Does anybody else

[Twin Fist]

Josh, I dont care what the rest of the world thinks because of one thing.

WE look out for their interests, but they dont return the favor. Look at Israel. We have backed them for decades, given literally BILLIONS to them in money,a ndmore in hardware. And yet they spy on us.

If something happens to them, they come running to US to fix it. Then complain about American interference in thier affairs....

WTF???

That sort of double standard chaps my sensitive areas.

the two biggest critics of the Iraqi invasion, Germany and France BOTH had illegal deals going on with Saddam's regime. So they didnt care about right or wrong, or legal or illegal, they wanted to make MONEY

What makes the US noble, we LOSE money to do the right thing, Like rebuilding Iraq. We dont have to. We could pull out, and bail. but we dont. because it wouldnt be RIGHT

BTW- before you blow a gasket, the reason i say it wouldnt be right is because pretty much everyone agrees if we leave, the Iranians WILL take over. OR a new Taliban takes over. Either or those things would be in the long term BAD for everyone involved. But worst of all for the Iraqi people.

Or do you disagree with that too?

And Josh, I like you well enough, but your comment was rude and over the line. For here. IRL it wouldnt bother me. But in this highly moderated forum, there is no place for that sort of thing.

But we are getting off topic

the media, is what it is, and more and more, what it is isnt good.

 

[The Last Legionary]

The rules are posted. You did read them right?
Oh, and for the record, I did report you.
Now I'll ignore you. Bye!

 

[Josh]

also, whoever just neg repped me for not being polite and respectful.. please. What I said was clearly a figure of speech meaning "to follow blindly". I show respect for people who disagree with me. If it's a matter of choosing my words more wisely It's noted.

 

[Josh]

The rules are posted. You did read them right?
Oh, and for the record, I did report you.
Now I'll ignore you. Bye!

I'm going to request this thread be locked. It got wayyy off track because apprently you cannot understand a figure of speech. If i'm to be banned for that..Good riddance.

 

[DustinJolley]

Twin Fist, these people don't seem to understand the obious fact that Liberals are the ones who are telling us what we SHOULD believe NOT the so called "Conservative," Fox News. "We report. You decide."

 

[DustinJolley]

We're going to have to continue this discussion again on Wed. the 14th because I will be out of town until then starting this Tue. morning. Thank you.

 

[Twin Fist]

see ya Dustin

 

[The Last Legionary]

I'm going to request this thread be locked. It got wayyy off track because apprently you cannot understand a figure of speech. If i'm to be banned for that..Good riddance.

It's off track because you confused this site with one of the crap filled mud pit ones and chose a poor metaphor, and then decided to be a jerk about it. Debate here is preferred to be a bit more, intellectual. Preferred. As TF said, face to face, no problem. Here, it's different. Face to face I'd be saltier still, and we'd probably laugh over cold drinks.

I'll stand down, you apologize for the comment, and y'all can go back to the more important discussion that was going on before this short trip to tangent land. Deal?
Please signify agreement by returning to the original discussion and not replying to me. :viking1:

 

[Josh]

And Josh, I like you well enough, but your comment was rude and over the line. For here. IRL it wouldnt bother me. But in this highly moderated forum, there is no place for that sort of thing.

In real life it wouldn't bother anyone. you're right. I think, or would hope the moderators would understand the difference between a figure of speech and being disrespectful. I like you enough too.. and the debate was good. I appreciate it. I'm done in the study though.. or if cry-babies get their way.. on MT.

Either way this will be my last post on this topic, regardless of what self righteous "you r s0 disresepctful lolol" comments are left after I'm gone.
It IS clear that my style of debate may be too abrasive for this forum.
So i'll step back. But apologize? "hahahhaa" <<that's all you'll get to the ones calling for it. ESPECIALLY the ones who didn't take part in the discussion until like 10 posts ago just to bash my posts. wow. Stop playing moral police.

Later.

 

[Kacey]

Attention all users:

Please keep the conversation polite and respectful

Karen Cohn
MT Senior Moderator

 

[Empty Hands]

If you dont think the DailyPOS crowd is extreem, then our definitions are very, very different.

They are profane, vicious, insulting, utterly committed to helping Democrats win, and they really hate the Republicans. They are also espouse mainstream policy positions. They are partisan, not political extremists.

Faith Based Initiatives are a way of getting the organizations that already do charitable work the funds to do so on a large scale. This is not establishment of any religion. This is not endorsement of any religion, so i am afraid you are just wrong about that.

The government is funding certain religious groups. I don't know what else you would call that. In any case, the far right was pretty happy about the development. I would agree that it is not the biggest thing to get worked up over, the office hasn't been well funded or been particularly effective. Nonetheless, it is an example of a far-right victory which is what you were asking for.

Roe should be overturned.Not because abortion is bad, but because it is a very badly decided case.

