They keep coming, and coming, and coming.

https://www.star-telegram.com/news/local/community/fort-worth/article230657259.html


The boom shows no sign of ending.

Fort Worth is now the 13th-largest city in the United States, behind Jacksonville, Florida, and ahead of Columbus, Ohio, as well as San Francisco, according to the latest Census Bureau population estimates released Thursday.

“Fort Worth’s rapid growth speaks to our incredible quality of life, business friendly climate and affordable cost of living,” said Fort Worth Mayor Betsy Price. “Of course, substantial growth presents both great opportunities as well as new challenges to strategically manage our growth without compromising what makes Fort Worth a unique place to live, work, and play.”

I like San Francisco better.  No stockyards. beautiful scenery, and lot's happening.

Howdy, pardners..

It's all them there Chuck Norris 'Walker, Texas Ranger' reruns what does it  !!!

WhoseYourWolfie wrote:

Howdy,  pardners..

It's all them there Chuck Norris 'Walker, Texas Ranger' reruns what does it  !!!

Chuck Norris lives in San Francisco. We work out together at the Bay Club in the Financial District.

He knows a good thing when he sees it.

Original Quill wrote:I like San Francisco better.  No stockyards. beautiful scenery, and lot's happening.

has it been a while?

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2018/aug/18/san-francisco-poop-problem-inequality-homelessness

The Devil, You Know wrote:

Original Quill wrote:I like San Francisco better.  No stockyards. beautiful scenery, and lot's happening.

has it been a while?

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2018/aug/18/san-francisco-poop-problem-inequality-homelessness

No...it's hopping right now.

As you know, the Congresswoman from San Francisco, Nancy Pelosi, is the present Speaker of the House. She's giving cry baby Donald fits.

It's exciting to be a part of it.

Original Quill wrote:I like San Francisco better.  No stockyards. beautiful scenery, and lot's happening.

I'm sure you do like it better.

The post was about the incredible growth in N Texas (minus Ben).

Not what you liked.

Original Quill wrote:

WhoseYourWolfie wrote:

Howdy,  pardners..

It's all them there Chuck Norris 'Walker, Texas Ranger' reruns what does it  !!!

  Chuck Norris lives in San Francisco.  We work out together at the Bay Club in the Financial District.

He knows a good thing when he sees it.  

You are full of shit. He doesn't live in San Francisco.

Nice try though.

Maddog wrote:

Original Quill wrote:I like San Francisco better.  No stockyards. beautiful scenery, and lot's happening.

I'm sure you do like it better.

The post was about the incredible growth in N Texas (minus Ben).

Not what you liked.

I've written off the south. It's no longer a part of the country.

Maddog wrote:

Original Quill wrote:

  Chuck Norris lives in San Francisco.  We work out together at the Bay Club in the Financial District.

He knows a good thing when he sees it.  

You are full of shit. He doesn't live in San Francisco.

Nice try though.  

What is he doing here...month after month, year after year. I think he's got a place in the Golden Gate Towers.

Original Quill wrote:

Maddog wrote:

I'm sure you do like it better.

The post was about the incredible growth in N Texas (minus Ben).

Not what you liked.

I've written off the south.  It's no longer a part of the country.

Geographically, no US state is southern. As they are all above the equator.

So what is the latitude you use to decide as to writing off the south?

You do realise this means all of Africa, South America, parts of Asia, Australia ect?

You also do not get to decide what is part of a nation

That is down to self determination, which means all US citizens to decide and not one individual

You sound like your forefathers, that decided to not recognise Indian lands and the peoples rights

This is what we refer to as "the south."

phil wrote:You also do not get to decide what is part of a nation

That is down to self determination, which means all US citizens to decide and not one individual

You sound like your forefathers, that decided to not recognise Indian lands and the peoples rights

Not individual. There is a substantial group of Pacific westerners who want the separation. It's a movement. It's much like devolution in Scotland...only ours will be successful.

Original Quill wrote:

Maddog wrote:

You are full of shit. He doesn't live in San Francisco.

Nice try though.  

What is he doing here...month after month, year after year.  I think he's got a place in the Golden Gate Towers.

Why don't you ask him Mr Mitty?

Original Quill wrote:

Maddog wrote:

I'm sure you do like it better.

