I made the mistake of sitting down with my supper to watch the republican debate. I'm sick to my stomach now.
I'm actually impressed though with one candidate... Ron Paul. I was at issue with him on only one point... I can't remember what it was. But he has his head on straight about the real costs of us in our foreign escapades.
I was disgusted with the overwhelming influence of religion in the political discussion.
What is "the assault on the family?"
Why must health care be delegated to "private sector" insurance companies? Why is it "a mistake" to consider national health care? (Insurance companies btw rake in 20 to 30 percent profit. I've heard that medicare and the veterans medical costs only 2 to 3 percent.)
Yes, nuclear weapons are on the table.
Overall, the diatribe was non stop. I love politics. I hate this crap spewing into my living room.
Cindi
Quote from: Cindi Jones on June 05, 2007, 08:30:05 PM
I was disgusted with the overwhelming influence of religion in the political discussion.
What is "the assault on the family?"
That's code for "your queers is gittin uppity agin"
tmw
"Foreign Escapades"......
These geniuses in the whitehouse, in addition to their other irresponsible and arrogant 'excursions', are really pushing buttons, with this ABM concept in Europe.
Russia is far from impotent.
Yeah... we've really managed to piss of Putin with our missle defense crap we want to plant all over Europe. Russia's history is filled with invadors. They have a right to feel threatened.... especially with our current stance in the world; "you're either with us or you're agin us".
Cindi
But BOOSH sez: The Cold War is Over.
[maybe that's code for:
Let's get the thang hetted up agin.]
Quote from: The Middle Way on June 05, 2007, 09:27:46 PM
But BOOSH sez: The Cold War is Over.
[rhetorically] Would you buy a used car from that man?
I wouldn't take one off his hands if he were giving it away! I'd hate to think what would follow.
Cindi
I think its time to vote for those other guys....not the dems either. I cannot stand either party anymore.
The more you read and observe about this Politics thing, you got to admit that each party is worse than the other. The one that's out always looks the best.
Will Rogers (1879 - 1935), Illiterate Digest (1924), "Breaking into the Writing Game"
I don't make jokes. I just watch the government and report the facts.
Will Rogers (1879 - 1935), quoted in Saturday Review, Aug. 25, 1962
Funny how some things never change.
Quote from: Lori on June 05, 2007, 09:59:45 PM
I think its time to vote for those other guys....not the dems either. I cannot stand either party anymore.
Vote for None-of-the-above!!
I'm with you, Lori. The Republicans have proven (once again) that they can't handle success and have forgotten everything they said that got them elected in the first place. They spend billions fighting a war (right or wrong, only History will tell), but can't seem to find a couple of million to, at least, hire another handfull of Border Guards. It seems like all the Democrats can say is "Bush is bad" and never seem to come up with ways to fix the problems they are complaining about. And when they do come up with a plan, Ms Pelosi seems to find a way to hose it up, or they come right out and tell you that your taxes will go up substantially to fund it (I may like them a lot, but my taxes are already too high). Shame nobody on either side thinks it is a good idea to quit spending money and live with the record amounts they are already collecting.
Oops...now look what I've done...I've boldly come out of the political closet and announced to the world that I'm a conservative. I humbly hope for your indulgence and acceptance, the way you hoped for it when you told your friends you were TG.
.....Laurie
Quote from: Cindi Jones on June 05, 2007, 09:40:09 PM
I wouldn't take one off his hands if he were giving it away! I'd hate to think what would follow.
Cindi
A trail of parts and vital fluids.
I'm not too popular anymore amongst my family for yet another reason: I vehemently oppose the (mis)Administration and the republican party.
Oh well. ::) >:(
Well you can write any name you want when you vote. Mickey Mouse and Goofy have had lots of votes. I think I'll write "Susan Stanton" this year.
The Republicans and the Democrats don't have any answers.
Gennee
:-\
I watched both debates and really wish someone would moderate these things. Over time? Cut off the microphone. Off topic? Cut off the microphone. Want to rabbit on while avoiding a yes/no answer? Cut off the microphone. repeatedly not play by the rules? Throw them off the stage.
it was frustrating to watch all of the dancing around issues.
I will vote for the lesser of two evils even though in my state the general vote will go towards any republican who is running for President. Locally the Dems do okay but then most of the local Dems are pretty conservative.
