Championship Subdivision Football | FCS Football | Stadiums | Blogs | Forums

[youtube]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=X10gyZoirhE[/youtube]




Perspective, Conklodytes!

* Edit

Interesting……no Conk SPIN!

Cap'n Cat wrote:Interesting……no Conk SPIN!

No shit. Conks love corporate welfare.

Mooks! I love that word.

Cap'n Cat wrote:Interesting……no Conk SPIN!

An overweight backwoods liberal named Bill with a video camera who thinks their view is the only view. You have been MIA for a while Cat. Can you confirm your whereabouts for the last month?

I couldn't get through 40 seconds of it. I can usually withstand a couple minutes of spandos' videos.

andy7171 wrote:I couldn't get through 40 seconds of it. I can usually withstand a couple minutes of spandos' videos.

Attention span of a (Conk) gnat, andy!

Cap'n Cat wrote:

andy7171 wrote:I couldn't get through 40 seconds of it. I can usually withstand a couple minutes of spandos' videos.

Attention span of a (Conk) gnat, andy!

You can't bullshit a bullshitter. That was a poor version of what you do here Cappy.

I was against it but the reason they gave money to bankers is because if the banks fail a bunch of people suffer. They were worried about a financial system collapse. Also, they gave it to them. That's not comparable to welfare fraud.

JohnStOnge wrote:I was against it but the reason they gave money to bankers is because if the banks fail a bunch of people suffer. They were worried about a financial system collapse. Also, they gave it to them. That's not comparable to welfare fraud.

The banks knowingly committed securities fraud and then got rewarded for it with a bailout. They are no better if not worse.

I can't figure out why either side (Democrat or Republican) keeps pretending we actually want black people and the throngs of poor doing anything OTHER than collecting welfare..?
(and burning down their own neighborhoods)

Thank sweet bald headed baby Jeezus for Welfare
It is the great neutralizer

Do we really want 50 Million Americans with nothing to lose roaming the streets..? - I think NOT
NOTE: There never would have been a French Revolution if they had a welfare system in place

The banks knowingly committed securities fraud

Elaborate.

JohnStOnge wrote:

The banks knowingly committed securities fraud

Elaborate.

Of for fucks sake if you're not aware of this...

Do we really want 50 Million Americans with nothing to lose roaming the streets..? - I think NOT
NOTE: There never would have been a French Revolution if they had a welfare system in place

What makes it different than the French Revolution is that you're talking about a minority. 50 million is about 16% of the population. If the rest of us had the will, we could do what we need to do to keep 16% under reasonable control. Just don't tolerate any crap from them. Iron Fist.

Simple as that. And Iron Fist works when you're talking about 84% vs. 16%. Don't take any crap off people who can't or won't do what it takes to succeed then want everybody else to take care of them.

Chizzang wrote:I can't figure out why either side (Democrat or Republican) keeps pretending we actually want black people and the throngs of poor doing anything OTHER than collecting welfare..?
(and burning down their own neighborhoods)

Thank sweet bald headed baby Jeezus for Welfare
It is the great neutralizer

Do we really want 50 Million Americans with nothing to lose roaming the streets..? - I think NOT
NOTE: There never would have been a French Revolution if they had a welfare system in place

This is one of your finer points.

Of for **** sake if you're not aware of this...

I'm just asking that you document your statement that they "knowingly" committed securities fraud then got bailed out.

A second question involves whether or not the individuals responsible for securities fraud, to the extent that it occurred, were held accountable.

JohnStOnge wrote:

Of for **** sake if you're not aware of this...

I'm just asking that you document your statement that they "knowingly" committed securities fraud then got bailed out.

A second question involves whether or not the individuals responsible for securities fraud, to the extent that it occurred, were held accountable.

Seriously, you haven't been paying attention. One of many examples and posted right here on this political board by lefty, Citadelgrad:

http://www.rollingstone.com/politics/ne ... s-20141106" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Seriously, you haven't been paying attention. One of many examples and posted right here on this political board by lefty, Citadelgrad:

http://www.rollingstone.com/politics/ne" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false; ... s-20141106

That article says a Chase CEO paid $9 billion in fines. I don't think I'd call that a case of not being held accountable.

I kind of read some of it. Don't know if I'll read the rest tonight. But it's basically allegations. Nothing truely documented so far. Looks like there were a bunch of settlements of civil cases; which is common.

You know, the Federal government goes after businesses and they find it cheaper to go ahead and settle and pay big fines rather than fight. That sort of thing.

JohnStOnge wrote:

Seriously, you haven't been paying attention. One of many examples and posted right here on this political board by lefty, Citadelgrad:

http://www.rollingstone.com/politics/ne" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false; ... s-20141106

That article says a Chase CEO paid $9 billion in fines. I don't think I'd call that a case of not being held accountable.

I kind of read some of it. Don't know if I'll read the rest tonight. But it's basically allegations. Nothing truely documented so far. Looks like there were a bunch of settlements of civil cases; which is common.

