Where do i stand politicaly.

[Seth8530]

Hey, ive grown up my whole life thinking im a republican. But now im starting to wonder, all of my conservative friends are starting to sound downright stupid to me. So where do my political alliance lie?

I believe in:
Minimal gun control (Ie. buying ages, tracking numbs, but keep guns very available)

Abortion is a choice because no one can philosophically prove whether a fetus is a life or not.

Legalize Marijuana, its really not that harm full and would be a soccer punch in the gut to gangs around the nation.

Gay marriage should be legal because it shouldn't be the governments business what people decide to do with their lives.

Mandatory health insurance is wrong! Government shouldn't be able to force anyone to buy health insurance!

Our health care system is broken and way to expensive and we must find a way to drive prices down without crushing the incentive to become an excellent health care practitioner.

Our government gives out way too many hand outs, food stamps should exist, well fare should exist to an extent, but by god we cant have people living off of this sh!t forever.

The gap between the rich and poor is growing to steep. If we are not careful we will become willing slaves to the men in suits. Corporate America is destroying the rest of America.

Social security should not be a retirement fund.

The government is way to tough on small business and insist on taxing the Pi$$ out of us.

We should seal our border to the south. and have a passive deportation policy for the illegals already in our country ( ie, if they are found at a crime scene or sent to court we should deport them)

We should have more financial incentives for middle class people to go to college.. If someone my age and is poor wants to go to college but didnt do jack in HS they can go to college nearly for free. But someone like me who worked my arse off in HS and comes from a middle class family who refuses to pay for any of my college gets slapped with massive amounts of loans for tuition and housing.

I also support lowering the drinking age down to 14 with a parent and 16 when alone. One of the most dangerous things in the world is a college student who gets his first go at alcohol without any of the social training that should go with it.

[AVGWarhawk]

Minimal gun control (Ie. buying ages, tracking numbs, but keep guns very available)


Control is mimimal. You can get one at Walmart.

Abortion is a choice because no one can philosophically prove whether a fetus is a life or not.


This is an entirely different thread that can stand on it's own. Can it be proved medically?


Legalize Marijuana, its really not that harm full and would be a soccer punch in the gut to gangs around the nation.



Yes, this will help with the broken medical system you speak of. More lung cancer!


Gay marriage should be legal because it shouldn't be the governments business what people decide to do with their lives.



I agree.

Mandatory health insurance is wrong! Government shouldn't be able to force anyone to buy health insurance!


Correct! It's illegal to do so.


Our health care system is broken and way to expensive and we must find a way to drive prices down without crushing the incentive to become an excellent health care practitioner.



Yes it is. Current administration throws money at it hoping it will go away. Drive prices down...start with tort reform.


Our government gives out way too many hand outs, food stamps should exist, well fare should exist to an extent, but by god we cant have people living off of this sh!t forever.


Nothing new here. People do make a living living off the gov't.

The gap between the rich and poor is growing to steep. If we are not careful we will become willing slaves to the men in suits. Corporate America is destroying the rest of America.


It already has done this....about two years ago. The haves and the have nots.


Social security should not be a retirement fund.



It really was not sold to the general public as a retirement fund.

We should seal our border to the south. and have a passive deportation policy for the illegals already in our country ( ie, if they are found at a crime scene or sent to court we should deport them)


I agree.


We should have more financial incentives for middle class people to go to college.. If someone my age and is poor wants to go to college but didnt do jack in HS they can go to college nearly for free. But someone like me who worked my arse off in HS and comes from a middle class family who refuses to pay for any of my college gets slapped with massive amounts of loans for tuition and housing.


In the state of MD there are moves to pass a bill to provide instate tuition to illegals. Great! My two kids get possibly screwed because an illegal filled a spot for instate tuition.



I also support lowering the drinking age down to 14 with a parent and 16 when alone. One of the most dangerous things in the world is a college student who gets his first go at alcohol without any of the social training that should go with it.


