Tab Content
  • Cleaner44's Avatar
    Yesterday, 06:46 PM
    Not interested in merging our nation with the shithole they call Mexico.
    30 replies | 351 view(s)
  • Cleaner44's Avatar
    Yesterday, 11:17 AM
    Establishment politicians are upset... I like it!
    32 replies | 427 view(s)
  • Cleaner44's Avatar
    06-25-2016, 02:20 PM
    No matter what, the Trump candidacy has already proven useful.
    6 replies | 193 view(s)
  • Cleaner44's Avatar
    06-25-2016, 11:42 AM
    ^^ Is actually Kim Jong-un.
    381 replies | 6067 view(s)
  • Cleaner44's Avatar
    06-24-2016, 01:27 PM
    Well considering that our elections boil down to people choosing between the "lesser of two evils" I would guess that you are correct, they would go to Trump. It doesn't matter how bad Trump is because people tend to vote against someone more than they vote for someone. Gary Johnson will be seen as a throw away vote, as will all 3rd party votes. The swing voters will choose between Hillary and Trump. This can't be your first time around is it?
    45 replies | 622 view(s)
  • Cleaner44's Avatar
    06-24-2016, 10:35 AM
    She is bulletproof with Democrat voters... not with independents. The swing voters are the ones that matter and they don't hold the blind alliance that robotic Democrat voters do.
    45 replies | 622 view(s)
  • Cleaner44's Avatar
    06-23-2016, 10:06 PM
    You know that the anti-Trump propaganda has jumped the shark when the Moral Majority is being cited. Go Hillary!
    8 replies | 205 view(s)
  • Cleaner44's Avatar
    06-23-2016, 11:33 AM
    Exactly. One of those two will in fact be our next president. Even Gary Johnson is no prize.
    9 replies | 179 view(s)
  • Cleaner44's Avatar
    06-23-2016, 08:53 AM
    Trump is an idiot. What we need is someone with real foreign experience, like Hillary Clinton!
    9 replies | 179 view(s)
  • PaulConventionWV's Avatar
    06-21-2016, 07:45 PM
    God bless America. (inb4 TheTexan)
    19 replies | 439 view(s)
  • Cleaner44's Avatar
    06-20-2016, 09:21 AM
    Cleaner44 replied to a thread Phoenix is Hot in Open Discussion
    Any with brains are staying indoors. That is why I don't have much of a tan. Who wants to be out in 119 degree heat?
    9 replies | 204 view(s)
  • PaulConventionWV's Avatar
    06-19-2016, 06:22 AM
    I've had those dreams before. I consider them nightmares.
    37 replies | 474 view(s)
  • PaulConventionWV's Avatar
    06-19-2016, 04:26 AM
    So if they did feed the gators, then they would be liable? Your comment doesn't draw a clear line. You say there is no concept of "letting" wild animals do things, which is baloney because we've been letting and not letting wild things do as they please since the dawn of man. And by harbor, I mean make some kind of accomodations on your property for it and let, yes LET it use those accomodations without interference. I used to do that with my pets and I still considered them pets. Why does it matter whether the animals are legally your property or not if you know they're there? Sounds to me like you're exploiting a legal definition loophole to justify your theory. The concept of "letting" is very applicable here because it's not just a blanket statement. We're talking about your property, to which you can choose to give access to animals or not.
    266 replies | 3743 view(s)
  • PaulConventionWV's Avatar
    06-19-2016, 04:20 AM
    I still hold that the beach is an attractive hazard.
    266 replies | 3743 view(s)
  • PaulConventionWV's Avatar
    06-17-2016, 03:23 PM
    So, in other words, you could harbor, feed and let wild animals use your property all the time and it's ok, but the second you CALL that animal your property, then suddenly it's your liability. Those gators had been on the Disney property for decades and the only reason you don't think they were liable is because they weren't called pet gators. What, exactly, is the difference between a pet and a wild animal? And also, I'm sure you're aware that these guests we're talking about are not trespassers.
    266 replies | 3743 view(s)
  • PaulConventionWV's Avatar
    06-17-2016, 12:35 AM
    Another piece of evidence that it was plain negligence is the clear motive Disney had for not telling people about the gators. And yet you Disney apologists won't even consider THAT evidence. It doesn't matter what their motives were, after all, does it? Except it kinda does because the fact that they have such a motive further strengthens the fact that they knew it would have caused people to change their behavior if they had let them know about it. There are signs all over the place for things far more trivial than that in the US, but they couldn't put up a sign about the alligators? Clearly they were hoping not to attract any attention to the fact that there was any danger there so that people wouldn't feel uneasy about going to their awesome party. Did you consider that, presence? Or are you just in blind denial that there is any scenario in which it is reasonable for you to let your visitors know about something that could very possibly kill them? Is there any such scenario in your mind?
