Here's a simpler explanation psychotix: the military tradition in this country is largely southern and white. White southern males are overwhelmingly Republican.
Not to mention the uneducated.
And there you go back to attacking the military again
Oddly enough most of the drop outs that are in the military, do not fit that role. You're looking at inner city kids, and you still haven't countered the fact that you can be educated and in the military, in fact they will fucking pay for it and push you to do it.
Other then you're "military members are less then the elite like me" you haven't contributed squat.
Here's a simpler explanation psychotix: the military tradition in this country is largely southern and white. White southern males are overwhelmingly Republican.
Well, that and the military is largely reflective of the country at large on the whole. It is somewhat more conservative and republican, but not drastically so. Maybe that's different in the immediate area of the Pentagon, but then that isn't really representative of couple million members of the armed forces either.
Speaking of the armed forces, I hear they protect the state of Maine. Which just told gays to go fuck themselves by a margin of 28,000 people.
Here's a simpler explanation psychotix: the military tradition in this country is largely southern and white. White southern males are overwhelmingly Republican.
Not to mention the uneducated.
And there you go back to attacking the military again
Oddly enough most of the drop outs that are in the military, do not fit that role. You're looking at inner city kids, and you still haven't countered the fact that you can be educated and in the military, in fact they will fucking pay for it and push you to do it.
Other then you're "military members are less then the elite like me" you haven't contributed squat.
I'm not seeing any contributions to the thread in just about any of the quote trees you're in. Just a lot of tangential concern trolling.
Here's a simpler explanation psychotix: the military tradition in this country is largely southern and white. White southern males are overwhelmingly Republican.
Well, that and the military is largely reflective of the country at large on the whole. It is somewhat more conservative and republican, but not drastically so. Maybe that's different in the immediate area of the Pentagon, but then that isn't really representative of couple million members of the armed forces either.
Speaking of the armed forces, I hear they protect the state of Maine. Which just told gays to go fuck themselves by a margin of 28,000 people.
The "educated" officer core tends to the hardcore conservative type, the uneducated enlisted class is a lot more liberal. Here in NOVA we have a higher concentration of officers, they are pretty far to the right.
Here's a simpler explanation psychotix: the military tradition in this country is largely southern and white. White southern males are overwhelmingly Republican.
Not to mention the uneducated.
I wonder what the actual numbers are on college education among current and former servicemembers.* Considering that the $70K or so of money I got for college might have made me marginally more likely to go (and finish).
Sure, the average private is probably high-school educated (at best). But it seems like a lot of former military members wind up going to school.
Also, a lot of current members above the rank of E-6 or so do as well.
I'll give you the white/southern (or just white/conservative) thing, though. I'm thinking that's a large portion of the everlasting military support of Republicans; they're better at paying lip service to the military, and they're more likely to reflect the values (even if not the interests) of a military or ex-military voter.
* - Compared to overall population, of course. Which includes a lot of uneducated people still slinging fries or coffees well into their 30's and beyond.
The "educated" officer core tends to the hardcore conservative type, the uneducated enlisted class is a lot more liberal. Here in NOVA we have a higher concentration of officers, they are pretty far to the right.
This too. Mainly because while they might be college educated, most career officers were in the military system since high school; even assuming they didn't attend actual service academies for their education, they were probably in ROTC programs while in college.
It's my experience that you're more likely to find liberals (particularly ones willing to self-identify) among the junior enlisted or junior NCO ranks than in the officer ranks.
So if two states now have repealed gay marriage laws, does that destroy the idea that after gay marriage is allowed people will realize it doesn't affect them and fuck off about it?
So if two states now have repealed gay marriage laws, does that destroy the idea that after gay marriage is allowed people will realize it doesn't affect them and fuck off about it?
that idea was wrong to begin with because it never affected the most hardcore people against it
it offends them on a deep ideological level
they won't stop fighting it or anything like it until they're absolutely sure they can have their way until they die
So if two states now have repealed gay marriage laws, does that destroy the idea that after gay marriage is allowed people will realize it doesn't affect them and fuck off about it?
that idea was wrong to begin with because it never affected the most hardcore people against it
it offends them on a deep ideological level
they won't stop fighting it or anything like it until they're absolutely sure they can have their way until they die
So if two states now have repealed gay marriage laws, does that destroy the idea that after gay marriage is allowed people will realize it doesn't affect them and fuck off about it?
that idea was wrong to begin with because it never affected the most hardcore people against it
it offends them on a deep ideological level
they won't stop fighting it or anything like it until they're absolutely sure they can have their way until they die
Well, we know what we have to do, then.
