Some Perspective on Massive Gulf Dead Zone: Agriculture

[CID1990]

I like pie. Anybody like pie?

Ooooh! Look! Airplane!


Also Sodomy.

[OSBF]

Fuckstick conk hypocrites

A law with a govt mandate on who has private property rights is fine.

A law that would guarantee equal access to our health care system to the poorest of the poor is socialism.

You people are fuckin' wack.

[89Hen]

Au contraire my Mensa friend.

[OSBF]

Au contraire my Mensa friend.

you jest jealous that the poli board has turned into my own personal little playground.

I bait you people into saying things, then i attack, and you're too dumb to see what's gonna happen.

I OWN you conk dumbasses.

[Pwns]

**** conk hypocrites

A law with a govt mandate on who has private property rights is fine.

A law that would guarantee equal access to our health care system to the poorest of the poor is socialism.

You people are ****' wack.

Yeah, dammit! Anyone who opposes government-ran healthcare should be a total anarchist or else they're hypocrites.

[CID1990]

Au contraire my Mensa friend.

you jest jealous that the poli board has turned into my own personal little playground.

I bait you people into saying things, then i attack, and you're too dumb to see what's gonna happen.

I OWN you conk dumbasses.

Klean, is that you?

My first clue was the shuckin', my second clue was the jivin', and the third clue was the grammar.

[Ursus A. Horribilis]

WTF is going on with OSBF? Sometimes it's a good logical argument but more and more over the last year things are just getting crazier and seem to be fueled by silly emotion?

This could all be an act but if it isn't then there are some strange things going though the ol' head lately.

Maybe I'm missing the point you are making OSBF but if republicans are for keeping corporate farming from buying up all the land and putting the little mom & pop's out to pasture then wouldn't they be exactly the type of people that democrats profess themselves to be? Republicans having a social conscience on the issue goes against what most of you dems try and pigeonhole them as being right?

I haven't seen a republican take your "bait" and say that corporations should be able to take over all the farmland and do with it what they wish so maybe they ain't what you are saying they are?

Illinois is where I think you said that Corporate farming can move forward unchecked correct? If that's the case is Illinois considered a more Republican or a more Democrat state in nature?

I'm sure you were just leading me in to some trap with your enormous brain so I'll just sit back and take the shellacking that I so richly deserve.

[dbackjon]

So...............

The conks got nothing.............

I guess gubment involvement is OK when it helps god fearing whitey

It only becomes a real problem when the gubment tries to help out the poor or brown folks

Then that becomes socialism.............

OR, your posts became so fucking boring, you drove everyone away.

Or, the truth hurts

[kalm]

WTF is going on with OSBF? Sometimes it's a good logical argument but more and more over the last year things are just getting crazier and seem to be fueled by silly emotion?

This could all be an act but if it isn't then there are some strange things going though the ol' head lately.

Maybe I'm missing the point you are making OSBF but if republicans are for keeping corporate farming from buying up all the land and putting the little mom & pop's out to pasture then wouldn't they be exactly the type of people that democrats profess themselves to be? Republicans having a social conscience on the issue goes against what most of you dems try and pigeonhole them as being right?

I haven't seen a republican take your "bait" and say that corporations should be able to take over all the farmland and do with it what they wish so maybe they ain't what you are saying they are?

Illinois is where I think you said that Corporate farming can move forward unchecked correct? If that's the case is Illinois considered a more Republican or a more Democrat state in nature?

I'm sure you were just leading me in to some trap with your enormous brain so I'll just sit back and take the shellacking that I so richly deserve.

Everyone is rhetorically for the small farmer Ursus.

I could be mistaken, but I haven't seen too many anti-corporation Republicans lately. But in fairness, I also haven't seen too many anti monopolists from either party.

[OSBF]

WTF is going on with OSBF? Sometimes it's a good logical argument but more and more over the last year things are just getting crazier and seem to be fueled by silly emotion?

This could all be an act but if it isn't then there are some strange things going though the ol' head lately.

