0
skyrider

Seriously, WHY are all the Mods here Ultra Libs?

Recommended Posts

Quote

Quote

...of course if you DID post your results and it turned out you WERE an ultra left-winger it might explain why you've been failing to meet your warning quota lately.



Ultra left-winger does not equal libertarian.



On the bright side, I enjoy my humor.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote


Just because someone gets a degree doesn't mean they are smart. All it means is they got the grades necessary to pass. That could be due to intelligence, but also could be cheating, a good bullshitter, etc.

As expensive as colleges have gotten, unless one has a way to pay for it besides going into massive debt, it just may not make economic sense for some careers anymore as well.



someone with a Bachelors still put in the effort and experience to earn 120 credits. One that opted not to go may still have a higher innate intelligence, but they haven't been tested.

For careers that have little to do with degree programs, the degree is more a validation of your ability to see a long project through.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

Quote


odd... I thought the point of the thread was a perceived imbalance in the moderation of this forum.


And pretty much the only way there would be a perceived "imbalance" would be if somebody thought there was something wrong.



One can see an imbalance even if it doesn't affect him.

I used to live in Orange Co, which at the time voted ~65-35 GOP, and then moved to the Bay Area, which can be as high as 80-20 Democrat. Totally imbalanced.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

Tom? he's pretty honest about his libertarianism - (libertarianism is definitely NOT conservative though - as it's not conservative on the social scale)



Right, but Libertarians are simply disgruntled Repubs; this is their way of rebelling. Look at Ron Paul, running back and forth as a Liber, then Repub, repeat several times. See, Libertarians claim they feel that the gov should stay out of our lives and keep taxes low, yet you just don't see them at pro-choice rallies and I'm sure not at gay ralleys, etc. However, they live at tea bagger ralleys and the sort. They claim stem cell research should be done, they GET FUCKING PISSED AT ANY TAX INCREASE. So they can check the box on leftist moral issues and beat the street with vigor on fiscal issues, rendering them Republicans who arean't moralists, which is all Libertarians are.

Quote

Quade? well......



Yep, Quade has his political fixation just perfect ;)

Quote

Billvon might be a liberal (bent with a bit of a superiority complex) - but certainly not a brainwashed Liberal (note the case).



Billvon is a true Libertarian, not just a pissed off Republican. Bill (errantly) thinks low taxes actually help the economy, but he truly wants the gov out of our lives in the form of intrusions about abortion, sexuality and other moral issues. Don't confuse Bill for a liberal, he has liberal positions, but not in the form of taxation. With that said, he isn't a dominant Libertarian in regard to fiscal issues, IOW's he doesn't cringe when Clinton raises the top marginal brkt from 31% to 40% as a typical pissed off Republican trying to understand fiscal policy would, Bill realizes that Reaganomics was stupid and that lowering taxes with moderation and common sense TO A REASONABLE POINT is fiscal responsibility. Most moronic Libertarians actually think that lowering taxes even more rather than implementing the stimulus, and letting teh banks fail would have been better; these morons can't read about history such as with the Great Depression and realize that would be a recipe for disaster. Even tho Bill is wrong, IMO, about lower taxes to a point leading to all around prosperity, he isn't so fanatical that he wants to lower it to 25%, 20%, 15% and keep going. He knows trickle-down failed twice; Hoover and Reagan and wouldn't advocate corporate takeovers as a good thing. He realizes that a combination of corporate control AND government redistribution is the key to fiscal success. The only rub I have with Bill is that he wants more corporate control and less gov redistribution than I do, but we're not off by a lot; I don't want complete Socialism.

Quote

But then again, most everyone here has a socially liberal (note case) bias that's reflected in libertarian preferences.



Right, lower case meaning Libertarians won't lose sleep if gay marriage is permanently struck down with the 28th Amendment and Abortion struck down too. Their social side is just a rationalization to pretend not to be Republican.

Quote

most everyone here has conservative positions too - only a couple Conservatives (note case) really are around here.



More than you credit; dominant Conservatives are just lock-stepped drones who refuse to buck their leaders like Limbaugh, Hannity, etc.

Quote

The only one I've met is BV, and he's a great guy.



Only one what? BTW, the deadline for sucking up has passed. :P

Quote

I think most are just cynical or playful and will play devil's advocate to keep the "true partisan believers" from either team frustrated



Most what?

Quote

90% of us here are socially liberal (i.e., we don't mind what others do one bit - or even care - unless it intrudes upon us).



