Tilted Forum Project Discussion Community  

Go Back   Tilted Forum Project Discussion Community > The Academy > Tilted Politics


 
 
LinkBack Thread Tools
Old 03-02-2007, 07:09 PM   #81 (permalink)
... a sort of licensed troubleshooter.
 
Willravel's Avatar
 
First off, welcome back Ustwo. We missed you (especially host).
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ustwo
With age comes wisdom, and I received a bit of a dose this last year or two. There is no need to be angry and agitated over that which you can not control. The difference between liberalism and conservatism seems to be one rallies against human nature and tries to force us to become what they think humans should be, while one accepts it and works out the best solutions we can understanding that nature and accepting its short comings.
That's an interesting idea, but I might have to disagree with you. Liberalism is a part of a two sided scale, the front side being liberal and the back side being conservative. On the liberal side of the scale, we have people who constantly pull society forward, always trying to reach above and beyond. On the conservative end, we have people who are content with stagnation or the status quo and who pull back against the liberals. As an 'equilibriust' (I just made that word up), and a student of anthropology, I am led to conclude that in a society that is too liberal, things move forward too fast...so fast that mistakes are made. It is in that way that conservatism becomes useful. Move too fast and you won't have time to consider the repercussions of every decision. A society that is too conservative, however, stagnates. As it is the natural state for all life to evolve over a slow period of time through processes of mutation and natural selection, so also society must develop, and therein lies the problem with your assertion. Human nature constantly evolves. We are not the same humans we were 10,000 years ago and we are not the same humans we were 1,000,000 years ago. As with all evolution, what is new today will eventually become old. Likewise, notions that are liberal today will become less liberal and eventually conservative. Take, for example, the idea of transfusion. When the idea of sharing blood for medical purposes was originally introduced, conservatives overwhelmingly condemned it as wrong. That is no longer the case except in very specific cases today. I doubt we would see Rush Limbaugh telling people not to give blood today. As such, liberal notions today such as homosexual marriage being accepted by the state or universal health care will either be destroyed by conservatism or undoubtedly become less liberal over time. Even you, Ustwo, are a product of societal development occurring for hundreds of thousands of years. That's liberalism eventually coming out on top consistently throughout human existence.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ustwo
It takes decades to see a change from one mind set to the other, and some never accept it, but regardless it makes arguing with someone who thinks the individual exists to serve the collective pointless with someone who thinks collectives form because they serve individuals.
Ironically, I must disagree. Meaning is relativistic. A 'personalist' and socialist could easily decide based on precedent and reason what the real world applications would be of each philosophy.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ustwo
Over my years posting here, I've had a number of PM's from people thanking me for posting or showing them there is another side of the debate. I was glad to know at least someone was gaining something from my efforts but such education wasn't worth having to deal with the rest. There was SOME good debate, but it gets buried in a mountain of over the top biased articles, communist pseudo-intellectual drivel, and cut and paste insanity which was once controlled a bit by the mods and no longer was (art was the best at this and he wasn't any easier on me).
Communism is one type of socialism. Not only is the term 'communist' inaccurate in referring to your adversaries here, but it carries with it a negative connotation because of McCarthyism. Just so you're aware, that's what a lot of people get mad about. I'm sure you'd be just as pissed if I inaccurately called you a fascist.

Just fyi, a new feature was added so that ultra-long articles can be better organized for the ease of the reader.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ustwo
So I came to a conclusion. Why bother getting mad? The politics of the world haven't changed because I no longer post on tfp. I have a mountain of personal goals to work on and a family which I'd rather spend more and more of my time with. I could argue with some 20 something who hasn't even figured out his own life about how the world should be run, or enjoy the life I have worked for and created myself without getting mad at the interweb political debate.
Personal goals are awesome. I agree that it's important to spend time with family an all that jazz. I wish you all the best in that.

You were a 20 something once upon a time, and I'm sure you had just as many big opinions on things as you do now. I'm also sure that you would have been pissed off if some older person tried to dismiss you and/or your ideas based solely on your age. Have the courtesy of showing others the respect they earn. If someone is an idiot, call them an idiot for the things they say and do, not their age.
Willravel is offline  
Old 03-02-2007, 07:33 PM   #82 (permalink)
Gentlemen Farmer
 
j8ear's Avatar
 
Location: Middle of nowhere, Jersey
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ustwo
The difference between liberalism and conservatism seems to be one rallies against human nature and tries to force us to become what they think humans should be, while one accepts it and works out the best solutions we can understanding that nature and accepting its short comings.
Thank you for, if nothing else, at least illuminating EXACTLY what the entire liberal mind set is all about. I've struggled personally with thoughts of something similar but the nuts and bolts eluded me. You nailed it!!!!

I can't say I completely agree with this characterization of conservatism, at least in it's present incarnation in US politics.

Essentially I think that the stripes of both "ideologies" are for the most identical, and essentially boil down to staying in power, at what ever cost.

Classical liberalism or true libertarianism I think is concerned with understanding human nature and adapting appropriate solutions and present day liberalism is essentially (and has yet to chalk up a single success. This lack of success or even a single improvement is key) attempting to create a utopia based on how the population of a utopia "should" behave. Obviously and without a doubt dillusional in assuming that human nature can be utopic or even in the slightest way manufactured or steered in such a direction.

Anywho....Ustwo, I miss your insights, and wish you well in your quest for family happiness and whatever other goals you seek to accomplish.

-bear
__________________
It's alot easier to ask for forgiveness then it is to ask for permission.
j8ear is offline  
Old 03-02-2007, 08:29 PM   #83 (permalink)
 
dc_dux's Avatar
 
Location: Washington DC
Quote:
Here is your test. I'd be pretty happy under a Libertarian government, would you be?
Ustwo....show me a successful Libertarian government anywhere in the world in the last 200 years.

Its a fine model on paper and may work well in a small, agrarian, homogenous, isolationist nation. I dont believe for a second that such a government can represent its citizens best interests in a post-industrial, geo-politically and economically complex 21st century.

No, I would not be happy living under such a government, because, IMO, most likely it would be a failed state.

