quote:

---

Well, D/X, you make a few good points. Kaufman pulled the rug out from under the crappy ones, but there seems to be one people aren't picking up on.

You don't seem to know a whole hell of a lot about politics. MaKK doesn't either, for that matter, but I suspect he is merely trolling. Here's why:

How could you judge either candidate if you don't really know what they stand for? That's extremely irresponsible of you.

quote:

---

Makk is probably trolling. I have little doubt there. Both arguments I've seen on my last rant have been very based on semantics. First off, yes, I used the wrong wording in my portion about rights and them being granted, I did mean to say that these rights are simply allowed, but I was on a roll, and didn't feel like stopping to back up and correct a verbage mistake.

Onto your question of my stance here. The "equal standing ground" I was referring to was how much both sides lie, skirt, or simply ignore their stances. Kerry has changed his stance more times than anyone has been able to count yet, except maying the psychotically obsessed right-wingers who just want to jump at every chance they can to knock him down a peg or two. Bush's stances seem straightforward at first glance, but a longer look into what he says, as opposed to what he does, shows that his political agenda is still questionable.

My point was not that they're both these amazing mysterious shadow figures who never let a word slip about their feelings toward key issues, my point was that they are both dodging them, changing their minds, and making a very poor showing in the actual political ring.

The war record, the swift boat veterans, the "soft-money" debates, these are all just distractions from the real issues that people seem to be mostly ignoring at the moment.

I am not a political science major, but I have strong opinions about what I do know when it comes to politics. Unlike MaKK, I'm not completely ignorant when it comes to the process; I get my information from sources other than Rush Limbaugh and Bill O'Riley. So can we please stop pushing all these anti-dragon smear ads about my voting record on previous political posts, and get back to the issues? You know, like why my nose has more hair than my head now.

---
Do you want ants? Because that's how you get ants.

quote:

---

quote:

---

While I'm still here, [u]MaKK[/u], what's your stance on gay marriage?

---

Do I have to make it flourescent pink?

---

quote:

---

Kaufman is 100% right on this score. According to the founding documents of my country, which are, to me, sacred texts: Rights are inalienable and granted by virtue of one's Creation. Governments are subservient to the supreme principle of human rights, and to the extent that governments abrogate this principle, they are wrong. Therefore, the people have the right to contest governments and claim their rights.

That is the soul of democracy, and of humanity.

---

Hey! Don't be getting all breachy with us.

---
I was gonna send a robot back in time, but I got high.

Although with gay marriage, my question is this. A same sex couple has a child, whether through adoption or some other means...

What if they have a divorce? Who keeps the kid? And then who pays for child support? Stuff like this needs to be thought about, whatever decision on gay marriage is.

No it does not, maddog. Those are also not issues to be determined on a federal or state basis. Those issues are always determined on a situational basis in divorce court. There may be a tendency for the female in a relationship to gain custody of the child, but it is by no means a law or rule. It is based on the actions of each parent throughout the course of the marriage.

Your points are non-issues and should have no influence on anyone's decisions.

---
The giant three-phallused phallus of Uzbekistan will one day squirt the cosmic jizz of revenge all over Canada.

quote:

---

No it does not, maddog. Those are also not issues to be determined on a federal or state basis. Those issues are always determined on a situational basis in divorce court. There may be a tendency for the female in a relationship to gain custody of the child, but it is by no means a law or rule. It is based on the actions of each parent throughout the course of the marriage.

Your points are non-issues and should have no influence on anyone's decisions.

---

quote:

---

quote:

---

Kaufman is 100% right on this score. According to the founding documents of my country, which are, to me, sacred texts: Rights are inalienable and granted by virtue of one's Creation. Governments are subservient to the supreme principle of human rights, and to the extent that governments abrogate this principle, they are wrong. Therefore, the people have the right to contest governments and claim their rights.

That is the soul of democracy, and of humanity.

---

I'm not down with this Lockean shit. Sometimes you have to breach the interests of the few to benefit the many. That's not "playing God", it's how we make moral choices in real life.

---

Hey, I was just thinking of the children. :)

To be honest, why is gay marriage even political? I don't understand, really.

And what's the difference between a marriage and a civil union? Aren't they essentially the same thing? Is there a ban on gay marriage/civil unions?

You really have to pardon me. I don't know much about politics at all. I shouldn't've even said anything about the kids, but I was curious about the opinion. I'll just shut up and try and win a comic competition.

I understand you were kidding, but I think your question about the kids deserves an answer.

Kids are amazing. They can handle the concept, "My Dad is a fruit." So could I, and so could you, if it came down to that. You know who can't? Bible whackers who pump money up GWB's bung like a runaway jackhammer. They are utterly freaked out, and they blame it on the kids.

---
What others say about boorite!

He still won't answer the question. Give MaKK something he can't answer and he changes the subject.

Possums:

If you give MaKK a question, he sits there and demands an answer.

Kaufman:

It shouldn't be political is what I was trying to express.

---
The giant three-phallused phallus of Uzbekistan will one day squirt the cosmic jizz of revenge all over Canada.

I wrote a lot in a thread about gay marriage, back when, you know, it was actually in the news, so I don't understand expecting me to bring it up again in a different thread.

What kind of argument is just calling someone out and asking their opinion anyway?

