Bush is a hero

Catcher1

Since: Sep 10

Fremont, CA

#159202 Feb 6, 2013
lisw wrote:
<quoted text>Laughing again.
I'm laughing too.

And I still think Sarah's hot.

“Pillars of Creation....”

Since: Jan 11

Into this world we're thrown

#159203 Feb 6, 2013
HipGnosis wrote:
<quoted text>And there it is. Any meaningful conversation with a fan is impossible.
What I'm a fan of is compassion for human beings. To give her crap is one thing, to take it as far as it has gone is another......

I'm not a fan of Sarah's per se, but I think she could have done as well as Biden any day had she been put in that position.

“Pillars of Creation....”

Since: Jan 11

Into this world we're thrown

#159204 Feb 6, 2013
lisw wrote:
<quoted text>Republicans can't win in the eyes of the liberal. All candidates bring their families into the limelight, it's supposed to be a good thing. I'll bet you're talking about she shouldn't have brought her pregnant unwed daughter out, should have hidden her, huh, not to mention her baby with downs syndrome, who wants to see THAT! Now Cheney was criticized by same liberals for not bringing his lesbian daughter out and parading her around. They said he was trying to hide something. Palin would have been fresh meat no matter what she had done. Those who go on and on about her make me ill. So you won't be getting more from me. You and Hip can have a free for all.
I believe you hit the nail squarely on the head with this post Lis..........

“Unemployed Bush 5.3 obama 8.7”

Since: Jul 10

Location hidden

#159205 Feb 6, 2013
WildWeirdWillie wrote:
<quoted text>There's two questions here - domestic and diplomatic.
Domestically, there was legitimate reasons for the Germans to fear Communism - Germany had an active Communist movement that had attempted to seize control in the immediate aftermath of WWI and the abdication of the Kaiser. As German politics polarized in the late 1920s, the Communist Party was making gains almost as impressive as the Nazis.
That's the kernel of truth that gives the big lie plausibility. The Nazis did what far right parties inevitably do
Just what the right does, place "socialist" in their party name, work to control all private industries, and immediatelly start supporting worker's unions.
http://www.britannica.com/EBchecked/topic/407...
WildWeirdWillie wrote:
- portray anyone to their left as communists. It's a technique that should be familiar to any American; it even has contemporary practitioners.
I'm sure you can provide examples of the right's leaders,(real leaders), claiming that this administration is "communist"? I don't believe anyone leaning to the right in this forum has made such a claim, either.
WildWeirdWillie wrote:
And yes ... that's a tool in the toolbox of the far left, too.
That, and gross misrepresentations of the rights positions and comments.
WildWeirdWillie wrote:
Diplomatically, well, another kernel of truth: Communist parties in that era were not just supported by but to some extent directed/controlled by Moscow.
Even with all that, I think it's more the ancient rivalries than the ideology. Mein Kampf, in making it clear that the Germans had a right to lebensraum at the expense of the inferior people who lived there. The ideology, such as it was, was nothing more than a justification.
Today, we don't refer to them as inferior people, we know them as obama's low information voter base... the takers that depend on Santa Claus for their goodies.

“On a sailing ship to nowhere”

Since: Jun 07

Colorado

#159206 Feb 6, 2013
Sister Kathryn Lust wrote:
<quoted text>Did the Court reverse the judgement?
Sorry, but in my opinion, too little, too late, too 'convenient'.
And something tells me it won't give 'closure' to her family, either. The only thing which will give them 'closure' on this, is time, and a quest for acceptance of her death, untimely or not. That's really REALLY hard to achieve, for some of us.
JMO
I don't think it did but now it's all in the appeals process. I am sure you're right regarding closure. The only argument I can make in the defense of the Catholic Church in this case is that there are times when lawyers represent you and you have nothing to do with the case. Ours was regarding an insurance settlement. We were sued for a large amount of $$ regarding a car accident our daughter was in. Fortunately for us we were covered by an umbrella policy on our insurance. The insurance company went to court on our behalf and we never heard "boo" regarding any of it until it was all settled. The insurance company itself did all the legal wrangling and we never went to court. This could be similar just because it would be an insurance company dealing with the lawsuit.

