Dear Red States:


Normally open July 4th only---the one day a year when partisan politics, religion, etc. are acceptable topics on this Board (within reason). The forum is now closed.

Dear Red States:

Postby Jack Slocombe » Tue Oct 28, 2008 4:40 pm

We've decided we're leaving. We intend to form our own country, and we're taking the other Blue States with us. In case you aren't aware, that includes California , Hawaii , Oregon , Washington , Minnesota , Wisconsin, Michigan , Illinois and all the Northeast. We believe this split will be beneficial to the nation, and especially to the people of the new country of New California.

To sum up briefly: You get Texas, Oklahoma and all the slave states. We get stem cell research and the best beaches. We get the Statue of Liberty. You get Dollywood. We get Intel and Microsoft. You get WorldCom. We get Harvard. You get Ole' Miss. We get 85 percent of America's venture capital and entrepreneurs. You get Alabama. We get two-thirds of the tax revenue, you get to make the red states pay their fair share.

Since our aggregate divorce rate is 22 percent lower than the Christian Coalition's, we get a bunch of happy families. You get a bunch of single moms. Please be aware that Nuevo California will be pro-choice and anti-war, and we're going to want all our citizens back from Iraq at once. If you need people to fight, ask your evangelicals. They have kids they're apparently willing to send to their deaths for no purpose, and they don't care if you don't show pictures of their children's caskets coming home. We do wish you success in Iraq, and hope that the WMDs turn up, but we're not willing to spend our resources in Bush's Quagmire.

With the Blue States in hand, we will have firm control of 80 percent of the country's fresh water, more than 90 percent of the pineapple and lettuce, 92 percent of the nation's fresh fruit, 95 percent of America's quality wines (you can serve French wines at state dinners) 90 percent of all cheese, 90 percent of the high tech industry, most of the U.S. low-sulfur coal, all living redwoods, sequoias and condors, all the Ivy and Seven Sister schools plus Stanford , Cal Tech and MIT. With the Red States, on the other hand, you will have to cope with 88 percent of all obese Americans (and their projected health care costs), 92 percent of all U.S. mosquitoes, nearly 100 percent of the tornadoes, 90 percent of the hurricanes, 99 percent of all Southern Baptists, virtually 100 percent of all televangelists, Rush Limbaugh, Bob Jones University , Clemson and the University of Georgia. We get Hollywood and Yosemite , thank you.

Additionally, 38 percent of those in the Red states believe Jonah was actually swallowed by a whale, 62 percent believe life is sacred unless we're discussing the death penalty or gun laws, 44 percent say that evolution is only a theory, 53 percent that Saddam was involved in 9/11 and 61 percent of you crazy bastards believe you are people with higher morals then we lefties.

Send us a postcard.

Peace out,
Blue States
[PS - We also get Hawaii and are happy to cede you Alaska]
Jack Slocombe
 
Posts: 852
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:32 am
Location: Groveland & Sunnyvale CA, & Poulsbo, WA

Postby SQUACKEE » Tue Oct 28, 2008 4:44 pm

62 percent believe life is sacred unless we're discussing the death penalty or gun laws

You really cant see the differance between an innocent baby and a viscious killer? REALLY? :?
SQUACKEE
 
Posts: 12885
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:32 am
Location: Heaven-In front of stereo listenin to re-mastered Beatles

Postby bad hammy » Tue Oct 28, 2008 4:56 pm

SQUACKEE wrote:You really cant see the differance between an innocent baby and a viscious killer? REALLY? :?

Re: the death penalty. In the last 16 years the Innocence Project has help free at lease 220 innocent prisoners based on DNA evidence. Not all of these were death row inmates, but how comfortable are you that we are always using the death penalty against just the guilty?? Me, not so much.
bad hammy
 
Posts: 10880
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:32 am

Postby tandfman » Tue Oct 28, 2008 4:57 pm

Don't you guys know that the death penalty is God's command?

http://www.jamaicaobserver.com/news/htm ... mmand_.asp
tandfman
 
Posts: 15041
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:31 am

Postby rasb » Tue Oct 28, 2008 5:08 pm

Let's talk important stuff --- who gets Joe the Plumber, and who gets
Colin Powell?
rasb
 
Posts: 2008
Joined: Sun Aug 05, 2007 4:48 pm
Location: South of the 49th

Postby SQUACKEE » Tue Oct 28, 2008 5:18 pm

bad hammy wrote:
SQUACKEE wrote:You really cant see the differance between an innocent baby and a viscious killer? REALLY? :?

Re: the death penalty. In the last 16 years the Innocence Project has help free at lease 220 innocent prisoners based on DNA evidence. Not all of these were death row inmates, but how comfortable are you that we are always using the death penalty against just the guilty?? Me, not so much.


