I mean, naturally Bush is now going to select an arch conservative for the bench. And I personally don’t believe for a second that he nominated Miers in order to make his subsequent pick more palatable. More palatable to whom? The conservative base? They were going to love him anyway. The liberal base? That wasn’t going to happen no matter what. Miers or no Miers, the Democrats were still going to object.
Not that it will make any difference.
You know what the main problem the Democrats have right now is? No sense of blood lust. If a Democratic president were hemorrhaging support and mired in as many failures as Bush currently is, the GOP would be massing like sharks around a wounded dolphin, and then they would be tearing in from all directions. The Democrats still sound and feel like exactly what they are: The party out of power. The GOP is already making noises about eliminating the judicial filibuster. The Democrats should be right in their face, shouting, “Do it! C’mon, do it, you sum’bìŧçhëš. Get rid of the filibuster, I double dog dare you. Because if you do, then sooner or later–probably sooner–the balance of power will be reversed, we’ll be in charge, and we’re going to make you eat whatever changes you make now to benefit yourselves, you hypocritical, smug, power-hungry jáçkáššëš.”
‘Cause if the situation were reversed, that’s what the GOP would be doing.
Because the GOP fights fire with fire, while the Democrats fight fire with popcorn, and they’d be well-advised to get with the program and make the most of the opportunities that the sanctimonious smugness of Bush and company are handing them before it all slips away again.
PAD
• 
How low have we sunk as a nation when passing a law banning torture is considered and act of defiance against the president?
Well, we have people saying, with a straight face, that torture is an effective way to get information…
Well, we have people saying, with a straight face, that torture is an effective way to get information…
Well, it IS an effective way to get information. Torture me sufficiently and I’ll confess to whatever you want.
It’s just a piss-poor unreliable way to get ACCURATE information, that’s all…
TWL
One of the things that really bothers me, besides the fact that there’s a debate in the first fracking place, is that on one of the other fora I participate in, there’s a poster who is proud of his evangelical Christianity – and who is also a vociferous defender of the idea of torturing suspected terrorists to get information. He says he’s still searching for the Biblical quote that will throw the “proper” light on the quotes I provided him from the Sermon on the Mount, that would somehow reconcile Christ’s pronoucement of the need for mercy and love towards one’s enemies with the idea of torture.
(Oh, and apparently I’m not a Christian, either…) :-/
(Oh, and apparently I’m not a Christian, either…) :-/
Of course not.
If you don’t believe the exact same things they do, you’re not a Christian in their book.
Well, it IS an effective way to get information. Torture me sufficiently and I’ll confess to whatever you want.
It’s just a piss-poor unreliable way to get ACCURATE information, that’s all…
Not a problem for these folks….
Craig,
I think the option you and I are both looking for is available through the open voting consortium at http://www.openvotingconsortium.org/. They are working to make electronic voting transparent- what a concept!
If only I had any faith that such a program would actually be adopted someday….
It’s a small number, yes, but how many Eric Rudolph’s do you need before fear of being bombed at a public event like the Olympics becomes legitimate in your mind? To me, one is more than enough.
I did read the whole post and know you qualified it. But why even bring it up? Is this type of killing really increasing? Is it really happening any more than what happened at Columbine? Or what happened in Fort Worth when a guy went into a church and started killing people (to give just one example of where it has happened the other way).
The reality is this is not a growing threat. I did not deny that it has, on a few occasions, happened. The belief that abortion ends a human life does, in the persons mind, give more justification for killing the “abortionist murderer” if someone is tyring to excuse it. But only if they deny everything else the pro-life and/or conservative Christian movement stands for.
My point is simply this: If you perform abortions, or are located near someone who commits abortion, you have far more to fear from a common criminal than from virtually any pro-life advocate. In fact, most pro-life advocates would come to your defense. Pro-life advocates are not neutral about this issue. We don’t sit by and quietly ignore the criminal and evil acts a few do to stop abortion by commiting murder or bombing.
Your answer is appreciated, even though I find it more based in fear than reality. But that is my opinion so I will leave you to yours.
Since when is the Bush administration interested in accurate information?
