Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you:
No adverts like this in the forums anymore.
Times and dates in your local timezone.
Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance.
Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely.
Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net.
If you are already a member then feel free to login now.
DR:70+S+G-MB-I+Pwmhd05#+D++A+++/aWD100R++T(S)DM+++ Get your own Dakka Code!
"...he could never understand the sense of a contest in which the two adversaries agreed upon the rules." Gabriel Garcia Marquez, One Hundred Years of Solitude
Redbeard wrote:For argument's sake, there is a website that lists over 10,000 top scientists as having this same viewpoint. It is probable that human activity has had something to do with the climate change. It is possible that if we change our ways, we can reduce the impact of climate change. But, it's also possible that this climate change is part of the earth's natural cycle. The climate changes from time to time, and there is no scientific evidence that states unequivocably that human actions are responsible for this current climate shift. It's probable that we have something to do with it, but it hasn't been proven by anyone.
Of the 10,000 odd scientists involved, few are climatologists, like around five of them, and this is out of an international field of tens of thousands. Most of the signatories come from unrelated fields, including soft sciences.
If there was a petition on whether or not the maths curriculum should be changed, would you really care if it was signed by ten thousand English teachers, if there was only a half dozen actual maths teachers on board.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2008/09/01 06:04:32
“We may observe that the government in a civilized country is much more expensive than in a barbarous one; and when we say that one government is more expensive than another, it is the same as if we said that that one country is farther advanced in improvement than another. To say that the government is expensive and the people not oppressed is to say that the people are rich.”
Adam Smith, who must have been some kind of leftie or something.
Including his time in state legislature? 10. 11 if you include the budget cycle post-candidacy.
It's not so much a question of her experience, but, rather, her experience compared to his. She hasn't voted 'absent' on nearly all legislation this year while off campaigning either. Obama's got 2 years of senate experience, of which one year he was abset most of the time...
You're double counting Obama's time off. Obama was swarn in to the senate in January 2005, and announced his candidacy for the presidency in February 2007. The 'two years experience' already writes off his time he's been in the senate but still out campaigning.
There is still debate. There's always the fringe questions. The 'if a woman is raped, can she have an abortion' question. The 'what about cases where the child is diagnosed with a genetic defect' question. Those questions are still used by the pro-choice side to attack the pro-life side positions. She's well placed to answer, or perhaps, head off, that question.
I just can't see it being an issue at all, beyond making it harder to win over disgruntled Hillary voters.
Yeah yeah, just like Obama saying he absolutely wasn't going to let the telecoms off the hook, up until the vote, where he changed his policy and voted to give them immunity. They're all politicians, they all lie when it suits them, they all change their mind when it suits them. I'm decidedly not-republican. I do not like the religious right's co-opting their party. I'm not part of the Cult of Obama either. I don't think he's any different. I don't think he got elected to Senate, in Illinois, by being an outsider. I think he's in tight with the Daley machine, and the corruption that goes along with it, and I think the telecom vote was just the first time he showed his true nature. As usual, there are no candidates that make me want to shell out the money to become a citizen and vote.
Obama's change rhetoric is just as much of a crock as McCain's maverick rhetoric. It's just branding, and people really need to look behind it to see what decisions each candidate will likely make in office, and ultimately this needs to be focussed on the area where they'll have most influence, foreign policy. Obama has shown he believes in stability first and foremost, while McCain, for all his claims of experience, has a record of comical overreactions to just about every foreign policy event during his time in office.
Right now I'd back a stabilitising hand over bombbombbomb....bombbombIran.
“We may observe that the government in a civilized country is much more expensive than in a barbarous one; and when we say that one government is more expensive than another, it is the same as if we said that that one country is farther advanced in improvement than another. To say that the government is expensive and the people not oppressed is to say that the people are rich.”
Adam Smith, who must have been some kind of leftie or something.
The poor man really has a stake in the country. The rich man hasn't; he can go away to New Guinea in a yacht. The poor have sometimes objected to being governed badly; the rich have always objected to being governed at all
We love our superheroes because they refuse to give up on us. We can analyze them out of existence, kill them, ban them, mock them, and still they return, patiently reminding us of who we are and what we wish we could be.
