This blog originally founded by Blogger who holds a theological degree and a doctorate in Counseling Psychology. Taught Psychology for 32 years and is now Professor Emeritus. Is a board-certified psychologist and was awarded the Lifetime Achievement Award in his profession. Ministered as a chaplain, and pastored Baptist and Episcopal churches. Publications cover the integration of psychology and theology. Served in the Army, the Merchant Marines and the Peace Corps.

Thursday, August 30, 2012

VENT PAGE LIII - The Love Bug Page.......

  Vent Page 53! - We thought that we would share some info on the CH=53 Marine Corps helicopter -
Or
Maybe the Czech ZB-53 Machine gun...

But, in recognition of the love and harmony so frequently displayed among the commentators on these Vent Pages....we decided that it was time for a page to honor that spirit of good will and love of our fellow posters with something more appropriate......THUS, THE LOVE BUG PAGE!
         =             =          =             =              =


Whenever the number of posts on a vent page make it cumbersome to navigate, a new vent page is started. This is number FIFTY-THREE in our series!

VENT PAGES are handy for posting of off-topic posts, rants, raves, rages, etc,  messages of love and peace, etc which might not be appropriate on other threads where adults are having serious discussions. Childish rant? Need to call another poster a name?Just feel like spouting off?  Childish display of love? Need to give another poster a hug? Just feel like singing  Kum ba yah?  Or even if you have something to say and there doesn't seem to be any other logical place to say it....THIS PAGE IS FOR YOU!

And, when we think of '53, we think of the cars of that era! One of my favorites for that year was the 53 Studebaker and I remember the first time I saw one that had the hot rodder's  popular engine conversion to the big Cadillac V-8 - the hybrid known as the "Studelac"!

This low slung, sporty looking coupe later morphed into the supercharged factory hot rod known as the "Golden Hawk"!

92 comments:

Happily Married said...

I would like to send a hug out to Johnny Rico - I think i might have offended him as he has not provided his typical retort to my last several comments. I do wonder about the issue of income equality in this country and how/if that is being addressed. I found this chart on the subject. There is an eerie level of income equality similar to the crash of 29 that is going on today. The republican mantra is to not tax the wealthy as they are teh job creators - the more wealth they have - the more jobs are created. The chart shows that the wealth of the job creators has been steadily increasing for the past 35 years - so why aren't they creating the jobs? http://www.rebelcapitalist.com/index.php/site/permalink/capitalism-is-flawed-part-2/

guy faulkes said...

HM, I am not Rico, but the reason entrepreneurs are not creating jobs is the possibility of Obama's tax hikes that would kill small business. "The wealthy" is an undefined term that would effect many if not most small businesses, if their gross yearly income is smaller than, say, $200,000.00. Therefore, they are waiting on trying to increase their businesses until they actually know what the government is going to do to them. Many may decide to go out of business as have many doctors if Obamacare is not repealed. This will mean even fewer jobs.

Rico posts as her job allows her. However, I think I will get some popcorn to enjoy while you two go at it after she reads your post.

Happily Married said...

Guy -
Whenever someone puts forth a statement like "tax hikes that would kill small business" I do some research - FACT CHECK:Still, there are limitations with this data because the number of tax returns filed by “flow-through entities” — such as law firms — has soared in recent years. We have also previously noted that a recent Treasury Department study, using a broad definition and a narrow definition of small businesses, found that 11 percent or 8 percent of the returns, respectively, showing income of more than $200,000 had some small business income. Under the broad definition, these businesses represented 64 percent of small business income; under the more narrow definition, such firms had 57 percent of small business income.

But Romney’s assertion that taxes affect business hiring decisions is simplistic. When we have written about this issue before, small business owners specifically rejected the idea that higher taxes would “kill jobs.” They noted that income that is used for business expenses — such as employee wages — are fully deductible. “I invested more in my business, especially as tax day drew near, because the alternative was giving a big slice of the money to Uncle Sam,” one small business owner said. This is from the Washington Post - and before you claim liberal slant please tell me specifically which part is not true.

Anonymous said...

It's hardly enterainment! More like watching Rico swat flies!

Happily Married said...

Another snippet from the fact check article: As for the statements about Obama raising taxes on “job creators,” we have written before that Republicans tend to exaggerate this effect. The Joint Committee on Taxation has determined that only 3 percent of all “small businesses” would be affected by Obama’s proposal, a point the president noted on Monday. However, that 3 percent does account for 50 percent of the estimated $1 trillion in business income reported in 2011.

guy faulkes said...

HM, according to many economists, fear of increased taxation along with over regulation are the major factors of why entrepreneurs are not investing. They are holding back to see what happens and how it effects their bottom line. If the impact is as negative as many of them fear, they may go out of business instead of taking the risk.

http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/business/taxes/may_2008/60_say_tax_hikes_hurt_economy

These 60% are the people that control the economy.

matt said...

HM, I know that income inequality may not be the point of your discussion now, but i am curious...and since it is a vent page...I'll ask because I have been trying to get my head around this topic.

What would be an "appropriate" gap in income for America? If the top 1% "only" had 40% of the wealth, is that acceptable? What exactly are you looking to change?

The way I see it is this. The easiest way to make money is to have money. If my bank account is $10 billion. The interest on my money market account may be more than you make for 20 years. It's just basic math. How do you propose we make large sums of money not earn interest as fast as money in your or my bank accounts?

Opoib said...

Since taxes came up here. I have a question it is long so be patient. If I am a big money earner say I have a ship building company like the Steinbrenners did.

