HomeLatest ThreadsGreatest ThreadsForums & GroupsMy SubscriptionsMy Posts
DU Home » Latest Threads » RC » Journal
Introducing Discussionist: A new forum by the creators of DU
Page: « Prev 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 ... 20 Next »

RC

Profile Information

Gender: Male
Hometown: North Dakota
Home country: US of A
Current location: Kansas City MO
Member since: 2001
Number of posts: 25,592

About Me

It does not matter where in the political spectrum one adheres. The same rules of right and wrong, good and evil applies to everyone. Our greatest danger of extinction comes from those that think the rules do not apply to them. www.timws.com

Journal Archives

What I would like to know and is missing from everything I have read about this, is

what did the girl involved think about the attention from the boy?
We don't actually know, for she was never asked. All we know is what her mother said, which is at odds with the mother of the boy.
However, this kissing had been ongoing for a while. The boy had a crush on the girl. Was it reciprocated? Why didn't the girl herself put a stop to it, if she didn't like it? There is no indication she even tried.
From raising my own daughters, I know they would let their feelings known to the perpetrator, or the teachers, or one or the other of their parents, in a situation like this. Also, why did the girl's mother seem to have a spot of difficulty convincing her daughter that she was not suppose to like it? That was in some of the articles I read about this.

These were kids. Neither child has the baggage we adults collect, that so clutter our lives with junk thought processes so many think are right and normal. But instead add to the dysfunction of society. This whole episode is an example of the dysfunction in our society.
Now both kids have started their own collection of junk.

No, because they would put her in prison for mass murder, for not doing what is necessary (icky sex)

for those future "little people" to developed and grow into real babies, which when born, they can then ignore, while punishing the women for obviously enjoying herself too much.

It doesn't have to make sense, we are talking about Conservatives here now.

Another way women are discriminated against?



This is a picture of two different Centrum Silver 50+. One for Women, the other for Men.
The Top one is a Women 50 + It just shy of an inch long.
The one below it is a 50+ for men. It is much smaller.

Why is it, the one made for us macho, manly men is so much smaller and daintier than the one made for women? Should us men not have the bigger pills? Why should women get the macho pills? (Actually I thing they both be pretty much the same size.)

Or is this more evidence that after centuries of second class treatment and subjugation of women, by even tougher macho, manly men than I, that women are actually tougher now than us regular macho, manly men are?

Whatever, I am having a problem seeing why the Women's 50+ should be so much bigger. My not really dainty, 50+ partner has a problem swallowing those pills, and I can see why she might. There are competitive brands that are smaller.

+1000

I think we can all name at least a few of them. They hide out of sight and out of mind for a while, till the rest of us relax, then they come out of the woodwork for a few days with one or more OP's full of their thinly disguised misandrist and even outright androphobia claptrap, daring anyone to disagree with them.

Most people on DU have learned to stay out of those threads, when they break out into the Home page, but they have a following.
You are correct, even though they call themselves Feminist, they are anything but. In fact they give the real Feminist a bad name.
They are actually bullies, bent on intimidating anyone and everyone not agreeing with their basic premise - That men are bad, evil, misogynist to the core. No, we're not. And for those men that are, those Pseudo-Feminists more than likely, had in a roll in making those men that way.
We are all people, both men and women, and most of us respond in kind to others. Be nice to us, we will more than likely, be nice to you in return. But the few women I am talking about are not nice, they intimidate, they attack, they insult, they put down right up front and then use the responses they provoke as proof of their premisses - Men are bad. Men are the cause of their {read women in general} problems. They do not see their own roll in turning people off in working for real equality and Equal Rights for everyone, regardless of gender, orientation, or anything else used to separate and classify us.

The only viable solution is to cover everything for everyone.

Prostate cancer for women - Covered. Pregnancy and ovarian cancer for men - Covered. Every medical condition is covered for everyone, regardless. NO MORE DENYING MEDICAL HELP because some bean counter, with a computer program tied to the bottom line, says someone is not covered because the are not rich enough! Who gets what medical procedures are medical decisions, not a business decision of a for profit, third party.

Single Payer, Universal Health Care, paid for by a tax on income, regardless of income, as long is it is some percentage above the poverty level. No caps, period. It makes no difference whether you make $10,000 a year or $100,000,000 or even more, everyone is covered the same. No more Cadillac plans for those that can afford them and denial of health care if you can't.

Too many can not put themselves in the shoes of others.

It never occurs to them that someone in a remote, dusty village 50 miles from nowhere, is no threat to the worlds only remaining super power. They only know what they are told. They seldom question even the highly questionable. How a "leader" we designate and a few supporters, being labeled as "terrorists" in a remote 3rd world location, is a threat to the worlds largest, very sophisticated military.
The OP is an good word picture of what it would be like to have the tables turned. To have us, just random people, as arbitrary targets of some other country, in the name of fighting terrorism.

Just who are the real terrorists anyway? A grandmother tending to her dead son's or daughter's kids? Or a corrupt government being run by profit seeking, war mongers?


Edited to add: I suspect this OP will sink like a rock because it strikes too close to home. DU has too many DLC, 3rd Way and other Right of Center denizens that go along with our "War on Terror". The really do believe the hype and think it is keeping our country safe.

That was the purpose of the DLC.

To drag the DNC far enough to the Right for the Republicans to comfortably switch parties. And that is what is now happening.
The DLC took over the Party leadership of the DNC, then dissolved their own DLC, as it was no longer needed.
But because they had a (D) by their name, that was A-OK with most people, because that meant they were Democrats. Never mind their politics are more main stream Republican than Democrat, they have that (D), so that makes then "Liberal" in the minds of too many. And compared to the current flock of Republicans, that is true in comparison. What is forgotten is that the the real political center is far to the Left of the current, apparent center, which is far to the Right of the Republicans of 40 years ago.

Yeah, that's just you.

The moral and ethics surrounding the NSA stink to high heaven. The NSA treats everyone as a potential enemy to justify their paranoia of treating everyone as if they are potential enemies. And around and around they go, feeding on themselves, generating ever more circular arguments, as to why they are even needed in the first place.

Translation: Nearly half of us are capable of thinking for ourselves.

Capable of critical thinking. We don't wait for the daily talking point to decide for us what our minds are. That is what makes us dangerous. We are not the sheeple that easily swallow the latest propaganda to keep us in line. We do not revere our leaders as somehow mystical and god like.
Too bad we aren't the majority.

We can't as of yet use the military for defense against the citizenry, so they are training,

and equipping the police for that job.
The above was just a training exercise. Send the mark a package. When the mark takes the package inside, the law enforcement unit that sent the package for the training exercise, then have probable cause to suspect drug dealing. And then the training for both the law enforcement and the victims, begins in earnest. If the victims survive, they know better than to do anything to attract the attention of the police. You know, like attending public protests about certain government policies, where the police will be.
Yeah, we are so free.
Go to Page: « Prev 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 ... 20 Next »