Vladimir

[quote name='mushrat' date='15 June 2010 - 07:17 PM' timestamp='1276654652' post='471776'] except *I* have to handle all the butt hurt people. so lets just do it my way cause I'm the Daddy ok? [/quote] I vote ban butt-hurt people. But I am guilty of throwing words around. But this is a series of tubes, if it was not invented for making fun of liberals, what is it good for?

I used to always smoke with quick-lights, but when I started smoking pretty much every day I could severely feel it in my lungs... absolutely definitely (and I have always been an on-again-off-again cigarette smoker, so when I say I feel it in my lungs you know it is bad)... I switched to naturals and never looked back. I guess I have smoked quick-lights at the hookah bar, but I don't think I could ever see myself purchasing quick-lights again.

[quote name='acolorado' date='10 June 2010 - 09:59 PM' timestamp='1276232356' post='471394'] Here's the problem many studies have found. Tax you more, and the U.S. government has more money to put into the U.S. economy by spending on projects, programs, and employment right here. [/quote] Here's the problem with that logic, the US Government spends money at a horrible rate of efficiency, and I can speak specifically to job creation has a pretty horrible rate of effectiveness. I do sales in construction, and I DO know what I am talking about. Their spending got a few heavy machinery operators their jobs back... these "shovel ready jobs" were more like "excavator ready jobs," and last time I checked it takes very few people to operate an excavator. Though less taxes may result in spending on products created overseas etc (which by the way, if everyone followed a similar model the global economy would level out and help us as much as them) at least it puts the power in our hands, and not the government's, which is rarely actually representative, efficient, or all around intelligent.

[quote name='acolorado' date='10 June 2010 - 11:05 AM' timestamp='1276193113' post='471352'] I take note neither of you wanted to argue that tax cuts don't stimulate the economy as much as Republicans like to claim, and that Republicans don't practice fiscal responsibility the way they would have us believe - I would expect you did the research there and found those were solid arguments which you didn't want to argue. [/quote] I did address this, I mentioned that this was not something I cared about, I support low, and lowering taxes, as an important aspect of liberty, not as a means to economic growth. Any economic growth or decline is unimportant, liberty > economy, and liberty > government intervention into the economy. [quote]And for the record I own 6 guns . My brother uses them now. I used to be a member of the NRA, but I've lost several friends to actual gun violence, one of them a close hunting buddy of mine, and I just haven't ever met anyone who has used one to defend themselves. I don't hunt or shoot anymore, but I understand the reasons people love guns, and why they hate them too. My friend may have still been killed if guns were illegal, maybe the gun that killed him was I don't know - but the truth is guns make it a lot easier to kill someone. That's why people don't usually kill people when they rob stores with a finger in their pocket. That may have colored (and may continue to color) my opinion on gun control - but you did a good debate on this.[/quote] You don't have to be cornered by experiences, my dad has had plenty of guns pointed and fired at him (as well as lost friends) and meanwhile he still supports the Second Amendment (to be fair he is a police officer- and yes almost all police officers strongly support the Second Amendment for those wondering). [quote name='acolorado' date='10 June 2010 - 11:11 AM' timestamp='1276193507' post='471353'] Oh and I have to mention - Vlad finally linked to something. you deserve a lot of credit for that. I really thought you were just a troll but you proved me wrong, and now you're debating like a champ. Your insults are even getting better.[/quote] To be fair I did not directly say it, but the thing is these are all issues I could care less what the facts say. I support/attack them because I believe in liberty, which innately also requires limited government. The only reason I posted links for gun control was I finally realized there was no other way. You want to argue something like gun control [normally], abortion, taxes, capital punishment [which I am against surprisingly]- I will argue based on ideological and philosophical grounds. You want to argue something like democracy in the third world, political approval rates in the Russian Federation, medieval Kiyven-Rus history.... these things will be based in facts. You seem a little liberal, so let's take gay marriage... when you argue gay marriage do you base your argument on facts, or the "fact" that it is just right and should be allowed?