You know, the Federal government goes after businesses and they find it cheaper to go ahead and settle and pay big fines rather than fight. That sort of thing.

You have lots of catching up to do...

JohnStOnge wrote:

Do we really want 50 Million Americans with nothing to lose roaming the streets..? - I think NOT
NOTE: There never would have been a French Revolution if they had a welfare system in place

What makes it different than the French Revolution is that you're talking about a minority. 50 million is about 16% of the population. If the rest of us had the will, we could do what we need to do to keep 16% under reasonable control. Just don't tolerate any crap from them. Iron Fist.

Simple as that. And Iron Fist works when you're talking about 84% vs. 16%. Don't take any crap off people who can't or won't do what it takes to succeed then want everybody else to take care of them.

You're cute when you're like this
John there are something like 1.7 million poor people in your sh!thole of a state Louisiana

Do you seriously think you could manage 1.7 million poor in your state
They'd be using guerrilla warfare tactics and you'd be locked in your own home

Seriously John...
Think it over - Welfare is a sound investment for States like Louisiana
It keeps folks mildly sedated and under control

You do not even want to know what its like without it... Again: A small price for relative peace

Chizzang wrote:

JohnStOnge wrote:
What makes it different than the French Revolution is that you're talking about a minority. 50 million is about 16% of the population. If the rest of us had the will, we could do what we need to do to keep 16% under reasonable control. Just don't tolerate any crap from them. Iron Fist.

Simple as that. And Iron Fist works when you're talking about 84% vs. 16%. Don't take any crap off people who can't or won't do what it takes to succeed then want everybody else to take care of them.

You're cute when you're like this
John there are something like 1.7 million poor people in your sh!thole of a state Louisiana

Do you seriously think you could manage 1.5 million poor in your state using guerrilla warfare tactics

Seriously John...
Think it over - Welfare is a sound investment for States like Louisiana
It keeps folks mildly sedated and under control

You do not even want to know what its like without it... Again: A small price for relative peace

They could always legalize pot.

Seems to have worked for WA!

travelinman67 wrote:

Chizzang wrote:
You're cute when you're like this
John there are something like 1.7 million poor people in your sh!thole of a state Louisiana

Do you seriously think you could manage 1.5 million poor in your state using guerrilla warfare tactics

Seriously John...
Think it over - Welfare is a sound investment for States like Louisiana
It keeps folks mildly sedated and under control

You do not even want to know what its like without it... Again: A small price for relative peace

They could always legalize pot.

Seems to have worked for WA!

Damn Straight..!!!
Legalize it / Tax it / Send the Drug Cartels back to Mexico (or California)

JohnStOnge wrote:

Do we really want 50 Million Americans with nothing to lose roaming the streets..? - I think NOT
NOTE: There never would have been a French Revolution if they had a welfare system in place

What makes it different than the French Revolution is that you're talking about a minority. 50 million is about 16% of the population. If the rest of us had the will, we could do what we need to do to keep 16% under reasonable control. Just don't tolerate any crap from them. Iron Fist.

Simple as that. And Iron Fist works when you're talking about 84% vs. 16%. Don't take any crap off people who can't or won't do what it takes to succeed then want everybody else to take care of them.

"the rest of us"

Tell us more about this "iron fist", Johnny. Who, exactly, is this iron fist? You ( )? Your neighbors in the KKK? How does a small government guy propose to fund the new, all-white, "iron fist"?

Tell us more about this "iron fist", Johnny. Who, exactly, is this iron fist? You ( )? Your neighbors in the KKK? How does a small government guy propose to fund the new, all-white, "iron fist"?

It's very simple. You don't need to have a "big government" to enforce the principle of being able to do what you want as long as you don't intrude on somebody else.

If some of "the poor" start intruding on the interests of someone else because they aren't getting they want you smash them down. You don't tolerate their crap.

This thing of saying we need welfare programs because, basically, the "poor" will get violent if we don't have them is crap. We shouldn't even be entertaining that kind of thought process.

You don't have the right to take what somebody else has because you don't have it. Period. And that's a principle we should live by.

JohnStOnge wrote:

Tell us more about this "iron fist", Johnny. Who, exactly, is this iron fist? You ( )? Your neighbors in the KKK? How does a small government guy propose to fund the new, all-white, "iron fist"?

It's very simple. You don't need to have a "big government" to enforce the principle of being able to do what you want as long as you don't intrude on somebody else.

If some of "the poor" start intruding on the interests of someone else because they aren't getting they want you smash them down. You don't tolerate their crap.

This thing of saying we need welfare programs because, basically, the "poor" will get violent if we don't have them is crap. We shouldn't even be entertaining that kind of thought process.

You don't have the right to take what somebody else has because you don't have it. Period. And that's a principle we should live by.

I'll stick with my previous statement about you being adorable when you're like this...