We have a two party system. If you vote outside of that, your vote doesn't count really. My philosophy is if I don't like a candidate, I vote them out by voting for the other guy. Up until recently, I've never voted a straight party ticket. I'm all for a third part... or no parties at all! But reality sets in and I know that we have to make what we have work. So if you don't like them, vote them out!
Cindi
Well, i'll be honest.
1. we are fighting a war on radical islam. this is important. but the big public issue here was iraq and how to better manage it.
2. don't ask don't tell is discriminatory. there would be no big problem if the u.s. gov. threw it out the window in 2008 or waited.
3. english is the most common language in the u.s., and i think it's important to learn. but the u.s. has been the fourth country in the world with the largest number of spanish speakers. i do not see this as a problem.
4. creationism is not supported by evidence. evolution is supported by evidence. Stop pretending that your god is a mandate for the rest of us.
the rhetoric has sunk to new lows; each candidate appealed to the worst instincts of the american people, while couching their words in lofty terms that only the most naive, uneducated, and easily duped people would believe. only rudy g. sounds like a man, rather than a political animal. the rest of them are chimps. clearly mcCain has sold out to the big corporations. oh well.
i thought rudy g. came off best. i would vote for him if he were selected.
so there.
Quote from: Katia on June 06, 2007, 04:03:51 PM
Well, i'll be honest.
1. we are fighting a war on radical islam. this is important. but the big public issue here was iraq and how to better manage it.
2. don't ask don't tell is discriminatory. there would be no big problem if the u.s. gov. threw it out the window in 2008 or waited.
3. english is the most common language in the u.s., and i think it's important to learn. but the u.s. has been the fourth country in the world with the largest number of spanish speakers. i do not see this as a problem.
4. creationism is not supported by evidence. evolution is supported by evidence. Stop pretending that your god is a mandate for the rest of us.
the rhetoric has sunk to new lows; each candidate appealed to the worst instincts of the american people, while couching their words in lofty terms that only the most naive, uneducated, and easily duped people would believe. only rudy g. sounds like a man, rather than a political animal. the rest of them are chimps. clearly mcCain has sold out to the big corporations. oh well.
i thought rudy g. came off best. i would vote for him if he were selected.
so there.
Neither can be demonstrated via the 'scientific method'.
Both are theoretical.
The fundamental premise of Evolution is absurd and untenable, in the context of what we know of physics, the universe and nature.
Wishful thinking does not constitute proof nor evidence.
"For the wrath of God is revealed from heaven against all ungodliness and unrighteousness of men who suppress the truth in unrighteousness,
because that which is known about God is evident within them; for God made it evident to them.
For since the creation of the world His invisible attributes, His eternal power and divine nature, have been clearly seen, being understood through what has been made, so that they are without excuse.
For even though they knew God, they did not honor Him as God or give thanks, but they became futile in their speculations, and their foolish heart was darkened.
Professing to be wise, they became fools,.."Romans 1:18-22 [NASB]
______________________________________
"The fool has said in his heart, 'There is no God'"Psalm 14:1 [NASB]
Are you familiar with the 'Second Law of Thermodynamics', Katia?
Evolution is based on a set of theories based on empirical data, these theories are constantly challenged by new empirical data and are used to predict new observations. They are tweeked to reflect new data, if it is possible, if not, new theories are expoused to better explain observations and predict new ones, THAT IS the SCIENTIFIC METHOD.
I think lay people have a strange view of science, its not because its a theory that its not sound; in science, there is no absolute, they always open the door to the possibility that another way will better explain the current empirical data. Most often, this new explanation is evolutionary, rather than revolutionary, it is built on the foundation of what currently exists. But, sometimes, there is a jump, a brand new way of seeing the world, a new theorie, that changes things, evolution was one of these things, einstein's theories of relativity are another example.
That's why its called a theory, instead of truth, religion deal in absolute but not science. It took decades for evolution to become the strong theoritical edifice that it is today based on thousands of supporting empirical observations and scientists constantly challenging its premise and derived theories; each theory and data, reinforcing and solidifying the other so that in the end, while not the truth in an absolute sense, it is unimpeachable logically.
The same method used for evolution is used to build theories in all fields, physics to biology, evolution is not a special case, so why balk at how it is applied there.
On the opposite end, in creationism and intelligent design is based on faith, there is no way to tie it to earth bound observations through a theorie that can be challenged and used it to predict future observations. The only thing that remains is a statement that the world is too complicated to not have been created by god. While that kind of absolute is kinda comforting, science is not about comfort and reassurance about our place in the world, and thus creationism in all its form is not science.