I employ hundred or thousands of people. Hence I pay in tons of taxes payroll and unemployment and state and federal employee taxes so on and so on. From this ship building I make 250 million profit for my self a year.

Part two I am a rich guy who became this way by being fortunate enough to have successful parents they left me a lot of money. That money is my primary source of income because I invest it. I pay taxes on it as capitol gains. I do not proved thousands of jobs but some.

But I also take a bigger risk then most due to the fact if my investments fail I loose the investment and the potential earnings.

Who should pay a higher tax rate on their earnings if both made 250 million a year?

"My Kind" Opoib

matt said...

Opiob,

If you create a business, such as an LLC or S-Corp etc etc as your shipbuilder did, there are so many tax shelters that with out a doubt, his money could effectively be taxed at a lower rate.

If he was smart he would not just pay himself 250 million into his personal bank account... but maybe that is getting off topic.

We are saying, at the end of the day that each person gets 250 million in their personal bank account, correct?

For me both should have the same tax rate.

Opoib said...

Thanks Matt, I appreciate the reply. I differ in that I think that a man who is an employer not just an investor should be at a different rate.

The employer is more of a contributor to society and he makes his money running a company not solely through investing.

As an employer my self I can see where your comming from, but the tax brackets are completely different. If my income was from capitol gains on investments I would pay a much lower rate then I do now.

The LLC only protects company debts from attaching to your personal property or income the assets of the business are still at stake.

When I was a sole proprietor my tax rate was even higher than as an incorporated company.

Anonymous said...

So, Opiob, you don't approve of a flat tax and want to penalize the employer? What happens when he decides not to keep his company going because its not worth the trouble?

Sarkazein said...

Obama's abject ignorance of capitalism is spreading.
The investors infuse money into the "employer's" company. Without the investors there would be little growth for hiring, purchase of machinery, and expansion. The investor puts at risk, money he has already paid taxes on. Capital, from investors, fuels capitalism.
Envy is the liberal keyword.

Anonymous said...

http://www.woai.com/mostpopular/story/Armed-bystander-stops-stabbing-outside-school/6zTYMpy8pUOeyrbElEBOTQ.cspx

Anonymous said...

http://www.mauinews.com/page/content.detail/id/564441/Crime-climbs-in-Australia-after-widespread-gun-ban.html?nav=18

Opoib said...

Anon 9:58 read my post again it is question i asked who should pay more the investor or the employer. Try reading it again.

Anonymous said...

The investor and the employer are the same person in most small businesses.

Opoib said...

Anon 11:23 you can to be that obtuse. I made the examples very clear two different people.

Who should pay more get it ? it is not a right or left question it is one of value.

Anonymous said...

All right, then both should pay the same proportional amount with a flat tax.

Opoib said...

GUY lets continue here as it is more appropriate. I will be happy to answer you after you answer mine that I asked you 1st.

Is it right in your opinion to baptize somebody 11 months after they die even if it goes against all they stood for while alive ?

But maybe we should move the conversation to the vent page out of respect. I do not want to offend people by replying in a thread you hijacked.

Johnny Rico said...

Happily Dumb said:

"I think i might have offended him as he has not provided his typical retort to my last several comments"

You didn't offend me, I just forgot you were there.

Here's a typically moronic comment by the village idiot (Happily Dumb)

"The chart shows that the wealth of the job creators has been steadily increasing for the past 35 years - so why aren't they creating the jobs?"

To ask this question belies an even more morbid level of uber stupidity than most liberals are capable of. I'll put it in base terminology so you won't have to go ask your mom for help.

Corporations have trouble creating jobs for several reasons. One is regulation by the government. Regulations like emissions, environmental considerations, permits, and hundreds of other liberal (you) sponsored roadblocks cause corporations to either not expand, or if they do, expand overseas.

Another good reason my petulant lemming is because of taxation. The government taxes corporations to the point it is often not wise to take on more manpower or expand because of taxes.

Another good reason my liberal socialist sheep of an idiot-friend is because of unions. Collective bargaining places burdensome restrictions on corporations to the point they (are you catching on now?) either don't add manpower or travel overseas.

You see, Happily Numb, the basic reasons listed above are fairly elementary concepts. To ask why corporations don't add jobs is like asking the abominable snowman why he doesn't live closer to the equator. Pure, unadulterated stupidity.

Your ole pal

Johnny Rico

Sarah Marshall

Johnny Rico said...

Happily Stupid,

Now that you're over the shock of being pounded into oblivion again, we need to revist a past post or two. I seem to remember you accused me of "attacking" you. When I turned the tables on you in most eloquent fashion and showed you were actually attacking me (any form of socialism/communism is an automatic attack), you ran to Blogger and asked him to stop me.

What you missed here was the fact I redirected your thought process and concerns. Notice folks how Happily Numb doesn't accuse me of attacking him anymore. He is relegated to whining about being called a name or some such. Happily Dumb, do you realize I did that to you? Johnny Rico has actually compromised your thought process! Great stuff.

In addition, as he was unable to come up with any substantive oratory regarding less gun accidents in the United States with far more guns, he has jumped to other subjects. The United States has less gun accidents with far more guns than at any time in modern history. Amazing how we as a culture are safer with more guns. LOL!!

I was out shooting this weekend with my boyfriend. I was shooting an AR-15 and noticed that I first shot a 10 round magazine followed by a 30 rounder. I seem to remember Happily Stupid saying I would need a higher level to training to use the 30 rounder. To me it seems the same to insert, fire, and remove a 30 round magazine as it does a 10 rounder.