I think 14 is to irresponsible an age. Practice not drinking. Much better for the liver.


You sound Conservative to me. :hmmm:

[Oberon]

Centrist?

Try this:

http://www.politicalcompass.org/

[Platapus]

At one time you may have been a Republican. But perhaps the party changed and not you?

I was a Republican all my life coming from a family of Republicans. In the past 20 years or so, the GOP has changed and changed in a way that no longer agrees with my opinions.

Hence, I am now an Independent.

[CCIP]

At one time you may have been a Republican. But perhaps the party changed and not you?

I was a Republican all my life coming from a family of Republicans. In the past 20 years or so, the GOP has changed and changed in a way that no longer agrees with my opinions.

Hence, I am now an Independent.

Yeah, you're not the first person I hear this from. Quite a difference between traditional conservatives and neo-conservatives. Sadly the neocon brand is easy to market to corporate america...

[AVGWarhawk]

But perhaps the party changed and not you


Good point. Sometimes one wonders what the flavor of the week is!

[Takeda Shingen]

At one time you may have been a Republican. But perhaps the party changed and not you?

I was a Republican all my life coming from a family of Republicans. In the past 20 years or so, the GOP has changed and changed in a way that no longer agrees with my opinions.

Hence, I am now an Independent.

^^ This echoes my story almost exactly.

[Armistead]

Just watching the news, corportate CEO's now make more than than they did in the 2007 booming economy due to increased profit. They say this is attributed to less employees, not increasing wages down and cutting benefits.

And they need a tax cut, better profits than when in a booming economy, paying a worse wage, layoffs, etc....

Good old trickle down economics.

[UnderseaLcpl]

At one time you may have been a Republican. But perhaps the party changed and not you?

I was a Republican all my life coming from a family of Republicans. In the past 20 years or so, the GOP has changed and changed in a way that no longer agrees with my opinions.

Hence, I am now an Independent.

I don't see how the GOP has undergone any kind of fundamental change in the past 20 years that would isolate its traditional base, save the comparatively recent Tea-Party movement, which is shifting it more to economic right. Indeed, one of the driving factors behind the Tea Party is disillusionment with the Republican economic platform, which has failed to be conservative in everything other than name for the better part of a century.

[Betonov]

What would be the term when you're against both poles (left/right)??

Anarcho-liberal, freelance centrist ?? :hmmm:

[Growler]

Where do I stand politically... hmm...


I'd have to say...


... over a toilet bowl, retching.

[AVGWarhawk]

Where do I stand politically... hmm...


I'd have to say...


... over a toilet bowl, retching.

No, no...not what you do after hosting a intergalactic kegger...:O:

[Ducimus]

At one time you may have been a Republican. But perhaps the party changed and not you?

I was a Republican all my life coming from a family of Republicans. In the past 20 years or so, the GOP has changed and changed in a way that no longer agrees with my opinions.

Hence, I am now an Independent.

Plat, you also described me to a T.

[frau kaleun]

I don't see how the GOP has undergone any kind of fundamental change in the past 20 years

In the last 20 years? Maybe not. But I think the overt pandering to the religious right started right up around the time the Moral Majority came to prominence. They've been making hay with that crowd by openly promoting or at least pretending not to disagree with an anti-gay, anti-choice, quasi-Dominionist agenda ever since.

And yes I say pandering, because IMO most of the Powers That Be in the GOP couldn't care less about the religious right's agenda beyond doing what it takes to get their votes on election day.

[UnderseaLcpl]

In the last 20 years? Maybe not. But I think the overt pandering to the religious right started right up around the time the Moral Majority came to prominence. They've been making hay with that crowd by openly promoting or at least pretending not to disagree with an anti-gay, anti-choice, quasi-Dominionist agenda ever since.

Agreed, and also unsurprising. They're just doing exactly what we designed them to do, which is to garner a majority of votes.