And Jim, if you read up there, I brought it up only in comparison to Bill’s comment about animal rights activists who were only talking about killing people. It’s not something that I fear every day and hopefully, never will face. I do, however, work the state Department of Health and the bureau that licenses all health clinics (inlcuding those that perform abortions) is located in the same builing as my office. So, do I sometimes think that some whackjob may decide to bomb my building to prevent a clinic from opening up in his neighborhood? Yes.
But for you to extrapolate from that thought that I think “a sizable number” of pro-lifers are that way is just plain stupid. Especially since I flat out said that wasn’t the case.
I know it’s a tiny minority. But it only takes one.
Pro-life advocates are not neutral about this issue. We don’t sit by and quietly ignore the criminal and evil acts a few do to stop abortion by commiting murder or bombing.
Kindly explain, then, why Randall Terry is still a viable political entity. Terry has quite consciously and deliberately turned blind eyes to people like Eric Rudolph, and by your claim above he should thus be condemned. Yet he’s not.
TWL
Terry has quite consciously and deliberately turned blind eyes to people like Eric Rudolph, and by your claim above he should thus be condemned. Yet he’s not.
In all fairness, I have to say that I have heard pro-life people condemn Terry. He was running for something or other in my hometown, or at least had a booth set up, as did some mainstream right to life group and they hated each other. Terry feels that the mainstreamers are part of the problem and the mainstreamers hated him because, well, he’s nuts.
(And while I don’t usually find schadenfreude an admirable thing to indulge in, I just can’t help pointing out that since then Our Mr. Terry has A- been censured by his church for, ahem, relationships with single and married women; B- divorced his wife; C- had one son come out as gay; D- had two daughters become pregnant out of wedlock, one of whom D- became a Muslim.
God has a plan and he’s not in it.
http://news.yahoo.com/s/afp/20051107/wl_mideast_afp/usiraqintelligence
But hey, at least he didn’t lie about a BJ.
Seriously, at what point will the remaining Bush apologists admit that his entire administration is full of crap?
In all fairness, I have to say that I have heard pro-life people condemn Terry.
Thanks, much appreciated. Of course, I’d rather it be a bit more widespread than it is, but this definitely gives me some hope.
TWL
Wouldn’t it be great if Randal terry and Fred Phelps met at a protest and just beat each other senseless? (But how could we tell?).
I would pay to see that fight.
So would I … assuming the money didn’t go to either of their causes, of course. 🙂
TWL
When you look at the large number who are pro-life, you realize that those who murder and bomb are an extremely minute portion of the whole
Subtract “pro-life”, add “Muslim”.
Sorry, I know it’s a bit off topic for this thread, in that abortion has nothing to do with terrorism (or at least the government hasn’t forced such a connection… yet), but I just wanted to include that because I’ve seen some disturbing thoughts on other forums. Forums where some idiots still think that any Muslim is a terrorist and so forth.
*sigh* I hate human beings.
Well, we had a victory against the anti-science crowd.
http://www.pennlive.com/newsflash/pa/index.ssf?/base/news-32/1131500646107450.xml&storylist=paelection
Yeah, democracy!
Great! Hopefully the same will happen in Kansas.
>> Pro-life advocates are not neutral about this issue. We don’t sit by and quietly ignore the criminal and evil acts a few do to stop abortion by commiting murder or bombing.
Just for the record, that is exactly how I would say most animal lovers feel about the extremists on their issue. PETA may be loud and obnoxious, but it’s the very reasonable Humane Society that actually represents most animal lovers, and that actually accomplishes stuff. I think the tremendous outpouring of respect the Humane Society received during their outstanding work in the aftermath of Katrina shows that most Americans know that, too.
Aye, good news, Den.
But with the good, Kansas seems to be heading in the same anti-science direction.
The thing that disturbs me is the viewpoint expressed by one of the moms in favor of the old Dover school board…basically, “I don’t believe in evolution, so I think the other side of the story should be told.”
Which shows just a plain ignorance of what science is. There is no “other side of the story.” The only accepted scientific explanation on the development or origin of species is evolution. There is no scientific “other side,” only faith based concepts. The unfortunate thing is that with the advent of so-called intelligent design, which is and always has been more of a philosophical observation, and not a scientific one, faith-based beliefs have some claim to the scientific arena.
The sooner we get a court decision ruling that ID is not science, the better. At least then we can give the whole ID discussion a rest, while people go back to the “activist judges” debate.
