Democrats, is this all you have? - Page 3

daredelvis · 20th February 2007, 08:40 AM

Originally Posted by pipelineaudio

Just so Im clear, "drugs" is one thing

but

coke requires a brain so malformed to do it is without excuse or pardon

Sorry if thats harsh to you cokeheads, but there is a point where something can be so stupid it really doesnt matter WHEN you did it.

The only difference between being stupid enough to do coke and stupid enough to lay down on the freeway, is that the cokehead is a lot more likely to still be alive

How old are you? I ask because attitudes and understanding about coke has changed dramatically over the last 30 years. I had a COP tell us in the late 70's during a drug education lecture that coke was absolutely not addictive. Are you sure you are not applying post 90's attitudes / understanding to an event that happened in the early 70's. Does that change your opinion?

To me it is like the person that thinks the world is only 6,000 years old. If they held that position prior to about 1900 it has no effect on my opinion of them, if they currently believe that they are a stone cold moron.

Daredelvis

Upchurch · 20th February 2007, 08:52 AM

Originally Posted by Azure

I like Obama too.

But I would like to know where he stands on most issues.

In brief

There are a couple of issues there I'm iffy on, but no one is going to be a perfect match.

Vorticity · 20th February 2007, 03:18 PM

It does surprise me how little mention Bill Richardson gets in these lists. He has a number of points going for him:

He probably has the best resume of anyone to declare so far:

15 years in the US House of representatives
US Ambassador to the UN
Secretary of Energy
Governor of New Mexico

Also, he's the only Hispanic to enter thus far, and I've been told this is a political advantage right now. Apparently polls show that he has some cross-party appeal, as well. Even Libertarians like him (compared to other Democrats, at least).

The Atheist · 21st February 2007, 02:28 AM

Originally Posted by Luke T.

Experience? And what experience is that?

ETA: I predict the word "experience" will not appear in any Obama campaign slogan.

Human rights and values, I guess - someone who's been at the coal-face of where action is most needed. Face it, USA will have a christian president next year, no matter what. Better to have one like Obama than one like Dubbya.

luchog · 21st February 2007, 03:08 PM

Originally Posted by Dr Adequate

You have sex with Republicans?

Ewww.

Of course, Democrats are too busy apologizing for everything to ever get around to actually having sex.

Libertarians, on the other hand are pretty hot in bed, and generally don't come with all the extraneous baggage. Although the extensive contractual negotiations required beforehand can tend to kill the mood (unless you're a lawyer, in which case it's considered foreplay).

pipelineaudio · 21st February 2007, 03:12 PM

Originally Posted by daredelvis

How old are you? I ask because attitudes and understanding about coke has changed dramatically over the last 30 years. I had a COP tell us in the late 70's during a drug education lecture that coke was absolutely not addictive. Are you sure you are not applying post 90's attitudes / understanding to an event that happened in the early 70's. Does that change your opinion?

Daredelvis

Im making the mistake of applying real world experience to my thinking. Without exception, every coke head I know is busily wrecking the lives of everyone around them. I enjoy their money so I give a bit of tolerance. Would I want someone like that in charge of my country? Hell no!

pipelineaudio · 21st February 2007, 03:17 PM

Originally Posted by Silly Green Monkey

I read through the thread waiting to see if pipelineaudio would give more information about Kerry's speech that 'lost him Arizona'. Suppose I should have known better.

no I made it up, Kerry never spoke in arizona

no really

Darth Rotor · 21st February 2007, 03:18 PM

Originally Posted by Mephisto

an ex-POW who supports torture?

Meph, this is weird:

Why are you slandering Senator McCain?

What is your evidence that he supports torture? In the past two years year I have read three different articles forwarded to Post and Times, etc, written by him (perhaps by his staff and him) wherein he explicitly challenges Rummy, Cheney, and other Executive Branchers on torture, to the tune of torture being bad, not a sound policy.

Why do you think he supports torture?

ETA: Hmmm, seems my files of articles are on another PC. May not be able to access them today.
From Sourcewatch

Quote:

Congressional torture ban

Senator McCain, as a former POW, is particularly sensitive to the issue of detention and interrogation of detainees from the War on Terror. On October 3, 2005, Senator McCain introduced the McCain Detainee Amendment to the Defense Appropriations bill for 2005. On October 5, 2005, the United States Senate voted 90-9 to support the amendment. [18]

This amendment would establish the US Army Field Manual on Interrogation as the standard for interrogation of all detainees held in Department of Defense custody, including those held by the Central Intelligence Agency. The amendment would prohibit cruel, inhumane, and degrading treatment and follow sections of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights.

