Travel Ban

[Balsy]

Scott Frantz, BAMF.

[skip-zip]

On 7/12/2017 at 1:50 PM, kreed5120 said:

we have more liberals living in this country than we do conservatives. That's a fact.

 

Then maybe you should tell them to stop voting so many Republicans into office?

 

President 

Senate

House of Representatives

33 of the 50 State Governors 

32 of the 50 State Legislatures

 

And more locally, Ohio chose the current President by nearly a Half MILLION votes.  

 

Like I said previously.  If you don't like what's going on, VOTE.  That's a "right" that is unquestionably yours.  You will always have ONE, just like everyone else who has decided to choose the leaders referred to above to represent us, make our laws, and enforce them.  Blocking streets and vandalizing businesses doesn't change that.  

 

[zen]

Any doors that have been closed on Millennials were not closed by anyone arguing on this board.   They were closed by the fiscal criminal negligence of the previous two or three generations.   No your hard work will not pay off.   It can't.    It's what they teach you in macro-economics 101.   If your nations GDP runs in a major deficit for a long time and you have to borrow massive debt from other nations, your Standard of Living absolutely must suffer an economic correction.   Cut right down to the core of the matter, if your nation as a whole is producing less and buying more, you need to produce more to offset your debt or pay for it with lower standard of living.    There are no good high paying jobs for making things because on-the-whole, you aren't buying your own things as a national economy.  

There are ways to offset the loss of your standard of living.  Tricks that the government and fed does.   Borrowing and printing money are the most obvious.  

If you think the doors are closing now, just wait.   The real correction hasn't really even started yet.   You can thank everyone from the boomers to Gen-X.   You're Fukkked!   Political parties have nothing to do with it.   They were and are all corrupt and criminally negligent arseholes, and they are untouchable.

Edited July 14, 2017 by zen

[kreed5120]

1 hour ago, skip-zip said:

 

Then maybe you should tell them to stop voting so many Republicans into office?

 

President 

Senate

House of Representatives

33 of the 50 State Governors 

32 of the 50 State Legislatures

 

And more locally, Ohio chose the current President by nearly a Half MILLION votes.  

 

Like I said previously.  If you don't like what's going on, VOTE.  That's a "right" that is unquestionably yours.  You will always have ONE, just like everyone else who has decided to choose the leaders referred to above to represent us, make our laws, and enforce them.  Blocking streets and vandalizing businesses doesn't change that.  

 

I do vote and once again I don't identify myself as a liberal. I wasn't blocking streets and vandalizing nor were anyone that I know personally. Once again there were MORE liberals that voted. See the numbers that Balsy and I posted. Liberals are just more concentrated in large population centers. Cities like Chicago, Philadelphia, and LA vote are landslide victories for liberals where they pull anywhere from 85-90% of the vote. The fact they are so concentrated and not more spread out is what costs them seats.

 

Obviously its you who doesn't understand how the system operates.

[kreed5120]

7 minutes ago, zen said:

Any doors that have been closed on Millennials were not closed by anyone arguing on this board.   They were closed by the fiscal criminal negligence of the previous two or three generations.   No your hard work will not pay off.   It can't.    It's what they teach you in macro-economics 101.   If your nations GDP runs in a major deficit for a long time and you have to borrow massive debt from other nations, your Standard of Living absolutely must suffer an economic correction.   Cut right down to the core of the matter, if your nation as a whole is producing less and buying more, you need to produce more to offset your debt or pay for it with lower standard of living.    There are no good high paying jobs for making things because on-the-whole, you aren't buying your own things as a national economy.  

There are ways to offset the loss of your standard of living.  Tricks that the government and fed does.   Borrowing and printing money are the most obvious.  

If you think the doors are closing now, just wait.   The real correction hasn't really even started yet.   You can thank everyone from the boomers to Gen-X.   You're Fukkked!   Political parties have nothing to do with it.   They were and are all corrupt and criminally negligent arseholes, and they are untouchable.

⬆ This guy gets it.

[skip-zip]

2 hours ago, kreed5120 said:

Obviously its you who doesn't understand how the system operates.