And yes I say pandering, because IMO most of the Powers That Be in the GOP couldn't care less about the religious right's agenda beyond doing what it takes to get their votes on election day.
Preaching to the choir, my friend. It was a lovely sermon, though, and decidedly more tolerable and succinct than most.:up:

[frau kaleun]

At one time you may have been a Republican. But perhaps the party changed and not you?

I was a Republican all my life coming from a family of Republicans. In the past 20 years or so, the GOP has changed and changed in a way that no longer agrees with my opinions.

Hence, I am now an Independent.

I never defined myself as a Republican, in fact I registered as a Democrat as soon as I was old enough. Of course I was forced to stay inside and watch the Watergate hearings as a child, and my first memory of the Republican party is of Richard Nixon, so let's just say that the GOP and I did not get off to a good start. :O:

On the other hand I never identified myself as a "liberal" either socially or otherwise until those who called themselves "conservatives" started bringing up a lot of stuff that I'd never really had much occasion to think about before. Basically they made issues out of things that were never "issues" to me before they started squawking about them, and the more they squawked the more obvious it became that I was on the other side of whatever line they were drawing if only because the way in which they drew it was so distasteful to me personally.

Now I think it's safe to say that unless there is a major purge of certain elements within the GOP, they've lost whatever shot they had with me. When I cast a vote it's more likely to be against their candidates than for whoever is running on the other side. I don't like it, but I refuse to just *not* vote because I'm keenly aware that however pointless it seems it's still more than a lot of people around the world will ever have the opportunity to do.

[gimpy117]

you sound like me

[Gerald]

I never defined myself as a Republican, in fact I registered as a Democrat as soon as I was old enough. Of course I was forced to stay inside and watch the Watergate hearings as a child, and my first memory of the Republican party is of Richard Nixon, so let's just say that the GOP and I did not get off to a good start. :O:

On the other hand I never identified myself as a "liberal" either socially or otherwise until those who called themselves "conservatives" started bringing up a lot of stuff that I'd never really had much occasion to think about before. Basically they made issues out of things that were never "issues" to me before they started squawking about them, and the more they squawked the more obvious it became that I was on the other side of whatever line they were drawing if only because the way in which they drew it was so distasteful to me personally.

Now I think it's safe to say that unless there is a major purge of certain elements within the GOP, they've lost whatever shot they had with me. When I cast a vote it's more likely to be against their candidates than for whoever is running on the other side. I don't like it, but I refuse to just *not* vote because I'm keenly aware that however pointless it seems it's still more than a lot of people around the world will ever have the opportunity to do. "I was old enough" Now we talking, :D

[vienna]

From Frau Kaleun:


And yes I say pandering, because IMO most of the Powers That Be in the GOP couldn't care less about the religious right's agenda beyond doing what it takes to get their votes on election day.


More truth than you think. Afew years ago I was asked to cover for someone who was going on a trip to Europe. They worked for a professional political campaign organizing firm and I was to provide IT coverage for the firm's Los Angeles office. When I went to their office, I discovered they were soley employed by the Republican Party or Republican Politcal Action Committees (PAC). I had always had suspicions abouth the ethics of political campaigns, but during the time I spent there, I was exposed to some of the most cynical, devious, underhanded, dishonest, and just about, but not quite, illegal activities ever to be seen. I wasn't even privy to the majority of the activities undertaken by these people but what I did see and hear exceeded anything I had ever experienced. The truly astonishing part of the experience was the totally amoral attitude expressed by the employees in the office. The attitude was one of "If it gets the votes, it's justified". I am rather certain that the Republicans are not alone in their use of such firms; the Democrats and other parties no doubt have there own political 'hitmen'. I am registerered as a Democrat; in California we do not have open primaries, so if you register as an independent, you are sometimes excluded or limited from cretain partisan election issues. I registered as a Democrat initially because the Republican Party in California is a near total mess. I vote for the candidate or issue I have decided upon after studying the issues. I was going to vote for John McCain for President until the Republicans foisted that joke of a running mate Palin on him and he chose not to object or refuse. I am not be registered as an Independent, but I vote independently of any partisan influence. Sometimes it seems if the voters scrapped party affiliations and voted not as told but as common sense indicates, we'd all be better off in this country.