Typical liberal - speak from the posterior end when they don't know what else to say.

LOL!!

Your ole pal

Johnny Rico

PS When you were growing up, did something happen to you that caused stupidity as a rule and not the exception. My guess is a sheltered childhood with a liberal father figure. How about it happily dumb (notice lower case).

Gary Baker

Nobody said...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3h8O7V-WxWQ&feature=g-vrec

Reagan v. Obama - Social Economics

Love this line from the end:
"A government big enough to give you everything you want is big enough to take away everything you have."

Opoib said...

Gus Faukles, I have tried two times o to move this thread here but you continue you hijack it.

guy faulkes said...
Not in my opinion, because other people cannot give him to God. He had to give himself before he died. Now, what is your objection, as you have hijacked the thread again, Opoib.
September 1, 2012 6:44 PM"

To answer yours I do not consider abortion murder never had. I personally can not have one and until I can I will refuse to tell someone to do something I can not. my self.

You can continue to call me LPOV or a liberal to try and insult me. It does not and just makes you look obtuse and petty.

I am and always will be a Libertarian and as such one of the core beliefs I have is I do not interfere in the business of others unless it affects me directly. Is that clear enough?

Johnny Rico said...

ObloPLOP! said:

"To answer yours I do not consider abortion murder never had."

This shows how off kilter you are.

What would you say to a baby as it smiled up at you just before a doctor snapped its neck with his hands? Would you say "You deserve to die you little bastard"? Or maybe, "It wasn't a baby yet anyway"? Or maybe even "He deserved it".

What would you say PLOP!. You killers try and claim gun owners to be irrational and dangerous, but killing babies as they show emotion is downright sick.

We have long known the left is out there so, unfortunately, this is not surprising. LOL!!

Ready to dodge another tough question or two OploPLOP!!! LOL!!!

Your ole pal

Sarah Lehman

Johnny Rico

PS Stings don't it

Johnny Rico said...

Guy,

When you were talking about popcorn it made me want some. I popped some the old way with vegtable oil in a pot. It tastes so much better that way. I bet Happily Dumb is slobbering like a rat with hemroids right about now. Perhaps when the rat bastard gets straight enough to post something, we can have some fun. LOL!!!

Your ole pal

Johnny "Orville Redenbacher" Rico

Sarah Lehaman

Opoib said...

Guy Faulkes, I think this may apply more to you then anyone I know.

http://i.imgur.com/qPWhd.jpg

Johnny Rico said...

OploPLOP!,

This may apply more to you than anyone I know:

PLOP!


LOL (tears)

Your dearest pal

Johnny Rico

Johnny Rico said...

Watauga County Commissioners:

This one is for you slugs with the exception of hero Vince Gable who does try and restore freedom to Americans.

Here it is:

http://www.guns.com/new-missouri-legislation-10841.html

I posted this link to Missouri in hopes you'll take a look at how freedom has been restored to the PEOPLE in Missouri. I know it's a bit of a stretch for you to think of applying it here in North Carolina, but the fact is, it can be done. In Missouri, citizens are empowered a bit by legislation. Here in NC, we are treated as subjects, not citizens. This is because of idiots like you.

We've been screamig at you to DO SOMETHING over the past 2 years. With Gable excepted, you've done NOTHING. We keep saying "DO SOMETHING", yet you sit around like the status quo sheep that you are. Sheep.

The people of this county elected you in deference to the awful liberal commission before you. In other words, voters were a bit edgy over the extremist policies formulated by Democrats who wished to rule every aspect of our lives. In you dolts come, and the county government immediately reverts to status quo. You neither give more freedom nor take any away (except for treating citizens like crimials at the Watauga County Courthouse). This status quo mentality, in hopes you'll be re-elected for not pissing anyone off, is, in actuality, just as bad as the commission before you.

Again, how about a right to hunt, shoot, and trap law for the state of NC? If we look at what's happening in states like New Jersey or California, we see hunting and shooting rights going by the wayside. In California, liberals are ready to ban hunting with hound dogs. Would you want the NC state dog, the Plott Hound, prevented from hunting game? An amendment to the state Constitution giving exclusive rights to the PEOPLE to hunt, shoot, carry guns, and trap furbearing animals would go a long way in staving off future attacks by liberals. And the future attacks are always one election away. When you slugs are voted out one day, and a liberal commission replaces you, the assult on individual freedoms will continue.

How about DOING SOMETHING about it right now? Only been asking for two years now. Why is it falling on deaf ears? Is it because you folks are RINOs maybe?

Vote them out folks. They just aren't cutting it.

Johnny Rico

PS Is it too much to ask for an increase in personal freedoms for Americans?

Johnny Rico said...

And now a good one for the liberal socialist sheep who love to ignore the Gulf Oil Spill which took place under the empty seat hussein obama (notice lower case) administration. In perusing my boyfriend's September copy of Field and Stream, I came across an interview with Ryan Lambert a fishing lodge owner on the Missippi Delta (page 54). He says:

"I would take another Katrina (his lodge was underwater for 43 days after Katrina) before I'd take another oil spill. I can fix my infrastructure, but I can't fix the damage from an oil spill".

"The oil did not come in for a long time. Then you'd see tar balls, then oil on top of the water, then dead fish, dilphins, pelicans, turltes. Now, shrimp are down 60 to 80 percent. Crabbers are complaining".