The problem with the firearm limitations you promote is a lack of statistically significant evidence. There is not a single case where the infringement on the Second Amendment, solely, has proven effective in curbing violence, let alone gun violence. Look at DC for an example, where violence actually climbed at times under the ban ([url="http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/11/12/AR2007111201818.html"]http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/11/12/AR2007111201818.html[/url]). Perhaps you should watch the heartbreaking testimony of a Texan politician, whose family was killed by a gunman while her pistol, by law, was left in the car, leaving her defenseless and helpless in the face of the attack (http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-4069761537893819675#). I also highly recommend Penn and Teller's "Bullshit", featuring gun control (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Oz5o1qEB5ok). This is of course all ignoring the basic fact that the Second Amendment unquestionably supports an individual's right to bear arms, and the liberty-based implications of such a right. Which again, is what I base my conclusions on almost without exception.

Heres the problem with this argument, which largely sums up one of the major problems America is facing today. Your defense of the democrat party is based, not on morals or values, or statistical evidence... instead it is based on "how bad those republicans are." This is a problem for two reasons... 1- Your political affiliation is then based solely on blame, which is spawned by bitterness, which gets you nowhere, and further is fragile because it is not based on conviction. 2- I'm not a republican, so you can attack them all you want, I have no interest in defending them.

[quote name='Arcane' date='08 June 2010 - 11:21 AM' timestamp='1276021299' post='471101'] at least i can run better.....hahahahahaha.... [/quote] Touche.

[quote name='acolorado' date='08 June 2010 - 10:50 PM' timestamp='1276062619' post='471180'] The last link in my previous post wasn't working. It's not permitted - but it's a post by Paul Krugman with references at the NY Times. And why the hell am i spending my time arguing and looking at danged reports from the NPA when I could be doing a million other things. We both know neither of us will change the other's mind on this. I think I will go look up the latest Pornady and then play some WoW or watch a movie. Heck I might even take a good walk. [/quote] It was the gun control facts that did it, was it not? They are pretty hard to argue with... if the liberals had something like that I would probably run away as well .

I am pretty sure inhaling lime would be a big no-no.

[quote name='thecyrax' date='07 June 2010 - 02:08 PM' timestamp='1275944885' post='470992'] [quote name='cotsi95' date='07 June 2010 - 02:32 PM' timestamp='1275939157' post='470983'] ABSOLUTELY NOT!! A good rule is to NEVER you any coals that arnt specifically made for hookah. [/quote] Not necessarily.... If you can find a brand of good hard wood coals they're far more than usable. It mostly depends on if the charcoal itself is treated with any harmful chemicals. [/quote] Any coals you can light with a match are treated with harmful substances

[quote name='Arcane' date='08 June 2010 - 01:26 AM' timestamp='1275985585' post='471057'] [quote name='Vladimir' date='07 June 2010 - 09:10 PM' timestamp='1275981003' post='471051'] [quote name='Arcane' date='07 June 2010 - 08:55 PM' timestamp='1275969324' post='471024'] apparently there are some professional runners that like the frees though... [/quote] To be fair, there are a lot of professionals who like [i]performance enhancers[/i] too... [/quote] and to be fair, they do in fact work...AND produce better results.... [/quote] And tiny testicals. It seems the only logical conclusion therefore is that Frees will make your soldiers shrink.

[quote name='Arcane' date='07 June 2010 - 08:55 PM' timestamp='1275969324' post='471024'] apparently there are some professional runners that like the frees though... [/quote] To be fair, there are a lot of professionals who like steroids too...