[Bakkels]

More truth than you think. Afew years ago I was asked to cover for someone who was going on a trip to Europe. They worked for a professional political campaign organizing firm and I was to provide IT coverage for the firm's Los Angeles office. When I went to their office, I discovered they were soley employed by the Republican Party or Republican Politcal Action Committees (PAC). I had always had suspicions abouth the ethics of political campaigns, but during the time I spent there, I was exposed to some of the most cynical, devious, underhanded, dishonest, and just about, but not quite, illegal activities ever to be seen. I wasn't even privy to the majority of the activities undertaken by these people but what I did see and hear exceeded anything I had ever experienced. The truly astonishing part of the experience was the totally amoral attitude expressed by the employees in the office. The attitude was one of "If it gets the votes, it's justified". I am rather certain that the Republicans are not alone in their use of such firms; the Democrats and other parties no doubt have there own political 'hitmen'. I am registerered as a Democrat; in California we do not have open primaries, so if you register as an independent, you are sometimes excluded or limited from cretain partisan election issues. I registered as a Democrat initially because the Republican Party in California is a near total mess. I vote for the candidate or issue I have decided upon after studying the issues. I was going to vote for John McCain for President until the Republicans foisted that joke of a running mate Palin on him and he chose not to object or refuse. I am not be registered as an Independent, but I vote independently of any partisan influence. Sometimes it seems if the voters scrapped party affiliations and voted not as told but as common sense indicates, we'd all be better off in this country.

Interesting story Vienna. One thing I always wondered; why do you have to register yourself for voting in the US? And what's even stranger to me; why do you have to register with either the democrats or the republicans? (well you dont have to, but as you said, if you don't you get excluded from voting which is -again even more- weird in my eyes) I never understood that.
Over here, even asking someone what they vote can sometimes be considered slightly offensive; it's your business and no one elses.

[August]

My earliest political memories were of the Democratic party were of LBJ and and their war in Vietnam (guess I'm a little older than you). But i've never registered for any party. None of them fully represent my beliefs and interests.

[vienna]

...why do you have to register yourself for voting in the US? And what's even stranger to me; why do you have to register with either the democrats or the republicans? (well you dont have to, but as you said, if you don't you get excluded from voting which is -again even more- weird in my eyes) I never understood that.


The purpose of registering is mainly to help ensure a person does not vote more than once in a given election; names, addresses, etc. are compared to detect duplicate registrations. Registering as a member of a party is really mostly governed by localities (states, counties). In order to select a candidate to represent a particular party for a particular office, primary elections are held where the voters in each party vote from a selction of candidates within the party and the candidate garnering the most votes goes on to represent the party in the main General Election. Therefore, only the voters officially registered in the party can vote from the party's list of candidates. Not all localities have primaries in this manner; some localities have "open" primaries where a voter can vote for a candidate across party lines. Here in California we do not have open primaries.

[UnderseaLcpl]

The purpose of registering is mainly to help ensure a person does not vote more than once in a given election; names, addresses, etc. are compared to detect duplicate registrations.
Close, but not quite correct. The main purpose of registering is to help ensure that people who actually vote do so along party lines. The only reason we have our voter and party guidelines we have is to shut out competition from third parties. Don't take my word for it, try to start a party yourself. I'll hold my breath while you gather the requisite 40,000 signatories, and that's in Texas where the guidelines are comparatively lax.

When it comes to persons themselves, the parties could care less about who votes or how many times. The Democratic party has no compunction about getting dead people to vote or bribing illiterates to vote, and the Republican party has no compunction about redistricting votes in their favor. Actually, neither party has a stance against that, but the Reps are better at it.