"the play's the thing wherein I'll catch the conscience of the king,
I'd be interested to know whether Palin's anti-abortion stance is secular or religious.
As proud as I am of my nation's history and heritage, I am under no illusions that the result of the US election will probably have a far more profound impact on the future than anything on this side of the pond.
What makes me (and probably most europeans) suspicious of the US is the fact that while we are becoming overtly secular (France) or 'multi-cultural' (UK), the US seems hell-bent on electing people who would like nothing better than to enact their version of Leviticus into law.
The US insists that an Islamic fundamentalist state is a threat to international security. Why is this any different with Christian fundamentalists?
While you sleep, they'll be waiting...
Have you thought about the Axis of Evil pension scheme?
The thing that the rest of the western world can't wrap their head around is that the US is the only western country that still has more than 50% of its population going to some sort of religious service (chuch, temple, mosque, animal sacrifice) at least once per week.
About 100 million USers (about 30%) describe themselves as born again Christians.
The politicians are so focused on religion because so many potential voters have those views and whilst the so called religious right have come to vote for the GOP, if they end up with candidates they don't want then they will just stay at home and not vote.
2025: Games Played:7/Models Bought:160/Sold:163/Painted:116
2024: Games Played:6/Models Bought:393/Sold:519/Painted: 207
2023: Games Played:0/Models Bought:287/Sold:0/Painted: 203
2020-2022: Games Played:42/Models Bought:1271/Sold:631/Painted:442
2016-19: Games Played:369/Models Bought:772/Sold:378/ Painted:268
2012-15: Games Played:412/Models Bought: 1163/Sold:730/Painted:436
Probably not, but who cares if it was? It's just as crappy as the obamasecretmuslim rubbish.
Do you really want elections be decided by fishwife gossip?
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2008/09/01 14:29:44
“We may observe that the government in a civilized country is much more expensive than in a barbarous one; and when we say that one government is more expensive than another, it is the same as if we said that that one country is farther advanced in improvement than another. To say that the government is expensive and the people not oppressed is to say that the people are rich.”
Adam Smith, who must have been some kind of leftie or something.
I appreciate that all politics is local. Not only voters, but candidates also will come out of those communities (and quite rightly so!) and people will vote for what they want.
What bugs me is the hyprocrisy of the GOP. Despite the fact that the US constitution specifically lays out the seperation of church and state, US politicians (mainly Republican ones) seem determined to pass laws derived from the basis of religious conviction.
These vary from education policy (Islamic Madrasses are evil, but schools where you have to say prayers and are told in SCIENCE classes that evolution didn't happen are fine) to health (lets overturn Roe) to lifestyle (the first ammendment only guarantees freedom of expression if you're not gay, apparently).
So Republicans are willing to throw out all sorts of bits and pieces of the Constitution in the name of Christian morality, yet what happened to 'thou shalt not murder'? In a country with one of the world's highest murder rates, don't you DARE try and regulate gun ownership - after all, that would be an infringement of their rights!
While you sleep, they'll be waiting...
Have you thought about the Axis of Evil pension scheme?
Chimera_Calvin wrote:What bugs me is the hyprocrisy of the GOP. Despite the fact that the US constitution specifically lays out the seperation of church and state, US politicians (mainly Republican ones) seem determined to pass laws derived from the basis of religious conviction.
I'm not a Republican, but how is that any different from the Democrats, who want to infringe on the right to bear arms, which is also in the constitution?
In my opinion, both parties have an agenda which would like to see certain parts of the constitution thrown out. Whether or not that is a bad thing depends entirely on whether or not you agree with them.
Personally, I find myself frustrated because I am a man without a country when it comes to US politics. I can't be a Democrat because I'm against abortion, and I can't be a Republican because the Christian right hates us Mormons. I would have voted for Romney, because it would have been nice for LDS people to have a voice in the white house for once, but with the current ticket I feel like no matter who I vote for, I lose.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2008/09/01 15:47:22
Man, that's the joy of Anime! To revel in the complete and utter wastefullness of making an unstoppable nuclear-powered combat andriod in the shape of a cute little girl, who has the ability to fall in love and wears an enormous bow in her hair.
