Pretty girls with petty politics.

[Tingkai]

Originally posted by Alexander's Horse
It's always been the case that the right wing has better chicks, and more willing.

You can't deny that.

Who bothers finding out if a woman is right or left. If she's willing that's all that matter.

[dannubis]

Originally posted by Ben Kenobi


But that takes talent to write that way, to convey these emotions.

Thanks for demonstrating my point.

hitler's "mein kampf" is also written in a very clear language. and it conveyd his emotions in a very clear way. what was your point again ?

[Stefu]

HOTT

[Ogie Oglethorpe]

Regarding the OP, this was an excerpt of an article that was supposed to be written for the USA today as a humor take from the right wing wack job POV.

Correspondingly the deal was to allow Michael Moore his opportunity to spount his left wing drivel at the GOP convention.

USA today censored Coulter on this one and would not run her article. Any takers on whether Michael Moore will be allowed his opportunity to spout his hatred?

[SpencerH]

I think she's quite humorous. She's certainly better looking than that blob of **** Moore (who has no sense of humor).

[GePap]

Originally posted by Ogie Oglethorpe

USA today censored Coulter on this one and would not run her article. Any takers on whether Michael Moore will be allowed his opportunity to spout his hatred?

Well, if he is less offensive and more humorous than this right wing intellectual pornographer, certainly his will.

[MichaeltheGreat]

Originally posted by KrazyHorse
I really doubt it.

Violence is a very common cause of death among tribal societies.

Much more so than in more developed societeies.

Increased population density and work specialization does increase the number of possible ways to die nastily and early, but for the most part, native conflict (excluding the central and south American empires) was small scale, local actions involving spontaneous contact or competition for resources.

There just weren't enough of them close enough together to generate really high numbers of battle deaths compared to death from other causes.

[MichaeltheGreat]

Originally posted by Ogie Oglethorpe
Regarding the OP, this was an excerpt of an article that was supposed to be written for the USA today as a humor take from the right wing wack job POV.

Correspondingly the deal was to allow Michael Moore his opportunity to spount his left wing drivel at the GOP convention.

USA today censored Coulter on this one and would not run her article. Any takers on whether Michael Moore will be allowed his opportunity to spout his hatred?

Has he said all Republicans are traitors, or spawn of satan? But yeah, you're right, I guess splicing pictures of Bush family members being all buddy-buddy with their Saudi masters over funny background music is "hatred." We should really be thankful to those generous Saudis for all they do for our economy.

[Last Conformist]

It occurs to me that this thread has reached five pages without anyone pointing out the arguably insulting in her implicit assumption that pretty girls chose political ideologies based on their male adherents' forwardness.

[GePap]

MtG, don;t you know that calling someone a liar and stupid is on the same plane as devil spawns and traitors? It shows an equal depth of hatred most certainly.....

[MrFun]

Originally posted by MichaeltheGreat


Has he said all Republicans are traitors, or spawn of satan? But yeah, you're right, I guess splicing pictures of Bush family members being all buddy-buddy with their Saudi masters over funny background music is "hatred." We should really be thankful to those generous Saudis for all they do for our economy.

That does bring up a question that I have been wondering about of late . . . . .


is the United States a puppet of Saudi Arabia, or is Saudi Arabia a puppet of United States?

[KrazyHorse]

Originally posted by General Ludd
Europeans would be worse simply through capacity to be so, if nothing else. Who's going to have more violence and savagery, nomadic tribes and small empires spread across a huge continent, or large imperialist empires who're all crowded together on a small continent and invading others?

And yet if you compare the rates of violent deaths I can almost guarantee you that NA in 1491 beat Europe in 1491

The thing about centralised governments is that they tend to monopolise violence, both as a tool of repression and of conquest.

When the violence occurs in this type of system it is massive and devastating, however if you add the numbers up you will generally find that the supposedly peaceful indigenous societies have a higher rate of violent death through a steadily higher murder rate (no police force, no jail, less societal consequences for personal violence) and through almost constant low-level warfare with neighbouring social groups.

[St Leo]

Originally posted by Last Conformist
She better never visit Europe.

Europe is a Lie of Evil Liberal Nutbags. It doesn't exist. That's what my Leprechaun friend told me and Leprechauns never lie.

[chequita guevara]

Originally posted by KrazyHorse
And yet if you compare the rates of violent deaths I can almost guarantee you that NA in 1491 beat Europe in 1491

I'd be willing to dispute you.

[KrazyHorse]

Originally posted by MichaeltheGreat


Increased population density and work specialization does increase the number of possible ways to die nastily and early, but for the most part, native conflict (excluding the central and south American empires) was small scale, local actions involving spontaneous contact or competition for resources.

There just weren't enough of them close enough together to generate really high numbers of battle deaths compared to death from other causes.

Untrue. I've read a couple of studies on this which find a much higher rate of violent deaths among native populations than you would expect to.

The point is twofold:

1) Murders occur much more frequently in societies where the government has not taken over most of the uses of violence for its own ends. There's simply more of a chance of "getting away" (with regards both to judicial consequences and social consequences) with murder in tribal societies than in a centralised state and so there are more murders.

2) The warfare that occurs is almost constant. Raids go on on a monthly basis (depending on which area you're talking about). There is no all-out warfare, but the fact that the individual "states" are so much tinier (and thus have a much larger border to area ratio) means that a much larger proportion of a tribe's population is engaged in this warfare than you would expect in a centralised state. Almost all the men will participate. It would have been a rare male who had not seen battle in most tribal societies (again, with some notable exceptions like the Inuit). In Europe, on the other hand, it was a rare generation that saw most of its young men in the armed forces.

Again, this is not to say that aboriginal societies were any more brutal than European societies. They each had their special way of being "worse".