Recent posts by karmakoolkid on Kongregate

Flag Post

Topic: Serious Discussion / The next President Clinton

Originally posted by SirPhilly:
Originally posted by Mafefe_Classic:

lol remember the time she deleted years worth of emails to avoid having her secrets revealed

but LIEberals are still worshiping her

i guess LIEberals think transparency only applies to ppl they disagree with????

Question is, will the liberals still worship her when she’s no longer in power?

.
.

Originally posted by SirPhilly:
Originally posted by karmakoolkid:

The wacko silly-cons still luv/worship Sarah Palin.


Look up what she charges to rant on about the same old shit.

As far as what the future holds for Hilly re “worship”….
all subjective on WHO you are talking about and WHAT you mean by “worship” and what you mean by “power”.

Well, she is the Wife to the President. I asked if the “lieberals will still worship her” if she’s no longer in office with the President.

And, I was responding to just that.
I was assuming you meant were she to have been President;
since she currently has been out of power—via your “Wife to the President position” — for nearly 15 years.

And, since being First Lady really isn’t an “office”.
Plus, the “power” differences between being merely the wife of the President and actually BEING the President are considerable.

Liberals will always love her…at least a goodly number of them since her ideology aligns w/ theirs.
Again, the Sarah Palin analogy.

Depending on how that “power” is handled by the person and who it is affecting/supported by, it can be considerable or nearly outright laughable (as in Palin).

 
Flag Post

Topic: Serious Discussion / This image sums up the USA perfectly!

I agree.
And, it is somewhat along the lines of NIMBY.
Most Americans can’t understand that we all have a backyard ….TOGETHER.
We are in this thing together; let’s behave like it.

 
Flag Post

Topic: Serious Discussion / The next President Clinton

The wacko silly-cons still luv Sarah Palin.
Look up what she charges to rant on about the same old shit.

As far as what the future holds for Hilly re “worship”….
all subjective on WHO you are talking about and WHAT you mean by “worship” and what you mean by “power”.

 
Flag Post

Topic: Serious Discussion / How Do You Feel About Collegiate Fraternities and Sororities?

So, tell me, btrgre … is this boyz club you speak of something like the American Boy Scouts—merit badges given out for accomplishments? What would the rape patch look like on their sashes? Or, much like our Native Americans and their scalps, do these oh-so honorable boyz just cut off the ears of their victims and wear them around their necks … ya know, like some of my “comrades” did to the VC in Nam?

Sure, we all know YOU are trolling…
and, we know who ya probably are.
But, I want to thank you for playing a bit of the foil so as to show just how fucked the mindset is of those stellar young men … a mindset that allows them to sickeningly justify an act that is, in some ppl’s view, only a notch or two below murder. In fact, have a look at how some American states view the heinous act.

But, speaking of unspeakable things being done to women … esp. those in collages … esp. those wanting to join a sorority, if one can believe what they see in looking at videos supposed made of initiation “ceremonies”, it would appear to me that there is a form of “consent” raping going on. They are “made” to perform sexual acts on each other and sometimes the sorority sisters. They have to straddle a rail w/ dildoes attached … going from one to the next … all the while shouting: Thank you sister for making my pussy feel so good (paraphrasing there).

Were my child to want to join such a sorority, I would first question my parenting skill set. I would then have an intensely serious conversation w/ her in order to try to understand why she would endure such shit just so she could be “bonded” to perverted bitches.

Depending on what was revealed in that convo, she just might find herself being “on her own” since she so strongly believes in her own “capabilities” to conduct her affairs in life than includes such depravity. I would wonder if such a sisterhood made “allowances” for being raped by fellow Greeks …. ya know, helping the boyz out since forced sex is so “natural”?

 
Flag Post

Topic: Serious Discussion / How Do You Feel About Collegiate Fraternities and Sororities?

Originally posted by petesahooligan:
stan said: there was a co-ed chemistry-based fraternity, where everyone was in one of the chemistry-related majors, studied science together, and remained friendly colleagues once they entered the workforce. It’s a useful system.

In terms of social, educational, and employment equity this is a pretty good example of a self-perpetuating mechanism for providing advantages to people that take traditional paths to career advancement.

