WHITE CORPUSCLES
WHITE CORPUSCLES ATTEMPT TO RID AMERICA OF FESTERING INFECTION
(Sarah Palin)
picture: dunno source, via our lol builder. lol caption: andiijbriggs
Show Only: News | Democrats | Republicans | Media
« Previous What do you mean I don’t ‘look 16?’ | remember the good ol’ days Next »
» 338 Comments
Get Daily Lol News Emails
RSS Lol News Feed
-
Recent Comments
Tyler on That’s not what i s… Tyler on Each 1/2 hour of Fox News… froofrou on BUT Cazmonster on Bailout Tyler on BUT froofrou on BUT Xias135 on That’s not what i s… Eric-in-STL on SOUTHWEST AIRLINES Eric-in-STL on BUT charro on BUT
Superb! Well done andiijbriggs!
Lame.
Lame. Why is it that Sarah Palin has liberals running scared?
Whatever it is, the more they dig at her, the better she does. Keep it up, I say!
R.
She wants the government to overturn Roe v. Wade, pretend like unplanned teen pregnancy isn’t a problem (abstinence only and age restrictions on birth control methods), she thinks the war in Iraq is a mission called upon by God (wonder what Jesus would say about people thinking that killing for God and government is okay?), and she wants to take away the amazing awesomeness that is science and evolutionary theories in our schools and replace it with theology and Bible stories. And you’re honestly wondering why liberals are scared? The United States of America by Sarah Palin is TERRIFYING.
Could you point me to some references?
No, because it’s a bunch of lies.
And it’s lies we’ve already debunked on previous lols. 8P
If by debunked you mean “denied, and the speaker shouted down” then yes, quite thoroughly.
You honestly believe she’s anti-contraceptive and that she wants to deny evolution? That’s all a bunch of hooey. If anything she seems pretty moderate and open on both counts. She doesn’t say ‘Don’t discuss evolution!’ She says ‘if Creationism comes up, discuss it too’. Is there a problem with that? If you’re in school to learn how can it be bad for them to expose you to more than one idea on the same subject? And she’s actively said she’s pro-contraceptive. The confusion on that issue seems to stem from the fact that the word “explicit” in sexual education draws different reactions from different people. It’s a very poor choice of a word. Most parents will gut-react ‘NO!’ if asked if they want the school to teach them ‘explicit sexual education’. But it’s because of the word, they should say clinical or something that wouldn’t have a negative connotation like ‘explicit’ which is only commonly used in terms of ‘explicit content: viewer/listener discretion advised’.
Yes, I honestly believe that she’s anti-contraceptive, at least to the point that she doesn’t want them discussed in sex-ed. That’s simply barbaric.
Yes, there is a problem with her discussing Creationism in any kind of scientific class, especially on the taxpayer’s dime. That kind of discussion belongs in a theology course. If it’s a question of presenting alternate viewpoints, then all alternate viewpoints should be discussed, not just one religion’s.
I do not want Sarah Palin anywhere near the Oval Office, unless she comes through on a public tour.
If ANYONE wants to discuss Creationism in school, we should all be scared.
See the discussion on the previous lol where we talked about having it in social studies so it wouldn’t have to pop up wherever they could squeeze it in. And we said to do the other stories too. ;D
Actually, they already do at my school. My very Christian dad was apalled at first, but I like knowing all sides of the story. And now when he rages against Islam, I can tell him exactly how he’s wrong!
It’s definitely very important to learn about other religions in school, rather than just one. Especially Islam, because in today’s society it has a very bad reputation which it doesn’t deserve, based on a few extremists.
Definitely. I always prefer to know more rather than less. Whoever said, “Ignorance is bliss,” was either a liar or a damn fool.
But most fundies pushing for religion in school really only want to have Christianity, not Islam, not Buddhism, certainly not Wiccan.
Thus the adage about being careful what you wish for.
Sadly, we don’t know what Sarah Palin is for and against because her party is too damn afraid to have her face the press and discuss it, aside from one carefully screened interview. Someone who can’t face the press on her own has no business running for public office, and the fact that they won’t let her tells me that the GOP knows she isn’t competent. That alone is enough to scare anyone with any sense.
You think the Obama interview with George Stephanopoulos was not carefully screened? No one ever asks Obama any hard questions, he would probably cry.
Nice way to try to deflect a genuine point, with an invalid attempted smear. The press is tougher on him than anyone else.
Which is still beside the point – the point is that Obama and McCain -and EVERYONE ELSE – does LOTS of them. Palin (or the GOP) is too scared to face multiple interviews, and now that she’s done one, it’s clear they were right to be worried.
Give her a chance, how long has she been a candidate? geez.
She was nervous and defensive on Gibson. And if you’re saying “How long has she been a candidate,” that’s kinda at odds with the assertion that she has all the experience she needs for the job.
How so? The fact that she has not been a VP candidate for more than a few weeks has nothing to do with her prior experience.
But the fact that she was virtually unknown does speak to her lack of experience. So far the only press she really has had has been bad.
As for her views on birth control, look at Bristol. Would YOU want Your 17 year old daughter to get married? Maybe if Bristol had known more about birth control, she wouldn’t NEED to get married.
Hear, hear! I really pity that girl, she largely has no say in the matter.
I pity the guy too! How much do you want to bet that Palin (Sarah) used her position to intimidate the poor boy into “falling in line”? Yes, he should partake in the responsibility, but that does NOT mean he has to marry her.
Her interview was pretty poor, she kept on repeating the same phrases over and over again.
Because the idiot interviewing her kept asking the same stupid question.
We would be happy to give her a chance, she just won’t take them. Ducking the press and interviews is not something that anyone who aspires to high office should be doing. It’s a danger sign, and since she seems confident enough for anything, it must be her party that doesn’t trust her to do press interviews.
She already gave an “inteveriew” if you can call it that, from Charlie Gibson who grilled her unmercifully and she did just fine. I’m sure she will do more interviews and of course there will be the debates which I am looking forward to.
One fairly mild interview just makes my point – by now there should have been half a dozen if they weren’t worried. And there are no more scheduled, either. Frankly, I don’t blame them – she’s too outspoken. Actually, I could almost like her for that, and it’s a shame they won’t let her speak more.
And if that was your idea of ‘grilled unmercifully’, then you are either biased or out of touch with what real reporting is like.
I certainly don’t remember any pressmen taking Obama for a stroll through the gardens when they were asking him about Rev Wright.
The general consensus that I heard today was that Charlie Gibson went a little easy on her. Now, the opinion on how well she did is divided depending on your viewpoint. From what I saw (and I didn’t see all of it) she didn’t seem to know what the Bush Doctrine was and saying you might declare war on Russia is crazy, you don’t declare war on a country whose nuclear power matches your own.
-
Most candidates give their first interview within days of announcing their candidacy, Sarah Palin actually waited a lot longer than is the norm. And if she can’t handle a reporter pressing her on an issue, even if she thinks it’s stupid, then maybe she shouldn’t be in this race.
Well, I don’t know if there ever was a formal definition of anything called a “Bush Doctrine”. He was just trying to confuse her. Can you imagine the name he could make for himself to the be one that tripped up Sarah Palin? They are all climbing over each other to trip her up, Wasilla is full of reporters from what I understand trying to find dirt on her, and they are getting pretty frustrated cause nothing is turning up. Is there some sort of rule that she needs to run out and give interviews the next day? It’s only been a week and she leaves a pretty clear record of who she is by her actions as governor of Alaska.
I wonder why the well-known advocate of womens’ affairs, Oprah Winfrey, won’t have Palin on her show until after the election? I think she’s afraid that Palin will look so good that it will swing women voters further in her direction.
Obama: “Oh noez! Shez in mah ahlekterat, steelin mah wimmens votes!”
“The press is tougher on [Obama] than anyone else. ”
Your credibility almost ran my over on its stampede out the door.
My credibility almost ran over your what? If you can’t say anything of substance, as least you could try to type it well.
Oh, and be the way – insult fail. I can back up my statement.
The Center for Media and Public Affairs, a nonpartisan research organization, did a study that showed that the tv network evening news shows were giving Obama more negative coverage than McCain. Specifically, “Since the primaries ended, on-air evaluations of Barack Obama have been 72% negative (vs. 28% positive). That’s worse than John McCain’s coverage, which has been 57% negative (vs. 43% positive) during the same time period.”