 

Of course. I'm just a moron in my 50's who doesn't understand politics, loves to discriminate against people, and is tensely waiting for the Millennials Apocalypse to take over the nation's elections.  All of which also has nothing to do with the current Republican dominance of elected offices, voted in by this country's supposed "liberal majority".  Maybe they're just mistakenly coloring in the wrong circle on the ballot  

 

I actually had no idea that urban centers vote overwhelmingly for democrats, which has long been the obvious reason for the situation in _______________(fill in any major city in America here).  And I also don't know a thing about districting of house seats (which, by the way, mix urban and rural areas in many cases).  Thanks for  enlightening me.   However, several of the major categories on that list are STATEWIDE or NATIONWIDE voting, which has nothing to do with where the population is concentrated within those states.  

 

It actually amuses me that so many are still piling on to their mountain of excuses 8 months after the latest wave of Conservatives were voted into office.  Should I mention that they are also 5-0 in races since November too (despite their expert predictions to the contrary)?  Maybe it will prompt another highly intellectual "you don't know what you're talking about" response? Followed by several more paragraphs to follow which will serve to educate me, and will certainly include something about the lack of Millennial-like righteousness in my life ?

 

 

 

 

[K92]

13 minutes ago, skip-zip said:

It actually amuses me that so many are still piling on to their mountain of excuses 8 months after the latest wave of Conservatives were voted into office.

There were x number of Republicans voted into office last go around.  I am guessing less than half of them are what I would call "conservative", at least by my definition.

[kreed5120]

1 hour ago, skip-zip said:

 

Of course. I'm just a moron in my 50's who doesn't understand politics, loves to discriminate against people, and is tensely waiting for the Millennials Apocalypse to take over the nation's elections.  All of which also has nothing to do with the current Republican dominance of elected offices, voted in by this country's supposed "liberal majority".  Maybe they're just mistakenly coloring in the wrong circle on the ballot  

 

I actually had no idea that urban centers vote overwhelmingly for democrats, which has long been the obvious reason for the situation in _______________(fill in any major city in America here).  And I also don't know a thing about districting of house seats (which, by the way, mix urban and rural areas in many cases).  Thanks for  enlightening me.   However, several of the major categories on that list are STATEWIDE or NATIONWIDE voting, which has nothing to do with where the population is concentrated within those states.  

 

It actually amuses me that so many are still piling on to their mountain of excuses 8 months after the latest wave of Conservatives were voted into office.  Should I mention that they are also 5-0 in races since November too (despite their expert predictions to the contrary)?  Maybe it will prompt another highly intellectual "you don't know what you're talking about" response? Followed by several more paragraphs to follow which will serve to educate me, and will certainly include something about the lack of Millennial-like righteousness in my life ?

We can go back and forth on this but at the end of the day there were more liberal voters than there were conservative voters. That's a fact. There has always been more states that are red than blue. That's nothing new to this election. The democrat states are just generally the larger ones where the candidates win in the large cities by a vast majority.

 

You have to remember many conservatives were disappointed with the Trump nomination because they felt he wasn't conservative enough, among other things. Once upon a time I defined myself as a democrat, but every election the democratic party has moved further away from the middle (hell Bernie Sanders was nearly their candidate), meanwhile, the Republicans have been running candidates closer to the middle as they know the typical conservative of 50 years ago wouldn't be winning in today's society. It's a big reason why Trump was able to flip registered democrats in states like Michigan and western PA. He appealed to the working middle class. A group democrats use to fight for, but have now abandoned to focus more on the lower class.

 

Who here is making excuses. Go back and read my earlier post. I've already stated the Republican candidates won fair and square. It still doesn't change the fact there are still more voting liberals in this country than there are conservatives. A number that is only going to continue to grow as your generation dies off and more millennials enter the voting population.

Edited July 14, 2017 by kreed5120

[skip-zip]

17 minutes ago, kreed5120 said:

Trump was able to flip registered democrats in states like Michigan and western PA. He appealed to the working middle class.

 

This part is true.  They are finally getting fed up.  

 

21 minutes ago, kreed5120 said:

It still doesn't change the fact there are still more voting liberals in this country than there are conservatives. A number that is only going to continue to grow as your generation dies off and more millennials enter the voting population.

 

Ah yes.  The dream of a liberal revolution is still alive.  You obviously weren't following my story earlier in the thread about growing up with all of the Liberal hippies in the 60s and 70s.  Guess what?  They grew up.  Just like every young generation.  And just like me and my 18 year old buddies who were looking for the next flower-painted Volkswagen Van that was heading to Berkeley.  We laugh about it today.  

