|
Post by Russ Koon on May 14, 2007 2:20:41 GMT -5
Hunter 480, I agree that the majority of the public is against gay marriage.
However, the move to adopt the amendment to the constitution began failing to pass in state after state, following some initial successes. People weren't in favor of rewriting their constitution to deny rights to their fellow citizens after having time to reflect on the matter, even if they were personally disgusted by the behavior in question.
As unpalatable as the activity may be to most of us, it's not as bad as the government telling us how to conduct our sex lives to be in accordance with the prevailing religious majority.
It's not that gay marriage became more popular, it's just that government intervention in the matter became less popular.
On the stem cell matter, I'm not even sure that W had a majority within the White House on that one. I seem to recall that Laura said she was in favor of the use of the cells that would have been disposed of anyway, if there was any reasonable chance that they could be useful in finding new treatments.
I think a lot of the president's "political capital" was spent pushing some of that agenda for the religious right, and it cost him and the party in the mid-terms, and will end up costing us all if the democrats take the White House. A lot of people don't want Pat Robertson deciding their moral questions, and even more people get real uncomfortable when the government makes law based on his decisions. Some of those people used to vote Republican.
|
|
|
Post by DEERTRACKS on May 15, 2007 6:03:39 GMT -5
I think it was the Tooth Fairy!
|
|
|
Post by JohnSmiles on May 15, 2007 15:41:13 GMT -5
I think it was the Tooth Fairy! I think it has more to do with statements like this, which while never proven true OR false, fall directly in line with the patriot act, nau and open borders: Many will always deny he said this, and it matters in no way actually whether true or false. This IS his stand, and his forcing the patriot act through proves it.
|
|
|
Post by tmarsh83 on May 15, 2007 22:00:45 GMT -5
I really don't want to get into this, but I am going to. Hindsight is 20/20. The "will of people" pre-invasion, was in favor. Period. This is why we are a republic and not a democracy. Yes, the public was in favor. THEN. WHy is it important that they were in favor then, so we went, but now that most are opposed, we stay? You don't like inconsistencies, remember? In this case, I don't either. I also can't stand bandwagon jumpers. Nor can I stand people who go back on their responsabilities, or don't finish a job they start. Should we be the world police, no. Should we finish a fight we started yes. Should congress stop micromanaging this war...HELL YES... An army has two jobs, to kill people, and break things, at this point the congress allows our military to do neither. Bomb, shoot, kill. That is how you win a war. Show me one that wasn't won this way. I'll show you alot that were lost without enough of it.
|
|
|
Post by JohnSmiles on May 15, 2007 23:16:01 GMT -5
Yes, the public was in favor. THEN. WHy is it important that they were in favor then, so we went, but now that most are opposed, we stay? You don't like inconsistencies, remember? In this case, I don't either. I also can't stand bandwagon jumpers. Nor can I stand people who go back on their responsabilities, or don't finish a job they start. Should we be the world police, no. Should we finish a fight we started yes. Should congress stop micromanaging this war...HELL YES... An army has two jobs, to kill people, and break things, at this point the congress allows our military to do neither. Bomb, shoot, kill. That is how you win a war. Show me one that wasn't won this way. I'll show you alot that were lost without enough of it. Well, sign up, and show em how its done there patriot! The public supported it, so it was justifiable. Now the vast majority of the public is against it, and its 'tough, finish what you started'? A war is one thing, a civil war is another. It is not possible to just shoot, kill and bomb away the 'bad guys' without doing same to the guys we are supposed to be 'helping' to create a viable democracy(whatever that is. Wish we STILL had one here). Hey, good news though. The prez is so overburdened he has nominated a 3 star general to be in charge of that war(brand new job title, never even existed before in America), while he worries about the other one. The one we haven't really started yet, but are expected to. . . Now, it isn't quite decided how well a 3 star general can give orders to all the 4 star generals, or how they will respond to orders they do not agree with, but we are assured it will all work itself out. ;D Our men are dying. They are under supplied. They are over burdened. They are repeating viet nam, and America is going broke fighting a war that really isn't even a war. All because we refuse to start impeachment procedings that would put Cheney in charge. While we don't think it could really get any worse, we are also NOT that sure of it! My suggestion would be simple: You have 6 months to get your country, and your people in order. We will assist you. In the event you cannot do this in 6 months, we will take over completely, and we will ask very few questions while doing so. If this is not acceptable, we can leave now.
|
|
|
Post by tmarsh83 on May 16, 2007 6:34:00 GMT -5
I can't pass the physical John. Back and knees...