***
edit:
Quote:
Hit and run? You know I covered this in my original long post.

There are about 15 liberals to one conservative that posts, I'm not going to respond to everyone who thinks they have a point.
FYI...here is an example of "hit and run" I am talking about....from you last post in Feb on global warming: (link)
Quote:
Long time no post, and while I don't plan on posting anytime soon again, I saw this and had to think of all you arm chair experts out there.

http://www.canada.com/nationalpost/s...6fef8763c6&k=0
.
You find one scientist that attributes global warming to solar activity (I found the article to be informative and may certainly have some validity)....AND with that you discount any other scientific possibility (like the findings of the 100+ scientists and climatologists of the International Panel on Climate Change) as well as making smug comments directed towards those here who disagree with you.
Quote:
I'm glad that some scientists are finally looking beyond the buzz and discovering what I and others have concluded for years. No amount of 'PCing' should be allowed to effect scientific judgement.
You conclude that your scientiist is right, the others are wrong, yet you dont hang around to debate....(you" don't plan on posting anytime soon again.") - hit and run...and a very disengenuous way to participate in a forum.

My apologies to others for the threadjack and and making it personal.
__________________
"The perfect is the enemy of the good."
~ Voltaire

Last edited by dc_dux; 03-02-2007 at 09:22 PM..
dc_dux is offline  
Old 03-03-2007, 01:11 AM   #84 (permalink)
Artist of Life
 
Ch'i's Avatar
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by dc_dux
On a serous note, that is probably the most baseless mischaracterization of liberalism/conservatisim I have ever seen.
Would you explain how it is a mischaracterization? If it is baseless, then add the foundation that you think should be there.
Quote:
Originally Posted by dc_dux
My apologies to others for the threadjack and and making it personal.
If you knew this, why did you persist?




Thanks for stopping by Ustwo. Hopefully your new found ability to let go of anger and disdain is contagious.

I wish you and your family well.

Last edited by Ch'i; 03-03-2007 at 01:20 AM..
Ch'i is offline  
Old 03-03-2007, 05:01 AM   #85 (permalink)
 
dc_dux's Avatar
 
Location: Washington DC
Ch'i....if you want to start a new thread on liberalism/conservatism (based on Ustwo's premise or not), I will be happy to debate it.
Quote:
The difference between liberalism and conservatism seems to be one rallies against human nature and tries to force us to become what they think humans should be, while one accepts it and works out the best solutions we can understanding that nature and accepting its short comings.
For now, I will suggest that it was predominantly "liberal" programs and liberalism (as it is/was characterized and practiced in US politics.. ie an active govt role vs limited govt conservatism.. rather than a classical political/economic sense) that created the post-WW II middle class (GI bill - opening the opportunity for college to millions of returing vets, programs to expand home ownership - Fannie Mae, programs enhancing small business opportunities - SBA loan programs, etc), provided retirement and affordable health security to seniors (social security and Medicare- both need fixing now), intiated the civil rights movement and programs to protect the environment, promoted scientific and technological research through government grants.....

Now if you think these examples are "against human nature and tries to force us to become what they think humans should be", as I said, I would be happy to discuss it further in a new thread....I would suggest it is religious social conservatism in the US that has these characteristics.

And, I persisted with my observation regarding Ustwo's follow-up comment to my initial observation of his "hit and run" tactics ("There are about 15 liberals to one conservative that posts, I'm not going to respond to everyone who thinks they have a point.") with an example -- I simply pointed out he if post an article and comment that criticizes others here as "armchair experts", he should stay around and debate it.

The same would apply to his latest sweeping characterization (or mischaracterization IMO) of liberalism/conservatiism. If he is going to offer that kind of controversial commentary, he should have the courage of his convictions to debate it and defend it.

I thought a public response was reasonable (considering all the threadjacking that goes on in the political forum) and I stand by what I wrote.
__________________
"The perfect is the enemy of the good."
~ Voltaire

Last edited by dc_dux; 03-03-2007 at 06:27 AM..
dc_dux is offline  
Old 03-03-2007, 12:28 PM   #86 (permalink)
Banned
 
....speaking of empathy.....let's hop in the "way back" machine, for a sec...

Seaver in this post on Aug. 12, 2006:
http://www.tfproject.org/tfp/showpos...1&postcount=53
Quote:
Originally Posted by Seaver
Ustwo, we agree on most views... but you're carrying this too far.

You're beginning to reflect Host in his potrayal of you as a government agent.
Post #15, on this thread:
Quote:
Originally Posted by Seaver
Really? Are you serious?

The reason I stopped posting is because everytime I did I was declared Racist, Imperialist, Ignorant, Ultra-Religious (trying to bring on the Apocolypse), and hundreds of other things hurled left and right. Though because they described it as "the right" it was not an insult and nothing was done.

Now there are conservative posters here that did flame, <b>the last month of Ustwo's posts here I agree were pretty unacceptable.</b> But to play the "pity us" card is equally unacceptable.
From post #78, on this thread:
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ustwo
While I don't think there was much 'unacceptable' in my last month, after having been called every name in the book on this forum including cock sucker for my beliefs I can't say I really care if any liberals think I was flaming them. .....
....a re-run...in a "drive-by", from a "conversation" that took place, last august?:

In this post http://www.tfproject.org/tfp/showpos...&postcount=204

http://www.tfproject.org/tfp/showthr...40#post2106840

Quote:
Originally Posted by host
08-16-2006, 04:33 AM


Quote:
Originally Posted by Ustwo
While arguing about what should be posted and how on politics has nothing to do with the decline of TFP I'd like to point out that politics has never been a place for original thought.

Before the 2004 election, I posted I thought Bush would win, and what the democrat reaction would be. I was almost right on the money as it turned out. It was something original, no links, just my opinion based on my knowledge of politics. Rather than discussing it, or telling me I was wrong, I was called a troll, in fact one long time poster told me to get Karl Roves cock out of my mouth (thats a quote)......
It is appropriate to observe that the second anniversary of the episode that you described will occur in three weeks. You received what seems to be a <a href="http://www.tfproject.org/tfp/showpost.php?p=1393112&postcount=53">sincere, public, apology,</a> from the member who directed those disturbing comments at you.

<b>The event that you described, happened 101 weeks ago, and you received a sincere apology,</b> yet your memory of what happened is still clear in your mind, and you posted about it, just yesterday.

I'd like to know how what happened here, just the other day:
http://www.tfproject.org/tfp/showthr...=107387&page=2 ......

.....seems to you now, in hindsight, after you read what I posted here:
http://www.tfproject.org/tfp/showpos...&postcount=128
....and now....it's more than 130 weeks since the "offense" took place....he received an apology.....while I'm still waiting for one....silently....but for the subject being dredged up, again....

