Vanguard News Network
VNN Media
VNN Digital Library
VNN Reader Mail
VNN Broadcasts

Old April 10th, 2012 #61
MikeTodd
Pussy Bünd "Commander"
 
MikeTodd's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: land of the Friedman, home of the Braverman
Posts: 13,329
MikeTodd
Default

IIRC you found Mr. Cobbs countenance not to your liking. Specifically his haircut as I remember.
__________________
Worse than a million megaHitlers all smushed together.

Last edited by MikeTodd; April 10th, 2012 at 03:34 PM.
 
Old April 10th, 2012 #62
Steven L. Akins
Banned
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: The Heart of Dixie
Posts: 13,170
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by MikeTodd View Post
IIRC you found Mr. Cobbs countenance not to your liking. Specifically his haircut as I remember.
He isn't the sort of person I would pick up if he were thumbing a ride on the side of the road. He seems to follow the Allen Ginsberg style:

Craig Cobb




Allen Ginsberg


 
Old April 10th, 2012 #63
MikeTodd
Pussy Bünd "Commander"
 
MikeTodd's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: land of the Friedman, home of the Braverman
Posts: 13,329
MikeTodd
jewsign

Quote:
Originally Posted by Steven L. Akins View Post
He isn't the sort of person I would pick up if he were thumbing a ride on the side of the road. He seems to follow the Allen Ginsberg style:

Craig Cobb




Allen Ginsberg


I'm not at all adverse to picking up a White man who's thumbing a ride, even if he's down on his luck (especially if he's down on his luck), and CC looks and acts like a White man.
You look like a wormy fucking kike.
("Scottish", my ass!)
__________________
Worse than a million megaHitlers all smushed together.
 
Old April 10th, 2012 #64
Steven L. Akins
Banned
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: The Heart of Dixie
Posts: 13,170
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by MikeTodd View Post
I'm not at all adverse to picking up a White man who's thumbing a ride, even if he's down on his luck (especially if he's down on his luck), and CC looks and acts like a White man.
You look like a wormy fucking kike.
("Scottish", my ass!)
Allen Ginsberg was a Jew, a gay, Jewish, hippie.

Seems your concept of what looks like a White man may be a bit off:


Quote:
Allen Ginsberg /ˈɡɪnzbərɡ/ (June 3, 1926 – April 5, 1997) was an American poet and one of the leading figures of the Beat Generation in the 1950s...Ginsberg was born into a Jewish family in Newark, New Jersey, and grew up in nearby Paterson....In 1954, in San Francisco, Ginsberg met Peter Orlovsky (1933–2010), with whom he fell in love and who remained his life-long partner.....One contribution that is often considered his most significant and most controversial was his openness about homosexuality. Ginsberg was an early proponent of freedom for gay people. In 1943, he discovered within himself "mountains of homosexuality." He expressed this desire openly and graphically in his poetry. He also struck a note for gay marriage by listing Peter Orlovsky, his lifelong companion, as his spouse in his Who's Who entry. Subsequent gay writers saw his frank talk about homosexuality as an opening to speak more openly and honestly about something often before only hinted at or spoken of in metaphor.
 
Old April 10th, 2012 #65
MikeTodd
Pussy Bünd "Commander"
 
MikeTodd's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: land of the Friedman, home of the Braverman
Posts: 13,329
MikeTodd
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Steven L. Akins View Post
Allen Ginsberg was a Jew, a gay, Jewish, hippie.

Seems your concept of what looks like a White man may be a bit off:
Forget your cut & paste crap. I know exactly who Allen Ginsberg was. I actually met him one time, alongside of Wavy Gravy (Hugh Romney) of Woodstock and Hog Farm fame.
Ginsberg looked like a jew. Cobb looks nothing like a jew. Right away I would know him as a fellow White man.
You, otoh, if you weren't wearing your plaid skirt and without further information you would definitely set off my jewdar.
I like the cut of Craig's jib and I would immediately recognize him as a man with whom I could see eye to eye as opposed to you who could only hope to see me eye to crotch.
__________________
Worse than a million megaHitlers all smushed together.
 
Old April 10th, 2012 #66
keifer
Senior Member
 
keifer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Posts: 2,216
keifer
Default

As an Ex New York City Cab taxi driver, my abilities to make quick judgements were put to the test to say the least. I can look at Cobb and say he is good for the fare.
 