Since when did the government have to change to the immediate whims of the public?
Our government is a Republic, and it is meant to move slow, in all ways, to prevent knee jerk reactions from causing more problems.
You cannot fight a war with kid gloves on. It can't be done. I am sure you are familiar with the term "collatoral damage", in a war, there will be some. Not allowing our soldiers to fight is essentially what has been done, and that will never work.
The war czar is BS.
3200 dead in Iraq. 3200. Many because Kerry "voted for the bill, before I voted against it" (sorry that just never gets old)...One life is too many, but this is a war. In what now, almost 4 years, 3200...in the grand scheme of a war, that is not a mind boggling number. As hog tied as they have been that number is a testemant to the greatest military the world has ever seen. Where was George Stephanopulous in 1941, broadcasting the names of every soldier killed in both theaters of war during WWII? Oh...yeah....
One cannot forget the media bias when it comes to this war. I know soldiers that have fought there, and they are beside themselves with how the war is portrayed. It isn't as bad as they would have us believe, but we have to let our men do their job.
If you want another helicopter scene from Saigon, that is fine, but I don't.
|
|
|
Post by tmarsh83 on May 16, 2007 6:38:08 GMT -5
One more thing, on the patriot act.
Blame bush for the creation. Don't blame him for passing it.
Both houses of our government are filled with spineless mindless jellyfish. THEY passed the patriot act in to law. They will all shirk their part in the way it happens, but make no mistake, they are there to check and balance, and they did neither. Be upset at them to.
Any president gets entirely too much blame(Bush, Hoover) or credit(see JFK, Clinton). More power resides within the walls of the capital building than the white house. That is simple.
|
|
|
Post by Russ Koon on May 16, 2007 12:08:48 GMT -5
Well said, tmarsh, in both posts.
|
|
|
Post by Russ Koon on May 16, 2007 12:44:17 GMT -5
John, I see an awful lot of folks saying that war is wrong, that war is bad, that war is costly.
I see very few offering alternatives to war in a situation where an external force is killing our citizens and is avowed to continue doing so.
Please tell us what actions you would have the government take when an opposing force is killing our citizens and admittedly wants to keep on.
Should we compromise and try to establish an annual limit on the number they kill, in the hopes that they'll comply voluntarily?
Maybe we should abandon our form of government and convert to an Islamic society? Fit our wives and daughters with veils and burkas, and get used to bowing to Mecca five times a day in prayers?
The alternatives you do provide in your last post seem extremely unlikely to provide results better or faster than the ones we are currently pursuing, IMO.
Should we be the world's police force? Maybe the first question we should ask is whether there should be a world police force. If we want the world to be anything other than a dog-eat-dog jungle with no restraints on those inclined to conquer their neighbors, then there has to some sort of a restraining force.
The UN has proven to be a disappointment in that effort. Various groups banded together by mutual defense treaties seem to have been more effective.
Where those organizations have not met the need, should we simply let the most aggressive tyrants continue to build strength and territory until we either have to surrender or fight another world war?
If there need to be police in the world, and noone else is willing to be the police, should we fill the need or should we just build more nukes and await the time when we need to use them to wipe out entire regions?
I think we can all agree that "War is Hell". I'm perfectly willing to consider supporting any alternatives that seem more likely to produce workable results. I haven't heard any so far.
We are not at war with Iraq, but with the extremist factions of the Islamic religion. The best way to stop those factions from having their way is to safeguard the establishment of a secular government that Iraquis of all persuasions can support as their own. We seem to be doing our best in that regard. I think it's a cause worth fighting for, and if it hasn't been done with absolute perfection, I think it's been done at least fairly well so far.