What % of babies were who were aborted were quilty of anything? Thats the original point that i was making.

I wouldnt allow the death penalty unless you pretty got a freaking video tape and that means Scott Simpson doesnt fry in my world. Some people have to fry and like i said if ya got a head in your fridge you either come up with a real good excuse or see ya.

And we cant forget the families of murdered victims who need justice so they can get on with their lives the best they can. Where is the compassion for them?
SQUACKEE
 
Posts: 12885
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:32 am
Location: Heaven-In front of stereo listenin to re-mastered Beatles

Postby BillVol » Tue Oct 28, 2008 7:11 pm

Weak, Jack. We could have fun with this one, too. We get Thomas Jefferson; you get Barney Frank. Etc.

http://uspolitics.about.com/gi/dynamic/ ... 235453.php

Alas, it's not Jack's writing after all.

http://www.craigslist.org/about/best/sfo/80714812.html
BillVol
 
Posts: 3759
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:31 am
Location: Chattanooga

Postby bad hammy » Tue Oct 28, 2008 7:49 pm

SQUACKEE wrote:And we cant forget the families of murdered victims who need justice so they can get on with their lives the best they can. Where is the compassion for them?

So killing folks is compassionate?? With the certain knowledge that some small percentage of those executed did nothing wrong???
bad hammy
 
Posts: 10880
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:32 am

Postby Daisy » Tue Oct 28, 2008 9:12 pm

bad hammy wrote:
SQUACKEE wrote:And we cant forget the families of murdered victims who need justice so they can get on with their lives the best they can. Where is the compassion for them?

So killing folks is compassionate??


The innocent are collateral damage?

Revenge is primal and the families of victims should to be allowed to satisfy it to the full. Beware those who kill, your time will come. At least i assume that is the argument?
Daisy
 
Posts: 13153
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:32 am

Postby EPelle » Tue Oct 28, 2008 10:17 pm

bad hammy wrote:
SQUACKEE wrote:And we cant forget the families of murdered victims who need justice so they can get on with their lives the best they can. Where is the compassion for them?

So killing folks is compassionate?? With the certain knowledge that some small percentage of those executed did nothing wrong???

Some murder victims, following their extreme (and rightful) prejudice for the law to be carried out to its fullest, have actually been known to embrace the very persons who have snatched their family members away rather than continue life bitter. There are True Movie accounts of folks who have done so... one is a woman whose son was murdered, and, eventually, after lobbying for years to keep the criminal locked away with no parole, she helps enable his parole and release back to his own family.
EPelle
 
Posts: 21442
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:32 am

Postby SQUACKEE » Wed Oct 29, 2008 2:29 am

bad hammy wrote:
SQUACKEE wrote:And we cant forget the families of murdered victims who need justice so they can get on with their lives the best they can. Where is the compassion for them?

So killing folks is compassionate?? With the certain knowledge that some small percentage of those executed did nothing wrong???


First of all let me say that being against the death penalty is a very reasonable point of view, i dont share it but i understand it.

I am only taking about a very specific case. What you bring up is also a very specific case, executing the wrong man.....of course thats not compassionate and i never said it was.

I am for executing the guy who kidnapped the little girl, raped her and buried her alive.

Now you would say what about the innocent people executed and i would say what about the hundreds and hundreds of felons who murdered and were paroled and murdered again?

ALL of my compassion is for the victims, i dont have any for the viscious and cruel killers who willingly take a human life, i just dont.
SQUACKEE
 
Posts: 12885
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:32 am
Location: Heaven-In front of stereo listenin to re-mastered Beatles

Postby bad hammy » Wed Oct 29, 2008 3:34 am

SQUACKEE wrote:First of all let me say that being against the death penalty is a very reasonable point of view, i dont share it but i understand it.

I am only taking about a very specific case. What you bring up is also a very specific case, executing the wrong man.....of course thats not compassionate and i never said it was.

I am for executing the guy who kidnapped the little girl, raped her and buried her alive.

To be clear, I am not 100% anti-death penalty. There are obviously some cases that are irrefutably clear as to who was responsible and heinous enough to be worthy of the death penalty. But in my opinion, here in the US we use this tool far too much and in far too many dubious cases.

Additionally, there are many places in the world where there is no death penalty and yet people are generally safer than they are here in the US, so it is not clear that the death penalty is helping to make this country a better place to live.
bad hammy
 
Posts: 10880
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:32 am

Postby Marlow » Wed Oct 29, 2008 3:38 am

Jack, attribution of your source is always good. It could be copyrighted, but doesn't appear so.

http://groups.google.com/group/alt.poli ... raot&fwc=1
Marlow
 
Posts: 21081
Joined: Thu Jan 24, 2008 5:00 pm
Location: Somewhere over the . . . hill

Postby SQUACKEE » Wed Oct 29, 2008 3:55 am

bad hammy wrote:
SQUACKEE wrote:First of all let me say that being against the death penalty is a very reasonable point of view, i dont share it but i understand it.