The number of people who really aren't represented by either party is significant. It's amazing to me that the two-party approach to government here has survived as long as it has.
The parties have looked for binary arguments that will most likely never be solved to fuel their campaigns in modern American elections. It keeps their bases in their camp and gives them annual funding.
With 300+ million people will we ever come to a final decision on:
Abortion rights?
Gay Marriage?
Role of religion in government life?
Gun laws?
Of course these are things the President has no authority over. He can suggest, cry, and throw a tantrum but they aren't in his authorized ball field. There are a few other old tropes as well. This is why taxes and nuanced policy tend to take a back seat, rhetorically. Winning the argument isn't as important as having it, so to speak.
Amidst the mists and coldest frosts he thrusts his fists against the posts and still insists he sees the ghosts.
yakface wrote:
She apparently believes that creationism should be taught alongside evolution in science classes, doesn't believe that humans are responsible for climate change and is opposed to all abortion, even in cases of rape.
Look at it this way. In the event that McCain gets elected and dies in office early, then our children can look forward to having the best education that theory and conjecture can provide.
"With pop hits provin' unlikely, Captain Beefheart retreated to a cabin to shout at his band for months on end. The result was Trout Mask Replica."
@Yakface, Bush's beliefs closely resemble the beliefs that you attibute to Palin. In the eight years that he has been in office, I don't think that creationism has been introduced into public school classrooms nor has there been ANY change in Roe vs Wade. I would not assume that if Palin were president that she would be able to change much either.
Ahtman wrote:The parties have looked for binary arguments that will most likely never be solved to fuel their campaigns in modern American elections. It keeps their bases in their camp and gives them annual funding.
With 300+ million people will we ever come to a final decision on:
Abortion rights?
Gay Marriage?
Role of religion in government life?
Gun laws?
Of course these are things the President has no authority over. He can suggest, cry, and throw a tantrum but they aren't in his authorized ball field. There are a few other old tropes as well. This is why taxes and nuanced policy tend to take a back seat, rhetorically. Winning the argument isn't as important as having it, so to speak.
They have no direct influence, but they do appoint supreme court justices.
“We may observe that the government in a civilized country is much more expensive than in a barbarous one; and when we say that one government is more expensive than another, it is the same as if we said that that one country is farther advanced in improvement than another. To say that the government is expensive and the people not oppressed is to say that the people are rich.”
Adam Smith, who must have been some kind of leftie or something.
@Doctor Thunder - I absolutely agree that both parties want to change the law.
The problem I have with the GOP is that they're not consistent.
They are generally the first ones to bang on about 'personal freedom' and 'constitutional rights' when it comes to posession of deadly weapons, yet such phrases are conspicuously absent on issues such as gay marriage.
They'll quite happily trot out speakers from the religious right to quote leviticus, yet they seem to avoid exodus all together...
While you sleep, they'll be waiting...
Have you thought about the Axis of Evil pension scheme?
Darrian13 wrote:@Yakface, Bush's beliefs closely resemble the beliefs that you attibute to Palin. In the eight years that he has been in office, I don't think that creationism has been introduced into public school classrooms nor has there been ANY change in Roe vs Wade. I would not assume that if Palin were president that she would be able to change much either.
Yes, but it wasn't from a lack of trying. Being at war also can slow these kinds of fights down as there are more pressing matters.
Amidst the mists and coldest frosts he thrusts his fists against the posts and still insists he sees the ghosts.
Actually, he found time to kill pretty much all funding to any faith-based initiatives that came around... so yeah, he had time to do SOMETHING about the issues the evangelical Christian right elected him for: shoot them down like a dog.
And really, it makes sense. If the GOP managed to "fix" what its constituents hate/fear/feel otherwise strongly about, what hot-buttons could they push next time they want to get elected? What, change issues? Change is bad! Conservative SMASH change! Rarr!
As a rule of thumb, the designers do not hide "easter eggs" in the rules. If clever reading is required to unlock some sort of hidden option, then it is most likely the result of wishful thinking.
