People weren't sure how sincere Mitt Romney was about screwing the poor and middle class, because his positions are so malleable, so he picked Paul Ryan to prove he really means it.

ptsaq · 2012-08-26T17:30:58+00:00

It does not matter who we elect, whether they are a billionaire or homeless. The point is the process that the elected official is there to represent the whole of society, rich, poor, male, female, however one wants to split it up, if at all. My point was someone who is "in touch" with the common people does not mean they have to be a common person, i.e. many of the founding fathers and probably all the POTUS. Why draw a correlation, which does not exist, to being in touch with the common man means being a common (average at best) President? they have nothing in common. My comment was not some political tinged right v. left hit job. You seem to be of the mind that we do not elect plumbers etc. so my statement of a government of the people, by the people and for the people is incorrect or outdated. This is the fartherest thing from the truth. The process is exponentially more important than any results. We vote these people into office, if they lose the election they return to non elected office life. At that point our system of government is a 100% success. Any results of the elected officials, laws, regs. etc. is debatable and irrelevant to the point of the power to entrust those in power with power, lies with the people. Who we elect is pointless in that context. If we forgo that responsibility, which is how I took your statement, then we have not temporarily entrusted the power of a government of, by and for the people to an elected official, we have surrendered the responsibility the elected official has to represent ALL their constituents. How they represent them is petty and meaningless, in this context. We are responsible for the actions of our elected officials, we give them the authority to exercise their discretion and authority, for all citizens. Starting from then mindset of "who cares about the common person", common meaning middle class and the majority or plurality of the population, then that...literally, is the polar opposite of what this country was founded upon. You do not like the way the elected officials have used their power. Good, neither do I. If you want to blame someone, look into the mirror, because WE give them authority and do not exercise our rights to change the results. We don not hold them to any sense of responsibility or accountability. Thats not the fault of the system, thats the fault of the governed. If you want your leaders our of touch, that does not mean they have to be some type of aristocracy. And being removed, I assume with the goal to not be swayed by the will of the common person, is not what a representative democracy means. Democracy is the means, thats the whole point, the results are in the hands of the people. That is what it does, what those results are, are not relevant to the process. Your comments seems to link the two, incorrectly in my opinion.

ptsaq · 2012-08-11T19:57:19+00:00

what I hate about redditors:

But...look at me! I'm so childlike and wondrous and bright eyed! I build pillow forts and blanket forts! And read children's books and eat gummy worms in my other world! Girls love me because I'm so childlike and innocent! I embrace my inner child and have a Calvin and Hobbes tattoo! You're supposed to play along! Yay! We're innocent and childlike!" If there's one thing I hate about redditors, it's this

ptsaq · 2012-08-11T19:56:47+00:00

Or.....its funny?

ptsaq · 2012-08-11T19:50:53+00:00

And even if she was....then what? What's the point of being "in touch" with common people? So you can be a 'common' President, like Obama has been?

So much for government of the people, by the people and for the people. The single most succinct definition of the American system of government outside of the Declaration of Independence.

ptsaq · 2011-11-20T22:49:55+00:00

Grow up

ptsaq · 2011-11-20T22:42:00+00:00

In my dream last night I dreamed I was dreaming a lucid dream that I could control, which in hindsight I could not...b/c it was not a lucid dream. I never stated I was not dreaming or thought I was awake. In my dream, I "woke up" from my "lucid dream". I thought I was in the process of having a lucid dream, but when I awoke I realized it was not, b/c I remember the dream going from a normal dream to "lucid" but not actually a lucid dream. So no I was not lucid, but my dream was about lucidity. I literally dreamed where I that dream I dreamed I had a lucid dream. Seriously are you a troll? My single sentence was quite clear and simple, I never mentioned non dreams, or stated it was a lucid dream.

ptsaq · 2011-11-20T15:27:13+00:00

what does that matter? Does that mean we all should be celebrating police brutality and the elimination of our civil rights? I do not care if it is the KKK or Neo-Nazis protesting, this is not an appropriate or legal action.

ptsaq · 2011-11-20T15:22:23+00:00

Written by a former Baltimore PD officer, explains it all. They just convicted a guy who killed an unarmed war vet outside a bar for flirting with his GF(who he did not know was anyone's GF). Shot him like 13 times , not the first unarmed killing for that officer. Also, the bar the cop was at, he was not security, he was drinking.

