IntenseDebate - PapaDawg

13 years ago @ DEBATEitOUT.com - Would gun control redu... · 0 replies · +1 points

Just like our 535 idiots at the seat of our government . . . The lights are on but nobody's home!

13 years ago @ DEBATEitOUT.com - Would gun control redu... · 1 reply · +2 points

Hello? Debate it out censors? Hello? Is anybody there?

5 days ago I wrote an opinion about this question. When are you going to post it? What century are you going to post my comments?

I know you don't like my opinions because they go against your political views and actually contain common sense. If you really wanted people to debate you wouldn't censor our remarks because they might be practical but contrary to your views.

Hello? Debate it out censors? Hello? Is anybody there? Hello?

13 years ago @ DEBATEitOUT.com - Would gun control redu... · 2 replies · +2 points

Thank you. I went to post my comments on this issue, but "debate it out" doesn't like certain political words. My comments have to be cleared by their censors, I suppose. Debate it out needs to get with the program here and knock off this censoring! I mean, if you don't like people knocking your political posture, well, that is sort of juvenile now isn't it?

13 years ago @ DEBATEitOUT.com - What will happen on De... · 0 replies · +2 points

Really?

Do you really think that the majority of the general population of this planet will give up their long-sought-after stupidity so easily? I mean, after all, there is a general consensus world-wide that the now extinct Mayans were all-knowing in their mathematical calculations to which they applied their calender dates. Who among us mere modern mortals dare to go against the predictions of a long ago "civilization" that placed its hopes and dreams upon the altar of human sacrifice?

Just kidding. My warped sense of humor sometimes gets the best of me . . . B)

13 years ago @ DEBATEitOUT.com - Will more states legal... · 1 reply · -1 points

Colorado and Washington have legalized it, and CA, OR, and AZ (the only states that I know about, but there may be others that I do not know about) have legalized it for medical use. Since I first entered law enforcement back in 1962 I have noticed a definite move to make "recreational" narcotics use legal among those stupid enough to use dope. They still haven't figured out just why it is called "DOPE"! I could write volumes on what narcotics, including MJ, ends up doing to you body and reproductive system and eventually your future offspring. However, no one wants to listen to what one lone former cop has to say. They all just want to get high. To them, that is all that matters. Stupid is as stupid does.

13 years ago @ DEBATEitOUT.com - Will the Internet rema... · 0 replies · +2 points

Not if the U.N. has anything to say about it!

13 years ago @ DEBATEitOUT.com - What will happen on De... · 0 replies · +3 points

BEWARE ALL YE WHO READ THIS! J-A-D IS COMING ON 12/21/2012!

So what is J-A-D you ask?

Are you really ready for the answer?????????

Drum roll, please . . . .

J(ust)-A(nother)-D(ay) B)

13 years ago @ DEBATEitOUT.com - Should the U.S. remove... · 0 replies · +1 points

Which ever political party loses the Presidential election ALWAYS wants to end the electoral college.

Before anyone can make an intelligent answer to that question, they must completely understand what the electoral college is and why it was implemented in the first place. Hint; there were only thirteen states and very little educated population back then as most folks were illiterate, so only male landowners were allowed to vote (Landowners were usually educated to some degree and could read and write).

Now, from what I hear, there are some folks who want to do Presidential elections by county vote, some want to do it by popular vote, and some want to do it by state vote. My choice would be the popular vote as that way everyone's vote would count. However, since the electoral college favors the northeastern states the most, I doubt if there will ever be a change during my lifetime.

13 years ago @ DEBATEitOUT.com - Will New York City be ... · 1 reply · +1 points

Yes, we DO need a Department of Common Sense. This little argument is proof of that. Why? Have you noticed that you and I are the only ones debating this issue? And our specific disagreement is not the original issue, but wether or not (and yes that answer is definitely not) I used accurate scientific information and calculations to determine my statement. (I don't know if that is an admission that you just might be correct or not) However I think (and I might be wrong) that we both agree that NYC won't be under water anytime in the foreseeable future.

I know that I have a sense of humor (however warped as it may be), but do you? If you happen to live in NYC (which I know I never will), my question is . . . "How long can you tread water?" ;) B)

13 years ago @ DEBATEitOUT.com - Will New York City be ... · 3 replies · 0 points

Someone told me before this last election that what we need is a department of common sense. To have everyone on this planet be a mathematical analyst and calculate everything mathematically just doesn't make any sense.

I have been told that scientists come up with ideas and engineers turn their ideas into practical reality. In that sense, you being an engineer, then you should know that the reality that you have predicted is just not practical.

Am not trying to insult you either, but you need to input some much needed common sense into your calculations. Then you could conceivably become much more accomplished.

IntenseDebate Comment System

Connect with PapaDawg

My blogs/sites

People I'm following

PapaDawg