Jump to content

NS Mike D

BST Users
  • Posts

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won


Everything posted by NS Mike D

  1. you do understand why pedophilia is a crime with a victim and using a bathroom is a biological function? Perhaps not.
  2. the part of about there being crime and nit consensual sex was posted several times, but the dishonest narrative continues to be championed post after post. I can only deduce they are not that stupid to comprehend the difference between consensual and non-consensual sex so by continuing he illogical argument, they simply want to bas gays and those to defend the rights of gays.
  3. Seriously, Jim and Albie are using an example of 17 year old saying she was 14 as evidence of pedophilia to prove that Dems endorse that crime????? *
  4. as KoQ is suggesting, the devil is in the details There are a number of assumptions that go into the modeling. They all have a cost of providing reliable cash flow - the underlying contracts that the insurance companies use to lock up the guarantees are not cheap. The bucket system is a good visual to understand the basics of cash flow and inflation. It also helps understand your near term risk tolerance v long term. I didn't come up with it, it's been around for a long time. Fairly proven way modeling your investments and you update it every year. The whole life is being sold as a long term care substitute. I can't say that is wrong - early death benefits have been part of whole life for years. However, a trust and estate attorney showed me a much more effective way of doing estate planning to qualify for medicaid sooner - which is how most seniors deal with the incredible high cost of medical care in those final two years. Few people have the real resources to save for both retirement during their active senior years and the final medical expenses. If you ever look at whole life, or any retirement model, have them show you the projections if you need to access any cash (emergency) early. They often collapse. So you have to ask yourself, what if .....? and plan accordingly leaving some cash in cash.
  5. and there you have it. and example of when you have made a false argument and cannot defend it. what a waste
  6. I don't think yours was correct. Attacking the left in deflection is not the same as defending him. I saw it as you using the same stupid logic that has been accepted here since I've been a member - if you don't come out and denounce him, you support him. If there was any sort of track record for removing those types of posts in the past, you'd have no leg to stand on. You were correct in that Jim's most is equally dishonest - called it hyperbole if one must, but as logic goes, it's a dishonest straw man to deflect from the truth of the OP story.
  7. right. You need to suspend the origins of the "you aren't denouncing him, so you defend him" logic of the PG to support your assertion. It's was a strawman created and embraced for years. Now that a non-right winger is using it in a reflective manner, edits are forthcoming. Classic and par for the course. Let's see when hyperbole will be on the radar now that it's been condoned as an acceptable from of trolling
  8. there does appear to be a pattern when the dictionary is brought out versus when words are dismissed as hyperbole or in this case, using insulting sarcasm because he said "blame the left" when there are post after post where the left was attacked in deflection from story about a republican molesting a child.
  9. "Liberals would throw a pep-rally and prattle on about what good he did." ​and there were have the daily rationalizing why right wing garbage is welcome and liberal garbage is removed for derailing threads. While neither are intended to further on topic discussion, one is condoned while the other gets pretzel logic to ignore it's dishonesty. Then mock the member for seeing that they were equally dishonest with the petulant "in your head" comment.
  10. you nearly made pastrami. try it with a pepper rub.
  11. IMO, Weber isn't looking to compete with akorn just yet. I suspect they are going after the BGE high end market - the ones that spend a fortune on the high end outdoor kitchen and is already committed to spending that much, if not more. on their high end gassers. Weber sells a lot of $2000 gassers while there are $200 models with 5 year guarantees sitting right next to them with the same specs (albiet cheaper material). If it was just economics, logic says you can get a new cheap gasser every 5 years and be ahead of the game than buying a weber. Weber doesn't care, because they know people will pay for the brand. I think there are a lot of people with the cash who will recognize the weber brand, the sleek look and think it will be easier to use the weber than the BGE. Let's face it, a number or these folks will know the BGE but will think you need to be some sort of expert to use it, while the weber has brand is synonymous with easy to use. I think that ability to correct over shooting temperature may underscore that ease of use attraction
  12. gas smokers are cheap and effective. They do produce a different flavor, but some folks prefer it and the purist denounce it. There are a number of smokehouses (like Dave's) that use the same concept. gas as the main heat source with wood to add flavor. It's not a bad idea when you consider that heat and smoke have two different functions. They are better than electric because gas combustion produces moisture. There are some drawbacks, 1. The racks tend to be small which means you have to cut your ribs or brisket to fit them. No big deals and rib racks can help. 2. You will need a second tank. Unlike charcoal, wood or pellets, it's a lot harder to predict when you will run out of fuel, and be assured that murphy's law will make that happen at 3 am during an overnight cook. 3. They tend to be made out of thin leaky metal. Some mods may be in order to get better air flow control. At $99 you really can't go wrong. The biggest drawback is whether or not you start itching to upgrade.