Any yet people like you continue to accuse the media of ‘liberal bias’, despite all the evidence. As MSNBC’s recent shakeup removing Olbermann and Matthews shows, any bias in the media is in favor of the right, not the left.
So what have you got that’s of substance? Nothing, I expect, your kind of hit-and-run ‘insult’ specialist rarely does.
“She says ‘if Creationism comes up, discuss it too’. Is there a problem with that?”
Not at all, as soon as churches all post Einstein, Newton, and Darwin next to the ten commandments. Hey, fair is fair, right?
No, not fair is fair. The separation of Church and State was placed by our forefathers for a reason. If any religion is going to be taught in schools, than all of them should be. If you’re going to leave out Christianity because it is the most popular argument against macro-evolution, than leave the rest out.
I’d also like to point out that it is MACRO-evolution that Christians fight. Man did not come from apes. If we had, there would be no apes left. Think people… Think. We cannot deny that micro-evolution happens. Cheetahs are running faster and their spots are changing to stripes. They are evolving little by little(micro) to contend with their ever evolving prey.
The fight is not Creationism vs. Evolution. It’s Creationism vs. The Big Bang… I really wish you people would pay more attention. I hate that I’m a high school student with a little broader view on these subjects I look up on my own.
Macro evolution is merely the overarching sum (that we can observe) of all micro evolution, so saying that micro evolution, which I assume you intend to mean evolution within a species, is the only type of evolution possible is absolute (pardon) bullshit. Just because you haven’t lived long enough to observe total speciation and refuse to look at transitional examples doesn’t mean that you’re right.
You better not let word get out about that. It’s the only reason uber-conservatives who questioned McCain in the beginning because of his less-than-neocon positions are choosing to vote for him, rather than abstaining from voting altogether.
Kaitlin NEVER posts references for anything. The only liberal person who ever links to references from decent sources is Seth. jellybeans posts references sometimes too but she usually just links you to some hyper-liberal blog.
Where is Seth ? I miss the ravings !:-(
Oh I’m sorry, I thought this was a macro comments page, not a journalism-based doument or term paper. MY BAD!
Yeah, just take a look at her record. It’s all there.
People always want references for things that are common knowledge or common sense. Why is that?
Because you touch yourself at night or for some other possible arbitrary reason.
Because what one person takes as “common knowledge” or “common sense” is sometimes a lie.
NBC Newsman David Gregory thought Bush deserved kudos for not immediately invading Iraq right after 9/11.
Strangely, I didn’t hear him give similar credit to Roosevelt for not invading China immediately after the Japanese bombed Pearl Harbor.
Common sense would SEEM to indicate you counterstrike whoever attacked you, rather than, say, someone else from that general region who had nothing to do with it.
So, Jim is correct: common sense apparently varies with perspective.
Um, you seem to have forgotten that Iraq had nothing to do with 9/11. But man oh man has the government gone to great lengths to help you forget that. We went into Iraq because we thought they had weapons of mass destruction available to them, remember?
Sigh.
Precisely. It’s terrifying that so many people in your country don’t even really know why the war in Iraq began.
And it’s debatable whether the governments involved ever really did believe they had WMDs. Peak oil and all that.
I do really, really hate coincidences. Oil man gets into office with votings issues from a state where his brother is governor. Then gets into war with Oil country. Now during Oil crisis, Oil companies are making record breaking Profits.
I hate sounding paranoid or like I am conjuring a conspiracy but am I the only person seeing all those coincidences? Hell we got hit in New York, can’t deny that then we shift gears and wage war on Saddam who we claimed had WMD but didn’t. He died so now we are terrorist hunting while Oil rapes us with a car shaped condom…
You’re not the only one who’s seeing this Nexus. I’m just waiting for more gas riots. Maybe next time though they’ll do it at the oil company’s corporate hq. Maybe drag an obscenely wealthy oil executive out in the streets.
BTW, Did anyone else have their gas prices jump about a dollar a gallon overnight a few days ago? Because it did hear. 4.60 a gallon now.
That’s odd, we are paying down around 3.37/gallon were I live.
Local gas shortage. Not fun. Where about do you live?
In southern Arizona, want me to send you some?
Because PK is SERIOUS BUSINESS and we’re all a bunch of losers because of it.
Maybe you should take a break from PK. You seem a bit hypersensative.
Lol, oh come on! You guys treat this site like it’s any kind of reputable forum for political debate and discussion! IT’S MACROS, PEOPLE!!!
Then why are you here? You sure don’t hesitate to weigh in with your opinion and expect to be taken seriously. While we are not going to change the course of history, we at least have a forum to discuss issues that mean something to us.
True but I find that Google is never hard to use if I really want to check somebody’s sources. Or I can just ask where they heard it from instead of demanding citation like I am grading a paper. I like the casual approach here.
Who says I expect to be taken seriously? Lol, I’m not that self-righteous to expect to be respected by the prestigious internet.
woops, hit the button too early… The thing I’m criticizing here is that you choose a MACRO site to discuss issues that mean something to you. No one’s proposing that all you srs bsnss folks am-scray… but I am proposing that being srs bsnss on a macro site is very very lulzy.
In bed.
Well, opinions are like armpits.. everyone has one or two..
I’m going to give you my biased, unqualified, totally personal opinion.. you’re a twit and a troll. Back to your cave!
I pretty much gotta agree with Kaitlin here, it’s just Macros, but unlike loldogs and lolcats, I actually come here for the comments because well, you guys are alot funnier than the pictures. Every bush pic that comes up has republicans crying all “WHY DONT THEY DO THAT TO OBAMA CONSPIRACY!” and then a libtard retorts “8 YEARS DOWN THE DRAIN!”, then somebody has to scream “SHOW ME SOME DAMN SOURCES OR YOU’RE A LIAR!” Seriously it seems everyone knows who theyre voting here already and debating this shit on a macros site makes you all look incredibly stupid. That being said, DONT EVER STOP. I love watching the fake outrage.
Hey, I have a suggestion.. piss in the direction of off! Kaitlin goes on and on about this being a MACRO site, but she is ready to throw her opinion around which makes her a hypocrit.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Political_positions_of_Sarah_Palin
Its all listed there and referenced at the bottom. Yes, she is anti-choice in all situations, she also didn’t prevent the town in alaska she ran from charging women for rape kits (its in the huffingtonpost from today).
Someone beat me to it, there’s a link to her politics below… And Yes, it’s a wiki page, and I know… Wiki is user-posted info… But that wiki page cites references.
Kaitlin may be going off of the FFL (Feminists for Life) website, of which Palin is a member. They have a platform of the non-use of “abortifacient” birth control methods Although I’m sure not every member follows this, considering Palin’s very public pro-life and abstinence only education beliefs, it’s not a stretch for the others to assume she’s also against forms of contraception that are outside of the rhythm or fertility awareness methods.
Palin is does NOT support abstinence only education. There have been sources posted on this already by truthtalker.
She backed it during her Gov. race.
“Will you support funding for abstinence-until-marriage education instead of for explicit sex-education programs, school-based clinics, and the distribution of contraceptives in schools?”
“Palin: Yes, the explicit sex-ed programs will not find my support.”
explicit sex-ed does NOT mean what you think it means, she is not saying she supports abstenence only by saying that. I found the article, linked to my name.
… but does it mean what PALIN thinks it means?
yep, i can:
http://www.johnmccain.com/Informing/Issues/95b18512-d5b6-456e-90a2-12028d71df58.htm
The McCain Website.
AMEN!!!
She isn’t going to win, why is everyone so worried?
‘Cause McCain IS.
Further to other replies to this question, can I also add that Governor Palin opposes putting polar bears and beluga whales on the endangered species list, enquired about banning certain books from her town’s library as mayor of Wasilla, Alaska, is rumoured to believe that dinosaurs existed 4,000 years ago….and as everybody knows, is currently embroiled in a state investigation in regards to misuse of power….she did not possess a passport before travelling to Kuwait to visit Alaskan troops…..I could go on, but I for one am terrified at the prospect of having this person so close to the being the most powerful leader in the world.
Polar bears are overpopulating currently – they’re far from endangered anymore. Sometimes animals stop being endangered. Like the bald eagle.
-
The book banning thing has been gone over already several times.