Old April 10th, 2012 #67
Steven L. Akins
Banned
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: The Heart of Dixie
Posts: 13,170
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by MikeTodd View Post
Forget your cut & paste crap. I know exactly who Allen Ginsberg was. I actually met him one time, alongside of Wavy Gravy (Hugh Romney) of Woodstock and Hog Farm fame.
Ginsberg looked like a jew. Cobb looks nothing like a jew. Right away I would know him as a fellow White man.
You, otoh, if you weren't wearing your plaid skirt and without further information you would definitely set off my jewdar.
I like the cut of Craig's jib and I would immediately recognize him as a man with whom I could see eye to eye as opposed to you who could only hope to see me eye to crotch.
I seriously doubt you can see past the haze of your marijuana smoke. You and Cobb would fit right in alongside the likes of Allen Ginsberg, Abbie Hoffman, Allen Cohen and the rest of those Jews that put Woodstock together and created the whole Jew-constructed Hippie counter-culture.

 
Old April 10th, 2012 #68
MikeTodd
Pussy Bünd "Commander"
 
MikeTodd's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: land of the Friedman, home of the Braverman
Posts: 13,329
MikeTodd
Default

I just said I met him. I never said I had any kind of involvement with him.

If you must know it was backstage at a show I roadied. Our talk was small.
__________________
Worse than a million megaHitlers all smushed together.
 
Old April 10th, 2012 #69
Steven L. Akins
Banned
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: The Heart of Dixie
Posts: 13,170
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by MikeTodd View Post
I just said I met him. I never said I had any kind of involvement with him.

If you must know it was backstage at a show I roadied. Our talk was small.
I merely mentioned the fact that Ginsberg was a gay Jew, one that Craig Cobb happens to bear a striking resemblence to.

You were the one that brought up the fact that you had met Ginsberg. Why are you now so suddenly becoming defensive and adamantly denying that your encounter with Ginsberg was not of a sexual nature? No one ever suggested that it was.

Ginsberg was only 5'7" tall by the way. Is that why you mentioned something about seeing "eye to crotch"?

Last edited by Steven L. Akins; April 10th, 2012 at 07:51 PM.
 
Old April 10th, 2012 #70
MikeTodd
Pussy Bünd "Commander"
 
MikeTodd's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: land of the Friedman, home of the Braverman
Posts: 13,329
MikeTodd
Default

Quote:
Why are you now so suddenly becoming defensive and adamantly denying that your encounter with Ginsberg was not of a sexual nature? No one ever suggested that it was.
Not defensive nor adamant. By "involvment" I'm confident the the non-pedantic reader understood the encounter to be casual and fleeting.
__________________
Worse than a million megaHitlers all smushed together.
 
Old April 10th, 2012 #71
Steven L. Akins
Banned
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: The Heart of Dixie
Posts: 13,170
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by MikeTodd View Post
Not defensive nor adamant. By "involvment" I'm confident the the non-pedantic reader understood the encounter to be casual and fleeting.
As I understand it, that is par for the course where most encounters with gay men, such as Ginsberg, are concerned.

Don't feel bad, Mikey, just think of you and Allen as two ships passing in the night.
 
Old April 10th, 2012 #72
MikeTodd
Pussy Bünd "Commander"
 
MikeTodd's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: land of the Friedman, home of the Braverman
Posts: 13,329
MikeTodd
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Steven L. Akins View Post
As I understand it, that is par for the course where most encounters with gay men, such as Ginsberg, are concerned.

Don't feel bad, Mikey, just think of you and Allen as two ships passing in the night.
My company had about $100,000 worth of equipment at the venue. I was working. I had not the time to play hide-the-hairy-haggis in kiltsies.
__________________
Worse than a million megaHitlers all smushed together.
 