The post was about the incredible growth in N Texas (minus Ben).

Not what you liked.

I've written off the south.  It's no longer a part of the country.

And yet they keep coming. Bailing on the Golden State.

Maddog wrote:

Original Quill wrote:

What is he doing here...month after month, year after year.  I think he's got a place in the Golden Gate Towers.

Why don't you ask him Mr Mitty?  

Your response is merely to take exception with the messenger, and not the message.  I take that as capitulation on your part.  Good.

Original Quill wrote:This is what we refer to as "the south."

phil wrote:You also do not get to decide what is part of a nation

That is down to self determination, which means all US citizens to decide and not one individual

You sound like your forefathers, that decided to not recognise Indian lands and the peoples rights

Not individual.  There is a substantial group of Pacific westerners who want the separation.  It's a movement.  It's much like devolution in Scotland...only ours will be successful.

That never answered my questions

You failed to show coroborative polls supporting your idea from all these states. Of which some are as southern as the ones highlighted.

All I see is a view to be prejudiced to people based on beliefs

That is as bad as Trump

Maddog wrote:

Original Quill wrote:

I've written off the south.  It's no longer a part of the country.

And yet they keep coming. Bailing on the Golden State.  

I understand that the favorable parts of California are expensive. They are desirable...about which I'm ambivalent. After all, expensive means popular, vindicating my point about California being a great place to live.

On the other hand, it's a big, big area. It's well served with transportation and public facilities, and as we build we make room of others, of all colors, income levels and persuasions, and make it a better place. All in all, it's a win-win.

We, on the west coast, have already chosen to live without a theme of bigotry and racism in the culture, and hence our desire to live without the south.

phil wrote:That never answered my questions

Your questions are off-point. You chase a lot of rabbit holes, so it's your own fault.

phil wrote:You failed to show coroborative polls supporting your idea from all these states. Of which some are as southern as the ones highlighted.

If you build it, they will come.

phil wrote:All I see is a view to be prejudiced to people based on beliefs

Wasn't that what Hitler said about Czechoslovakia, right before he invaded?

Original Quill wrote:

phil wrote:That never answered my questions

Your questions are off-point.  You chase a lot of rabbit holes, so it's your own fault.

phil wrote:That is a copout reply. That is you using excuses not to answer them

If you build it, they will come.

phil wrote:How did that work for the Berlin wall?

Wasn't that what Hitler said about Czechoslovakia, right before he invaded?

No, not at all actually, as he never invaded Czechoslovakia.

The Sudetenland was majority German and was given up without a fight and invasion. It took people like you thinking this is what the people wanted. It ignored the rest of Czechoslovakia. It simple centered on the majority German  population in the Sudetenland. Which is what you are claiming now. Of course the Nazis's later annexed the rest of the country.  You are making a spurious claim based around political beliefs, whilst also condemning many people who live in these lands. Based on sterotypes you hold. You are doing exactly what Hitler did.

You want to annex lands and people to your new nation. Not based on any universal US vote, but your view to take land for your new nation. You want to annex land for your new country. Based on similar lines, based on your political beliefs. I imagine you would impliment similar measures and build walls to deny people you disagree with from entering your new nation. Just as Trump is trying to do.

How ironic is that?

Original Quill wrote:This is what we refer to as "the south."

phil wrote:You also do not get to decide what is part of a nation

That is down to self determination, which means all US citizens to decide and not one individual

You sound like your forefathers, that decided to not recognise Indian lands and the peoples rights

Not individual.  There is a substantial group of Pacific westerners who want the separation.  It's a movement.  It's much like devolution in Scotland...only ours will be successful.

One lying weirdo on a forum is hardly a substantial group. Or did Chuck Norris join this movement too, making it two?

Original Quill wrote:

Maddog wrote:

And yet they keep coming. Bailing on the Golden State.  

I understand that the favorable parts of California are expensive.  They are desirable...about which I'm ambivalent.  After all, expensive means popular, vindicating my point about California being a great place to live.

On the other hand, it's a big, big area.  It's well served with transportation and public facilities, and as we build we make room of others, of all colors, income levels and persuasions, and make it a better place.  All in all, it's a win-win.