[kreed5120]

27 minutes ago, skip-zip said:

Ah yes.  The dream of a liberal revolution is still alive.  You obviously weren't following my story earlier in the thread about growing up with all of the Liberal hippies in the 60s and 70s.  Guess what?  They grew up.  Just like every young generation.  And just like me and my 18 year old buddies who were looking for the next flower-painted Volkswagen Van that was heading to Berkeley.  We laugh about it today.  

Yes, and what came out of that was the civil rights movement. I've stated it before and I'll state it again your generation is WAY more accepting than what your parents and grandparents generation were. There has probably never been such a large generational gap. We are more accepting than your generation and whatever generation is after the millennials will likely be more accepting than we are. It's just the natural progression of our society. Republicans have been loosing up on the social issues because society has dictated they had to. A blatant racist could get elected in the deep south 100 years ago without a second thought. Today they would be extremely criticized.

Edited July 14, 2017 by kreed5120

[skip-zip]

You're still ignoring the most important factor that's characterized the voting population for decades.  Those liberal fanatics in their Teens and 20s (like me) don't stay that way.  They never do.  If they had, Democrats would be winning landslide elections today.  Instead, you see the results I posted earlier.  The numbers don't lie.  I can't remember a time where Republicans dominated public offices across the board like this.  So, If you contend that stances on social issues have "loosened" recently, it obviously didn't matter.  Other issues were clearly more important to voters.  But I guess you can keep hoping that the next young generation does not change, and will become the 50-70 year old liberals that break the mold. Good luck with that.  

[Balsy]

13 hours ago, zen said:

Any doors that have been closed on Millennials were not closed by anyone arguing on this board.   Political parties have nothing to do with it.   They were and are all corrupt and criminally negligent arseholes, and they are untouchable.

 

I agree, and disagree.  Where I disagree, is voting for parties and politicians that continue this crap.  Trump antithesis of the Criminally negligance of the past three generations, and Clinton was the antithesis of the negligently corrupt.  There have been those who have challenged the system but were defeated by it because of the pandering to Red-Haring issues (like polarizing people on Gay marriage, abortion, transgender people, climate change) while the system robs us all blind, and rigs itself in favor of those who have been corrupting the system.

Where those generations failed, is they failed to rein in.  There have been times where the reining in has happened in small part, only to have voters blindly vote in assholes hell bent on destroying what little was done in the name of some polarizing horse crap.

[Balsy]

16 hours ago, skip-zip said:

 

Then maybe you should tell them to stop voting so many Republicans into office?

 

President 

Senate

House of Representatives

33 of the 50 State Governors 

32 of the 50 State Legislatures

 

And more locally, Ohio chose the current President by nearly a Half MILLION votes.  

 

Like I said previously.  If you don't like what's going on, VOTE.  That's a "right" that is unquestionably yours.  You will always have ONE, just like everyone else who has decided to choose the leaders referred to above to represent us, make our laws, and enforce them.  Blocking streets and vandalizing businesses doesn't change that.  

 

 

One word Skip: gerrymandering.  That'll explain the House of Representatives for you.  It's rigged from the get-go.

As for the Senate...power is given to rural states over populous ones.  California (overwhelmingly Liberal with tens of millions of people) gets 2 votes, while North Dakota (couple hundred thousand people, largely conservative) gets 2 votes as well.  There's a reason any attempt to add states like Guam or Puerto Rico have been met with opposition; they'd likely balance the scale more than they are now.  And Amazingly, even though the Senate is stacked against the largely Liberal States, the senate is Liberal more times than it is conservative.  Funny, isn't it.

As for the State Governors and Legislatures, this doesn't mean those states are largely conservative.  It means the Democratic party has failed misserably to understand what it takes to win in the mid-west.  Standard of Living > Social Issues is key, and the morons on the coasts are blind to it.  Bernie Sanders isn't however.  But there is also a level of gerrrymandering on the state level that fucks over the citizens.  Creating super-power districts in favor of one party, instead of forceing competitive races.  Competitive races = battle of ideas.  Super-power districts = fringe assholes.

 

[Balsy]

9 hours ago, skip-zip said:

 

This part is true.  They are finally getting fed up.  

 

 

Ah yes.  The dream of a liberal revolution is still alive.  You obviously weren't following my story earlier in the thread about growing up with all of the Liberal hippies in the 60s and 70s.  Guess what?  They grew up.  Just like every young generation.  And just like me and my 18 year old buddies who were looking for the next flower-painted Volkswagen Van that was heading to Berkeley.  We laugh about it today.  