[quote name='acolorado' date='06 June 2010 - 10:56 PM' timestamp='1275890165' post='470932'] Rather than trying to insinuate that I'm being dishonest here -which you are - perhaps you would take a moment to remember that not everyone will uncritically support failure. Some people will actually decide to try something different, and when it gives better results, they'll stick with it. [/quote] That's why Republicans will be back in control soon, and then democrats again, and then republicans. Don't pretend it is not true. [quote]Many of the Republican positions which I used to support sounded great but just didn't work out. Tax cuts don't stimulate the economy - they just lead to budget crises. Having fewer gun restrictions doesn't reduce crime - it just turns what could have been assaults into murders. High levels of military spending don't make us safer - it only creates the incentive to get involved in unnecessary and expensive wars. Fiscal responsibility is something I believe in - which is why I don't support Republicans anymore - they don't practice it. The ideas which used to sound terrific to me and which I supported just never produced the results which conservatives claimed they would. So rather than blindly continue to support those obvious failures - I did what any rational and thinking human being will - I admitted to myself that they didn't work and started looking for someone with better ideas.[/quote] We have two problems here. The first of which is I have [u]never[/u] defended my positions on things like tax cuts, the Second Amendment, First Amendment, etc, etc on what [u]works[/u] best, it does not matter what [i]works best[/i], what matters is what is [u]right[/u]. All the things I mentioned, come down to liberty, and not "functionality." The second problem is that you are flat out wrong. For a simple example,[font="Arial"][size=2] Guns are used 2.5 million times a year in self-defense- which equals about 6,850 times a day. Take the 30,000 deaths statistic and you get a result that firearms are used over 80 times as often to protect than kill. In fact, a high-school student is twice as likely to die playing football than by a gunshot wound.[/size][/font] [quote]And to finish - Obama is a moderate in many respect - I know, because myself and many others wish he were more liberal.[/quote] Yea and I am a moderate in many respects, it doesn't come close to making me a moderate. [quote]Did you know that Obama fully supports the 2nd Amendment and has said so publicly? Do you know he reduced the deficit by 300 billion since last year, and has pledged to focus on deficit reduction in the next session of congress? Did you know he upholds Bush's program for indefinite detention (quite wrongly i believe). Do you know he has agreed publicly with many of the same positions on immigration that Republicans hold?[/quote] You made a typo, you should have said "Did you know that Obama [u]says[/u] he fully supports the 2nd Amendment?" That is funny because his record as a senator is in complete contradiction with that, and his casual statements are also in complete contradiction to that (consider my a proud "clinger"). No one really expected to see any action against the Second Amendment until his second term, but quite frankly I think even that would be ridiculous of him since he knows he doesn't have a chance in the Supreme Court- then again, politicians have done crazier things. [quote]No - FOX news doesn't run those stories - so you probably didn't know any of that.[/quote] Oh yes the old liberal line, when in doubt bash Fox! Don't be so intimidated by them, it will all be okay.

Most of the "minimalist community" hates the ###### Frees... not so much because of what they are, but because of what they claim to be. They really are not a minimalist shoe due to the heavy padding and inclined heel. But as a transition shoe perhaps that makes more sense. EDIT: Interesting, the forum appears to censor the brand of shoes we are talking about

[quote name='acolorado' date='06 June 2010 - 02:15 AM' timestamp='1275815725' post='470823'] [quote name='Vladimir' date='06 June 2010 - 12:33 AM' timestamp='1275806003' post='470811'] Has anyone noticed the OP claimed to have always considered himself a moderate, and then everything he sees clearly paints him as a pretty staunch partisan. Not to say there is anything wrong with that... but he was obviously trying to hide behind a label that he saw as more "acceptable". Nothing worse than a sheep in wolf's clothing. Come out and tell the truth man. You are a democrat liberal, there's nothing wrong with it. If you are ashamed that is a bummer. [/quote] Vlad the very first words of this thread are " I used to consider myself a moderate". I'll give you the benefit of the doubt and say maybe you just misread it.[/quote] Yes, but this is sort of like when Obama claimed to be a moderate... you can say it all you want, but what counts is the ideology you spout, and it in no way lines up with moderate political ideology. That being said, I have to admit it is [i]possible[/i] a few years ago you were a moderate who could swing republican or democrat, but I find that incredibly unlikely and you either say that because it has a natural "enlightened" smell about it, or more likely because you used to [u]think[/u] you were a moderate... and then when you actually started thinking about politics you decided you were not at all. No one really goes from a [i]true[/i] moderate position to one like you [u]or me[/u] in any reasonable amount of time. [quote]Also, you still have not given us even one shred of evidence to support your "fact" that "welfare programs success is based on how much money they hand out". No program I've looked at is based on that measure, and you are obviously not prepared to provide anything to back it up with.[/quote] They frequently base the need for more funding based on how much they handed out the previous year, not on how many people got "back on their feet". Keep in mind this was back when the economy was good and welfare was not increasing due to rapidly rising unemployment.