We, on the west coast, have already chosen to live without a theme of bigotry and racism in the culture, and hence our desire to live without the south.

Houston, is the most diverse city in the country.

San Francisco, one of the least.

Maddog wrote:

Original Quill wrote:This is what we refer to as "the south."





Not individual.  There is a substantial group of Pacific westerners who want the separation.  It's a movement.  It's much like devolution in Scotland...only ours will be successful.

One lying weirdo on a forum is hardly a substantial group. Or did Chuck Norris join this movement too, making it two?

You're upset. I understand. But calling me "weirdo" is not going to remedy your problems, nor the ills you feel.

Seek professional help.

Original Quill wrote:

Maddog wrote:

One lying weirdo on a forum is hardly a substantial group. Or did Chuck Norris join this movement too, making it two?

You're upset.  I understand.  But calling me "weirdo" is not going to remedy your problems, nor the ills you feel.

Seek professional help.

I'm hardly upset. I'm just calling out your bullshit about some movement to secede.

It's non existent, except in your imagination. Kind of like your workout partner.

Maddog wrote:

Original Quill wrote:

I understand that the favorable parts of California are expensive.  They are desirable...about which I'm ambivalent.  After all, expensive means popular, vindicating my point about California being a great place to live.

On the other hand, it's a big, big area.  It's well served with transportation and public facilities, and as we build we make room of others, of all colors, income levels and persuasions, and make it a better place.  All in all, it's a win-win.

We, on the west coast, have already chosen to live without a theme of bigotry and racism in the culture, and hence our desire to live without the south.

Houston, is the most diverse city in the country.

San Francisco, one of the least.  

Yes, but SF is landlocked on a Peninsula. It is very desirable, and expensive.

The only time I hear anything about Houston, it's either a fire or an oil spill...or another black person is killed in the Waller County jail.

Maddog wrote:

Original Quill wrote:

You're upset.  I understand.  But calling me "weirdo" is not going to remedy your problems, nor the ills you feel.

Seek professional help.

I'm hardly upset. I'm just calling out your bullshit about some movement to secede.

It's non existent, except in your imagination. Kind of like your workout partner.  

You sound upset...and a bit jealous.  Seep help.

Original Quill wrote:

Maddog wrote:

I'm hardly upset. I'm just calling out your bullshit about some movement to secede.

It's non existent, except in your imagination. Kind of like your workout partner.  

You sound upset...and a bit jealous.  Seep help.

Quill I respect you but you are losing the debate here, by the above

Its petty, so stick to the points and the same goes to maddog

Original Quill wrote:

Maddog wrote:

I'm hardly upset. I'm just calling out your bullshit about some movement to secede.

It's non existent, except in your imagination. Kind of like your workout partner.  

You sound upset...and a bit jealous.  Seep help.

Upset about what?

Your vivid imagination?

Now, their is a movement to break up California, but that's different than seceding?

Maddog wrote:

Original Quill wrote:

You sound upset...and a bit jealous.  Seep help.

Upset about what?

Your vivid imagination?

You are allowing him to draw you outside the debate here mate

He is making it personal and you are falling for this

https://www.forbes.com/sites/billwhalen/2018/07/18/california-takes-a-break-from-breaking-up/#1573446eb807

There is no similar movement to secede.

phildidge wrote:

Maddog wrote:

Upset about what?

Your vivid imagination?

You are allowing him to draw you outside the debate here mate

He is making it personal and you are falling for this

Thanks.

But unlike you, I don't respect the guy. But I don't mind playing his game, because I'm better at it.

Maddog wrote:

phildidge wrote:

You are allowing him to draw you outside the debate here mate

He is making it personal and you are falling for this

Thanks.

But unlike you, I don't respect the guy. But I don't mind playing his game, because I'm better at it.  

But by claiming you are better at a game, which there is no judge to decide. It simple falls down to ego

I know this better than most and have mastered this and it proves naff all

You should simple stick to your line of debate, as it has Quill on the ropes and he knows this

Quill is clever and I do respect him, as i do you. Even when we all disagree

Otherwise it simple becomes a dick measuring competition

Just saying

phildidge wrote:

Maddog wrote:

Thanks.

But unlike you, I don't respect the guy. But I don't mind playing his game, because I'm better at it.  