How come the hussein obama administration isn't held accountable for this ecological disaster which took place on his watch? The Gulf was never declared a disaster area, Dutch skimmer ships were never brought in, and the president did nothing for over 100 days except say he was going to kick an oil companies ass. The only ass kicking I see going on is high gas prices at the pump which certainly ain't kicking an oil companies ass.

Anyway, the gulf oil disaster is being swept under the rug by liberal socialists. Funny how they claim to be such environmentalists, yet they don't want to seem to talk about tough environmental subjects when it doesn't suit them. Typical liberals. And, as usual, hunters, fishermen and trappers are left to pay for the environment.

Ask yourself. Where is Greenpeace, Defenders of Wildlife or the Sierra Club when it comes to the Gulf Oil Spill? I haven't heard a peep out of those fringe left idiots. Like pov sheep, Happily Dumb, and Watauga Watch, they only attack safe subjects.

This ought to be interesting..

Your ole pal

Johnny Rico

PS I won

Johnny Rico said...

Here's a great question for Happily Dumb:

How come president clinton wouldn't send tanks to Mogadishu but DID send tanks to Waco?

Does this seem a bit odd, strange, or maybe even not right to you?

This ought to be interesting......


Your ole pal

Johnny Rico

PS Guy, do you have some popcorn ready for when this idiot tries to umm and ahh his way out of this one. LOL!!! What a dunce.

Johnny Rico said...

any liberal sheep wanna say something....anything......LOL!!!

Anonymous said...

Anon 11:50 the only burning that will happen to me after death is if i am cremated.
It is scientifically proven that a dead body feels no pain. I will not be aware of it when it happens so your question is a moot point.


I replied to you here to avoid being a further part of Guy hijacking that thread.

guy faulkes said...

Opoib/LPOV, I am curious as to your logic of why you think this would apply to me more than anyone you know.

http://i.imgur.com/qPWhd.jpg

Please explain with examples.

And by the way, you do not know me so does that mean it does not apply to anyone?

Johnny Rico said...

OploPLOP!

You've some difficult questions to answer. How about my question on smiling babies being killed during late term abortions. How exactly would you kill the baby as it smiled at you? Tough question isn't it? Is that why you ignore it so strongly? LOL!!!

Your ole pal

Johnny Rico

Opoib said...

Guy, it applies to you in the context that you are the most vocal denier of women's rights on this blog.

Explain to me how you will provide for the resulting unwanted children that will be brought to the world, if women are made to have children they did not want to have?

My self as a fiscal conservative does not want to see anymore children or single mothers on welfare that is a large enough tax burden on me now.

Anonymous said...

Opoib is onto something here! Maybe we should abort both the child and the welfare mother too! That would save taxpayers even more money.

Johnny Rico said...

Yet another question dodge by OploPLOP! Care to tell us how you would do it? Again, difficult question isn't it? LOL!!

Your ole pal

Johnny Rico

PS Why is it we see the same pattern here by liberal socialist sheep povs, OploPLOP!, Happily Dumb and other liberal socialists? Failing to answer simple questions. LOL!!!!

Amused said...

Anon 5:03, I thought that was you. Your the Anon that got Called out befoe for saying somebody should have been aborted. How did that work out for you ?

guy faulkes said...

Opoib/LPOV, I have denied no woman any right. No one, man or woman has the right to commit murder. Millions of people believe abortion is the murder of the unborn. We are going to get this murder stopped through legislation.

You did not answer the question. You do not know me. Why do you think your link would apply to me? Do you know how many charitable contributions I have made to children's causes?

Have you ever heard of adoption?

Do you think people might be more concerned about not making the woman pregnant if abortion was not so convenient as it is?

Do you really think a child would be better off dead than on welfare, or is (as you posted) your financial well being more important than the life of the child?

What about the man's rights? What if he wants the child? It is half his genetic makeup.

Reader said...

I'm sure God is smiling on your comment, Guy.

Wolf's Head said...

From Drudge, just to tick off the lefties.....

http://www.charlotteobserver.com/2012/09/02/3497857/group-says-it-found-30000-dead.html

Voter ID IS A NECESSITY.

Opoib said...

Guy Faulkes you asked this. I think this a pot meet kettle situation. The conservatives are against forcing the church or employers to pay for birth control, yet you post this

"Do you think people might be more concerned about not making the woman pregnant if abortion was not so convenient as it is?

I only speak for myself. I make no claim to speak for millions. It is not my right to tell a woman what to do with her body.

If a woman has an abortion it is her choice, if she doesn't it is her choice .

That is my stand on the subject. Now please commence psychoanalysis of that statement to tell me so much more about my self .

guy faulkes said...

How about telling a woman she cannot murder her child, Opoib/LPOV?

How about answering the other questions and tell me if it were not for abortion (many times free) would these people pay for their own birth control? Condoms are a few bucks a box.

guy faulkes said...

Wolf, did you know you have to have picture ID to get in the Democrat convention, but they do not think you need it to vote. Interesting, is it not?

Sarkazein said...

Opoib- Society says a woman cannot commit suicide. Society says a woman cannot inject illegal drugs in her body. Society says a woman cannot take illegal drugs while pregnant.
What you are saying, is - it is OK for women to drink heavily and use recreational drugs while pregnant. After all, we can't tell a woman what to do with her body. We tell her she cannot drink or use tobacco until she is 18 or 21. We tell her she cannot get a tattoo until she is 18 or 21... but kill your pre-born baby.... no problem.