So far … so good.
Whatever “name” given to most any form of an “organization” that “pools” its various “resources” in an effort to better exact results that they feel best represents their ideology and/or will enhance their form of materialism, one still will see these kinds of groups as being of “self” benefiting.

Is this “selfish”?
I dunno … too damn subjective … a bell-curve of variables that run the gamut of widely/wildly varying degrees of good vs. evil self-interest.

One example of this would be the obvious differences of the capitalistic system in America. We have corporations that are evil fuckers who have ONLY the interest of the very few in mind.

On the other hand, we have the fraternity/sorority of stockholders who (in their own varying ideological concepts) have pooled their resources (money) to promote a “self-perpetuating mechansim for providing advantages to people” (them) via a method that is a “traditional path [capitalism] to career [monetary-lifestyle] advancement”.

None of what stan said above is contrary to that.
Sure, there is a high degree of comparing apples to oranges to bowling balls going on here.
But, that is simply life.

Where the real issue begins is what YOU point out:
“All of these [cliques?] tend to see people as “one of us” or “not one of us.” That’s usually okay… but it can be dangerous, too.”

THAT is where “darkness” can impregnate what is supposed to be something that is intended to be good. I’ve seen this happen many times in my life.
.

Pete said: These kinds of advantages are good for individual members of that fraternity but bad for everyone else. Having a familial bond with someone based on a social or academic club (that ultimately provides career opportunity) produces advantages and inequity.

This is diametrically opposite to what stan said in the balance of his post above . At least it takes a view that sees the benefit from “networking” as being bad for those who aren’t a part of such networks.

Yeah, I guess one can (and should?) be aware of this …. it happens; it happens all too frequently in life; it can have horribly detrimental effects on the “outs” when the “in crowd” wields its “power” at the expense of the very little of what the “outs” have to begin with. Basically, I’m obviously talking about the cliques most of us knew in high school and how they all too often made overt effort at shaming those w/ “less”. That is nothing more than simple bullying …. of the worst kind.

But, Pete, I need to know more about where ya’re going w/ your " but BAD for everyone else … .ultimately provides career opportunity) producing advantages and INEQUITY ".

Give me more insight on your choice of words in bold.
Good is opposite of bad.
Why is it a bad thing for a group wanting to benefit from the “good” it produces?

Inequality IS a fact of life …up/down; good/evil; night/day; love/hate.
While intrinsically tied together, these concepts usually aren’t considered to be equally desirous.
Are ya saying that by wanting more for my family, I am inherently & intentionally wanting “less” for other’s?

 
Flag Post

Topic: Serious Discussion / #hyperthetical: 300

As a person who was in an explosion at age 14 and had 3rd degree burns on 50% of my body, I’m not all that sure I’d give this “challenge” a try unless there were faaaaaaaaaarrrr more payout than a measly $25K. Given my current age, a BILLION $ might be a consideration … providing my death would be of major benefit to those I love and things I highly support.

A bit of a grizzly consideration, were I to be set on fire, I’d gulp in as much hot air as possible (even gasoline fumes), searing my lungs, thereby cutting oxygen to the brain, passing out long before the skin blistered off my body. Plus, I might give this form of concentration a try.

But then, this guy (go to 5:50 min) likely wasn’t a monk and he managed to walk some distance while being totally on fire. What a sad, SAD day in Bradford City. Any such wooden stadiums left in the world should has sprinkler systems and be sprayed w/ fire retardants.

Any fellow forum posters who are going to participate in this thread should take very much consider the immense amount of pain a burn causes during the burn and, should you survive, the weeks of intense that follow. Even the keloid scars can present pain for years.

 
Flag Post

Topic: Serious Discussion / The next President Clinton

Originally posted by TheBSG:

Why can’t I drop some racist shit and then boost? This place is dumb yo. I’m a professional 15-yr-old-with-an-opinion, I don’t need dis.

LOL.
Nice to see ya still hangin’ ’round.
I had no idea you are so multi-lingual.
 
Flag Post

Topic: Serious Discussion / How Do You Feel About Collegiate Fraternities and Sororities?

Originally posted by ImplosionOfDoom:

Here’s an old question that’s been rattling around the back of my head for a while….

Were fraternities / sororities ever intended to have a legitimate purpose (ex: provide student to student mentorship / tutoring) or have they always been just glorified “social clubs” purely for the sake of entertainment?

