One Political Plaza - Home of politics
Home Active Topics Newest Pictures Search Login Register
Posts for: maximus
Page: <<prev 1 ... 147 148 149 150 151 152 153 154 155 ... 237 next>>
Mar 27, 2019 18:43:20   #
Peewee wrote:
Unless you know what state it happened in and what those schools allow, you are wrong to say he was wrong. Other than that, I agree with you. Yes, I saw 'your opinion' disclaimer.


Peewee,
I did think that part of the arrest was having the gun where it is not allowed. If I'm wrong, I will retract the statement with apologies.
"The gun went off" is ludicrus because guns do not just go off. Some action always has to happen for a gun to fire.
It sounded like an anti gun report to me. The report didn't even give enough detail to make any kind of decision about it without a lot of guesswork.
I always like to read your posts.




Correction: happened in AL, eh? Even so, was he carrying in a gun free area?
The report is so vague that we are just guessing.

Second correction: One of the charges was possession of a firearm on school grounds, so I was right in that he was wrong to have the gun in the first place. After reading the report again, I' m convinced that it was written and posted by an anti gunner.
Go to
Mar 27, 2019 12:39:41   #
Kevyn wrote:
Perhaps it was a revolver without a safety.


Good point Kevyn. There are a lot of maybes here and no details. What caliber was the gun? Was it a wheel gun or a semi? Was it cocked. Was there a safety? Was it on safe? Was his hand in his pocket? Was the weapon a piece of junk?
I find it very, VERY hard to believe that the weapon just...went off. Never heard of that in my entire life.
To me, there are 2 main questions here;
!. Why did the substitute teacher have the gun in his pocket to start with? (being illegal)
2. What exactly caused the gun to fire?

Now for my opinion, the man was WRONG to have the gun at school. Good gun owners obey the law.
Wh**ever the reason the gun fired, the man should have been aware of the possibility. Good gun owners always know the condition of their firearms and what state they are in, i.e. is my weapon loaded, is my weapon cocked, is my weapon on safe, is my weapon's location on my body safe.
Personally, I would like to know all the missing details, but the man was wrong to have the gun at cshool.
Go to
Mar 27, 2019 12:20:07   #
no propaganda please wrote:
Have you ever wished your dog could talk?

There are those moments when it feels like your dog is trying so hard to tell you something…

But you just can’t tell what it is.

Well, what if I told you, there is a way to interpret what your dog’s telling you — and no, it’s not through barks or whines.

It turns out, you can “read your dog’s mind” by simply looking at…

Their tail.

Now, you probably know that a “wagging tail” means your dog is happy, and a “tail-between-the-legs” means they’re afraid…

But your dog’s “tail language” goes a little further than just that.

And right now, I want to share an easy way for you to understand your pup’s language.

I call it: The Doggie Decoder.

Don’t worry, there’s nothing to it.

Just take a quick look at your dog’s tail to see if it’s:

Wagging quickly back and forth

This could be a sign that your dog is feeling tense or hostile.

(Yep — a wagging tail doesn’t always mean a happy dog.)

So if your dog’s tail is moving like this, try to calm them down with some gentle petting or by taking them to a quiet place.

And if you see another dog’s tail wagging like this, it’s best to steer clear for a minute until they become more relaxed.

On the other hand, when you see your dog’s tail…

Wagging slowly

… it could mean they’re very focused, and trying to plan their next move.

Your dog might be watching a squirrel, planning their approach, or trying to figure out if a stranger is a threat or not.

And if a strange dog is wagging its tail slowly at you, proceed with caution until they get more comfortable with you.

Now, it’s not just the speed of a dog’s tail that means something — the direction they wag it in is telling sign, too.

For instance, if a dog’s tail is…

Wagging to a certain side

… this could be an indicator of their mood.

See, one clinical study showed that dogs wagged to the right when they were happily approaching their owners…

And wagged to the left when approaching something they were unsure of.1

So if a dog approaches and his or her tail is wagging to the right, it’s more likely that dog is friendly (but always use your best judgment!).