But by claiming you are better at a game, which there is no judge to decide. It simple falls down to ego

I know this better than most and have mastered this and it proves naff all

You should simple stick to your line of debate, as it has Quill on the ropes and he knows this

Quill is clever and I do respect him, as i do you. Even when we all disagree

Otherwise it simple becomes a dick measuring competition

Just saying

There are mods here, if they want to step in.

Until then, I'll say my piece about the man, a term I use lightly when describing him.

Ciao!

Maddog wrote:

phildidge wrote:

But by claiming you are better at a game, which there is no judge to decide. It simple falls down to ego

I know this better than most and have mastered this and it proves naff all

You should simple stick to your line of debate, as it has Quill on the ropes and he knows this

Quill is clever and I do respect him, as i do you. Even when we all disagree

Otherwise it simple becomes a dick measuring competition

Just saying

There are mods here, if they want to step in.

Until then, I'll say my piece about the man, a term I use lightly when describing him.

Ciao!

I am just saying mate. You are better, when you are not drawn in to when he uses emotions

You use sound arguments

I respect that

Take that or leave it

I see this from an outsideer view and respect you both

I just think you have like me a threshold on topics that matter to you

Just saying, he knos when he is losing to suck you in to be personal

It shows he has actually lost the debate and you never take advantage of that

phildidge wrote:

Maddog wrote:

Original Quill wrote:

You sound upset...and a bit jealous.  Seep help.

Upset about what?

Your vivid imagination?

You are allowing him to draw you outside the debate here mate

He is making it personal and you are falling for this

Yep, one should always stick to the actual topic of the debate and never make it personal. I have said this on here somewhere recently....I am sure of it....

A Texas "rancher" visiting Australia for the first time, sidles up to the bar in an outback pub, and trying to bignote himself says :

"My ranch is so big, it takes me a week just to ride from one end to the other !"

A local station owner leaning up against the bar, after listening to Tex's boasting then drawls :

"Yeh ?  I had a horse like that once, but I shot it for being too slow.."

Maddog is just like that Texas "rancher" --  all talk, little substance..

phildidge wrote:

Maddog wrote:

Upset about what?

Your vivid imagination?

You are allowing him to draw you outside the debate here mate

He is making it personal and you are falling for this

Nah, don't be so feisty. The debate is long over, and I have won. I'm showing him that I have feelings, and he is losing so bad that I feel sorry for him.

The game is long over...no need to carry it on. Didge, sometimes you've got to let the loser go lick his wounds.

Original Quill wrote:

phildidge wrote:

You are allowing him to draw you outside the debate here mate

He is making it personal and you are falling for this

Nah, don't be so feisty.  The debate is long over, and I have won.  I'm showing him that I have feelings, and he is losing so bad that I feel sorry for him.

The game is long over...no need to carry it on.  Didge, sometimes you've got to let the loser go lick his wounds.

You did not win anything, as there was nothing to win

I rightly pointed out that you descended the discussion to a farce

Which is a correct assessment of the debate, mainly as you could not intellectually respond to points

I felt sorry for him, didge. He was reduced to trying to argue the reputation of Houston, TX, FGS. That's like drinking the water from Flint, MI.

I'm not going to kick a dog who is reduced to drivel. You look at debate as warfare...kick 'em while he's down. You shouldn't. Have a little compassion for others.

WhoseYourWolfie wrote:

A Texas "rancher" visiting Australia for the first time, sidles up to the bar in an outback pub, and trying to bignote himself says :

"My ranch is so big, it takes me a week just to ride from one end to the other !"

A local station owner leaning up against the bar, after listening to Tex's boasting then drawls :

"Yeh ?  I had a horse like that once, but I shot it for being too slow.."

Maddog is just like that Texas "rancher" --  all talk, little substance..

You seem obsessed with me.

eddie wrote:

phildidge wrote:

You are allowing him to draw you outside the debate here mate

He is making it personal and you are falling for this

Yep, one should always stick to the actual topic of the debate and never make it personal. I have said this on here somewhere recently....I am sure of it....

Well, they have these people called mods that could enforce that.....................................

But, there would only be a bout 4 posters here.

Maddog wrote:https://www.star-telegram.com/news/local/community/fort-worth/article230657259.html


The boom shows no sign of ending.