 

This is where I disagree with Kreed.  The Democratic party IMHO has shifted to the left on social issues; but shifted to the RIGHT on Military, Taxes, Social Security, Helathcare (ACA was a Republican plan back in the 80's...Obama failed as a leader, to push for the Liberal plan of universal healthcare).  The Republican party has shifted further to the Left.
 

Had Bernie Sanders been the Democratic nominee, Trump losses.  He appealed, and currently appeals, a great deal to the working class in this country.  Enough so to swing Pennsylvania and Michigan, Iowa and Wisconsin.  I wish I could say Ohio too, but I'm not willing to say it would.  If you compare some of the thing Trump said on the campaign stump, especially on trade and healthcare (Trump advocated in stump speeches all the time for a closer to universal than the crap republicans are passing now) and rebuilding infrastructure, to Bernie Sanders.  There was only one politician who has consistently polled in favorability double-digits above Trump during the election, and after: Bernie Sanders.  

And I'm tired of the freaking "grow-up" pandering you're throwing at us.  No Skip, you need to.  You're not smarter than us because of age.  There are no "secrets" that you suddenly no now that you're in your 50's that we won't no.  My grandfathers (both of them) are laughing in their graves at that comment, because they were older than you and wouldn't have agreed with a single word you espousing to us here.  Neither would my mother, who is slightly older than you by about a decade.  Either there's a drastic shift in the next decade of life, or your full of crap.  You think you know better than we do, but you're wrong.  We have access to more information now then ever in history, and we know what you're saying is horsecrap.  Said for decades by older people musing over their lost youths.  

 

3 hours ago, skip-zip said:

You're still ignoring the most important factor that's characterized the voting population for decades.  Those liberal fanatics in their Teens and 20s (like me) don't stay that way.  They never do.  If they had, Democrats would be winning landslide elections today.  Instead, you see the results I posted earlier.  The numbers don't lie.  I can't remember a time where Republicans dominated public offices across the board like this.  So, If you contend that stances on social issues have "loosened" recently, it obviously didn't matter.  Other issues were clearly more important to voters.  But I guess you can keep hoping that the next young generation does not change, and will become the 50-70 year old liberals that break the mold. Good luck with that.  

 

Here you go again, putting party labels on things.  Party labels have nothing to do with how people voted 40 years ago and now.  Democrats are not the holders of liberal ideas, despite the Republicans desperate attempts to demean/assign that over the decades.  Will we be more "conservative" than those younger than us?  Probably.  Will be more liberal than you guys as a whole?  ABSOLUTELY!  

Edited July 15, 2017 by Balsy

[Balsy]

11 hours ago, skip-zip said:

You're still ignoring the most important factor that's characterized the voting population for decades.  Those liberal fanatics in their Teens and 20s (like me) don't stay that way.  They never do.  

 

Here's actual research into the issue conducted by pew research.

"...while different age cohorts do have markedly different profiles, the relationship is considerably more complex than young=liberal and old=conservative..."

 

"On an individual level, of course, many people’s political views evolve over the course of their lives. But academic research indicates not only that generations have distinct political identities, but that most people’s basic  outlooks and orientations are set fairly early on in life...A recent paper by two Columbia University researchers that combined multiple survey data sources finds evidence of this sort of generational imprinting. Their study identified five main generations of presidential voters, each shaped by political events during their formative years: New Deal Democrats, Eisenhower Republicans, Baby Boomers, Reagan Conservatives and Millennials.

Looking at the youngest American adults, those ages 18 to 29, nearly one-in-five are what we call Young Outsiders — GOP leaners who favor limited government but are socially liberal. Almost exactly the same percentage are what we’ve termed the Next Generation Left, who tilt more to the Democrats but are wary of social-welfare programs. And many (17%) are Bystanders — not registered to vote, don’t follow politics and generally the least politically engaged. That’s the biggest share among all age brackets, though perhaps not entirely surprising."

 

Strong presidential imprinting:

 

 

Now if you actually gave enough of a damn Skip to read this post, this research mostly points to how Kreed and I are right about our claims.  It also demonstrates how your perceived "get more conservative as you get older" can be explained.