Well, maybe socially passive. Socially liberal means you actually give a shit that gays can marry, most peopel here are social passivists.

Quote

The others (right and left) are just social control freaks that cannot handle any kind of diversity - they eventually grow up.



Yea, as well most social Nazis are just lock-stepped Republicans keeping the moral vote on the right side of the isle. Remember, true GOPers are just the Limbaugh variety who really don't care about moral issues, just greed. They realize tehy need the moral vote so they throw the religious nuts a bone every now and then.

Quote

90% of us here are fiscally conservative - we don't mind helping others out, but would rather do it voluntarily for things we believe in.



The fiscal side is what really defines a person's political position. As for voluntarily, that means, "Fuck off and deal with it;" we get it. Of course, unless it invloves a good ole boy RWer, then social svs are right it line an fair. Conservitards are a joke; they decry socialism until they need it. I know so many so-called conservatives who do just that; SO FUCKING MANY.

Just like with social issues, fiscal issues render the same kinds of idiots who slam the gavel and then sneak around the backside to be the hypocrites that they are.

Quote

The others (right and left) are just babies that want a free ride for groups of their choosing (for various reasons that they justify as noble or kind or whatever let's them sleep at night).



There is no distinction, take a liberal or a conservative and put them in need and watch them run for the social nipple at the same speed, diff is that the conservitard will then IMMEDIATELY turn and denounce socialism as justify his recent freebies as warranted for reasons X, Y and Z.

Quote

all the bickering is about pretty petty stuff once the baseline is really established



Right, teh baseline is healthcare, so what you're saying is the fight is over the baseline; couldn't agree more.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

Matt this is a myth Liberals continue to spew. It's just not true. The media are the last people to listen to since the media are Liberals and are in the business to brainwash people into whatever agenda they want to pursue.



http://www.cato.org/pub_display.php?pub_id=9880

FDR actually prolonged high unemployment: he tripled taxes; he signed laws that made it more expensive for employers to hire people, made discounting illegal, and authorized the destruction of food; and he launched costly infrastructure projects like the Tennessee Valley Authority that became a drag on states receiving TVA-subsidized electricity.

FDR tripled taxes, as in tripled the tax rate? Here's a great and dominant counter to your theory; it was Hoover raised the top marginal bracket 260% with the revenue act of 1932.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Revenue_Act_of_1932

The Revenue Act of 1932 (June 6, 1932, ch. 209, 47 Stat. 169) raised United States tax rates across the board, with the rate on top incomes rising from 25 percent to 63 percent. The estate tax was doubled and corporate taxes were raised by almost 15 percent.

Before you continue to make unfounded and incorrect, and of course the usual unsubstantiated claims, just pass on by.

IT IS YOUR RW RAGS THAT PROLIFERATE THE LIES AND GARBAGE.....CONSTANTLY.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

Quote

Quote

Quote

Hey Quade, you should take the political compass test (http://www.dropzone.com/cgi-bin/forum/gforum.cgi?post=2114986;) and update the thread so we can confirm this Ultra Lib moderator imbalance.
Billvon is clearly sticking out already.


Mostly because I don't agree with a number of assumptions they've made, I don't like two dimensional testing as a means for judging ones worth and they've never revealed their methodology.
In other words, I think the test is flawed to begin with.


I don't think anyone is talking about "judging one's worth.".



Really? Because I think that's the entire direction of this thread. That somehow "right wing" equals "right way" and "liberal" equals "wrong way" when in fact most people on this forum don't even have an accurate description of what the word "liberal" means.



Or what ringht wing and left wing mean and the origin of the terms.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

Quote

I actually do believe in "he who rules the least, rules the best"



Concur.

How very Libertarian of you, lefty. :P



Until you need the gov to force a greasy corp to act right or need social svs.....thne it's HELP ME GUBBMENT.... after that it's back to wanting a small gov.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

Really? Because I think that's the entire direction of this thread. That somehow "right wing" equals "right way" and "liberal" equals "wrong way" when in fact most people on this forum don't even have an accurate description of what the word "liberal" means.


Politically, it has been defined with regard to application of government. That is to say, should we address problem X, Y or Z with a liberal dose of government, or should we be conservative in our use of government in seeking a solution?



Windsor, you are quite possibly one of the most intelligent and erudite posters on this forum and I've thought so for a long time, even before this forum existed and me having an opportunity to watch you post way back on AVSig.