Last edited by host; 03-03-2007 at 12:37 PM..
host is offline  
Old 03-04-2007, 11:27 PM   #87 (permalink)
Crazy
 
Intense1's Avatar
 
Location: Music City burbs
My post has to do with the statements made about hunger in the US - I am amazed that anyone would say that there is true "hunger" in the US, true hunger meaning there is no access to services or ministries that would alleviate an actual physical hunger.

I have lived in Thailand for years, I have walked amongst poverty stricken people there in the slums of Klong Tuey and have walked down the streets of Vientienne, Laos, and in the eastern border towns between Thailand and Cambodia. I have walked in Myanmar, and have seen hungry kids asking for money for food (or for their weekly amounts they must give their handlers who are watching on the side)

I have walked in Egypt and had kids asking for "bahksheesh", kids who don't have homes and who only eat when a foreigner gives them money.

In these years I have been privileged to walk amongst such children, never have I seen a "fat" kid, a child who obviously and truly had enough to eat. Not like most all American kids I have seen, even in the most impoverished of American kids.

So don't say that there is true "hunger" here in America - there are services available, and failing that, there are ministries who will care for these kids. In other countries, there is nothing - no government, no services, no ministries.

These kids are truly "hungry".

Americans need to pull their heads out of their asses and see what is going on in the world, and not just think the sun rises and sets on them.

And I am an American.
__________________
(none yet, still thinkin')
Intense1 is offline  
Old 03-05-2007, 01:14 AM   #88 (permalink)
Banned
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Intense1
My post has to do with the statements made about hunger in the US - I am amazed that anyone would say that there is true "hunger" in the US, true hunger meaning there is no access to services or ministries that would alleviate an actual physical hunger.........

......In these years I have been privileged to walk amongst such children, never have I seen a "fat" kid, a child who obviously and truly had enough to eat. Not like most all American kids I have seen, even in the most impoverished of American kids.

So don't say that there is true "hunger" here in America - there are services available, and failing that, there are ministries who will care for these kids. In other countries, there is nothing - no government, no services, no ministries.

These kids are truly "hungry".

Americans need to pull their heads out of their asses and see what is going on in the world, and not just think the sun rises and sets on them.

And I am an American.
Please read the following article and tell me that you don't sound remarkably similar to candidate Bush during his first presidential campaign:
Quote:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn...111501621.html
Some Americans Lack Food, but USDA Won't Call Them Hungry

By Elizabeth Williamson
Washington Post Staff Writer
Thursday, November 16, 2006; A01

The U.S. government has vowed that Americans will never be hungry again. But they may experience "very low food security."

Every year, the Agriculture Department issues a report that measures Americans' access to food, and it has consistently used the word "hunger" to describe those who can least afford to put food on the table. But not this year.

Mark Nord, the lead author of the report, said "hungry" is "not a scientifically accurate term for the specific phenomenon being measured in the food security survey." Nord, a USDA sociologist, said, "We don't have a measure of that condition."

The USDA said that 12 percent of Americans -- 35 million people -- could not put food on the table at least part of last year. Eleven million of them reported going hungry at times. Beginning this year, the USDA has determined "very low food security" to be a more scientifically palatable description for that group.

The United States has set a goal of reducing the proportion of food-insecure households to 6 percent or less by 2010, or half the 1995 level, but it is proving difficult. The number of hungriest Americans has risen over the past five years. Last year, the total share of food-insecure households stood at 11 percent.

Less vexing has been the effort to fix the way hunger is described. Three years ago, the USDA asked the Committee on National Statistics of the National Academies "to ensure that the measurement methods USDA uses to assess households' access -- or lack of access -- to adequate food and the language used to describe those conditions are conceptually and operationally sound."

Among several recommendations, the panel suggested that the USDA scrap the word hunger, which "should refer to a potential consequence of food insecurity that, because of prolonged, involuntary lack of food, results in discomfort, illness, weakness, or pain that goes beyond the usual uneasy sensation."

To measure hunger, the USDA determined, the government would have to ask individual people whether "lack of eating led to these more severe conditions," as opposed to asking who can afford to keep food in the house, Nord said.

It is not likely that USDA economists will tackle measuring individual hunger. "Hunger is clearly an important issue," Nord said. "But lacking a widespread consensus on what the word 'hunger' should refer to, it's difficult for research to shed meaningful light on it."

Anti-hunger advocates say the new words sugarcoat a national shame. "The proposal to remove the word 'hunger' from our official reports is a huge disservice to the millions of Americans who struggle daily to feed themselves and their families," said David Beckmann, president of Bread for the World, an anti-hunger advocacy group. "We . . . cannot hide the reality of hunger among our citizens."

In assembling its report, the USDA divides Americans into groups with "food security" and those with "food insecurity," who cannot always afford to keep food on the table. Under the old lexicon, that group -- 11 percent of American households last year -- was categorized into "food insecurity without hunger," meaning people who ate, though sometimes not well, and "food insecurity with hunger," for those who sometimes had no food.

That last group now forms the category "very low food security," described as experiencing "multiple indications of disrupted eating patterns and reduced food intake." Slightly better-off people who aren't always sure where their next meal is coming from are labeled "low food security."

That 35 million people in this wealthy nation feel insecure about their next meal can be hard to believe, even in the highest circles. <b>In 1999, Texas Gov. George W. Bush, then running for president, said he thought the annual USDA report -- which consistently finds his home state one of the hungriest in the nation -- was fabricated.</b>

"I'm sure there are some people in my state who are hungry," Bush said. "I don't believe 5 percent are hungry."

Bush said he believed that the statistics were aimed at his candidacy. "Yeah, I'm surprised a report floats out of Washington when I'm running a presidential campaign," he said.

The agency usually releases the report in the fall, for reasons that "have nothing to do with politics," Nord said.

This year, when the report failed to appear in October as it usually does, Democrats accused the Bush administration of delaying its release until after the midterm elections. Nord denied the contention, saying, "This is a schedule that was set several months ago."
<center><img src="http://media3.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/graphic/2006/11/16/GR2006111600045.gif"></center>
....and why would you compare the hunger problem in the US to the situations in third world countries such as Thailand, with 1/5 of per capita income of the US, and Egypt, with less than 1/10 of US per capita income?

But, since you did compare the US to those countries, please take note of the fact that Thailand has a lower poverty rate than the US does, compared to the respective mean incomes in each country. Notice, too....that in both Egypt and Thailand, the bottome ten percent enjoy almost twice the 1.8 percent of total national income that reaches the bottom ten percent of the US population.

