Business woman beheaded after husband refuses to pay ransom

[Vern Humphrey]

Non-responsive. Nice try at a sidestep but but I am not hall monitor here, and there wasn't an answer there to any of the questions.

Might as well give it up -- you won't get anything substantive out of him.

[togor]

Non-responsive. Nice try at a sidestep but but I am not hall monitor here, and there wasn't an answer there to any of the questions.

First of all, what question? Sid's original? I don't know why anyone would want criminals coming here. I only jumped in because Vernon loudly declared that I think it's a wonderful idea. Second, this forum is full of people who have made themselves by definition non-responsive, with their ignore filters. You say you're not a hall monitor but proceed to want to monitor me. Typical bodyman elliptical prose.

- - - Updated - - -

Might as well give it up -- you won't get anything substantive out of him.

Someone is sore from flubbing the business tax subject.

[Bodyman]

Your Honor, ...

Again, non-responsive. Your Honor, I'm going to need a little leeway with this witness - seems to be a little hostile.

Pick any question in there - there are many. And I am not monitoring you, I am indicting all of modern liberalism for being the worthless failure and sham that it is - a lie that steals power from those with the least among us by tricking them into giving it all of their power. Or worse; a criminal conspiracy to rob people of their Inalienable Rights and the very notion of Individual Liberty. I find such a thing to be the absolute antithesis of the ideals of this Great Country and what it was meant to be - you just happen to be the standard bearer for it around here.

So pick any question to answer - if you cannot answer them and defend liberalism/socialism/communism and all of its disgusting consequences here to a little bodyman, like somewhere between 50 and 75 million dead in the last century that all lie at the bottom of that very slippery slope you condescendingly stand upon, then how on earth do you think it is ok to foist these notions upon the rest of the world without ever owning or even recognizing the consequences that have come before?

In the end a socialist does not believe in you when a Conservative does - why do you think these guys waste time even picking on you? It is because the believe in you and in your ability to actually grow. It's up to you.

Or not.

Oh well, ...

[togor]

Non-responsive to what? If you have a clean question, not laden with implicit wife-beater-style assumptions, go ahead and ask it.

So pick any question to answer - if you cannot answer them and defend liberalism/socialism/communism and all of its disgusting consequences here to a little bodyman, like somewhere between 50 and 75 million dead in the last century that all lie at the bottom of that very slippery slope you condescendingly stand upon, then how on earth do you think it is ok to foist these notions upon the rest of the world without ever owning or even recognizing the consequences that have come before?

Practicing for an open-mic night at a nearby coffee house? Be warned, referring to one's self in the third person can wear thin on an audience quickly.

But seriously, if you have a question for me, post it now and let's see what happens.

[S.A. Boggs]

What was interesting to see is which "personality" Togor will use to reply. My favorite is "Joe Cool" AKA RKT. Joe Cool was a hoot to read, so predicable.
Sam

[Roadkingtrax]

What was interesting to see is which "personality" Togor will use to reply. My favorite is "Joe Cool" AKA RKT. Joe Cool was a hoot to read, so predicable.
Sam

Joe Cool? Peanuts fan I see.

[togor]

Joe Cool? Peanuts fan I see.

Boggs liked the pictures but thought there were too many words in Peanuts strips. And he never could figure out those Far Side cartoons either. Don't get him started about Calvin & Hobbes.

[bostonbound]

Boggs liked the pictures but thought there were too many words in Peanuts strips. And he never could figure out those Far Side cartoons either. Don't get him started about Calvin & Hobbes.

Just another ad hominem attack.

[togor]

Just another ad hominem attack.

Oh you're keeping score on those now? Pray tell, who is on the leaderboard? As it is, Boggs just posts memes, prefers not to debate issues in a substantive way.

[lyman]

No, the problem is that any time anyone disagrees with the left they are attacked personally

here, that seems to happen on both sides,

[Bodyman]

Hmmm, ...

Non-responsive to what? If you have a clean question, not laden with implicit wife-beater-style assumptions, go ahead and ask it.

So pick any question to answer - if you cannot answer them and defend liberalism/socialism/communism and all of its disgusting consequences here to a little bodyman, like somewhere between 50 and 75 million dead in the last century that all lie at the bottom of that very slippery slope you condescendingly stand upon, then how on earth do you think it is ok to foist these notions upon the rest of the world without ever owning or even recognizing the consequences that have come before?