-
This is the first time I’ve heard that rumor. Trying to start it yourself?
-
Misuse of power? For the govenor to visit her own troops in the field? Ridiculous. That’s like saying “How dare Fundraiser X give money to charity?!” or “How dare Human Being 1 care about Person Defending Them 2?!”. I’d be far more disturbed if she *didn’t* go visit her troops. Good show Palin!
I didn’t start the dinosaur ‘rumour’ – it’s all over the internet. I called it a rumour because I can’t substantiate it and therefore obviously won’t report it as fact until we know that to be true.
The misuse of power comment was not related to her visiting her troops. I was referring to allegations that she attempted to have her ex-brother in law removed from his job as a state trooper. She is currently under investigation for this.
Yes the book banning thing has been ‘gone over’ many times – the librarian in question will no longer comment, saying she doesn’t want to ‘revisit that time’ in her life. But a journalist who covered the story at the time insists the story is true.
I commend the fact that she visited Alaskan troops. The point was that she did not have a passport before this recent trip. I would like to think that someone so close to being the most powerful leader in the WORLD would therefore have travelled to some of these countries to give her a taste of what the world is about. It is not all about one country.
Hysterical reactions to reasonable comments: Ur doin it Right.
Like I said, hadn’t heard the dinosaur thing before. Sounds *highly* untrue and not worth mentioning as a possibility if there’s no evidence. That’s like saying “Obama used to have a swastika flag in his home”. There’s no evidence of it. Someone made it up (me, just now). But putting it out there as a ‘rumor’ on the net just gets it in people’s heads and someone’ll believe it. Hopefully they won’t believe the one I just made up though, especially since I just said I made it up darn it.
-
That trooper was caught driving drunk in his squad car. He had it coming.
-
I’ll believe the other reports over the journalist who’s trying to make news.
-
Not everyone in the world gets to travel. And those that do sometimes have such a long time between trips that passports expire. Not saying that’s the case here, but having a ton of vacations in one’s life has never been a requirement for high office. A govenor usually has no reason to go bouncing all over the world. It’s not surprising she hadn’t had need of one before then.
-
“I for one am terrified at the prospect of having this person so close to the being the most powerful leader in the world” And I’m the hysterical one? ;P
I’m not hysterical and I’m not American. I can merely watch from the outside and hope American voters do the right thing. I do know non-American soldiers who have died in the Iraq “war” – this is a direct result of Republican governmental policy (along with Blair and Howard) and therefore yes, as a world citizen I have a right to be terrified of four more years of this after the last eight. John McCain is a decent man but he has largely agreed with all Bush’s policies, and his VP pick is way off the mark.
A recent BBC world poll showed that 49% of citizens of 22 other countries would prefer Obama to win the election, versus 12% for McCain. You can’t dismiss those figures as worthless – there are more opinions than just American ones. American governmental policies affect the world.
The world has no more right to pick our leaders than we do any other countries. How’d she get to be Queen? I didn’t vote for her! (Slight twist on Monty Python anyway) ;D
-
The fact that 49% of the rest of the world wants Obama is all the more reason not to vote for him. The other poll that was recently taken shows those same people want a weaker America. So of course you want Obama, you think that’ll get us there faster. Those of us who’d like to see America stay the strongest country in the world will just have to deal with McCain as the lesser of two evils.
But the fact that America IS so powerful, is precisely why we, world citizens, at least have a right to take an interest in who becomes leader. US policies AFFECT THE WORLD. I’m not saying anyone but Americans have a right to pick your leader – you as Americans do that – I’m just asking you to be aware that there’s more to consider than just one country staying the strongest. I’ve lived and worked in the USA and had a wonderful time when I was there. I guess I just go by the words ‘World First’ rather than ‘Country First’.
Imagine there’s no countries
It isn’t hard to do
Nothing to kill or die for
And no religion too
Imagine all the people
Living life in peace
Anyway I’m genuinely depressed by the conversation so I’ll sign off. Take care.
I’m sorry your depressed Bee, I wish we could all live in peace too. But there has to be at least one strong country to stand up to the bad guys, at least until there are no more bad guys anymore. I don’t know when that will be though.
We wouldn’t have to spend so much time “standing up to the bad guys” if we didn’t create so damn many of them. If we stopped making them (like Saddam, like the Taliban, both our former friends and allies), then we wouldn’t need to waste so much time and energy ‘defending’ against them.
We did not create all the bad guys, for crying out loud. There have been bad people and bad civilizations since before our country even began and there probably always will be. We may have made some people mad but we have made for more people happy. The good our country has done in the world far out weighs any bad.
And further to this, what has been the net gain for those we have helped or liberated? We get kicked in the teeth and stabbed in the back (not always, but often enough).
Taking an interest is fine. It’s good to pay attention to the world. But you pretty much have to go by ‘Country First’, because the world isn’t all made of friendly people.
-
Imagine is a beautifully sounding song, but the words leave something to be desired. I don’t go for the socialist ‘no possesions’ thing. Peace is fine, but not at the expense of the things that make life enjoyable.
-
Sorry to upset you. Actually wasn’t what I was shooting for at all. Feel better!
lol, I think most people would have a problem with the “no possesions” thing when it came right down to it.
Ya, I’m a possessive bastard but in a fun way. XD
Funny you should say that we have no right to pick the leaders of other countries… “regime change” ring any bells?
We didn’t pick their leader. We removed their cancer and let them pick a new one.
If you believe that any of their “choices” wasn’t thoroughly vetted by the occupation, then I have a bridge to sell you.
So we gave them the once over on viable options. Nothing wrong with making sure another dictator type doesn’t step up so you have to go repeat the process. Better to leave people with approved Choices A, B, and C and let them choose between them than say leave them with no leader and get Evil Choice D that’ll cause more trouble.
Considering we are the country that supported and put Saddam in power, I think your thinking is a tad flawed if not completely hypocritical. Your previous statement implies we shouldn’t be vetting any of their choices at all since that would be showing bias on their country’s choices.
There is a major difference you both seem eager to miss. There was a war. The old leader was deposed. There was no government. We had to fix that since we got rid of the bad leader. It’s not like we went and started voting for the President of France or Queen of England. We have no say in those because they darn well can handle it themselves and we aren’t fighting them.
So with a war, we should be allowed to dispose of a leader, install a new one, then just remove him again?
Never said anything about voting, now did I?
DethWyrm,
I commented on the phenomenon of the US installing dictators elsewhere, but am pretty sure that you didn’t see it. You seem reasonable, so I’ll recap it here.
The overriding principle in international relations is STABILITY. As Churchill noted, liberal democracies do not make war upon one another. By and large, right wing dictators don’t, either. (They oppress their own people, often horribly.) But they keep it within their own borders.
Left-wing regimes–post-Batista Cuba, post-Imperial China, the Soviet Union, post-Shah Iran, whoever took over Guatemala after the bastard we installed there–and on and on–all tend to EXPORT revolution. Without exception, as far as I can tell.
We supported Hussein because he held Iran in check. Once Iran collapsed militarily, though, he went mad. At that point he had the sixth largest military in the world. And once it became clear, not only to the US, but to the Security Council and the majority of the UN, that he was WA-AY too big for his britches, it became time to take him down.
Not sure how much we had to do with vetting a new government in Iraq. I DO know that the Iraqis passed their own law prohibiting Ba’ath members from holding office in the new government.
I know the US doesn’t look great for supporting some right bastards. But, as I said, look what happens when they are deposed from within. Usually not good.
Respectfully,
R.
Much appreciated and I understand, I just find it hypocritical when we tell other countries to mind their own business when we have the strongest military on Earth and the difference between a dictator/madmen can sometimes just be perspective.
Granted, I am not saying that Saddam didn’t need to be killed, I am just saying we shouldn’t get so offended because other countries are worried about who we have in charge. It affects them too and they don’t even have a vote or say, which is correct but like I said, still affects them.
I think we all remember Bush stating that whomever wasn’t with us was against us. So I am not surprised that other countries are a bit on edge right now.
*difference between dictator/madman and great leader.
Stupid mornings making me stupid.
To be clear, I am a rightie, but as I noted, you seem open to reason, unlike a LOT of folks here. I hope we can continue to dialogue. -R.
I am a moderate with leanings towards what I feel is realism so I am open to discussion and definitely some reason. I look foward to further discussion.