Because while these are great tips, they’re just guidelines — so make sure you’re looking for other signals and cues as well (like baring teeth and growling) to decode a dog’s language.

There you have it, a new tool to interpret “Doggy Language!”

Now you can open up a new window of communication between you and your pup — and feel that much closer to them.

To happy and healthy dog years ahead,
Dr. Gary Richter

P.S. There’s one more “tail wag” I can’t forget — because it’s the best one:

The “Whole Body Wag!”

You probably see this one all the time when you come home — when your dog gets so excited they wag their entire bodies, not just their tail.

Well, that one means exactly what it looks like — uncontrollable joy. :)
Have you ever wished your dog could talk? br br T... (show quote)



I just read something about this the other but I couldn't remember which tail wag meant what. Thanks for reminding me! Good post.
Go to
Mar 27, 2019 12:07:16   #
rumitoid wrote:
And do you think that White Privilege is a myth?


Let me answer that....YES, I do. I never had any privilege over anybody else. I'll tell you who does though! Those with filthy lucre...MONEY!!!
MONEY MONEY MONEY MONEY

Do the NFL players not have black privilege? I'm sorry but, NO they don't...they have money privilege. Money is what the privilege is all about. Why else would a basketball player meet 3 times with the dictator of a country? Money. Why else would Michael Jackson not have been d**gged through the court system for P********a? Money. Why was OJ found to be innocent? Money. (I know...evidence was botched, but without money, OJ could have never afforded the lawyer that brought this to light). Money. Money is privilege. Money is power. Money runs the world. Why is America so great? Money!
Why can 4 black kids hold a r****ded white boy against his will and torture him for quite a while and nothing is done? It's the misconception of white privilege. There IS NO white privilege...it's MONEY privilege. Tell me, anybody out there, how many poor politicians do you know? None...zip...nada! It ain't race, it's money. There was a time when it was race, but most people have changed since then. I know I have.
Let's say there IS white privilege. If so, then there IS black privilege. And there is Hispanic privilege.
When I pass the "new" projects and I see a great looking neighborhood full of townhouses with expensive cars setting in the driveway, I certainly don't feel as though I have ANY kind of a privilege. Want to know why? Money...cause I don't have any.
I am white and I won't accept condemnation because of something I've never had. In the pecking order from 1 to 10, I'm about a 2, maybe even a 1. Why? Money.
Nuff said.
Go to
Mar 26, 2019 22:01:48   #
rumitoid wrote:
3/5 of a person, not 2/3. And 2/3 is far, far better than the South would allow. Just more well-informed, sorry.

How did they get to 3/5 during the 1787 United States Constitutional Convention? This population number would then be used to determine the number of seats that the state would have in the United States House of Representatives for the next ten years. The compromise solution was to count three out of every five s***es as a person for this purpose. Its effect was to give the southern states a third more seats in Congress and a third more e*******l v**es than if s***es had been ignored, but fewer than if s***es and free people had been counted equally. No matter what our Declaration of Independence lied about being "created equal."
3/5 of a person, not 2/3. And 2/3 is far, far bett... (show quote)



The North didn't want s***es counted at all, for the same reasons, which meant not human, I.e. a human HAD to be counted. Don't forget that the North also had s***es and Lincoln did not want to free the northern s***es.
Check this out; at the start of the War Between the States, not one Republican owned a s***e. NOTONE! That means that in 1860, every s***e owner in the United States was a Democrat!
If you don't believe it, try to disprove it.
Go to
Mar 26, 2019 13:14:19   #
cbpat1 wrote:
Of course they’ll walk! They’re democrats, that’s what they do, no shame. God bless the republicans, they just don’t have it in them to get down and dirty like the democrats do, but, I wouldn’t have much respect for them if they were that dirty. But you know, just for once, I would love to see them turn the tide on the democrats and give it back to them in spades. Of course all that would do is cause even more discourse in the country, which would ultimately be bad for everyone, so, I guess it’s good there are some adults in the room.
Of course they’ll walk! They’re democrats, that’s ... (show quote)


I agree except that when there is evidence, there is no need to get "down n' dirty". It should be just another day in court...a criminal is charged, evidence is presented, guilt is proven, sentence is passed. That's how it should go IF the dems are made to toe the line.
Go to
Mar 26, 2019 02:29:08   #
kankune wrote:
Very good post Max.....spot on. Yep...very strange!! These people need to suffer consequences. Big time!!