Practicing for an open-mic night at a nearby coffee house? Be warned, referring to one's self in the third person can wear thin on an audience quickly.

But seriously, if you have a question for me, post it now and let's see what happens.

Skip to the end if your coffee isn't hot, ...

Admittedly most people are only into these concepts for what they can get out of it right now - the free-bees. It is human nature. Like Abe says you can fool some of them all the time - I say instead; bought cheap with trinkets (some of the union guys will tell you; "I can't eat my guns'. What? You know it is true and you know the guys that say it, don't even start with me, ...). In my opinion they are missing their God-given Right to better, ... but that is my humble conservative opinion. I am taking you, Togor, as not among them; the trinket grabbers, and that you understand that these aren't just dusty ideologies, but are bigger. They aren't even world views but play into and are intertwined with entire cosmologies - all of these goofy, remote, philosophical, blabby notions are a reflection of is how we each see the world around us and those in it.

Obviously the higher order questions are not to your liking, my take is that you don't like the answer that you have to give so you just go on to something else. So lets see if we can come up with a very basic question to see if we can discover where your ideals branch off; where liberalism parts from us. This type of exercise is frustrating to conservatives (and at the risk of generalizing too far) because even at the most fundamental level - at the very foundations - liberalism and its adherents, if they somehow don't like something or see that they are lead to a water they wish not to drink, they will deny logic and even reality itself.

OK, you just threw your head back and huffed all the air in your lungs out and said; "Come on. Really! Like what?", ...

Well, first that you don't see the questions if you don't like the answer, ...

OK, we'll start with something easy - lets just look at religion. Liberalism in all its forms is averse to religion (I humbly maintain that they don't like to share any power and want ALL of it for themselves, ... but that is just me) and point to such things as the Spanish Inquisition (convenient that they are suddenly history buffs, ...), to which I point to the hideous crimes of liberalism in all its forms (which never made it into their history lessons, ...). But today we have a body of liberal academics and scientists that refuse to believe in God because they cannot see Him. And yet want us to believe that most of the universe is made of a 'dark matter' and 'dark energy' that we cannot see (feel, or verify in any way, ...) but that must be there so their equations - equations only a thousand people on the planet understand - will balance. We spent untold billions at CERN on the large hadron collider on a scale beyond anything before in all of history, in an effort to understand equations only these 1000 people might grasp, all in an effort to try to understand the universe back as close to the big bang as possible - 1 over 10 to the 44th of the first second - that is not a normal fraction like 1/10th, or 1 divided by 10, but a 1 divided by a 1 followed 44 zeros! But then we find out that we can't go further because at that moment, 1 over 10 to the 44th of the first second, every rule in the universe that we know now, and that everything we see relies upon, breaks down and doesn't exist. We spent and still spend untold billions on space telescopes to see back beyond 13.8 billion light years. In the space covered by a speck of sand held at an arms length, one square millimeter, the Hubble Ultra Deep Field saw an estimated 10,000 galaxies, ... And that is approximately one twenty-six millionth of the total sky, ...

Are not these religions and these scientists its priests. What do we expect to see at 13.9 billion light years? What is behind that last galaxy, ... If the universe really is 13.8 billion years old and everything started in the same spot, then why can we see something in every direction at 13,8 billion light-years away? Funny on so many levels, but doesn't that actually make us 'the' center of the universe. What do we expect to see at one over ten to the 45th of the first second when even the religion of high energy particle physics is forced to admit that based on everything they know and have learned and expect to learn, ... there really is nothing there. At what point are we not all talking about the same things, just with different names, ...

You see, the current version of domestic liberal/progressive thinking that democrats are plying, isn't really liberal. It is adulterated to get them power. They have conveniently overlooked or just outright destroyed things and their actions can be best understood as nothing more a grab for power. Things like undermining the nuclear family, prohibitions on abortion, and just outright free-bees to buy votes with public largess (like Gore promising 10 thousand dollars for every new teacher - that is the price of a vote; 10 grand. Despicable, ...). If you want to see REAL liberalism then you have to, ... wait for it, ... look to the preachings of Christianity. Yup. Those are the real, uncompromising tenets of liberal thinking and they are hard. Even if liberals want to say there is no God, and want to rail against organized religion, how on earth can liberals discount Christian teachings, ... unless they want to be the sole arbiter of 'right' and 'wrong', ... which is the same as saying they don't want to share power with anyone else, about anything, ...