I come from a religious background, now agnostic, and I have no qualms about religious beliefs, whatever they are, as long as they stay outside the secular space where a collision between beliefs with varying view cannot be mediated because it is all based on truism in each religion's view of the world that cannot be challenged. So, which version of creationsim is the right one, the christian one or the hindu one? Both, neither, how is it possible to prove either way? If it stays in the spiritual realm, does it really matter which is "right", or there is a right one at all. Does it really challenge a person's personnal faith what other's believe?
Anyway, just some nuggets of non absolute theoritical wisdom's based on mucho empirical data 8)
Look, creationism has the whole enchilada, everything there is, occurring in six. thousand. years.
(according to a book that has the center of the universe 'right here')
You can't show how that works with any kind of method. Gives 'absurd' a bad name.
tmw
Religion or faith is not theory. A theory requires facts as supporting evidence. Facts must be reproducable and measured by any other third party. Religion does not meet the test for a theory. Rather it is a belief, conjecture, or postulation only. I'm not putting it down mind you... it's just not theory.
I had a very hard time with all the religion professed in the debate. I know that these men hold their faith sacred. And for that reason, I would appreciate it if they didn't smear it all over the air waves. Of course... they may not feel the need to do so if it were not set as some kind of standard that must be met. What in the world is this?
Cindi
Quote from: rhonda13000 on June 05, 2007, 09:29:07 PM
Quote from: The Middle Way on June 05, 2007, 09:27:46 PM
But BOOSH sez: The Cold War is Over.
[rhetorically] Would you buy a used car from that man?
I would but just for long enough to drive it up his [something].
Quote from: Keira on June 07, 2007, 10:10:56 AM
I think lay people have a strange view of science, its not because its a theory that its not sound; in science, there is no absolute, they always open the door to the possibility that another way will better explain the current empirical data. Most often, this new explanation is evolutionary, rather than revolutionary, it is built on the foundation of what currently exists. But, sometimes, there is a jump, a brand new way of seeing the world, a new theorie, that changes things, evolution was one of these things, einstein's theories of relativity are another example.
I wonder why the stinkheads seem to accept Galileo's theories and Einstein's theory, but their simple little minds can't accept evolution?
I guess exploiting the solar system and nuclear physics pay off for them somehow. I'd like to deny every one of them the use of every vestige of technology including fire, the wheel, medicine, and clothing. We could keep those people in zoos and allow schools to have field trips so that students can see how great life is without science.
Sorry if I'm coming across as being mean. I'm actually in a good mood, but it is frustrating to see adults who went to college kissing up to idiots for money and votes. Why is it so hard to make the world a nice place to live?
Quote from: RebeccaFog on June 07, 2007, 09:35:10 PM
I wonder why the stinkheads seem to accept Galileo's theories and Einstein's theory, but their simple little minds can't accept evolution?
But they didn't accept Galileo's proof that Copernicus was right. Galileo was arrested for heresy, (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Heresy) tried and found guilty. He recanted, and thus was allowed by the Vatican to live the rest of his life under house arrest.
I believe he was pardoned by the Roman Catholic church in 1978, more than 300 years after they found him guilty of heresy.
The biggest reason they couldn't accept a Copernican universe is that it brought into question their fundamental beliefs in [G/g]od.
Evolution does the same thing, but it's much easier to ignore/explain away the evidence that supports Evolution.
I guess Special and General Relativity don't challenge god or fundamental beliefs in the universe. I mean, how many people really understand that Energy (in ergs) is equivalent to mass (in grams) times the speed of light (in centimeters per second)(squared)?
Karen
Karen,
I can't fathom how you can explain away the evidence for evolution. Those who I have discussed this with, simply dismiss the evidence saying that it does not exist. Sorta like those who deny the holocaust... same thing. It's history. The evidence is there. The explanation of evolution fits. Nothing else I've ever read fits.
Hey, I hear they opened a new natural history museum somewhere back east this past week... was it Nashville? It's a Mecca for the little young ones to come and learn about how the Grand Canyon was created in two weeks and how the earth is only 6000 years old.... you know, stuff like that. And just think, any one of those little, wonderfully educated children could be president some day. Makes you want to puke doesn't it?
Cindi
Quote from: Karen on June 07, 2007, 10:23:47 PM
Quote from: RebeccaFog on June 07, 2007, 09:35:10 PM
I wonder why the stinkheads seem to accept Galileo's theories and Einstein's theory, but their simple little minds can't accept evolution?
But they didn't accept Galileo's proof that Copernicus was right. Galileo was arrested for heresy, (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Heresy) tried and found guilty. He recanted, and thus was allowed by the Vatican to live the rest of his life under house arrest.
I believe he was pardoned by the Roman Catholic church in 1978, more than 300 years after they found him guilty of heresy.
The biggest reason they couldn't accept a Copernican universe is that it brought into question their fundamental beliefs in [G/g]od.
Evolution does the same thing, but it's much easier to ignore/explain away the evidence that supports Evolution.
I guess Special and General Relativity don't challenge god or fundamental beliefs in the universe. I mean, how many people really understand that Energy (in ergs) is equivalent to mass (in grams) times the speed of light (in centimeters per second)(squared)?
Karen
I know they didn't accept Galileo's ideas at the time, but they do now. i mean can't they look at how their crowd is always reactionary before coming around? You'd think they could just say, "wow, we grew to appreciate other 'heretical' ideas, so maybe we should just accept that science is not a threat to our beliefs?"
Maybe I should just join the Flat Earth society, wear a pinwheel on my head, avoid inoculations, burn some books, and steadily drool through my missing teeth. Then everything would make sense to me.
Quote from: Cindi Jones on June 08, 2007, 01:57:26 AM
Hey, I hear they opened a new natural history museum somewhere back east this past week... was it Nashville? It's a Mecca for the little young ones to come and learn about how the Grand Canyon was created in two weeks and how the earth is only 6000 years old.... you know, stuff like that. And just think, any one of those little, wonderfully educated children could be president some day. Makes you want to puke doesn't it?
Cindi
I read about this too. I was thinking the same thing kind of. "You spent a decade studying theories of Creation based on a book written by ignorant desert people almost three thousand years ago? Welcome to NASA!!!!!"
Quote from: Cindi Jones on June 05, 2007, 08:30:05 PM
I made the mistake of sitting down with my supper to watch the republican debate. I'm sick to my stomach now.
Ah yes, good old US politics.
Poli from the latin meaning "
many" and
tics from the southern meaning "
blood sucking creatures."
Quote from: BeverlyAnn on June 08, 2007, 10:05:54 PM
Quote from: Cindi Jones on June 05, 2007, 08:30:05 PM
I made the mistake of sitting down with my supper to watch the republican debate. I'm sick to my stomach now.
Ah yes, good old US politics. Poli from the latin meaning "many" and tics from the southern meaning "blood sucking creatures."
Ah, yes.
Ron Paul, at least, seems to be an exception to that. I've been a fan of his for years, and am definitely supporting his campaign for President. It seems to be gathering momentum -- supposedly he has raised around $5 million this quarter. That's not at the level of the "major" candidates yet, but it's a dramatic increase from the $500,000 he had before this quarter.
Quote from: ChildOfTheLight on June 09, 2007, 02:52:45 AM
Quote from: BeverlyAnn on June 08, 2007, 10:05:54 PM
Quote from: Cindi Jones on June 05, 2007, 08:30:05 PM
I made the mistake of sitting down with my supper to watch the republican debate. I'm sick to my stomach now.
Ah yes, good old US politics. Poli from the latin meaning "many" and tics from the southern meaning "blood sucking creatures."
Ah, yes.
Ron Paul, at least, seems to be an exception to that. I've been a fan of his for years, and am definitely supporting his campaign for President. It seems to be gathering momentum -- supposedly he has raised around $5 million this quarter. That's not at the level of the "major" candidates yet, but it's a dramatic increase from the $500,000 he had before this quarter.
I've heard good things about Ron Paul from several people on this site. I saw him on TV briefly and he didn't make me feel uncomfortable.
I figure I cant loose this upcoming election with the 4 most popular current candidates that I see.
The 2 republican candidates seem very unusual.
Rudy Giuliani- Seems barely republican.
Mitt Romney- Even though I am a recovering mormon, having one in as the main candidate tickles me in a little way. Knowing the conservatives would band together, and shoot silly inspirational type videos about a candidate many believe is a cult member, but would some how start spreading the "we are all christian message".
The 2 democratic candidates. First african american and first woman president.
Barack Obama
Hillary Clinton
If any of these 4 are candidates come voting time, they will as of now have my consideration, although the reasons really are not too rational, idealistic, or too issue related.