Well, I think each state which tries and tries to make things fair does help. Almost all the funding comes from the same religious nutcases, whose funds are at least limited. It does surely exhaust their funds, which would otherwise be used attacking other areas of civil liberty. If we weren't pushing so hard for gay marriage, they would be attacking abortion even stronger. Every vote is getting closer and closer, its like with abortion, they haven't stopped opposing it, but now that we're pushing on gay marriage they don't have the time left to give it their 100% attention.
We just need more and more states to pass the law. Well, what we really need is a federal mandate.
If the dems are ever not going to be the "party that hates our troops" that shit needs to change.
This is just culture war smoke puff.
And also weird, considering the only thing that brought your rant on was Thanatos's bitter hatred of police, which is rather peculiar to his own mind. He's famously eccentric in this way.
Considering that it isn't even a campaign season, we could probably slack off on our hatred of dated ideological stereotypes for a few more months and no one would accuse us of doing anything wrong.
We just need more and more states to pass the law. Well, what we really need is a federal mandate.
The attitude that if we force unpopular changes people will just get used to it through cognitive dissonance has always bothered me. That's not usually how we do things in a liberal democracy.
So people use the democratic process, vote their minds as they are allowed to in this country, things don't go your way, and now you scream for a federal mandate.
Typical.
Last night was a great night. The right took VA, the right took NJ, the right spoke out in Maine.
So people use the democratic process, vote their minds as they are allowed to in this country, things don't go your way, and now you scream for a federal mandate.
Typical.
Last night was a great night. The right took VA, the right took NJ, the right spoke out in Maine.
Rock on America.
Democracy is great, but if it weren't for the feds, there'd still be slaves in this country.
So people use the democratic process, vote their minds as they are allowed to in this country, things don't go your way, and now you scream for a federal mandate.
Typical.
Last night was a great night. The right took VA, the right took NJ, the right spoke out in Maine.
Rock on America.
Hey, let's have a vote on if you should have the right to marry! Who cares if it fucks up your life, it's the political process!
So people use the democratic process, vote their minds as they are allowed to in this country, things don't go your way, and now you scream for a federal mandate.
Typical.
Last night was a great night. The right took VA, the right took NJ, the right spoke out in Maine.
Rock on America.
Hey, let's have a vote on if you should have the right to marry! Who cares if it fucks up your life, it's the political process!
Naa, my marriage is rooted in tradition and religion and various other things from the past many dozens of years, not a new fangled liberal idea designed to force feed the conservative majority in this country a lifestyle that does not go along with our beliefs.
This is still a Christian nation and the silent majority who has sat on the sidelines not putting up a fight is finally waking up and taking a stand against those who are trying to change it.
Lord Jezo on
I KISS YOU!
0
Options
KalTorakOne way or another, they all end up inthe Undercity.Registered Userregular
edited November 2009
What a great American tradition it is to say "I'm in the majority, so your civil rights can go jump in the fucking lake, tralalalaaaa!"
So i assume you're opposed to interracial marriage being allowed, as beforehand it had never fit the definition of "marriage". How about required dowries?
Oh, and how does "let some other people get married to each other if they want to" equal "force-feed"?
Your so-called "silent majority" failed to elect a Republican for president, failed to win NY-23, and only barely overturned gay marriage in Maine. Some majority.
Naa, my marriage is rooted in tradition and religion and various other things from the past many dozens of years, not a new fangled liberal idea designed to force feed the conservative majority in this country a lifestyle that does not go along with our beliefs.
Your current lack of serfdom, access to education and freedom of religion were all "new fangled liberal idea(s)" at some point, pal.
The fact is, though, Baldacci enacted the gay marriage law in Maine without the input of the citizens - no vote. When it came to a vote, it was repealed. Regardless of which side you're on, I think it's wrong to sidestep public vote to push a hot-topic item through.