You are so cynical n8, it’s calming down over there, violence and deaths are down. Let it be a good thing.
There’s still more than there was 8 years ago. When we weren’t there.
That is debatable when you consider the violence inflicted on his own people by Saddam Hussein. Now there is much more hope for a less violent future even in a region that is always been plagued with violence.
You want to debate that with the families that live in Baghdad who are too afraid to send their children to school now? Or too scared to go to the corner store to get groceries? I’m sure they’d like to point to you the evidence that shows that they felt safer with Hussein in power, regardless of what he did to the Kurds. And over all, we just incited a religious civil war, because even if at the moment they are united to get us out, they are only going to turn on each other once we do leave to try and gain power. At least, that is what the people of Iraq are saying.
But it’s good to know that you can predict the future and say that more violence now means less violence later. Because history suggests otherwise.
Do you live over there? Show me sources that say that people are afraid to take their kids to school or get groceries. Do Kurds not count as people to you? Good to know. We did not incite any civil war, these cwars in that region have been going on for ages. As for more violence = less violence, what happened after WWII?
There are too many sources to list. Instead, I give you this from Google:
Results 1 – 10 of about 237,000 for iraq fear afraid school. (0.25 seconds)
In addition the information that n8 provided, I’m in correspondence with at least six of my friends who are in the military and stationed in Baghdad. A good friend of mine has had a student visa and is from Iraq, and still has family there. Personal accounts of people on both sides of the conflict tell me that it is much worse now than when Saddam was in power.
And read what I wrote. I never said that the Kurds weren’t people. I said that the people of Iraq felt safer when Saddam was in power, even taking into account what he did to the Kurds.
And you’re right. We didn’t incite a civil war. We only united the two sides against us. They will resume to fight each other for power.
As for WWII. Stalin only began to inflict more harm upon the Russians after the war because his brand of socialism was to set up the country for war production. When there was suddenly no more war to be funded and supplied, the people suffered and he had to institute small capitalist ventures which helped to further the collapse of the Russian economy. Or how about what happened in Japan? There is more to history that what is presented. WWII didn’t end all happy and celebratory Time/Life V-Day photo would suggest. Because even after that, the woman sued the sailor for assault.
“There’s still more [violence] than there was 8 years ago. When we weren’t there.”
Christine,
It’s a lie. Whether yours or someone else’s, I don’t know.
Mass graves are no longer being filled. Women are no longer being selected from a balcony by the country’s leaders for rape, and their husbands murdered for objecting. Villages are not being sprayed with the chemical and bioweapons that the left would like us to believe did not exist.
More and more of the country has clean water and electricity. The schools are ameliorating the illiteracy prevalent in Muslim cultures and freeing the people from the grip of the evil imams who preach hatred against unbelievers.
Iraqi families are naming children after American soldiers and inviting them to their weddings.
My girlfriend’s son deserted from the Army, believing the same sorts of things you suggest. I can’t mention his name, but if you’ve followed national news for the last couple of months, you’ve seen him. He thinks he is the reincarnation of John Kerry (another traitorous liar) and is a member of Winter Soldier.
I had the chance to engage during a rare visit home and challenge him on his beliefs. He about stroked out, because he has NEVER BEEN CHALLENGED ON ANY OF THIS. When presented with an objective knowledge of history and current events he and others I have met resort to name calling and bumper stickers, because they have no FACTS to back up their assertions.
I can tell you are sincere, but your information would, in a court orf law, be called “hearsay”–unsubstantiated second-hand data. (BTW, I don’t know where you came up with that bit about Stalin’s “small capitalist ventures”. What does that have to do with the 36 million people HE murdered BEFORE the war?)
Respectfully–but armed with hard information–R.
We let them pick a new one? You mean we didn’t install a puppet?
Every Iraqi head of state vetted by the US starts off mistrusted by the Iraqi population, which is part of the reason we’re having a hard time attaining stability there.
“The world has no more right to pick our leaders than we do any other countries. How’d she get to be Queen? I didn’t vote for her!”
No, but we do anyway. Like the Taliban. Like Talabani. Like West Germany. Like Israel. I could go on, but I think I’ve given you enough to go and find it out on your own. That is if you want the facts.
I’m sure there are many Afghani women who are glad we kicked out the Taliban, I would be one of them if I lived there.
Will the US liberate oppressed women in Saudi Arabia too?
Hell will they simply empower the ones here in the US? I am tired of the equal pay and abortion rights argument. Pay the damn women the same damn money as you pay us damn men and let them have control of their bodies without making it a battle. /mini rant
I saw a wonderful mural of a Liberty figure charging through assorted images from a dollar bill: “The Spirit of ‘76 cents to the Dollar”
And the issue that I want to underscore in neon-fucking-green regarding abortion: 1) what will the penalty be for a woman having an abortion? Death? 10-20? 2)Does anyone genuinely believe it would drive down the number of abortions? It will only bring back the dark days where women died of toxix overdoses of aborteficients and coathanger-ruptured uteruses.
It must be an unwritten law that Prolifers don’t read history books on the matters they are against.
It’s the difference between theory and practice. ProLife looks great on paper, but nobody thought through past a few slogans and the idea to hold up pictures of miscarriages posing as abortions.
It wasn’t even the reason they we went over there in the first place, but I still bet they are glad for it.
Well, they were glad for it, until we started in killing/abducting/torturing their fathers, brothers, uncles, etc. Now they pretty much hate us again.
Sources please.
I refer you to the existence of camp X-Ray at Guantanamo bay. Great Odin’s beard, you people would ask for sources if told that the sky were blue.
If we were killing/abducting/torturing their men, which I doubt, the women would probably be glad THEY weren’t getting killed, adbucted and tortured anymore. At least Afghani women can now go back to school and work.
Granted that I find the culture of women as second class citizens rather revolting but I also find it to be an overassumption to believe that the women are relieved to have their husbands/son/brothers/etc being tortured as I doubt they are all treated like crap.
I try not to assume that the males of an entire culture are without love and affection for their women, even if they are just cuddly at home.
It seems like you all think that women should be ‘liberated’ in these countries without considering that they have different cultures and may not want to be ‘liberated’. It’s concerning how the US seems to simply be trying to Americanise or at least Westernise the middle-east instead of respecting their culture.
(I’m not condoning violence towards women.)
I do think that women should be liberated but only if they want to. Some girls just like chains.
Sure, we women in the U.S. are comparatively liberated, but we still earn less than our male counterparts. We still have to argue to get birth-control pills covered by our health insurance, while viagra and all facsimiles are covered.
And yes, the women’s lib movement had a lot to do with choices. the choice to behave how we want. If you’re in to chains and whips, that’s your choice.
I am reminded of working for Medco and watching how many insurance companies bitched about birth control but just required a yearly doctor call for ED meds.
I’m a guy and that just pissed me off. People seem to think birth control promotes promiscuity but don’t think that Viagra promotes anything but husbands getting their “due.”
Well for the record, I had way more guys just wanting pills for the weekend than husbands… I’ll stop before I get indignant on behalf of women and their delicious curves and minds.
“. . . Viagra and all facsimiles are covered.”
Avis,
No, they’re not. Trust me. There are inequities, but that’s not one of them.
R.
I have to disagree. I worked for insurance companies before in their prior authorization departments. Doctors basically had to make a phone call a year for prior auth and they got their ED meds.
Women had a similar process but 9/10 times they were declined that authorization because it was being prescribed as contraceptive instead of another reason.
I know this from working with Medco for over a year and they handle a lot of different insurance companies.
With many insurance companies, yes, they are. But birth control pills are not. Why won’t an insurance company cover elective sterilization for women? It would cut down on the need for the pill, and any abortions. I for one would do it if it wer offered. Of course, in my case, a pregnancy could kill me. Genetics are such a bitch.
They were probably pissed that we gave them the weapons to take control in the first place.
There is a difference between picking a leader in peace time (trying to influence another country’s voting procedure) and deposing a villain in war. We had every right to dispose of Hitler. And there were 4 powers involved in reforming Germany. The same story goes with Iraq – we removed an evil dictator. And we were kind enough to give the lawless country a choice in how to govern itself instead of just colonising it or something. Or leaving it for the Taliban to take over.