Fort Worth is now the 13th-largest city in the United States, behind Jacksonville, Florida, and ahead of Columbus, Ohio, as well as San Francisco, according to the latest Census Bureau population estimates released Thursday.

“Fort Worth’s rapid growth speaks to our incredible quality of life, business friendly climate and affordable cost of living,” said Fort Worth Mayor Betsy Price. “Of course, substantial growth presents both great opportunities as well as new challenges to strategically manage our growth without compromising what makes Fort Worth a unique place to live, work, and play.”

I guess we could start over. Does anyone have any insight as to why people are flocking to Texas to live?

Maybe it's the weather?

eddie wrote:

phildidge wrote:

You are allowing him to draw you outside the debate here mate

He is making it personal and you are falling for this

Yep, one should always stick to the actual topic of the debate and never make it personal. I have said this on here somewhere recently....I am sure of it....

Agreed and one should not also say what posters can say or not say within a debate. Where you actually did this and based on you thinking that something was off topic. Never being able to reason this, on a topic, that was already subjective based on beliefs

Go figure

Nope. I wanted to stick to the topic. Never stopped anyone posting.

Round and round we go.

eddie wrote:Nope. I wanted to stick to the topic. Never stopped anyone posting.

Round and round we go.

You dictated what the topic was and never allowed for other opinions on this

Hence you did actually stop a discussion on this

You only approved of views that alligned with yours

phildidge wrote:

eddie wrote:Nope. I wanted to stick to the topic. Never stopped anyone posting.

Round and round we go.

You dictated what the topic was and never allowed for other opinions on this

Hence you did actually stop a discussion on this

You only approved of views that alligned with yours

She never told anybody they couldn't talk about whatever they wanted.

She only said she wasn't interested in talking about those other topics that were raised.

If you can prove me wrong, I'll admit it, right here.

But you can't, because she never did that.

Ben Reilly wrote:

phildidge wrote:

You dictated what the topic was and never allowed for other opinions on this

Hence you did actually stop a discussion on this

You only approved of views that alligned with yours

She never told anybody they couldn't talk about whatever they wanted.

She only said she wasn't interested in talking about those other topics that were raised.

If you can prove me wrong, I'll admit it, right here.

But you can't, because she never did that.

So only what she is interested in eh?

So other views thus do not count

I just proved you wrong, by your own statement

Are now my views and Eilzels do not count based on the views of Eddie?

Do you want me to post up again what she said

I applaud your defense but you even made it worse and emabrresed yourself here doing so

This is an open forum, and for a mod to say , what can and cannot be debated in a thread, based on their beliefs, is a form of dictatorship

This is what Eddie said

Eddie wrote:

But I’m not interested in discussing the points you both raised because that’s not what I wanted to discuss?
Not sure why you need me to discuss them seeing as I wanted to discuss something else?

Start your own thread about the points you want to discuss. That seems the better option.

http://www.newsfixboard.com/t27150p50-why-do-we-have-such-a-strong-need-to-always-be-right#514413

How is that allowing for debate?

How is that even being open to Eilzel s views or mine?

Seriously?

I didn’t  stop you though, did I?
Perhaps I should have ignored you? I mean, most posters only answer the posts that they want to on any given thread, including you. Right?

You’re the only one with a problem (and Les, slightly).
All I said was I didn’t want to address your particular points and gave my reasons. Others understood.

Perhaps you were upset that I didn’t want to discuss what you wanted? Who knows?

I do know I am done explaining. It’s SO boring!

eddie wrote:I didn’t  stop you though, did I?
Perhaps I should have ignored you? I mean, most posters only answer the posts that they want to on any given thread, including you. Right?

You’re the only one with a problem (and Les, slightly).
All I said was I didn’t want to address your particular points and gave my reasons. Others understood.

Perhaps you were upset that I didn’t want to discuss what you wanted? Who knows?

I do know I am done explaining. It’s SO boring!

You dont get it Eddie

You were never interested in views that never agreed with you

This is a debate forum and for you to dictate what can and cannot be said on a thread, shows a form of authoritism.

For you to dictate what can be discussed is problematic. It shows you are not open minded and only open to views that agree with you

How is that even a debate?