Maybe I'm missing the point you are making OSBF but if republicans are for keeping corporate farming from buying up all the land and putting the little mom & pop's out to pasture then wouldn't they be exactly the type of people that democrats profess themselves to be? Republicans having a social conscience on the issue goes against what most of you dems try and pigeonhole them as being right?

I haven't seen a republican take your "bait" and say that corporations should be able to take over all the farmland and do with it what they wish so maybe they ain't what you are saying they are?

Illinois is where I think you said that Corporate farming can move forward unchecked correct? If that's the case is Illinois considered a more Republican or a more Democrat state in nature?

I'm sure you were just leading me in to some trap with your enormous brain so I'll just sit back and take the shellacking that I so richly deserve.

I am playing the "get government out of my personal life" angle. You conks are SCREAMING all the time get the big brother government out of my personal life.

So.................

you want to get govt involvement out of peoples personal lives, but are OK with a LAW allowing the govt to ordain who has something as basic and fundamental as PRIVATE PROPERTY RIGHTS?

I have no doubt if ever constitutionally tested this law would go up in flames. Just think about it, something as fundamental as private property rights, being controlled by the government. Conks, you gotta be all over this one like stink on a dead possum.

You're OK with a law saying who has private property rights, but not OK with laws designed to stop people that shouldn't have handguns from owning handguns?????????????

The dichotomy is just too delicious.

[OSBF]

I'm sure you were just leading me in to some trap with your enormous brain so I'll just sit back and take the shellacking that I so richly deserve.

It isn't enormous, just functions at a little higher level than most folks.

And I've had a fair amount of formal training in debate and interrogation methods with my job.

The other key here is to never get sucked into a debate with someone on a point of opinion. No-one can win and the emotion can negate the skills of a good debater. Stick to issues with points of fact, and go in armed with the facts. You'll kick the crap out of someone that only has emotion every time. Prime example is when D kicks joe and Andy's ass on catholic church abuse issues. Joe and Andy have no facts on their side and are fighting from a virtually in-defensible position. It's so one sided as to actually be more than a little un-fair.

[OSBF]

.

[89Hen]

Au contraire my Mensa friend.

you jest jealous that the poli board has turned into my own personal little playground.

I bait you people into saying things, then i attack, and you're too dumb to see what's gonna happen.

I OWN you conk dumbasses.

The mentally challenged are usually the last to know they are mentally challenged.

You jest stoopit.

[OSBF]

you jest jealous that the poli board has turned into my own personal little playground.

I bait you people into saying things, then i attack, and you're too dumb to see what's gonna happen.

I OWN you conk dumbasses.

Klean, is that you?

My first clue was the shuckin', my second clue was the jivin', and the third clue was the grammar.

I'm sorry about that, the "goober" routine is just something I slip into when I know I've got somebody firmly by the nuts and I'm going in for the kill shot. Sometimes I don't even realize I'm doing it. My grammar and spelling are just naturally bad to begin with. Dat don't hep none.

[andy7171]

Who exactly do you have by the nuts?

[89Hen]

Who exactly do you have by the nuts?

Himself.

[bandl]

Just checked this thread out for the first time....good gawd this is a wierd one.

[Ursus A. Horribilis]

WTF is going on with OSBF? Sometimes it's a good logical argument but more and more over the last year things are just getting crazier and seem to be fueled by silly emotion?

This could all be an act but if it isn't then there are some strange things going though the ol' head lately.

Maybe I'm missing the point you are making OSBF but if republicans are for keeping corporate farming from buying up all the land and putting the little mom & pop's out to pasture then wouldn't they be exactly the type of people that democrats profess themselves to be? Republicans having a social conscience on the issue goes against what most of you dems try and pigeonhole them as being right?

I haven't seen a republican take your "bait" and say that corporations should be able to take over all the farmland and do with it what they wish so maybe they ain't what you are saying they are?

Illinois is where I think you said that Corporate farming can move forward unchecked correct? If that's the case is Illinois considered a more Republican or a more Democrat state in nature?

I'm sure you were just leading me in to some trap with your enormous brain so I'll just sit back and take the shellacking that I so richly deserve.