What a great American tradition it is to say "I'm in the majority, so your civil rights can go jump in the fucking lake, tralalalaaaa!"
I'd rather the actual people have a say in the way their country is run than live in North Korea where Kim Jong says "I am the leader and can do whatever I want to all of you naa naa naa naa naa."
If it went the other way, sure, us right wingers would be sad, but that would be the process in action. We have the ability to vote for things and have our voices heard, and that is what happened.
Lord Jezo on
I KISS YOU!
0
Options
KalTorakOne way or another, they all end up inthe Undercity.Registered Userregular
The fact is, though, Baldacci enacted the gay marriage law in Maine without the input of the citizens - no vote. When it came to a vote, it was repealed. Regardless of which side you're on, I think it's wrong to sidestep public vote to push a hot-topic item through.
Civil rights for minorities shouldn't be put to a popular vote. If a town of 400 people votes 399 to 1 to kill one person, that doesn't make it right.
Since I'm so fucking sick of the silent majority canard;
PRINCETON, NJ -- The Republican Party's image -- quite tattered in the first few months after the 2008 elections -- has seen some recent improvement. Forty percent of Americans now hold a favorable view of the Republicans, up from 34% in May. The Republicans still trail the Democrats on this popularity measure, as 51% of Americans now view the Democrats favorably. With the Democrats' favorable rating dipping slightly since last November, their advantage has narrowed.
The fact is, though, Baldacci enacted the gay marriage law in Maine without the input of the citizens - no vote. When it came to a vote, it was repealed. Regardless of which side you're on, I think it's wrong to sidestep public vote to push a hot-topic item through.
Civil rights for minorities shouldn't be put to a popular vote. If a town of 400 people votes 399 to 1 to kill one person, that doesn't make it right.
This is not about civil rights, this is about them taking marriage away from it's traditional roles of the past forever. They still get civil unions and all that, they are just pushing themselves onto the whole word marriage because they want to feel included.
Or you know, this chart if you want to start throwing charts around.
Lord Jezo on
I KISS YOU!
0
Options
KageraImitating the worst people. Since 2004Registered Userregular
What a great American tradition it is to say "I'm in the majority, so your civil rights can go jump in the fucking lake, tralalalaaaa!"
I'd rather the actual people have a say in the way their country is run than live in North Korea where Kim Jong says "I am the leader and can do whatever I want to all of you naa naa naa naa naa."
If it went the other way, sure, us right wingers would be sad, but that would be the process in action. We have the ability to vote for things and have our voices heard, and that is what happened.
Sorry, tyranny of the majority is not freedom. Especially when that majority isn't really a majority but a portion of a voting public.
The fact is, though, Baldacci enacted the gay marriage law in Maine without the input of the citizens - no vote. When it came to a vote, it was repealed. Regardless of which side you're on, I think it's wrong to sidestep public vote to push a hot-topic item through.
Civil rights for minorities shouldn't be put to a popular vote. If a town of 400 people votes 399 to 1 to kill one person, that doesn't make it right.
This is not about civil rights, this is about them taking marriage away from it's traditional roles of the past forever. They still get civil unions and all that, they are just pushing themselves onto the whole word marriage because they want to feel included.
Why shouldn't they feel included?
"Traditional roles of the past" was an argument made against interracial marriage, I would note.
The fact is, though, Baldacci enacted the gay marriage law in Maine without the input of the citizens - no vote. When it came to a vote, it was repealed. Regardless of which side you're on, I think it's wrong to sidestep public vote to push a hot-topic item through.
Civil rights for minorities shouldn't be put to a popular vote. If a town of 400 people votes 399 to 1 to kill one person, that doesn't make it right.
No, that's true. But this is obviously a hot-button issue at the moment, and I really don't think passing legislation without a vote is going to net a positive result.
This is not about civil rights, this is about them taking marriage away from it's traditional roles of the past forever.
The traditional role of the woman becoming the man's chattel who cannot do anything without the husband's permission? The economic role done solely to ensure alliances or marry up? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Coverture
"Traditional roles of the past" was an argument made against interracial marriage, I would note.
And when the majority finally goes that way then it will be part of our country and I'll be a cranky old man sitting in my chair holding my guns talking about the good old days.