The Amendment was initially opposed by the Bush administration, particularly Vice-President Dick Cheney. Before the vote supporting the amendment, the White House threatened to veto any language limiting the use of torture on suspected terrorists. However, due to the size of the majority voting in favor, this was not an option. The White House then sought alternative language which would exempt CIA operatives from the torture ban. The Senate refused the compromise.

On December 15, President Bush announced that he accepted McCain's terms and will "make it clear to the world that this government does not torture and that we adhere to the international convention of torture, whether it be here at home or abroad."[19] Nevertheless, President Bush can interpret the law "in a manner consistent with his own constitutional authority." In his signing statement, or interpretation of the law, President Bush reserves what he interprets to be his constitutional right to torture in order to avoid further terrorist attacks. [20]

From his article on 'The Terrible Toll of Torture"

Our commitment to basic humanitarian values affects—in part—the willingness of other nations to do the same. Mistreatment of enemy prisoners endangers our own troops who might someday be held captive. While some enemies, and Al Qaeda surely, will never be bound by the principle of reciprocity, we should have concern for those Americans captured by more traditional enemies, if not in this war then in the next. Until about 1970, North Vietnam ignored its obligations not to mistreat the Americans they held prisoner, claiming that we were engaged in an unlawful war against them and thus not entitled to the protections of the Geneva Conventions. But when their abuses became widely known and incited unfavorable international attention, they substantially decreased their mistreatment of us. Again, Al Qaeda will never be influenced by international sensibilities or open to moral suasion. If ever the term "sociopath" applied to anyone, it applies to them. But I doubt they will be the last enemy America will fight, and we should not undermine today our defense of international prohibitions against torture and inhumane treatment of prisoners of war that we will need to rely on in the future

DR

luchog · 21st February 2007, 03:28 PM

Originally Posted by pipelineaudio

Just so Im clear, "drugs" is one thing

but

coke requires a brain so malformed to do it is without excuse or pardon

Complete crap and pure prejudice. Cocaine has a lower physical dependence profile, and is far less damaging in the long term than, say, heroin or methamphetamine; nor does it affect behaviour to quite the same degree. As far as behavioural modification, it's on the low end of the "hard drug" spectrum, roughly equivalent to, say, alcohol or MDMA.

The only thing that sets cocaine apart from other "hard" recreational drugs is its unique political characteristics, due entirely to an accident of geography and botanical biology.

steverino · 21st February 2007, 03:34 PM

Originally Posted by luchog

Of course, Democrats are too busy apologizing for everything to ever get around to actually having sex.

Also worth doing are uptight Catholic girls, many of whom are repressed Republicans and have daddy issues. Just don't knock them up.*

*Every Sperm is Sacred (Eric Idle)

Darth Rotor · 21st February 2007, 03:41 PM

Originally Posted by luchog

Of course, Democrats are too busy apologizing for everything to ever get around to actually having sex.

*WJ Clinton voice*

Quote:

Libertarians, on the other hand are pretty hot in bed, and generally don't come with all the extraneous baggage. Although the extensive contractual negotiations required beforehand can tend to kill the mood (unless you're a lawyer, in which case it's considered foreplay).

Isn't foreplay where the you sit on the bed and tell her how good it is going to be, since the free market empowered her to make the choice for your superior goods and servicing? Uh, sorry, goods and services . . . oh never mind!

DR

pipelineaudio · 21st February 2007, 05:23 PM

Originally Posted by luchog

roughly equivalent to, say, alcohol or MDMA.

are you on coke?

Kaylee · 22nd February 2007, 08:22 AM

Originally Posted by Vorticity

It does surprise me how little mention Bill Richardson gets in these lists. He has a number of points going for him:

He probably has the best resume of anyone to declare so far:

15 years in the US House of representatives
US Ambassador to the UN
Secretary of Energy
Governor of New Mexico

Also, he's the only Hispanic to enter thus far, and I've been told this is a political advantage right now. Apparently polls show that he has some cross-party appeal, as well. Even Libertarians like him (compared to other Democrats, at least).

I thought he did well at the Carson City, NV Forum yesterday.

Anyone know if there is a transcript available for that on the web?

Merko · 27th February 2007, 05:17 PM

Originally Posted by Darth Rotor

Meph, this is weird:

Why are you slandering Senator McCain?

What is your evidence that he supports torture?

Maybe he's referring to how McCain more or less folded in his attempt on the so-called 'torture ban'. Though I have no political reason to support McCain, I don't think this is accurate. Even though he may be a very convinced opponent of torture, there might still come a point where he'd allow himself to be pragmatic. And in a sense the no-ban was still an partial win for McCain, I think it is better to leave it as a gray area, which I think is what happened, than to explicitely allow torture, which was also clearly on the table.