They claimed that they just wanted the “other side heard”, but their actions showed that they really wanted to repress science in favor of their narrow religious interpretation.
I really wish everyone would just agree that science is science and religion is religion. Both attempt to answer different questions (how vs. why). Unfortunately, there is a sizable faction in this country who not only reject science, but want to make sure that everyone conforms to their fundamentalist view of religion. To them, you’re either a fundamentalist or an atheist. There’s no middle ground.
BTW, the court should be ruling soon on whether ID is science. Of course it’ll probably be appealed all the way the SCOTUS, so this debate isn’t going away.
Kansas seems to go in cycles. About ten years ago, their state board of education voted on a similar measure, only to be voted out in the next election. Now it seems to have come full circle and the creationists are back in power.
Anyone know when their next election is?
I’m just relieved to see folks attempted to use a public position to advance religious beliefs get voted out. I hope that’s a trend we see continue for at least the next cycle of elections. I hold very dearly my personal religious beliefs, but I in no way want to see any legislation or other government act to coerce others into thinking like I do. In addition to that view being contrary to my own beliefs, it goes against one of the fundamentals this country was founded on. Besides, I’ve always thought that if your faith needs the government’s support in order to get people to adhere to it, maybe your faith isn’t as persuasive as you’d like to think it is.
Anyone know when their next election is?
Not soon enough.
On another forum, I commented on some quotes from these nutjobs that I found particularly interesting/sickening:
“This is a sad day. We’re becoming a laughingstock of not only the nation, but of the world, and I hate that,” said board member Janet Waugh, a Kansas City Democrat.
It’s ok, because the whole country is becoming a laughingstock.
Supporters of the new standards said they will promote academic freedom. “It gets rid of a lot of dogma that’s being taught in the classroom today,” said board member John Bacon, an Olathe Republican.
This change supports academic freedom? It gets rid of dogma? Gee, I thought you had to have religion to have “dogma”.
It just goes to show that ol’ Mr. Bacon doesn’t have a clue as to what science really is. And, like many of those like him, he doesn’t care to find out; he is right, the rest of us are wrong. Period.
Apparently, some of them are up for reelection next year.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/11/08/AR2005110801211_2.html
“Sue Gamble said the board, by dropping a phrase that defined science as “a search for natural explanations of observable phenomena,” was opening the door to supernatural explanations.”
Okay, that’s disturbing. And some of you say I’m crazy for saying that there’s a war against science being waged in this country.
Okay, that’s disturbing.
Yep, it is.
But, since they’re going to allow it, we better not stop with “intelligent design”: Teachers better be ready to discuss ID (and it’s idential twin, creationism), the Flying Spaghetti Monster, any other creation story from other religions, the important of the Ghostbusters in today’s society (we need somebody to fight the supernatural baddies, right?), and so forth.
They won’t. The agenda of the wingnuts to get all kids indoctrinated into a literal acceptance of Genesis, regardless of how their parents feel. ID and other smokescreens are just Trojan horses to get the real goal achieved.
That’s why even the Discovery Institute pulled out of the Dover case.
The problem with teaching “Intelligent Design” in schools…
Who is the “Intelligent Designer”?
You can’t have ID without a designer responsible for it.
And where did that designer come from?
Was it God, Zues, Ares, Odin, Buddha, Vishnu, Allah, Yahweh, Bob, Ra, Galactus, Aliens?
And if you take the bible at face value, then we’re all inbred, starting at Adam & Eve, then collapsed back down to Noah’s gang, back up to today…
The real problem with ID is that it’s boring to teach and learn. Anything that seems difficult to understand, instead of being taken apart and examined, is dismissed with a little hand waving.
Student: Why do we have an appendix?
Teacher: Intelligent design (God did it).
Student: Why do men have nipples?
Teacher: Intelligent design (God did it).
Student: Why do snakes and dolphins have vestigial hip bones?
Teacher: Intelligent design (God did it).
Student: Why do pandas have “thunbs”?
Teacher: Take your ritalin!
Den/Craig/Bill et. al.
Did you see the results for the Dover School Board elections? All sitting members got tossed out on their áššëš. Apparently the good citizens of Dover don’t much like their foofooraw either.