Sarkazein said...

A Leftist woman said; "You can't tell me what I can do with my body, but I can tell you to supply my birth control pills."

Anonymous said...

It isn't her body that's the issue. It is the little human being that is growing inside her body.

Opoib said...

Anon 10:56 would it be different if she had a little alien growing inside her body?

Nice try to put the human disclaimer in your post to make it more sympathetic.

Opoib said...

Sarkazien, when you speak for me as you did in your last post you make your self look the fool as much as Guy Faulkes does.

I never said anything you wrote. Please show me where I have. If I have I will apologize for being wrong, if not your lying plain and simple.

Please show me where I have said any of these things you attribute to me

"- it is OK for women to drink heavily and use recreational drugs while pregnant. After all, we can't tell a woman what to do with her body. We tell her she cannot drink or use tobacco until she is 18 or 21. We tell her she cannot get a tattoo until she is 18 or 21... but kill your pre-born baby.... no problem."

I made my stance clear several times in this thread, but I will reiterate again for the hate fueled ones.

I am not nearly important enough or wise enough to be able to decide and then enforce by law what choice a woman should be able to make.

My Kind Opoib

Opoib said...

Sarkazien, here is one for you. As far as suicide goes . As a libertarian I am for it being legal with physician assistance. If somebody decided they want to go they should have that choice.

It is not my place to tell them they have to suffer or stay alive if they do not want to.

Blogger said...

One of our best friends, supporting Democrat Convention speaker Sandra Fluke, said Fluke’s birth control pills would cost her $130 per month. So I looked it up and sent this link to our friend:
The Truth

Mike D. said...

Opoib,

I am not making a comment one way or another here about abortion itself, but I do have a question about the logical basis of one of the pillars of the pro-abortion position. Within a human body, every cell (not counting parasites and mutualistic pro-biotic organisms like lactobacillus), yes every cell, contains the same DNA. Every cell is part of the organism, part of the whole.

But the DNA of a fetus is different from that of the 'mother-to-be'. Considering a human fetus to be part of the mother suggests one of two things. Either 1) anything contained wholly within something else is part of and property of the larger vessel or 2) anything which begins its existence within a larger vessel is part of that vessel until it leaves.

Both lines of reasoning fail when logic is applied. 1) When I get on a bus, I do not become part of the bus, and the bus does not own me. 2) If the fetus is part of the mother until it exits her body in a hospital, then the existence of the baby begins while it is wholly contained inside the hospital, making it part of, and property of, the hospital, until the time of its release.

That is the problem with saying that life begins at birth. It provides an emotional exception to logic and reason.

We may kill the caterpillar which eats our garden but remark upon, admire, and enjoy the beauty of the resulting butterfly. But when it comes to writing laws, those emotional exceptions must be removed. If the butterfly is in danger of becoming extinct, you had better believe that it will become just as illegal to kill the caterpillar as the butterfly itself.

Sarkazein said...

Opoib- So what? My comment was about society, not one liberal's opinion. Society has made suicide pretty much illegal. Society can and does tell a woman (or man) what she (or he) can do with her body. I believe in protecting the pre-born, who gets no say in the matter.

Opoib said...

Sarkazien thats for admitting you are a liar. I have gained a little respect for you.

"What you are saying, is - it is OK for women to drink heavily and use recreational drugs while pregnant. After all, we can't tell a woman what to do with her body. We tell her she cannot drink or use tobacco until she is 18 or 21. We tell her she cannot get a tattoo until she is 18 or 21... but kill your pre-born baby.... no problem.

Your statement starts with you stating "I" said something.

My Kind Opoib

Anonymous said...

Alien in her body? What is that about. We are talking about aborting a human being, not an alien and not anything else. Try to stay on topic. If you can't talk sense then do us all a favor and STFU!

Alien....Jesus!

Opoib said...

Mike D, I think you are posing a question to me that I have answered.

I am not pro or anti abortion, what I am is anti telling every woman in the country that she has no choice with what to do with a pregnancy she may or may not want.

Opoib said...

Anon 12:55 you felt the need to qualify the pregnancy as a "human" in her body.

Why did you need to add in the "human" part in your post?

And nice intelligent retort "STFU" That shows volumes of intellect and eloquence and thought while posting.

Sarkazein said...

MikeD wrote- "I am not making a comment one way or another here about abortion itself..."

Of course not.

Opoib said...

Mike D, thanks go out to you for addressing me with out profanity or calling me a political party I am not or any other attempt's to engage in arguing for arguing sake.


We may not agree on the topic but you dealt with that in a mature demeanor.

To me your not one of the ones here trying to turn conservatives off of voting for their party.

Thanks Opoib

Mike D. said...

Opoib,

Really, I wasn't asking a question. As an independent with Libertarian-leaning views, for many years I have also held the view that I really shouldn't have the right to vote on the legality of an operation which I cannot possibly have performed on me. But if my logic, as stated above, is sound and reasonable, then as a Libertarian, do I not have a responsibility to protect the rights of others, or should it only be my own rights which concern me?

Well, ok... I guess you succeeded in beating a question out of me. :-)

Sarkazein said...


"What you are saying, is - it is OK for women to drink heavily and use recreational drugs while pregnant. After all, we can't tell a woman what to do with her body. We tell her she cannot drink or use tobacco until she is 18 or 21. We tell her she cannot get a tattoo until she is 18 or 21... but kill your pre-born baby.... no problem.

Opoib said- "
I only speak for myself. I make no claim to speak for millions. It is not my right to tell a woman what to do with her body.