Some answers for ya might be found here.

For the MOST part, I believe they were to be something where like-minded ppl could merge similar interests for heightened mutual benefit. Today, however, it can run a very wide gamut of what their purposes are …. or so it would appear based on my very casual & mostly disinterested view of them.

But, groups w/ “rules” tend to make me a bit “nervous”.

 
Flag Post

Topic: Serious Discussion / Questioning the Nature of Your Embodiment

Awwww ….stan, ya’s just end up staying home and playing w/ yourself.
lol

But, seriously …. this is done all the time. Pre-op transvestites (usually) have to live as the gender they are wanting to be reassigned. Of course, there is also usually a lot of hormone treatment involved. But, you can still—highly depending on your Tootsie-ability it a shot to see how society will respond to you as a female AND how you yourself will respond.

 
Flag Post

Topic: Serious Discussion / How Do You Feel About Collegiate Fraternities and Sororities?

Originally posted by stanwise:

Someone I know was once raped by a frat boy, so I’m biased. Very biased. Extremely biased.

Biased I understand.
My niece was sexually abused by her stepdad.
To this day, even though she is remarkably successful as a business person and woman, she isn’t interested in a relationship w/ a man.

But, stan, make the “connection” for me about how the fraternity part of that boy was integral to the rape.
Are you saying that the fraternity specifically (or frat life in general) contributed to it?
And, even further and more sickening, PROMOTED it?

 
Flag Post

Topic: Serious Discussion / The next President Clinton

Originally posted by josaphine17:

Keep your shirt on dude. Its called an opinion of which i am allowed to express wanna know why? Cuz its a forum and it allows ppl to do so freely ;)

And, I expressed MY opinion of yours.
That is what involves a discussion forum.
Your whiney shit that I was somehow impinging on your “freedom” to do so is only some childish ploy to hide the fact that you won’t/can’t respond to my questions.

Go read the Forum Guidelines:
4. Try to back up your points [OPINIONS] with respected sources whenever possible if you’re presenting a topic for debate, even though the bulk of your argument should be your own.

And, before Don stupidly (egotistically?) deleted the 2 original guidelines posts, in favor of his own, there was something about "expect your ideas [OPINIONS] to be challenged.

Now, do ya care to make a response more worthy than: DUDE?

 
Flag Post

Topic: Serious Discussion / How Do You Feel About Collegiate Fraternities and Sororities?

You do realize there are many, MANY fraternities and sororities beyond those of higher education?
If you are going to talk about kids who are 18-22; what do you think you are going to be talking about…sex, drugs, booze, silliness—for the most part.

And, why not?
Young ppl SHOULD have some fun.
It is the fuckers who aren’t able to be reasonable & responsible that the media focuses on ….
as they well should.

 
Flag Post

Topic: Serious Discussion / The next President Clinton

Originally posted by josaphine17:
Obama screwed up and he shamed the african americans.

Seriously …. SHAMED?
Please, OH PLEASE, tell me just what he has done that so “shamed” anyone … let alone his race?
At least anymore than the 30+ WHITE guys before him.

BTW, you do realize he isn’t “ALL” Black?
AND, why do you so rapaciously jump to race;
why not simply leave it at: the Presidency?

Yes, yes, I know your comparative of his “race” to Hilly’s gender.
However, only ignorant voters choose based on race or gender instead of the issues …..
Ooooops, damn … I forgot we are talking about America.
My bad.
.
.

Originally posted by onlineidiot1994:

Vote for Pedro.

Even though ya likely meant this as a bit of a joke; there is a lot of truth to be found in that movie.
Which, oddly, I just happened to watch a bit of last night.
 
Flag Post

Topic: Serious Discussion / Looks like this forum is dying

Originally posted by vikaTae:
Tag. Byesies :)

This forum isn’t “dying”;
it is merely regressing into senility.
I’ll take vanguard’s “lively”—as in ALIVE—discussions over Pete’s silly games any ol’ day.
 
Flag Post

Topic: Serious Discussion / Looks like this forum is dying

Once AGAIN, vika … the point completely eludes you.
Why in hell would YOU think I am bothered by “it”?
Odd.

Regardless of what/how he went about injecting data into the forum, we certainly didn’t have a problem not looking for enough reasons to ignore him and all of that “nastiness” you speak of …. now did we?

