Well, all I can do, in the end, is try to persuade the ones that I come in contact with that they should breathe hard. To try to show them the silliness (much of it, IMO, quantitatively idiotic silliness) at the heart of such politicians and their ideas.

I can't make a sheep have courage or a lemming stop from running off the cliff. Only the individual sheep can give himself courage. Only the individual lemming can turn aside.

The best Marine NCO in the world can only try to show the grunt why its important to charge that damn hill. But, in the end, only that grunt can decide what he's going to do when confronted with that hill. Will he charge up it? Or won't he?

Now that NCO is better at what he does than just about anyone else. And so his charges are, almost all the time going to charge that hill. But that's because that NCO is a real person in their world and they are real people in his (regardless of the names he might call him during said training.

But can that best of all NCOs inspire a bunch of strangers 500 or 5000 miles away to charge up their own hills? Can he go out on the Internet, or get the ear of the President, or pass a law that says, "take all hills owned by scumbags and kill the scumbags?"

I think not.

The greatest of the great -- business, military, education, whatever -- these all have been great because of what they've done in a sandbox. In a community.

That's why politicians qua politicians and economists qua economists are such bad role models. Politicans and economists speak in terms of abstractions, not in terms of communities. The politican or the economist, unlike the marine NCO or the fireman or the individual neighbor or father, can't be great by what he does for some abstraction called "society" or "nation" or "economy". He can only be great insofar as he is a good leader for his team, or good father or neighbor.

It's not about solving society's problems. It's about being a good father, son, neighbor, spouse, and friend. Screw up those things, and I don't care how many social problems you worked on or how much you did for a cause or how much international power and recognition and wealth you accumulate. To the extent you haven't been striving toward good personal relationships first and foremost, then that is the extent to which you have been a failure. And to the extent that you HAVE been so striving in your personal relationship (and regardless of whether you have actually managed to succeed all the time or not), *then* you have been successful.

IMO.

Should I put you down as favoring the 5 cartridge magazine max or against? Personally, I'm totally ready to give up the high-capacity magazines if only it would shut Dakota T's liberal-assed-big-yap for just five fucking minutes. Alternatively, should we discuss Plato's 36?

Sorry, Wade, lol - I can't help myself- good stuff...

Edited by member Saturday, December 22, 2012 8:50:20 PM(UTC)  | Reason: Not specified

I got you down as a vote favoring the 5 round magazine limit, comrade. lol

Unfortunately, I fear that compared to your enlightened ass, 95% of America would qualify as rednecks. I'm dammned glad I don't have a gun!

That might be the ONE friggin' thing he got right, lol

Can we go to a five round clip to appease the friggin' libs, or no?

Edited by member Saturday, December 22, 2012 9:52:25 PM(UTC)  | Reason: Not specified

Well, with my bad vision, *I* shouldn't be allowed anything more than a zero cartridge magazine. :)

But I favor no restrictions on gun ownership (other than the obvious ones re: felons, certified psychopaths, etc.

So, put me down as "anti."

:)

By the way, Sage Steele, like any babe, looks far better in stiletto heels than in knee high boots.

Whoever invented knee high boots for attractive women should be required to be locked in a room with a bunch of people armed with mega-magazined automatic weapons.

And I'd definitely vote for a ban on attractive women wearing knee high boots for anything other than being outside in northern winters. *That* would be a law worth passing.

:)

It's clear your being intentionally obtuse for the sake of being incredibly annoying. Mission accomplished. It was stupid of me thinking I could raise your intelligence about such brainwash tactics as you've fallen for. The irony is you're saying essentially what I am, but missing the point that the alledged FACTS being reported were WRONG. You don't grasp that error in your thinking and mistakenly think since it was reported as fact, thus it was. And we're full circle back to my hatred of the media these days and right back to my initial inquiry of checking out the most users on PH date.

Dec 1st, over 1,200 visitors within 15 minutes. Why?
Chiefs player commits suicide on Dec 1st.
PH was one of the first websites to have the players name, thus, we were in the top 5 Google results for 'chiefs player suicide'.


Wish you'd set aside our fan differences and think of me as a man who is intelligent. You wouldn't be like this towards me. I just tried to help widen your perspective, not change it.

I liked a lot of the stuff Formo said in this thread.

Who is Sage though?