“On a sailing ship to nowhere”

Since: Jun 07

Colorado

#159207 Feb 6, 2013
WildWeirdWillie wrote:
<quoted text>I did not know the answer to that off the top of my head, so I Googled it. This is from Wikipedia, but what it says is consistent with information I've read about the impact of the book.
"American copyright law before 1856 did not give novel authors any control over derivative stage adaptations, so Stowe neither approved the adaptations nor profited from them. Minstrel show retellings in particular, usually performed by white men in blackface, tended to be derisive and pro-slavery, transforming Uncle Tom from Christian martyr to a fool or an apologist for slavery.
"Adapted theatrical performances of the novel remained in continual production in the United States for at least 80 years. These representations had a lasting cultural impact and influenced the pejorative nature of the term Uncle Tom in later popular use."
How sad for such a slur to be attached to such an honorable character and great story. I wish the book had been made into a movie before Michael Clarke Duncan died. To me he would have been the perfect actor for the part.
Thank you for taking the time to research this. I am so glad that it isn't really because of hatred for the real character in the book.

“On a sailing ship to nowhere”

Since: Jun 07

Colorado

#159208 Feb 6, 2013
HipGnosis wrote:
<quoted text>Please excuse my presumption, but I feel like it's a case where many are emotionally invested in a person, and naturally tend to gloss over any wrinkles, and just as naturally resent those who point them out. You surely have to admit at least that there's something more than Sarah-bashing going on when so many from that campaign, and on back to Alaska, who were in her camp at one time, ended up not being fans. One or two disgruntled workers? We could dismiss that. But we're talking about numbers here.
I'm sorry, I still can't see that Ms. Palin underwent anything that all candidates don't endure. She really wasn't ready for that slot, and it showed. She may have been in the future, but not in 2008. But she ended up making lemonade out of a lemon. There's no revenge like success.
I was not talking about you or anyone here regarding comments made about Palin. My thoughts were directed to comments made by popular media from Maher, Olberman, Sullivan, Stewart, Letterman, etc. The only comment I made regarding you was in respect to the comment that she was richly rewarded for the hits she took. You are right in that if a person is a public figure much goes with the territory but I have yet to see Obama, Michele, or the girls get hit with things aimed at their personal lives from the vaunted media darlings on the alphabet networks.

“Help Cecil Help!”

Since: Dec 06

Lafayette IN

#159209 Feb 6, 2013
BobinTX wrote:
<quoted text>
Just what the right does, place "socialist" in their party name, work to control all private industries, and immediatelly start supporting worker's unions.
http://www.britannica.com/EBchecked/topic/407...
<quoted text>
I'm sure you can provide examples of the right's leaders,(real leaders), claiming that this administration is "communist"? I don't believe anyone leaning to the right in this forum has made such a claim, either.
<quoted text>
That, and gross misrepresentations of the rights positions and comments.
<quoted text>
Today, we don't refer to them as inferior people, we know them as obama's low information voter base... the takers that depend on Santa Claus for their goodies.
There is no single leader that speaks for or controls all the groups on the right, which ranges from Charlie Christ all the way out to fringe people I doubt even you'd have anything to do with.

By the standard [sic] you're using, the Nazis didn't just embrace labor unions. They 'embraced' everything from youth groups of all ages, all women's groups, all Protestant churches, and all professional organizations for doctors, lawyers, social workers, butchers, bakers, and candlestick makers.

They 'embraced' all them, too - embraced 'em to death. They 'embraced' them the same way the Soviets 'liberated' the nations from the Baltic to the Mediterranean that fell behind the Iron Curtain.

The Nazis, like fascists, Communists and even some monarchies, were totalitarian. Totalitarian is not an ideology. The fact that they kept and utilized some of the trappings of socialism after they murdered ever last stinkin' Nazi leader who took the 'socialist' part of the party name seriously (Google "Night of Long Knives") says more about their propaganda techniques and their rhetoric than their ideology.

If you want to talk about whether or not the Nazis were on the right at all, I'm game - IF you can find me a contemporary (say, before 1950) reference to them as anything other than that.
Chris Clearwater

Clearwater, FL

#159210 Feb 6, 2013
BobinTX wrote:
<quoted text>
Just what the right does, place "socialist" in their party name, work to control all private industries, and immediatelly start supporting worker's unions.
http://www.britannica.com/EBchecked/topic/407...
<quoted text>
I'm sure you can provide examples of the right's leaders,(real leaders), claiming that this administration is "communist"? I don't believe anyone leaning to the right in this forum has made such a claim, either.
<quoted text>
That, and gross misrepresentations of the rights positions and comments.
<quoted text>
Today, we don't refer to them as inferior people, we know them as obama's low information voter base... the takers that depend on Santa Claus for their goodies.
Hey, I'm glad you back, at least for a min. You were right, I was wrong on the drones. This morning while I had the Beck (radio) program on a man called in that had served in Afghanistan in support of the Pres's policy. His point was that now the battlefield isn't so easy to define. I get your point now.

