Agent ONE Posted May 4, 2004 Author Share Posted May 4, 2004 Generalizations are like sterotypes... And all steortypes exist for a reason. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MSW Posted May 4, 2004 Share Posted May 4, 2004 (edited) The two aren't mutually exclusive. You can be vulgar, greedy, and rude... and still be an inactive pushover who's not willing to stand or fight for much of anything, except for the right to be greedy, vulgar, and rude.-Al and to think it only took 6 pages to come to that conclusion...Even 6 year olds have better observation skills Edited May 4, 2004 by MSW Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Agent ONE Posted May 4, 2004 Author Share Posted May 4, 2004 The two aren't mutually exclusive. You can be vulgar, greedy, and rude... and still be an inactive pushover who's not willing to stand or fight for much of anything, except for the right to be greedy, vulgar, and rude.-Al and to think it only took 6 pages to come to that conclusion...Even 6 year olds have better observation skills Thats not nice. He just got to this thread. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sundown Posted May 4, 2004 Share Posted May 4, 2004 (edited) Thats not nice. He just got to this thread.So true, in fact the CEO of the company I work for fits that description. Well, I had been scanning the thread a little bit, but I do appreciate the backup from your doorknob adoring buffness. Lotsa folks in high places fit that description. It's a tossup whether their position is cause for their greedy spinelessness, or if they're there because of it. It's all smiles and sucking up to folks they can't get away being an asshat to, and asshatery doled out to everyone else. and to think it only took 6 pages to come to that conclusion...Even 6 year olds have better observation skills What's with the pot shot and angst, buddy, if that's what it was? Especially since it was a response to you seemingly implying that it had to be one or the other. And especially since... well, you asked. -Al Edited May 4, 2004 by Sundown Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pfunk Posted May 5, 2004 Share Posted May 5, 2004 My kids will be raised stricter then most, catholic school ... AWESOME!!! Just to prove the great kids that Catholic schools produce: I went to Catholic school!!!! Your children will be destined for greatness. Hell yeah, I wish I would have went, they push you through public schools and just try to raise more money that some shithead superintendant is pocketing. anyway, i graduated highschool with a 1.2GPA and in college I got a 3.89 cum laude and took 90% of general ed 1st. Tell me thats not proof Back on topic, spare the rod, spoil the child sums it up(im not saying beat your children, but have a fair and just punishment for being bad,,,sometimes that can just be a look), My buddy Rick has never hit his kids, but he diciplens them right away after being bad(yelling sometimes) and people walk up to him and his wife in the grocery store and complement him on how well his kids behave Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MSW Posted May 5, 2004 Share Posted May 5, 2004 What's with the pot shot and angst, buddy, if that's what it was? Especially since it was a response to you seemingly implying that it had to be one or the other. And especially since... well, you asked.-Al Wasn't intending to exactly offend you, sorry about that...I was trying to get you, and everyone to think... If there really were a problem with kids today, then why isn't everyone in agreement on just what that problem is? I used those two extreams in my previous post simply because they were largely opposeing viewpoints...on one hand it seems kids are falling victom to the "PC police", on the other kids are more vulgar and rude then ever before...those are seperate opposeing generalisations (If the PC police are trying to make everyone into sensitive "care bears"...but kids are more rude and vulgar...well they haven't exactly been falling victom to the PC police, now have they?)...I presented those generalisations in a binary "this or that" exclusive manner, simply because that is how the authors presented them...note that I even labeled them in my question as generalisations (note that "mostly useless" part) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.