Peace time? I don’t call what we are doing in Iraq to be peace time nor do the other countries sending in soldiers. If that is peace, I shudder to think of what you would call war. Perhaps you only consider it war when it is WW or WW2 level but I still call what is happening in Iraq as war. Sorry, can’t back you on that difference.
not true at all,
supplie some fucking ounce of evidence,
plse thnx
Absolutely true. You can go look up the evidence yourself with that attitude Buster. If you’re smart enough to use Google. kthxbai
Ummm, I sure hope that we aren’t going to select our next president based on the rest of the world’s opinion.
… and plenty of Iraqis don’t want their leader selected based on ours. Are we gonna go through this crap again?
A passport is required to enter America from Canada. Therefore, if Governor Palin were to visit Canada, a country inextricably tied to the state she governs, she would have to have a passport to fly back home. If she doesn’t have one, she is by implication disinterested in affairs outside of her state, even when those affairs matter *to* her state.
Isn’t the dinosaur thing all part of “intelligent design?” If God created the world 4000 or 5000 years ago, dinosaurs had to be in the Garden of Eden, right? At least they are willing to acknowledge that dinosaurs existed, huh? Huh?
I agree! That picture of the soldier she’s visiting in the hospital, in Landstule, Germany? That’s my brother.
I’m terrified someone could be so entirely ignorant of the facts. Polar bear populations are on the rise, the number of books banned by Palin stands at 0, so what if she believes something about dinosaurs? point is she does not push her personal beliefs on the populace. The said state investigation involves a trooper who the police found: Tasered his 11 year old stepson, threatened the life of Palin’s father, and was drunk or drinking (and driving) on duty. his punishment was a 5 day suspension. The Palin family then asked questions as to why the hell this guy was still on the force. Seems like a reasonable question and the safety commissioner is on record saying no one asked him to fire the trooper and the legislature has already admitted he could be fired for any reason.
2 out of 19 polar bear ’subpopulations’ are increasing in terms of numbers. The rest are either declining, stable or not determined by scientists. Isn’t the issue that while current numbers are not immediately alarming, that in the future, sea ice changes due to global warming will affect their habitat and therefore their future as a species.
The Bush administration listed the polar bear as a ‘threatened species’ in May 2008.
Only if you believe in global warming. All evidence points that we’re closer to the next ice age than burning to death though.
It’s more than likely this is all about keeping drilling from happening in ANWR and not about polar bears and whales.
Even George Bush now believes in global warming.
Yeah, and what have you guys been saying about his intelligence?
That it is dim, considering how long it took him to figure it out. Even idiots can eventually get it right once you corner them with evidence.
Show me evidence that global warming is real. And I’ll warn you, I am a scientist. It’s all a bunch of baloney and flawed science.
“Back off man! I’m a scientist!”
Ooooh, we’re so scared. You might want to look at the IPCC documents, there’s plenty of evidence there.
The human race has not been recording the weather long enough to tell what is man made and what is natural cycling. Personally though, I’d like a hydrogen powered car. But then, what about all the pollution from China, India and other countries ?
( this logical statement made me dizzy- I gotta go lay down now!)
you must have a stalker!
OoO…. Not again!
Is yours back too ?
Then again- I have a Russian stalker, but he hasn’t quite got it right.
He calls himself “MegaBoobski” !
LOL! MegaBoobski sounds like a Russian porn actress!
I find this thread relevant to my interests.
Whatever. For a noted person (other than myself) that also says it’s a hoax, try the founder of the Weather Channel. One link’s above. None of the IPCC’s reports give incontrovertible proof. And much has been called in question as to such things as how the areas around the weather stations have changed over time. You can’t build a air-conditioning exhaust vent next to a thermometer and not expect to get a higher temperature than when it was just standing there on its own. The entire ’science’ of it is flawed, including the increased ice caps, cooler temperatures, and longer deeper winters it cannot explain.
If you’re asking for “incontrovertible proof,” you are obviously NOT a scientist. It is impossible to prove ANYTHING in science. You can only DISPROVE.
And you’re saying that all weather stations in the world have air-conditioning exhaust vents that were built next to them? No? How many did? What percent of the total number of weather stations is that?
Also, just because some guy (i.e. founder of the Weather Channel) says it’s a hoax, how does that disprove global warming? How does he explain all the massive amounts of evidence that supports the theory?
There are many proven things in science as well. And my main reason for asking for incontrovertible proof from you was you appeared to believe you had it and there was no room for any other idea. Thus placing the burden of proof upon yourself.
-
No, not *all* weather stations are next to air-conditioners. Some of them are out in the middle of the ocean even. There’s quite a bit of information about it, though I don’t think an exact study has been done yet. You can look at the wiki above if you like. You can also go to http://www.sailwx.info/wxobs/stationpick.phtml to see how badly placed they are worldwide.
-
That ’some guy’ has been a meteorologist and a leader in the field for longer than many of the folks here have been alive (judging by the gen Xers and such). I’d think if anyone knew, he would. You can easily look him up yourself.
It ate my post again – I’ll give it a bit to see if it comes back on its own
Nothing is absolutely proven in science; markmier is correct.
I appeared to think I had incontrovertible truth? How did you get that from my comments here? I said there is plenty of evidence in the IPCC reports. And there is. I never said anything about proof, as it is impossible. There is nothing that is proven in science, there is only massive mounds of evidence about a great many things. That’s what science is about — gathering evidence to support (or disprove) a hypothesis.
I visited your link, I don’t see how it supports your argument that they’re badly placed. Please explain.
The fact that you can trot out a meteorologist that dissents from the commonly accepted theory of global warming doesn’t prove anything, I can equally bring up thousands of other meteorologists (some of which have probably been alive LONGER than your dissenter, if that is so important to you) that DO accept global warming. That’s what the IPCC reports are all about.
Maybe he meant to say he has taken some science classes not that he is a scientist?
-
You know, like Sara meant to say that she is NOW against the bridge to nowhere, or that she TRIED to sell that plane on ebay, or that she is KIND OF a reformer…
-
The reformer thing is what is currently cracking me up. It would seem that her “reformer” title came about because she exposed one politician for using his office email and staff time for campaigning purposes.
-
COUGH COUGH – so did she.
-
Or how about little miss fiscal conservative charging her state a per diem expense for 312 nights that she spent in her own home …
-
Or how about all the lipstick hoopla when McCain used the exact same phrase about Hilary Clinton’s health care policy and Obama never once mentioned Palin’s name leading up to that comment?
-
Or perhaps we can chuckle at the press finally starting to call the GOP on some of the lies? They used FactCheck.org as a source in one ad and Factcheck.org themselves had to refute that quote.
-
Fannie and Freddy are failing because they ate too much tax payer money according to the lovely Miss Alaska runner up, of course they were not government entities … ouch
-
Let’s see, what else … HMMMM … How about the GOP beginning the voter caging scams again in battleground states. Don’t you guys want to at least LOOK like you are winning fairly?
-
How about the republican senator that called her a cocky wacko? Or Ed Koch (who vociferously has supported republicans because he felt the safety of the nation would be best served by Bush in office) writing a letter stating that she utterly terrifies him in the context of what will happen to this country if McCain wins?
-
One of my favorite interviews right now is Matt Damon calling her a “Bad Disney Movie” since doing the actuarial tables McCain has a 1 in 3 chance of dieing in his first term. That leaves the hockey mom as president faving down Putin with folksy wisdom learned at the rink … I believe his exact words were “Utterly ludicrous”
-
yup, I think I will be chuckling all evening thinking of how republicans are flipping over with glee about this woman while the rest of the world looks on with undisguised horror.
*facing
It is why I have a picture of Cthulhu for president on my Gaia profile. Why vote for a Lesser Evil? Granted I support Obama but Cthulhu would just end it all and get it over with. Enemy country? Squished!!! Enemy regime? Horrified, mutilated, and THEN squished.
Vote Cthulhu!!! Don’t be Fooled!!!
May I be eaten first!
Yes you may.
I am wondering where the hell that longer winter and more ice caps are coming from since I just read about an ice floe melting off that was the size of Manhattan and our winter here in Iowa wasn’t that long at all. No longer than usual and started later too.
I agree, though it should be noted that “Global Warming” is not meant to imply that it is warmer at every point on earth as the years go by. What it means is that the global mean temperature is rising as the years go by. Any particular locality may in fact be cooling. And in fact, if the Atlantic Convector Current shuts off (as a result of global warming, natch), Northern Europe will end up being VERY MUCH colder. However, in exchange, other parts of the world would be quite a bit warmer.
