I think, honestly... we all know that the smugness and superiority is a "front," the poor guy is probably actually very insecure about his lot in life.
Claims of omniscience are a sign of a narcissistic disorder.
based on the intellectual level of your posts I am convinced you are a vegetable.
Did I strike a nerve Freddy ? When I said plant ….it wasn’t vegetation. If anybody thinks the guv doesn’t insert people into conversations to stir things up you have your head in the sand. Keep thinking you’re the smartest guy in the room buddy…
[This message has been edited by PhatMax (edited 08-12-2023).]
Originally posted by PhatMax: Did I strike a nerve Freddy ? When I said plant ….it wasn’t vegetation. If anybody thinks the guv doesn’t insert people into conversations to stir things up you have your head in the sand. Keep thinking you’re the smartest guy in the room buddy…
What "things"..?
It's too funny.
This reminds me of a video that's been posted somewhere in the annals of the Pennock's forum. A circle of hippies or something like that, out in the woods and gathered around a bright yellow Fiero, like it's an object of worship. Or maybe something that the central character in the skit wants to sell online.
Anybody remember that one? And how to find it?
[This message has been edited by rinselberg (edited 08-12-2023).]
Claims of omniscience are a sign of a narcissistic disorder.
FACT.
Hahah... I'm good Fred. Of all the psychological evaluations I've had in my last career, I've never been identified as having that. Confident, Type-A, and a little arrogant, yes... but I'm well-aware that the world does not revolve around me.
Originally posted by 82-T/A [At Work]: Hahah... I'm good Fred. Of all the psychological evaluations I've had in my last career, I've never been identified as having that. Confident, Type-A, and a little arrogant, yes.
Well, to quote someone from earlier in this thread. . . "we all know that the smugness and superiority is a "front," the poor guy is probably actually very insecure about his lot in life."
Of course I would never say anything like that because I do not suffer from the delusion that I am omniscient.
Originally posted by fredtoast: The only purpose for the jury is for "findings of fact". They decide what facts are proven and what are not. Then they plug the "findings of fact" into the law to come up with a decision. They have no authority (and are not qualified) to change laws.
Correct that they can not change law. However, one juror can not agree with a law and vote accordingly. You should know this.
Originally posted by fredtoast: But if you die with no life insurance you could leave a wife and children with no support, then the taxpayers have to take care of it.
I do not need the government to protect me from my self, nor my wife.
quote
Originally posted by fredtoast: Or if you get seriously injured with no health insurance (or not enough) you could stick a hospital with millions of dollars of bills that will never get paid. Then other people see their health care costs rise to cover these costs.
Or you could survive, but be permanently disabled and unable to work. Again, if you don't have disability insurance (and most people don't) then the tax payers have to step up to pay for your stupidity.
The damage from any popular dangerous activity effects the entire society.
There is a solution for that gibberish. Let the deceased person's family, and the surviving wife's family provide them with support. And the charitable entities in the land. Americans are a very giving people.
Originally posted by cliffw: There is a solution for that gibberish. Let the deceased person's family, and the surviving wife's family provide them with support. And the charitable entities in the land. Americans are a very giving people.
His statement here, "Or if you get seriously injured with no health insurance (or not enough) you could stick a hospital with millions of dollars of bills that will never get paid." ... is somewhat questionable. If this was a concern, a legitimate one, then we wouldn't be allowing millions of illegals in every year... all of which overwhelm the public health system, including putting dozens and dozens of Christian charity / not for profit hospitals out of business... to which point they're being converted into private hospitals (if they don't get shut down entirely), which then lead to higher costs and a profit-driven motive. Which... is not a bad thing, but then those who can least afford it, and the very people the Democrats say they are trying to help... literally get even more disadvantaged.
And this is the biggest problem with Democrat policies. For decades they've been stating that their policies help the downtrodden, but in fact they almost always lead to worse pain and suffering for the very people they proclaim to help. The most simple example I can give was in Florida. Back when I moved to Florida in the 90s, I was a Democrat if for no other reason than because I listened to my teachers, and possibly rebelling from my parents (I cannot remember why). The Democrats had a policy of emissions and safety inspection testing which was very rigorous. Much more defined than most other states. It required strict adherence to emissions testing, which even required you to run your car on a dyno (at speed) while you did a sniffer test. They also checked everything on your car to make sure it was "safe" to be on the road.
