[Vision2020] [Bulk] Re: Curious

[joekc at roadrunner.com]

Paul,

Thanks for your thoughtful comments. Just a few points.

I agree that military service is a plus and for that and other reasons McCain is a formidable 
candidate. If it were McCain running against Kerry instead of Bush I might have voted Republican. 
At that time I liked him a lot. But for all of his military experience he still refuses to admit that 
Iraq was a huge mistake. Fine that we can't pull out right away. But we shouldn't have gone in 
there in the first place and he should have the courage and knowledge to admit that. By not doing 
so, and by selecting a candidate to please the right-wing fundamentalists, he has wrecked his 
independent, maverick reputation and shown himself to be just another politician trying to do 
whatever it takes to get elected. I can't vote for him.

I liked Palin as well as McCain up until about half way through her speech at the Republican 
Convention. Then the attacks came and since she spent a lot of time making offensive comments 
directed at people like me, it should not be too surprising that I was offended. But that is not why 
I won't vote for her. I just can't get around the fact that we're supposed to praise her daughter for
making the right choice yet if we elect her, she will work hard to take that choice away from 
others. Suppose, for instance, that her daughter was trying to choose between killing her next door neighbor or not. If she decided not to kill her next door neighbor, we certainly wouldn't praise her for making the right decision. Ergo, whatever your views on the subject are, abortion simply is not the same thing as killing an adult person. It just isn't morally the same.

Second, if you believe, as Palin does, that it is murder, why on earth would you give your daughter 
the choice? You wouldn't. If Palin is honest about her convictions, she wouldn't have given her 
daughter the choice and thus the daughter is not deserving of praise, for she had no choice about 
the matter. Any way you cut it, the whole thing sickens me. Here is a genuine moral dilemma 
which Palin oversimplifies, again, for political gain. That is not leadership.

I still think that our disagreement about trolls is a generational thing. But I respect your opinion!

--
Joe Campbell

---- Paul Rumelhart <godshatter at yahoo.com> wrote: 
> I should have been more clear.  When I said "Ok, with most of those I 
> can see your point", I was referring to the other bills that were 
> mentioned.  For example, "celebrating the life of Bishop Gilbert Earl
> Patterson".  Nothing wrong with that, I think it's a good thing, but if 
> you're looking for a list of "meaningful" bills according to his logic, 
> then it falls short.
> 
> As for prior military service, I don't think that it should be a 
> prerequisite for being President.  The military is a calling for a 
> dedicated few, not something I believe that everyone should have to 
> participate in (unless in time of real war - I'm talking invasion, not 
> declaring war on an abstract concept).  However, the President is the 
> Commander in Chief, so military service is a definite plus.  I'm not a 
> McCain fan by any stretch of the imagination, but I do give him credit 
> for his time spent in active service.  My political views don't often 
> align with active military members, which I discovered while I was in 
> the military, but I do respect them for their idealism and their bravery.
> 
> My fondness for a talented troll is something I've learned on various 
> forums on the Internet.  It takes great skill to craft a message 
> designed to enrage you without revealing what they are actually doing.  
> If he really is a troll, then he might even be a Democrat.  He's just 
> working hard to craft messages that provoke people like myself into just 
> having to respond.
> 
> I don't think that Governor Palin was a good choice for Vice President, 
> and I would not like to see her in the Oval Office.  She has just the 
> wrong amount of far-right fundamentalism (i.e. greater than zero) for me 
> to want her anywhere near being in charge.
> 
> Paul
> 
> joekc at roadrunner.com wrote:
> > Paul,
> >
> > Do you think it is relevant that Obama didn't serve in the military? I mean, what wars were going 
> > on when he was 18? What did he miss? And I don't get how pointing out that Obama is equally 
> > unqualified (more or less) as Palin to be President isn't just explicitly noting what a bad choice it is 
> > that McCain made (given especially how old he is and that Palin would be a heart beat away). In 
> > this short run this "strategy" might work but how stupid do we think Americans are?
> >
> > Also, I guess that your appreciation for trolls must be a generational thing. I don't like them at
> > all. I mean, what weight does the "criticism" of not serving in the military count coming from 
> > someone who we know exactly nothing about. For all we know Schwaller is a draft dodger. If you 
> > can't put your own name next to something, a post is worthless as far as I see it. As you would 
> > note, a good argument is a good argument but testimonials about the relative importance of the 
> > accomplishments of candidates strike me as worthless without a real name to back them up. What 
> > are Schwaller's accomplishments? We'll never know, will we!
> >
> > --
> > Joe Campbell
> >
> > ---- Paul Rumelhart <godshatter at yahoo.com> wrote: 
> >   
> >> Ok, with most of those I can see your point.  But in today's world of 
> >> high oil prices, dependence upon foreign oil, and the possible threat of 
> >> global warming, why would you consider "a bill to increase the fuel 
> >> economy standards of passenger cars" not to be meaningful legislation?  
> >> What about the bill classifying children's products containing lead to 
> >> be banned as hazardous substances?  Couldn't that somehow be considered 
> >> meaningful?  You know, if you're one of those weirdos that likes kids to 
> >> be healthy or something?
> >>
> >> I don't think that God is "punishing" us for GW Bush.  I think GW Bush 
> >> is punishing us for our stupidity and our gullibility these last eight 
> >> years.
> >>
> >> Paul
> >>
> >> P.S.  Part of me suspects you're actually an accomplished troll.  If so, 
> >> my hat's off to you - a job well done.
> >>
> >>
> >> Glenn Schwaller wrote:
> >>     
> >>> Well shoot, considering the amount of time he's served in the Senate 
> >>> (work days - less than half a year), amount of time served in the 
> >>> military (zero), the amount of *meaningful* legislation he has 
> >>> sponsored (I will NOT count resolutions "designating "National Summer 
> >>> Learning Day", "supporting the goals and ideals of Sickle Cell Disease 
> >>> Awareness Month", "celebrating the life of Bishop Gilbert Earl 
> >>> Patterson", a bill to establish a VA Hospital report card, a bill to 
> >>> increase the fuel economy standards of passenger cars, A bill to 
> >>> direct the Consumer Product Safety Commission to classify certain 
> >>> children's products containing lead to be banned hazardous substances 
> >>> etc etc etc - so Zero meaningful legislation), and the fact he 
> >>> couldn't get the security clearance needed to provide protection for 
> >>> himself, it looks to me like any one of the Republican women listed 
> >>> are better qualified than Obama.
> >>>
> >>> And God is "punishing" us for GW Bush?  Are you $%&#@ serious?!?!!?
> >>>
> >>> GS
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>       
> >> =======================================================
> >>  List services made available by First Step Internet, 
> >>  serving the communities of the Palouse since 1994.   
> >>                http://www.fsr.net                       
> >>           mailto:Vision2020 at moscow.com
> >> =======================================================
> >>     
> >
> >
> >   
> 
>