Until then the people will vote the way they want and the country will go in the direction that their actions take them.
I am sure Obama and his commies will force feed us their ideas eventually because Democrats like to regulate the way we think and feel that the public needs to be coddled and guided by their great leadership, but we'll keep fighting back as much we can.
Lord Jezo on
I KISS YOU!
0
Options
KageraImitating the worst people. Since 2004Registered Userregular
edited November 2009
I'm going to prognosticate here and say this discussion will lead to nowhere but the dude towing the party line and saying the same thing you can hear on Fox News every five minutes.
The fact is, though, Baldacci enacted the gay marriage law in Maine without the input of the citizens - no vote. When it came to a vote, it was repealed. Regardless of which side you're on, I think it's wrong to sidestep public vote to push a hot-topic item through.
Civil rights for minorities shouldn't be put to a popular vote. If a town of 400 people votes 399 to 1 to kill one person, that doesn't make it right.
This is not about civil rights, this is about them taking marriage away from it's traditional roles of the past forever. They still get civil unions and all that, they are just pushing themselves onto the whole word marriage because they want to feel included.
Or you know, this chart if you want to start throwing charts around.
Conservatives have had more of the ideological self-identification. However ideological self-identification is pretty squishy anyways. You tend to have a decent baout of people who identify as the other 'side's identification on either side, and even with numbers like that the left has crushed the right since in the last two national elections.
I am sure Obama and his commies will force feed us their ideas eventually because Democrats like to regulate the way we think and feel that the public needs to be coddled and guided by their great leadership, but we'll keep fighting back as much we can.
ahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha
You're precious. Let us talk about "[regulating] the way we think and feel" regarding, oh, lets say "terror levels." You know, color-coded levels of how scared we should be. Levels that might accidentally become elevated around the time that our nation's "protector" needs to get relected.
So people use the democratic process, vote their minds as they are allowed to in this country, things don't go your way, and now you scream for a federal mandate.
Typical.
Last night was a great night. The right took VA, the right took NJ, the right spoke out in Maine.
Rock on America.
Hey, let's have a vote on if you should have the right to marry! Who cares if it fucks up your life, it's the political process!
Naa, my marriage is rooted in tradition and religion and various other things from the past many dozens of years, not a new fangled liberal idea designed to force feed the conservative majority in this country a lifestyle that does not go along with our beliefs.
I wasn't aware that this law required straight people to marry their own gender.
The fact is, though, Baldacci enacted the gay marriage law in Maine without the input of the citizens - no vote. When it came to a vote, it was repealed. Regardless of which side you're on, I think it's wrong to sidestep public vote to push a hot-topic item through.
Hmm, there's something very stupid about this argument. Oh wait, I know what it is, it's the fact that majority vote already decided on the legislature, who did their jobs by passing legislation that they thought was right. If the people want a change to the legislation, they should vote in people who will change it. Legislation by referendum continues to underscore how right the founders were to take the power of legislation out of the the hands of the electorate.
Also, Lord Jezo is either an idiot or a troll. 60 years ago, people like him used the same rhetoric to argue against equal rights for black people.
Also, Lord Jezo is either an idiot or a troll. 60 years ago, people like him used the same rhetoric to argue against equal rights for black people.
Why is it considered trolling on the internet if you are a conservative Christian republican? I think we're just a rare species in the cyberspaces, it's normally dominated by the Democratic Underground types so when one of us show up people don't know how to handle it.
Also, Lord Jezo is either an idiot or a troll. 60 years ago, people like him used the same rhetoric to argue against equal rights for black people.
Why is it considered trolling on the internet if you are a conservative Christian republican? I think we're just a rare species in the cyberspaces, it's normally dominated by the Democratic Underground types so when one of us show up people don't know how to handle it.
Because your type are basically the ideological equivalent of the boy in the bubble?
Also, Lord Jezo is either an idiot or a troll. 60 years ago, people like him used the same rhetoric to argue against equal rights for black people.
Why is it considered trolling on the internet if you are a conservative Christian republican? I think we're just a rare species in the cyberspaces, it's normally dominated by the Democratic Underground types so when one of us show up people don't know how to handle it.
Because your type are basically the ideological equivalent of the boy in the bubble?
