Jump to content


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by Kevbo_Jones

  1. These militarized police chumps are incredibly under/poorly trained on the equipment that defense contractors are selling them. I was always taught that you NEVER, under any circumstance, muzzle flash someone unless you're 100% intent on shooting them. That's the difference between a soldier who's trained to use the equipment, and an over weight St. Louis cop on a power trip...
  2. Creed?!? Might as well throw some ****ing Nickleback in your rotation too...
  3. http://bjjimmersion.com/why-it-pays-to-tap-out-early/ "Oh ****! ...Jimmy?" "Zzzzzzzzzzzzz"
  4. It doesn't because his car doesn't react to it. It fishtailed when he hit Ward, but somehow didn't even budge when hitting another car? C'mon dude... He tried to pass high, which never works, and Stewart boxed him out. Had Stewart clipped him with his tire, he likely would've spun out to the left. Also, before any race, on any circuit in the US there's a driver's meeting prior to the race with the race officials. One of the main topics they go over is not to exit their car for any reason other than the car being on fire, until the emergency crew arrives. Literally, before every race.
  5. You have to accelerate to turn a Sprint car. That's how they turn. They have fixed axle rears that are turned slightly inward and to the left. Sprint cars also don't have brakes and idle at about 35 mph or they stall out. Stewart didn't hit the kid on purpose. Even the driver directly after Stewart said it looked like he did everything he could to avoid Ward. Ward made a stupid mistake and it cost him his life. That's what happens when road rage and an ego get combined. Edit: One last thing, Stewart's car didn't pin Ward into the wall. In fact, the cars never touched. Ward was trying a right side wall pass, which never works if in a pack because the inside car will box the outside car out. Yet another mistake by Ward. Ward got pissy because Stewart didn't cede his position and let Ward pass. That's racing 101.
  6. I doubt Stewart hit him on purpose. However, I do think he may have been trying to buzz him or spray some dirt up at him. Other dude just took it to another level trying to give him a right cross mid turn.
  7. Cool story bro. Get in those vacations while you can. Once you have a kid/kids, everything you think you know about finances will do a 180.
  8. Oh, now I see where they get it from! Rothbard slandered Milton Friedman in much of the same way SVT and Noob do to me. Rothbard was also intellectually dishonest, so it would come as no surprise that his disciples would follow suit. http://battlestarcatallactica.com/2013/11/05/murray-rothbard-troublingly-wrong-on-milton-friedman/
  9. This, based on performance. If they are capable of the production of a competent male, absolutely! If they're not, they deserve less.
  10. Indeed there is! I don't care though. I will continue to debate Noob and SVT because the ideology they push is ridiculous and radical. They also give libertarians a bad name because of their delivery. I hold nothing against Chons. Sometimes he's right, sometimes he's wrong. Unlike the other though, he admits it when he's wrong and seems to acknowledge both sides of a debate. Some people get irritated by that, but I don't. It's a refreshing change from many who get involved in these types of threads.
  11. I disagree... Intellectually dishonesty When one avoids an honest, deliberate and comprehensive approach to a matter because it may introduce an adverse effect on personally and professionally held views and beliefs. Intellectual dishonesty is a failure to apply standards of rational evaluation that one is aware of, usually in a self-serving fashion. If one judges others more critically than oneself, that is intellectually dishonest. If one deflects criticism of a friend or ally simply because they are a friend or ally, that is intellectually dishonest. etc. See, when you asked if it was stupidity from me, I said I guess so. I was holding myself to the same standard I am holding them to. They on the other hand, are doing every single thing in that definition. They never admit faults in their ideals, they never acknowledge criticisms but instead produce more supportive information to assert their points. Secondly, saying someone said something stupid is not the same as calling them stupid directly. It's not a personal attack, it is an observation. Many smart people say stupid things and usually admit to it when provided reasonable evidence to the contrary. I get it though. You're my forum "rival" and have to disagree for the sake of disagreement.
  12. I'm not miffed and I didn't call either one of them stupid. I said I was pointing out stupidity in their posts. That's not a personal attack. In fact, I would say both of them have above average intelligence, but it's misguided and they're intellectually dishonest. Which they are by the very definition of the term.
  13. I'm not a liberal, so this makes no sense. Neither of you have refuted anything of substance, SVT has resorted to name calling, and you're now nut hugging him. Sounds like quality debate to me...
  14. I guess so. Is anything I'm saying incorrect, in your opinion?
  15. Oh, one more thing. In order for capitalism to exist, a state is required. In your ideology however, instead of a government run state, you will have privatized "mini states" in a hierarchy structure. Let's take private national defense, police, and courts for example, because of the brutal and competitive nature of capitalism, citizens will still want the best defense, police, and courts that their money can buy. Guess what happens then? A "state" arises, especially if all three are under the same banner, which they most likely would be. The defense contractor with the most money and resources becomes the "mini state" and you freely accept that because you pay for it...
  16. That statement proves that your messiah is clueless. They aren't compatible and there's literally hundreds of articles and essays to back that up if you chose to look for them. Therein lies the problem though. You and Noob both look for material solely supporting your ideology and NEVER honestly read it's criticisms and rebuttals because both of you are intellectually dishonest. You both tunnel vision directly on to information that supports your narrative and then parrot it as gospel. Also, nice touch with the idiot comment at the end. Thank you for ceding the debate.
  • Create New...