Old April 14th, 2012 #73
Thomas de Aynesworth
Banned
 
Join Date: May 2009
Posts: 3,752
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Sándor Petőfi View Post
Not rationality in itself, but the value of it, and moreover what is considered to be 'rational', as this depends on the social consensus of what constitutes knowledge and the social development of the concepts of a language. Not to leave it at that, beyond mere considerations, what is rational, 'objectively' rational, to one person, or one society, may not be so to another, even though they both employ the same concept of it. That is to say, it is contextual, and subjectively so.
Right, rationality is not totally objective in its details, but rather the concept of the term as a whole, as its details vary from person to person. The social consensus for what is rational tends to be a focal feature for men, exceptions aside, and its support and rather coercion on their part leads to women forming some kind of status quo, and yes, the man's ordered universe, whatever that social convention happens to be, is always related to how women act in any given society. For example, I say men are rationally ordered organisms, but even so, there are some men who use their own world view to do rather abhorrent thing, does the way in which the woman act in society depend upon the latter? No, never.

Think of David Hume's Principle of the Uniformity of Nature. Dogs bark, but not all dogs. Men are rational beings, but not all men.
Quote:
Morality on the other hand is entirely a matter of human society. The natural world does not, and cannot, know of any 'laws'.
Of course, morality really is an extension of rationalism, or rather, when dogma is attached to how a certain individual or group sees such a matter, and using coercion forces its rationality upon a population in various means. This is why morality is not wholly universal, despite what you hear from a vicar.
Quote:
It has, and the proposition is nonetheless false, and demonstrably so, beginning with the utter absurdities entertained by the Eleatic school.
I think that the trend of European thought has placed the Eleatics as the mathematical and metaphysical oddity that it is. However, their ideas and games have gone a long way to imply that while man is ruled by his rational understanding of the universe, it is far from infallible.
Quote:
As for the last clause, it doesn't follow in any way whatsoever from your premises. If 'rationality' were necessary for human societies (it isn't for any but the civilised societies of historical man), it would be its existence, not its source, that would be of relevance.
Likely because rationality is necessarily due to the mind of men, and within this discussion, essentially outlining the differences between the sexes, that is of relevance. That man sees the universe as ordered through his rational understanding of it is pivotal to understanding his most important innate trait and furthermore to understand why women in toto react and view the universe using an emotional, non-rational position.
Quote:
In the absence of a conceptual language, 'rationality' is absent from nature outside of the human species, and entirely so, so as to make the asking of such a question in seriousness something to put you in a spot of trouble.
True, mea culpa.
Quote:
Therefore rationality is not absolute as you would seem to have it.
Yes, as philosophy and its baby, science emerge from an age of moral and rationalist dogma, you have a very real and understandable change in how man perceives his world. As for the men who can make the contortion, see his world in a certain light and react upon it in a way that we would not define as rational within our social consensus has as much bearing as the singing dogs of New Guinea have on the rule that all dogs bark.
Quote:
It doesn't follow from your ability to 'think' a rational thought process into some situation that what took place did so as a result of a rational thought process. The truth is all human behaviour is a mix of the two, varying from person to person and from situation to situation in its weighting.
Certainly, as we can clearly see that any such thousands of situations I alluded to is but a drop in the bucket to erratic behaviour. I wouldn't call a man who has dementia to be necessarily rational, but I certainly would a man who has had his children taken from him after a nice, long polishing of his worldly possessions by his former wife, going back and kidnapping his offspring, even if the exercise is futile.
Quote:
Versus purposeful ones, naturally. Now now, as generally true as it may be, if someone wanted, say, to rob a house and spend the gains on drugs and women, and had deemed this to be the course of action to arrive at his desires after 'rational thought', then the behaviour is 'rational'. It is the mode of acting upon a particular kind of thought that is of interest here, and not the results of this action, which cannot be called 'rational' or 'irrational'. And there is nothing necessarily 'irrational' in any behaviour because the result of such behaviour is at odds with your own values.
It isn't necessarily the behaviour itself but how the individual landed upon such a decision, whether it be through some kind of emotional desire, or even premeditation. Negroes are exceptional at, from what I can tell, not thinking anything through, whether it be a flash mob injuring hundreds or failing the 3rd grade twice in a row.
Quote:
Which women? In seriousness, so what is 'being moral', in the last analysis, other than being in possession of a set of prohibitions on human behaviour and the sincere belief that one ought to adhere to them? Perhaps they lack the ability to think through an act within the context of this conceptual scheme in a logical manner, but that hardly makes one 'amoral'. I fail, yes I fail, to see the merit in the proposition. Where man in general distinguishes himself from woman here is in the naked force and purposefulness of his will to power, and his utilisation of conceptual thought and its logical rules, making him all the more hostile to life.