I am only taking about a very specific case. What you bring up is also a very specific case, executing the wrong man.....of course thats not compassionate and i never said it was.

I am for executing the guy who kidnapped the little girl, raped her and buried her alive.

To be clear, I am not 100% anti-death penalty. There are obviously some cases that are irrefutably clear as to who was responsible and heinous enough to be worthy of the death penalty. But in my opinion, here in the US we use this tool far too much and in far too many dubious cases.

Additionally, there are many places in the world where there is no death penalty and yet people are generally safer than they are here in the US, so it is not clear that the death penalty is helping to make this country a better place to live.


To be clear, I am not 100% anti-death penalty...im not either :D
SQUACKEE
 
Posts: 12885
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:32 am
Location: Heaven-In front of stereo listenin to re-mastered Beatles

Postby Marlow » Wed Oct 29, 2008 4:08 am

bad hammy wrote:To be clear, I am not 100% anti-death penalty.


Well, I am! :D State-sponsored murder is no different than self-sponsored murder (to me - your mileage may differ). Solitary confinement for the rest of your life (and since all life is precious, yes, we the tax-payers, will bear the financial burden) is cruel and unusual punishment, but I'm OK with it!

To answer squackee's next question, yes, if someone attacked my family, I probably would kill them, but if they were just arrested and tried and found guilty, I would not want them executed. But if they were found not guilty and I knew they were guilty . . .
Marlow
 
Posts: 21081
Joined: Thu Jan 24, 2008 5:00 pm
Location: Somewhere over the . . . hill

Postby SQUACKEE » Wed Oct 29, 2008 4:17 am

Marlow wrote:
bad hammy wrote:To be clear, I am not 100% anti-death penalty.


Well, I am! :D State-sponsored murder is no different than self-sponsored murder (to me - your mileage may differ). Solitary confinement for the rest of your life (and since all life is precious, yes, we the tax-payers, will bear the financial burden) is cruel and unusual punishment, but I'm OK with it!

To answer squackee's next question, yes, if someone attacked my family, I probably would kill them, but if they were just arrested and tried and found guilty, I would not want them executed. But if they were found not guilty and I knew they were guilty . . .


My dear Marlow i must say you sound a little confused. 8-)
SQUACKEE
 
Posts: 12885
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:32 am
Location: Heaven-In front of stereo listenin to re-mastered Beatles

Postby jazzcyclist » Wed Oct 29, 2008 4:31 am

Marlow wrote:Solitary confinement for the rest of your life (and since all life is precious, yes, we the tax-payers, will bear the financial burden) is cruel and unusual punishment, but I'm OK with it!

That may be worse than the death penalty, because dead people can't suffer.
jazzcyclist
 
Posts: 10858
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:32 am

Postby Marlow » Wed Oct 29, 2008 5:06 am

SQUACKEE wrote:My dear Marlow i must say you sound a little confused. 8-)

Y'think?! 8-)
Marlow
 
Posts: 21081
Joined: Thu Jan 24, 2008 5:00 pm
Location: Somewhere over the . . . hill

Re: Dear Red States:

Postby Flumpy » Wed Oct 29, 2008 6:18 am

Jack Slocombe wrote: We get the Statue of Liberty. You get Dollywood.


That's not fair. Seeing as New California will have about 99% of all gayers can't we annex it? :D
Flumpy
 
Posts: 3899
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:32 am

Re: Dear Red States:

Postby tandfman » Wed Oct 29, 2008 6:27 am

Flumpy wrote:That's not fair. Seeing as New California will have about 99% of all gayers can't we annex it? :D

Do you really think that 99% of all the gays in the US are in California? Far, far from it.

http://www.gaydemographics.org/USA/2000 ... _rural.htm
tandfman
 
Posts: 15041
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:31 am

Postby Flumpy » Wed Oct 29, 2008 6:52 am

Firstly if you read the original post correctly you will see that 'New California' was the fictitious name given to the imaginary break away republic made up of the Blue states.

Secondly, I was joking. Lighten up.
Flumpy
 
Posts: 3899
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:32 am

Postby Pego » Wed Oct 29, 2008 7:29 am

Marlow wrote:
SQUACKEE wrote:My dear Marlow i must say you sound a little confused. 8-)

Y'think?! 8-)


Based on my perspective, I am afraid, Squackee is more confused than Marlow. I second Marlow's sentiment on capital punishment.
Pego
 
Posts: 10197
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:32 am
Location: beyond help

Postby SQUACKEE » Wed Oct 29, 2008 7:54 am

Pego wrote:
Marlow wrote:
SQUACKEE wrote:My dear Marlow i must say you sound a little confused. 8-)

Y'think?! 8-)


Based on my perspective, I am afraid, Squackee is more confused than Marlow. I second Marlow's sentiment on capital punishment.


