fire anyone? Great Depression? Who are going to be the ones to go into the record books and clean out those old laws? And when they do, will the same tragedies reoccur because of greed or apathy?

Bartman, you were doing okay for awhile but then you went over the edge again. Conservatives, and to a lesser extent the Tea Party, want a smaller government not no government. You discredit your argument when you set up these straw men for knocking down.
As for others on these site, you're right, I don't know anything about them nor do they know about me. However that doesn't stop them from making outlandish charges (false IDs, homosexuality, fascist tendencies stop me when these sound familiar). I recently had someone try to score points in a PM by saying they were a cancer survivor. If they knew my story they probably won't have said that. So we can only go by how well (or poorly) someone writes. This may not be fair but it all we have.

Since we're trying to sound civil now; it has become obvious to many people that government cannot continue to spend this country into oblivion. You bring up the US Constitution and it's protections for the minority (not racial, but in numbers). The ultimate example has always been ten people on an island who institute a democracy because they have always been told that a democracy is the best form of government. This time the men outnumber the women by seven to three. In a democracy without constitutional protections the majority could decide that the three women must service the men sexually twice a day. A consitution, specifically the US Constitution, protects the rights of the minority from the majority. By the way, we have a representative republic and not a democracy. Now comes my point, we have protected the rights of many minorites but there is a minority that has been forgotten; the people who provide the jobs and opportunities. No one ever went to a poor person for a job.
Back to spending. We can't do this anymore. We have a choice of taking all the money from those who have it and cutting services to those who don't deserve it. It has been demonstrated that confiscating all the wealth of all the millionaires and above will only run the government for five months. Taking the money is a dead end and it can only be done once. We have to talk about cutting. Why do both parties spend so much money? Every individual has their reasons but part of it is altruistic (you know, bringing home the bacon), part of it is paternalistic (I have to take care of my constitutents), and in my opinion part is to maintain their power. We must take back that power by our votes. This is important. Every voter must have a very clear idea of who is truly responsible and chose not to reelect them no matter how popular, charming, or how much money they have brought back to the area. We have come to rely on the media to help us make our decisions, that is some of us. The media has become corrupt and have admitted that they are in the tank for the democrats.
I could continue but it is time to get ready for other things. More on this later.