Registering as a member of a party is really mostly governed by localities (states, counties). In order to select a candidate to represent a particular party for a particular office, primary elections are held where the voters in each party vote from a selction of candidates within the party and the candidate garnering the most votes goes on to represent the party in the main General Election. Therefore, only the voters officially registered in the party can vote from the party's list of candidates. Not all localities have primaries in this manner; some localities have "open" primaries where a voter can vote for a candidate across party lines.

That's what they'd like you to think. The truth is... well, what you just said. It's just a mechanism for polarizing the vote along party lines. Nothing more, nothing less. You won't find open primaries in any district that matters, nor will you find third-party candidates on their ballots. It's an extortion racket, albeit a cleverly concealed one.



Here in California we do not have open primaries.
Most states don't. The idea is supposedly to prevent subversives from voting against a viable candidate, but the real reason is to separate voters and side-line third parties and independent candidates. Don't take my word for it, just fill out a false voter registration form. Nobody is going to do a background check. You can vote two or three times if you like, maybe more, as long as you register in different counties.

Both parties are quite fond of the two-party system, and they are keen to keep it as such, hence the system we have now.


That's my interpretation, anyways. Maybe I'm right and maybe I'm wrong, but it can't hurt to be mindful of the nature of the system and the results it has given us.

[Platapus]

Don't take my word for it, just fill out a false voter registration form. Nobody is going to do a background check. You can vote two or three times if you like, maybe more, as long as you register in different counties.



I doubt that. In Virginia all voter registrations are verified and you can only vote in the county where you are a residence. I am sure that the other states have similar protections.

[UnderseaLcpl]

I doubt that. In Virginia all voter registrations are verified and you can only vote in the county where you are a residence. I am sure that the other states have similar protections.

A minor obstacle. Had I the care to do so I could register and vote in Virginia and then vote again under a different name, provided I had the requisite SS number, which isn't really difficult to obtain.

I've served as a registrar in county and state elections. Nobody checks your identity or cross-references it, nobody cares, nor do they have the means to do so if they did care. You have entirely too much faith in the system, my friend.

[Platapus]

I've served as a registrar in county and state elections. Nobody checks your identity or cross-references it, nobody cares, nor do they have the means to do so if they did care. You have entirely too much faith in the system, my friend.

No I just happen to be an Election Official and I know how the system works in my state. Perhaps your state has different rules. :)

[UnderseaLcpl]

No I just happen to be an Election Official and I know how the system works in my state. Perhaps your state has different rules. :)

It probably does. Nonetheless, I could vote multiple times in your state. You have no photo-ID system, nor do you have a reliable database to consult. You have no measures in place to ensure that I don't vote under a different identity, provided that I have an SS number, which could easily obtain from others. I don't even need to know which state you live in to make such an assertion. Election official or no, you do not have the means to identify me. I could vote in another county under a different and totally valid name and SS# and you would be none the wiser. You have no means to cross-reference my identity, not that I'd ever do such a thing.

Don't take my word for it, though. Just look at the number of voter-fraud cases. Those people managed to get past people just like you with little difficulty. Intelligent as you are, you place too much faith in your abilities and those of others.

[August]

I could vote multiple times in your state

So maybe a person could vote, what, maybe 5 to 10 times using that exploit? I'd think any more would just invite getting caught. Well if so it'd still take literally an army of conspirators doing that to have a material effect on even state or local elections, let alone the national ones.

[Onkel Neal]

Hey, ive grown up my whole life thinking im a republican. But now im starting to wonder, all of my conservative friends are starting to sound downright stupid to me. So where do my political alliance lie?

.

Well, you're from Tennessee.

[Aramike]

Seth, sounds like you're an independant, which is where I think most people would fall in some shape or another if they exercised free thought. Instead, most people tend to let the parties think FOR them on most everything so long as that party agrees with their opinion on one or two things.

I fancy myself an independant although I no doubt lean conservative on most issues. Quite frankly most social issues I couldn't care less about. Economics and foreign policy are my key issues, and at times I have supported both parties in approaches and reforms. It can be draining at times because it's simple to find yourself in the middle of both sides in an argument, fighting off rhetoric and talking points seemingly without an ally in the world.