How Did Jay Carney Respond to Reporters’ Questions About Drone Strikes on American Citizens?

http://www.theblaze.com/stories/2013/02/05/ho...

“Help Cecil Help!”

Since: Dec 06

Lafayette IN

#159211 Feb 6, 2013
BobinTX wrote:
<quoted text>
Today, we don't refer to them as inferior people, we know them as obama's low information voter base... the takers that depend on Santa Claus for their goodies.
Sometimes the coach gives you the take sign and the next pitch comes across the plate as big as a watermelon...

(five days from spring training, doncha know...)

Since: Apr 07

Location hidden

#159212 Feb 6, 2013
HipGnosis wrote:
<quoted text>It must lie in a difference in personalities. For me, if we can't know a thing for certain, what's the point of addressing it at all? What good does it do us to assert an absolute must exist, while acknowledging we may not know for certain what it is?

I don't think it follows that if there are no absolute truths than anything goes. Actually that's pathological thinking. Back up now - not saying you're pathological for proposing so, you're just formulating an argument for absolute truth. I just disagree with your path to that conclusion. Societies agree in concert the basics of right and wrong. Those societies that disagree over those basics, generally don't play well together.

It might seem to be an absolute truth that murder is wrong. Some things are universally agreed upon, at least at core. At it's most basic concept, taking a life is murder. Recognizing murder as a wrong is universally realized to be, if not "truth", then at least socially beneficial. But we quickly add qualifiers to that concept, and equivocate what constitutes "murder". We ourselves cause this absolute truth to be relative. I don't think it can be both things at once. Very few societies have managed to reject the taking of life in total, at any time, for any reason. No major society, philosophy, or religion has done so. Therefore it seems that murder as a concept is universally recognized, but what exactly constitutes "murder" is relative.

If I lived alone on an island, there would be no reason to elaborate sets of rules. I am free to decide for myself what is right and wrong. It's when people chose to live together in groups that a social structure became necessary. It's a fundamental of society to decide together what is right and wrong. They decided that taking a life within the group was detrimental to that society. Taking a life from that group over the hill? That's where it gets murky, and little has changed over the years, no matter the "absolute truth" each allegedly adheres to. Nonetheless, a basic concept of murder has been universal across all time, and all societies, from the savannah to the city. Thus we can say with validity that flying a plane into a building is unacceptable to society at large, no matter the certitude of the perpetrator. It's not an absolute, because we can and have rationalized the taking of life ourselves as the situation arises. But it is an accepted truth.

There are certain absolute truths - we need air to survive, gravity sucks, the actual cost of a repair is always more and never less than the estimate, the phone always rings just as you sit on the pot, and so on. But I've yet to see an absolute truth in social structures. Just accepted conventions.
PART I

I agree with some of what you've said, so I'll confine my reply to the points where I don't.

1. First and foremost, you said "if we can't know a thing for certain, what's the point of addressing it at all?" You surprise me, Hip. Isn't it obvious that when we don't know for sure what is right and wrong, the point of addressing it is TO FIND OUT?

2. I’m not talking about “absolute TRUTH” here. I am speaking of absolute MORALS. That is a separate issue, although I grant you it is closely related. One of the most damaging and most pernicious lies of the times we live in is that “there are no moral absolutes, it all depends on your values/worldview,” etc.(By the way, I remembered yet another name for this poisonous nonsense,“situational ethics.”)

Since: Apr 07

Location hidden

#159213 Feb 6, 2013
PART II

I maintain that indeed there ARE moral absolutes. Right and wrong—good and evil—exist independently of an individual’s “values.” For instance, I might have no use at all for the quality of mercy, even if Shakespeare’s Portia does ;) I might favor strict justice, never cutting anyone any slack at all for any reason whatsoever. But regardless of whether or not I personally value the quality of mercy, I think you’ll agree with me that mercy is a good thing and the kind of justice I described may very well be an evil in itself.

3. There's nothing pathological about acknowledging that if absolutes of right and wrong do not exist, then anything goes. That's just human nature, that's just the way it is. We human beings have an inexhaustible capacity for rationalizing what we have done, or want to do. Some people want to hurt others, and they’’ll find ways to rationalize that, for instance the abusive husband telling his wife “You MADE me hit you, it’s YOUR fault!”

