dorbie

Members
  • Content

    3,980
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Feedback

    0%

Everything posted by dorbie

  1. Yes indeed. In my opinion, it will take a leader such as Egypt's Sadat to advocate a change. I don't think this change will be hastened by appeasement. Sadat was assasinated by islamic fundamentalists. The same might happen to anyone else offering similar policies towards a "mid-east solution". This has grown beyond Israel anyway. That's just the useful canard that's thrown around these days.
  2. The implication that Bush lied here is a joke. It was Kerry who lied, scaring millions of teens into voting for him by telling them Bush was gonna draft them when he wasn't. One ex-reservist does not a draft make. Kerry was the liar on this issue not Bush. You've gotten your brain so twisted through bias that you cannot see the obvious lie from Kerry (or you accept the lie because the means suits your ends) and stretch for tennuous evidence of a lie in the case of Bush.
  3. Says it all really. These issues are not binary. Pro euthenasia: For the terminally ill with chronic pain or just anyone who asks? Anti-Abortion: For rape victims in the first trimester? Are we talking about the morning after pill or are we talking about partial birth abortions after 8 months. What about sextuplets and a risk to the other kids? Death Penalty? For a child murdering serial killer with a penchant for buggery and a trail of DNA evidence or a juvenile who's the getaway driver in a liqour store raid gone bad?
  4. Wrong. Presenting a anthropological conceit as fact will not win the argument. Our behaviors can be seen as evolved traits. Several primates wage war (as do some insect colonies). As for waging war on other species, that's not what happened here but some animals have evolved to eliminate the competition.
  5. I think you've watched too many Disney movies. Where do you think many of our baser Human behaviors evolved from? I've seen animals take revenge on other species or attack them out of spite or frustration.
  6. Is he any relation to Flipper? Or Herman Munster? Blues, Dave This is where your judgement is unfortunately clouded. There were many names called, but I'm specifically referring to seriously intended accusations of stupidity. Calling a candidate flipper because he flips on policy or mocking his appearance because he's vain enough to get Botox injections (or some other procedure that radically altered his face) is not even in the same league as repeatedly calling Bush stupid for 4 years, let alone calling everyone who voted for him dumb. Trust me on this guys, calling half the electorate stupid ain't gonna work for you, even if you're displeased that they called your cartwheeling candidate a flip-flopper. At some point the facts play a role and people don't like being insulted because they didn't do what you wanted them to do. Calling over half the voters stupid is just amazing, they wouldn't elect the guy who took both sides of every issue and griped constantly about how bad things were and you call them dumb because you hate Bush and believe Moore's propaganda. Great job, hearts & minds, hearts & minds!
  7. Raping it's resources? Like Oil? Yea we really raped the oil, it was happy sitting there under miles of dirt minding it's own business. Man *IS* part of nature. Our actions form part of the existence of Earth and IMHO the richest part in many ways. Life in the Solar system is much more brutal than man. The Earth has been "raped" several times by cometary collisions that cause massive extinctions of most species and ecosystems. That's OK by you because the comet has no brain. We do, so maybe if we're smart we can do something about the next collision, and even avoid the otherwise inevitable extinction of all life on our world with the death of the Sun & geothermal activity. I'm not saying a world is entirely pointless without intelligent life, but is a petri dish of bacteria pointless before it's sterilized. I'm sure the bacteria have a great time but... well ... It's not that the Earth would be pointless without us, it would be vastly diminished. You're too busy fretting over some cruel details (that happen a millionfold in nature if truth be told) and completely miss how enriching a conscious intelligent presence is on our planet. It's an indulgent position I find as contemtible and disappointing as many other unfortunate human traits. Man is an animal in part, driven by instincts and baser motives, it's in part our legacy of being like the animals you adore that drives some of what you despise. Not that I really like to draw a distinction between different aspects of what a human is.
  8. Don't even try to claim that's partisan. There are also the constant cries of "liberal idiots" coming from the right. That's kind of like "reaching out to those who share your goals." That's not really reaching out, now is it? It's called winning an election. Your comment is a complete non sequitur but let's run with it. I don't recall anyone mentioning reaching out when Clinton won, but for the record Bush has tried this IMHO with folks like Ted Kennedy on education. He may do it again but his policies have been so mischaracterized and slandered there's not much common ground left. One thing's for sure, there's no reaching out to many of the left because they believe the Moore propaganda that's demonstrably false. That's what I mean by radicalizing your base. As for name calling, I do see it as partisan, it's palpable I've seen & heard the constant accusations from folks on the left that Bush is an idiot (despite strong evidence to the contrary), and nothing similar about Kerry from anyone. Now I'm hearing it about anyone who voted for Bush, I don't recall hearing anyone in the mainstream characterize the entire electorate on the left as stupid. What I do see is the "elites" label applied to the left from the right. A response no doubt to accusations of stupidity and bigotry. There is a sense on the right that folks on the left see themselves as intellectually superior and I think it is more than merely perception by the right, if you were honest you'd admit that. It's why we have a lot of this distain for this "dumb Bush cowboy". You pretending it's the same on both sides of the aisle doesn't change the reality.
