First told me not to start a flamewar. I deleted my original post. Now, it looks like we've got a flamewar. Well, I tried.
what would happen if the Democratic Party got everything it wanted?
We'd FINALLY have a nation to be proud of!
that's not what he said
He said "misguided," ... now, followed by a comma, I assumed that to mean that Democrats are misguided. But, to what DID you mean?
have you heard of any successful rehabilitations of a murderer that could have been executed?
I would rather rehabilitate a person their first time in jail ... first offences are usually for rather minor things. That way, maybe (just maybe), we could avoid that murder all together. But god forbid we try and rehabilitate people! Oh, no! And when did killing people EVER become an answer to ANYTHING?
does this apply to Siamese twins as well?
It would apply to anyone that doesn't want others telling them what to do (or not to do) with their own damn body.
George W. Bush, Ronald Reagen, Bob Dole, et. al lied to the people of this country?
Besides Iran Contra?
why do you believe Bush used drugs?
What does that matter? How can you prove to me that he didn't?
the DNC is involved in race baiting
How so?
...that killed thousands of people for no reason
*Cough*MyLai*cough*
Things happen in the past, Omega. Or have you forgotten this nation's horrible history with the natives of this land? We're not completely innocent here, bub.
Why do you not respond to the accusation that the DNC disregards the constitution when inconvenient?
ROFLMA. They never have.
------------------ Star Trek Gamma Quadrant Average Rated 7.5 out of 10 Smileys by Fabrux *** Shop Smart -- Shop "S"-Mart
posted
Or maybe you think Omega's got the advantage because you're on his side. Both sides are doing the exact same thing, basically. Oh well, I suppose some people have nothing better to do.
------------------ "Solipsism, like other absurdities of the professional philosopher, is a product of too much time wasted in library stacks between the covers of a book, in smoke-filled coffeehouses (bad for the brains) and conversation-clogged seminars. To refute the solipsist or the metaphysical idealist all that you have to do is take him out and throw a rock at his head: if he ducks he's a liar." --Edward Abbey
------------------ "Karate is a form of martial arts in which people who have had years and years of training can, using only their hands and feet, make some of the worst movies in the history of the world." - Dave Barry
posted
"what would happen if the Democratic Party got everything it wanted?
We'd FINALLY have a nation to be proud of!"
I wish more specificity. Can you describe what you believe would be the social ramifications of programs such as HillaryCare, were they passed?
"that's not what he said
He said "misguided," ... now, followed by a comma, I assumed that to mean that Democrats are misguided. But, to what DID you mean?"
My apologies for the ambiguity. My statement was that First did not say that Democrats were misguided specifically because they disagreed with him. My question was why you assumed this was, in fact, what he meant.
"have you heard of any successful rehabilitations of a murderer that could have been executed?
I would rather rehabilitate a person their first time in jail ... first offences are usually for rather minor things. That way, maybe (just maybe), we could avoid that murder all together. But god forbid we try and rehabilitate people! Oh, no! And when did killing people EVER become an answer to ANYTHING?"
I would be interested in hearing your proposal on how we might rehabilitate criminals.
As for executing murderers, it does prevent them from killing anyone else, does it not? Would it not, therefore, be a method of reducing the number of possible future murders?
"does this apply to Siamese twins as well?
It would apply to anyone that doesn't want others telling them what to do (or not to do) with their own damn body."
But what is your position on the right to do what one wishes with one's body, when the excersize of that right involves the death of another?
"George W. Bush, Ronald Reagen, Bob Dole, et. al lied to the people of this country?
Besides Iran Contra?"
Can you provide evidence of this?
"why do you believe Bush used drugs?
What does that matter? How can you prove to me that he didn't?"
You stated that you believe Bush used drugs. I simply wish to know why you believe this.
"...that killed thousands of people for no reason
*Cough*MyLai*cough*
Things happen in the past, Omega. Or have you forgotten this nation's horrible history with the natives of this land? We're not completely innocent here, bub."
Do you believe that the unauthorized actions of a few under a previous government are equivalent to the ordered actions of a current government? Do you believe that previous crimes commited by people claiming to represent this country justify dealing with murderers?
"Why do you not respond to the accusation that the DNC disregards the constitution when inconvenient?
ROFLMA. They never have."
You believe that the DNC has never disregarded the constitution. Does this include their support for the "Fairness Doctrine?"
------------------ "You know, you--you let a wolf save your life, they make you pay and pay and pay..." - Fraser, "due South"
[This message has been edited by Omega (edited December 07, 2000).]
quote:My apologies for the ambiguity. My statement was that First did not say that Democrats were misguided specifically because they disagreed with him. My question was why you assumed this was, in fact, what he meant.
Why do you assume that he assumed what you thought that Rob was thinking before either of you thought to assume otherwise?
quote:I would be interested in hearing your proposal on how we might rehabilitate criminals.
As for executing murderers, it does prevent them from killing anyone else, does it not? Would it not, therefore, be a method of reducing the number of possible future murders?
If you don't, of course, count the murders that are committed by state. But them's the Government, so it's OK.
quote:>Besides Iran Contra?
Can you provide evidence of this?
I'd like to see you provide examples to refute this. I'd imagine you won't, seeing as how you never have when asked for anything else, simply making some statement that shows that you know how to evade, and then berate someone else for evading a different question.
quote:You stated that you believe Bush used drugs. I simply wish to know why you believe this.
Sweet Jesus M. P. O. Y. M. Christ! I agree with this. I think that the whole Bush=Crack debate is moronic, and anyone who uses this as example needs to "read a book or some shit"
quote:Do you believe that the unauthorized actions of a few under a previous government are equivalent to the ordered actions of a current government?
In the future, they will become the previous government. Then will the events become as non-important as the ones you are dismissing as coming from a previous government?
quote:Do you believe that previous crimes commited by people claiming to represent this country justify dealing with murderers?
Well, aside from the fact that *gasp* mass-murder hasn't just happened before in China, I'd ask to why anyone would deal with you.
quote:You believe that the DNC has never disregarded the constitution. Does this include their support for the "Fairness Doctrine?"
What's this 'Fairness Doctrine?'
------------------ "Karate is a form of martial arts in which people who have had years and years of training can, using only their hands and feet, make some of the worst movies in the history of the world." - Dave Barry
posted
Let's hope my computer doesn't crash when I'm halfway through this time ... ::sigh::
I would be interested in hearing your proposal on how we might rehabilitate criminals
A proposal? Hah! More like a rough scratch of the surface. I'm not going to pretend to know what has or has not worked, I will start off by saying we've got to be able to do something better than locking people up and then sending them back out into society. These are full of holes, but they're rough ideas at best:
When it comes to drug abuse, prison is probably a bad idea. They take up space that more deserving people need. Drug-rehab facilities (although not doing Robert Downey, Jr. much good) are a much better place for the average crackhead. Sure, we'll have to build a few more, but better these than more jails, right? I mean, we'll be freeing up space in the jails by building drug-rehabs ...
Education. Get people their godamn GEDs. Those that have 'em, start 'em off in some Community College classes. Add to this a program to help people find jobs when they're out of jail (a few years ago, there was an article in the Balt. Sun about a man who ran a construction company and regularly hired ex-cons ... very few of them ever returned to crime -- they'd paid their debt to society and were happy to be productive citizens).
The key is to finding out how to get current prisoners from returning to jail and make them into productive citizens. Do that, and we'll start to have a much better society.
Now ... onto the murderers ...
Let's say I kill someone.
I'm convicted of murder, and find myself facing the death penalty, or life in jail.
I would WANT to be executed. The prospect of spending the next seventy years or so staring at a 10 foot cell doesn't much appeal to me. What would I do? Lift weights? Get raped in the shower? Every weekend night I'd be tortured by the knowledge that I could be out drinking, playing pool, and having fun with my friends ... but instead am trapped in a cell ...
Life in jail is much more punishment, IMHO, then death would be. That is why I am against the death penalty.
'Cuz I'm one sadistic son of a bitch ...
But what is your position on the right to do what one wishes with one's body, when the exercise of that right involves the death of another?
Let's not get into a debate on when "life" begins...
If I happen to someday get some girl pregnant, then I will have say in the matter. What will I do? I honestly don't have a clue ... will I still be in school? Will I be working at a job where I could provide for a child, or support her in raising the child?
There are so many factors to take into consideration, but what it comes down to is, it's not my body
Do you believe that the unauthorized actions of a few under a previous government are the equivilant to the ordered actions of a current government?
With regard to Lt. Calley and My Lai? No, of course not, but it did happen, and authorized or not, it was carried out in the name of the United States of America.
And its the same government. Different administration these days is all.
Same thing with what we did to the Indians.
I believe peace means dealing with people we don't like, even the Chinese. We're not going to get them to change their outlook on things like Human Rights by threatening them with sanctions.
Look at it this way ... if your enemy suggests something, you shoot down that suggestion. But if your friend suggests something ...
you believe the DNC has never disregarded the Consitution...
I never said that.
What I said (well, what I replied to), was that the Democratic National Party had never disregarded the Constitution when it was inconvenient.
------------------ Star Trek Gamma Quadrant Average Rated 7.5 out of 10 Smileys by Fabrux *** Shop Smart -- Shop "S"-Mart
posted
I dunno, it might make a neat episode of that 'Junkyard Wars'.
Get it? Salvageable? Junkyard? HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA.
Fried eggs told me the secrets.
MA.
------------------ "Karate is a form of martial arts in which people who have had years and years of training can, using only their hands and feet, make some of the worst movies in the history of the world." - Dave Barry
posted
No, but you're the guy who was all wierd about being proud to be white, are you not?
------------------ "Karate is a form of martial arts in which people who have had years and years of training can, using only their hands and feet, make some of the worst movies in the history of the world." - Dave Barry
"Why do you assume that he assumed what you thought that Rob was thinking before either of you thought to assume otherwise?"
Rob called the Democrats "misguided." JK, in such a manner that seemed to me to indicate that it was a rhetorical question, asked whether it was because they disagreed with him (Rob). My question was why JK assumed that that was what Rob meant or believed.
"If you don't, of course, count the murders that are committed by state. But them's the Government, so it's OK."
Do you believe that all intentionally caused human death is murder? If so, what is your position on abortion?
"In the future, they will become the previous government. Then will the events become as non-important as the ones you are dismissing as coming from a previous government?"
I don't believe "important" would be the most accurate word. "Relevant" would be more appropriate. But to answer the question I believe you're asking, yes, once the government of China has changed out, I would agree that the actions of the previous government are not relevant to our relation with the then-current one, and thus I would support diplomatic and trade relations.
"What's this 'Fairness Doctrine?'"
The 'Fairness Doctrine' was an FCC regulation originally instituted in 1949. The FCC later summarized it with the following statement:
"The Fairness Doctrine, as developed by the commission, imposes upon broadcasters a two-prongedobligation. Boradcast licenses are required to provide coverage of vitally important controversial issues of interest in the community served by the licensee and to provide a reasonable opportunity for the presentation of contrasting viewpoints on such issues."
As the terms in this regulation were completely undefined, it proved dangerous. Red Lion vs. FCC involved a case in which a small TV station broadcasted something contraversial. A viewer wrote in demanding free broadcast time in which to reply. They sent him a rate card. He challenged to the FCC, which sided with the viewer, as did the Supreme Court, in effect dictating that which a private media institution could broadcast. This regulation was repealed by the FCC on August 4, 1987.
In at least every legislative session between then and '93, the Democrats have introduced legislation to reinstitute it. Lieberman recently publicly stated that he misses the days of the Fairness Doctrine.
JK:
"The key is to finding out how to get current prisoners from returning to jail and make them into productive citizens. Do that, and we'll start to have a much better society."
Agreed, provisionally.
"Life in jail is much more punishment, IMHO, then death would be. That is why I am against the death penalty."
But which is better for society? Once the rights of the criminal are agreed not to be relevant, that is the only question. It's cheaper for the taxpayer to fund an execution than to fund fifty years in prison, is it not?
"But what is your position on the right to do what one wishes with one's body, when the exercise of that right involves the death of another?
Let's not get into a debate on when "life" begins..."
That was not the question.
"There are so many factors to take into consideration, but what it comes down to is, it's not my body"
But is not the body of the child the body in question? Would it not follow that the mother can not choose the actions to be undertaken on the child's body?
"Do you believe that the unauthorized actions of a few under a previous government are the equivilant to the ordered actions of a current government?
With regard to Lt. Calley and My Lai? No, of course not, but it did happen, and authorized or not, it was carried out in the name of the United States of America."
Do you believe that all things done in someone's name are consistant with their wishes?
"And its the same government. Different administration these days is all."
If a government has different people running it, would it not constitute a different government?
Would saying that the current administration is responsible for the actions of a rogue Lieutennant thirty years ago not be equivalent to saying that the CEO of Delta Airlines is responsible for the actions of a single pilot that crashed a plane before he was even born? If not, why?
"I believe peace means dealing with people we don't like, even the Chinese. We're not going to get them to change their outlook on things like Human Rights by threatening them with sanctions."
Do you believe the Chinese would cease their attrocities if we traded with them? If so, why?
"Look at it this way ... if your enemy suggests something, you shoot down that suggestion. But if your friend suggests something ..."
Do you believe that, if we had signed a treaty with Hitler, and asked him nicely, he would have stopped his "Final Solution?"
"What I said was that the Democratic National Party had never disregarded the Constitution when it was inconvenient."
Inconvenient in this case modifies "the Constitution." Thus, the expanded question is, "Why do you not respond to the accusation that the DNP disregards the constitution whenever the document proves inconvenient?"
------------------ "You know, you--you let a wolf save your life, they make you pay and pay and pay..." - Fraser, "due South"
posted
Hoooookayyy... How the heck did a post discussing the philosphy behind the electoral colleges and its current obselesence turn into a thread with two people bashing each other in the head for their political party affiliations? Have you forgotten how relatively close to the center our two parties are? We are talking here about parties which might as well be labeled the SMCTT (Slightly More Conservative Than Them) Party, and the SMLTT (Slightly More Liberal Than Them) Party. American parties do not exhibit the absolute extremes witness in political parties of other countries. Be thankful that if you register as a Republican, not only will the Democrats not kill you when they win, but you won't be much (if any) worse off than you are now. The same applies in the reverse. You guys should really hear yourselves bickering about such relatively minor issues. If you did, you might then realize just how lucky we are.
And I haven't seen any bashing by Omega-he's just asking questions... ones that seem very relevant too. Now, if he could get a straight answer to them, then it will get much more interesting.
------------------ "I'm not like George Bush. If he wins or loses, life goes on. I will do anything to win." - Al Gore, Newsweek, 1999
posted
It wouldn't hurt if Omega could actually give a straight-answer instead of just ignoring our answers, ya' know?
Okay ...
collective guilt
Do you think the parents of the Columbine killers feel guilt? What could we have done differently? What signs did we miss?
My Lai & Native Americans
The Government of the United States is responsible for:
a) Lt Calley's actions b) The forceful relocation of Native Americans against their will
Lt. Calley was an officer in the employ of the Government of the United States of America. It is cowardly to not take responsibility for the actions he committed in the name of the U.S.A. Calley, while a US Officer, did knowingly order the murder of women and children.
This does not mean that the Gov't ordered him to do this. But a Government must take responsibility for the actions of its officers and soldiers. To do otherwise is irresponsible.
b) If you don't know what happened to the Native Americans, well, go read a book.
Government
Omega, you seem to confuse "government" ... look at the USSR. They've changed governments three times ... from a Monarchy, to a Communist Nation, to their current attempts at Democracy.
The United States of America has had the same government for two hundred plus years. Different people running it? Oh, certainly, but the same government ...
So, if whomever was running China when Tianamen Square occured left office, you'd be fine with trade relations? Same government, dude, just different guy in charge ... sounds like the same thing I suggested. Sheeesh.
Look at it this way. If Hitler was killed earlier in the war, and Goehrig took over, would it still be the same Nazi Government?
Fairness Doctrine
First Ammendment. Freedom of Speech. Pretty basic principles on which our country was formed. You really want to be a part of restricting that freedom?
Executions...
Are more expensive. You keep forgetting about our appeals process, Omega. Retrials cost MONEY. It is actually cheaper to keep someone in prison for their whole life. Due process is such a wonderful thing, is it not?
I don't expect Omega to listen to this. He doesn't seem to understand the concept that his whole argument seems to rely on the idea that executions save the state money, when, in fact, they don't...
Abortion
It's not your body, keep your hands off of it.
Constitution
Depends on how you interpret your question, I suppose. I read it to mean that the DNC disregarded the Consitution when it was inconvenient. Kinda stupid to do so, don't you think?
------------------ Star Trek Gamma Quadrant Average Rated 7.5 out of 10 Smileys by Fabrux *** Shop Smart -- Shop "S"-Mart
[This message has been edited by JeffKardde (edited December 08, 2000).]
[This message has been edited by JeffKardde (edited December 08, 2000).]
Printer-friendly view of this topic