Are you defending the idea that, in the US, a country where the average income is five to ten times the average income in Thailand and Egypt, hunger that is say....."half" as severe, for the bottom ten percent here in the US, as it is in those much poorer places, is acceptable, or out of the realm of your belief system, as it seemed to be out of candidate Bush's?

Your opinions contradict the reports from the USDA, and the CIA factbook offers statistics that indicate that the bottom ten percent here control only 1.8 percent of the total wealth, 1/17 of the top ten percents' 1997 figure of 30.5 percent. ....and if the CIA factbook can tell us the income distribution in the last few years in foreing countries, why do your think that 30.5 percent wealth figure for the top ten percent in the US is from 1997...nine years old now.....?

You say that it is not so bad here....but don't the income numbers tell us that it should be five times better for the poorest here, than in Thailand?
Your comparisons of conditions of the poorest of the population living in the wealthiest major country in the world, with the plight of the poorest in 4 or 5 impoverished third world countries, as a method to dismiss the hunger problem in the wealthiest major country, is unconvincing and disturbing to me. It reminds me of Newt's shameful rhetoric:
Quote:
http://www.crooksandliars.com/2007/0...ms-of-katrina/
(Newt Gingrich, speaking at CPAC) blamed the residents of New Orleans' 9th Ward for a "failure of citizenship," by being "so uneducated and so unprepared, they literally couldn't get out of the way of a hurricane."

And he called for a "deep investigation" into this "failure of citizenship."

Here's the full quote:

How can you have the mess we have in New Orleans, and not have had deep investigations of the federal government, the state government, the city government, and the failure of citizenship in the Ninth Ward, where 22,000 people were so uneducated and so unprepared, they literally couldn't get out of the way of a hurricane. (emphasis original)

To listen to the audio, click here.

I tell you, this CPAC convention really highlights the humanity of these conservatives. And the worst part? It's not the first time Newt's put this in one of his speeches. Jeffrey Feldman has more…
You and the political agenda that you support does not recognize that there is a crisis in the US. and that hunger is only a real symptom of it. Keep backing bills like the "bankruptcy reform act", and reduction of short term capital gains taxes from 28 percent to 15 percent, and tax cuts that shift, even slightly, the total tax burden from the top ten percent to the bottom twenty percent of income earners, and a "fair tax" that eliminates progressive income taxation, or propaganda that changes the description of estate taxes to "death" taxes.

Keep pushing an agenda that makes it impossible for the rural poor to obtain birth control and sex education, and birth control products and access to safe clinical abortion.....

Keep doing all of the things that I've described republicans' supporting, and you'll succeed in shifting that last 1.8 percent of the national income that does trickle down to the poorest ten percent in the US, and keep denying that there is a hunger problem, here, because you have witnessed REAL hunger....and maybe you'll get to see REAL hunger here, too!

Quote:
https://www.cia.gov/cia/publications...k/geos/th.html
Thailand

Infant mortality rate:
Definition Field Listing Rank Order
total: 19.49 deaths/1,000 live births
male: 20.77 deaths/1,000 live births

GDP (purchasing power parity):
Definition Field Listing Rank Order
$585.9 billion (2006 est.)


GDP - per capita (PPP):
Definition Field Listing Rank Order
$9,100 (2006 est.)
female: 18.15 deaths/1,000 live births (2006 est.)

Population below poverty line:
Definition Field Listing
10% (2004 est.)
Household income or consumption by percentage share:
Definition Field Listing
lowest 10%: 2.8%
highest 10%: 32.4% (1998)
Distribution of family income - Gini index:
Definition Field Listing
51.1 (2002)
Quote:
https://www.cia.gov/cia/publications...k/geos/eg.html
Egypt

Infant mortality rate:
Definition Field Listing Rank Order
total: 31.33 deaths/1,000 live births
male: 32.04 deaths/1,000 live births
female: 30.58 deaths/1,000 live births (2006 est.)

GDP (purchasing power parity):
Definition Field Listing Rank Order
$328.1 billion (2006 est.)

GDP - per capita (PPP):
Definition Field Listing Rank Order
$4,200 (2006 est.)

Population below poverty line:
Definition Field Listing
20% (2005 est.)
Household income or consumption by percentage share:
Definition Field Listing
lowest 10%: 4.4%
highest 10%: 25% (1995)
Distribution of family income - Gini index:
Definition Field Listing
34.4 (2001)
Quote:
https://www.cia.gov/cia/publications...k/geos/us.html
United States

Infant mortality rate:
Definition Field Listing Rank Order
total: 6.43 deaths/1,000 live births
male: 7.09 deaths/1,000 live births
female: 5.74 deaths/1,000 live births (2006 est.)

GDP (purchasing power parity):
Definition Field Listing Rank Order
$12.98 trillion (2006 est.)

GDP - per capita (PPP):
Definition Field Listing Rank Order
$43,500 (2006 est.)

Population below poverty line:
Definition Field Listing
12% (2004 est.)

<h3>Household income or consumption by percentage share:
Definition Field Listing
lowest 10%: 1.8%</h3>
highest 10%: 30.5% (1997)
Distribution of family income - Gini index:
Definition Field Listing
45 (2004)

Last edited by host; 03-05-2007 at 01:26 AM..
host is offline  
Old 03-05-2007, 06:58 AM   #89 (permalink)
Junkie
 
Seaver's Avatar
 
Location: Fort Worth, TX
Ustwo, I really do understand where you came from. You see that little warning bar under my name? That is because I got sick of the feces which was pouring out from another TF'er and I simply didn't care. I never apologized and I never will. By the end of your tenure, however, you were doing nothing more than flame baiting.

We saw eye to eye on most issues, and would try to mutually support each others arguments against the heavy tilt which is TF Politics. However by the end of it you didn't care and it showed, hell I hardly post here anymore. Even salmon give up after swimming up stream long enough, but simply not posting is much more civil than the one liners you were using.
__________________
"Smite the rocks with the rod of knowledge, and fountains of unstinted wealth will gush forth." - Ashbel Smith as he laid the first cornerstone of the University of Texas
Seaver is offline  
Old 03-05-2007, 08:44 AM   #90 (permalink)
Tone.
 
shakran's Avatar
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by host
....and why would you compare the hunger problem in the US to the situations in third world countries such as Thailand, with 1/5 of per capita income of the US, and Egypt, with less than 1/10 of US per capita income?
You've pointed out another example of government doublespeak. It's not hunger. It's just low food security. And the janitor is really a custodial systems engineer. And a 13 cent nut becomes a $100 hexiform rotatable surface compression unit.