    266 replies | 3743 view(s)
  • PaulConventionWV's Avatar
    06-17-2016, 12:26 AM
    I don't know, man. Give me some specific examples so I can tear them apart. Hurricanes, tsunamis: everybody knows about those. They're on the weather channel. That's not the landlord's job. Weather is something far less predictable than some crocodiles in a pond where an attraction was built specifically for humans to hang out at. Luckily, we have weather services who warn us about this stuff and evacuation services if it's a really big deal. Besides that, everybody already knows to consider the weather when going to a place. That is a part of life wherever you are in the world. If you don't want to live in a place where there are hurricanes and tsunamis, then it's pretty easy to avoid that. The last alligator attack was in the 1980s. The last time the sea levels rose and wiped out Florida was.... when? Unlike alligators, people can't control their proximity to amoebas because they're all over the place, too, and there's no way to know if they're there or not. That doesn't mean we shouldn't be cautious about things we can warn about and can predict, like ferocious beasts all located in a very specific area on which you are building an attraction so people can hang out there. Don't warn about the things you can't, do warn about the things you can.
    266 replies | 3743 view(s)
  • PaulConventionWV's Avatar
    06-17-2016, 12:17 AM
    Yeah, like I said, go crazy with dreaming up your fictitious scenarios. Amoebas in the water is still a very different scenario because there's no way to control or monitor how amoebas behave or where they will be, much less lightning. If there was a certain area of the pond where it was known that certain killer amoebas were concentrated in unusually high numbers, I'd say it would be nice to be notified about that, too, especially if the attraction were built in that specific area. What is known is that the alligators are always in the pond and they are always a threat that can, at the very least, be recognized and notified about. But hey, keep dreaming up scenarios and you might find one ambiguous enough to get me to say I don't know, but this one is really straightforward. Tell your damn guests that the party you're holding is right on gator feeding grounds. That way people can choose not to come, to come and not bring their children, to keep a safe distance from the water, whatever it is. If you're just swimming in a pond with no alligators, then there's really no way to prepare against amoebas, but amoebas exist everywhere in the world, as does lightning, so it's reasonable to expect people to already be aware of this stuff. I don't know what a metal teller stamp is and I don't care. Lightning is everywhere in the world and it's magnitudes less predictable than a bunch of alligators in a pond, so that doesn't apply here.
    266 replies | 3743 view(s)
  • PaulConventionWV's Avatar
    06-17-2016, 12:04 AM
    You can make anything sound ridiculous if you just imagine up ridiculous scenarios that, by the way, have nothing to do with what I'm proposing, which is a simple, common, everyday sign or some kind of warning through other media. You don't have to construct a billboard or anything like that, ok? As for the black bears, you can disclose it to your visitors for however long you like to ensure their safety. They roam around a lot, so it's not likely that they would always be found on your property in a very specific location like, say, a pond. And it's not like you constructed some kind of attraction outside where you knew there were black bears around. If you did that, then heck yes, you should disclose that to your visitors. You like to make it complicated, but it's really simple. You can dream up whatever scenario you want and maybe it will be ambiguous enough that I will eventually say 'Gee, I don't know', but I will always point out how it was a reasonable expectation in THIS scenario.
    266 replies | 3743 view(s)
  • PaulConventionWV's Avatar
    06-16-2016, 10:06 PM
    Because everyone knows signs cost millions of dollars. Besides, I've already proven that it's common practice to warn visitors even if you're not a millionaire. And this doesn't mean every time someone is hurt on your property you should be held responsible. It's all about reasonable expectation. In this case, it was beyond reasonable to expect them to warn people about the dangers there. If you go to a similar event on someone's property and they tell you after the fact that there were deadly creatures in the water on that beach, would you ever go back to their property? I sure as hell wouldn't, especially if my two year old was wading in that very water. It's very simple. Disney was negligent and didn't do what any other normal person would do because they didn't want to ruin the party. The fact that the party was ruined by their negligence just makes them look like bumbling, incompetent fools.
    266 replies | 3743 view(s)
  • PaulConventionWV's Avatar
    06-16-2016, 10:02 PM