4. Yes, many issues of right and wrong, murder for instance, are affected by differences between individuals, cultures or nations. Al-Quaeda calls flying jets into the World Trade Centers and killing 3000 people “justice” or “jihad.” WE call it murder. That is a valid issue, but it doesn’t mean that there isn’t plain old right and wrong at the bottom. You said “Some things are universally agreed upon, at least at core.” Certainly, and I’m sure you’ll say that means that most of the world agrees on certain moral standards, and that shows that moral standards are subjective rather than objective. But you’d be mistaken, Hip. What it shows is that within each and every human being is a CONSCIOUSNESS OF RIGHT AND WRONG, that “still inner voice.” And that indicates to human beings having been specially equipped with this knowledge, something not given to animals. A conscience, knowing right from wrong, isn’t something one can choose to have or not have. After all, when we do wrong—when we sin (surely, Hip you realized I’d “go there,” so get over it!)—who would CHOOSE to feel guilty about it? When a spouse cheats and then feels guilty about it, is he or she CHOOSING to feel guilty about it?

5. If you lived alone on a island, would there be reasons for sets of rules? I don’t know, Hip, but either way, right would still be right and wrong would still be wrong. Even if you’re alone on that island, if a tourist is kidnapped and murdered 1500 miles away, that’s still wrong, isn’t it? Even if Man Friday suddenly shot up through the sand and murdered YOU, that would still be wrong, wouldn’t it?

6. Last, and I’ve said before, no, it’s not always easy to distinguish right from wrong, good from evil. But we MUST NOT DENY THAT THEY EXIST. We must keep looking for the truth—this is where the related issue of absolute truth comes in. To do all that, we need an objective standard to guide us, rather than our own desires. We need God.

You knew I’d go there, Hip ;)

“Unemployed Bush 5.3 obama 8.7”

Since: Jul 10

Location hidden

#159214 Feb 6, 2013
WildWeirdWillie wrote:
<quoted text>Sometimes the coach gives you the take sign and the next pitch comes across the plate as big as a watermelon...
(five days from spring training, doncha know...)
I'm a 49ers fan... still trying to get the tears to stop. Thank goodness the baseball season is so close behind. C'mon Phillies!!!!

“Help Cecil Help!”

Since: Dec 06

Lafayette IN

#159215 Feb 6, 2013
BobinTX wrote:
<quoted text>
I'm a 49ers fan... still trying to get the tears to stop. Thank goodness the baseball season is so close behind. C'mon Phillies!!!!
It was a hell of a second half ....

Needless to say, go Cards, he says, listening to the Pacers play the Sixers

;-)

Since: Feb 13

Location hidden

#159216 Feb 6, 2013
The entire fiasco could have been avoided if it went through congress the way it was supposed to. If the congressmen didn't let the president step all over the constitution and did their job and actually voted on whether or not to declare war and not some half assed "authorization of force", you can bet your butt a lot fewer congressmen and women would have been hesitant to put their vote behind it. There would have been more debate and discussion and maybe we wouldn't have ended up in this 10+ year quagmire with countless soldiers and civilians dead for no reason. Can't completely blame Bush though, the same thing happened with all "wars" since Korea to the best of my knowledge. They've all been illegal engagements according to our very own constitution.

“I'm here with bells on.”

Since: Jul 12

Location hidden

#159217 Feb 6, 2013
BobinTX wrote:
<quoted text>
I'm a 49ers fan... still trying to get the tears to stop. Thank goodness the baseball season is so close behind. C'mon Phillies!!!!
Hi, Bobin. Missed you earlier, but good to see you now....

“I'm here with bells on.”

Since: Jul 12

Location hidden

#159218 Feb 6, 2013
lisw wrote:
<quoted text>Republicans can't win in the eyes of the liberal. All candidates bring their families into the limelight, it's supposed to be a good thing. I'll bet you're talking about she shouldn't have brought her pregnant unwed daughter out, should have hidden her, huh, not to mention her baby with downs syndrome, who wants to see THAT! Now Cheney was criticized by same liberals for not bringing his lesbian daughter out and parading her around. They said he was trying to hide something. Palin would have been fresh meat no matter what she had done. Those who go on and on about her make me ill. So you won't be getting more from me. You and Hip can have a free for all.
I guess you must have missed the part where I opined that the slurs against her children were un-called for....

Why am I not surprised?

The thing is, she got MILEAGE out of her children's afflictions and foibles, and I doubt I'm not alone in thinking she did that calculatedly. Which is one of my biggest problems with the woman....I never had a problem with her kids.

“Help Cecil Help!”