That doesn't change the fact that nominating these two justices was a huge priority for the far right, and they got their big victory. They want Roe gone, and not because they are finnicky legalists - they want abortion banned by any means necessary.

 

[Twin Fist]

That doesn't change the fact that nominating these two justices was a huge priority for the far right, and they got their big victory. They want Roe gone, and not because they are finnicky legalists - they want abortion banned by any means necessary.

Ok, and what will happen is Roe is overturned?

WORST case, it goes back to the state legislators, and the people can vote on it.

Wow, thats horrible, letting the people actually decide something.............


ok, that was sarcastic, but I trust you get my meaning. SO WHAT if it gets overturned? The states would just have the option of doing what they want with the issue. And I think it would still end up legal in any case. i think it should be. But, if the people actually got to decide the issue, whats the harm in that?

 

[Twin Fist]

and i have to point out, it hasnt been overturned, has it?

no.

And it more than likely never will be.

 

[Josh]

Hey, I hate to be off topic.. but upon reviewing my own comments.. Yeah, I was offensive. I apologize for the harmful comments.

On the whole Roe v Wade issue. I have to leave my own opinions at the door on this one. I feel like it should be a states issue. I feel at the very least it should be voted on.

 

[elder999]

Both are theories. Neither is proven. Both are believed by a LOT of people. I would prefere that creationism be taught in Social Studies raher than biology, but it should be discussed at least.
.

Actually-and I need to point out that I believe in the Creator AND evolution-creationism is not a theory. While the normally excellent MErriam-Webster's English Language Technical Manual is deficient in this case (the definition might apply to creationism) I can say as a scientist that in order to qualify as a scientific "theory," the idea has to be testable and capable of being disproven, which creationism is not:

from the excellent but totally confounding to most, National Academy of Sciences


Some scientific explanations are so well established that no new evidence is likely to alter them. The explanation becomes a scientific theory. In everyday language a theory means a hunch or speculation. Not so in science. In science, the word theory refers to a comprehensive explanation of an important feature of nature that is supported by many facts gathered over time. Theories also allow scientists to make predictions about as yet unobserved phenomena

What creationism is is a speculation, conjecture or postulate-can't verify it, and you can't disprove it. Doesn't make it an invalid idea, just one whose scientific basis is unduplicable, testable or provable-unlike evolution, for which there are myriad testable models....and, of course, one does not necessarily exclude the other....additionally, the confusion comes from most people (other than scientists) commonly using the word "theory" to denote an idea, conjecture, speculation or postulate....Come sail away, come sail away, come sail away with me!

....I like the idea about teaching it in social studies, though-good man.

 

[elder999]

.

BTW Elder, GE's IS, not "was" run by CEO Jeffery Immelt, not a republican

Why, because he's a tree-hugging greenie?

I'm not sure what his party affiliation is, but his public record of political donations, seen here, leans heavily to the Republican side-not exclusively Republican-wisely-but more than 70% of his affiliated donations went to the Republicans.Come sail away, come sail away, come sail away with me!


And, for the record, I'm willing to bet he won't be CEO of GE come 2010 at the latest-

regardless of who OWNS the, look at their CONTENT.

but that doesnt matter to you guys I am sure. Even though you know FULL WELL that owners dont control content.

Well, you'd think that in the case of the news, the facts would control content, but that's not the case either.....who really cares about any other programming-it's the expression of the free press that's troubling.....in any case, there's every indication that Rupert Murcdoch controls content.

 

[Empty Hands]

But, if the people actually got to decide the issue, whats the harm in that?

I didn't say it was harmful, I said getting Roe overturned by any means necessary was a big priority for the far right. Do you deny this?

 

[Big Don]

I didn't say it was harmful, I said getting Roe overturned by any means necessary was a big priority for the far right. Do you deny this?

In that the purpose of the judiciary is the interpretation of laws, not the making of new laws, that being the purpose of the legislature, the court's ruling in Roe, is, or should be, null and void. Unless of course you want judges like the idiots that sentence child molesters to 6 months in jail running the country...

 

[Big Don]

Interesting that the CEO of News Corp (owns Fox News) Rupert Murdoch, contributes to Hillary, Kerry, Specter, Ted Kennedy, Fritz Hollings and others, and is STILL called all kinds of nasty names by your end of the political spectrum....
Shoot, I think less of Fox news now, just seeing what kind of liberal dipsticks Murdoch has given money to, Chuck Schumer for Pete's sake...

 

[Twin Fist]

I didn't say it was harmful, I said getting Roe overturned by any means necessary was a big priority for the far right. Do you deny this?

I dont deny it, mind you, as I have said, i am pro-choice myself. And no, I am not a fool, the far right wants RvW overturned because they want to end abortion, I know that.

But

The Supreme Court is, as you pointed out, already "stacked"

why hasnt there been a challenge to Roe?