NO, we gleefully jumped on him & his threads (how many of them were HIS?) and banged our fingers to bloody pulps pouring our indignation into the forum about him/them.

NOW what are “we” doing?
Talking on a thread that is mostly an obit.
Kool.

 
Flag Post

Topic: Serious Discussion / Looks like this forum is dying

Originally posted by tgggrtbr:

it is dying because everyone shunned vanguarde once again so he stopped doing 95% of the work for SD in regards to finding and bringing things up to discuss.

THIS!

Like it or not; for quite awhile now, this has been a fact.

 
Flag Post

Topic: Serious Discussion / Why do LIEberals still worship OBUMMER???

Or, NOT.

 
Flag Post

Topic: Serious Discussion / Looks like this forum is dying

But, glowing grass would be great for 2nd-shifters that couldn’t mow it in the evening like everyone who is “normal” … they could mow it at 3 AM and make the neighbors regret their insolence.

 
Flag Post

Topic: Serious Discussion / (Obama,Bush,isis and False flag wars)There is more shit in the world than we ever thought.

Originally posted by TheBSG:

I miss CROW.

Me TOO.
 
Flag Post

Topic: Serious Discussion / How old do you want to be when you die?

Originally posted by vikaTae:
Based on my own understanding of human nature and instinctual behavior, I doubt that removing age-based mortality will make one lick of difference to the individual’s fear of death. Potentially living longer is not going to sate that fear at all.

Lacking an understanding of vika’s intention of sate of the fear of death, I’m going to go w/ an ABATEMENT of the fear of death is likely not so much a factor of the road-of-life has become a longer one as it is one of HOW LONG an amount of time it has been traveled … the amount of life experiences acquired along the way.

The closer to the end of the ride, the keener the realization that an end actually does exist. Such is probably what spurs the concept of mid-life crisis for some circles of thinking about the somewhat “odd” behavior of middle-aged persons. Reaching “retirement” age is a serious defining moment … one no longer does what was an essential part of their life. They tend to no longer feel worthiness. Their occupation defined them; their parenting usually isn’t that much of a factor at that age; the social order really hasn’t much of a niche for them.

It seems to me that a certain forlorn state of resignation to/recognition of/fear? of death tends to slowly creep in and steal one’s zest for life. I’m talking about degrees here …. shades of gray applied to ages 60 +.

Tell me, outside of the few unfortunate souls who obsess about death, when do you hear of younger (30 & below) ppl giving much thought at all about their death? I don’t see them so much living as if there weren’t a tomorrow …. more that they think there will (probably?) “always” be a tomorrow.

I think there probably is some very base instinct drive involved here. Were ppl to have such a keen focus on death, might not a give-a-shit-I’m-gonna-die-anyway attitude set in and defeatism breed out such a trait?

A keen understanding/relationship w/ death is the domain of those who are in a position to be much more intimate with it. We seniors have experienced a lot of death/destruction/harm around us over the years. We are the ones that are here to help keep the young ones from killing themselves via advanced foolishness. But, maaaaaaaaaa … it seemed like a damn good idea at the time. Or, I seen it done & I figured I could do it, TOO.

 
Flag Post

Topic: Serious Discussion / American Conservatism versus the world.

Originally posted by thepunisher52:
Originally posted by jhco50:

Of course it was Vika, quartering troops in private homes, confiscating weapons, raping women, etc had noting to add to it, right? Maybe you should read your history and stop picking just what you want out of it.

Hyperbole much?

6th degree black belt?
 
Flag Post

Topic: Serious Discussion / How old do you want to be when you die?

This is how long I want to live:

“Too young to fight in the First World War, but destined to lead the first successful expedition to another star system, the (literally) immortal Lazarus Long is the most popular and enduring character created by Robert A. Heinlein, author of numerous New York Times best sellers. He starred in Heinlein’s most popular novels, including Methuselah’s Children, Time Enough For Love, The Number Of The Beast, To Sail Beyond The Sunset and others. The oldest living member of the human race due to his unique genes, Long has been a pioneer on eight planets, survived wars and lynch mobs, and explored most of the galaxy. His adventures have given him a breadth of experience distilled through the irony of an immortal viewpoint. But there is nothing pompous about Long’s reflections on the human condition. As the noted editor and critic David G. Hartwell has observed, “Lazarus” comments are acute, lively and intelligent." And here they are, compiled in one beautifully designed trade paperback, filled with illuminations and illustrations by renowned Science Fiction artist Stephen Hickman, for the delight of the millions of Heinlein fans around the world."