Also, Lord Jezo is either an idiot or a troll. 60 years ago, people like him used the same rhetoric to argue against equal rights for black people.
Why is it considered trolling on the internet if you are a conservative Christian republican? I think we're just a rare species in the cyberspaces, it's normally dominated by the Democratic Underground types so when one of us show up people don't know how to handle it.
Because your type are basically the ideological equivalent of the boy in the bubble?
So how do we keep winning?
In the face of a recent landslide Presidential defeat and nearly unprecedented losses in congress, you're going to have to define your metrics here.
Also, Lord Jezo is either an idiot or a troll. 60 years ago, people like him used the same rhetoric to argue against equal rights for black people.
Why is it considered trolling on the internet if you are a conservative Christian republican? I think we're just a rare species in the cyberspaces, it's normally dominated by the Democratic Underground types so when one of us show up people don't know how to handle it.
Because your type are basically the ideological equivalent of the boy in the bubble?
So how do we keep winning?
A decade ago, a legislature passing and a governor signing into law a same sex marriage act would have been unthinkable.
Now, you have to pump millions into a state to barely kill such a bill.
Posts
And there you go back to attacking the military again
Oddly enough most of the drop outs that are in the military, do not fit that role. You're looking at inner city kids, and you still haven't countered the fact that you can be educated and in the military, in fact they will fucking pay for it and push you to do it.
Other then you're "military members are less then the elite like me" you haven't contributed squat.
Well, that and the military is largely reflective of the country at large on the whole. It is somewhat more conservative and republican, but not drastically so. Maybe that's different in the immediate area of the Pentagon, but then that isn't really representative of couple million members of the armed forces either.
Speaking of the armed forces, I hear they protect the state of Maine. Which just told gays to go fuck themselves by a margin of 28,000 people.
I'm not seeing any contributions to the thread in just about any of the quote trees you're in. Just a lot of tangential concern trolling.
The "educated" officer core tends to the hardcore conservative type, the uneducated enlisted class is a lot more liberal. Here in NOVA we have a higher concentration of officers, they are pretty far to the right.
I wonder what the actual numbers are on college education among current and former servicemembers.* Considering that the $70K or so of money I got for college might have made me marginally more likely to go (and finish).
Sure, the average private is probably high-school educated (at best). But it seems like a lot of former military members wind up going to school.
Also, a lot of current members above the rank of E-6 or so do as well.
I'll give you the white/southern (or just white/conservative) thing, though. I'm thinking that's a large portion of the everlasting military support of Republicans; they're better at paying lip service to the military, and they're more likely to reflect the values (even if not the interests) of a military or ex-military voter.
* - Compared to overall population, of course. Which includes a lot of uneducated people still slinging fries or coffees well into their 30's and beyond.
This too. Mainly because while they might be college educated, most career officers were in the military system since high school; even assuming they didn't attend actual service academies for their education, they were probably in ROTC programs while in college.
It's my experience that you're more likely to find liberals (particularly ones willing to self-identify) among the junior enlisted or junior NCO ranks than in the officer ranks.
that idea was wrong to begin with because it never affected the most hardcore people against it
it offends them on a deep ideological level
they won't stop fighting it or anything like it until they're absolutely sure they can have their way until they die
Well, I think each state which tries and tries to make things fair does help. Almost all the funding comes from the same religious nutcases, whose funds are at least limited. It does surely exhaust their funds, which would otherwise be used attacking other areas of civil liberty. If we weren't pushing so hard for gay marriage, they would be attacking abortion even stronger. Every vote is getting closer and closer, its like with abortion, they haven't stopped opposing it, but now that we're pushing on gay marriage they don't have the time left to give it their 100% attention.
We just need more and more states to pass the law. Well, what we really need is a federal mandate.
This is just culture war smoke puff.
And also weird, considering the only thing that brought your rant on was Thanatos's bitter hatred of police, which is rather peculiar to his own mind. He's famously eccentric in this way.
Considering that it isn't even a campaign season, we could probably slack off on our hatred of dated ideological stereotypes for a few more months and no one would accuse us of doing anything wrong.
The attitude that if we force unpopular changes people will just get used to it through cognitive dissonance has always bothered me. That's not usually how we do things in a liberal democracy.
Typical.