Yeah, I posted the link up above.
Did you see the results for the Dover School Board elections?
Yep. I need to recheck some links, but the one story I read said that 8 were up for reelection and were tossed.
I just haven’t seen anything saying whether there are only 8 school board members, or whethers were not up for reelection.
Ahh, crap, hit post by accident.
That link says there are 9 board members total, 8 tossed out.
I think the people of Dover are trying to tell somebody something, but I bet the ID supporters will be dámņëd to figure out what exactly that “something” is.
“Sue Gamble said the board, by dropping a phrase that defined science as “a search for natural explanations of observable phenomena,” was opening the door to supernatural explanations.”
Okay, that’s disturbing. And some of you say I’m crazy for saying that there’s a war against science being waged in this country.
Chris Mooney doesn’t think it’s crazy. He wrote a book called The Republican War on Science that discusses the ways the current Republican party has been treating science itself as a partisan issue, from intelligent design to stem cell research to global warming. He points out that there’s a difference between policy differences (is stem cell research moral/ethical to fund with public money?) and ignoring scientific input on technical matters to decide policy (the arbitrary number of stem cell lines that were preserved, and so forth).
Ok, ok, I couldn’t pass this one up.
On Dubya’s recent tour of South America, Brazilian President Luiz Inacio Lula da Silva showed Bush a map of the country.
Bush’s reaction?
“Wow, Brazil is big.”
http://www.arkcity.net/stories/110305/com_0001.shtml
Some freinds of Peace Mother Sheehan, or PMS, FINALLY show their true idea of “Support For The Troops”
“While a small group waved signs and took joy in the death of a U. S. Soldier Wednesday in South Haven, an assortment of veterans and motorcycle groups made sure at least, that the family of the deceased would not be bothered.
The protestors, who numbered less than 10, held signs, tore American flags and made hateful remarks aimed at families of soldiers who have died in the line of duty.
There were over 125 motorcycles at the funeral Wednesday, representing veterans and cyclists from all over Kansas and Oklahoma. They surrounded the small group of protestors and whenever they would try to speak, dozens of motorcyclists revved their engines to drown them out.”
That SCOTUS-Selected ChimpFace Smirky Dumbya Bu$Hitler is so dumb that, not only did he remark at how big Brazil is, the stupid cokehead, alcoholic frat-boy, who, by the way, is so dumb that he managed to trick lotsa Lyberal, I mean, Progressyve Congress People with false intelligence on Iraq, he is sooo dumb that he also met with the Dalai Lama even though China objected.
If Impeached President BJ Clinton had still been in office, he would have listened to China.
http://reuters.myway.com/article/20051109/2005-11-09T210849Z_01_SPI976107_RTRIDST_0_NEWS-CHINA-TIBET-USA-DC.html
BraBra Streisand…the gift that keeps on giving to…people…people who need people…
Posted on October 26, 2005
If there was ever a time in history to impeach a President of the United States, it would be now. In my opinion, it is two years too late. We should have done this before the election to spare the country the misjudgment, the incompetence and the malfeasance of this administration. Let us remember that UN weapons inspectors asked for more time to search Iraq for WMDs. Two months into their search, the Director General of the UN’s International Atomic Energy Agency, Mohamed ElBaradei, stated that he found no evidence that Iraq had revived its nuclear weapons program since its elimination in the 1990s. And Saddam Hussein had begun to comply with the administration’s demands. Why would you invade a country if there was still a chance for peace? Shouldn’t war be an absolute last resort? We went to war because we were misled. And we should be angry because of the 2,000 American soldiers and the 200 armed coalition forces that have died. We should be livid because of the 15,000 American soldiers that have been horribly maimed and wounded. We should be disgusted because of the 30,000 innocent Iraqi civilians that have been killed and the 20,000 that are wounded after administration officials claimed that the US was going to liberate the Iraqi people.
When does it stop? It stops with the indictment and impeachment of this corrupt, power-hungry, greedy group of incompetent leaders. How many more have to die before this happens?
http://barbrastreisand.com/statements.html#ifnotnowwhen
And if you take the bible at face value, then we’re all inbred, starting at Adam & Eve, then collapsed back down to Noah’s gang, back up to today…
It’s worse than that. If you take Genesis at face value, God created Adam, then Eve – then he stopped making people (at least, there’s no further mention of it). Eve bore Cain, then Abel. Cain killed Abel (reducing the entire population of humanity by 25%), then ran away to the land of Nod, where he married a local woman, and had children of his own.