You can make up any word you want for hunger but it's still hunger. Note I said hunger, not starvation. Sure, there are few, if any, people in America that are truly starving. Sure, there are many countries where the people are a whole lot hungrier than we are. But comparing the USA to egypt and saying "See? Look! We're not as bad as them so things are great" is disingenuous. It's rather like coming home to mom and dad with a D on your report card and saying "Yeah, but this other kid got an F, so compared to him I'm awesome and therefore don't need to do anything to improve!" It simply doesn't fly.

There are certainly organizations that you can turn to for help if you can't afford to buy food - - - but why should we think it's acceptable that so many Americans *have* to turn to those organizations. If the citizens in the richest country on earth can't afford to buy even cheap, crappy food for themselves, while the government drops BILLIONS into a front of the "war on terr" that in fact has nothing to do with the fictitious war on terror, what does that say about our priorities?
shakran is offline  
Old 03-05-2007, 08:54 AM   #91 (permalink)
Wehret Den Anfängen!
 
Location: Ontario, Canada
You can have low food security without being hungry. You can have low food security and be fat.

A non-reliable or unsafe source of food is a food security problem. A non-nutritious source of food is a food security problem.

I thought that most industrialized nations engage in practices to increase the price of food?
__________________
Last edited by JHVH : 10-29-4004 BC at 09:00 PM. Reason: Time for a rest.
Yakk is offline  
Old 03-05-2007, 11:31 AM   #92 (permalink)
Pissing in the cornflakes
 
Ustwo's Avatar
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Seaver
Ustwo, I really do understand where you came from. You see that little warning bar under my name? That is because I got sick of the feces which was pouring out from another TF'er and I simply didn't care. I never apologized and I never will. By the end of your tenure, however, you were doing nothing more than flame baiting.

We saw eye to eye on most issues, and would try to mutually support each others arguments against the heavy tilt which is TF Politics. However by the end of it you didn't care and it showed, hell I hardly post here anymore. Even salmon give up after swimming up stream long enough, but simply not posting is much more civil than the one liners you were using.
80% warn and proud of it Ironicly I took more heat for mentioning some wicca or pagan fest as a place to pick up easy hippy chicks than anything on politics, I guess the LARPers and their made up regilion get upset very easily, its only ok to make fun of Christianity here The current warning system as a gaping obvious flaw of course, but I won't bother with that.

You did nail it though, I didn't care anymore, but I wouldn't say I was flame baiting. If you recall ANY post of mine became a flame bait to the slavering horde, it doesn't matter on how it was presented. My posts did stand out more, but when you think of the outright flames, no bait, just complete flames, I would get without any moderator action until it was pointed out since the moderators never bothered to read those posts, I should take some solace in that my posts were at least read.

In the end I've just decided to look at the path my life has taken, and then the paths of others and wonder who's philosophy should be the rule of law. Maybe now I am 'The Man' in many eyes, but I am what I am by taking control of my own life and hard work, not by leeching off the work of others or complaining it wasn't fair.
__________________
Agents of the enemies who hold office in our own government, who attempt to eliminate our "freedoms" and our "right to know" are posting among us, I fear.....on this very forum. - host

Obama - Know a Man by the friends he keeps.
Ustwo is offline  
Old 03-05-2007, 11:45 AM   #93 (permalink)
Artist of Life
 
Ch'i's Avatar
 
I never read any of those posts, Ustwo. Seems I was wrong in thinking that you had grasped at any sense of humility as well. Not really sure why I did in the first place. Oh wait, that's right! I thought you had actually meant something when you said "With age comes wisdom, and I received a bit of a dose this last year or two."

My mistake.
Ch'i is offline  
Old 03-05-2007, 11:56 AM   #94 (permalink)
 
roachboy's Avatar
 
Super Moderator
Location: essex ma
my my, ustwo.....such Grand Pronouncements.

it is i guess nice to see that your time spent in an ashram had such effects, focussing you on the Big Picture and reducing those of us who scuttle about here to a suitably small scale.

just be careful up there in those Olympian Heights: the air is thin and it makes you dizzy the way drinking in boulder can.

one consequence of this thinness in the air is that your sentences--you know, those transmissions aimed at us Little People--dont really make sense at times. like your equating of your "life path" and that of "whose philosophy should be the rule of Law". i dont recall your having much of a philosophy.

but, as one of those Little People that you use in order to get a sense of the scale of your Magnificence, i am sure that the problem of recognizing your philosophy lay entirely with me: as does the sense of garble in your last post.

so no worries: next time you feel inclined to stride mightily downward from the Heights in order to deliver a Transmission, i'll be just as grateful as i am right now. it is always lovely to see you and your sentences. god knows there's nothing quite like reading a post from someone who imagines himself to be copping a squat on you from a great height: it really makes me feel inclined to say welcome back.
__________________
a gramophone its corrugated trumpet silver handle
spinning dog. such faithfulness it hear

it make you sick.

-kamau brathwaite

Last edited by roachboy; 03-05-2007 at 11:59 AM..
roachboy is offline  
Old 03-05-2007, 12:33 PM   #95 (permalink)
Asshole
 
The_Jazz's Avatar
 
Administrator
Location: Chicago
People, let's quit the personal criticisms. Almost all of us are faceless internet personalities, and decending into personal attacks are counterproductive to the very basis for this thread.

In other words, keep it above the belt.
__________________
"They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety." - B. Franklin
"There ought to be limits to freedom." - George W. Bush
"We have met the enemy and he is us." - Pogo
The_Jazz is offline  
Old 03-05-2007, 01:03 PM   #96 (permalink)
All important elusive independent swing voter...
 
jorgelito's Avatar
 
Location: People's Republic of KKKalifornia
Ustwo, what's wrong with being the "Man"? People reap what they sow. Not everyone gets this. *shrug*

I have a great quote (paraphrase cause I can't remember it verbatim) for you that you may like from one of my favorite statesmen:

Winston Churchill:

"If you are not a rebel by the time you are 20, then you have no heart. But if you are not part of the establishment by the time you are 30 then you have no brain."