Opoib said...

Sarkazien, You admitted to lying once that's enough. You need not punish your self by posting more proof on my behalf. The two quotes have no statements that are alike.

Nothing in the quote of me by you mentions tattoos or pre-born babies.

I forgive for for lying about me. It doesn't make you less a lair, but I am not one to live a life fueled by hating others.

Opoib said...

Mike D, my response was only meant as a compliment. I did not mean to get anything out of you question or not:)


Your heart tells you to protect the rights of pregnancies. Mine tells me to stand up for the rights of women to decide for them selves what to do about that pregnancy.

It is fine by me if we disagree. I will not deny you the right to vote for what you feel is right. Nor would I expect you deny me the right to vote in favor of what I think is right.

Johnny Rico said...

Question for Happily Dumb,

You failed to answer several questions I posted. You hoped they would be lost within the thread, but no such luck. I'll ask them again:

1. How come president clinton (notice lower case) refused profusely to send tanks to Mogadishu but DID send tanks to Waco without a second thought?


2. In perusing my boyfriend's September copy of Field and Stream, I came across an interview with Ryan Lambert a fishing lodge owner on the Missippi Delta (page 54). He says:

"I would take another Katrina (his lodge was underwater for 43 days after Katrina) before I'd take another oil spill. I can fix my infrastructure, but I can't fix the damage from an oil spill".

"The oil did not come in for a long time. Then you'd see tar balls, then oil on top of the water, then dead fish, dilphins, pelicans, turltes. Now, shrimp are down 60 to 80 percent. Crabbers are complaining".

How come the hussein obama administration isn't held accountable for this ecological disaster which took place on his watch? The Gulf was never declared a disaster area, Dutch skimmer ships were never brought in, and the president did nothing for over 100 days except say he was going to kick an oil companies ass. The only ass kicking I see going on is high gas prices at the pump which certainly ain't kicking an oil companies ass.

Anyway, the gulf oil disaster is being swept under the rug by liberal socialists. Funny how they claim to be such environmentalists, yet they don't want to seem to talk about tough environmental subjects when it doesn't suit them. Typical liberals. And, as usual, hunters, fishermen and trappers are left to pay for the environment.

Ask yourself. Where is Greenpeace, Defenders of Wildlife or the Sierra Club when it comes to the Gulf Oil Spill? I haven't heard a peep out of those fringe left idiots. Like pov sheep, Happily Dumb, and Watauga Watch, they only attack safe subjects.


Tough questions aren't they Happiloy Dumb!

LOL

Your ole pal

Johnny Rico

Claire Lesman

Johnny Rico said...

And our friend and idiot OploPLOP! failed to answer as well.

OploPLOP!, what would YOU say to a baby as it smiled up at you just before a doctor snapped its neck? Would you say "You deserve to die you little bastard"? Or maybe, "It wasn't a baby yet anyway"? Or maybe even "He deserved it".

What would you say PLOP!. You killers try and claim gun owners to be irrational and dangerous, but killing babies as they show emotion is downright sick.


I noticed you've dodged this one to the point it's obvious. What would you say? Would you help abort a late term baby sir? If not, why? You say you support baby killing (abortion), so that must mean you're willing to get your hands dirty. Right?

Your silence is so telling. LOL!!!

Your ole pal

Johnny Rico

Bill Bradford

Mike D. said...

Opoib,

I am not immune to emotional reasoning, and I don't think it is entirely healthy to be so. In the case of abortion, my heart provides me only with conflicted feelings, so I place myself firmly in the 'undecided' category, and I am likely to remain there.

As such, I place more weight on other issues, like spending money we don't have. And in that regard, except for a house and my education, I have not bought that which I did not have the money to buy, and I don't appreciate my government doing it for me. If I had to pigeon-hole myself with a label, I might choose "Fiscal Conservative / Civil Libertarian who thinks there should be some degree of safety net for the lesser-abled and less motivated members of our society while preserving a mostly free market economy and doesn't want to see another genocide of the Jews".

Mike D. said...

Johnny Rico,

What are "dilphins" and "turltes"? They sound like small, delicious pastries. :-)

For tonight's finishing touch on our meal, we have two specialty tarts:

First, we have the traditional puff pastry of the Viking noblesse, the "dilphin". It is made from gently raised filo dough triangle wraps, enveloping a soft, creamy filling of mascarpone cheese, red raspberry compote, and North Atlantic lumb Rock Crabmeat, finished with a drizzle of Icelandic whitefish roe and reindeer tears.

And second, the 'piece-de-resistance'... "turltes". This Mayan delight features a crispy quinoa panko mini pie-crust, filled with raw cane juice-sweetened souffle of Kemp's Ridley Sea Turtle eggs and monkey brain, encrusted with a ground cashew butter, broiled in banana leaf wrappings, and covered with a fan of butterflied slices of fresh cactus fruit.

Bon appetit! :-)

Johnny Rico said...

OploPLOP!

How come we hear nothing in the liberal news media about soldiers dying in Afghanistan? Or Gitmo? Gitmo is still open for business, right? Or the Patriot Act (hussein obama signed it didn't he?).

I seem to remember hussein obama (notice lower case) receiving the Nobel Peace Prize about 4 years ago. And he has continued a war that's been raging in a region for thousands of years.

And who POV/PLOP! is the party of hate?

LOL!!!

Stings don't it

Your ole pal

Johnny Rico

PS You dolts have some answering to do!!!!!