Last night was a great night. The right took VA, the right took NJ, the right spoke out in Maine.
Rock on America.
I KISS YOU!
Democracy is great, but if it weren't for the feds, there'd still be slaves in this country.
Hey, let's have a vote on if you should have the right to marry! Who cares if it fucks up your life, it's the political process!
Naa, my marriage is rooted in tradition and religion and various other things from the past many dozens of years, not a new fangled liberal idea designed to force feed the conservative majority in this country a lifestyle that does not go along with our beliefs.
This is still a Christian nation and the silent majority who has sat on the sidelines not putting up a fight is finally waking up and taking a stand against those who are trying to change it.
I KISS YOU!
Oh, and how does "let some other people get married to each other if they want to" equal "force-feed"?
Your so-called "silent majority" failed to elect a Republican for president, failed to win NY-23, and only barely overturned gay marriage in Maine. Some majority.
Old PA forum lookalike style for the new forums | My ko-fi donation thing.
They tried to bury us. They didn't know that we were seeds. 2018 Midterms. Get your shit together.
I'd rather the actual people have a say in the way their country is run than live in North Korea where Kim Jong says "I am the leader and can do whatever I want to all of you naa naa naa naa naa."
If it went the other way, sure, us right wingers would be sad, but that would be the process in action. We have the ability to vote for things and have our voices heard, and that is what happened.
I KISS YOU!
Civil rights for minorities shouldn't be put to a popular vote. If a town of 400 people votes 399 to 1 to kill one person, that doesn't make it right.
Old PA forum lookalike style for the new forums | My ko-fi donation thing.
This is not about civil rights, this is about them taking marriage away from it's traditional roles of the past forever. They still get civil unions and all that, they are just pushing themselves onto the whole word marriage because they want to feel included.
Or you know, this chart if you want to start throwing charts around.
I KISS YOU!
Sorry, tyranny of the majority is not freedom. Especially when that majority isn't really a majority but a portion of a voting public.
Why shouldn't they feel included?
"Traditional roles of the past" was an argument made against interracial marriage, I would note.
Old PA forum lookalike style for the new forums | My ko-fi donation thing.
No, that's true. But this is obviously a hot-button issue at the moment, and I really don't think passing legislation without a vote is going to net a positive result.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Coverture
And when the majority finally goes that way then it will be part of our country and I'll be a cranky old man sitting in my chair holding my guns talking about the good old days.
Until then the people will vote the way they want and the country will go in the direction that their actions take them.
I am sure Obama and his commies will force feed us their ideas eventually because Democrats like to regulate the way we think and feel that the public needs to be coddled and guided by their great leadership, but we'll keep fighting back as much we can.
I KISS YOU!
Conservatives have had more of the ideological self-identification. However ideological self-identification is pretty squishy anyways. You tend to have a decent baout of people who identify as the other 'side's identification on either side, and even with numbers like that the left has crushed the right since in the last two national elections.
You're precious. Let us talk about "[regulating] the way we think and feel" regarding, oh, lets say "terror levels." You know, color-coded levels of how scared we should be. Levels that might accidentally become elevated around the time that our nation's "protector" needs to get relected.
I wasn't aware that this law required straight people to marry their own gender.
Hmm, there's something very stupid about this argument. Oh wait, I know what it is, it's the fact that majority vote already decided on the legislature, who did their jobs by passing legislation that they thought was right. If the people want a change to the legislation, they should vote in people who will change it. Legislation by referendum continues to underscore how right the founders were to take the power of legislation out of the the hands of the electorate.
Also, Lord Jezo is either an idiot or a troll. 60 years ago, people like him used the same rhetoric to argue against equal rights for black people.
Why is it considered trolling on the internet if you are a conservative Christian republican? I think we're just a rare species in the cyberspaces, it's normally dominated by the Democratic Underground types so when one of us show up people don't know how to handle it.
I KISS YOU!
Because your type are basically the ideological equivalent of the boy in the bubble?
So how do we keep winning?
I KISS YOU!
They tried to bury us. They didn't know that we were seeds. 2018 Midterms. Get your shit together.
A decade ago, a legislature passing and a governor signing into law a same sex marriage act would have been unthinkable.
Now, you have to pump millions into a state to barely kill such a bill.
That's not winning.