Thanks!

Go to
Mar 25, 2019 12:38:13   #
kemmer wrote:
Nobody seems to think that enough to bring it to the courts. And the Trumpkins have had Congress and the WH for 2 years. And during those 2 years, it seems Trump's precious wall wasn't as important anymore. Strange.


Yes...very strange. Strange that members of the republican party would stand against one of their own being president.
Strange until you consider the fact that DJT had NEVER held any public office...meaning that no one in DC knew if he could be bribed, if he would become a part of the swamp, if he would lie like a dog. They just didn't know if THEY could trust him. So, they joined the detractors to rid DC of DJT and get things back to status quo. Strange that the FBI, CIA, DOJ, judges can make a push to take DJT down by any means and there are no charges...very strange. Strange that the very act that they accused DJT of, they themselves were guilty of committing. Strange that the democratic angel, Mueller, found no collusion and no further indictments. Now the dems are turning on Mueller. I'm no lawyer but it seems to me that there are some legal paths to be chosen by DJT after the besmearing of his reputation and character.
Yep, very strange.
Go to
Mar 25, 2019 12:22:00   #
moldyoldy wrote:
Wok TF.


That's a good one. Laughed my butt off.
Go to
Mar 25, 2019 01:56:08   #
billy a wrote:
I'm with bahmer on the childhood thing...I live in South Florida,where gators,big iguanas etc. are a fairly normal thing to see. They always remind me of the Great Lizards (that's what the Peabody Museum in Ct. called them in '63)
I wonder if there were 12-step programs for these cold-blooded critters?...
"Would you like a brandy floater on that Triceratops blood?"...


Sir Richard Owen, the man who created the name dinosaur, called them "terrible lizards" in Greek.
There's also a big debate on whether the dinosaurs were warm or cold blooded or somewhere in between.Many think there is no one state of thermal control, but across species, some were cold, some were warm, and some were in between.
Go to
Mar 25, 2019 00:48:18   #
Kevyn wrote:
We would never question a Christian or Jew in this manner, Muslim members of Congress swear an oath to our constitution the same as Christians, Jews and Non Believers do. In the case of the latter it is a solemn confirmation. Below is a list of punishments from the Bible many defy our constitution or law. Would you find it necessary to query every Christian congressman on wether adulterous Americans should be exicuted as is required in their holy text?

Punishments for Sin
20 The Lord said to Moses, 2 “Say to the Israelites: ‘Any Israelite or any foreigner residing in Israel who sacrifices any of his children to Molek is to be put to death. The members of the community are to stone him. 3 I myself will set my face against him and will cut him off from his people; for by sacrificing his children to Molek, he has defiled my sanctuary and profaned my holy name. 4 If the members of the community close their eyes when that man sacrifices one of his children to Molek and if they fail to put him to death, 5 I myself will set my face against him and his family and will cut them off from their people together with all who follow him in prostituting themselves to Molek.

6 “‘I will set my face against anyone who turns to mediums and spiritists to prostitute themselves by following them, and I will cut them off from their people.

7 “‘Consecrate yourselves and be holy, because I am the Lord your God. 8 Keep my decrees and follow them. I am the Lord, who makes you holy.

9 “‘Anyone who curses their father or mother is to be put to death. Because they have cursed their father or mother, their blood will be on their own head.

10 “‘If a man commits adultery with another man’s wife—with the wife of his neighbor—both the adulterer and the adulteress are to be put to death.

11 “‘If a man has sexual relations with his father’s wife, he has dishonored his father. Both the man and the woman are to be put to death; their blood will be on their own heads.

12 “‘If a man has sexual relations with his daughter-in-law, both of them are to be put to death. What they have done is a perversion; their blood will be on their own heads.

