gftChris Posted August 11, 2015 Report Share Posted August 11, 2015 (worse in what way?) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Westside Steve Posted August 11, 2015 Report Share Posted August 11, 2015 (worse in what way?)Well let's see, megyn kelly called him out for referring to some women as fat cows idiots etc. We here call each other all sorts of shitty names all the fucking time. You stupid cock sucker. WSS Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
StinkHole Posted August 11, 2015 Report Share Posted August 11, 2015 She's done nothing to show she should be president And she's done a lot to show why she shouldn't. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Clevfan4life Posted August 11, 2015 Report Share Posted August 11, 2015 They really do think Trump can win the general election. My god, if it's Trump....I mean ffs Biden's gonna trounce him. Not like people would be happy to vote for Biden but FFS Trump is completely unelectable in the general election. He will not win the GOP delegates either, those people have made clear what they think of Trump......so what all this "populist" enthusiasm for Trump is going to do is make him think running 3rd party is a good idea. Whether he's the GOP nom or runs 3rd party he's "ensuring" another 4 years of a democrat. Martin Omalley would jaw jack him in the general election. You idiots just don't understand what you're doing by feeding his ego. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Clevfan4life Posted August 11, 2015 Report Share Posted August 11, 2015 I think we should all agree that the worst GOP candidate is better than the two idiots that Democrats have on the table at the moment. If the GOP can't win the next one, and lose to Clinton or the self proclaimed socialist Sanders, this country is screwed to hell... Actually no. Imo the worst GOP candidates are Trump, Walker...maybe Huckabee although I don't think he's a bad dude. Walker because he's against abortion even to save a womans life...so he's done. Trump...well that's obvious. If I voted in the primaries I'd vote for Lindsey Graham over him. Actually Sanders and Hillary look better than 80% of the republican candidates. There's "maybe" 3 or 4 that have a legitimate shot at beating whoever the dems run. Paul, Rubio, Kasich and Fiorino. Pick anyone outside those 4 and it's going to be the exact same numbers as the last two elections. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gftChris Posted August 11, 2015 Report Share Posted August 11, 2015 Well let's see, megyn kelly call him out for referring to some women as fat cows idiots etc. We here call each other all sorts of shitty names all the fucking time. You stupid cock sucker. WSS Maybe yourself (though generally not), but I try to stay away from that kind of stuff, and have even called others out on it being petty, immature and doing nothing to advance any conversation. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Westside Steve Posted August 11, 2015 Report Share Posted August 11, 2015 Maybe yourself (though generally not), but I try to stay away from that kind of stuff, and have even called others out on it being petty, immature and doing nothing to advance any conversation.Maybe.But frankly I find it refreshing if a candidate call his opponent an asshole if he feels that way rather than to pretend otherwise. If women really want equal treatment... I think you get the point. WSS Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Westside Steve Posted August 11, 2015 Report Share Posted August 11, 2015 Seriously don't you get sick of politicians or celebrities who say something a little bit un pc then have to go on TV prostrate themselves and beg forgiveness for the stupid horrible unfeeling words they said? Especially by reading a prepared statement from somebody's PR department in a completely unconvincing manner? WSS Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Legacy Fan Posted August 11, 2015 Report Share Posted August 11, 2015 Call it whatever you want, I'm not the only one here that has said this. If you can actively shun mountains of scientific evidence in favor of your own, evidence lacking beliefs, then who is to say that wont happen on other issues? Can you not see how this could be concerning on other issues?The ONLY issue where this becomes a problem is if he's mediating talks between Israel and Palestine and they bitch about who's been fucking over who longer and the math doesn't add up to him. That's it. Otherwise it's a non-starter. Yeah I would prefer the reigns of the operation to be in the hands of someone who can look at the scientific evidence and at least see that the Earth is not 6,000 years old. If they can be willfully ignorant (Carson is not dumb at all so he has to want to believe this stuff) about information, I don't want them making major decisions. I don't have a beef with someone religious being in office so long as they don't make that the key factor in their decision making.Again, I'd take my kid to him for neurosurgery and expect him to use his clinical judgment and evidence to treat my child - not solely rely on prayer (though I'd appreciate them). So we already have evidence of him using religion as an *adjunct* in decision making - not the only source. Not even as a crutch. I don't think that would change when he got to the whitehouse. Again I just can't fathom where a critical decision comes down to the age of the earth. A daily double on jeopardy maybe? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MLD Woody Posted August 12, 2015 Report Share Posted August 12, 2015 The ONLY issue where this becomes a problem is if he's mediating talks between Israel and Palestine and they bitch about who's been fucking over who longer and the math doesn't add up to him. That's it. Otherwise it's a non-starter. Again, I'd take my kid to him for neurosurgery and expect him to use his clinical judgment and evidence to treat my child - not solely rely on prayer (though I'd appreciate them). So we already have evidence of him using religion as an *adjunct* in decision making - not the only source. Not even as a crutch. I don't think that would change when he got to the whitehouse. Again I just can't fathom where a critical decision comes down to the age of the earth. A daily double on jeopardy maybe? No, you're missing the point. It isn't necessarily what he's believing, but how he's coming to that conclusion. You're right, the age of the Earth won't matter to the president or most people. The issue is with him ignoring mountains of scientific evidence to go with the words in an old book. He wasn't using religion as a crutch in his decision making, he was using it at his sole source of reasoning. Unless you're aware of any reputable scientific evidence that supports his claims. THAT'S why I wouldn't vote for him. He could come out and say "A magic man in the sky told me to tax and legalize weed, allow abortions under certain restrictions, allow day marriage, increase funding of alternate energy, improve STEM education, ban oversigning in the NCAA and investigate OSU and every SEC team, etc". I STILL wouldn't vote for him because he's basing his beliefs and actions off of pure faith. He's a great surgeon I'm sure. Let's just hope s few verses don't align correctly and he thinks your kid is the anti christ or something. I mean hell, he doesn't need much convincing if its in a certain book... As Logic said, he's not dumb. He's just willfully ignorant. Which is honestly much worse. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Legacy Fan Posted August 12, 2015 Report Share Posted August 12, 2015 Pretend Carson is saying the earth is "Obamao" years old. That's how significant it is. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MLD Woody Posted August 12, 2015 Report Share Posted August 12, 2015 Again, it is how he got to his conclusion, not necessarily the actual age of the Earth. You are right, the age of the Earth will not affect a presidency. Thinking the Earth is 6000 years old and ignoring all scientific evidence, that type of decision making, THAT can affect a presidency. You get it now? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Cysko Kid Posted August 12, 2015 Report Share Posted August 12, 2015 Drinking game: drink every time woody mentions stem or bitches about "young earth". Double shots every time he has a delusional belief michigan can compete with OSU. you'll never be sober. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MLD Woody Posted August 12, 2015 Report Share Posted August 12, 2015 Drinking game: drink every time woody mentions stem or bitches about "young earth". Double shots every time he has a delusional belief michigan can compete with OSU. you'll never be sober. Is it a new mention every time I just reply to an ongoing conversation? In that case, you owe Legacy fan for your buzz. Is there a drinking game about you saying every black person in the world having the same "black" culture? How about your obviously very emotionally charged views on topics? No game? oh, ok If you want delusional, read the posts by OSU fans in the CFB Board (some of which are yours). Anything that isn't 100% OSU all of the time is an attach or an insult on the school. You can't sort one from the other, especially from a Michigan fan. I'll leave it at that though, this thread would get even more off topic. Reply to this part of the post as you see fit. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Legacy Fan Posted August 12, 2015 Report Share Posted August 12, 2015 Again, it is how he got to his conclusion, not necessarily the actual age of the Earth. You are right, the age of the Earth will not affect a presidency. Thinking the Earth is 6000 years old and ignoring all scientific evidence, that type of decision making, THAT can affect a presidency. You get it now? I've "got it" all along, kids table. I've already pointed out his ability to utilize "all scientific evidence" when a decision is actually important. This. Just. Isn't. Also, points for him having the restraint to be able to carve into a baby's head and not immediately feel the urge to sell everything he finds in there. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gftChris Posted August 12, 2015 Report Share Posted August 12, 2015 Can we cut the layer of bullshit here? The main point is that he, like many other YECs, does not accept that climate change is a thing and so wouldn't endorse any corrective actions, such as funding research in cleaner fuels, moving from a dependency on fossil fuels etc. and this is in spite of the mountain of evidence to the contrary - like the age of the earth, which is obvious to anyone without a hardcore creationist narrative. Woody, am I wrong on your concerns? Legacy, thoughts? Because this is clearly something he'll have to deal with should he become president. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Legacy Fan Posted August 12, 2015 Report Share Posted August 12, 2015 Then he would be the first president to do so. That research is in motion already and none of our 44 presidents have had much to do with it. But you already knew that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Legacy Fan Posted August 12, 2015 Report Share Posted August 12, 2015 Oh wait. Are we still pretending those G8 or g20 world summits actually accomplish anything? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gftChris Posted August 12, 2015 Report Share Posted August 12, 2015 He would be the first president to be confronted by climate change decisions? I'm not sure how you came to that conclusion. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Legacy Fan Posted August 12, 2015 Report Share Posted August 12, 2015 Then you obviously have a list of legislation authored exclusively by each of our presidents. Sounds riveting. I'd love to read it sometime. Edit: *climate change legislation Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Legacy Fan Posted August 12, 2015 Report Share Posted August 12, 2015 Otherwise he'd be about the 9th or 10th president to merely "continue to do what's already in motion" when it comes to seeking alternative fuels, power, etc. You're arguing from some alternate universe where Carson claims his car runs on Jesus semen because there is no possible way the natural process that creates petroleum could have happened. Therefore he sees no need to seek an alternative method of powering his combustion engine because Jesus semen is unending and his "cup runneth over" already. I can do hyperbole all day if we want to keep pretending this is significant. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gftChris Posted August 12, 2015 Report Share Posted August 12, 2015 Are you legitimately trying to argue that a president's stance on climate change has no bearing on what legislation is passed? I mean, seriously? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Legacy Fan Posted August 12, 2015 Report Share Posted August 12, 2015 You're aware of how a law is passed in our country, right? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Legacy Fan Posted August 12, 2015 Report Share Posted August 12, 2015 We got a Toyota Prius during Bush's reign of terror, right? But no, please elaborate how his aww shucks Sunday schoolin prevented the creation (sorry, poor choice of words) of the engine that runs on water, maaaan, forcing us to settle for the 50mpg Prius. Bonus points if you can provide evidence that Bush even knows what the fuck a Prius is. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Legacy Fan Posted August 12, 2015 Report Share Posted August 12, 2015 Personally I'd like to avoid discussing things like why spending $350b to "reduce $1.2t student debt & make college free" (Hahahaha) is a terrible idea. Whereas $600b wasted on a website that still doesn't work quite right could have been put in that pot & forgiven ½ of all student debt. We have a spending problem. Let's continue to (poorly)treat symptoms and not the cause. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gftChris Posted August 12, 2015 Report Share Posted August 12, 2015 Personally I'd like to avoid discussing things like why spending $350b to "reduce $1.2t student debt & make college free" (Hahahaha) is a terrible idea. Whereas $600b wasted on a website that still doesn't work quite right could have been put in that pot & forgiven ½ of all student debt. We have a spending problem. Let's continue to (poorly)treat symptoms and not the cause. I very much agree on the symptoms/cause business, throwing money at something and hoping for the best is never the way to go. Forgiving student debt, also not a viable option. Reducing the cost of tuition should be something to aim for, as it's astronomical and for the most part people (myself included) end up with tens if not hundreds of thousands of dollars of debt, which affects their ability to buy a house and other things like that. But anyway, you think Dr Carson (or any of the GOP candidates) would be pushing the green agenda like Obama? Take Ted Cruz, for example, who suggested that funding for NASA's Earth Science be cut because NASA should focus on space - in what we're to assume is completely unrelated to Cruz's stance on climate change? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Westside Steve Posted August 12, 2015 Report Share Posted August 12, 2015 Convincing idiots not to take out a $30,000 loan to get a degree in something that won't help you get a good job would be a start. Like buying a $30,000 guitar and being angry with the manufacturer because you can't sing or play and now you aren't a star. WSS Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gftChris Posted August 12, 2015 Report Share Posted August 12, 2015 Yep, absolutely agree. Too many people getting degrees in subjects that don't need degrees, too many low quality institutions churning out low quality graduates. And at the same time shortages in skilled labourers - I'm assuming the same there, but here there's a great shortage of sparkies, who could easily earn £40-50k p/a, and yet people still spend money desperately trying to become the next, I don't know, Brad Pitt, or whoever. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Westside Steve Posted August 12, 2015 Report Share Posted August 12, 2015 Tell me about it. I was a theater major, minor in speech and speech therapy and secondary ed as I assumed I would someday teach. I'd be very surprised if any casting director takes your college transcript very seriously when selecting an action hero. As far as a low quality degree I'd imagine that there are other factors involved in a kid that graduates with high marks fromance a top school, intangibles, that make him more apt to succeed then the guy that drifts through cornfield Community College. WSS Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Westside Steve Posted August 12, 2015 Report Share Posted August 12, 2015 Also that even a poor kid with brains desire and drive will find a way to get through that top notch school and earn a useful degree. WSS Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.