I hope you stick around Ustwo, it brings a little balance to this place.
jorgelito is offline  
Old 03-05-2007, 03:12 PM   #97 (permalink)
Junkie
 
Location: Right here
Quote:
Originally Posted by jorgelito
I hope you stick around Ustwo, it brings a little balance to this place.
The only balance it brought was by the end of the third page there is a big red mod warning. other than that, the conversation was going fine...so it seems "where's the old heated debate" is answered in that a few specific people are no longer posting derogatory comments.
__________________
"The theory of a free press is that truth will emerge from free discussion, not that it will be presented perfectly and instantly in any one account." -- Walter Lippmann

"You measure democracy by the freedom it gives its dissidents, not the freedom it gives its assimilated conformists." -- Abbie Hoffman
smooth is offline  
Old 03-05-2007, 04:26 PM   #98 (permalink)
 
dc_dux's Avatar
 
Location: Washington DC
People come and go all the time...thats the nature of political forums.

I do find added entertainment value from those who feel a need for an extended public farewell tour.
__________________
"The perfect is the enemy of the good."
~ Voltaire
dc_dux is offline  
Old 03-05-2007, 10:46 PM   #99 (permalink)
Pissing in the cornflakes
 
Ustwo's Avatar
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by smooth
The only balance it brought was by the end of the third page there is a big red mod warning. other than that, the conversation was going fine...so it seems "where's the old heated debate" is answered in that a few specific people are no longer posting derogatory comments.
Yes remember, because its important that you only listen to people who agree with you.

You just don't get it, but thats ok.

Quote:
Originally Posted by roachboy
my my, ustwo.....such Grand Pronouncements.

it is i guess nice to see that your time spent in an ashram had such effects, focussing you on the Big Picture and reducing those of us who scuttle about here to a suitably small scale.

just be careful up there in those Olympian Heights: the air is thin and it makes you dizzy the way drinking in boulder can.

one consequence of this thinness in the air is that your sentences--you know, those transmissions aimed at us Little People--dont really make sense at times. like your equating of your "life path" and that of "whose philosophy should be the rule of Law". i dont recall your having much of a philosophy.

but, as one of those Little People that you use in order to get a sense of the scale of your Magnificence, i am sure that the problem of recognizing your philosophy lay entirely with me: as does the sense of garble in your last post.

so no worries: next time you feel inclined to stride mightily downward from the Heights in order to deliver a Transmission, i'll be just as grateful as i am right now. it is always lovely to see you and your sentences. god knows there's nothing quite like reading a post from someone who imagines himself to be copping a squat on you from a great height: it really makes me feel inclined to say welcome back.
Seems you are in Chicago now? Wanna get a beer?
__________________
Agents of the enemies who hold office in our own government, who attempt to eliminate our "freedoms" and our "right to know" are posting among us, I fear.....on this very forum. - host

Obama - Know a Man by the friends he keeps.

Last edited by Ustwo; 03-05-2007 at 10:48 PM.. Reason: Automerged Doublepost
Ustwo is offline  
Old 03-06-2007, 05:23 AM   #100 (permalink)
Getting it.
 
Charlatan's Avatar
 
Super Moderator
Location: Lion City
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ustwo
Seems you are in Chicago now? Wanna get a beer?
now there's a meeting i would like to see.
__________________
"My hands are on fire. Hands are on fire. Ain't got no more time for all you charlatans and liars."
- Old Man Luedecke
Charlatan is offline  
Old 03-06-2007, 06:24 AM   #101 (permalink)
Tone.
 
shakran's Avatar
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ustwo
Yes remember, because its important that you only listen to people who agree with you.

You just don't get it, but thats ok.
Pot, meet kettle. You have yet to consider an opposing opinion, or even admit that it might possibly have some validity.
shakran is offline  
Old 03-06-2007, 07:25 AM   #102 (permalink)
 
roachboy's Avatar
 
Super Moderator
Location: essex ma
ustwo: chicago yes.
a beverage would be interesting, sure.
pm me.
__________________
a gramophone its corrugated trumpet silver handle
spinning dog. such faithfulness it hear

it make you sick.

-kamau brathwaite
roachboy is offline  
Old 03-07-2007, 08:32 PM   #103 (permalink)
Crazy
 
Intense1's Avatar
 
Location: Music City burbs
Perhaps, Host, I was unclear about what I stated before - I have seen hunger, and it is awful. Perhaps we should define the term "true hunger". I see true hunger as being a situation in which there is no hope, either from familial, ministerial or governmental means, for alleviation of hunger. I'm writing of personal experience of actually seeing kids/adult suffering with both marasmus and kwarshkor (sp?).

I don't know about statistics regarding how horrible you feel the Bush administration has performed regarding the poor in the US. You have so many stats and quotes that I just really have no desire to work through, but from what I can see, you just are focussed on the politics of seeing conservative issues fail.

That is not what I am talking about - I'm talking about real hunger. Kids with distended bellies, kids who have begged me for water and food, kids and adults who have no one else but me (a foreigner) who can supply them with a few pennies in order to give them another meal.

I've personally walked through this, Host, in other countries. I've never seen emaciated kids in the US. Where are they? If there are emaciated kids in the US, why aren't YOU out there helping them? Or at least calling attention of the numerous government services available to them?

Where are you, Host, in the issue of hunger in America?
__________________
(none yet, still thinkin')
Intense1 is offline  
Old 03-07-2007, 08:55 PM   #104 (permalink)
Tone.
 
shakran's Avatar
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Intense1
Perhaps, Host, I was unclear about what I stated before - I have seen hunger, and it is awful. Perhaps we should define the term "true hunger". I see true hunger as being a situation in which there is no hope, either from familial, ministerial or governmental means, for alleviation of hunger. I'm writing of personal experience of actually seeing kids/adult suffering with both marasmus and kwarshkor (sp?).

I don't know about statistics regarding how horrible you feel the Bush administration has performed regarding the poor in the US. You have so many stats and quotes that I just really have no desire to work through, but from what I can see, you just are focussed on the politics of seeing conservative issues fail.

That is not what I am talking about - I'm talking about real hunger. Kids with distended bellies, kids who have begged me for water and food, kids and adults who have no one else but me (a foreigner) who can supply them with a few pennies in order to give them another meal.

I've personally walked through this, Host, in other countries. I've never seen emaciated kids in the US. Where are they? If there are emaciated kids in the US, why aren't YOU out there helping them? Or at least calling attention of the numerous government services available to them?