I maintain that we are all liberals, ... and conservatives, ... Like the riddle of Oedipus we walk on 4 in the morning, then 2 at noon, and finally 3 in the evening.

So, we all exist and this morass - this grand soup - and the only thing that is certain is that we are each going to eventually die and there is not one thing that anyone can do to stop it. Unfortunately, the current tendency of liberal/progressive dems is to pander to the lowest common denominator and somehow promise that if they spend just a bit more of everyone else's money on this that or the other, then they can make YOU better off - you will be richer, thinner, have more hair, have a prettier wife, a hotter car, and be the envy of all your friends, ... that is if you vote for them.

All that aside, my question for you is; In your own words, how does a liberal (progressive) differ from a Conservative? At a fundamental level, where did we part?

(No wikipedia answers, either)

[S.A. Boggs]

Skip to the end if your coffee isn't hot, ...

Admittedly most people are only into these concepts for what they can get out of it right now - the free-bees. It is human nature. Like Abe says you can fool some of them all the time - I say instead; bought cheap with trinkets (some of the union guys will tell you; "I can't eat my guns'. What? You know it is true and you know the guys that say it, don't even start with me, ...). In my opinion they are missing their God-given Right to better, ... but that is my humble conservative opinion. I am taking you, Togor, as not among them; the trinket grabbers, and that you understand that these aren't just dusty ideologies, but are bigger. They aren't even world views but play into and are intertwined with entire cosmologies - all of these goofy, remote, philosophical, blabby notions are a reflection of is how we each see the world around us and those in it.

Obviously the higher order questions are not to your liking, my take is that you don't like the answer that you have to give so you just go on to something else. So lets see if we can come up with a very basic question to see if we can discover where your ideals branch off; where liberalism parts from us. This type of exercise is frustrating to conservatives (and at the risk of generalizing too far) because even at the most fundamental level - at the very foundations - liberalism and its adherents, if they somehow don't like something or see that they are lead to a water they wish not to drink, they will deny logic and even reality itself.

OK, you just threw your head back and huffed all the air in your lungs out and said; "Come on. Really! Like what?", ...

Well, first that you don't see the questions if you don't like the answer, ...

OK, we'll start with something easy - lets just look at religion. Liberalism in all its forms is averse to religion (I humbly maintain that they don't like to share any power and want ALL of it for themselves, ... but that is just me) and point to such things as the Spanish Inquisition (convenient that they are suddenly history buffs, ...), to which I point to the hideous crimes of liberalism in all its forms (which never made it into their history lessons, ...). But today we have a body of liberal academics and scientists that refuse to believe in God because they cannot see Him. And yet want us to believe that most of the universe is made of a 'dark matter' and 'dark energy' that we cannot see (feel, or verify in any way, ...) but that must be there so their equations - equations only a thousand people on the planet understand - will balance. We spent untold billions at CERN on the large hadron collider on a scale beyond anything before in all of history, in an effort to understand equations only these 1000 people might grasp, all in an effort to try to understand the universe back as close to the big bang as possible - 1 over 10 to the 44th of the first second - that is not a normal fraction like 1/10th, or 1 divided by 10, but a 1 divided by a 1 followed 44 zeros! But then we find out that we can't go further because at that moment, 1 over 10 to the 44th of the first second, every rule in the universe that we know now, and that everything we see relies upon, breaks down and doesn't exist. We spent and still spend untold billions on space telescopes to see back beyond 13.8 billion light years. In the space covered by a speck of sand held at an arms length, one square millimeter, the Hubble Ultra Deep Field saw an estimated 10,000 galaxies, ... And that is approximately one twenty-six millionth of the total sky, ...

Are not these religions and these scientists its priests. What do we expect to see at 13.9 billion light years? What is behind that last galaxy, ... If the universe really is 13.8 billion years old and everything started in the same spot, then why can we see something in every direction at 13,8 billion light-years away? Funny on so many levels, but doesn't that actually make us 'the' center of the universe. What do we expect to see at one over ten to the 45th of the first second when even the religion of high energy particle physics is forced to admit that based on everything they know and have learned and expect to learn, ... there really is nothing there. At what point are we not all talking about the same things, just with different names, ...