    Your reasoning is incorrigibly naive. You keep referring to people being idiots as if it's the same thing as building a damn beach on your pond in which alligators are harbored. I don't care if it's an infestation, five alligators in a pond is more than enough to have some sort of warning about. Most people know there are alligators in Florida, but they don't exactly slither through the grass, so it is relatively easy to know where they will be (in the pond) and warn people who might venture near said location. Just as I would warn someone not to go in a grassy patch if I knew there were snakes there. It's just common fucking sense, something you appear to think is for sissies. It's amazing to think that someone from WV doesn't understand the concept of warning someone if there is a deadly creature on your property. And another ridiculous argument you make is that you think people will say they had no idea there were alligators in Florida. Almost everyone knows there are alligators in Florida, but they aren't aware of the distribution of the gator population or if they might expect to find them in a pond at a Disney resort. Most people would assume not because, once again, common fucking sense, but I wouldn't expect you to know anything about that.
    266 replies | 3743 view(s)
  • PaulConventionWV's Avatar
    06-16-2016, 08:07 PM
    Remind me never to come to your property if we ever become friends. Which probably isn't going to happen since I know you are incapable of acting like a friend. We're both from WV, and I don't know about your experiences, but it has always been very common for people to warn visitors on their property about possible wildlife that might be lurking around, especially if it's something unusual, like bears or panthers. (No, it's true, there were two panthers known to dwell in the woods around our house when we were young.) Some things may be very rare, but it usually pops into a friend's mind to warn them about the things they should be most concerned about that are common in that area but might not be common in other areas, especially if they might be lethal. It doesn't require the threat of a lawsuit for a friend to warn people, so is it too much to ask for Disney to act like any friend would and give its visitors a simple warning?
    266 replies | 3743 view(s)
  • PaulConventionWV's Avatar
    06-16-2016, 07:57 PM
    They've definitely knocked their safety rating down a notch with this trick. Correct me if I'm wrong, but I believe this was the first time they did this particular kind of event, and that being the case, they've proven themselves to be less competent at managing such events than we previously thought, thereby tarnishing their overall competency and safety reputation.
    266 replies | 3743 view(s)
  • PaulConventionWV's Avatar
    06-16-2016, 07:45 PM
    That is a ludicrous assertion. What are you even talking about? If they know enough about alligators to realize there's a danger, which almost everyone does, then that's all the more reason to think the signs WOULD help, not the other way around. Most people know alligators are dangerous but they just don't know where alligators are found. So if you tell them that they are in the water at the beach, that doesn't lead you to the conclusion that they would ignore the signs. In fact, that leads you to the exact opposite conclusion, that if you tell them that there are alligators here, they will realize alligators are dangerous and be more cautious. Heck, that's probably why Disney didn't tell anyone. They didn't want to scare people and ruin the party. Yeah, that seems reasonable, but it's a bit irrelevant to the liability issue. This all goes back to the doctrine of reasonable expectation. You can't just wave your hand and say "The world is a dangerous place! Get used to it, ya crybabies!" If you were a friend and you had someone over from out of state to your property with a pond, would you not want them to know about the gators? Would you hold a party on the beach of said pond and not make sure everyone knew there were gators? Would you assume that no swimming signs meant everyone should know it's because of gators and that you don't have to be swimming for a gator to attack you? Jesus, the thick-headedness of some people.
    266 replies | 3743 view(s)
  • PaulConventionWV's Avatar
    06-16-2016, 07:05 PM
    Heck, it would've been better if they DID hang out on land. At least people would've seen them, then. The fact that they don't tend to hang out on land just makes it a more compelling reason to warn guests from far away about the dangers of going near the water. Even if the kid wasn't in the water, right on the edge, the gators could've easily come up and snatched him and been gone before anybody knew it. The "libertarian" solution is to be a friend and tell people about the dangers on your property. I've explained this before. You don't build a beach on a pond and then host a party without ever thinking to tell people that there are gators in there. Are the "No swimming" signs sufficient? Hell no, nooooo. NO WAY. Not even close. Don't even think for a second that that logic is going to absolve you of responsibility when your friend gets eaten by an alligator. If I were on that panel and you were the one arguing that you shouldn't have been required to tell your friends about the gators in the pond you were having a party on, I would have no mercy on your ass.