Take a guess who this hurt the most? The only people this actually affected, were people with older cars. People with classics or modified cars made up like... what, 1%? The majority of the people who were affected were the people who could barely afford cars in the first place... the day laborers and workers who had to get back and forth to work. The people with newer cars, well... this was no problem. They always passed. But the poor people... having to replace a catalytic converter usually wiped out a person's savings (if they even had any), and it resulted in fines, which gave them a "fix-it" ticket, that they had to fix and correct within 60 days. Not to mention the fact that they didn't get their registration renewed, so it's not like that helped... it was just an additional frustration they had to deal with.
Jeb Bush, who was really the start of the state of Florida becoming Republican, eliminated all of this. And it dramatically helped the lower income class... I mean, substantially. It lifted all boats as they say. The state workers got other jobs within the state, and almost all of those old emissions testing facilities turned into speed shops.
We'd only had like 1 or 2 Republican governors in the entire history of Florida up to the point that we elected Jeb Bush, and each one was only a 1 term governor, elected only because the previous Democrat had resigned as a result of fraud and corruption. So Jeb in 1998, was really the start of Florida becoming a deep blue racist state like all the others, from slowly becoming Republican. It occurred from a lot of Republican New Yorkers moving South, and the increase in immigration from Cubans and people fleeing Venezuela during that time (who, assisted by the Cubans, quickly became Republican).
Originally posted by 82-T/A [At Work]: My dad though, almost never puts his seat belt on... but will eventually put it on after I say... "DAD!!!" Even to this day, he still forgets and starts driving and the car makes all the dings and beeps that I've never heard before. He's old school, and that's just kind of how it was back then.
I do not think I am old enough to be your father. Sounds like I am more old school than he. I will not own a vehicle that uses noises to control me.
In 2005 I bought a brand new 2005 Toyota truck. No bothersome noises. In 2011 I bought my wife a 2011 Toyota Rav4. No bothersome noises. She would never hear them but I might.
Originally posted by fredtoast: I bet even the biggest fighters for FREEDOM around here wear their seat belts.
I will take that bet and raise you $100.00
quote
Originally posted by fredtoast: You owe it to the passengers in your car to wear a seatbelt because human bodies are the biggest objects flying around the passenger compartment during an accident. You are "free" to go beltless if you are driving alone, but when travelling with others your respect for their safety should outweigh the minimal restriction on "freedom" that a seat belt imposes.
There you go again . Deciding for other people how they need to live.
I do not think I am old enough to be your father. Sounds like I am more old school than he. I will not own a vehicle that uses noises to control me.
In 2005 I bought a brand new 2005 Toyota truck. No bothersome noises. In 2011 I bought my wife a 2011 Toyota Rav4. No bothersome noises. She would never hear them but I might.
It's funny, I was visiting my dad yesterday for dinner (they live a couple hours away), and I went with my dad to my storage unit where I keep my VW Bus. The second I started driving to the storage unit... my car was beeping like crazy, and I said... "DAD!!!" hahah... I immediately thought of Patrick scolding me about my dad not wearing his seat belt, and I was like... ugh... why did my brain build this neural-pathway.
I like you Patrick, but I don't want to think about you at random times!
Originally posted by Patrick: The only people benefiting from minority rule are those who currently find themselves in a favorable societal position which can only be maintained through unfair representation in governmental affairs. So sure, I understand why these particular people would strive to maintain the status quo... but let's not pretend this is equatable for all. To suggest that the rights of a few have more weight than the rights of the many is... is... let me introduce you to the "royal" families of Europe. I thought Americans wished to distance themselves from this nonsense.
How blind are you ? It has nothing to do with maintaining the status quo. It is from changing the status quo.
Originally posted by fredtoast: Without government protection individuals and the environment were exploited and subjugated by corporate powers. The government is the only protection we have from the corporate "muggers".
Originally posted by 82-T/A [At Work]: When I was a kid, he pulled the buzzer out of his Volvo 240 because it wouldn't shut off until you put your seat belt on.
My 2009 Ford Explorer has a buzzer that goes off due to a failure in the trac system. It's been like this for over a year, but I almost never drive it, and it drives amazing... so I don't feel like spending the $700 for a new ECM at this point. But I removed the gauge pod, and the buzzer is soldered to the back-side of the pod. LOL!
Originally posted by olejoedad: This Forum also has members that post long screeds that say nothing of any meaning to those that spend their time reading them.