But there's no sense crying over every mistake;
You just keep on trying till you run out of cake.
Chimera_Calvin wrote:Why is this any different with Christian fundamentalists?
Oh, I don't know??? The enlightenment? While I don't like fundamentalists of any stripe, the current Christian fundamentalists have a MUCH, MUCH, MUCH (et cetera) lower BODY COUNT than Islamic fundamentalists do this century.
Ahtman is absolutely correct about the partisan adoration of the binary issue.
The legality of abortion is clearly the responsibility of the Congress to decide and codify. And they haven't touched it. They won't touch it.
1) It's toxic, because reason fled that debate years ago.
2) Why should they? Both parties get so many contributions on "abortion=murder" or "the war on women". Those issues turn out money and votes, because the argument itself is life vs. freedom, our two most cherished values.
So the people whose JOB it is to make a reasoned decision have no impetus to do so. As Chris Rock said: "There is no money in the cure. The money is in the TREATMENT."
Chimera_Calvin wrote:Why is this any different with Christian fundamentalists?
Oh, I don't know??? The enlightenment? While I don't like fundamentalists of any stripe, the current Christian fundamentalists have a MUCH, MUCH, MUCH (et cetera) lower BODY COUNT than Islamic fundamentalists do this century.
This century is quite new, and conveniently starts with 9/11, while missing all the African and Eastern European genocides that happened in the 90's. Even still, what sources are you citing?
Chimera_Calvin wrote:The problem I have with the GOP is that they're not consistent.
They are generally the first ones to bang on about 'personal freedom' and 'constitutional rights' when it comes to posession of deadly weapons, yet such phrases are conspicuously absent on issues such as gay marriage.
They'll quite happily trot out speakers from the religious right to quote leviticus, yet they seem to avoid exodus all together...
I completely agree. I find it aggravating the way they quote God's laws, but ignore God's requirements for love and tolerance. We Mormons believe that Christianity should be conciliatory and celebrate common ground and brotherhood. I wonder if that is why fundamentalists hate us so much?
Likewise, I find many of the Democratic platforms inconsistent. How in the world can you be pro-abortion and anti-death penalty at the same time? Kill the babies but spare the rapists? I don't suppose I'll ever understand that one.
Furthermore, as an Independent voice I want to explain to Democrats that screaming "Republicans are evil" is not a platform. Every time I ask a Democrat what their ideas are to change this country, all I ever get is a tirade about how evil Republicans are. I think, "great, now I get to choose between a party of bad ideas and a party of no ideas." The Democrats are bought and sold, just the same as the Republicans, so the only thing I can use to distinguish between them are their ideas, and "Republicans are evil" are not ideas.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2008/09/02 16:11:12
Man, that's the joy of Anime! To revel in the complete and utter wastefullness of making an unstoppable nuclear-powered combat andriod in the shape of a cute little girl, who has the ability to fall in love and wears an enormous bow in her hair.
I saw this on another site and though it was apropos:
The pundits who think that her daughter is going to cause some sort of problems with the evangelical community, or the fact that, by the numbers, Gov. Palin herself conceived her first child out of wedlock by a couple months, don't really know the conservative christian community. The true believers, who already adore this woman on account of her being a dumbshit, view every problem not through the lens of "how does this contradict their professed public policies," but rather "does this story end with them finding Jesus (or more Jesus)?" Palin and company have said all the right things to appease the base ("they're keeping the baby and getting married IN A CHURCH" etc etc) so while this will play in the news for a bit, it's not really the deciding item here. The big item is:
Governor Palin is an outright moron and vindictive sleazebag that couldn't manage a dead rat out of a trash can (unless she could fire either the rat or the trash can for not supporting her campaign into the pest control position)
She thinks the founding fathers wrote the Pledge of Allegiance, and that it included "under God" when they wrote it.
Not only did she and/or her husband attempt to have her brother-in-law state trooper fired during a vicious custody battle between the trooper and the gov's sister, she fired the state's public safety commissioner for refusing to fire the trooper. Also, as a mayor of Shittybritches, Alaska, she fired the police chief for insufficiently supporting her administration (read: supported her opponent in the election). A lawsuit regarding that headchopping was dismissed when a judge said that the mayor could fire state employees for political reasons.