I am playing the "get government out of my personal life" angle. You conks are SCREAMING all the time get the big brother government out of my personal life.

So.................

you want to get govt involvement out of peoples personal lives, but are OK with a LAW allowing the govt to ordain who has something as basic and fundamental as PRIVATE PROPERTY RIGHTS?

I have no doubt if ever constitutionally tested this law would go up in flames. Just think about it, something as fundamental as private property rights, being controlled by the government. Conks, you gotta be all over this one like stink on a dead possum.

You're OK with a law saying who has private property rights, but not OK with laws designed to stop people that shouldn't have handguns from owning handguns?????????????

The dichotomy is just too delicious.

That's my favorite thing about you emotional idiots that choose one side or the other and have to follow along with whatever that sides talking points are. You call me a republican when I am not because I do not see it as you do. You think you are making some great point but you are not. I'm watching and commenting simply as an observer. You are trying to mix your emotional attachment to gun & health care issues with the fact that it's not only possible but quite likely that a lot of republicans can see that having corporations squeezing out the little guy is not a helthy proposition.

But you live in a primarily democratic state that should surely be for the little guy and is letting corporations run rampant on the farmland?

Seems you have as many questions to answer about your team as you are asking the other.

[Appaholic]

I am playing the "get government out of my personal life" angle. You conks are SCREAMING all the time get the big brother government out of my personal life.

So.................

you want to get govt involvement out of peoples personal lives, but are OK with a LAW allowing the govt to ordain who has something as basic and fundamental as PRIVATE PROPERTY RIGHTS?

I have no doubt if ever constitutionally tested this law would go up in flames. Just think about it, something as fundamental as private property rights, being controlled by the government. Conks, you gotta be all over this one like stink on a dead possum.

You're OK with a law saying who has private property rights, but not OK with laws designed to stop people that shouldn't have handguns from owning handguns?????????????

The dichotomy is just too delicious.

That's my favorite thing about you emotional idiots that choose one side or the other and have to follow along with whatever that sides talking points are. You call me a republican when I am not because I do not see it as you do. You think you are making some great point but you are not. I'm watching and commenting simply as an observer. You are trying to mix your emotional attachment to gun & health care issues with the fact that it's not only possible but quite likely that a lot of republicans can see that having corporations squeezing out the little guy is not a helthy proposition.

But you live in a primarily democratic state that should surely be for the little guy and is letting corporations run rampant on the farmland?

Seems you have as many questions to answer about your team as you are asking the other.

Nailed it. Trying to pigeonhole centrists like UAH to validate your argument screams of emotional desperation ("if you're not with me, you're aginst me"), not formal debate training...

[Ursus A. Horribilis]

I'm sure you were just leading me in to some trap with your enormous brain so I'll just sit back and take the shellacking that I so richly deserve.

It isn't enormous, just functions at a little higher level than most folks.

And I've had a fair amount of formal training in debate and interrogation methods with my job.

The other key here is to never get sucked into a debate with someone on a point of opinion. No-one can win and the emotion can negate the skills of a good debater. Stick to issues with points of fact, and go in armed with the facts. You'll kick the crap out of someone that only has emotion every time. Prime example is when D kicks joe and Andy's ass on catholic church abuse issues. Joe and Andy have no facts on their side and are fighting from a virtually in-defensible position. It's so one sided as to actually be more than a little un-fair.

If your brain functions at a higher level then the conveyance is sincerely lacking. You have a lot of trouble letting us see that extra capacity. You appear no sharper than a majority of posters on this board.

You also have an emotional angle on most of your posts and you are by no means on D1B's level when it comes to debate. You are definitely not special in this arena in spite of your extra training.

No real harm in you thinking that you are special though I guess.

[Ursus A. Horribilis]

That's my favorite thing about you emotional idiots that choose one side or the other and have to follow along with whatever that sides talking points are. You call me a republican when I am not because I do not see it as you do. You think you are making some great point but you are not. I'm watching and commenting simply as an observer. You are trying to mix your emotional attachment to gun & health care issues with the fact that it's not only possible but quite likely that a lot of republicans can see that having corporations squeezing out the little guy is not a helthy proposition.