Brevity in writing is an art form in the communication world. If one can get their message point across with few words, the reader appreciates the time savings.
Ah yes. If you can not dazzle them with brilliance, baffle them with bullzhit..
Originally posted by rinselberg: That's funny. Although I saw a report that the VP has been working to improve her informal or "off the cuff" remarks, and perhaps also her more formal statements.
Yeah, she was ready on day one and still is not ready now.
Originally posted by cliffw: Typical leftoid. Infecting a good organization which is a political neutral organization to affect change. Will you be alive when it happens?
That was addressed to me, and I'd appreciate a follow-up on it.
quote
Infecting a good organization which ia political neutral organization...
Organization? Does that mean the Pennock's forum?
quote
to affect change.
I have never equated my online conversations via Pennock's, which are now the only online conversations that I have, as any kind of political activism or any attempt at being an online "influencer."
I think anyone who thought that way about their online conversations on Pennock's would be having an hallucination—a mystical and mirage-like delusion of grandeur—about what they are doing when they engage with the Pennock's forum. It would be evidence of a narcissistic psychological disorder, and I don't believe I have that kind of psychology, and certainly, not to the extent that I would be succumbing to that severe of a level of self-deception and "daydreams."
(An argument could be made for saying "affect change"—as you have it—but I think what you really wanted to say is "effect change." But that's really neither here nor there, as the old bromide reacts... because what else would a salt compound comprised in part by the element Br be able to do?)
quote
Will you be alive when it happens?
Probably not. Although I'm not too clear about "it." What is the "it" that is referenced by this question?
Does saying "leftoid" instead of "leftist" put a little extra dill in your pickle? (So to speak.)
[This message has been edited by rinselberg (edited 08-14-2023).]
Friar Chicken or Friar French-Fries ? Maybe Friar mars bars ?
A bit random, but... in much of Europe, they eat French fries with mayonnaise. Since I more or less grew up with this, I eat my fries with mayo... don't judge me, it's delicious.
He was quoting The Bard, but methinks the Bard had been at the bar.
Part of being ADHD, I make random associations... I hear "Bard" and I immediately think about this fantastic game Trilogy from the 80s...
The Bards Tale
Among all the things I'd like to waste my time on, I would love to relieve parts of my childhood by replaying (and actually finishing) these games, as with dozens of others. There's a 4th one that just came out (which I bought), and have yet to play them.
Carry on!!! I apologize for the randomness of this...
A bit random, but... in much of Europe, they eat French fries with mayonnaise. Since I more or less grew up with this, I eat my fries with mayo... don't judge me, it's delicious.
That is tame compared to what they do to french fries in MEM's neck of the woods.
That is tame compared to what they do to french fries in MEM's neck of the woods.
I've had these from Tim Horton's Coffee whenever I've been in Canada... love that place. It's like cheese curds. It builds fat so you stay warm in those winters.
quote
Originally posted by fredtoast:
Anyone who claims a jury can nullify a law please tell me the legal basis for that. I don't know what makes people think that is possible.
It is crazy to claim that 12 random citizens with no legal or public policy background has MORE POWER that the elected legislature.
Please cite the law that says that can happen.
I've actually never heard of this either. I'm wondering if perhaps we're misunderstanding what was being conveyed. Laws are made by legislatures, and decisions (from a judge) can affirm or reject the interpretation of a law and helps set future precedence. A jury serves no other purpose than to determine guilt (as a jury of your peers) for various crimes that are defined in the penal code. And... to that point, the judge is still the one that determines sentencing... which is entirely at his/her own discretion unless the particular penal code defines a minimum (or maximum) sentencing.
I'm open to being proven wrong, but this is new to me... unless I'm misunderstanding.
Anyone who claims a jury can nullify a law please tell me the legal basis for that. I don't know what makes people think that is possible.
It is crazy to claim that 12 random citizens with no legal or public policy background has MORE POWER that the elected legislature.
Please cite the law that says that can happen.
lawdog showing why they just can't get it
the jury can rule anyway they like it is about that rare elusive idea of justice not just following the law
emmit till is a very famous case of a white jury nullifying his death by local custom bad example on conservative use sure but a well known one of many in the civil rights era
. Deciding for other people how they need to live.
? It has nothing to do with maintaining the status quo. It is from changing the status quo.
?
.