This research to me makes sense, because neurologically the brain fully matures by the age of 25...for women there's a slight shift towards ages 22, 23.   This is when the the prefrontal cortex fully develops, which is the part of the brain that undergoes considerable development in teenage years which leads to people almost universally identifying teenagers as assholes.  Which is why you can be right in your observations of those 18-25, but not accurate in your observations of those 25+.  People don't tend to radically shift their views after the age of 25.  I know you think they do, but the research supports otherwise.  Individuals might, but as a species not so much.

[Hilltopper]

Take a breath dude! BTW, spell-check is your friend. I sure hope that the other teachers UA produces have a better grasp of the basics of composition and grammar than you show on this forum.

 

Red Herring

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Red_herring

Edited July 15, 2017 by Hilltopper

[K92]

28 minutes ago, Hilltopper said:

Take a breath dude! BTW, spell-check is your friend. I sure hope that the other teachers UA produces have a better grasp of the basics of composition and grammer than you show on this forum.

 

Red Herring

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Red_herring

Ahem.  Grammar.

[Hilltopper]

3 hours ago, K92 said:

Ahem.  Grammar.

I'm not a teacher. Hell, I nevr evan gradiated collage! 

[skip-zip]

12 hours ago, Balsy said:

You're not smarter than us because of age.  There are no "secrets" that you suddenly no now that you're in your 50's that we won't no.

 

Did you mean "know"?

 

The statement I made about "liberals grow up" apparently was misconstrued enough that it launched  you into a Saturday Typing Marathon.  It had nothing to do with Neurological Development (but thanks for all of the information you provided on that very exciting topic this morning) or Being Smarter.   But there's no disputing that you gain knowledge (not the same as intelligence) as you get older.  The progression through stages in life where you are gaining more knowledge changes what's important to people, such as the challenges of owning a home, paying property taxes, raising children, managing/owning businesses, etc.  

 

Yes, there's certainly other pieces to the story than just "Young People are Liberal" and "Old People are Conservative".  But your chart showing that people who are Solidly Conservative rises from 4% to 21% (an increase of OVER 500% !!) with age, while the percentage of people who are Solidly Liberal decreases slightly with age, easily explains the voting differences that we've been seeing in the respective age categories.   

 

I hope you're finding something more fun to do this weekend than this.  

 

[kreed5120]

@skip-zip, the original post was about social inequality. If I currently feel gays shouldn't be refused services offered to everyone else solely because they are gay, I'm sorry there is no way in hell I'm going to change that opinion when I'm 50. 

 

Your may have changed your economic stance, but you still said you are for race equality. It wasn't something you "outgrew". Meanwhile, you are trying to say we will outgrow thinking gays should be treated equal.

[Hilltopper]

You need to look deeper at the cake baker case. The real issue is about artistic expression. The gay couple were longtime friends and customers of the bakery. If they had walked in and bought an off the shelf cake and not asked to have the decorator embellish it there would not be an issue. The issue is does the decorator have the right to not use their artistic expression to create something that violates their beliefs. What would your opinion be if a Nazi group demanded that a Jewish bakery decorate a cake for a rally denying the holocaust?  

Edited July 15, 2017 by Hilltopper

[skip-zip]

 

 

I tried to point that out to them.  It was about MAKING a gay-themed wedding cake.  Not someone saying "I won't sell you a cake in our store because you're gay."

 

1 hour ago, kreed5120 said:

I'm sorry there is no way in hell I'm going to change that opinion when I'm 50. 

  

Kreed, I think you essentially end the ability to debate this issue when you proclaim that you know how you'll view an issue decades from now.  Just for the record, my views on many things (I was a Liberal) are dramatically different than they were decades ago.  I also have no idea how I will see them decades from now.  And maybe most  significantly, how I will rank each of them in terms of how important they are to my life is completely undetermined.  

 

All we know for sure is what people currently in those age groups say, and how they vote.  And that changes.   

 

1 hour ago, kreed5120 said:

Your may have changed your economic stance, but you still said you are for race equality.

 

When did I say that my views on racial issues have always been the same?  If I did, I'd be lying.  

Edited July 15, 2017 by skip-zip

[Balsy]

3 hours ago, Hilltopper said:

You need to look deeper at the cake baker case. The real issue is about artistic expression. The gay couple were longtime friends and customers of the bakery. If they had walked in and bought an off the shelf cake and not asked to have the decorator embellish it there would not be an issue. The issue is does the decorator have the right to not use their artistic expression to create something that violates their beliefs. What would your opinion be if a Nazi group demanded that a Jewish bakery decorate a cake for a rally denying the holocaust?  

