PDA

View Full Version : who is the bigger sociopath?


corplinx
26th December 2003, 09:17 PM
Joe Lieberman has to go to bed crying every night thinking "whats wrong with being boring and sincere?".

jj
26th December 2003, 09:18 PM
"W" You left out the answer. "W".

corplinx
26th December 2003, 09:20 PM
This is related to the democrat primaries which are upon us. I figured you or Tmy would be the first person to mention Bush.

American
26th December 2003, 09:23 PM
In what- height, weight, or evil?


The answer's "yes".

Suddenly
26th December 2003, 09:46 PM
Originally posted by corplinx
Joe Lieberman has to go to bed crying every night thinking "whats wrong with being boring and sincere?".

I thought he went to bed crying every night thinking "Why the heck am I in the democratic party when I am slightly to the right of Albert Speer?"

As polls go this is right up there with "Did "W" stop smoking crack after 9-11?"

Anyway, I have to go off the board and choose "D: Yao Ming."

(Just because it is the last thing they would expect. Gotta keep 'em on their toes...)

Otther
26th December 2003, 09:46 PM
Al Sharpton!

Zero
26th December 2003, 10:04 PM
Why don't you 1) look up sociopath in the dictionary, 2) find the names of actual sociopaths, 3) try reposting this poll from reality, instead of whatever weird place your attitude comes from.

corplinx
26th December 2003, 10:09 PM
Originally posted by Zero
Why don't you 1) look up sociopath in the dictionary, 2) find the names of actual sociopaths, 3) try reposting this poll from reality, instead of whatever weird place your attitude comes from.

I know what a sociopath is, here is a quick definition I found w/google just for shins and giggles.

"Sociopaths are very egocentric individuals that lack a sense of personal responsibility and morality. They may be impulsive, manipulative, reckless, quarrelsome, and consistent liars."

Next time just choose the planet x option and try to have some fun, its primary season! Its time to let your hair down and goof on these clowns. Lighten up.

Zero
26th December 2003, 10:17 PM
Originally posted by corplinx


I know what a sociopath is, here is a quick definition I found w/google just for shins and giggles.

"Sociopaths are very egocentric individuals that lack a sense of personal responsibility and morality. They may be impulsive, manipulative, reckless, quarrelsome, and consistent liars."

Next time just choose the planet x option and try to have some fun, its primary season! Its time to let your hair down and goof on these clowns. Lighten up. Oh, so the definition is the same as that for 'Republican'? Thanks for clarifying that for me.

Jocko
26th December 2003, 10:25 PM
Originally posted by Zero
Oh, so the definition is the same as that for 'Republican'? Thanks for clarifying that for me.

Thus spake Mr. Objectivity. Thank YOU for clarifying.

Zero
26th December 2003, 10:27 PM
Originally posted by Jocko


Thus spake Mr. Objectivity. Thank YOU for clarifying. In the words of corplinx: lighten up.:D

Jocko
26th December 2003, 10:33 PM
Originally posted by Zero
In the words of corplinx: lighten up.:D

Hey, I'm just saying you make quite an issue about even-handedness and seeing things from the other fellow's point of view.

That being said, consider it lightened. ;)

Jocko
26th December 2003, 10:34 PM
Originally posted by corplinx
Joe Lieberman has to go to bed crying every night thinking "whats wrong with being boring and sincere?".

Maybe he can share a room with Bob Dole at the Betty Ford home for political dinosaurs. Sounds like they'd have a lot to talk about.

Zero
26th December 2003, 10:35 PM
Originally posted by Jocko


Hey, I'm just saying you make quite an issue about even-handedness and seeing things from the other fellow's point of view.

That being said, consider it lightened. ;) On the other hand, that definition in all honesty seems not to describe sociopathy as I understand it(from a psychological POV), but it does describe most politicians pretty well. Unfortunately, the "impulsive, manipulative, reckless, quarrelsome" part describes pretty much everyone who would spend time posting on a bulletin board, doesn't it?