Ever since the days of Ronald Regan, the Republican party has had its moral compass set by radical right "religious" organizations of the US. I refuse to call these groups churches! Nowadays, you have to wave the "God Flag" if you are going to be considered a viable Republican candidate. Its one of the reasons I finally registered as a Democrate. (I've been voting that way for years!)
Most people believe that the word theory means an idea. They do not understand that it is an idea with overwhelming evidence to support it and that it is testable. I ran into this problem with a member of my school board. He wanted to use the popular definition of the word theory and I refused to budge on the correct definition.
Chaunte
Quote from: Cindi Jones on June 05, 2007, 08:30:05 PM
Why must health care be delegated to "private sector" insurance companies?
A person works for a big company and makes a nice salary. The big company negotiates a 60% discount on a $10,000 medical bill so that the total cost is $4,000. The employee pays 20% of the bill or $800 and the big company pays the residual or $3,200.
Now another person is without a job and has the same medical bill of $10,000. If the person does not pay $10,000 then they will be sued by the hospital and their credit rating will be tarnished.
The U.S. government has more negotiating power than any big U.S. company. The U.S. government could easily negotiate a 60% discount. Why must an unemployed person without medical insurance pay $10,000 for the same service that an employed person pays $4,000? This is absurd!
.................
I do not have a problem with the bible or Christianity. I have a problem when politicians take a literal interpretation of every bible verse and use it for their own political agenda.
I happen to believe we are each spiritual beings and God does exist. I see no conflict between science and creationism and evolution. I view the phase "In the beginning God created the Heaven and the Earth" as "in the beginning" not 6000 years ago.
.................
I believe you vote for the candidate that you think will do the best job regardless of the current party in power. If you think Bush did a poor job and a new Democratic is the best overall candidate then the Democratic candidate should get your vote and vice versa if you think a new Republican candidate is the best overall candidate. However if you think Bush did a poor job and all candidates from both parties are equally bad then I would vote the opposite party as a vote of no confidence for the party in power. The reverse is used if you agree with Bush's strategies.
.........................
I also believe it is good to watch some of the debates and register and vote.
W
Actually, you can get some hospitals to knock off some money off the bill if you can show duress and talk of a paying plan with them, they prefer being payed now, than suing and maybe getting a bit of money a far future. But, the resulting bill is still higher than the one you would have had through a private insurance; a bill you would not have had to pay. I've lived both situations...
There is much to be done. I don't know that either party can get it done. But I know what we've had and I'm voting for the other guys.
S
I just thought it was funny that we had a topic started by Cindi and the last post was by Squirrel.
No comment on the actual topic. You may resume normal activities.
And Squirrel - you have to look at the title of Cindi's book to get why that was funny.
Dennis
Quote from: Dennis on June 12, 2007, 10:59:02 PM
I just thought it was funny that we had a topic started by Cindi and the last post was by Squirrel.
No comment on the actual topic. You may resume normal activities.
And Squirrel - you have to look at the title of Cindi's book to get why that was funny.
Dennis
I was thinking the same thing. I was wondering if Cindi had assumed the identity of her muse.
Quote from: RebeccaFog on June 13, 2007, 08:07:07 AM
Quote from: Dennis on June 12, 2007, 10:59:02 PM
I just thought it was funny that we had a topic started by Cindi and the last post was by Squirrel.
No comment on the actual topic. You may resume normal activities.
And Squirrel - you have to look at the title of Cindi's book to get why that was funny.
Dennis
I was thinking the same thing. I was wondering if Cindi had assumed the identity of her muse.
Yes, she does pop in to my life from time to time. Okay Squirrel, that's enough. You can go away now.
Cindi
oh geez
my only thoughts on a 'Republican debate', is:
why would I want to hear mosquitoes' talking points?
hopeless cases, I'M'O
none.of.the.above.
and BTW cind/squirrel:
one of your brethren tried to steal my peanut butter sammich two nights ago. squirrels are sentient creatures, so i didn't retaliate.
even if they tastes like chicken.
Quote from: gennee on June 06, 2007, 09:31:33 AM
The Republicans and the Democrats don't have any answers.
The heck with the answers! I'd be happen if they just had the right qustions.
i was going to smile and lalala and dance at your unfortunate predicament of having no-one to vote for. Until i realised that whoever i vote for will do what whoever you vote for says.
Which is exactly why we should vote in a French citizen.
Boulez for prez