However, you certainly must be aware that what you've written is pretty much only how liberalism has been defined by the "newspeak" of the right since about the time of the New Deal and even then only in the US.

What you have posted, specifically about its application of government to issues is wrong in terms of the classic use of the term in political science.

Virtually all of the founding fathers of the US were "liberals" in the classic use of the term. Read John Locke.

As I previously stated, most people on this forum don't seem to have an accurate description of what "liberal" means.
quade -
The World's Most Boring Skydiver

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

Virtually all of the founding fathers of the US were "liberals" in the classic use of the term. Read John Locke.

As I previously stated, most people on this forum don't seem to have an accurate description of what "liberal" means.



Neo-conservatism renders the primordial concept of:

Liberal = bad
Conservatism = good

with no explanation of why.

Lincoln was probably the most liberal of all presidents, yet he was also the 1st Republican, not considering the Democrat-Republican Party. Today's Republicans would have been 1860's Democrats.

I can't think of a time when liberal reform wasn't beneficial to/for most.

- Slavery abolition
- Woman's suffrage
- 1964 Civil Rights Act

Today's Republicans seem to think that Dems have always been the liberals and R's always conservative. Around Wilson's time they switched positions. Liberal has always meant, "progressive" but Democrat hasn't always meant, "liberal."

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
>Just because someone gets a degree doesn't mean they are smart.

And just because someone wins a 4-way competition doesn't necessarily mean that they are any good at 4-way. But they _probably_ are better than people who don't win them.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote


Right, but Libertarians are simply disgruntled Repubs; this is their way of rebelling. Look at Ron Paul, running back and forth as a Liber, then Repub, repeat several times. See, Libertarians claim they feel that the gov should stay out of our lives and keep taxes low, yet you just don't see them at pro-choice rallies and I'm sure not at gay ralleys, etc.



How do you know? Do you survey? Or are these facts pulled out of your ass? By definition, a Libertarian is going to support gay marriage. What you're claiming is that all actual people are bastardized versions of the political creed.

Quote


Billvon is a true Libertarian, not just a pissed off Republican.



You just said that all Libertarians are pissed off Republicans. But you didn't really mean that? Make up your mind already. Since you're claiming to be a mind reader, you should be able to tell what you're thinking.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

>Just because someone gets a degree doesn't mean they are smart.

And just because someone wins a 4-way competition doesn't necessarily mean that they are any good at 4-way. But they _probably_ are better than people who don't win them.



You can cheat, BS, and/or lie and possibly get a degree. How would those enable you to win a 4 way comp? :S
Stupidity if left untreated is self-correcting
If ya can't be good, look good, if that fails, make 'em laugh.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
>You can cheat, BS, and/or lie and possibly get a degree. How would those
>enable you to win a 4 way comp?

Same way. You could cheat, lie or BS. You could even be the only team in your division, which isn't even cheating.

Still, most people who win 4-way competitions are better at 4-way than people who don't win 4-way competitions.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

>You can cheat, BS, and/or lie and possibly get a degree. How would those
>enable you to win a 4 way comp?

Same way. You could cheat, lie or BS. You could even be the only team in your division, which isn't even cheating.

Still, most people who win 4-way competitions are better at 4-way than people who don't win 4-way competitions.



Please explain how you can cheat, lie, or BS and turn more points on a videoed skydive. :|
Stupidity if left untreated is self-correcting
If ya can't be good, look good, if that fails, make 'em laugh.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
>Please explain how you can cheat, lie, or BS and turn more points on
>a videoed skydive.

Cameraman can speed up video playback as it's being dubbed.

Cameraman can look away from the door until after exit (old French trick.) Gets them a few more tenths of a second.

Cameraman can get on level or get way high during points you tend to bust (another old French trick.)

You can have someone jump in your place using your jumpsuit/rig. Judges generally do not check carefully.

You can substitute an entire other team's video. Again, judges generally don't check.

You can mess with the other team's camera without their knowledge. Simply zooming them in all the way just before climbout will do the trick; video bust.

There are lots of ways. But again, most people who win 4-way competitions do so just because they're good 4-way skydivers.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

>Just because someone gets a degree doesn't mean they are smart.

And just because someone wins a 4-way competition doesn't necessarily mean that they are any good at 4-way. But they _probably_ are better than people who don't win them.



that would be a much better analogy if degrees were only handed out to the top XX percentage of the class.

Or to be more specific to your analogy, if you were discussing someone at the top of their college class.

To say that someone who enters and jumps in all rounds in a 4-way competition is better than someone who doesn't is off the mark. That's what a degree means. Someone who entered college and completed all their classes.
--
Rob

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

>Please explain how you can cheat, lie, or BS and turn more points on
>a videoed skydive.

Cameraman can speed up video playback as it's being dubbed.

Cameraman can look away from the door until after exit (old French trick.) Gets them a few more tenths of a second.

Cameraman can get on level or get way high during points you tend to bust (another old French trick.)

You can have someone jump in your place using your jumpsuit/rig. Judges generally do not check carefully.

You can substitute an entire other team's video. Again, judges generally don't check.

You can mess with the other team's camera without their knowledge. Simply zooming them in all the way just before climbout will do the trick; video bust.

There are lots of ways. But again, most people who win 4-way competitions do so just because they're good 4-way skydivers.



Fair enough. I'll take a different tactic. ;)

Winning a competition is not the same as getting a diploma. In a competition there's only one winner per group. While there is a valedictorian, all the others who meet the requirements "win" a diploma as well.
Stupidity if left untreated is self-correcting
If ya can't be good, look good, if that fails, make 'em laugh.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

Quote

>Just because someone gets a degree doesn't mean they are smart.

And just because someone wins a 4-way competition doesn't necessarily mean that they are any good at 4-way. But they _probably_ are better than people who don't win them.



You can cheat, BS, and/or lie and possibly get a degree. How would those enable you to win a 4 way comp? :S


You've never paid attention to 4-way at the international level; have you?
quade -
The World's Most Boring Skydiver

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

Please explain how you can cheat, lie, or BS and turn more points on a videoed skydive. :|



I agree that it's harder to cheat on a video'd skydive than on a college test.

However, there have been people who "take advantage" of lax rules in this sport.

Thread drift warning!

One story is from the way-old days, when style (the old fashioned turn-turn-backloop kind) was judged through telemeters (big binoculars) from the ground, because freefall video hadn't been invented yet. One competitor was said to have just taken off his motorcycle helmet in freefall, waved it back and forth a couple of times, and then put it back on. From a distance, through the grainy telemeters, it looked like an amazingly fast legal style series.

Another example: A seasoned style and accuracy competitor wanted to compete in the collegiate national competition, but wasn't in college. So they enrolled for one class for one semester to meet the qualifications of being a college student, without any real intention of attending the classes. The real full-time college students in the competition were easy to beat.

And in more recent times, there have been plenty of RW competitors who took advantage of the experience requirements to jump in classes that were really beneath their skill level, in order to improve their chances of winning a medal. For example, three guys with thousands of jumps each, might pick up a fourth who has a few hundred, but is very talented, and then beat everyone else in the intermediate class, which is really intended for more novice team jumpers.

Yep, there are people who are unethical and willing to bend the rules. But they are few and far between, and the rules have been tightened up because of such abuses to eliminate them. Mostly.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
>In a competition there's only one winner per group. While there is a
>valedictorian, all the others who meet the requirements "win" a diploma
>as well.

OK. In that case, change the analogy to someone who participates in, and gets, a big way world record. All the people on the record - even the ones who sucked but never got cut - "win" a record.

Nevertheless, it is fair to say that, in general, the people who get world records are better bigway skydivers than people who have not gotten world records. Even though there are undoubtedly exceptions.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote



To say that someone who enters and jumps in all rounds in a 4-way competition is better than someone who doesn't is off the mark. That's what a degree means. Someone who entered college and completed all their classes.



At our school you have to PASS all your classes with a "C" average or better. Just completing them gets you nothing.
...

The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

Quote

So for all the University educated people who majored in business, science, technology, engineering and medical fields (plus a few others) my hat goes off to you people. You are very smart.



Just because someone gets a degree doesn't mean they are smart. All it means is they got the grades necessary to pass. That could be due to intelligence, but also could be cheating, a good bullshitter, etc.

As expensive as colleges have gotten, unless one has a way to pay for it besides going into massive debt, it just may not make economic sense for some careers anymore as well.



So what qualifications would you suggest for the folks who design the planes you fly in and the bridges you drive over?
...

The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

Quote



To say that someone who enters and jumps in all rounds in a 4-way competition is better than someone who doesn't is off the mark. That's what a degree means. Someone who entered college and completed all their classes.



At our school you have to PASS all your classes with a "C" average or better. Just completing them gets you nothing.



I thought about that while writing that. I should have added it. doing too many things at once
--
Rob

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

0