New Election Thread

[LouieB]

I hate to be the one to break it to you, but Bush isn't running this year. The 22nd Amendment to the Constitution limits a President to just two terms.

You don't have to break anything to me....he isn't but his proxy...John McCain certainly is.

 

LouieB

[Party @ the Moontower]

Reasonable?

 

LSD should be legal. Guns and booze are.

 

The war on drugs is a joke, if booze, coffee, energy drinks, and prescription drugs are legal so should pot and some drugs. I'm insane on coffee and energy drinks, not so much on other things. It scares the hell out of me thinking about all the kids high on insane energy drinks and fun coffee drinks with 4 shots espresso in them.

 

 

I also find it amazing and ridiculous how hemp is still ilegal with over 500,000 positive uses.

[ikol]

The war on drugs is a joke, if booze, coffee, energy drinks, and prescription drugs are legal so should pot and some drugs. I'm insane on coffee and energy drinks, not so much on other things. It scares the hell out of me thinking about all the kids high on insane energy drinks and fun coffee drinks with 4 shots espresso in them.

 

 

I also find it amazing and ridiculous how hemp is still ilegal with over 500,000 positive uses.

 

Agreed.

[OOO]

The war on drugs is a joke, if booze, coffee, energy drinks, and prescription drugs are legal so should pot and some drugs. I'm insane on coffee and energy drinks, not so much on other things. It scares the hell out of me thinking about all the kids high on insane energy drinks and fun coffee drinks with 4 shots espresso in them.

 

 

I also find it amazing and ridiculous how hemp is still ilegal with over 500,000 positive uses.

 

Not that you needed more reasons to like Barack but...

 

[mountain bed]

Not that you needed more reasons to like Barack but...

 

Umm, let's see...he was a teenager in Hawaii in the late '70s. If he didn't inhale I'd be disappointed.

[bleedorange]

You don't have to break anything to me....he isn't but his proxy...John McCain certainly is.

 

LouieB

 

 

That's right, I forgot. If you say something enough times, it eventually becomes true.

[Party @ the Moontower]

Not that you needed more reasons to like Barack but...

 

 

 

Thanks! I don't actually do it, I just think it should be legal. Like prostitution, that I don't do..but the Bunny Ranch has proven it can work, and work well .

 

That's right, I forgot. If you say something enough times, it eventually becomes true.

 

If walks like, talks like, and votes like....

[lost highway]

This post says more about you then any thing else you've ever posted.

 

God, I hope not. That's about as Andrew Dice Clay as I can get. Sometimes someone just needs to say the most wrong thing available.

[ChooChooCharlie]

To be fair, I don't think we can translate that as "screw the earth." There's nothing in that passage that suggests members can't be environmentally-minded. In fact, it sounds like members should be concerned with the environment--as long as spiritual matters remains their first priority.

Yeah, I'm a left-leaning independent (pretty far left actually), and I found nothing outrageous about the quotes from Palin's church. The 2nd coming of Jesus is a pretty commonly held belief in our society -- I read those quotes waiting for the wacky radical Christian line, but it never came -- so I fail to see what warrants all the reactions. I do, however, hope they ask her if she believes in evolution at the debates. We need an administration that acknowledges the existence of science.

 

I'm ok with someone being pro-life, just not ok with anyone wanting to overturn Roe vs Wade. Don't know if that applies to her or not, but It does for McCain. Eventually his goal is to end abortion in the US.

 

I'm with you on that one. Most men I know could care less on this issue. It's not just a woman's issue.

That's a pretty widespread indictment of the male gender. Most men I know do care about abortion, despite some women saying it is none of their business. Since it takes two to procreate, I agree its not just a woman's issue -- and I would bet the majority of men agree, and care more than your anecdotal sample would suggest.

[Party @ the Moontower]

I do, however, hope they ask her if she believes in evolution at the debates. We need an administration that acknowledges the existence of science.

 

 

That's a pretty widespread indictment of the male gender. Most men I know do care about abortion, despite some women saying it is none of their business. Since it takes two to procreate, I agree its not just a woman's issue -- and I would bet the majority of men agree, and care more than your anecdotal sample would suggest.