Where are you, Host, in the issue of hunger in America?
Once again we have someone saying that Ethiopia is worse, and therefore we don't have to do anything to fix our own problems. I never held myself to the standards of the remedial students in school, I expect my country to have the same outlook.
shakran is offline  
Old 03-07-2007, 10:42 PM   #105 (permalink)
Crazy
 
Intense1's Avatar
 
Location: Music City burbs
Quote:
Originally Posted by shakran
Once again we have someone saying that Ethiopia is worse, and therefore we don't have to do anything to fix our own problems. I never held myself to the standards of the remedial students in school, I expect my country to have the same outlook.
You misunderstand me, Shakran. I never said that we shouldn't fix our own problems, I just stated that our problems seem to pale in comparison with other problems. We in the US are concerned with making sure there are enough people above the poverty line - in other countries they are just concerned with having enough people over the HUNGER line.

If this is an "Ethiopia is worse" problem, then so be it. Sometimes you just have to concede that indeed, Ethiopia is just worse off than we are.
__________________
(none yet, still thinkin')
Intense1 is offline  
Old 03-08-2007, 09:34 AM   #106 (permalink)
Tone.
 
shakran's Avatar
 
No one disagrees that Ethiopia is worse. However I feel it is not a meaningful activity to compare the US to other countries. Either we're doing what we need to do or we are not. And the simple fact is, we are not. Those homeless shelters and soup kitchens should not be anywhere close to full every night, yet they are, all while the richest tiny fraction of our society spends their days deciding between the Bentley and the Rolls Royce - - and then deciding aww what the hell, let's get both. I have no problem with people being wealthy, but I find it unconscionable that those who are wealthy do not have to contribute their fair share to the government, which could then turn around and help empty out those shelters and kitchens.
shakran is offline  
Old 03-08-2007, 10:39 AM   #107 (permalink)
All important elusive independent swing voter...
 
jorgelito's Avatar
 
Location: People's Republic of KKKalifornia
But "fair share" can be tricky to assess. It is subjective.
jorgelito is offline  
Old 03-08-2007, 11:04 AM   #108 (permalink)
Banned
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by jorgelito
But "fair share" can be tricky to assess. It is subjective.
how are these CIA "fact book" statistics, "subjective"?
Quote:
https://www.cia.gov/cia/publications...k/geos/sw.html
Sweden

Household income or consumption by percentage share:
lowest 10%: 3.7%
highest 10%: 20.1% (1992)
Distribution of family income - Gini index:
25 (2000)
Quote:
https://www.cia.gov/cia/publications...k/geos/ja.html
Japan

Household income or consumption by percentage share:
lowest 10%: 4.8%
highest 10%: 21.7% (1993)
Distribution of family income - Gini index:
38.12 (2002)
Quote:
https://www.cia.gov/cia/publications...k/geos/gm.html
Germany

Household income or consumption by percentage share:
lowest 10%: 3.6%
highest 10%: 25.1% (1997)
Distribution of family income - Gini index:
28.3 (2000)
Contrast the "share" of the bottom 10 percent, with that of the top ten percent, and the GINI index number, of the three above countries, with the data of the three countries, displayed below......

Quote:
https://www.cia.gov/cia/publications...k/geos/br.html
Brazil

Household income or consumption by percentage share:
lowest 10%: 0.7%
highest 10%: 31.27% (2002)
Distribution of family income - Gini index:
56.7 (2005)
Quote:
https://www.cia.gov/cia/publications...k/geos/mx.html
Mexico

Household income or consumption by percentage share:
lowest 10%: 1.6%
highest 10%: 35.6% (2002)
Distribution of family income - Gini index:
54.6 (2000)
Quote:
https://www.cia.gov/cia/publications...k/geos/us.html
United States

Household income or consumption by percentage share:
lowest 10%: 1.8%
highest 10%: 30.5% (1997)
Distribution of family income - Gini index:
45 (2004)
Can a politcal philosophy, or a politcal party, sustain itself by embracing the idea that the distribution of wealth in the US is fairer, or sounder for the politcal status quo, if it matches the arrangements in Mexico and Brazil, closer than those of Germany, Sweden, and Japan? Is the top ten percent in the US Mexico, and Japan, better off, from a security and politcal influence standpoint, goinf forward....than the top ten percent in Japan, Sweden, and Germany?

Are the lower class inhabitants of the US. Mexico,and Brazil, lazier, or less productive, than their counterparts in Sweden, Germany, and Japan.

Are the top ten percent in the US, Brazil, and Mexico, smarter, or more productive...or are they simply, and probably temoporarily, in possession of more politcal influence than their counterparts in Japan, Germany and Sweden?
host is offline  
Old 03-08-2007, 11:30 AM   #109 (permalink)
All important elusive independent swing voter...
 
jorgelito's Avatar
 
Location: People's Republic of KKKalifornia
What are you talking about host? Your stats don't prove squat. I was referring to taxes cause that's what I assumed we talking about when it comes to "fair share". So yes, apparently it is very subjective because we all have different views as to what is subjective.
jorgelito is offline  
Old 03-10-2007, 06:37 PM   #110 (permalink)
Insane
 
nofnway's Avatar
 
Location: under the freeway bridge
Quote:
Originally Posted by StephenSa
I've been absent from the forum for a while due to many personal issues and when I was active I generally didn't post on the politics forum because it seemed so very inflammatory on both ends of the politcal spectrum. Now that I've returned, I see things are a bit more civil. The biggest change I see though is the far right conservative side seems to be more silent. So what gives? There are still some lefties that sound off as much as before, the right though seem to have stifled their bark a bit. I'm just curious, have the events we've witnessed over the past few years given one doubts? Perhaps we grow in wisdom through experience ( Bush has still to learn that, pity.) Where is all the piss and vinegar? I guess we're saving it to blame on the next administration. I dunno, I just don't see all the crowing about Bush I used to see posted. Truly, I don't wish to be crass, but have any minds been changed, or are we just quietly scraping off the "W" stickers from our trucks?

I can't speak for anyone else but I don't post much because frankly the line by line dissection of each others posts and sources is TEDIOUS.

I get more enjoyment out of the first few posts in a thread when people are on point and projecting their opinions (right or wrong) from original thoughts rather than sniping the other guy and getting so far afield from the original topic that it is forgotten.
__________________
"Iron rusts with disuse, stagnant water loses its purity and in cold water freezes. Even so does inaction sap the vigor of the mind"
Leonardo Da Vinci
nofnway is offline  
Old 09-07-2007, 12:55 AM   #111 (permalink)
Tilted
 
Necrosis's Avatar
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ustwo
While I don't think there was much 'unacceptable' in my last month, after having been called every name in the book on this forum including cock sucker for my beliefs I can't say I really care if any liberals think I was flaming them.
With the degree of civilized discourse that our members present here, the term "cocksucker" must have been immediately followed by a Seinfeldian "Not that there's anything wrong with that."

