Who do you support for U.S. Senate in...

Since: Dec 11

Location hidden

#33811 Jan 28, 2013
TSF wrote:
Lets see here. Four Americans are killed and the next day the President describes the event as a terrorist act. If someone commits a terrorist act, one could safely assume that person to be a terrorist. So Bacon, here is test question #2. The persons who killed the four Americans would be (a.) girl scouts (b) your vicious mother (c) terrorists (d) Jehovah witnesses
Last year my operational budget was lean because outstanding accounts were not being promptly paid. One crew foremen was begging for a new truck because he claimed the old one was getting dangerous. I had the money to buy the truck, but because my operational budget was so lean and I had no way of knowing what unexpected other expense might occur, I didn't buy the new truck.
That management decision is reasonable if I think the old truck is not an excessive traffic hazard.
Since Ms Lamb could not personally keep the money, why do you think she did not spend it without hesitation? Could it be because republikans has just slashed the budget and she was being cautious with available funds?
?
<quoted text>
On your test question, you left out my mother-in-law and I believe we could have had a winner. She was a terror, so I guess that would make her a terrorist.
Gotta throw the BS flag on Ms. Lamb keeping the money due to being cautious. When there were numerous, you're the numbers guy, you know more than ONE email, asking for more security in a very volatile part of the world politically and pissed at the U.S., do you not think Ms. Lamb could have been a little less prudent about doling out some money for security? It's not like he was in Canada or Bermuda, he was in a country where we killed their beloved leader Gadaffi(? sp). TSF, please don't try to make excuses for Ms. Lamb and her disregard for the numerous requests for increased security. Again, the Republicans cut the budget, not completely and by her own admission, the money was there to increase security. I know she didn't get to keep the money. I can't wrap my head around why of all places in the world she would decided to pull a Hillary and say literally "The buck stops with me." Scrimp a little on security in Bermuda, Canada, British Virgin Islands, Bahamas etc, but not countries our country killed their "beloved leader", who years before he died whipped them into a frenzy to hate Americans, and basically gave us the finger and wonder why they attacked the consulate. Why this lady didn't take off the tinfoil hat and put 2+2 together, I'll never know. Is this best we can find in Washington to be a controller of money that doesn't understand the dynamics of how volatile we are with countries we've angered? The man didn't say he need someone to come trim the yard, clean the pool, and pick up groceries, he stated emphatically he needed more security, you know protection??
Allen

Penrose, NC

#33812 Jan 28, 2013
Silvercoastcorks wrote:
<quoted text>
Says the democrat taking entitlements. Perhaps we should institute a more regulations on entitlements, testing for alcohol and tobacco use.
Want to improve your wealth? Private message me and I can give you a number to call. But he charges a fee for advice.
First off I am a democrat who has never received an entitlement. Second, I agree with your second statement. Third, here is a message that's not private: How about you call the number for me an tell that idiot on the other end, that he can take a number and get in line to kiss my a$$ right behind you.

Since: Dec 11

Location hidden

#33813 Jan 28, 2013
Allen wrote:
<quoted text>
First off I am a democrat who has never received an entitlement. Second, I agree with your second statement. Third, here is a message that's not private: How about you call the number for me an tell that idiot on the other end, that he can take a number and get in line to kiss my a$$ right behind you.
I would say that is a pretty clear statement with no need for further explanation.

“Seek Light”

Since: May 12

Location hidden

#33814 Jan 28, 2013
emlu wrote:
It was not until 2012 that Delaware became the first state to adopt the emerging nonviolent European model and pass a statute defining “physical injury” to a child to include "any impairment of physical condition or pain."[15]
Main articles: Discipline in Sudbury Model Democratic Schools and Sudbury Valley School
Sudbury model democratic schools, attended by children ages 4 to 19, claim that popularly-based authority can maintain order more effectively than dictatorial authority for governments and schools alike.
Furthermore they emphasize that much more important than the externals of order is the question of the sources of internal discipline: how does an individual come to develop the inner strength and character that endows his life with order and coherence, an independent person appropriate to a free republic of co-equal citizens, capable of making decisions within a rational, self-consistent framework—a person treating and being treated with respect?
They affirm that the hallmark of the independent person is the ability to bear responsibility and since there is no way of teaching or training another person for self-sufficiency, there is no technique for obtaining or transmitting these traits. Hence, the only way a person becomes responsible for himself is for him to be responsible for himself, with no reservation or qualifications. Thence the need to permit children, at home and school, freedom of choice, freedom of action, and freedom to bear the results of action—the three great freedoms that constitute personal responsibility.[36][37][38]
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Child_discipline...
OMG.....That is the funniest thing I ever heard...if I'd been raised that way, I'd be a serial killer by now...
Allen