The bottom line my friend? I figure that, rather than voting a spectrum it is most wise to vote based upon the few things that are most important to you, AT THAT TIME, and to be sure to revisit the issues and their importance regularly. For instance, I tend to (loosely) side with many environmental causes which are a Democrat issue. Yet, it's hard to see the US being in any position to accomplish anything environmentally with a broken economy, and I'm convinced the Democrats are on a path to fiscal ruin.

JFK said it best with "Ask not what your country can do for you. Ask what you can do for your country." I think these are probably some of the most inspired words any US politician has ever uttered. I take that to mean that, in the very least, we should all strive to understand our nation's needs at any given time and attempt to put in power those most suited to serve those needs, understanding that needs will change and different people will be required. To be able to honestly do so means that one must never be led into blind ideological slavery to any political party or special interest.

Read August's signature once - while I believe that "never" is a strong word, I agree with it in principle.

[Platapus]

Don't take my word for it, though.

No worries, I don't. :)

[STEED]

Centrist?

Try this:

http://www.politicalcompass.org/

I did, found some of the questions a bit to much in the grey area.

[Armistead]

I use to be a hook, line and sinker GOP member, although I voted for a few state and local Dems.

Our government reminds me of a past employee I once had. Him and his wife fought like hell over everything, neither giving. They were divorcing and fighting over their few goods and trailer home. She wanted half. He actually got drunk, took a chainsaw and cut the thing in half, even caught on fire. In the end fighting over having to have it their way, nothing was left...That's what government has done, except were the ones with nothing left.

As I said elsewhere, I don't fit in with either party. Government as is has become so partisan, I don't ever see them doing anything. Both groups have some decent ideas on some things, but to admit the other side has ideas means they may get credit and neither side wants the other to have any credit, because it equals political points..

I'm much more liberal as I've gotten older, simply, I don't feel I have to force or judge people to live by my morals.

The fact is this next election will only show how bad and partisan things are.

[Seth8530]

Well, you're from Tennessee.
And your from Texas ^_^ just what are ya trying to imply here (;

[Seth8530]

Seth, sounds like you're an independant, which is where I think most people would fall in some shape or another if they exercised free thought. Instead, most people tend to let the parties think FOR them on most everything so long as that party agrees with their opinion on one or two things.

I fancy myself an independant although I no doubt lean conservative on most issues. Quite frankly most social issues I couldn't care less about. Economics and foreign policy are my key issues, and at times I have supported both parties in approaches and reforms. It can be draining at times because it's simple to find yourself in the middle of both sides in an argument, fighting off rhetoric and talking points seemingly without an ally in the world.

The bottom line my friend? I figure that, rather than voting a spectrum it is most wise to vote based upon the few things that are most important to you, AT THAT TIME, and to be sure to revisit the issues and their importance regularly. For instance, I tend to (loosely) side with many environmental causes which are a Democrat issue. Yet, it's hard to see the US being in any position to accomplish anything environmentally with a broken economy, and I'm convinced the Democrats are on a path to fiscal ruin.

JFK said it best with "Ask not what your country can do for you. Ask what you can do for your country." I think these are probably some of the most inspired words any US politician has ever uttered. I take that to mean that, in the very least, we should all strive to understand our nation's needs at any given time and attempt to put in power those most suited to serve those needs, understanding that needs will change and different people will be required. To be able to honestly do so means that one must never be led into blind ideological slavery to any political party or special interest.

Read August's signature once - while I believe that "never" is a strong word, I agree with it in principle.

I like the way you think, you seem to be very analytic of whats going on Sadly, im thinking that thier isnt a politician that i believe deserves to be voted into office.. THAT is why, im announcing my candidacy to run..

[Onkel Neal]

And your from Texas ^_^ just what are ya trying to imply here (;


Most of the original Texicans were from Tennessee.

[August]

Most of the original Texicans were from Tennessee.