    266 replies | 3743 view(s)
  • PaulConventionWV's Avatar
    06-16-2016, 06:58 PM
    Yeah, that does seem like a bit of bureaucratic nonsense, but that's the least of my worries. Even for someone who is very libertacious (new word) and super-suspicious of lawsuits that require signs or such, think about having a friend over. Wouldn't you take the time to tell your friend about the danger involved if they were from far away and didn't know? Heck, if I were having someone over, I would suggest not even going near the pond, much less build a beach on it. That seems like a reasonable thing to expect from a friend. If you live in a place where there are alligators, these are things you have to be thinking about, and I wouldn't think it was too much to ask to warn your friends from out-of-state and even help check a swimming area for gators before allowing your friends to use it. If you know there are gators in a pond, I would alert the friends and warn them to stay well away from it. I think anyone you could call a friend would do that.
    266 replies | 3743 view(s)
  • PaulConventionWV's Avatar
    06-16-2016, 06:47 PM
    If I was having a friend over from out-of-state that didn't understand the dangers, then I would certainly deign to explain it to them and help check for alligators before allowing them to use my swimming pool.
    266 replies | 3743 view(s)
  • PaulConventionWV's Avatar
    06-16-2016, 06:45 PM
    If a friend goes over to a friend's house and the property has a pond on it and there are alligators in said pond, I would definitely expect the property owner to let his friends know that there alligators in that pond first thing they come on the property. If the friends go down to their host's pond without his supervision and never once mentions the freaking alligators, are we supposed to say "Oh, what a pity! You should watch out for wild animals!" NO FREAKING WAY! The property owner not mentioning the dangers to his friends is a clear negligence of his duties as a friend and a property owner. I would absolutely say any kind of friend would certainly not fail to mention this crucial fact before letting others onto his property. And that brings up another point: they weren't necessarily in public. Although there were other people on the property, there was a reasonable expectation of safety from the dangers of truly public life. I don't think this situation calls for extra-tight precautions on the part of the parents. The child was under their direct supervision, but they were totally unaware as to which direction they could expect an attack from. I certainly wouldn't blame any parents for letting their child stray a few feet from them in this situation.
    266 replies | 3743 view(s)
  • PaulConventionWV's Avatar
    06-16-2016, 06:29 PM
    THEY FUCKING KNEW! They should've said something! They knew there were alligators on the property. A pond or lagoon could even be considered a kind of cage but you heartless bastards seem to think shit just happens if somebody gets grabbed and I guess it's either the parents' fault for being ignorant or nobody's fault and we should just act like it's inevitable for this to happen. I think that's ridiculous. Even if the parents were a little ignorant for not being from Florida, the fact that the property owner knew about the possibility of this tragedy happening puts the liability on their shoulders. Did they take all the necessary means and precautions that could reasonably be expected of them to prevent this? I think not!
    266 replies | 3743 view(s)
  • PaulConventionWV's Avatar
    06-16-2016, 06:11 PM
    What part of getting dragged into the water by an alligator has anything to do with "acting like a 2 year old"?? By constant supervision, do you literally mean never letting go of the child's hand, ever? And are you saying that the parents are liable for not assuming that there were alligators in the water that could snatch their child? What other dangers are they supposed to be watching out for that make them bad parents for letting their 2 year old stray 5 feet away? Why do you insist on blaming the parents? I don't think most people consider letting a 2 year old go 5 feet or however many feet it was a bad or irresponsible parenting practice. It certainly wasn't bad in comparison to hosting a party on an alligator-infested pond with no warnings or precautions about things that could come up out of the water and literally kill someone. The magnitude of this situation implores you to have some sympathy for the aggrieved parents and stop playing the "I'm the best parent in the world and this never would have happened had I been in that situation" game. I think it's disgusting.
    266 replies | 3743 view(s)
More Activity