20th February 2007, 08:52 AM	#82
Upchurch Papa Funkosophy Join Date: May 2002 Location: St. Louis, MO Posts: 32,468	Originally Posted by Azure I like Obama too. But I would like to know where he stands on most issues. In brief There are a couple of issues there I'm iffy on, but no one is going to be a perfect match.
	__________________ "There is nothing more deceptive than an obvious fact." -- Sherlock Holmes. "It’s easier to fool people than to convince them that they have been fooled." -- Mark Twain, maybe.

21st February 2007, 02:28 AM	#84
The Atheist The Grammar Tyrant Join Date: Jul 2006 Posts: 28,630	Originally Posted by Luke T. Experience? And what experience is that? ETA: I predict the word "experience" will not appear in any Obama campaign slogan. Human rights and values, I guess - someone who's been at the coal-face of where action is most needed. Face it, USA will have a christian president next year, no matter what. Better to have one like Obama than one like Dubbya.
	__________________ The point of equilibrium has passed; satire and current events are now indistinguishable.

21st February 2007, 03:08 PM	#85
luchog Neo-Post-Retro-Revivalist Join Date: Aug 2005 Location: The Emerald City Posts: 16,201	Originally Posted by Dr Adequate You have sex with Republicans? Ewww. Of course, Democrats are too busy apologizing for everything to ever get around to actually having sex. Libertarians, on the other hand are pretty hot in bed, and generally don't come with all the extraneous baggage. Although the extensive contractual negotiations required beforehand can tend to kill the mood (unless you're a lawyer, in which case it's considered foreplay).
	__________________ When you say that fascists should only be defeated through debate, what you're really saying is that the marginalized and vulnerable should have to endlessly argue for their right to exist; and at no point should they ever be fully accepted, and the debate considered won.

21st February 2007, 03:12 PM	#86
pipelineaudio Illuminator Join Date: Feb 2006 Posts: 4,863	Originally Posted by daredelvis How old are you? I ask because attitudes and understanding about coke has changed dramatically over the last 30 years. I had a COP tell us in the late 70's during a drug education lecture that coke was absolutely not addictive. Are you sure you are not applying post 90's attitudes / understanding to an event that happened in the early 70's. Does that change your opinion? Daredelvis Im making the mistake of applying real world experience to my thinking. Without exception, every coke head I know is busily wrecking the lives of everyone around them. I enjoy their money so I give a bit of tolerance. Would I want someone like that in charge of my country? Hell no!
	__________________ Don't fear the REAPER, embrace it

21st February 2007, 03:17 PM	#87
pipelineaudio Illuminator Join Date: Feb 2006 Posts: 4,863	Originally Posted by Silly Green Monkey I read through the thread waiting to see if pipelineaudio would give more information about Kerry's speech that 'lost him Arizona'. Suppose I should have known better. no I made it up, Kerry never spoke in arizona no really
	__________________ Don't fear the REAPER, embrace it

20th February 2007, 08:40 AM	#81
daredelvis Master Poster Join Date: Oct 2002 Posts: 2,217	Originally Posted by pipelineaudio Just so Im clear, "drugs" is one thing but coke requires a brain so malformed to do it is without excuse or pardon Sorry if thats harsh to you cokeheads, but there is a point where something can be so stupid it really doesnt matter WHEN you did it. The only difference between being stupid enough to do coke and stupid enough to lay down on the freeway, is that the cokehead is a lot more likely to still be alive How old are you? I ask because attitudes and understanding about coke has changed dramatically over the last 30 years. I had a COP tell us in the late 70's during a drug education lecture that coke was absolutely not addictive. Are you sure you are not applying post 90's attitudes / understanding to an event that happened in the early 70's. Does that change your opinion? To me it is like the person that thinks the world is only 6,000 years old. If they held that position prior to about 1900 it has no effect on my opinion of them, if they currently believe that they are a stone cold moron. Daredelvis

20th February 2007, 03:18 PM	#83
Vorticity Fluid Mechanic Join Date: Apr 2002 Posts: 2,681	It does surprise me how little mention Bill Richardson gets in these lists. He has a number of points going for him: He probably has the best resume of anyone to declare so far: 15 years in the US House of representatives US Ambassador to the UN Secretary of Energy Governor of New Mexico Also, he's the only Hispanic to enter thus far, and I've been told this is a political advantage right now. Apparently polls show that he has some cross-party appeal, as well. Even Libertarians like him (compared to other Democrats, at least).

21st February 2007, 03:18 PM	#88
Darth Rotor Salted Sith Cynic Join Date: Aug 2006 Posts: 38,527	Originally Posted by Mephisto an ex-POW who supports torture? Meph, this is weird: Why are you slandering Senator McCain? What is your evidence that he supports torture? In the past two years year I have read three different articles forwarded to Post and Times, etc, written by him (perhaps by his staff and him) wherein he explicitly challenges Rummy, