Real Fiero Tech

TheFieroBoy wrote:

EBSB52 wrote:If I wanted to get your attention, I would post a Sesame Street link. Hilarious for your <100 IQ to be even trying to occupy the same space as my intellect.

For someone who supposedly has "superior intellect", you sure are fond of the "2-digit IQ style" of communication. (let's see if you can figure out what I'm referencing) Of course, your comeback will be something like "I talk on their level so they can understand me" which, of course, is utter bullshit. If you really had superior intellect, you'd display it, instead of acting like a high-school kid on an ego trip.

It just occurred to me that I may have used too many >2 syllable words. If you have trouble reading the previous paragraph, let me know and I'll post a picture for you.

Anus, Emo with a second user ID, or whoever you are, I've posted source after another with my data supporting my argument, your BF Emo and yourself have failed to even address it, yet you claim I'm not intelligent. Please, another 20-something Emo dweeb, do something useful, go answer some of my data and arguments I've posted.


Emo queer wrote:

For someone who supposedly has "superior intellect", you sure are fond of the "2-digit IQ style" of communication. (let's see if you can figure out what I'm referencing) Of course, your comeback will be something like "I talk on their level so they can understand me" which, of course, is utter bullshit. If you really had superior intellect, you'd display it, instead of acting like a high-school kid on an ego trip.

2-digit style would sub-100 level IQ; real difficult. If you went back and read the progression of this mess, you would understand I post an issue with source and data, and your Emo BF's come here and are unable to even understand it and then get pissy. Hell, the jarhead didn't even know the composition of congress or the historical representation, yet he wants to be right 'cause his diddy or his diddy's diddy felt the same way. IOW's, I try to be constructive, post data with argument, these necks have no answer so turn it ugly. I could go away, but why? There is no intelligent argument to be had here. I've been in the Fiero world longer than 90% of the members here and I actually own one.

When was the last time one of your post actually had something to do with a fiero? Why do you make so many threads to have "educated arguments" about the same damn topic? If you really want an educated political debate and substantiated opinions and political theorys why don't you go to a political forum? Its old, go back and read "obama speech" the things I said are not that hard to understand if you remember what you said. Good luck starting over in life, with zero debt, you shouldn't have any problems. I do want to let you know that I semi agree with you about serving in the military, but I dont think it should be mandatory, but I think if someone wants government college money or something they should have to serve a couple years or something. If someone draws a certain amount of unemployment they should have to join up and learn a new skill before they can keep moaning about being out of work.

slowpoke wrote:When was the last time one of your post actually had something to do with a fiero? Why do you make so many threads to have "educated arguments" about the same damn topic? If you really want an educated political debate and substantiated opinions and political theorys why don't you go to a political forum? Its old, go back and read "obama speech" the things I said are not that hard to understand if you remember what you said. Good luck starting over in life, with zero debt, you shouldn't have any problems. I do want to let you know that I semi agree with you about serving in the military, but I dont think it should be mandatory, but I think if someone wants government college money or something they should have to serve a couple years or something. If someone draws a certain amount of unemployment they should have to join up and learn a new skill before they can keep moaning about being out of work.

You have an entire bevy of issues I posted in response to your statements. Just becuase you can't answer them and have them align with you jarhead flag-waving position, you turn to me and my Fiero posts. It's been a while, as with many members. Hell, some members don't even have Fieros, do you? This is anything goes, not tech, so get over it, if you want to talk Fieros, which I have plenty in the past, there is a section, go do it. Jarhead, just go addess the issues and assertions I spent much time compiliing or go away. Yes, your party has fucked things up, yes, they own most of the debt, yes, they are responsible for class disparity. If ya wanna sort of bag on Dems you have to go back to Truman, if you really wanna bag on them you have to go back to the mid 1800's. Your hero Reagan really fucked things up and in your terms, was a Clinton when he failed to counter-attack WITH ANYTHING WHATSOEVER in 1986 after the Beruit barracks were bombed killing 300 Marines, at least Clinton lobbeed a couple missles over. Hell, even Carter tried a lame, ineffective rescue attempt to get the Iranian hostages.

Frustrated that you, like Will, can't paint this picture of the US as always the best? Try reality and paint them as sometimes good, sometimes not so good.

COMPULSORY MILITARY: Explain why most of Western Europe has this and the US does not. It's hard for me to hear this flag-waving BS when it's voluntary and most do not consider service, then call themselves the party that cares about the US, but has no civic duty. I think it's great that you served, I call you a jarhead because you are, grunts tend to have a simplistic view on life and of problem solving, but that takes nothing from your service, you can call yourself a true American since have civic duty, for whatever reason you enlisted.

UNEMPLOMENT: I think job retraining s/b available and most would take it. My dad recieved 400+ unemp per week in Washington for over a year and they sent him to CDL school after he was laid off and his field was shrinking, he was a boilermaker for 35 years+. Here in RW maggot town, Phoenix, it's 6 months on unemo and fuck off, just go die. Seriuosly, I lost my job as an acft mech in 01 right before 911 and I went to get retraining, a big FUCK YOU. Red states, Republican states couldn't give a shit less about people, just money and the rich people who hold it. So to answer your question, I think job retraining s/b available and mandatory if a person's career is shrinking, but your party doesn't want to fund it.

BTW, I'm not starting over in life, I have asset, I'm doing OK.

If anything is getting old, just don't click on a topic that has a political theme or that the turd, Shaun is part of, real simple. I welcome constructive debate. Will was good for a while, but once he is unable to paint his pseudo picture of the US as this perfect oasis, he runs. Too bad, he's a smart guy.

I never said that any of them were my hero.

you said that there are (I think) 535 members of congress? Well how many of those were dem and repub in 1980? Regardless of senate or house the party with the most has a majority.

As far as calling me jarhead goes, don't sweat it, its a fact I'm proud of.

I don't know anything about compulsory military, therefore I'm unable to explain anything about it, but I'm saying if someone has already been on unemployment for a long time and can't find work, let them get new job training in the military. You want to make it compulsory, why would this be a bad idea. Seems like it might keep people from sitting on their ass longer than they need to.

And I'm not sitting here flag waving and saying this country is perfect, I think there are a lot of problems here, but this is where I would rather be.

EBSB52 wrote:Frustrated that you, like Will, can't paint this picture of the US as always the best?

Will was good for a while, but once he is unable to paint his pseudo picture of the US as this perfect oasis, he runs. Too bad, he's a smart guy.

LOL. You get some strange ideas. It's five o'clock somewhere, right?

I think all politicians are shitheads. You're the one who thinks that some of them are right. THAT's what's weird.

slowpoke wrote:

I never said that any of them were my hero.

Don't key on the rhetoric, it's just for fun and we all do it, eye on the substance. Truth is, you adore the R's, obviously you like the guy.

you said that there are (I think) 535 members of congress? Well how many of those were dem and repub in 1980? Regardless of senate or house the party with the most has a majority.

See, this is what defines you; I posted a detailed description of congress, spent a fair amount of time and all you pull away is that there are 535 congressmen and women. 435 in one house, 100 in the other; OK. It doesn't matter if you have 100% Dems in the House of Reps and 55/45 R's in the Senate, you can't take Reps over to the senate from the house, so that would be a split congress. Shall I repost the description of congress? First learn, then Hoorah, ok. Hopefully one last time, from 55-95 congress was Dem controlled except for 81-87 when the R's held the senate. BTW, these were the monsterous years of debt.

As far as calling me jarhead goes, don't sweat it, its a fact I'm proud of.

And you s/b, I mean it in an endearing way, I think it's great that you served, not many can say that and perhaps they have less right to bitch rather than voting or not. The US would have more men and fewer punks like shaun and Cinci if we all served. People who serve get it, others do not.

I don't know anything about compulsory military, therefore I'm unable to explain anything about it, but I'm saying if someone has already been on unemployment for a long time and can't find work, let them get new job training in the military. You want to make it compulsory, why would this be a bad idea. Seems like it might keep people from sitting on their ass longer than they need to.

What if they're 53? Compulsory military or any military service must be done by people in their young years for many reasons. It's a nice thought, but not real viable. Taxes are supposed to encourage people to certain kinds of behavior, I think education and healthcare are those ides as a starter. We can be more prosperous if we are intelligent and healthy.

slowpoke wrote:And I'm not sitting here flag waving and saying this country is perfect, I think there are a lot of problems here, but this is where I would rather be.

The why attack liberalism when you don't know what it means? Why support wars when you don't understand them? See, this ties into why I just wrote that military service, compulsory or otherwise, must be done young. I was 17 when I enlisted and wished I was part of a war, as I got older I realized taht was a dumb wish; you can't expect all of the troops to not be consciencious objectors as they are more well informed.

Go ahead and list in deatail what sucks about this country - bet ya won't.

1.

2.

3.

4.

etc

The Dark Side of Will wrote:

EBSB52 wrote:Frustrated that you, like Will, can't paint this picture of the US as always the best?

Will was good for a while, but once he is unable to paint his pseudo picture of the US as this perfect oasis, he runs. Too bad, he's a smart guy.

LOL. You get some strange ideas. It's five o'clock somewhere, right?

I think all politicians are shitheads. You're the one who thinks that some of them are right. THAT's what's weird.

Love your attempts at distraction from the issues, but it' nice to see you're reading even tho you're not replying.

So Geo Washington was a shithead? Lincoln, shithead? FDR? Eisehower? COme on Will, that's ridiculous.

But I wasn't talking about politicians when I wrote that, I was talking about the USA. If anyone dares impeach the US as anything but perfect you throw your tantrum and then go away. You're a smart guy, one of the few worth conversing with in here, yet you can't be honest about the US due to too much pride I guess.

EBSB52 wrote: 2-digit style would sub-100 level IQ; real difficult.

Wow, you figured out that a 2-digit number is less than 100! Should I give you a gold star? (LOL) Too bad you didn't figure out what I was really getting at. I'll give you a little more time to think about it. And if you can't noodle it out, I'll post some pretty pictures for you.

EBSB52 wrote:

The Dark Side of Will wrote:

EBSB52 wrote:Frustrated that you, like Will, can't paint this picture of the US as always the best?

Will was good for a while, but once he is unable to paint his pseudo picture of the US as this perfect oasis, he runs. Too bad, he's a smart guy.

LOL. You get some strange ideas. It's five o'clock somewhere, right?

I think all politicians are shitheads. You're the one who thinks that some of them are right. THAT's what's weird.

Love your attempts at distraction from the issues, but it' nice to see you're reading even tho you're not replying.

So Geo Washington was a shithead? Lincoln, shithead? FDR? Eisehower? COme on Will, that's ridiculous.

But I wasn't talking about politicians when I wrote that, I was talking about the USA. If anyone dares impeach the US as anything but perfect you throw your tantrum and then go away. You're a smart guy, one of the few worth conversing with in here, yet you can't be honest about the US due to too much pride I guess.

Distraction from the issues? You're the one who's putting words in everyone's mouths and then arguing with them about "the issues". You're like someone who asks survery questions, then critiques the answers of those who respond. You solicit arguments of people who otherwise wouldn't bother.

Maybe I should have said our political system is full of shit. The way we run things right now just moves all the totalitarianism down a level to the party caucus instead of the actual government. The way we do things sure fosters its share of shitheads. I'm sure you've seen the piece circulating the internet about the bankruptcies, credit ratings, driver's licenses, etc of congress. Don't know how much of it's true, but as people like Blagoyevich only too commonly demonstrate, we're not putting shining stars of virtue and forthrightness into office.

It's actually too much frustration.

TheFieroGayBoy wrote:

EBSB52 wrote: 2-digit style would sub-100 level IQ; real difficult.

Wow, you figured out that a 2-digit number is less than 100! Should I give you a gold star? (LOL) Too bad you didn't figure out what I was really getting at. I'll give you a little more time to think about it. And if you can't noodle it out, I'll post some pretty pictures for you.

If you have some obscure point to make, make it. If you want to parade it around like the little Fiero gayboy you are, have fun.

The Dark Side of Will wrote:

EBSB52 wrote:Frustrated that you, like Will, can't paint this picture of the US as always the best?

Will was good for a while, but once he is unable to paint his pseudo picture of the US as this perfect oasis, he runs. Too bad, he's a smart guy.

LOL. You get some strange ideas. It's five o'clock somewhere, right?

I think all politicians are shitheads. You're the one who thinks that some of them are right. THAT's what's weird.

Love your attempts at distraction from the issues, but it' nice to see you're reading even tho you're not replying.

So Geo Washington was a shithead? Lincoln, shithead? FDR? Eisehower? COme on Will, that's ridiculous.

But I wasn't talking about politicians when I wrote that, I was talking about the USA. If anyone dares impeach the US as anything but perfect you throw your tantrum and then go away. You're a smart guy, one of the few worth conversing with in here, yet you can't be honest about the US due to too much pride I guess.[/quote]

Distraction from the issues? You're the one who's putting words in everyone's mouths and then arguing with them about "the issues". You're like someone who asks survery questions, then critiques the answers of those who respond. You solicit arguments of people who otherwise wouldn't bother.

Examples? Please show them. You can't, there are none, I make a point, support it with evidence, the neo-cons can't impeach it so they get nasty. WILL, QUIT THE GRANDSTANDING AND ANSWER SOME POINTS. I can repost some enumerated if you wish? Of course you don't wish, you ran from them already.

Maybe I should have said our political system is full of shit. The way we run things right now just moves all the totalitarianism down a level to the party caucus instead of the actual government. The way we do things sure fosters its share of shitheads. I'm sure you've seen the peice circulating the internet about the bankruptcies, credit ratings, driver's licenses, etc of congress. Don't know how much of it's true, but as people like Blagoyevich only too commonly demonstrate, we're not putting shining stars of virtue and forthrightness into office.

Let's not take that last POS and make him the posterchild for all of Washington, Granted, Wash and Hollywood attract and foster all kinds weirdos, but Obama is a man of honor and change, GHWB was also, Eisenhower, etc. My opinion is that you liked GWB and thought the last 8 years was awesome, correcct me if I', wrong. Certainly your opinion to have, but not one of most and the data that describes destruction illustrates it.

The other issue: I just can't understand how you think the FF were swell guys, they may or may not have deplored slavery, but many owned slaves and none did anything to outlaw it. Enjoy this country for what it is, some really bright spots, but some horrific ones too. Denial is foolish, can't understand why you subscribe to it. Funny how denying the Hallocaust is a felony over in Austria, denying American Indian ethnocentricity isn't even addressed. BTW, that was our little Hallocaust.

It's actually too much frustration.

Truth over denial.

Still didn't answer the question, that's what I mean when I say you avoid it, I don't think I said democrats controlled congress with an iron fist and republicans were not allowed in the building, I said there was a democratic majority in congress for forty years ending in the mid 90s.
True or false, there is always a mojority one way other.

Can any one tell me the ratio of dems to repubs in congress in 1980?

Btw obama used to use cocain and said so himself, not knocking him for it but you keep bringing up GWB addiction. Guess every body makes mistakes. But at least clinton didn't inhale

EBSB52 wrote:

Distraction from the issues? You're the one who's putting words in everyone's mouths and then arguing with them about "the issues". You're like someone who asks survery questions, then critiques the answers of those who respond. You solicit arguments of people who otherwise wouldn't bother.

Examples? Please show them. You can't, there are none, I make a point, support it with evidence, the neo-cons can't impeach it so they get nasty. WILL, QUIT THE GRANDSTANDING AND ANSWER SOME POINTS. I can repost some enumerated if you wish? Of course you don't wish, you ran from them already.

QED

EBSB52 wrote:If you have some obscure point to make, make it. If you want to parade it around like the little Fiero gayboy you are, have fun.

Pretty picture, as promised:

Eb asked me to shit in his mouth. He is sick isn't he guys? yuck.

slowpoke wrote:Still didn't answer the question, that's what I mean when I say you avoid it, I don't think I said democrats controlled congress with an iron fist and republicans were not allowed in the building, I said there was a democratic majority in congress for forty years ending in the mid 90s.
True or false, there is always a mojority one way other.

Dork, what am I avoiding? I posted a chart at least 3 times, you refuse to look at it, it clearly shows from 55 to 95 Dems held the House and Senate but for 81-87 with the senate, the Repukes controlled it then, the big debt years. Are you on crack, do I need to post it again? I will, but you won't look at it.

I said there was a democratic majority in congress for forty years ending in the mid 90s. True or false, there is always a mojority one way other.

Stupid, is this not clear? No pundit takes a chunk of time and tries to average the composition, the way it works is that they take 2-year blocks and describe which party controls the House, which controls the Senate. Try to click on this: http://uspolitics.about.com/od/usgovern ... sion_2.htm

No political pundit says take the 84th Senate and the 105th House and let's see what would happen. This is not some computer-generated Iron Curtain defense against the 85 Bears. See if you can have a clue, click the link and see the 84th congress in 1955? That was when House and Senate were both Dem with a Republican president. If you don’t have the technology to simply click the link on your phone, you need to go get a computer, go to the library or just go away. This is an easy graph, it illustrates all kinds of neat shit. Obviously you clicked it and you're out of arguments so you want to try to sum the whole thing up as one big convolution.

You also claim on a different note that 95 to 2000 were the good deficit years. True, but that had more to do with Clinton than the congress. We had the same Republican majority during the Bush years where he didn't cast one veto for his first 5.5 years in office and it set unprecedented levels of debt growth and left a borderline depression. You really have no talking points here, I'd love to read them, but if you can't click the graph, how can we debate?

As for a majority one way or the other, there can be a tie in the senate, the VP breaks most ties. The house could have a tie if an odd number of members didn't vote.

Can any one tell me the ratio of dems to repubs in congress in 1980?

Either you're playing me or you're borderline retarded. OK, 1 more time. Congress is split into 2 parts

- House of Representatives 435 members
- Senate 100 members

The ratio means zero, but the MAJORITY IN EACH CHAMBER DETERMINES WHO CONTROLS THAT SIDE, if they all vote along party lines. Ratio in all of congress is for retards, majority in each chamber is king. You could have 400 Dems in the House and 35 Repubs. You could have 51 Repub senators to 49 Dem senators. The result would be the Senate belongs to the R's, the House the D's; is this rocket science? The overall congressional ratio would be 449 D's / 86 R's, but that wouldn't be worth discussing unless you wanted to talk about how close the senate was or how lopsided the House was. I'm under the impression that you think Congress is one big clusterfuck and whoever has the most wins. No, it's divided and each chamber has it duties, a heavy House has no effect on the senate. Majority in each chamber is all that matters, IF each party votes along lines which is usual with a few defectors.

Btw obama used to use cocain and said so himself, not knocking him for it but you keep bringing up GWB addiction. Guess every body makes mistakes. But at least clinton didn't inhale

I make fun of GWb cause he's such a loser, along with his electorate, but I don’t care that he was a cokehead or even that he dodged the war like Clinton, or that he was the first pres to be a criminal and to not voluntarily post his DD214. I care that he took a good economy and turned it to shit.

TheFieroBoy wrote:

EBSB52 wrote:If you have some obscure point to make, make it. If you want to parade it around like the little Fiero gayboy you are, have fun.

Pretty picture, as promised:

Oh God that's new, I've never seen that before several thousand times.

Scatmaster wrote:Eb asked me to shit in his mouth. He is sick isn't he guys? yuck.

Shaun is scatmaster