Additionally, her claim to fame as a "reformer" in Alaskan politics is bs, seeing as she supported (and begged for earmarks for) the infamous Bridge to Nowhere up until it was a national laughingstock. She also claims to have taken on the notoriously corrupt Alaskan GOP "good ol' boys" network, chaired by Sen. Ted Stevens, but before she hopped on the shame wagon to scold him for his already well-known indiscretions, she chaired one of his 527 political organizations, the "Little Stevens Urban Achievers," and accepted his endorsement when she ran for governor.
Oh, and she was a member of the Alaskan Independence Party, which wants to separate off from the United States into its own country where moose loving is not merely legal, but replaces school buses. And she doesn't know what the Vice President actually does, and she doesn't know what is happening in Iraq, by her own admission. So, there ya go. Harriet Miers ain't got gak on this knuckle-dragging baby dropper.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2008/09/02 17:30:07
"With pop hits provin' unlikely, Captain Beefheart retreated to a cabin to shout at his band for months on end. The result was Trout Mask Replica."
To be honest her brother in law was convicted of DUI, tazering his 10 year old stepson, and beating her sister. He should have been removed a long time ago but the commissioner never did. I think this is a loosing issue for the Democrats especially when it finally gets out en masse what a jerk this guy was and the fact he should have been taken off the roster a long time ago.
Only now do I realize how much I prefer Pete Haines' "misprints" to Gav Thorpe's "brainfarts." :Abadabadoobaddon
DM,
The Dems won't touch that little issue. Going after a woman for stopping a serial abuser hiding behind a badge will WIN her votes, not cost her votes.
Redbeard,
Actually, this century started with 2000. I'll use the 90's as well, if you feel it more appropriate. I do recommend you take a look at the religious affiliations of many countries in Eastern Europe and Africa...a strong percentage are Muslim.
Furthermore, move away from the genocide (almost all of which is tribal based, and not religion, anyway) and let's look at honor killings and the like. I may dislike Christian fundies, but they aren't killing people. But this is general info...I didn't research it. So maybe I am completely incorrect.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2008/09/02 17:46:51
dienekes96 wrote:DM,
The Dems won't touch that little issue. Going after a woman for stopping a serial abuser hiding behind a badge will WIN her votes, not cost her votes.
Redbeard,
Actually, this century started with 2000. I'll use the 90's as well, if you feel it more appropriate. I do recommend you take a look at the religious affiliations of many countries in Eastern Europe and Africa...a strong percentage are Muslim.
Furthermore, move away from the genocide (almost all of which is tribal based, and not religion, anyway) and let's look at honor killings and the like. I may dislike Christian fundies, but they aren't killing people. But this is general info...I didn't research it. So maybe I am completely incorrect.
Not so much incorrect as guilty of confirmation bias. It seems when you've seen violence committed by Christian groups or in Christian countries you've thought 'sure, but that's more tribal or political, despite the religious trappings it often takes on'. But when you've seen violence committed by Islamic groups, you haven't seemed as willing to consider that similar tribal or political factors may exist, that Islam may be just as much an excuse as Christianity was.
“We may observe that the government in a civilized country is much more expensive than in a barbarous one; and when we say that one government is more expensive than another, it is the same as if we said that that one country is farther advanced in improvement than another. To say that the government is expensive and the people not oppressed is to say that the people are rich.”
Adam Smith, who must have been some kind of leftie or something.
I thought it was fairly well establsihed that no one knows what the vice president does once the election has finished ?
The first American Vice President, John Adams, described the post as "the most insignificant office that ever the invention of man contrived". The man who was Vice President of the United States from 1933 to 1941, summed up the job as "not worth a pitcher of warm piss". His name was John Nance Garner IV, a fact of which you will almost certainly need to be reminded – thus making his point.
To Vice President Hubert Humphrey has sometimes been attributed the remark that "once the election is over, the Vice President's usefulness is over. He's like the second stage of the space rocket. He's damn important getting into orbit, but then...".