While likely to be viewed as only tenuously relevant to the OP, I see what this band coming to Wichita is promoting as something I AM & would be involved in until I would die:

“Imaginary Enemy arrives with the wrath of a hurricane, railing against the mainstream media distractions that keep the populace complacent about poverty, disease, war, famine and the seemingly inevitable police state decimating privacy. Even as humanity grows more interconnected through technology, self-absorbed narcissism keeps much of the West with a nose in a smartphone and their empathy obscured. As The Used’s lyricist/frontman Bert McCracken declares: “We need new heroes – or no heroes at all. We need more leaders and lessTwitter followers.”"

 
Flag Post

Topic: Serious Discussion / Freedom of Speech: Garland, TX style

Here is some free speech that is going to have a “cost” somewhere down the road. Hopefully, a serious cost for the principle. That bitch is sooooo representative of racism … esp. in the South. For those racists thee, they aren’t even able to see/understand where/when they are doing it.

Be sure to catch the part where she was derisive in her comments to the Black graduates as she handed them their diplomas and “not-so-much” for the white students.

That principle certainly has her right/freedom to say what she pleases ala the video.
But, the private school she works for must might have a say of their own.
HOWEVER, the repercussion of that free speech, that is going to be of much greater consequence, is how it will be one more huge straw on the back of our underground racist society that is now having a lot of light shed on it due to recent police misconduct.

 
Flag Post

Topic: Serious Discussion / Freedom of Speech: Garland, TX style

I haven’t had the time lately to follow this thread; well, at least as closely/thoroughly as I would like to.
So, I beg pardon if my response here isn’t what it should be.
Now, I hope I’m not being any too “guilty” of not respecting this:

Originally posted by stanwise:
Originally posted by Kasic:

So, not to derail the thread or anything, but if you’d post your sources in a new thread, we can talk about climate change there and get back to freedom of speech here.


This, please.


.
issendorf said: “I only brought up climate change …..”
Pete said: "I think there’s an interesting overlap between the Climate Change Debate and Freedom of Speech concerns. Climate Change is an example of how much “freedom” should we afford ideas that are controversial to the norm?

Likewise, I’m mentioning climate change because it does relate to the OP as being an example of how the “speech” of particular concepts/ideas is all too often “censored” by means that run the gamut of ignored—ridiculed—killed.

Pete gives a keen insight that supports this (and did so via some fine prose). He said, “I believe the main point of interest though is how the language of social change exerts itself in the public sphere… whether it be climate change, feminism, evolution, or whatever. Change is a constant, and that change is borne on the wind of a million voices. It doesn’t take much for another group to oppose it by blowing back… and if they start losing then they’ll say that the game is rigged. This is normal and we all live in the middle of it.”

I want to challenge that a bit, though.
There is always going to be “that group” that offers opposition … for a host of reasons.
There is always going to be parts of that group that will say it is rigged.
However, regardless of what the percentage is, we should not totally ignore those in that group that make the most sense and who should be RESPECTFULLY viewed as being the loyal opposition. I call this the “Kings New Clothes” effect. We don’t want to be duped by clever manipulation from those who stand to benefit from “misinformation”.

There is another aspect of the debate about freedom of speech—and how it is assailed—that is all too problematic. That is likely because of the way the media reports this debate … “the media” wants to make money. The best way to do that is to pander-to-the-prurient that appears to be too greatly manifest in those the media “serves”. The greater the focus is on the smoke & dust, the more interest, the more money.

However, such presentation is at the expense of knowing the truth of the matter … i.e. censorship by ignoring most of the truth. Toss in the ridicule the media hypes and we get even further from the truth. Let’s not forget the “killing” … this happens when the media purposefully “kills” information it should present because it doesn’t fit into its process of responding to its interest in making money.