Johnny Rico said...

Mike D,

As long as you're not a fringe left, vegen retard, then you're free to eat whatever old world pastries you want. Bon appetit. Turtles and Dolphin are pretty tasty too. I like to spear fish and shooting a Dolphin is great sport and good eating. That is, of course, unless you live in the Gulf Waste Zone where nothing lives because hussein obama didn't know what to do when a catastrophe occured.

Johnny Rico

Mike D. said...

Rico,

I hear Dolphin is pretty nasty, actually.

Baby manatee, however...

Yummmmmm. :-)

Wolf's Head said...

How about our President using our tax dollars to help protesters at the RNC?

http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Government/2012/08/29/Is-Holder-s-DOJ-Community-Organizing-Occupy-Activists-at-the-RNC

guy faulkes said...

Why is the Wolf's link not surprising? It has come to the point this kind of illegal behavior is not only tolerated, it is expected.

Opoib said...

Johnny Whacko. I have made my stance clear time and time again. Maybe some reading comprehension classes would help you.

You claim to be a woman, I vote to let you decide for yourself to do with your body what you want to.

I will never make a decision on how to preform an abortion a I am not a physician or plan to become one. Clear enough?

Opoib said...

Johnny Whacko, I am glad you have a boyfriend as your recent posts claim.

Maybe if you two have consensual relations the serotonin release will make you more sane and less hateful when you post again.

Opoib the Libertarian

Johnny Rico said...

OploPLOP!,

My, my, a wee bit mad are we? LOL! Alas, you still never answered my questions. How would you kill the late term baby as it was SMILING at you my dear friend? Many doctors murder the children by snapping their necks. Do you advocate doing this in the name of allowing a woman to do what she wants with her body? Perhaps if they made dolts like you kill the child during abortions, you might value the understanding of life. Then again, you're pretty stupid so that might not even do the trick.

For liberal socialist sheep like you, it reminds me of your reaction to eating chicken, mutton, beef or other mammels. As long as you have no involvement in killing and cleaning the animal, it's fine and dandy. But the moment you see, or there is even a hint of your involvement, the screaming would be loud and long.

Yes, it would be interesting to see your reactions to a child being killed during a late term abortion.

Tough questions, tough questions

Your ole pal

Johnny Rico

PS My sex life is none of your business, but my boyfriend is a man and then some. You ought to try being one sometime. LOL!!!

Sarah Lehman

Johnny Rico said...

happily dumb (notice lower case),

Where are you at. Cut and run yet again I see. LOL!!

Your ole pal

Johnny Rico

Opoib said...

Whackamole, I have made the point over and over, I will answer one more time for the emotionally or intellectually or physically frustrated like you.

I am a Libertarian. I support you having the choice of what to do with your body as despicable an idea as that is.

I would never be able to preform an abortion as I am not a physician.

Do not flatter your self. I do not take you seriously enough to allow you to upsset me.

Opoib the "My Kind" Libertarian Atheist.

Sarkazian said...

Sarkazein has left a new comment on your post "VENT PAGE LIII - The Love
Bug Page.......":

Opoib- So it is not that a woman should not be told what she can do with
her body... except for abortion and suicide?
According to you, society should allow her to commit suicide or terminate
her pregnancy, but not allow chemical abuse while pregnant (might hurt the
baby) or get a tattoo until of legal age?

The lie is, almost always, the liberal uses the phrase- "a woman shouldn't
be told what she can do with her body" when really, it means only abortion.


NewGuy said...

Sark...I was reading your post on an "edit" page instead of as "normal" people would do...when I went to exit the page, I accidentally deleted the post.

Sorry...I've reposted it above exactly as it first appeared.

Opoib said...

Wow!!!! I never thought I would see it or say it but I do not support Sarcrazien being censored here.

I checked and saw this post has been removed by the administrator when looking at a Sarcrazien post.

I am going to reply one last time on this topic to you Sark.

I am a Libertarian no other party get it ?

I do not support any law telling a woman what to do with her body be it aborting a pregnancy she does not want or be it denying her the right to end her life with a physicians assistance or be it her getting a tattoo.

Her body is not mine. I do not have the right to tell her what to do. if you feel you have the right to tell a stranger what to do with their body vote to make it that way.

I do not feel I can make it any clearer to you.

My Kind Opoib

Opoib said...

Sarcrazien again You lie while trying to speak as me.

I do not think I have the right to tell anyone what to do unless it affects me woman or man.

That is what we have laws for. If you do not think a woman should have the right to control when she reproduces vote to take that right away from her.

Until then I will support. personal choice and responsibility.

My Kind Opoib

guy faulkes said...

Opoib/LPOV, As far as I know, Sark does not lie. Stating his opinion is not a lie. I have disagreed with him many times in the past, but i have never thought he was lying.

I cannot say the same for you and your trolling.

Mike D. said...

Guy,

Have you ever met Johnny Rico?

Blogger? New Guy? Have you?

In general, I am opposed to discussing the personal identity, in any form, of fellow bloggers; however, in this case, Johnny Rico has repeatedly described him or herself as female. Blogger has met me and will easily verify that I am male, even though I have never felt a need to proclaim my gender in this blog, as Rico has so often felt a need to do. I don't believe him, and quite frankly, I feel it is one thing to be anonymous and adopt a nickname, but it is quite another thing to just flat-out lie. So I ask (and please remember that all liars will be cast into an eternal pool of fiery sulfur in the second death - Revelation 21:8)... Guy... Blogger... NewGuy... Have you met Rico? Is his or her gender claim accurate, or is it the lie I have suspected for years? Come on now... let's be honest in the eyes of God.