---
Vote Jeb Bush 2008

Maddog, the state actually determines child support and who pays it based on both incomes. They try to find a happy balance and have set guidelines. I don't know what happens when the kid has a better income than both parents, though :P

---
“It is only with the heart that one sees rightly; what is essential is invisible to the eye.” - The Little Prince by Antoine de Saint-Exupéry (1945)

Never said it was an argument. I was just asking your opinion. :|

Futile anti-Bush protests reach shrill climax, arson begins

"Boo! We hate both the democratic process of a party selecting their candidate, and your ability to get around NYC! Boo!"

Hey Mikey, didn't you say you weren't protesting the convention because you didn't want them "taking over the city"? What exactly does all this pointless protesting do? Mikey? Can you hear me? Oh no he seems to have been blugeoned unconscious by a cop and thrown into the East River. How sad. :C

---
Vote Jeb Bush 2008

Yep.

Meanwhile, the First Lady doesn't think the Swift Boat ads are unfair to Kerry.

---
Think classy, you'll be classy.

possums I told you to go look in the thread about gay marriage for my opinion. Learn to use the Internet.

You're right niteowl, those ads are just so unfair to Kerry! They barely even bring up his purple hearts! ;)

---
Vote Jeb Bush 2008

Kerry is lagging a tad in the latest polls, but the Republicans are taking no chances. Rumor has it that they have already selected a special prosecutor to dig up whatever dirt they can on the Democrat, and Congressional Republicans are already planning impeachment hearings, just in case Kerry wins.

I will go way out on the "odds" limb here and put my five bucks to your four that Bush will win. That's better than Vegas will give you at this point. You'd have to be a sucker not to take Kerry at those odds.

Oh, wait: Vegas can't offer odds on Presidential elections.

...

Now that we have all laughed ourselves silly, I'm nabbing all the action I can get on these odds. Takers?

---
What others say about boorite!

quote:

---

Futile anti-Bush protests reach shrill climax, arson begins

"Boo! We hate both the democratic process of a party selecting their candidate, and your ability to get around NYC! Boo!"

---

They are just meeting in New York, they aren't changing the name of the convention to the "9-11 Memorial Convention of Freedom". It's all in your mind. Yes, people can move on and consider New York to just be a city and not "that place where 9-11 happened".

They started the dirt digging a long time ago boorite. They nabbed Kerry's FBI file from back when he was under investigation. Also Edwards might be in similar trouble soon. ;)

I'd give 55 - 45 odds favorite to Bush. He's incumbent, and any extraneous factors like terrorism may have as much chance as helping him as hurting him. It's hard to pick a single outside event that would hurt Bush as much as you could say an outside event would hurt Kerry. Nabbing Osama, shutting down a terror cell in Iraq, stopping a terror plot, all these things would without a doubt hurt Kerry. Would a terror attack hurt Bush? Maybe, maybe not. Afterall look at his approval numbers after 9-11. Bush's biggest weakness would be a minor but material scandal in his administration.

---
Vote Jeb Bush 2008

MakK, you're basically a dick. Everyone here knows that. But if you're putting 55:45 money on Bush, then I think you're just about right. I said 5:4 on Bush, but I was being brash. Shaving it a hair this way or that way is safer, and that's what you did. Also you are a cock who is wrong about almost everything.

---
What others say about boorite!

You, who fought me tooth and nail on every point I made about Iraq, might find it interesting that Kerry agrees with most of the points I made. Does that mean I should vote for Kerry?

I think Bush will take 55% of the vote, that's what I meant. The actual electoral count will probably be much closer.

I am more filled with glee that the same people who trashed Bush are now facing the same dirty campaign turned on them then I am one side winning over the other ones. It was the anti-Bushites who started this war, don't forget that. All in all I think Bush handled the attacks in a very classy way, by saying exactly nothing about them. It's amusing to me that Kerry cannot do the same, for what is all in all much tamer attacks.

Much of the problem Kerry inherited just by being the nominee, so I'm not faulting him completely.

---
Vote Jeb Bush 2008

Though I hate to admit it, I will concede that Bush will likely win this election, and if trends are any indicator, 2008 will feature a whole host of odd candidates. While an actor may gain the governorship of California, a Wrestler in another state, and possibly a comedian jumping into political office, I doubt we'll be seeing another entertainment personality in the white house for a while. I do, however, think that some of the frontrunners for the next race will be Gull- Julli- the dude from NY who people considered a hero during 9/11, and the womean who is only a woman due to the fact that she doesn't have a penis, Hillary Clinton. It is possible, however unlikely that Gore may run again, and it seems like a plausible chance that we'll see McCain vying for the white house again, but I doubt either of those potential candidates has a chance.

I actually recently had a friend trying to convince me to become a libertarian. Sounds nice in concept, but then, so did communism and national socialism. All about freedoms, so they say. My problem is that we're not talking about good-natured creatures of peace and happiness, we're talking about humans, and humans, as a rule, don't do well with large volumes of people and lots of freedom. Of course, as I understand it, Libertarians are big on gun control. That's kinda like a Christian saying you shouldn't have long hair.

No, I'm serious, look it up.

Also, on the issue of gay marriage and custody rights: I'm not a custody lawyer, but I know how often the law fucks up in custody cases. I think if we're going to introduce a new group of people to the sanctity of marriage, we should tidy up the place a bit before they move in. We need tighter, and more well-defined laws regarding child support, especially since the courts often decide on custody via gender (and don't give me the bullshit argument that gender inequality in custody cases is a myth). If it were up to me, I'd have a team of lawyers file through the millions of laws on the books, find ones which are outdated, underdefined, or simply stupid, and forcibly out them so that our legal system is clear, concise, thought-out, and very well defined.

All this said, I'm still voting for Dio.

\m/

---
Do you want ants? Because that's how you get ants.