Where did the people of Nod come from??
Courtesy of the Mouth of Sauron, er God, hisself Pat Robertson:
“I’d like to say to the good citizens of Dover. If there is a disaster in your area, don’t turn to God, you just rejected Him from your city. And don’t wonder why He hasn’t helped you when problems begin, if they begin. I’m not saying they will, but if they do, just remember, you just voted God out of your city. And if that’s the case, don’t ask for His help because he might not be there.”
Christ on the Cross, what an áššhølë . . .
With today being the 230rd Birthday of the finest group of military troops ever to tred the planet Earth, The United States Marine Corps, I’m sure that all the Lybrals, I mean, Progressyves, who really, truly and honestly do “support the troops” have sent off an e-mail to The Corps wishing them many, many, many more years.
Here you go: http://www.marines.mil/marinelink/ind.nsf/contactus
Semper Fi and God Bless The United States Marine Corps.
Yep Johnathon, that’s where I was headed with that one 🙂
Bob Jones, I support the troops, but not how their being used. And no, I’m not sending them anything. Card, e-mail, or otherwise. They chose the job. I hope they stay safe, despite the Scumbag-in-Chief’s determination to throw their lives away invading sovreign nations that are no threat to the US.
By the way, how are those recruiting numbers for the Armed Forces doing?
By the way, how are those recruiting numbers for the Armed Forces doing?
Could be better…but since you sort of brought it up, whatever happened to all that talk about a draft? It was supposed to be right around the corner but suddenly, as quickly as an election return, it just sort of vanished.
Was this all just a campaign ploy? has something changed that now makes it less likely? Or do those who claimed it was coming still believe that to be true?
Well, if recruiting numbers are as low as rumored, it still may ne coming…
Well, a discussion should be held on the makeup of the army, anyway….
Given that a) National Guard call ups tend to be killed at a much higher rate than regular army, b) they tend to be more poorly equipped, and c) their absence from home probably has a deleterious effect on localized economies, I wonder if it’s a good idea to be so reliant on them for extended actions overseas.
(for some reason, this didn’t post the first time I tried. I apologize if I end up double posting)
Funny that the day we bring this up there’s a story from reuters:
http://today.reuters.com/news/newsArticle.aspx?type=topNews&storyID=2005-11-10T223206Z_01_SCH081084_RTRUKOC_0_US-ARMS-USA-RECRUITING.xml&archived=False
Recruiting brightens for Army
WASHINGTON (Reuters) – The U.S. Army, in its first recruiting month since missing its fiscal 2005 goal, topped its target for October, and the Army National Guard beat its goal for the first time in 13 months, officials said on Thursday.
The Army sent 4,925 recruits into boot camp in October, beating the goal of 4,700 by 5 percent, the Pentagon said. That means the Army has achieved five consecutive monthly recruiting goals dating back to June after a difficult spring.
Army Recruiting Command spokesman Douglas Smith said the recent positive trend may be attributable to steps taken by the Army to add recruiters and increase enlistment incentives.
The active-duty Army fell about 7,000 short of its annual goal of 80,000 recruits in the fiscal year that ended September 30, and Army officials attributed that shortfall in part to wariness of young people to volunteer during the Iraq war.
I’m guessing that a 7,000 shortfall would not in any way be worth starting a draft over.
The question on recruiting goals is: how’s that number compare with this time last year? With what the goal was originally set at? It’s easy to make your goals if you keep lowering your standards.
The question on recruiting goals is: how’s that number compare with this time last year? With what the goal was originally set at? It’s easy to make your goals if you keep lowering your standards.
From the article:
The active-duty Army fell about 7,000 short of its annual goal of 80,000 recruits in the fiscal year that ended September 30, and Army officials attributed that shortfall in part to wariness of young people to volunteer during the Iraq war.
The Army again is seeking to attract 80,000 recruits in fiscal 2006.
So apparently the recruiting goal is identical.
I’m still curious as to why all the draft talk, which seemed to be so certain a year ago, has vanished from the scene.