The poor man really has a stake in the country. The rich man hasn't; he can go away to New Guinea in a yacht. The poor have sometimes objected to being governed badly; the rich have always objected to being governed at all
We love our superheroes because they refuse to give up on us. We can analyze them out of existence, kill them, ban them, mock them, and still they return, patiently reminding us of who we are and what we wish we could be.
"the play's the thing wherein I'll catch the conscience of the king,
Doctor Thunder wrote:Likewise, I find many of the Democratic platforms inconsistent. How in the world can you be pro-abortion and anti-death penalty at the same time? Kill the babies but spare the rapists? I don't suppose I'll ever understand that one.
It's slowed in the same way that Republicans are anti-choice and pro-capitol murder at the same time.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2008/09/02 19:27:54
Amidst the mists and coldest frosts he thrusts his fists against the posts and still insists he sees the ghosts.
Personal rant on:
This is my personal opinion but I've often found the hard core members of either party tend to be mirrors of each other and often only hold portions of the Constitution in regard.
Democrats:
Pro abortion, anti guns (2nd A), anti corporate, anti free speech they don't like (1st A), pro taking my money and giving it to someone else, antiwar unless started by a Democratic President.
Republicans:
anti abortion, pro guns, pro corporate, anti free speech they don't like, pro taking my money and giving it to someone else, antiwar unless started by a Republican President.
Both are good at taking my money and trying to tell me what to do.
-"Wait a minute.....who is that Frazz is talking to in the gallery? Hmmm something is going on here.....Oh.... it seems there is some dispute over video taping of some sort......Frazz is really upset now..........wait a minute......whats he go there.......is it? Can it be?....Frazz has just unleashed his hidden weiner dog from his mini bag, while quoting shakespeares "Let slip the dogs the war!!" GG
-"Don't mind Frazzled. He's just Dakka's crazy old dude locked in the attic. He's harmless. Mostly."
-TBone the Magnificent 1999-2014, Long Live the King!
dienekes96 wrote:DM,
Redbeard,
Actually, this century started with 2000. I'll use the 90's as well, if you feel it more appropriate.
Well, it would certainly mean more than "Islamic Fundamentalists have killed more people than Christian Fundamentalists in the last 8 years." I'm not sure that even including the 90's gives a good sample size. Perhaps see if the claim can still be made as "in the last 100 years" instead of "in this century".
I do recommend you take a look at the religious affiliations of many countries in Eastern Europe and Africa...a strong percentage are Muslim.
Yes, a large percentage of those who were killed were too. For example, in Bosnia, in the 90's, the Serbians explicitly targetted the Croatians and the Muslims.
Furthermore, move away from the genocide (almost all of which is tribal based, and not religion, anyway)
Right, if you ignore everything that doesn't contribute to your argument, you find things that do. The Bosnian Genocides targetted Muslims. If you look closely at all such actions throughout history, they're all based on things like land.
I may dislike Christian fundies, but they aren't killing people. But this is general info...I didn't research it. So maybe I am completely incorrect.
Perhaps 'killing in the name of Christ' isn't happening anymore. Killings by Christians, perhaps in spite of their faith, far exceed those of any other faith. Christianity has been, by far, the most bloodthirsty religion the world has ever known. Maybe that's just because it's so big. Maybe it's because so many so-called christians don't pay any heed to the words of Christ. Whatever the cause, christians have done far worse than muslims, all throughout history.
I thought we were talking about how great it is that in this election we're going to either have the first female US VP or the first non-anglo saxon US President? How did this devolve into Christian bashing?
-"Wait a minute.....who is that Frazz is talking to in the gallery? Hmmm something is going on here.....Oh.... it seems there is some dispute over video taping of some sort......Frazz is really upset now..........wait a minute......whats he go there.......is it? Can it be?....Frazz has just unleashed his hidden weiner dog from his mini bag, while quoting shakespeares "Let slip the dogs the war!!" GG
-"Don't mind Frazzled. He's just Dakka's crazy old dude locked in the attic. He's harmless. Mostly."
-TBone the Magnificent 1999-2014, Long Live the King!