Now i am more confused than ever. Marlow wants to kill the guy himself in the act but doesnt want the state to kill the guy but if a jury of his peers finds him innocent Marlow again wants to kill the guy.......right???? :?
SQUACKEE
 
Posts: 12885
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:32 am
Location: Heaven-In front of stereo listenin to re-mastered Beatles

Postby skyin' brian » Wed Oct 29, 2008 8:13 am

he may want to do it but that doesn't make it the right thing to do.
skyin' brian
 
Posts: 1128
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:32 am

Postby Marlow » Wed Oct 29, 2008 8:31 am

skyin' brian wrote:he may want to do it but that doesn't make it the right thing to do.

Exactly - I had hoped that went without saying. Plus, I wouldn't 'want' to; but at the moment I would be in diminished capacity. If I did do it, I would expect to face the full extent of the law, which, if it did determine the sentence to be death, I would also accept (for me - not others).
Marlow
 
Posts: 21081
Joined: Thu Jan 24, 2008 5:00 pm
Location: Somewhere over the . . . hill

Postby SQUACKEE » Wed Oct 29, 2008 8:48 am

Marlow wrote:If I did do it, I would expect to face the full extent of the law, which, if it did determine the sentence to be death, I would also accept (for me - not others).


Now im so confused i cant wind my watch....

If you killed a man who was in the process of raping and killing your wife you would accept the death penalty for it but not accept the death penalty for the killer who caused the whole thing in the first place!!!???????

So you would find it acceptable to execute you, a protective husband, but not a monster? :shock:
SQUACKEE
 
Posts: 12885
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:32 am
Location: Heaven-In front of stereo listenin to re-mastered Beatles

Postby Marlow » Wed Oct 29, 2008 8:52 am

SQUACKEE wrote:So you would find it acceptable to execute you, a protective husband, but not a monster? :shock:


Yup! :D

I would take responsibility for my deed, under the laws that I did it.

But I would not allow the government to murder someone else.

Makes perfect sense to me.
Marlow
 
Posts: 21081
Joined: Thu Jan 24, 2008 5:00 pm
Location: Somewhere over the . . . hill

Postby SQUACKEE » Wed Oct 29, 2008 9:04 am

Marlow wrote:
SQUACKEE wrote:So you would find it acceptable to execute you, a protective husband, but not a monster? :shock:


Yup! :D

I would take responsibility for my deed, under the laws that I did it.

But I would not allow the government to murder someone else.

Makes perfect sense to me.


Ok,i think were are done here, i totally respect yout point of view. Its amazing how different people are, i mean right to the core. I will say in your defense if there is a God he might find your view nicer and take me out to the shed. :twisted:
SQUACKEE
 
Posts: 12885
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:32 am
Location: Heaven-In front of stereo listenin to re-mastered Beatles

Postby Marlow » Wed Oct 29, 2008 9:40 am

SQUACKEE wrote: Its amazing how different people are, i mean right to the core.

Squackee, I've read thousands of posts by you and you are much more LIKE me, than not! :shock:
Marlow
 
Posts: 21081
Joined: Thu Jan 24, 2008 5:00 pm
Location: Somewhere over the . . . hill

Postby SQUACKEE » Wed Oct 29, 2008 9:52 am

Marlow wrote:
SQUACKEE wrote: Its amazing how different people are, i mean right to the core.

Squackee, I've read thousands of posts by you and you are much more LIKE me, than not! :shock:


All right now your being just plain mean! :P
SQUACKEE
 
Posts: 12885
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:32 am
Location: Heaven-In front of stereo listenin to re-mastered Beatles

Postby mcgato » Wed Oct 29, 2008 10:00 am

How can the Red States have 92% of the mosquitos when the Blue States include Minnesota and Wisconsin?
mcgato
 
Posts: 1605
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:32 am
Location: Hoboken

Postby Pego » Wed Oct 29, 2008 11:12 am

mcgato wrote:How can the Red States have 92% of the mosquitos when the Blue States include Minnesota and Wisconsin?


That's the remaining 8 :shock: :wink: .
Pego
 
Posts: 10197
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:32 am
Location: beyond help

Postby mcgato » Wed Oct 29, 2008 11:18 am

I grew up in Minnesota, and I can't imagine them having less than 20% of the US mosquito population.
mcgato
 
Posts: 1605
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:32 am
Location: Hoboken


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest