Just another reason why I cant stand Liberal lefties


If homosexuality is a normal variant in human beings, as it appears to be, why would anyone want to terminate that? Would you terminate a left-handed child because your entire family is right-handed?

I lived in Switzerland and I am familiar with their “gun in every house”. The entire male population is basically their National Guard. But it is ONE gun, not the massive amount of armaments that U.S. gun-lovers have on hand. Also it is a country with an excellent health and mental health system. People with mental illness get treated; they don’t go out and buy guns at gun shows to wipe out their local post office, school, or family.

Talk to Europeans about our gun-kill rates…they are horrified. “Why don’t you change it?” they keep asking.

Didn’t George Bush repeal Clinton’s assault rifle ban? Now that’s a weapon that belongs ONLY in the hands of military and police.

We need some sanity here. Let’s license and control guns and not allow crazies to buy them unhindered.


Now you’re thinking!!!


Hitler was for gun control. It didn’t work out so well for the Jews.

Here’s another good article:

From the WSJ Opinion Archives
Gun Control Misfires in Europe
What’s behind the massacres in Germany, France and Switzerland?

Saturday, May 4, 2002 12:01 A.M. EDT

Sixteen people were killed during last week’s school shooting in Germany. This follows the killing of 14 regional legislators in Zug, a Swiss canton, last September, and the massacre of eight city council members in a Paris suburb last month. The three worst public shootings in the Western world during the past year all occurred in Europe, whose gun laws are exactly what gun-control advocates want the U.S. to adopt. Indeed, all three occurred in gun-free “safe zones.”

Germans who wish to get hold of a hunting rifle must undergo checks that can last a year, while those wanting a gun for sport must be a member of a club and obtain a license from the police. The French must apply for gun permits, which are granted only after an exhaustive background and medical record check and demonstrated need, with permits only valid for three years. Even Switzerland’s once famously liberal laws have become tighter. Swiss federal law now limits gun permits to only those who can demonstrate in advance a need for a weapon to protect themselves or others against a precisely specified danger.

The problem with such laws is that they take away guns from law-abiding citizens, while would-be criminals ignore them, leaving potential victims defenseless. The U.S. has shown that making guns more available is actually a better formula for law and order.

America has seen a major change from 1985, when just eight states had the most liberal right-to-carry laws, which automatically grant permits once applicants pass a criminal background check, pay their fees and in some cases complete a training class. Today the total is 33 states. Deaths and injuries from multiple-victim public shootings fell on average by 78% in states that passed such laws.

In Europe, by contrast, violent crime is rising. Many factors are responsible, but it’s clear that strict gun control laws aren’t helping.

In 1996, Britain banned handguns. The ban was so tight that even shooters training for the Olympics were forced to travel to other countries to practice. In the six years since the ban, gun crimes have risen by an astounding 40%. Britain now leads the U.S. by a wide margin in robberies and aggravated assaults. Although murder and rape rates are still lower than in the U.S., the difference is shrinking quickly. Dave Rogers, vice chairman of the Metropolitan Police Federation, said that despite the ban, “the underground supply of guns does not seem to have dried up at all.”

Australia also passed severe gun restrictions in 1996, banning most guns and making it a crime to use a gun defensively. In the subsequent four years, armed robberies rose by 51%, unarmed robberies by 37%, assaults by 24%, and kidnappings by 43%. While murders fell by 3%, manslaughter rose by 16%.

And both Britain and Australia have been thought to be ideal places for gun control because they are surrounded by water, making gun smuggling relatively difficult. By contrast smuggling is much easier on the Continent or within the U.S.

Gun-control advocates frequently ignore another inconvenient fact: Many countries with high homicide rates have gun bans. It is hard to think of a much more draconian police state than the former Soviet Union, with a ban on guns that dated back to the communist revolution. Yet newly released data show that from 1976 to 1985 the U.S.S.R.'s homicide rate was between 21% and 41% higher than that of the U.S.

Many French politicians complained during their presidential election that the shooting in Paris meant “it’s getting like in America, and we don’t want to see that here.” Americans may draw a different lesson from the evidence, and hope that they don’t become more like the Europeans.

Mr. Lott is a resident scholar at the American Enterprise Institute and the author of “More Guns, Less Crime” (University of Chicago Press, 2000).


The problem is it “sounds” good, but in reality it is not effectual…

I will say one thing… from what I’ve read here, you’re quite the world traveler, with health care, gun control, etc. all being better everywhere else you lived (which is bogus, IMHO) and yet you chose to live here in the USA, where all these issues are substandard according to your posts…

“Now that’s a weapon [assault rifle] that belongs ONLY in the hands of military and police.” - Problem is those pesky people who IGNORE the laws called criminals who will get their hands on them whether they are legal or not.

Despite what you see on TV, criminals use these type of weapons very little, as they are hard to conceal. In fact, more deaths using these types of weapons are from police use rather than the other way around.

If you do a basic search on the subject, you’ll find you are just parroting the media speak out there regarding guns in general. Do you know that you are statistically five times more likely to be stabbed to death vs. being shot by an automatic gun? Now what? Do we ban all butcher knives? Or do we continue to allow LAW ABIDING CITIZENS (or mentally stable) to buy WHATEVER type of knife they want?

If someone is going to kill you with a gun, and they can’t get one, they will find another way. If they are going to kill themselves via a gun, and they can’t get one, they will find another way.

Auto deaths outweigh gun deaths (combined), so why are you not proposing that cars be banned?

You would do yourself more justice and be better informed if you were to research BOTH sides of an issue before coming to a knee-jerk response… Remember, gun stats are lumped together no matter the cause (i.e. - criminal activity, self-defense, suicide, etc.).

With regards to “If homosexuality is a normal variant in human beings, as it appears to be, why would anyone want to terminate that? Would you terminate a left-handed child because your entire family is right-handed?”…

It’s as arbitrary a reason as any other reason, ESPECIALLY if you an atheist, and ultimately make you own decisions, right Funder ?.. Families in China routinely abort SOLELY because it’s a girl because of LIMITATIONS imposed on them from their government. If you are going to say that is wrong, my question would be why?

It’s OK to abort because you are not “emotionally” or “financially” ready (which is usually not the case no matter when), but not if it is a lefty or a homosexual? Would not both those conditions fall under being “emotionally” ready?

Your reasoning for this, and gun control, being that more CARS kill people than GUNS and abortions dwarfs them both… will be interesting…

BTW, I am left-handed… :biggrin

How do you come to a conclusion on a topic? Do you rely on a knee-jerk reaction to things, do you follow the masses in potential fear of non-conformity, are you focused on being politically correct, do you leave open your opinions for revision… do you delve into it listening to opinions on both sides, rely on your upbringing… how do you come to a determination of what YOU actually believe?..

“I am 100% in agreement that we need separation of church and state. That may be the most important liberty of all. Keep religious dogma away from our laws.”


“…reason and experience both forbid us to expect, that national morality can prevail in exclusion of religious principle…” -
George Washington, Farewell Address

“ It is impossible to rightly govern the world without God and Bible.” - George Washington

Your position is in direct conflict with our first President who was the first to govern with the laws of the land…

George Washington was a living breathing contradiction on NUMEROUS subjects.

George Washington who spoke of the evils of SLAVERY, yet OWNED over 200 SLAVES and wouldn’t have been able to build anywhere near the wealth he created without them. He did NOTHING about slavery while President of the United States. When Washington died his will declared that his then 300+ slaves would be freed ONLY upon the death of Washingtons wife. This at a time when the Washington’s were one of THE RICHEST families in the Country.

HOW GALANT!!! How many of those slaves DIED in bondage while Washingtons wife lived out her remaining years in the lap of luxury.

As if by Washington owning slaves that negates his principles in other areas… :rolleyes Your straw man does NOT change what I said… that Furnishedowners position was in contrast to Washingtons…

“We have no government armed in power capable of contending with human passions nbridled by morality and religion. Our Constitution was made only for a religious and moral people. It is wholly inadequate for the government of any other.” - John Adams, 2nd President of the US

“The proscribing any citizen as unworthy the public confidence by laying upon him an incapacity of being called to offices of trust and emolument unless he profess or renounce this or that religious opinion is depriving him injuriously of those privileges and advantages to which, in common with his fellow citizens, he has a natural right.” --Thomas Jefferson, 3rd President of the US

I could go on, but I think you get the point… But according to your assertion FDjake, the fact that he owned slaves should also negate all his other principle positions… :rolleyes Of course, that would only be if they disagreed with your flawed supposition… FYI, 8 out of 10 of our country’s first 10 Presidents owned slaves while in office…

As the first President of America, Washington was conscious of the very real risk of splitting apart the young republic over slavery. He did not advocate the abolition of slavery while in office, but did sign legislation enforcing the prohibition of slavery in the Northwest Territory, so he did take steps… remember where he was living… in the south…

"After the Revolution, Washington told an English visitor, “I clearly foresee that nothing but the rooting out of slavery can perpetuate the existence of our [Federal] union by consolidating it on a common bond of principle.”

[i][b]“it being among my first wishes to see some plan adopted, by which slavery in this country may be abolished by slow, sure, and imperceptible degrees” - George Washington

10 years later - “There is not a man living who wishes more sincerely than I do to see some plan adopted for the gradual abolition of slavery”[/b][/i]

He was dealing with political realities of the time… His final act on the subject was freeing the slaves in his will, yes, after his wife’s death…


The Founding Father’s position on the concept of “separation of church and state” is clear… they all exhort that the state should NOT be allowed to hinder the free exercise of religion or establish a state religion, but they felt from the Declaration of Independance forward that our freedoms were based on unalienable rights ENDOWED by our Creator… FREE EXERCISE not be abridged…

If you do not believe that our rights are endowed by our Creator, what do you base your rights on? If you are going to argue our laws, they are based on the former…

Our HISTORY is our history, and it does their memory injustice to mispresent their beliefs… the men and women, both free and slave who FOUGHT with their treasure and blood to this end, deserve more…

“Facts are stubborn things; and whatever may be our wishes, our inclinations, or the dictates of our passions, they cannot alter the state of facts and evidence.” - John Adams

I simply pointed out that EVERYONE including our FOUNDING FATHERS have CONFLICTS regarding their BELIEFS vs their actual PRACTICES.

You constantly quote our founding fathers and I thought it interesting to see the REALITY of how LIVES were LIVED versus what these people WROTE or what was written about them.

It actually reminded me of YOU. Someone who thinks in broad strokes and grand ideas but can’t finish a simple project on time.


They need to make a Bud light commercial for you.

"Real men of genius

Here’s to you Mr. ““Termite King”” defender of the right, master of the cut and paste guy.

You own a termite infested dump, but you would rather spend your time (NAY) waste your time arguing online with total strangers behind a fake name.

Mr. “Termite King” defender of the right, master of the cut and paste guy." (Sung to the tune of Real Men of genius)



I think I may have passed out for a few seconds from LAUGHING so hard!!!

:beer :beer :beer :beer :beer

You constantly quote our founding fathers and I thought it interesting to see the REALITY of how LIVES were LIVED versus what these people WROTE or what was written about them.

So you are saying that they wrote one thing that they knew would be best for the country BUT lived a completely different way. And what they WROTE is meaningless as they didn’t live that way.

FD, I would love for you to actually base what you are writing on factual information as Positive is. That way we can get to the bottom of things.

And Chris, the termite thing again… give it up. As you know, he is making money on the house. EVERY experienced investor has found hidden problems after they bought a house. Anyone would say otherwise is either a lair or an amateur.

You want FACTS??? Here’s the FACTS…

WASHINGTON owned OVER 200 SLAVES while he WROTE about how bad it was…He did absolutely NOTHING about slavery while President. Those are called FACTS!!!

People write what they WANT others to believe…What they DO, shows us how they REALLY lived their lives.

THAT HOOCH is called a FACT!!! If I tell a group that stealing is wrong and I’m stealing from them as they sit there…What I SAY is just BULLSH*T…What I’m DOING really shows these people what type of person I am.

You can make stats and facts say whatever you want them to say. You can cut and paste quote after quote after quote. IN the end ALL that matters is what you actually DO…Not what you SAY should be done.

Everything else is just SPIN.

The Republican party lost The White House, the House of Reps and the Senate because American people got sick of being told ONE THING while the EXACT OPPPOSITE was done right in front of their eyes.

Hooch, let them talk… they BOTH jump to their straw men of personal insults that have NOTHING to do with the subject at hand…

“Termite-infested” - It was along the outer rim of the house (approximately 10-13 feet) which did no structural damage… so not exactly “infested”… :rolleyes

Christopher, I am not aware of you being an active real estate investor… are you?

“but you would rather spend your time (NAY) waste your time arguing online with total strangers behind a fake name”

I’ve already expounded on my schedule for this project… point is, I will make what the self-appointed great FDjake made on his flip that cost him MORE money to get the same result… must be killing him that the rookie’s numbers were better than his… which is why I suspect he tries to demean it so often and will continue to do so… he can’t help himself…

No matter, EVERYONE sees it for what it is… Childish school-yard banter by someone supposedly in their 40’s… :rolleyes

“Someone who thinks in broad strokes and grand ideas but can’t finish a simple project on time”

My thoughts are specific, and as far as “on time” that is based on my schedule and specifics, not your’s…

What is laughable is that they both criticize both of us for spending time on this site, when they both spend MUCH MORE TIME on this site… with the majority of FDjakes post just personal attacks and straw men… just look at their stats… the overwhelming MAJORITY of FDjakes posts and time spent on this site are in Random Ramblings… :rolleyes


As a matter of fact I sold my last fully rehabbed investment property last may and made a nice profit of 30K thank you. I do however work with investors EVERY SINGLE DAY and give advice on structuring sales contracts, setting up HML loans, etc… So if your point is to make me look as a if I am spouting about a subject in which I am not familiar you failed.

FdJake gives stock advice here which is where he is supposed to post.

FDJake has made his money already. Every month you hold the property in question your profit goes down. So while you can dream about the money you hope to make; he has already made his money and is using it to make more money. I am quite sure if we add up all of Jakes money made from that one deal as well as on the deals he had had since then from the profit it will be a nice tidy sum.

When Jake and I had a beef a few weeks back I did some very thorough digging on him and what I discovered is he is investing in Cars, and Vintage Guitars, and Stocks, and Real Estate so I am quite sure that he knows what he is talking about.

You on the other hand spend countless hours baiting people with your rhetoric and then nit-picking when they don’t give you the EXACT answer you were looking for. Now who is childish? As I have said before arguing with you is like teaching a pig to dance. It never works and it just annoys the pig.

Looks like somebody thinks there better than you PostiveOutlook…

We get it Chris… your awesome, and im a potsmoker, and PositiveOutlook is a childish lazy bum who sits on his PC spewing rhetoric.

We get it. Your personal attacks are dead-on man. Your posts are greatly appreciated.


“He did NOTHING about slavery while President.”

Again, you are incorrect and painting with your “broad strokes”… from my previous post - “He did not advocate the abolition of slavery while in office, but did sign legislation enforcing the prohibition of slavery in the Northwest Territory”

“What they DO, shows us how they REALLY lived their lives”

Which is why I did not just talk about real estate, I put my money where my mouth was an invested… how I proceed is my business… It just so happens that in addition to the reasons I already provided, my son just got his learners permit, and wants to buy a car next year on his birthday, so he will be working with me this summer on finishing the project, so he can earn money for his car… so again, I have personal reasons that you know nothing of, but are more than willing to criticize for… Your opinion on how long I choose to work on this property has no effect on me personally, but it BORES everyone else, because just like your self-congratulation and insults, you do it ALL THE TIME… :banghead

“made a nice profit of 30K thank you”

Christopher - GREAT! Congratulations on your $30K! How long did it take you? I was not trying to make you “look as a if I am spouting about a subject in which I am not familiar you failed”… I can read, and I know you are in mortgages and participate in Financing, Hard Money forum…

So there was no failure, as it was just an assumption on your part… but you should know that according to FDJake’s standards, you are not an investor… :rolleyes

I don’t think I am better than anyone. That is what makes me the person I am and why I am so good at my job because I don’t judge people. I give everyone the benefit of the doubt no matter how screwed up their belief system might be.

On the other hand you and all your right wing cronies on this board feel the need to bash everything that does not fit into the little black and white box in which you live.

For example… Gun control. I am all for the right to bear arms, but c’mon does anyone really need to own an assault rifle for personal protection??? If you are in a situation where you need an assault rifle to protect yourself you are in serious trouble.

I do however think I am smarter than most people. My posts are not personal attacks all I am doing is pointing out the facts as I see them.

But that is what liberals do correct?