  13. confusing economics verses race makes no sense. Bringing in Newport as an example of city liberals makes no sense. seems that you have no idea what you are taking about
  14. that is what Hamlet and FnA were attempting to do. That is the strawman/goal posts that were mentioned were about. Diversity was being pigeoned holed as a bad liberal thing and morning into illegal immigration and refugees. Diversity was a cause going back to the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution, when it was pronounced that all men are stead equally ----creator etc. This meant that liberty applied to all men, not just the British ruling class. It has come to include blacks and women who were denied liberty at the onset. Eco systems are more likely to survive when they are diversified. Societies and groups are at risk for failure when contrarian thinking isn't around and cultural assimilation prevents limits of problem solving. That doesn't mean that 11million people off the books or open doors is a good thing. It doesn't justify a wall when more civil solutions are available. But generally speaking, great empires found a way to keep diversified populations included in the empire, and not shut out.
  15. I no longer live in a democratic city. It had no bearing on your comment. I did live on the west side, the village and queens. All three areas would be decried as UN. The boundaries were along economic status, not race. You are commingling the two. Of course rich people don't live next to poor people. That's economically driven. has been from the beginning of time. The poor whites in the hamptons live far away from the waterfront rich whites.
  16. nice last line. not only was hamlet talking about immigration, and a large influx or a single different group. he was also sanitizing diversity to remove the concept of a broad collection of individuals benefits us all. When you talk about this do you think these programs that embrace a diverse collection of different individuals but do not view the broad tapestry as benefiting "us all" that was hamlets point, no? That it's a bad thing that drags down the country.
  17. which is it FnA Are diversity pushers the masses of liberals as was being portrayed in the thread or a smaller group of elitists that live in isolated neighborhoods? having lived in three different boroughs over a ten year period, I think you looking at a narrow sector to form your broad stroke about the dem stronghold in densly populated areas. newport is not what I would call a typical dem city.
  18. ^^^ given the opportunity to continue the "lucid" conversation, and ^^^^ predictable Bob and Weave.
  19. " - is not the same as worshiping the nebulous concept the left calls "diversity" - Hamlet you said "Oh, I think it is very much a cause to many people. " the floor is yours ......
  20. and then Tim jumps in and lectures me for derailing the thread. In this thread Salty finally says he thought my post about religion was about him. I can see how that happened. It was a proximity thing. I addressed post and then added a a thought I had about politics in general . So in here he was specific that the strawman he said I created was the region post. Took me all of a few seconds to clarify that I wasn't referring to him, now he says we are having lucid conversation . See how simple that is. Salty, If you just answered honestly when you are asked about posts you make, lucid conversation follow.
  21. no doubt he'll never explain which side he was taking. The general decision about diversity and it benefits or the narrow reframed narrative to trash liberals. Stop putting my actual posts in front of me and asking me to chose what i think.
  22. FnA trolls with this post: "Know who's always pushing for and defending so called divetsity? Those who reside nowhere near it." ​So I posted, "like dem strongholds in homogenous cities?' Tim deleted me for trolling. Gotta tip my hat to you FnA. Not sure if you saw it. I never saw it coming
  23. you read too much into my post. I never said you said it, I included it as a general observation why I think certain laws are being written. You said I was putting words in peoples mouths (you didn't say yours) I corrected you and took ownership that it was my opinion "I said it" was my response. If you didn't play games and asked me directly if I was referring to you, I would have most certainly clarified it, just as I did right here first time, I think you had no idea what you were arguing in that thread. I think you saw me and magish and chose to argue with us merely for the sake of arguing. I even posted in that thread that you appeared to be saying something similar to what magish and I were saying until you sided with Hamlets strawman.
  24. You switched gears Salty and refused to clarify. You were making posts about diversity and then shifted to the strawman and when asked you punted all over the place. What is so hard about reconciling the two contradicting points you made, other than playing carousel
  25. Totally agree. My posts, that did not mention anyone, opining why the goal posts were being moved and how diversity in a general sense was good lead to at least three good responses. Jrock and I moved that into a very interesting discussion. Tim decided that post that created interesting discussions related to the OP was off topic personal and derailing. I think it was because I used the phrase goal posts.
  • Create New...