13 “‘If a man has sexual relations with a man as one does with a woman, both of them have done what is detestable. They are to be put to death; their blood will be on their own heads.

14 “‘If a man marries both a woman and her mother, it is wicked. Both he and they must be burned in the fire, so that no wickedness will be among you.

15 “‘If a man has sexual relations with an animal, he is to be put to death, and you must k**l the animal.

16 “‘If a woman approaches an animal to have sexual relations with it, k**l both the woman and the animal. They are to be put to death; their blood will be on their own heads.

17 “‘If a man marries his sister, the daughter of either his father or his mother, and they have sexual relations, it is a disgrace. They are to be publicly removed from their people. He has dishonored his sister and will be held responsible.

18 “‘If a man has sexual relations with a woman during her monthly period, he has exposed the source of her flow, and she has also uncovered it. Both of them are to be cut off from their people.

19 “‘Do not have sexual relations with the sister of either your mother or your father, for that would dishonor a close relative; both of you would be held responsible.

20 “‘If a man has sexual relations with his aunt, he has dishonored his uncle. They will be held responsible; they will die childless.

21 “‘If a man marries his brother’s wife, it is an act of impurity; he has dishonored his brother. They will be childless.

22 “‘Keep all my decrees and laws and follow them, so that the land where I am bringing you to live may not vomit you out. 23 You must not live according to the customs of the nations I am going to drive out before you. Because they did all these things, I abhorred them. 24 But I said to you, “You will possess their land; I will give it to you as an inheritance, a land flowing with milk and honey.” I am the Lord your God, who has set you apart from the nations.

25 “‘You must therefore make a distinction between clean and unclean animals and between unclean and clean birds. Do not defile yourselves by any animal or bird or anything that moves along the ground—those that I have set apart as unclean for you. 26 You are to be holy to me because I, the Lord, am holy, and I have set you apart from the nations to be my own.

27 “‘A man or woman who is a medium or spiritist among you must be put to death. You are to stone them; their blood will be on their own heads.’”
We would never question a Christian or Jew in this... (show quote)



Kevyn...do you knot realize that those severe punishments are what gives us our moral code today? Would you marry your sister. Have sex with your mother? Your father's (2nd) wife? Of course not!! Because we have the laws that God handed down to Moses. Many of the things you mentioned are still illegal today. If you asked the Jews to repudiate k*****g the Canaanites, they would refuse because God instructed them to do it, as they were guilty of all the things you listed (verse 23).

Kevyn, also those things were done at the beginning of the law, and, yes, they were strictly enforced, hence the reason they survive with us today after 2,500 years.
Yes, you are correct, we would never ask those questions to a Christian or a Jew.....or a Hindu...or a Buddhist... or a Mormon, or pretty much any religion on earth, as Islam is about the only one I know of that have honor k*****gs, k**l those other religions as I just mentioned, marry children (no...they don't exactly have sex with them at 9 or 10, but they "thigh" them. If anyone doesn't realize what that means, it's this;
they hunch their penis on the little girl's thigh until they ejaculate. Then at 12 or 13...POW.
Nope, there is no need to ask those questions of ANY other religion that I am aware of. (Keep in mind, I am NOT a world traveler.)
Go to
Mar 24, 2019 22:59:06   #
rumitoid wrote:
Way too funny. You perpetually avert talking about the topic. Do you do that in front of a mirror? Address the topic and not your image.