I applaud all concerned, from the freshest recruit on his or her way to the desert, right on up to the CIC.
Hopefully a viable alternative to war will come into view sometime soon and we can all quit blowing each other up and get on to mankind's next problem. Until then, I hope those on our side aren't forced to quit, because the guys running the show on the other side are even scarier tyrants than the worst of ours.
|
|
|
Post by kevin1 on May 16, 2007 13:26:38 GMT -5
Would anyone here really shed a tear if we were to neutron bomb Tehran, Kabul, and Damascus just to send a warning to the jerks over there? ;D
|
|
|
Post by parrothead on May 16, 2007 14:19:46 GMT -5
Half of all medical students grad. in the bottom half of their class. Now that is scary
|
|
|
Post by Old Ironsights on May 16, 2007 14:23:18 GMT -5
Half of all medical students grad. in the bottom half of their class. Now that is scary I hope you aren't being serious... I mean, if you had a class of 2 and one "passed" with a 100% and the other "passed" with a 99%, still fully 1/2 would graduate in the "bottom half" of their class...
|
|
|
Post by JohnSmiles on May 16, 2007 18:02:54 GMT -5
I can't pass the physical John. Back and knees... Since when did the government have to change to the immediate whims of the public? 'immediate whims'? The government is 'OF, BY and FOR the People. It is the WILL OF THE PEOPLE, not the stubbornness of a power grabbing fool that is SUPPOSED to rule this country. And the People have been turning away from this man for a very long time now. 'Immediate' is hardly a valid word in this context. The People have been demanding we either get this under control, or get out for much longer than it took to decide to go in now. This is no knee jerk, the public reaction has been growing for two full years minimum. Exactly. Never said otherwise. Remember, this is NOT a war. We are NOT at war with a COUNTRY. We are involved in a police action against a waring faction IN that country. While said faction is also being supported by those claiming to be our friends and those who are not. And the greatest nation on earth is going broke trying to pretend it has no limits. Our soldiers do NOT have all the supplies they need, and they never did! We are spread way too thin, with way too little, and attempting to resolve these issues now is simply WAY too late to be successful. It is lip service by our leaders, and our soldiers will see no actual gain. Yes the czar is a crock. Just another facade to absorb some of the heat is all. I have a nephew and several cousins who have and are currently serving over there. Trent, this IS Viet Nam all over again. I had two older brothers in that one, and they see the same bs I see. This country indeed has a great military, but it is being blatantly exhausted by 'stay the course' with NO COURSE YET SET!
|
|
|
Post by JohnSmiles on May 16, 2007 18:07:45 GMT -5
One more thing, on the patriot act. Blame bush for the creation. Don't blame him for passing it. Both houses of our government are filled with spineless mindless jellyfish. THEY passed the patriot act in to law. They will all shirk their part in the way it happens, but make no mistake, they are there to check and balance, and they did neither. Be upset at them to. Any president gets entirely too much blame(Bush, Hoover) or credit(see JFK, Clinton). More power resides within the walls of the capital building than the white house. That is simple. I blame them all. I blame the one who created much more than those who went belly up and allowed it to be passed, but make no mistake I do indeed blame them as well. If what I said looked as if I thought otherwise, it was simply lack of details. While he shoved it right down their throats, they decided to swallow it all by themselves.
|
|
|
Post by Decatur on May 16, 2007 18:10:42 GMT -5
Give me a break!