Penrose, NC

#33815 Jan 28, 2013
Makin bacon wrote:
<quoted text>
Arnold, we raised our children in a different time and we were raised in a different time than our children were. I agree with Silver on the fact that parents should be parents, and not your BFF. When raising my daughter, we discussed far more things than I did with my parents. I still drew the line on her individuality when my money paid for what I didn't like. At about 13-15 when "hoe clothes", you know the tighter the better, the lower cut the better and the shorter the skirts, dresses or shorts was her idea of individuality, I nixed the idea and the money to buy such. I raised her to respect her body and if you had to get a guy to look at you by how much flesh you were showing, you didn't need him and I know why he wanted you. I didn't necessarily embrace her idea of looking cool was a cigarette hanging out of her mouth at age 15 and I caught her expressing her individuality one time looking like hooker with a cigarette hanging out of her mouth and nixed that little "freedom." She had the freedom to say she didn't agree with me about curfew time, but when she was driving my car and I was paying for the upkeep of the car and gas, I felt like my freedom of speech trumped her's. She didn't have the freedom to disrespect her elders, whether she agreed or not, what could a 16 year old tell a 75 year old about life the 75 year old didn't know? We discussed religion, politics, school her goals and I listened to her opinions. I didn't always agree with them, told her as much, allowed her to respectfully tell me why she didn't agree with me, but as long as she lived in my house, she would follow my rules and when she felt she couldn't, she knew not to let the door hit her in the butt on the way out. I couldn't control her opinions or mind, but I could control who was the parent and who was the child under my roof. I didn't rob her of her opinions, but I did rob her of being the parent when she was the child. Did I do everything right as a parent, no, but I did pretty good with my daughter and she has grown into a productive, caring, respectful, law abiding citizen and I couldn't be more proud. She looks back and laughs now at her "goth" days. I took all her "goth" gear, given to her by friends because I wouldn't buy that stuff and threw it away. I took the freedom of her looking like Elvira with a cig hanging out of her mouth away from her. Never apologized, never will. I did what I felt was best. As parents that's all we can do and hope for the best.
Bacon I agree with you 100% here. You said, "We discussed religion, politics, school, her goals and I listened to her opinions." This statement sums it up. These are the things that they should be allowed to voice opinions on. I don't think anyone here believes that laws should be passed based upon the opinions of children.

Since: Dec 11

Location hidden

#33817 Jan 28, 2013
Allen wrote:
<quoted text>
Bacon I agree with you 100% here. You said, "We discussed religion, politics, school, her goals and I listened to her opinions." This statement sums it up. These are the things that they should be allowed to voice opinions on. I don't think anyone here believes that laws should be passed based upon the opinions of children.
It would be my guess that Silver carries a different view about the free family discussion and opposing viewpoints to his agenda. He is a dictator and control freak.

“Seek Light”

Since: May 12

Location hidden

#33818 Jan 28, 2013
Why is Silvercoast a"dictator" and a"control"freak? How is that known?
Allen

Penrose, NC

#33819 Jan 28, 2013
Arnold-Ziffel wrote:
<quoted text>
It would be my guess that Silver carries a different view about the free family discussion and opposing viewpoints to his agenda. He is a dictator and control freak.
Not to mention a "wanna be" terrorist.
TSF

Kenly, NC

#33820 Jan 28, 2013
Obviously, in retrospect, she should have spent the money and sent more security. One would hope that if republikans had known in advance , they would not have cut the budget either. Reality is that the budget cuts were an important factor in all this. When one gets budget cuts, that tells you that you have to cut back on spending somewhere if you want to keep your job. The woman admitted fault and fell on her sword. Hopefully, she has been fired.
But none of that excuses republikans siding with the terrorist and blaming Americans for something that the terrorist did. Aiding and abetting the enemy by making a circus of the tragic deaths of our military security personnel was a dispicable act by republikans trying to get votes. It didn't work and it serves no useful purpose now other than encouraging our enemies to repeat the act somewhere else . It just doesn't make sense.
Makin bacon wrote:
<quoted text>
On your test question, you left out my mother-in-law and I believe we could have had a winner. She was a terror, so I guess that would make her a terrorist.
Gotta throw the BS flag on Ms. Lamb keeping the money due to being cautious. When there were numerous, you're the numbers guy, you know more than ONE email, asking for more security in a very volatile part of the world politically and pissed at the U.S., do you not think Ms. Lamb could have been a little less prudent about doling out some money for security? It's not like he was in Canada or Bermuda, he was in a country where we killed their beloved leader Gadaffi(? sp). TSF, please don't try to make excuses for Ms. Lamb and her disregard for the numerous requests for increased security. Again, the Republicans cut the budget, not completely and by her own admission, the money was there to increase security. I know she didn't get to keep the money. I can't wrap my head around why of all places in the world she would decided to pull a Hillary and say literally "The buck stops with me." Scrimp a little on security in Bermuda, Canada, British Virgin Islands, Bahamas etc, but not countries our country killed their "beloved leader", who years before he died whipped them into a frenzy to hate Americans, and basically gave us the finger and wonder why they attacked the consulate. Why this lady didn't take off the tinfoil hat and put 2+2 together, I'll never know. Is this best we can find in Washington to be a controller of money that doesn't understand the dynamics of how volatile we are with countries we've angered? The man didn't say he need someone to come trim the yard, clean the pool, and pick up groceries, he stated emphatically he needed more security, you know protection??

“Arch Nemisis of Democrats”

Since: Jun 12

Location hidden

#33821 Jan 28, 2013
Allen wrote:
<quoted text>
Not to mention a "wanna be" terrorist.
Put down the bong hophead...

You can get your food stamps in a few days...

“Arch Nemisis of Democrats”

Since: Jun 12

Location hidden

#33822 Jan 28, 2013
Arnold-Ziffel wrote:
<quoted text>
It would be my guess that Silver carries a different view about the free family discussion and opposing viewpoints to his agenda. He is a dictator and control freak.
Said from a black guy who's mom was white and can't identify with her heritage regardless of what is "printed" on his birth certificate.

Since: Dec 11

Location hidden

#33823 Jan 28, 2013
waco1909 wrote:
Why is Silvercoast a"dictator" and a"control"freak? How is that known?
Do you, for one minute, think that Silver would allow any of his children to be racially tolerant and defy his view of racism?

Since: Dec 11

Location hidden

#33824 Jan 28, 2013
For instance, do you think Silver would allow a child of his to like any black artist and express that love in their taste of music? Would Silver allow his child to read any political material that disagrees with his point of view?

“Seek Light”

Since: May 12

Location hidden

#33825 Jan 28, 2013
Arnold-Ziffel wrote:
For instance, do you think Silver would allow a child of his to like any black artist and express that love in their taste of music? Would Silver allow his child to read any political material that disagrees with his point of view?
Ask him?

“Arch Nemisis of Democrats”

Since: Jun 12

Location hidden

#33826 Jan 28, 2013
Arnold-Ziffel wrote:
For instance, do you think Silver would allow a child of his to like any black artist and express that love in their taste of music? Would Silver allow his child to read any political material that disagrees with his point of view?
Call UNC and give them their money back because you robbed them of a free ride.

Since we are beating this dead horse, again, our kids are grown. They have the right to define themselves however they see fit. They all have chosen for themselves to align themselves with conservative points of view. They did have "black" friends while they played sports and they even listened to rap music at some point. But, again, the all have chosen, on their own free will, to endorse a conservative point of view.

Fortunately, for Katie and I, we taught them to make decisions based being informed and not an emotions. I am not sorry you disagree. Perhaps when you have your own children, you can raise them your own way.

Since: Dec 11

Location hidden

#33827 Jan 28, 2013
Silvercoastcorks wrote:
<quoted text>
Said from a black guy who's mom was white and can't identify with her heritage regardless of what is "printed" on his birth certificate.
Said by a white guy who is not exactly the shining star of my mom's heritage. It's not the skin color, it's the sucking attitude.

Since: Dec 11

Location hidden

#33828 Jan 28, 2013
waco1909 wrote:
<quoted text> Ask him?
You have. Now he can answer.

Since: Dec 11

Location hidden

#33829 Jan 28, 2013
Silvercoastcorks wrote:
<quoted text>

Fortunately, for Katie and I, we taught them to make decisions based being informed and not an emotions. I am not sorry you disagree. Perhaps when you have your own children, you can raise them your own way.
Could they purchase black music and play it in your home? Could they bring black friends home for a visit? Decisions based on being informed? What information is that, when you yourself, deny the law of the land in the Civil Rights Act? I will bet you that they have defied your views more than you will ever know. I bet that you you have driven such fear into them that they don't want to piss you off and lose their inheritance.

Since: Dec 11

Location hidden

#33830 Jan 28, 2013
Silvercoastcorks wrote:
<quoted text>
Call UNC and give them their money back because you robbed them of a free ride.
I paid every cent of my own tuition at UNC, thank you, Mr. well informed.

Since: Dec 11

Location hidden

#33831 Jan 28, 2013
waco1909 wrote:
<quoted text> Is it unreasonable to blame an act of terror on a.....terrorist?
To me and you, no. To a man that declared an "end to the war on terror", yes. By admitting that terrorist exists is to admit he didn't "end the war."

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Charlotte Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
News Source: Body found dismembered in woods near St... 2 hr Smoss 1
Provisions bit the dust 4 hr belmontcitizen 6
Are Southerners Stupid or do they just sound th... (Oct '08) 8 hr Zinjanthopus 4,850
Jimbo from Intervention (Feb '11) 12 hr You freak 65
Anybody want to buy a Percussion Plus beginners... Tue High Pitch 3
Best Plastic Surgeon In Charlotte? Mon Al Sharpton 2
Did Rick Hendrick Ever Really Have Leukemia? (May '09) Jul 27 pekosbob 74
More from around the web

Personal Finance

Charlotte Mortgages