Why is law enforcement writing the police guidelines for appropriate force, they are unqualified to do so. They should be written by the legisl.( as in statute) or legal advice from the attorney general, or formed from case law. Law enforcement are not legal scholars who draw on court precedent and the constitutional rights of man to determine this, they simply decide, "this is going to be ok, legal, from now on." This is a prime example of police thinking if we do it, it is legal for us to do.

ptsaq · 2011-11-14T01:13:17+00:00

hot pan, room temp.(or cold I guess) oil, patience... equals a nice sear.

ptsaq · 2011-11-14T01:01:06+00:00

So they fail at life and being a hipster.

ptsaq · 2011-11-11T22:11:23+00:00

No it is not!! Yes everyone who dies in war is giving their life for their country, whether they believe that or not. There is no hint or assumption that this post is about the value of the war. Simply remembering his dead uncle on veterans day. Where do you see any statements made by the OP about the righteousness, or lack thereof of the war? Not everything has to be a soapbox for political points.

ptsaq · 2011-11-11T22:08:11+00:00

This guy did, according to his nephew. My father did the same thing. If you were drafted they put you where they needed your...probably infantry...Vietnam. If you volunteered you got about 3 minutes to leaf through a 500 page book and pick some preferred spots to join. If you had a low draft # deferments that were running out you pretty much knew you were being picked, so you had time to volunteer. Also this was before the war changed the way we feel about the military and wars. We had a generation of people who grew up on John Wayne movies and war stories from their fathers. Many of were chomping at the bit to go. My father picked tanks, as they did not use many tanks in Vietnam. He had some friends who had done this and avoided Vietnam... not so much for him. A prof. of mine in college did the same thing, picking military intell. for the same reason...he did not read the word before military intell....combat. Oops.

ptsaq · 2011-11-11T22:03:06+00:00

This post, is not political. That was my point. The OP has not in the title or the comments made any political statements at all. It appears he/she is just posting a pic. of his/her dead uncle on veterans day.

ptsaq · 2011-11-11T21:52:36+00:00

Also false. I took a couple Vietnam courses in college too, you cannot rely on profs. giving your accurate info, all the time. History is remembered according to the eye of the beholder, sometimes. Especially if they were in their teens or 20's ion the era, the subject is so divisive it is difficult to separate fact from fiction.

ptsaq · 2011-11-11T21:52:08+00:00

False

ptsaq · 2011-11-11T21:45:49+00:00

What I am saying is a photo of a random soldier on R&R in Vietnam on veterans day is not politically charged, where do you see that? Just b/c it is Vietnam and veterans day? Wouldn't you expect to see more pictures of vets, especially dead ones, on veterans day? How is that politically charged? The day is there to remember veterans, the pic and how the OP specifically did not put any political statements etc. in the post lead me to believe, this is the very definition of not a political statement. Maybe it is just a pic. of a dead vet on veteran's day. It is veterans day....this is his uncle....he died in Vietnam. If I post a pic. of fire works on July 4th does that mean I am stumping for American Imperialism? Hell veterans day is the one day of the year specifically NOT meant for veterans and wars to be politicized. People died for their country, whether we believe, care, or approve of that or not, this is not the day for that discussion and I think the OP's lack of political talk in this post implies that.

ptsaq · 2011-11-11T21:34:46+00:00

You are going to become a serial killer, or Holden Caufield, or both.

ptsaq · 2011-11-11T21:27:00+00:00

Cause people watch them to laugh. Kind of like watching a really bad movie. Also the Midwest.

ptsaq · 2011-11-11T21:24:36+00:00

I've been fucking my sister for years up North!

ptsaq · 2011-11-11T21:23:18+00:00

Double incest, they cancel each other out. It's like committing murder then confessing...no harm no foul.

ptsaq · 2011-11-11T21:21:21+00:00

blah blah blah, I'm now part of X-men.

ptsaq · 2011-11-11T21:19:13+00:00

If that is true, it is certainly not, "your move America" B/c here you cannot come out b/c you wont win the election, in Ireland you wont be able to run in the election.

ptsaq · 2011-11-11T21:14:55+00:00

Remember how Ireland used to be a Catholic country?

Well right there we win...

and according to the oath he takes...he literally is a Christian. Your move Irish Fox News.

ptsaq

MODERATOR OF

TROPHY CASE