No? How shocking.
Necrosis is offline  
Old 09-07-2007, 02:37 AM   #112 (permalink)
I Confess a Shiver
 
Plan9's Avatar
 
Wow, it IS like Clash of the Titans up in here.

With more than one Krakken!

(drops his humble baked goods, runs for his life)
__________________
Whatever you can carry.

"You should not drink... and bake."
Plan9 is offline  
Old 09-07-2007, 11:35 AM   #113 (permalink)
Deja Moo
 
Elphaba's Avatar
 
Location: Olympic Peninsula, WA
You brought doughnuts?
__________________
"You can't ignore politics, no matter how much you'd like to." Molly Ivins - 1944-2007
Elphaba is offline  
Old 09-15-2007, 02:39 AM   #114 (permalink)
let me be clear
 
ottopilot's Avatar
 
Location: Waddy Peytona
edit

Last edited by ottopilot; 12-27-2007 at 08:37 AM..
ottopilot is offline  
Old 09-16-2007, 09:26 AM   #115 (permalink)
Conspiracy Realist
 
Sun Tzu's Avatar
 
Location: The Event Horizon
It also appears the touchy subject of Israel / Palestine is avoided now. That seemed to lead to real nasty dialogue.
__________________
To confine our attention to terrestrial matters would be to limit the human spirit.- Stephen Hawking
Sun Tzu is offline  
Old 10-15-2007, 01:44 PM   #116 (permalink)
Playing With Fire
 
DaveOrion's Avatar
 
Location: Disaster Area
Now this thread was an interesting read, very informative. I'm glad to know I'm not alone in my view on certain modular TFP matters......dont ask.

80% warn on Ustwo??? Obviously I don't call members cocksuckers quite as much as I should. I feel inadequate with no warnings at all.....

Quote:
Originally Posted by Crompsin
Wow, it IS like Clash of the Titans up in here.

With more than one Krakken!

(drops his humble baked goods, runs for his life)
Come back!! I want a fuckin doughnut to you cocksucker!!
__________________
Syriana...have you ever tried liquid MDMA?....Liquid MDMA? No....Arash, when you wanna do this?.....After prayer...

Last edited by DaveOrion; 10-15-2007 at 01:46 PM.. Reason: Automerged Doublepost
DaveOrion is offline  
Old 10-16-2007, 03:12 PM   #117 (permalink)
Junkie
 
loquitur's Avatar
 
Location: NYC
I've been away from this forum for a while and it looks like things are proceeding apace...........

Carry on, tallyho, pip pip..........
loquitur is offline  
Old 10-17-2007, 05:29 PM   #118 (permalink)
Illusionary
 
tecoyah's Avatar
 
I was thinking (yeah...I know, bad Idea), but for me at least the lack of serious debate comes down to two things:

1) the vast majority of people agree for the most part with my stance, thus making debate pointless.

2) those who do not agree have debated with me on the issues, and are extremely negative for the most part, making debate again...pointless.
__________________
Holding onto anger is like grasping a hot coal with the intent of throwing it at someone else; you are the one who gets burned. - Buddha
tecoyah is offline  
Old 10-17-2007, 06:28 PM   #119 (permalink)
Junkie
 
loquitur's Avatar
 
Location: NYC
Tecoyah, I guess that means you're a uniter, not a divider! <ducking>
loquitur is offline  
Old 10-17-2007, 06:44 PM   #120 (permalink)
Tilted
 
Necrosis's Avatar
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by tecoyah
I was thinking (yeah...I know, bad Idea), but for me at least the lack of serious debate comes down to two things:

1) the vast majority of people agree for the most part with my stance, thus making debate pointless.

2) those who do not agree have debated with me on the issues, and are extremely negative for the most part, making debate again...pointless.
Perhaps there is yet another reason.

A search of posts containing the word "Abramoff":
Showing results 1 to 40 of 91

A search of posts by Host containing the word "Abramoff":
Showing results 1 to 40 of 58

In these posts, Host was able to delve out incredibly minute details of public figures he dislikes. Contrast that to a search for posts by Host containing the word "Hsu":
Showing results 1 to 3 of 3
Unfortunately, none of these refer to NORMAN Hsu.

A man who can tell you Abramoff's uncle's shoe size, and who posts at length of real and imagined transgressions by Republican politicians, does not stimulate me to debate if he has not heard of Norman Hsu. For that matter, a large majority of other posters on this forum has no interest in lawbreakers who are not named Abramoff, Cheney, Rove, or Bush.

Why in the world would anyone consider debating people with such closed mindsets? Perhaps one of Host's lengthy posts, this time dishing on Norman Hsu, would stimulate animated debate.
Necrosis is offline  
 

Tags
debate, heated


Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On



All times are GMT -8. The time now is 11:55 PM.

Tilted Forum Project

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Search Engine Optimization by vBSEO 3.6.0 PL2
© 2002-2012 Tilted Forum Project

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84 85 86 87 88 89 90 91 92 93 94 95 96 97 98 99 100 101 102 103 104 105 106 107 108 109 110 111 112 113 114 115 116 117 118 119 120 121 122 123 124 125 126 127 128 129 130 131 132 133 134 135 136 137 138 139 140 141 142 143 144 145 146 147 148 149 150 151 152 153 154 155 156 157 158 159 160 161 162 163 164 165 166 167 168 169 170 171 172 173 174 175 176 177 178 179 180 181 182 183 184 185 186 187 188 189 190 191 192 193 194 195 196 197 198 199 200 201 202 203 204 205 206 207 208 209 210 211 212 213 214 215 216 217 218 219 220 221 222 223 224 225 226 227 228 229 230 231 232 233 234 235 236 237 238 239 240 241 242 243 244 245 246 247 248 249 250 251 252 253 254 255 256 257 258 259 260 261 262 263 264 265 266 267 268 269 270 271 272 273 274 275 276 277 278 279 280 281 282 283 284 285 286 287 288 289 290 291 292 293 294 295 296 297 298 299 300 301 302 303 304 305 306 307 308 309 310 311 312 313 314 315 316 317 318 319 320 321 322 323 324 325 326 327 328 329 330 331 332 333 334 335 336 337 338 339 340 341 342 343 344 345 346 347 348 349 350 351 352 353 354 355 356 357 358 359 360