 

Oh bullshit.  What if an atheist walks into the store and buys a cake and wants the atheist symbol embellished on it.  That could violate the beliefs of the store owner as well.  Except, currently you cannot discriminate against people based upon religions (of which absence of one is protected under law as well). 

Like literally the worst argument.  If it was about artistic expression; Republicans could discriminate against Democrats.   Democrats against Republicans.  Burnettes against Blondes, Blue Eyed people against Brown eyed people.  It's just a dumb argument Hilltopper, sorry bud.

For your Nazi Group Jewish Bakery denying the holocaust; they would also be discriminating and it would be wrong.  Look, people are SUPPOSED to be protected equally under the law period.  No matter how vial their speech, or how vial their actions or beliefs, so long as they don't impede/harm others directly.  That's why the KKK can still hold rallies, thats why the wackos of the Westboro Baptist Church can go protest military funerals.  Thats because we live in a country that is run by a rule of law.  Our country isn't supposed to take sides; it's supposed to make a level playing field.  If you don't want to play in a level playing field, because of the chance someone might walk into your store and ask you to perform a service that you offer to everyone else, but something you don't agree with, then don't open your business.

 

Also, it's poor business.  Money is money, no matter who gives it to you.

 

[Balsy]

5 hours ago, skip-zip said:

 

Did you mean "know"?

 

The statement I made about "liberals grow up" apparently was misconstrued enough that it launched  you into a Saturday Typing Marathon.  It had nothing to do with Neurological Development (but thanks for all of the information you provided on that very exciting topic this morning) or Being Smarter.   But there's no disputing that you gain knowledge (not the same as intelligence) as you get older.  The progression through stages in life where you are gaining more knowledge changes what's important to people, such as the challenges of owning a home, paying property taxes, raising children, managing/owning businesses, etc.  

 

Yes, there's certainly other pieces to the story than just "Young People are Liberal" and "Old People are Conservative".  But your chart showing that people who are Solidly Conservative rises from 4% to 21% (an increase of OVER 500% !!) with age, while the percentage of people who are Solidly Liberal decreases slightly with age, easily explains the voting differences that we've been seeing in the respective age categories.   

 

I hope you're finding something more fun to do this weekend than this.  

 

 

I think you missed something.  The chart is a snapshot of NOW, not a progression of one generation over time.  The second graph shows that people who came of age during specific presidencies, don't really seem to change their loyalties (despite the argument you're trying to make to the contrary).  Parties, sure but not really that much, core issues that were represented by the candidates who were in those elections, not much.  So no it's not an increase of 21% from 4% it's that the younger's have a shift away from hardline conservatives and more towards "bystanders" and more liberal stances.  Of course, you needed to read the article to understand that...or magically you're getting something out of there I didn't.  

 

The reason I brought up the Neurological development, is it could explain your claim that "people view things differently in their older age then when they were young" claim.  But no, age does not equal gaining knowledge, experiences does and seeking new/different experiences can.  Are you saying younger people can't be more knowledgable than older people?  My sister bought a house, hasn't shifted her views one bit, as have many of my friends.  I have been a manager of a business in charge of making financial decisions and hiring/firing people...hasn't changed my positions.  If anything, it's shifted me in more away from the direction that you claim I should be going in.  I haven't raised children, but I work with them on a daily basis and their families so I'm not blind to understanding.  One does not have to have done things to understand them Skip.  I didn't have to sink with the Titanic to sympathize with how terrible of an experience it was for the people who did, or to think of how to do things better.  Both my grandfathers didn't end on the same political spectrum as you did Skip, and they did all the stuff you did and were older.  So why the discrepancy?   Please stop being condescending.

 

There's a saying I love:  "When I graduated from High school I knew everything.  Then I graduated from College and I thought, I knew everything.  Then I gained a graduate degree and learned that I know nothing.  I finally achieved a PhD and learned that neither does anyone else".  Humility should come with age, not assurance that the way you see things is the right way. 

I did actually have fun things this weekend, I had a wonderful date this late-morning/afternoon thanks for asking.

[K92]

I went into Giant Eagle and wanted a cake inscribed with "eat-bite-f-suck-gobble-nibble-chew, nipple-bosom-hairpie-fingerf-screw" and I was rebuffed.  Should I contact the ACLU?

Edited July 16, 2017 by K92