Zero
26th December 2003, 10:37 PM
Originally posted by Jocko


Maybe he can share a room with Bob Dole at the Betty Ford home for political dinosaurs. Sounds like they'd have a lot to talk about. What's up with Bob Dole? He became cool once he dropped out of politics...

Jocko
26th December 2003, 10:40 PM
Originally posted by Zero
What's up with Bob Dole? He became cool once he dropped out of politics...

Viagra can do that for a guy. It's enough to give any old fart hope.

Actually, I followed him closely in '96, and indedd long before. He's damned smart, ruthlessly efficient and still manages to have a great sense of humor, especially about himself. I think he wound up swallowing too much bad advice from his handlers during the election; left to his own dry kind of charm, he would have probably given Clinton a run for his money.

Zero
26th December 2003, 10:42 PM
Originally posted by Jocko


Viagra can do that for a guy. It's enough to give any old fart hope.

Actually, I followed him closely in '96, and indedd long before. He's damned smart, ruthlessly efficient and still manages to have a great sense of humor, especially about himself. I think he wound up swallowing too much bad advice from his handlers during the election; left to his own dry kind of charm, he would have probably given Clinton a run for his money. And, heck, too bad he was too busy screwing his old lady thanks to Viagra, and you poor Republicans got stuck with Shrub, huh?

American
26th December 2003, 10:58 PM
Dean is the true Liberal (~sociopath).

Clark is a liar, quite simply. He had nothing but praise for Bush only less than a year ago. Further, he is a Vietnam era West Point-er, a time when the academies were much fiercer and as un-left, un-PC as you can imagine. That will always be his primary identity, and the democrat party is nothing but a tool to advance his principles.

Unfortunately, he seems to have forgotten the Honor Code in several respects. However if it serves his mission, then I say forget all you want, General. I think he has a secret plan of sorts, and it's not about health care or social security.

Jocko
26th December 2003, 11:00 PM
Originally posted by Zero
And, heck, too bad he was too busy screwing his old lady thanks to Viagra, and you poor Republicans got stuck with Shrub, huh?

Don't look at me, I wrote in McCain. But the GOP could have done worse. Remember Gary Bauer? Pat Buchanan? Think about them next time someone goes on about how faith-oriented the President is. Coulda been a lot worse.

corplinx
26th December 2003, 11:04 PM
Originally posted by Jocko


Don't look at me, I wrote in McCain. But the GOP could have done worse. Remember Gary Bauer? Pat Buchanan? Think about them next time someone goes on about how faith-oriented the President is. Coulda been a lot worse.

Could have been a whole lot worse. Remember a guy named David Duke?

Jocko
26th December 2003, 11:06 PM
Originally posted by corplinx


Could have been a whole lot worse. Remember a guy named David Duke?

I always wanted to see that Duke/Larouche dream ticket. But then again Dean/Clark would probably run a close second. Gonna be a hell of a primary.

Troll
26th December 2003, 11:44 PM
It's Dean, hands down. He thinks he has the political arena down pat. who to say what to and when. No god, guns or gays speak in certain regions,he just will not speak on those three things. Cocked it up in the south earlier with the confederate flag thing, can't admit it. Now he's going to be speaking about his religious views and how his wife and kids are jewish, which is not his religion. His religion he dumped and transfered to another after an issue over, get this, a bike path.

Sorry, but if anyone thinks CNN and MSNBC combined can be moderately truthful then he's screwed because both ran the story tonight.

Wanna know how well Dean is doing? Let him ask you what is important to you and how you feel about those subjects, then and only then, will he answer questions on the subject. I'm glad that he has the lead though. As a republican, I 'd have had to debate between Bush and Lieberman. As a libertarian hopeful, who is hopeful only in the sense of wanting to see a decent candidate, I would still have two and maybe one more to choose from.