 

 

I said some of the men I know. Not all the men in the universe. And sorry, but some men don't realize what the bigger issue is concerning abortion, keeping government off your body. Again, I said from my experience, not yours.

 

As far as Palin is concerned, this daughter of a science teacher said that she personally believes in creationism. Want creationism in your kids science class? I don't, you can do that @ home where it belongs.

 

She said "Teach both. You know, don't be afraid of information. Healthy debate is so important, and it's so valuable in our schools. I am a proponent of teaching both."

 

http://dwb.adn.com/news/politics/elections...p-8243554c.html

[Sir Stewart]

How hard is SNL trying to get Tina Fey to rejoin the cast right now?

[bjorn_skurj]

Women can't be free unless they have control over their reproductive systems. If men want to have babies, they can build one out of popsicle sticks.

[bleedorange]

How hard is SNL trying to get Tina Fey to rejoin the cast right now?

 

No kidding. It's a really close resemblance.

[SeattleC]

I'm ok with someone being pro-life, just not ok with anyone wanting to overturn Roe vs Wade. Don't know if that applies to her or not, but It does for McCain. Eventually his goal is to end abortion in the US.

 

It definitely applies to her. Pro-choice advocates should be very concerned about this.

 

 

(by the way, I have often wondered how the so called pro-lifers ever got to hang on to that moniker? I'm 'pro-life', as in I don't support sending young people off to die in an unnecessary war, for example, and pro-choice. Nobody says 'yippee, I'm having an abortion today', but it should remain a safe and viable alternative, or we will return to coat hangers and back alley practitioners.

[Analogman]

Link

 

Sarah Palin, Web InventionHow a college sophomore put Alaska's governor on the map.

By Timothy Noah

Posted Friday, Aug. 29, 2008, at 1:52 PM ET

Adam Brickley.Adam Brickley

 

According to both the Aug. 29 Anchorage Daily News and the June 13 Colorado Springs Gazette, Sarah Palin became John McCain's vice presidential candidate largely through the machinations of someone even younger and less experienced than herself. From the Anchorage Daily News:

 

The hype can probably be traced to the Web site of a 21-year-old college senior majoring in political science at the University of Colorado in Colorado Springs. Adam Brickley, a political buff who will graduate in May, started a "Draft Sarah Palin for Vice President" blog last year and has relentlessly promoted the idea ever since.

 

Brickley has never been to Alaska or met Palin. But while researching potential vice presidents, he stumbled on Palin and thought she would be a good No. 2 to just about all of the major Republican candidates in the race at the time.

[kwall]

I do, however, hope they ask her if she believes in evolution at the debates. We need an administration that acknowledges the existence of science.

 

A belief in evolution and the science behind it and a belief in a creator are not mutually exclusive. Evolution does not explain how life began.

[kwall]

Women can't be free unless they have control over their reproductive systems.

 

a women has control over her uterus (excepting the case of rape or incest for the moment) by allowing or disallowing herself to be inseminated. what you are really talking about is her "right" to escape the natural consequences of her actions. the constitution describes no such right, regardless of what the supreme court "found" in it.

[SeattleC]

A belief in evolution and the science behind it and a belief in a creator are not mutually exclusive. Evolution does not explain how life began.

 

Agreed, but unfortunately there are alot of creationists out there who do believe they are mutually exclusive.

[kwall]

Agreed, but unfortunately there are alot of creationists out there who do believe they are mutually exclusive.

 

well, yeah, there's a whole spectrum of beliefs out there. some people believe the earth is flat and point to bible verses that describe the "four corners of the earth". my point was that you shouldn't dismiss someone's willingness to acknowledge the existence of science just because you heard they believe in a creator.

[ChooChooCharlie]

I said some of the men I know. Not all the men in the universe. And sorry, but some men don't realize what the bigger issue is concerning abortion, keeping government off your body. Again, I said from my experience, not yours.

I acknoledged in my post you were referring to your experience, but the implication is broader than that. And some men (and women) probably don't agree with you that the bigger issue is keeping government off your body, so maybe that's why they don't "realize it," as if it were fact. Overall, I agree with your statements about retaining negative liberty in regard to our bodies, but disagree that concern is the "bigger issue" in regard to abortion.