Nobody said it was simple. That’s the problem, it’s not easily summarized into a sound bite. That doesn’t mean it’s not happening.
Poor Vikings…
Screw the Vikings. Due to Climate Change, the Northeast is becoming more intolerable for sugar maples, which would mean an end to maple syrup. Real maple syrup; not that crap liquid derived from corn.
And sadly I lost my “C’thulu is ‘96: why settle for the lesser evil?” button.
You will flogged for your loss. I mean, sorry for your loss. I will miss good syrup…
I was going to reply, but I’m just going to stop. People are just getting mean.
J-beans,
I’ve noticed something interesting about these long lists of factoids bbeing presented regarding Palin. (I’m also interested in how they appear so quickly. I’m sure you researched all of those yourself before posting, right?)
The factoids: What I have found is that the surface statements are almost always true, i.e., “Palin discussed banning books.” On further research I have uniformly found that there is nothing derogatory.
In the case of similar lists regarding Obama, I have uniformly found the “facts” to be out-and-out wrong. One post here cited an economic policy institute as saying that McCain’s tax plan would only raise after-tax income for the average wage earner by 0.5%, while Obama’s would do so by #%. When I looked at the actual report, however, it was 2% for McCain’s pland and 0.02 for Obama’s.
You REALLY SHOULD check your facts before you make such posts.
R.
It might also be worth noting that one of the two failed mortgage agencies was run from 1996 to 2002 by one of Clinton’s former financial wizard’s–who now is advising Obama on fiscal policy. He left under a cloud when it was discovered that the books had been cooked to provide upper management with enhanced bonuses. He himself made $52 million. Look it up.
Qua: Mean? Where, I would go so far as silly but not mean.
Qua, I don’t see anything mean here. I see Palin-bashing (which after all is what this LOL is about), and Cthulu silliness…er…extremely serious prophecies, and a little bit of maple syrup/Viking remarks on global warming. I don’t see anything that I would consider “mean.”
Maybe you just have a thin skin due to not having a clue about how real science works?
Cthulhu discussion: Serious Business.
You’re not a scientist, don’t make me laugh.
You’re not worth my time.
Yet you replied?
sigh
That was my thinking.
Doesn’t that make him a “flip-flopper?” What goes around comes around!
Please cite this “all evidence” you mention.
Though I must admit that your statement is technically correct — no one that I’m aware of thinks that we will literally burn to death.
keeping it to one thread above
Well if you knew what Global Warming does, you wouldnt say that.
Global warming causes the melting of polar ice caps. Those ice caps are
FRESHWATER. Enough fresh water moves into the oceans and you have
issues, not with flooding but with desalinization.
The salt/water ratio in the earth’s oceanscontrol something we call The Gulf Stream.
The Gulf Streamis the BIGGEST influence of the world’s weather. With the sea’s water/salt ratio shifted The Gulf Stream shifts, and/or stops completely.
Without that circulation of hot air The Stream provides, the earth spirals
into a cooling cycle. Basically causing an ice age. So in essence…
Global warming causes ice ages…. in essence.
So the beginning is the end is the beginning… Dammit, now I have an urge to listen to Smashing Pumpkins. I hope you’re happy…
You should be listening to late Beatles: “P.C. 31 says we’ve caught a dirty one . . . “
I should, I just might.
Furthermore I didn’t say that she banned books – but I did say that a journalist covering the story at the time has gone on record to say that Palin made enquiries as to whether books could be banned in her town library.
I am not saying she wanted to ban books, or that any books should actually be banned. I do wonder why there has never been a list of these books she had supposedly intended to ban? I would really love to see which books they were, ever find any list?
The Frontiersman, the local paper covering this story, reported at the time that Palin asked the librarian if she would “object to censorship even if people were circling the library in protest about a book”. The librarian said at the time “I told her clearly I will fight anyone who tries to indicate what books can go on the library shelves.”
Palin was part of the Assembly of God Church, who wanted the removal of the book “Pastor I am Gay” by author Pastor Howard Bess from book stores.
The same week that the librarian (Mary Ellen Baker) refused to give in to demands to censorship, Palin fired her for not being ‘loyal’ to the administration. She was reinstated after a public outcry and remained in her job for a further two years after the incident.
The journalist covering the story asserted that Palin wanted three specific books taken off the library shelves – but I don’t know what these books were.
There’s quite a bit more to that story. The librarian was the girlfriend of the chief of police she’d had to remove earlier because he was lying to the city council. Government positions often get changed with changes of administration. Would you keep someone around who kept trying to make you look bad because they were loyal to the last guy?
Did she actually need to worry about looking bad? It is a librarian and book banning should have never even been mentioned. Book banning discussion as a loyalty test?
Care to find a way to spin that so it doesn’t look like a conversation that should never occur in America between official and librarian?
Huh? Name a politician out there that wouldn’t have someone who was actively against them removed from the payroll. A good portion of politics is about looking good or bad. Shouldn’t be, but it is. So, yeah, she did have to worry about it. The book banning question and the loyalty thing are two separate things. She wasn’t fired over the books. She was fired for being a part of the corrupt prior government.
-
I don’t see how asking “Can books be banned?” in a rhetorical situation matters at all. I mean, technically I just asked the question right there. It’s like going to a police officer and saying “Can I see your gun?” They’ll say ‘no’ and you can just say ‘ah well. I guessed as much, darn’. The librarian said no they can’t and that was the end of it.
Ooo – change ‘can’ to ‘may’. Bad me!
Is that a change we can believe in?
Person in power asking if books can be banned is worlds different than you asking me on a forum. The person who can fire you and make policy for the public asking if you would oppose them making changes on something fundamentally against the constitution…
Gee, let’s think about how that could be construed as wrong…
Would you not worry if Your boss came up to you and starting posing hypotheticals about messing up Your job? Maybe I am just crazy but calling up a librarian as a person in power to talk about hypothetically censoring what is allowed to be read just seems a bit wrong.
Then again, I like freedom so perhaps I am.
I just haven’t seen anything that made it sound like it was a serious question and not just trying to get a rise out of the lady. Especially given the bad blood between them.
My boss comes up to me and hypothetically (and actually) messes things up all the time. ;D
I need liberating! 8D
I suppose I could make reference to the difference between leaving your job and leaving the town to avoid a person’s policy but if you think discussing book banning as a “rhetorical” question isn’t a problem, the effort would be wasted.
I wonder if I could get away with saying anything I want if I simply state afterward that I was being rhetorical… “You see, Your Honor, I was speaking rhetorically when I asked the lady about chewing through her dress and eating her cervix. All in jest with no harm, no foul right?”
How about we make this the rhetorical question thread starting now. Post rhetorical questions because they are never threats…
I just think there’s not enough information to substantiate the charge. Thus I’ll take her at her word until she gives me reason to doubt. All you can do really. And don’t tell me you haven’t said something just to see how someone would react. ;D
Not in an official capacity, no. I do my creepy rhetorical questions outside the work place.
The part about the librarian being fired the same week is not true.
Palin aked the librarian to resign several months later, over a different issue (loyalty to the former mayor). The librarian never actually lost her job.
did it ever occur to you that maybe just maybe,
palin doesnt want that list to be published and dispurssed?
hmmm,
ooo,
the possibilities are simply mind numbing
Or maybe there never was a list.
more likely!
“I do wonder why there has never been a list of these books she had supposedly intended to ban?”
Ema,
Luv,
Because there wasn’t one . . .
Well, if there never was a list, then I doubt she ever seriously intended to ban any books, don’t you? If she did intend to ban books, there probably would be some books she was interested in banning… but no one seems to know what those books are! I think it is more likely she was trying to assess the loyalty of this person like others have said before.