Do you swear, Rico, in the presence of God and witnesses, that you are female?

I don't want to know who you are, but I do want to know if your forceful assertion that you are female is truth or lie. Personally, I have always felt that is is a bald-faced lie.

Sarkazein said...

Thank you New Guy- Just another attempt to prove liberals cannot be honest in this debate.
They say they are for "choice" when it actually means they are pro-abortion. The word choice just sounds more reasonable and acceptable than pro-abortion.
One of the many terms the deceptive liberal uses to soften their opinion.
Even the term liberal is being avoided by many liberals.


Sarkazein said...

MikeD- It's kinda-like-- if you have to ask you can't afford it. I know race and gender are of the utmost importance to a liberal, if you will notice, only the liberal commenters on this blog question JR's gender.

guy faulkes said...

The only person that I know on the blog is the Wolf. I am proud to call him one of my best friends, MikeD.

I personally do not care if Rico, or you for that matter, is male, female, or a combination thereof.

Why is gender any more important than your real name? Almost everyone uses a pseudonym, several apparently use Opoib, formerly used LPOV, and at least half a dozen use Anonymous. This does not seem to bother you.

The comment is the important part. Rico makes very astute comments, although many of them are in a rather caustic format. She does not suffer liberals gracefully. This does not mean she does not make very valid points.

She has said many times she uses blogs to vent her frustrations. She apparently does this well.

When she decides to make a purely logical post, not many can effectively argue with her.

It seems that she has gotten under your skin more than is just the norm with heated debate, MikeD. I would think about the wisdom of letting her know. This probably amuses her.

Johnny Rico said...

OploPLOP! said:

"I would never be able to preform an abortion as I am not a physician"

Ahhh, we have the quintessential liberal socialist response above. It's called pass the buck when asked a difficult question. So you want someone else to do the killing of smiling late term aborts, is that what you're saying? As long as YOU don't have to snap the neck, it's ok, right?

You remind me of liberals who think meat at the local supermarket just appears. If you idiots had to get your hands dirty, things might be different. But, as your post indicates, you're not willing to get your delicate hands dirty. My bet is abortions (killing living babies) would fall off dramatically if you idiots had to actually kill the baby. It would be interesting to see the reaction of liberal socialist sheep (you) when a baby showed emotion just before you killed it.

Liberals are at their best when they have others to do their bidding. Must make bigots like you feel powerful, eh PLOP! Also, how come liberal socialist sheep pov never posts when PLOP! is posting? LOL!!

Tough questions, tough questions

Your ole pal

Kim Massey

Johnny Rico

Johnny Rico said...

Mickey D,

You just couldn't help yourself. It just had to come out one way or another. My guess is my comment to one of your fellow liberal sheep, PLOP!, really chafed your fragile psyche. Upon pointing out the fact abortions would go down drastically if you liberal socialist sheep, baby killing idiots, actually had to do the killing yourselves, it made you pause if only for a second. The repulsiveness of that thought made you rethink your values. In other words, it showed that you can't argue the point.

Then, like a typical liberal, you resort to race and gender when beaten in an arguement. The problem is liberals like you don't deal in base elements (black and white), and that's what I've brought to you on this thread. Base elements. Can you kill an aborted smiling baby with your bare hands? You don't like it when it's framed in that fashion.

So, Mikey D, with sulfer fire worms ready to devour your soul forever, do you believe in abortion, and could you kill an unborn baby, as it showed emotion, with your bare hands? Tough questions. Sad questions that they shouldn't even have to be asked.

Quit trying to derail with gender. My large breasts, fit for suckling children, catch the attention of many a man at the Wellness Center where I've worked out literally hundreds of times. But that's not the point. The point is, I've stalled the abortion arguement amongst you vile liberal socialist lemming idiot sheep. You don't like it because you, and others like you, are unable to argue with the stark, scary scenario I've set before you. I'm such a gracious host aren't I Mickey D!

Your ole pal

Johnny Rico

James Thourcea

Johnny Rico said...

Blogger,

I'm getting ready to have a chilling effect on your blog. When Mikey D starts screaming uncle, it's time to back off. I've done my work here sir. I'm committed to making a difference through the written word, and I've accomplished this endeavor.

Johnny Rico will sign off for a while. I've some bug wars to fight with Felix, Jack Crow, Dizzy, and Shizumi. We will be unable to communicate as hyper drives are engaged, which, coupled with worm holes and the near speed of light as we pass through the space/time continium, will propel us to pretty much any galaxy we want to go in mere seconds.

Whether it's pounding a dumb liberal or lasering 900 pound murderous arachnids by the millions, be advised I do this to make the world a better place.

I DO MY PART!

Johnny Rico

NewGuy said...

JR...I, for one, hope you will not be gone long! Hurry back!

Mike D. said...

Rico,

Why are you now running away? Was honesty pounding a little too closely at the door, buddy? I believe it was. I'll make you a deal. You responded to my question, not with an honest answer, but with name-calling and a return question (like I can't tell you are just trying to avoid the question and run away). So here is my offer. I asked first, so answer honestly, and I will answer yours as honestly and frankly as I am known to do in this and other blogs.

NewGuy said...

How many reasons do you need? Obama has failed....let's get on with repairing the damage!

https://www.nationalreview.com/nrd/articles/314773/689-reasons-defeat-barack-obama