You see, the current version of domestic liberal/progressive thinking that democrats are plying, isn't really liberal. It is adulterated to get them power. They have conveniently overlooked or just outright destroyed things and their actions can be best understood as nothing more a grab for power. Things like undermining the nuclear family, prohibitions on abortion, and just outright free-bees to buy votes with public largess (like Gore promising 10 thousand dollars for every new teacher - that is the price of a vote; 10 grand. Despicable, ...). If you want to see REAL liberalism then you have to, ... wait for it, ... look to the preachings of Christianity. Yup. Those are the real, uncompromising tenets of liberal thinking and they are hard. Even if liberals want to say there is no God, and want to rail against organized religion, how on earth can liberals discount Christian teachings, ... unless they want to be the sole arbiter of 'right' and 'wrong', ... which is the same as saying they don't want to share power with anyone else, about anything, ...

I maintain that we are all liberals, ... and conservatives, ... Like the riddle of Oedipus we walk on 4 in the morning, then 2 at noon, and finally 3 in the evening.

So, we all exist and this morass - this grand soup - and the only thing that is certain is that we are each going to eventually die and there is not one thing that anyone can do to stop it. Unfortunately, the current tendency of liberal/progressive dems is to pander to the lowest common denominator and somehow promise that if they spend just a bit more of everyone else's money on this that or the other, then they can make YOU better off - you will be richer, thinner, have more hair, have a prettier wife, a hotter car, and be the envy of all your friends, ... that is if you vote for them.

All that aside, my question for you is; In your own words, how does a liberal (progressive) differ from a Conservative? At a fundamental level, where did we part?

(No wikipedia answers, either)

What are you trying to do, short circuit a brain? It would be easier for "them" to ponder the question of the chicken and the egg.
Sam

[Sandpebble]

I'm sorry Bodyman .... but after such a long diatribe.... you sound like a guy on mushrooms .... tone it down... make a statement.

Most here don't have the ability to concentrate that long and absorb what you have to say ......

[togor]

All that aside, my question for you is; In your own words, how does a liberal (progressive) differ from a Conservative? At a fundamental level, where did we part?

There are many facets to liberals and conservatives. Where you see magnetic poles, north and south, I'm inclined to see more of a colorwheel. For example there are social conservatives, fiscal conservatives, small government conservatives. Social liberals, economic liberals, etc. The Republicans of my youth were clear eyed about Communism and not given to policies ruled by sentiment. They believed in science and practical, pragmatic thinking. They sure as heck would have no use for Trump's demagoguery over the wall, or his attempt to evade the will of Congress. As for the current makeup of the liberal and conservative tribes, for all we know it shifts even as we breathe. My own view is that there is a growing slice up for grabs that are neither enamored of the far left or the GOP's surrendering to Trump and his xenophobic and increasingly reactionary base. But the center is hard to hold and I do not respect relief anytime soon.

My favorite experiment these days is LIGO, the two laser interferometers that were built on opposite sides of the country to look for gravity waves. Combined with a less sensitive experiment in Italy, the 3 points define a plane in space. And so when a signal was detected at all 3 locations, they could calculate a vector back in space corresponding to the source direction, and direct telescopes throughout the world to examine the sky in that direction. Sure enough, emissions in other EM bands were seen. It was the collision of two black holes, and among other things it confirmed that gravity waves travel at the speed of light, as Einstein predicted. Far from being the work of priests espousing given knowledge of a deity, this is superb work of science and worthy of the Nobel prize.

[RED]

They sure as heck would have no use for Trump's demagoguery over the wall,

Another full fledged 100&, bald faced lie from a low life agitating. POS, traitor.... Want proof, look at the videos of Obama, the Clintons and other Democrats during the Obama reign that said we should have secure borders. Then look at Ike Eisenhower... do you think for a minute that if 100's of thousands illegals had invaded the USA in 1955, that Ike would have not built a wall? He built the interstate system to transfer troops to fight off an invasion and that cost 1,000 times more than a wall.

Lie, lie, lie, twist and turn... the new Joseph Goebbels, the new Baghdad Bob...