I once borrowed few books from a public library for my then 4-year-old granddaughter and started reading one to her on our way home on the train. After a few pages into the class the girl in the story developed a crush on her very adult male teacher – I nearly choked, closed the book, and grabbed another. Does she need the idea of getting a crush on her teachers planted in her little head as she started her school just now? Who the hell approved that book for the kids? I WANT IT BANNED. Tell me why I am wrong.
you’re not wrong to think this book is abhorrent (as you rightly say, how did this book get published?!) but at the end of the day, surely we either live in a free and fair, democratic and censorship-free society or we don’t…
We don’t exactly live in a censorship-free society, there is some censorship and there should be. If public school libraries are funded by public funds and most likely local public funds, then I don’t see why local people can’t have some say about what books are available to their children. I do wish I knew what books where in the list, I imagine they are so over the line that most reasonable people would agree with taking them off the shelf. That’s probably why they are keeping the titles hushed IMHO.
But one local person shouldn’t have say over what is available for someone elses child. Parents should be the only ones controlling what their child is allowed to read.
Hi Kurt! If the majority of local people object to a certain book in a school library don’t you think they should be able to ask the book be removed? Especially if their tax dollars go to fund the school? That is what I was saying there.
That is a valid point. But the one parent who wants the ‘undesirable’ book to be available also pays taxes. The idea behind our democracy is majority rule with minority rights. Just because most people disagree with you, doesn’t mean your opinion doesn’t matter.
I think a judge might say that the most harm would be to the marjority in this case that wanted the book removed when it would be an easy thing for the minority to just have a copy in the home available to their children if they wanted it. IMHO. Probably a really unlikely case though…
I would like to point out that you are now seriously suggesting it is okay to ban books because you don’t agree with what ideas occur within them. I don’t agree with Feng Shui. Nor do a good many people. Say our argument is that something like this, dealt with in a serious manner in a book, could fundamentally alter our child’s perceptions, skew their ability to tell truth from falsehood.
Does that mean we could get together and have the book removed, so that our child will never be exposed to it, ever?
And, of course, this is all because we disagree with the idea.
Just because you picked out an age-inappropriate book for your granddaughter does not mean it should be banned. I don’t know the book you’re talking about, but certainly depending on the age group, having a crush on a teacher is rather common.
It’s only a big deal if its the other way around.
You mean it would be wrong for me to have a crush on her 4 year old granddaughter?? I’m being repressed!!
Because nobody made you borrow the book for one? Your preference does not equal policy for the public. As for crushes on teachers, since when is that uncommon? Hell, damn near every woman I know had a crush on an older man when they were a kid. They grew out of it.
Did you read further into the book to see if the character dealt with it by growing out of it or did you just assume there was going to be sex like an idiot without confirming it?
Again, public library means books of all types for the public. Nobody is making you even go there, let alone borrow anything.
I am sorry but Freedom of Speech trumps your indignation. Don’t like it, Leave. Don’t want to read it or have your kids read it? Then don’t and don’t let them.
Grow up. The government is NOT your babysitter or nanny. My fiancee’ and I will raise my sons. I suggest you do the same for your kids.
Banning the book is kinda overkill, but making sure it’s not in the kids section would be appropriate. That’s why they have a kids section after all. For the “everyone agrees this one’s ok” books.
Most people don’t have a problem with books that have crushes in them, even on teachers since that is something that happens a lot growing up. Every book I have seen with that scenario has the teacher either telling the kid why it is inappropriate or the kid’s bubble being burst and they grow/move on when they realize that the teacher is not the ideal person they thought they were, like pretty much every crush.
This is where the reading the whole book part comes into play.
Yea, and then the teacher loses his/her job and goes to jail! Ha, if I was a teacher I would want those kinds of books banned!
(I actually meant “or” instead of “and then” up there…)
No… That happens if they actually do anything intimate. Why would the teacher go to jail for telling a child that they shouldn’t be fixating on them?
Oh I was reaching… It didn’t work, I fail. I meant if anything actually happens, like some cases that have been in the news.
Ah.
Sooo is that the “Devil made me do it” thinking? Where a bit of text or game or other inanimate object causes behavior? If that is the case, I seek a motion to ban the bible. It depicts incest, rape, murder, war, intense sexual situations, pride, avarice, drunken conduct, etc etc…
We can’t expose our kids to that. It will warp them.
I meant it as a joke Wyrm, it is a joke, a sad failed joke, let it die.
Mmm, my apologies. Book banning under the pretense of bible morals are a hot button for me.
There are some places that have challenged the Bible, Wyrm, just so you know. Not many: the Xians usually restore it to the shelves in all its prurient glory. I LOL at all the hullabaloo regarding the Harry Potter books (doubled-up know that JK Rowling announced Dumbledore was gay).
It’s a deep secret of mine that I eventually write a book that is challenged in a public library; I’d love to make the same roster as “Catcher in the Rye” “Lolita” and “Are You There, God? It’s Me Margaret”.
Celebrate literacy. Read a banned book.
Hmmm, I suppose the groups that try to ban the bible are never as loud as the groups using the bible to ban since I had never heard of them before. I am rather annoyed that people were/are trying to keep Huckleberry Finn and Tom Sawyer out of schools saying it was racist…
I suppose satire that depicts the times in which they are written never occured to them, nor did they actually catch the lessons tolerance therein. I guess Mark Twain’s warning about taking the books seriously was overlooked.
I’ve actually started writing a book that if I ever actually finished and got published would probably be banned. It tips its hat to Douglas Adams, Neil Gaimen, and Terry Pratchett in that fun, irreverant way that usually pisses off folks that don’t like humor about Srs Biznis.
You have me intrigued. Write it and I will do what I can to procure a copy and indulge.
Gonna be a while, all I have atm is a prologue and a rough outline. I don’t get a lot of time in a large block for writing, so it’s very slow going.
No worries, I have a lot of mental blockage keeping me from writing right now so I sympathize.
I hear you, truth. Between two jobs and a baby, I’ve written maybe ten pages in the last two months.
I didn’t even know you were pregnant!
Well, this is where censorship runs into some problems. What the original poster finds offensive and what I find offensive are two very different things. I seriously doubt that the ending of that book had the teacher and student “hooking up” as it were. A lot of children’s books are written as a method for teaching lessons through story. They sell books on becoming potty trained, bullies, sharing, divorced and mixed families, death, special needs, you name it they’ve written a book for it. Many students develop crushes on their teachers, and not just older kids (I had a hell of a crush on my high school chemistry teacher, he was hot!). Primary aged children are for the first time in their lives spending a good chunk of time with an adult who is not a family member. More than likely this was a book that was written to show a student how to deal with those feelings. Since the original poster didn’t finish reading the book they can’t even tell us what the book is about. Just because she doesn’t want to read it to her daughter does not follow that it was inappropriate, that’s a subjective issue that’s not up to anyone but individual parents to decide.
dont fucking read it then moron,
its works just like abstiance,
and we all know how good u republicans are with that,
if u dont read it, then u cant know what its talking about.
Issues much?
His point, though crudely expressed, stands. If you don’t like it, don’t read it.
I do like when Logic is so damn simple that people can’t even follow it.
You’re wrong because society doesn’t cater to just you.
Maybe because you should have read the book yourself before reading it to your daughter? The library isn’t your daughter’s parent, you are.
My rant above agrees with you. I hate people wanting objects and other people raise their kids. -_-
She does? Because what, you… *say* she does?
not at all,
no bodies running scared,
at all,
even close.
Republicans just make it seem like liberals are,
because all they put out is shit to make it sound like the liberals are.
If anyone should be running scared its the republicans,
theyre not taking this one,
its a gaurentee.
Sarah Palin is everything Obama isn’t. A genuine, experienced reformer who lives up to her word.
Liberals are the past, and Palin is the future.
I dunno, calling something God’s War seems to be a step backwards.
What about her challenges to toe-the-line with Russia? That’s some quality foreign policy there, really showing she’s ready to take over the day McCain has a stroke while on the john.
Now that is a damaging mental image…
And while having said stroke, dies of a heart attack.
Then it’s a good thing she didn’t say that.
As usual, this is just another left-wing smear. What she actually said was
‘” Pray for our military men and women who are striving to do what is right. Also, for this country, that our leaders, our national leaders, are sending [U.S. soldiers] out on a task that is from God,” she exhorted the congregants. “That’s what we have to make sure that we’re praying for, that there is a plan and that that plan is God’s plan.”’
Quite different.
Task from God… A task that is actually a war. But you’re saying that isn’t saying it is God’s War…
So if she is saying they are doing a task from God and they are going to war, then how is that not God’s War since it is a Task from God?