|
|
|
Post by JohnSmiles on May 16, 2007 19:05:09 GMT -5
John, I see an awful lot of folks saying that war is wrong, that war is bad, that war is costly. I see very few offering alternatives to war in a situation where an external force is killing our citizens and is avowed to continue doing so. You also do not see this man making any attempt to secure our borders against them. While everyone has pointed this out, over and over, doing so might actually hinder some of our illegal aliens also, and Bush wants amnesty almost as much as he wants this war. I would have secured OUR borders to start with, several years ago, instead of making sure illegals are flowing in by the millions to feed the greed of big business and depress the wages of one industry after another. I will assume that is humor, as no one I know has that view here. I am against this pres, and this failed and horribly botched war effort. That does not imply I in any way support, or bow down to allah and his extremist flakes. IMO, the ones we are currently following are producing no results at all, so mine could hardly do less. No one nation has that much power, and several nations have the ability to make it an end run if push comes to shove. We have advanced to the point of being no wiser, yet absolutely powerful enough to eradicate mankind from the planet. Several nations now have that ability. Until we get our OWN police and justice system up and viable again, we have no business trying to police the planet. And quite frankly, we do not have the power to do so anyway. We are not the only ones with nukes. We were simply the first to prove we would actually use them. I agree. The UN is a joke, and has no real use unless there is a world war being fought. This country has been acting as if it has the right to force its policies on other nations for decades. Many countries are very disillusioned with the USA. That is one of the reasons the pres wants to push the NAU through. To become an even larger super power, with more leverage to apply to other countries who don't see it our way. We had more nukes than we could ever justify 20 years ago. We have enough to destroy every person on the planet SEVERAL TIMES OVER on our own, without counting all the other nukes in all the other countries. You see, its about oil. We have tons of the stuff ourselves, btw, but we don't want to exhaust or even seriously tap into our own reserves until we have used up what is over there. A REAL oil shortage would cripple most nations overnight, and that is fact. Nukes will be used, and it will be to either destroy oil fields we cannot claim, or nations who would oppose us. Maybe none exist. Maybe this is as good as it gets. And this is not acceptable as is, and not supportable indefinitely. So, it is quite possible we can go nowhere here but down, and when all else has been exhausted you admit its a NO WIN situation and stop sending men to die with no justifiable reason afforded. I completely disagree. I think this was jumped into with no clear goal other than to START the war while the public still backed it. I applaud all who have fought and risked their lives. I pray for those who have given their lives honoring their country. I hold nothing but disdain for the President and most of his officials. I am not convinced of the last, but I adamantly agree with the first. We as a planet have major problems to overcome, and as separate nations we can't get past the finite reserves, and infinite value, of oil. We are all probably way off topic here by now, depending on how you look at it. I don't blame the man for everything, but as I said, he has done little to change the ever more common, absolutely self-centered perspective of 'anything goes as long as it gets me what I desire'.
|
|
|
Post by tmarsh83 on May 16, 2007 21:06:04 GMT -5
The last thing I will say on this is just this...
This is no democracy. This is a republic. You vote someone into office, their job is to have your opinion for you. Your opinion isn't always the same as theirs. Nor are your allegiences.
People change their minds, nothing wrong with that. But, when you elect someone, you get them for the time that they are in there. Period.
|
|
|
Post by JohnSmiles on May 16, 2007 21:22:36 GMT -5
The last thing I will say on this is just this... This is no democracy. This is a republic. You vote someone into office, their job is to have your opinion for you. Your opinion isn't always the same as theirs. Nor are your allegiences. People change their minds, nothing wrong with that. But, when you elect someone, you get them for the time that they are in there. Period. This is indeed a republic. We can, however, impeach someone who is going against the will of so many Americans on so many issues. But with Cheney up next in line, in fact we won't. I once supported Bush and the war. I was wrong on both. The war isn't about terrorists, its about oil. Bush isn't about America, he is about Bush.
|
|
|
Post by bsutravis on May 16, 2007 22:30:03 GMT -5
Make that a double Decatur...
|
|
|
Post by drgreyhound on May 17, 2007 4:27:42 GMT -5
Half of all medical students grad. in the bottom half of their class. Now that is scary I hope you aren't being serious... I mean, if you had a class of 2 and one "passed" with a 100% and the other "passed" with a 99%, still fully 1/2 would graduate in the "bottom half" of their class... OIS--you are correct in your observation. I don't know about med school, but in professional grad school, everyone is at a "high level" of achievement (I'm sure it's the same for med school), and therefore even if everyone gets a high grade, half of the students would be in the "lower half" of the high grades. There are other checks and balances to ensure that graduates of programs such as these practice competently and with sufficient educational preparation.
|
|