 

BTW -- ty for the links on Palin's evolution stance, that was informative and basically answered the question I had hoped for in future debates.

 

How hard is SNL trying to get Tina Fey to rejoin the cast right now?

Fer sure -- she wouldn't have to rejoin, but I'd put money on some guest appearances.

 

A belief in evolution and the science behind it and a belief in a creator are not mutually exclusive. Evolution does not explain how life began.

Creationism and evolution are mutually exclusive. That was my point. I never referenced how life began. And although there may not be a consensus, many proponents of evolution do theorize how life began.

[sweetheart-mine]

Link

fascinating. and here i'd thought unknown bloggers just like hearing themselves talk -- but no, they get to pick v.p. candidates! truly amazing, as if yesterday wasn't enough of a shock. you know, there are a lot of things i don't care for about john mccain, but i never thought he was stupid. he is now passing my stupidity test.

 

some of the comments on that guy's blog are pretty interesting. any angry hillary clinton supporter who votes for this ticket must not have the slightest clue what hillary clinton is about. i think to support clinton and then turn around due to sour grapes and vote for mccain/palin is like taking a gun and shooting yourself in both feet -- not to mention the values that clinton holds dear, and not to mention our country. i thought that before the palin pick, but now it's a double whammy.

[bjorn_skurj]

a women has control over her uterus (excepting the case of rape or incest for the moment) by allowing or disallowing herself to be inseminated. what you are really talking about is her "right" to escape the natural consequences of her actions. the constitution describes no such right, regardless of what the supreme court "found" in it.

I hold at as a human right, beyond the U.S. Constitution. There are a lot of coercive situations, based mainly on economics and power, which put women in situations where they have children they don't want to have. And what about the consequences to the inseminator? There are no natural things that happen to a man after he knocks up a woman. Man can get up from bed, put his pants back on - or not - walk outside, cross the street to get the mail and be hit by a bus. That baby is still coming. So, the final decision to have the baby should lie with the person whose birth it ultimately and irrevocably - the mother.

[sweetheart-mine]

It definitely applies to her. Pro-choice advocates should be very concerned about this.

 

 

(by the way, I have often wondered how the so called pro-lifers ever got to hang on to that moniker? I'm 'pro-life', as in I don't support sending young people off to die in an unnecessary war, for example, and pro-choice. Nobody says 'yippee, I'm having an abortion today', but it should remain a safe and viable alternative, or we will return to coat hangers and back alley practitioners.

that's a very good point. i do know a very few people who can claim the "pro-life" label with no hypocrisy, but suspect most would have a serious problem if all of their beliefs about life/killing were scrutinized closely. the majority of "pro-lifers" sound only like anti-abortionists to me, rabid about saving the fetus they'll have nothing to do with and just as rabid about going to war and killing untold numbers of people for very questionable reasons and in very objectionable ways if the prez says to (as you say, just one example).

[sweetheart-mine]

I hold at as a human right, beyond the U.S. Constitution. There are a lot of coercive situations, based mainly on economics and power, which put women in situations where they have children they don't want to have. And what about the consequences to the inseminator? There are no natural things that happen to a man after he knocks up a woman. Man can get up from bed, put his pants back on - or not - walk outside, cross the street to get the mail and be hit by a bus. That baby is still coming. So, the final decision to have the baby should lie with the person whose birth it ultimately and irrevocably - the mother.

yes, and i would add that the decision to take part in the act that leads to insemination is hardly the decision of one person in most cases. why is kwall taking into account only the woman's responsibility? the guy takes part in the decision and in the act. if he isn't a part of the consequences, there's a serious imbalance there that needs righting. so far there's only one way to right it -- the woman has the choice.

[Lammycat]

yes, and i would add that the decision to take part in the act that leads to insemination is hardly the decision of one person in most cases. why is kwall taking into account only the woman's responsibility? the guy takes part in the decision and in the act. if he isn't a part of the consequences, there's a serious imbalance there that needs righting. so far there's only one way to right it -- the woman has the choice.

This doesn't make sense to me. The man is accountable ("a part of the consequences") for creating the baby but has no say in whether or not it's brought to full term/birth? That's solely the woman's decision? That doesn't jibe with me.