She is actually asking for prayers so that the people overseeing the war are doing so according to God’s plan, and that if they are not doing something according to His plan, that He will make it clear. She said “Pray for our…country, that our leaders…are sending [US soldiers] out on a task from God. …that there is a plan and that that plan is God’s plan.”
Palin is a barbarian and a fraud, and should be shipped back to Alaska on the first available transport.
Because she is a fundamentalist nutjobs, and she is convincing all of the fundamentalist nutjobs in this country to vote for McCain.
Who’s running?
Not running scared, just more driven to win and avoid 4 more years of Bush and renaming America Jesusland.
The problem is, the harder they try the more the are driving people away. Don’t ask me why, but Obama’s ratings are slipping daily.
I suspect O’s campaign is busy prepping for the debates, where they plan to make their big push. I can’t really come up with any other reason for them to have been so quiescent of late.
Give Palin enough rope and she’ll hang herself. Maybe take McCain with her. Obama just needs to sit back and be above the mud-slinging. Like he does.
You know, the same thing happened to Dukakis and he got his ass handed to him. If Obama thinks he’s going to win by ‘winning’ at the debates, he may be in for a horrible crash. The only thing that saved Dukakis was Lloyd Bentsen. He thoroughly cleaned Dan Quayle’s clock. I still remember the line, “Senator, I knew Jack Kennedy. Jack Kennedy was a good friend of mine. And Senator, YOU are no Jack Kennedy.” I mean that was just a classic slam.
True, but Dukakis had other minuses against him. That whole Willie Horton thing was a master-stroke by the Bush I campaign. As I recall Dukakis wasn’t terribly charismatic, but I was too young at the time to pay much attention. And in retrospect, that “tank commander” photo was just ridiculous.
I’m hoping that Obama’s and Biden’s natural strengths will carry the day. Victory is assured to neither side, at this point.
Obama’s going to have start doing some fast thinking. His numbers just aren’t in his favor.
True that, mainly because of some really clever Republican tactics or really stupid decisions from there side (probably both). He let himself being lured in non-issue talks (like 1 of his latest, about that “enough is enough”). Obama stands strong when it’s about the issues, and he propagated himself to be a man of the issues. If he wants to win, he better starts showing that pretty damned fast.
The problem is, the more Obama opens his mouth (without a prescripted speech), the more trouble he digs himself into. The debates are gonna be very rough on him I think.
I’m really looking forward to the debates.
Obama is at his greatest disadvantage when he has no teleprompter.
Just as McCain/Palin’s greatest strength are interviewers that don’t bother to ask them to answer the damn question.
If I’d a dollar for ever time John used the phrase “When I was a POW…”I could finally find out what the $200 bottle of tequila at the liquor store tastes like.
Yep. The numbers of 1.023 people who choose to respond to a poll.
Polling processes are flawed. No matter which way it swings. Classic example is Truman.
Uh-huh, that’s why they qualify them by stating a +/- percentage. For the most part, most of the polls are indicative of any given subject and the respondents point of view. They aren’t scientific, nor do they claim to be. But it does give you the overall sentiment.
They still resort to the time-honored landline phone polls, and project numbers for cell phone users. I can understand the belief that many of the 18-24 y/o would forget to go out and vote, but with that whole text-message from Obama network going, what’s to say there won’t be a reminder the night before to get thee to a polling place?
F’real. No one asked me to take a poll. Did they ask you?
I don’t understand it either. I guess America just loves Jesus!
Yes, and the Repubs are all about loving their fellow men.
/rimshot
n8, I love ya man! I respect your opinions even though I disagree wirh 90% of them. (see Republicans can love their fellow man!)
Back atcha, pal. The respect is mutual!
You two aren’t going to do a remake of Brokeback Mountain are you?? *masturbates*
I wish I knew how to quit you… And by that, I mean I never watched the movie and have no problems with quitting you or any other guy. Women on the other hand… Damn they’re addictive.
You can’t live with ‘em. You can’t live without ‘em. And yet there’s something irresistible-ish about ‘em.
. . . Two, three, four . . . Did you say “new Leash on life?” Yeah. Thought so.
Not in this lifetime, sorry to disappoint you though..
Now if they only stopped loving their fellow men in public restrooms.
Check again! Ohio just pulled out of the red and into the…. well the grey, but hey! It’s something!
Ohio is a very purple state.
Scary though that GOP is already starting the process to challenge votes in the 5 poorest counties in Ohio. If you know anyone in Ohio or Michigan tell them to get their butts down to voter registration and make sure they are still on the lists.
by poorest I mean most foreclosures, sorry should have been more specific
I’ve gotten my registration sent to me twice already.
When Geraldine Ferraro was the first woman to be nominated VP for the Democratic party in 1984, the Repub numbers slipped initially. But in the end, things balanced out and the race focused on campaigning around issues, not sensationalism. We just have to pray to God that things balance out again.
Palin is nothing more than a pretty puppet for the McCain machine, and I just hope the rest of the country can open their eyes to that before it is too late.
Sensationalism, smear, slander, and whining are all McCain et al. have left.
LOL! Nice, very creative.
I support Governor Palin, but this is more about lols than correctness. Sometimes you just gotta laugh =D
Beautiful.
(Though I am curious how many people were pissed att his because they weren’t sure of what corpuscles are…)
Dead bodies don’t fight infection, that’s outrageous sir!
Good pic! Fly little corpuscles, and godspeed!
And of course they’re being followed by healthy red blood cells!!
I feel sorry for the few non-oxygenated blue cells.
Reminds me of Racquel Welch being attacked by antibodies in the movie !
Yowsa!
Those weren’t antibodies. The white masses moving to cover her were– oh, nevermind.
Shouldn’t that rather be leukocytes?
Go white corpuscles, go!!!!! GET THAT INFECTION!!! KILL IT!!!!! KIIIILLLLL IIIITTTTT !!!!!!!
Liberal tolerance- it’s a beautiful thing !
Troll bait! Mission accomplished.
*feeling smug*
**masturbates!**
EEewww! Is that the reason for your name ? “Spankin’ the Monkey ” might work better !
Iz saim ting, srsly. ktxhbai
I don’t care who you are, THAT’s funny!
I’m no Republican (or Democrat, or Libertarian, or Green, or whatever), but this is just not funny.
Love it!
White corpuscles?
They’re clearly Rovers.
I’ve been a wild rover for many a year, and I’ve spent all my money on whiskey and beer…
Yay for Celtic drinking songs!
Erin go bragh !
oh god … tell me you don’t claim any Irish.
The whole Emerald Isle just collectively vomited and don’t even know why
Well, they assumed it was from the drinking they did last night but they were wrong.
LOL me laddy !
I’m Irish and can vouch for the collective vomit. It was very strange, I’m glad I’ve found the cause.
A bad batch of Guiness ?
Luckily I’m only part irish. All I did was get a bit queasy.
If the ‘part Irish’ people got queasy, that must’ve been 90% of the American population :p
I love Ireland though and had a great time for 4 years of high school (imagine, it was supposed to be a punishment) and I credit Ireland with making me even more liberal that when I got there.
There is a lot of activism and social conscience even among the school kids that is pretty rare here.
LOL!!
Erin go braless!!
That’s “braghless”, you ninnegh.
I’ll raise a glass of Jameson to that!
Aye, or a pot o’ Killian’s Red!
Well, if it’s beer you’re wanting, give North Coast’s “Old Rasputin” a try. That stuff makes Guiness look like tapwater!
I’m partial to cider black, when I can get it made right. It’s surprisingly hard to find black currant juice.
As me Gran used ta say ” What does an Irishmen call a seven course meal? A potato and a six pack!” and then she would fall off her chair drunk….
lol
Hard to find blackcurrant juice? What deprived country do you live in?! Cider and blackcurrant is one of the most popular drinks here [Ireland].
Oh, a great one is Irish Soldier Laddie:
Will ye stand in the band like a true Irish man,
And go and fight the forces of the crown?
Will ye march with O’Neill to an Irish battle field?
For tonight we go to free old Wexford town!
Aww! Little Roverlings
FUNNY AS HELL!!!!!!
And only about 8 years late, too.
Why is everyone who isn’t staunchly republican automatically called a liberal?
Oh right, I forgot, all issues are black & white with no gray! And surely people’s opinions always fall to party lines, with no variation or…thought.
Oy vay! Have you got the wrong discussion forum…