But you live in a primarily democratic state that should surely be for the little guy and is letting corporations run rampant on the farmland?

Seems you have as many questions to answer about your team as you are asking the other.

Nailed it. Trying to pigeonhole centrists like UAH to validate your argument screams of emotional desperation ("if you're not with me, you're aginst me"), not formal debate training...

Ah shit I guess I could have left that last post out as I was gonna take on his debate skills in his later post. He can't really think he approaches this stuff in an unemotional fashion can he?

I'm sure he just roped me into something though.

[TerrorD]

It isn't enormous, just functions at a little higher level than most folks.

And I've had a fair amount of formal training in debate and interrogation methods with my job.

The other key here is to never get sucked into a debate with someone on a point of opinion. No-one can win and the emotion can negate the skills of a good debater. Stick to issues with points of fact, and go in armed with the facts. You'll kick the crap out of someone that only has emotion every time. Prime example is when D kicks joe and Andy's ass on catholic church abuse issues. Joe and Andy have no facts on their side and are fighting from a virtually in-defensible position. It's so one sided as to actually be more than a little un-fair.

If your brain functions at a higher level then the conveyance is sincerely lacking. You have a lot of trouble letting us see that extra capacity. You appear no sharper than a majority of posters on this board.

You also have an emotional angle on most of your posts and you are by no means on D1B's level when it comes to debate. You are definitely not special in this arena in spite of your extra training.

No real harm in you thinking that you are special though I guess.

Mr. OSBF is still bitter from being broken down like a double-barrel over the back of the rectory couch.

[OSBF]

That's my favorite thing about you emotional idiots that choose one side or the other and have to follow along with whatever that sides talking points are. You call me a republican when I am not because I do not see it as you do. You think you are making some great point but you are not. I'm watching and commenting simply as an observer. You are trying to mix your emotional attachment to gun & health care issues with the fact that it's not only possible but quite likely that a lot of republicans can see that having corporations squeezing out the little guy is not a helthy proposition.

But you live in a primarily democratic state that should surely be for the little guy and is letting corporations run rampant on the farmland?

Seems you have as many questions to answer about your team as you are asking the other.

At issue is the govt deciding who does or does not have private land ownership rights. Constitutional matter really. I don't give a rats ass about the protectionism vs coporate interest thing, that's really immaterial to this. The issue is weather or not it is OK for the government to decide what rights can be bestowed on any segement of the population as opposed to different rights for other segements.

No, Illinois is not a democratic state, Chicago is, but the vast majority of downstate is as conservative and backasswards as any place you care to name. They hate blacks, gays, fly their confederate flags, and have gun racks in the back windows of their rusted out chevy pickups.

[andy7171]

At issue is the govt deciding who does or does not have private land ownership rights. Constitutional matter really. I don't give a rats ass about the protectionism vs coporate interest thing, that's really immaterial to this. The issue is weather or not it is OK for the government to decide what rights can be bestowed on any segement of the population as opposed to different rights for other segements.

No, Illinois is not a democratic state, Chicago is, but the vast majority of downstate is as conservative and backasswards as any place you care to name. They hate blacks, gays, fly their confederate flags, and have gun racks in the back windows of their rusted out chevy pickups.

Only a Mensa member could involve the weather into a govermental rights arguement.

[Ursus A. Horribilis]

At issue is the govt deciding who does or does not have private land ownership rights. Constitutional matter really. I don't give a rats ass about the protectionism vs coporate interest thing, that's really immaterial to this. The issue is weather or not it is OK for the government to decide what rights can be bestowed on any segement of the population as opposed to different rights for other segements.

No, Illinois is not a democratic state, Chicago is, but the vast majority of downstate is as conservative and backasswards as any place you care to name. They hate blacks, gays, fly their confederate flags, and have gun racks in the back windows of their rusted out chevy pickups.

Only a Mensa member could involve the weather into a govermental rights arguement.