Is Texican an amalgamation of Tennessean and Mexican?

[Skybird]

Where do i stand politicaly


Stand on side of the opinions that you have formed in the best way you can. What you get labelled as by others, is unimportant. Stamps they try to put on you, are unimportant. Common habits, traditions and hear-say and claims are unimportant. Important is that you are clear with your own conscience and your own intellectual analysis.

You will make yourself more enmies than friends with this, and you fit only between all chairs. But as they say: a man's fame is measured by the number of his enemies. :D

[Betonov]

You will make yourself more enmies than friends with this. But as they say: a man's fame is measured by the number of his enemies. :D

To augment this phrase with a Churchill quote: You have enemies, good, that means you've stood up for something in your life.

You'll have 2 types of enemies:
The ones that don't agree with you, but formed their opinions by themselves. But those kind of enemies are actually nice to have around (if they can make a civil conversation, aka not stuborn) as they will make a conversation quite interesting.
And the ones that don't agree with you and their opinion was made by someone else aka the sheep (baaaaaaaa). They will be stuborn, they will be uncivilized and they will be offended if proven wrong. And they come in mass like a mongolian horde. Except the mongolians were civilized compared to these guys.

[Seth8530]

Most of the original Texicans were from Tennessee.
Cool, guess ya learn something new everyday!

Stand on side of the opinions that you have formed in the best way you can. What you get labelled as by others, is unimportant. Stamps they try to put on you, are unimportant. Common habits, traditions and hear-say and claims are unimportant. Important is that you are clear with your own conscience and your own intellectual analysis.

You will make yourself more enmies than friends with this, and you fit only between all chairs. But as they say: a man's fame is measured by the number of his enemies. :D

oora for being controversial! Something you seem to excell at (; I like what your saying.

To augment this phrase with a Churchill quote: You have enemies, good, that means you've stood up for something in your life.

You'll have 2 types of enemies:
The ones that don't agree with you, but formed their opinions by themselves. But those kind of enemies are actually nice to have around (if they can make a civil conversation, aka not stuborn) as they will make a conversation quite interesting.
And the ones that don't agree with you and their opinion was made by someone else aka the sheep (baaaaaaaa). They will be stuborn, they will be uncivilized and they will be offended if proven wrong. And they come in mass like a mongolian horde. Except the mongolians were civilized compared to these guys.

Nice quote, tells alot about Mr. Churchill.

[nikimcbee]

Well, you're from Tennessee.

Well, it could be worse. You could be from arkansas:haha:.

[vienna]

And the ones that don't agree with you and their opinion was made by someone else aka the sheep (baaaaaaaa). They will be stuborn, they will be uncivilized and they will be offended if proven wrong. And they come in mass like a mongolian horde. Except the mongolians were civilized compared to these guys.


aka Rush Limbaugh's 'Ditto Heads'?

[August]

Well, it could be worse. You could be from arkansas:haha:.

Now there's an odd state name. How does Arkansas and Kansas get to be pronounced so differently?

[Torplexed]

Now there's an odd state name. How does Arkansas and Kansas get to be pronounced so differently?

When the first maps of the territory were drawn up, the areas names was spelled in a variety of ways. In Marquette and Joliet's "Journal of 1673", the Indian name is spelled AKANSEA. In LaSalle's map a few years later, it's spelled ACANSA. A map based on the journey of La Harpe in 1718-1722 refers to the river as the ARKANSAS and to the Indians as LES AKANSAS. In about 1811, Captain Zebulon Pike, a noted explorer, spelled it ARKANSAW.

During the early days of statehood, Arkansas' two U.S. Senators were divided on the spelling and pronunciation. One was always introduced as the senator from "ARkanSAW" and the other as the senator from "Ar-KANSAS." In 1881, the state's General Assembly passed a resolution declaring that the state's name should be spelled "Arkansas" but pronounced "Arkansaw."

Personally, I blame the Civil War...or Bill Clinton. :D