That brings me to what Pete said just above: “Over time, you move “normal.” This is the power of freedom of speech. This is the pattern of all social change.” I think Pete put normal in quotes to (as I do) show that the word shouldn’t be seen as what one normally (< lol) would. I see him saying that, regardless of the amount of truth in the “normal” knowledge held by society, society will move (as in change is a constant) in a direction greatly aided by that amount of truth it has been given, or not given.

Besides what the media does to the truth by focusing on the more heated, salacious aspects wrought by the dissention in the debates, it is the way those who are more respected as having more reliable information, both pro & con, are doing the debating. When these ppl give in to the baser darkness of frustration & anger, the debate then loses focus & merit which the media is most happy to exploit.

These respected ppl in the debate need to keep their heads and agree to disagree and not be disagreeable in doing so.
.
.
One more thing I want to address is:

Originally posted by Kasic:
Pete said: I totally agree. I believe that skepticism is healthy and informs the direction and pace of progress in practically any discipline… science, religion, human rights… and they will always be treated as fucking lepers… burned at the stake, crucified, silenced, exiled, and sometimes (the worst fate of all) ignored.

I want to call bullshit on this, btw. Skeptics aren’t treated like lepers – people who don’t understand what they’re talking about and get shot down think that they were shot down because others don’t agree with them. Then they play the victim card. They were never ignored or prevented from voicing their ideas. They were never told to get out. Often they’re invited to debate and then whine when they’re shown to be completely ignorant or decline the invitation entirely (as Issendorf just did when I invited him to make a climate change thread so he could present his ideas to be discussed), and go off to tell their buddies how they were discriminated against for daring to disagree.

By putting the hyperbole aside, we should be able to see that the truth more likely situations are somewhere between the two concepts give by Pete & Kasic. Basically, they are both right … to some degree or another, in the various areas (superficially?) indicated, and applied at different times in history. Or, “D” … all of the above.

Last, I want to rain on Pete’s parade a bit.
He said, “…but leaving is losing; failing to participate is conceding. If you believe that your cause is worth representing, you last a little bit longer than your opponent(s) and you move the ball a little bit.”

Pete, sometimes a person just has to know when to say when … pick their battles … move on to greener pastures. What is that little catchy phrase that was popular a few years back: “Insanity: doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results.”

Moving the ball towards your goal line when the other team & the spectators have all left the stadium is a hollow victory. Regardless of the validity of the “ignoring” the game by that huge majority, the fact remains that a victory-of-truth by the winner of an “uncontested” game is usually still tossed in the record book as a loss.

I think I remember someone saying in this thread that the originator of an idea is often thought of as a kook. It is when someone w/ a serious interest in moving the ball in another similar contest will do a bit of research into “old games” and find that that ignored one does have merit if see through the eyes of happenings that occurred after it was ignored. Think of those prisoners that have been proven right by DNA.

It really isn’t so much the FREEDOM of speech that is the real issue, it is the way in which society is encouraged—via all the means it operates by: parents, sermons, media, etc.—to LISTEN that should be the focus.

Let your judgment, and resulting actions, reflect your knowledge.
Always endeavor to seek the truth …. knowing that it is elusive and difficult to find.

 
Flag Post

Topic: Serious Discussion / Freedom of Speech: Garland, TX style

Hate speech as a crime:
“Hate speech is, outside the law, speech that attacks a person or group on the basis of attributes such as gender, ethnic origin, religion, race, disability, or sexual orientation.12

In law, hate speech is any speech, gesture or conduct, writing, or display which is forbidden because it may incite violence or prejudicial action against or by a protected individual or group, or because it disparages or intimidates a protected individual or group. The law may identify a protected individual or a protected group by certain characteristics.3456 In some countries, a victim of hate speech may seek redress under civil law, criminal law, or both.”

“Enforcement of hate speech laws[edit]
Hate law regulations can be divided into two types: those that are designed for public order and those that are designed to protect human dignity. Those designed to protect public order seem to be somewhat ineffective because they are rarely enforced. For example, in Northern Ireland, as of 1992 only one person was prosecuted for violating the regulation in twenty one years. Those meant to protect human dignity, however, like those in Canada, Denmark, France, Germany and the Netherlands seem to be frequently enforced.14

.
.
30 ft.
LOL
Yeah, that’s very close to well over 3 American football fields away.
I’d say that particular “free speech” was being very limited …. be it hate or not.
Our motorcycles tend to drown out their shit anyway.