But, if women are 'amoral' as you say, then jolly good for them.
Hm, perhaps "amoral" is the wrong term to use, irrational and selfish, I suppose the latter being a moral term. Self-serving? Of course, Sándor can see value in milking other humans for all they have. Personally, I find the behaviour not only bizarre but something that we, men, and our violence and force and even unnatural will to power should be ending post haste. In the meantime have your fun, but I know that you're not stupid enough to take such a proposition lightly. Whom is exploiting whom, in our society? Who is being taken for a ride in a relationship and very often (what, almost 50% in the USA), financially ruined by this failure of women in their lack of ability to, as you say, think out a situation.

Why, take a look at some women mulling over divorcing their husbands, their reasons for it, boiling down to "wants" instead of "needs" and totally missing the point of any financial contract whatsoever.

Last edited by Thomas de Aynesworth; April 14th, 2012 at 08:37 PM.
 
Old April 18th, 2012 #74
John_Alexander
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Posts: 11
John_Alexander
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Swede View Post
Are women amoral?
YES

I think we should stop hating Jews and blacks and hate women instead. Also, we should resurrect Ancient Greece because the Ancient Greeks were both patriarchal and totally gay. We should all be fags.

MY HERO
vvv
http://www.menarebetterthanwomen.com/
 
Old August 8th, 2012 #75
Waldman
Junior Member
 
Join Date: May 2012
Posts: 41
Waldman
Default

I would definitely answer yes to that question. I will give you examples for that.

I have had several girlfriends, and I would say that all of them could be completely amoral in situations when they were for themselves, especially with other women. Look at women partying together and having a "girl's night": they engage very often in really disgusting activities (start kissing each other while drunk, be very friendly with non-whites, dance with them, and so forth).

It is since always that it is men who are moral guardians and keep women on the track. Look at what feminism has caused to our nations, and then you see the results in women having power and "girling around" in politics, companies, etc.

It has with biology to do. Have a look on the crucial difference when a man wants to have sex compared to a woman: the picture is clear.
 
Old August 8th, 2012 #76
Steven L. Akins
Banned
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: The Heart of Dixie
Posts: 13,170
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Waldman View Post
I would definitely answer yes to that question. I will give you examples for that.

I have had several girlfriends, and I would say that all of them could be completely amoral in situations when they were for themselves, especially with other women. Look at women partying together and having a "girl's night": they engage very often in really disgusting activities (start kissing each other while drunk, be very friendly with non-whites, dance with them, and so forth).

It is since always that it is men who are moral guardians and keep women on the track. Look at what feminism has caused to our nations, and then you see the results in women having power and "girling around" in politics, companies, etc.

It has with biology to do. Have a look on the crucial difference when a man wants to have sex compared to a woman: the picture is clear.
Women never grow up, they just grow old.
 
Old August 11th, 2012 #77
P.E.
Geriatric Coalburner
 
Join Date: May 2010
Posts: 1,825
P.E.
Default

Healthy and beautiful women are a joy.

It's the ugly women that are the problem:

 
Old August 11th, 2012 #78
MaxKrieger
Junior Member
 
MaxKrieger's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Posts: 83
MaxKrieger
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Steven L. Akins View Post
Women never grow up, they just grow old.
You think thats genetic or maybe a societal thing?

Much like they teach our young White boys that aggressive behaviour is bad, under any circumstance. ridiculous right?

What would make you think they would leave females out of the mental fuck they are building for us White folks?

Where is your degree of woman hating going to get us? An all White society of males? Do you see a possible problem with that?

So you can't get laid by the hottest girl in town, that does not make a conspiracy, it just makes you unnatractive.

Do you really think whining will help?
 
Old August 11th, 2012 #79
Angel Ramsey
Banned
 
Join Date: May 2012
Posts: 6,145
Default

Yes, we're all amoral (who's morals?). Send us all to New york for our free vibrators. All you men can fuck right off.
 
Old August 11th, 2012 #80
Shockley
Banned
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Posts: 252
Default

women aren't amoral, they are self delusional

example: they "care" about things, but they don't want to pay for it, they want you to
 
Reply

Share


Thread
Display Modes


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 10:41 AM.
Page generated in 0.14853 seconds.