  9. The world would be a much less interesting place and would IMHO be a bit pointless. I hope that if we do ever find another planet with sophisticated life that it is inhabited by intelligent creatures on par with Humans (or better). If it was just a biological zoo floating around in space until its star died that would be a disappointment. The Earth is enriched by our presence and appreciation of it's majesty as is the universe. Our conscious appreciation of these abstract things is the pinnacle of emergent properties in a stunningly complex and seemingly improbable yet possibly inevitable series of such things.
  10. Have no fear, the Dems ain't listening. Their conclusions on the reasons are boiling down to: 1) Bush supporters are just soooo stupid. 2) Bush supporters are a bunch of bigoted homophobes. You have absolutely nothing to worry about, the Democratic introspection has much more to do with self gratification than winning any election by drawing useful conclusions.
  11. This is a certainty if their continued response to their loss is to call the folks who voted for Bush stupid. Something I keep hearing. I mean they used to limit the name calling to the candidate (and Bush while inarticulate is no dummy), when you start calling the electorate stupid you've wandered off the reservation. You don't change someone's mind by derriding them, you just isolate yourself. The party still doesn't get why they lost and are playing up the values thing because it fits their view of the 'idiots' who voted for Bush. They believe their own hype saying Bush F*cked up the economy, the war in Iraq is a disaster etc. Many who voted for Bush interpret the facts differently and so just don't agree on the substance. Blaming a single issue is as usual an over simplification. Radicalizing your base might have felt good in the short term but after a while the only folks listening to the sermon are in the chior.
  12. Rubbish. Are you much worse than an animal because you're outraged by this? Is anyone on this board? Man is capable of many things, from wanton cruelty to irrational indulgent self loathing. We all have the capacity for this inside but many of us choose to live and act and think well. To take an isolated incident of the most horrible abhorrent kind of behavior and use that to tar us all as a species in support of your agenda when most of us are repulsed by this doesn't even approach rational thought.
  13. Goes far beyond just election night. I'm referring only to the Monty Pythonesque nature of the situation, specifically; this Parrot is dead, not pinin' for the Fjords.
  14. Last report I saw Arafat was brain dead but on life support. Reminds me of the Kerry campaign on election night. Funniest thing I read was that the old crook may have taken the numbers to the Swiss bank accounts to his grave. That's another donation to the Swiss banker retirement fund. Apparently he wouldn't divulge the numbers even as he was getting on the helo to Jordan saying "I'm still alive, thank God, so don't worry". Farewell and rest in hell Arafat.
  15. Another US debate where the lines are drawn between the two extremes. How about some intelligent public discourse of where when what circumstances. Why is this debate framed between morons who want to rights for zygotes and idiots who want to be able to deliver a kid no matter how late & slit it's throat on the way out? Rape, deformities, child molestation and any number of additional factors play a role in my judgement here as it probably would for most Americans if they weren't constantly assaulted by meaningless buzzwords like pro-life and pro-choice. You can barely tell what you're advocating choosing either position here because each camp has it's share of nut jobs. Only a fool would jump into either bed considering the company. Accusations and scaremongering around this issue are also misplaced. Bush has done one thing, ban partial birth abortion, and that's been overturned by the judiciary. Maybe it wouldn't be in future but that doesn't mean it would be open season on the law. This gets to the heart of the problem. Here's a concept, how about we elect a bunch of people who get to make the decision instead of this ridiculous system where we try to filter judicial nominees (who time their retirements) based of how we think they'd interpret a 400 year old document that wasn't even written with a vague incling of the rights (or lack) of the unborn. I can think of few less democratic systems. Judicial checks is a useful thing, making it up as you go along is quite another. Next time you think you're having an intelligent discussion just remember the context of your looney positions and the contrived constitutional/judicial setup in a supposedly democratic republic.
  16. This for me highlights the silliness of rules interpreted too literally vs common sense. Folks should worry much more over how gear has been stored and handled, it makes an infinite difference by comparrison to one day of difference in repack time. Doesn't help when you're trying to get permission to jump a rig I realize.
  17. OK, who's in and who's out? Whuffos to the end of the line.
  18. The interesting thing here is that most relatively liberal societies in Europe that the left tends to aspire to (w.r.t. cultural evolution) still recognize that Marriage by definition is a traditional institution between a Man and a Woman, even where they have equivalent rights. They don't have the kneejerk accusations of homophobia against anyone who happens to hold this point of view, heck some gays hold this point of view. In the USA the debate has been compeltely skewed to be either full blown marriage activists supporters vs bible thumping homophobes and that's just not where the lines of division are drawn up. There's only one state AFAIK that has banned any equivalent legal rights the rest have banned gay "marriage". That paints a very different picture. I don't think the country needs to evolve, the people who are advocating change need to practice the art of persuasion instead of using activists to bushwack everyone else.
  19. What has that got to do with the many people for whom the issue of redefining marriage has nothing to do with religion? As for ramming it down the throat of the populace, this started with you lamenting the decision of the populace in ten states. You know all those inconvenient "unpatriotic" voters you were bitching about earlier. Back to the subject at hand, CBS is really holding out desperately now, you can see them willing a protracted legal battle into view. Looks like Kerry won't concede and Bush may make an acceptance speech before the Kerry concession. Edwards is vowing to 'fight for every vote', as if it's a noble calling, sigh. New Mexico seems to be the only genuinely close state with a few thousand in it rather than tens or hundreds of thousands of votes at the current count and it could go anywhere. Ohio has almost 100% of the precincts counted and there's about 145,000 votes in it, about a 3% spread. Don't see how you can interpret that into anything but a win for Bush even with intangibles like provisionals etc, but they still won't call it. Getting clear they're holding out in anticipation of shenanigans.
  20. I'm not at all affraid of my opinion, I'm posting it. Deal with the arguments instead of name calling. Try reading George Orwell's "1984" with your own mind open if you're interested in more than merely name calling around the issues of PC. What you have done in trying to redefine marriage and calling people who don't agree with you unpatriotic is *profoundly* Orwellian as you'll see if you read that book. Fortunately we have the ballot box instead of a boot stomping on a face. You don't like the result this time around but you could try to graduate to persuasion instead of name calling and in the long term you may change minds and win the debate.
  21. I agree one is too many, but look what led us here. That is one too many. Having the opinion and expressing it is a given right in this country and I support their right to have a disenting point of view. However. Force feeding their sense of morality, religion, and pious rhetoric so someone is denied a right the rest of the country has? Just so they can feel comfortable? That is disgusting. The seperation of Church/State is not there to protect the church; it is there to protect the State from that influence. I don't care what anyone's definition of marriage is. It doesn't matter. Marriage is a privledge that can now be decided upon by the state? Hey, while we are at it, lets set up a license for people to have kids - there are a few people I know that should never spawn. It's simple. Any excuse against gay marriage is exactly like the people that came up with excuses on why we should have slaves. That is how terrible that ignorance is. No it's not, there's irrefutable data on reproduction and serious concerns on issues like child adoption, and the redefinition of language for the sake of political correctness and false affirmation. Equating this to slavery is sleazy and contemtible.
  22. You're confused, all Americans have equal rights to marriage now.
  23. P.S. OK, they *finally* called it. The returns haven't changed but the analysts have caught up. Stick a fork in Kerry, he's done. Time to tune in to CBS and watch Rather weep.
  24. Another reason it's a great day is because 9 states have banned gay marraige. Thank fucking God. You enjoy having something on the books that denies a right to Americans? So much for equal rights in this country. Very unpatriotic. Very Disappointing. Disgusting. Only one state AFAIK has voted for legislation that would prevent equal equivalent legal rights w.r.t. civil unions, the other states ban "Marriage". Calling people who have reasoned objections to your views unpatriotic is just bizarre, and disgusting. I'm a supporter of equal rights for gays, but I also know what marriage is. For me it's a fundamental definition. This debate has been intentionally polarized by the left and the right and this is the result. How about this for a definition of unpatriotic: "Divisively polarizing an issue with the intention of splitting the country where before there had been steady progress towards a common ground." The quiet progressive moves towards tollerance and legally recognized civil unions just wasn't enough for politically motivated partisans in this so they let the wrecking balls fly for a few more votes (they hoped). Someone please tell me why they won't call Florida with 98% of returns in and a 5% spread for Bush? And please no B.S. about absentee ballots any fool can see that's a non issue at this stage.