Since: Dec 06

Lafayette IN

#159219 Feb 6, 2013
Chris Clearwater wrote:
Anyone bothered by drones being used on U.S. citizens? I remember Bob from Tx. was quite outspoken against it. Looks like he was right. Even nbc seems to be a tad upset.
http://usnews.nbcnews.com/_news/2013/02/05/16...
Yes, I'm bothered by drones being used on U.S. citizens.

I'm also bothered by U.S. citizens giving 'aid and comfort' to an enemy entity that has been at war with the United States since at least 1996.

If you have an easy solution to this, I'm all ears.

These drone attacks have been conducted 'in the field', or as close to a 'field' as the war on terror has. Those places are a little out of reach for conventional law enforcement entities tasked with dealing with criminal civilians; they're not even within reach of military units up to and including special forces.

Now, we could call time out and ask that the American citizen 'ineligible player down field' be taken out of the game and turned over to the appropriate authorities, but I'm not sure the other guys are playing by those rules.

Again, if you have an easy solution to this, I'm all ears.

This IS a slippery slope, and I know it - but what's the alternative? Declare hands off on al Qaeda operatives overseas who might be American citizens? Is that a risk we want to take?

One more time, with feeling, if you have an easy solution to this, I'm all ears.

Since: Apr 07

Location hidden

#159220 Feb 6, 2013
HipGnosis wrote:
<quoted text>Aw, now, is that fair? For meself, the reason I keep coming back is because people here tend to be well-read and know things like, oh, like, who these people even are.
;)
I know exactly what you mean by that, and for once, Hip, I wholeheartedly agree with you :) I don't expect everyone I meet have Ph.ds after their names, but I do expect them to know, at least, that life before football DID exist, beer and potato chips are NOT a basic food group, there are adjectives which contain more than four letters and Canada is NOT one of the 50 states! I just don't want to associate with anyone who doesn't have at least that much between their ears.That's about as minimal as it gets, don't you think?

After that, certain cultural niceties, such as knowing not to scratch your genitals in public, there IS more to life than the latest hairdos and shades of fingernail polish, that some people don't care what the Kardashians are doing, or find wondering who "is my baby daddy" on TV to be sickening, to say the least.

Finally, if you really want to step up, some awareness of great literature, music and drama, some knowledge of history and geography are helpful. And anyone who thinks that all a POTUS has to do for anything to happen is say "My will be done" is automatically disqualified.

I know exactly what you mean, Hip. I like discussing issues with people who not only know that the United States of America has a vice-president, but what the name of the current one happens to be, who not only know who wrote "THE INFERNO" but just as important, actually CARE that they know.

“Help Cecil Help!”

Since: Dec 06

Lafayette IN

#159221 Feb 6, 2013
Roberta G wrote:
<quoted text>
I know exactly what you mean by that, and for once, Hip, I wholeheartedly agree with you :) I don't expect everyone I meet have Ph.ds after their names, but I do expect them to know, at least, that life before football DID exist, beer and potato chips are NOT a basic food group, there are adjectives which contain more than four letters and Canada is NOT one of the 50 states! I just don't want to associate with anyone who doesn't have at least that much between their ears.That's about as minimal as it gets, don't you think?
After that, certain cultural niceties, such as knowing not to scratch your genitals in public, there IS more to life than the latest hairdos and shades of fingernail polish, that some people don't care what the Kardashians are doing, or find wondering who "is my baby daddy" on TV to be sickening, to say the least.
Finally, if you really want to step up, some awareness of great literature, music and drama, some knowledge of history and geography are helpful. And anyone who thinks that all a POTUS has to do for anything to happen is say "My will be done" is automatically disqualified.
I know exactly what you mean, Hip. I like discussing issues with people who not only know that the United States of America has a vice-president, but what the name of the current one happens to be, who not only know who wrote "THE INFERNO" but just as important, actually CARE that they know.
Dan sumptin' or other, weren't it?

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Top Stories Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
News Plurality of Americans think Trump is failing (Mar '17) 3 min Uncle Jack 60,084
News Roman Catholic church only true church, says Va... (Jul '07) 5 min kent 695,657
Prove there's a god. (Mar '08) 1 hr Aerobatty 994,087
Last Post Wins !!! [ game time :) ] (Jan '11) 4 hr texas pete 2,500
News Data on Investors Obtained by Fraud (Jul '06) 11 hr Picky 3
Where can I find good Colombian coffee in Boston? 15 hr Orion Spirit 2
Depressed girlfriend. Don’t know what to do 16 hr MOGADORE 3
wierd situation with my mom. (Jul '14) Feb 19 Pimpy 23
More from around the web