11 Visitor Messages

  1. View Conversation
    Could be why she hasn't popped in to pester me.
  2. View Conversation
    Double post
  3. View Conversation
    Whatever. You aren't worth an argument.

    Have a good life.
  4. View Conversation
    You honestly care about something as insignificant as reputation?

    Grow up.
  5. Please help me spread the word about Liberty Candidates United
  6. My twitter is @Cleaner4d4
    My email is cleaner44@gmx.us
  7. View Conversation
    Thanks for the Rep
  8. View Conversation
    I am still checking out your web site from time to time, so if you see a good deal, make a forum post. Thanks Cleaner!
  9. I am the creator of The Case For Ron Paul
    http://thecaseforronpaul.wordpress.com/
Showing Visitor Messages 1 to 10 of 11
Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
About Cleaner44

Basic Information

About Cleaner44
Interests:
Freeeeeeeedom!
Occupation:
Online Marketing
Profile Sidebar Configuration

Profile Sidebar Configuration

Displayed city:
Phoenix, AZ
Displayed state:
Arizona
Displayed country:
USA
Activist Reputation (Self-Rated):
1
Select if you support the site's Mission.:
I support the site Mission. (This will change your user title to "Supporting Member".)
Display site reputation bars.:
Display site reputation bars.
Political Campaign Skills
Graphics:
Web Designer / Developer
Computer and Technical:
WebMaster, Telecommunication
Marketers:
Online Marketer

Signature


Regardless of any observations and opinions that I share about Donald Trump that fail to shred him, I am not a Trump voter and have no plans to be.

U.S. Air Force Veteran
@cleaner4d4

I am a libertarian. I am advocating everyone enjoy maximum freedom on both personal and economic issues as long as they do not bring violence unto others.

Statistics


Total Posts
Total Posts
7,142
Posts Per Day
2.27
Visitor Messages
Total Messages
11
Most Recent Message
03-18-2016 02:47 PM
General Information
Last Activity
Yesterday 06:46 PM
Join Date
11-12-2007
Referrals
1
Home Page
http://atlasmarketingsolutions.com/

5 Friends

  1. CaseyJones CaseyJones is offline

    Member

    CaseyJones
  2. Live_Free_Or_Die Live_Free_Or_Die is offline

    Member

    Live_Free_Or_Die
  3. PaulConventionWV PaulConventionWV is offline

    Member

    PaulConventionWV
  4. playboymommy playboymommy is offline

    Member

    playboymommy
  5. Tink Tink is offline

    Member

    Tink
Showing Friends 1 to 5 of 5
View Cleaner44's Blog

Recent Entries

Foreign Aid to Israel puts the U.S. deeper in debt and is bad Foreign Policy

by Cleaner44 on 07-12-2011 at 11:47 PM
When the United States government gives foreign aid to any nation, it throws the concept of Fiscal Responsibility completely out the window.

The U.S. is deeply in debt and must continually borrow money from nations such as China just to operate on a daily basis. Borrowing money to give away to foreign nations that do not pay into our national treasury is fiscally irresponsible. Borrowing money to give to Israel is a heavy burden on the American taxpayer and we simply can not afford

Read More

Categories
Uncategorized

Fiscal Responsibility: Ron Paul vs. Mitt Romney

by Cleaner44 on 06-25-2011 at 04:00 PM
When it comes to the issue of fiscal responsibility both Ron Paul and Mitt Romney understand that the spending of the U.S. federal government is out of control. The annual budget deficits are leading to an ever increasing national debt that is unsustainable. The federal spending must be cut massively in order to balance the budget and that means massive cuts to the size of the federal government.

There are three steps that must be taken in order to get to a point of fiscal responsibility.

Read More

Categories
Uncategorized
No results to display...
Page 1 of 12 12311 ... LastLast

06-27-2016


06-25-2016


06-24-2016


06-23-2016


06-20-2016


06-09-2016


06-08-2016


06-07-2016


06-06-2016



Page 1 of 12 12311 ... LastLast