Sorry, rumitoid, but it looks to me like Smedley buzk**l shot you down in flames. Every word he said is true. Not that your report is not true, but the people of that time viewed s***es as less than human. Actually, the north was even MORE r****t than the south as they wanted the s***es not counted as human at all. Keep in mind, there are only 19 years difference between Britain and the US abolishing s***ery. That's a pretty close run for a country whose southern half depended heavily on s***e labor.
But, as Smedly said, we ain't the only ones that did it, and many countries are still doing it. If we're to punish people for historical past injustices, then why don't we punish the Palestinien's when in Old Testament time they overlorded the Jews. That one just came to mind because that's why Samson did what he did.
Usually, at the end of the wars, whoever lost and wasn't k**led were taken as s***es. This has been the case throughout history. There are hardly ANY races that didn't own s***es or were owned as s***es. You DO realize that in early America that there were wealthy black s***e owners, don't you? In 1830, of 2,458,453 b****s in America, 13% or 319,599 were free and most owned s***es. That s***ery by Africans had been practiced for thousands of years. That the first s***es were bought from African s***e owners.That the Cherokee held about 1,500 s***es at the turn of the nineteenth century. That the first legal s***e owner in American history was a black tobacco farmer named Anthony Johnson. If you're going to spank somebody for s***ery, you 're got a lot of spanking to do.
Go to
Mar 24, 2019 22:02:33   #
woodguru wrote:
Hey, you were right, now wake up and pay attention to the fact that we will see what the information is and how congress proceeds. Maybe Trump didn't collude with Russia, but we sure as hell know Flynn, Manafort, Cohen, and others did as spelled out in their indictments and plea bargains...

We will see, this is actually the beginning, not the end


I said this on another thread...guilty even though proven innocent. Mueller found him innocent.
If Mueller couldn't do it, then who can? Mueller had unprecedented freedom in his investigation. All we conservatives thought it was a stink job, a set up. All you lefties kept saying...it's happening now, Trumps finished now, it's gonna happen, just wait and see, it's over now, Trumps headed for prison...IT DIDN'T HAPPEN!! So, now you want to imprison Trump for the crimes of those around him? I don't mean to insult you but this is not Cuba or Russia, this is America!! The man was found innocent, leave him alone.
Go to
Mar 24, 2019 21:12:36   #
donrent wrote:
Look for another investation into what Muller "overlook" and failed to report .


Actually, Adam Schiff has already said that it's not over. So has Pelosi and Shumer. They're going to aggravate Trump to death. Every move he makes, he will have hell's hounds on his tail. If he gets enough of it, maybe he'll play that ace I believe he has been holding until Mueller's report came out. He has said he has enough to "take em' down". We''ll see.
Go to
Mar 24, 2019 21:04:43   #
Canuckus Deploracus wrote:
Neither the soviets Nor the North koreans practice/d full democracy...

Neither did the Greeks...

I am actually having trouble coming up with a single example of a society that practices full democracy....

Perhaps it would help if we defined what a complete democracy is...



Hey, Kyle,
Hope you are well. I actually read some time back so this is just my memory of it. It was the Greeks I believe. Everyone v**ed on everything with a white stone or a black stone, white meaning yes. The article said that everyone took a turn in government with no "career" politicians. If I remember correctly, their civic duty was for one year. I may be wrong and I may have it mixed up, but as I remember it, I'm right on it.
For the sake of argument, let's just say that my memory is accurate. In this society, the majority always rules. Everything would be fine as long as the minority was happy. But, let's say that the minority is the minority ALL the time. Pretty soon, the minority would be pretty unhappy, because they never got what they wanted. Let's say that the ruling class, (the majority), didn't like the minorities and they v**ed on a law that prevented any minorities from owing land. What recourse would the minorities have against such a law? None.
This type of stacked power does not happen in a republic such as ours, because all people are represented in government, not just the biggest gang.
A prime example is the E*******l Collage. Without it, states like Alaska, Vermont, Maine, Rode Island, ect., would never have a voice, just like in the democracy I just described. Let's reverse that situation...without the E*******l Collage, California and New York would pretty much select every president, due to large populations and dominant liberalism.
Would that be fair? No...It would be almost impossible to elect any president without California and New York.
Kyle, I apologize if my memory failed me, but it's a good example anyway.
I've been pretty busy...I rode my 3 wheel homemade bike at the park where I work on Friday night, and I went back and played my homemade instrument, a diddleybow, on the bridge over Chattanooga Creek, a good 2 nights.
Your Friend,
David
Go to
Page: <<prev 1 ... 147 148 149 150 151 152 153 154 155 ... 237 next>>
OnePoliticalPlaza.com - Forum
Copyright 2012-2024 IDF International Technologies, Inc.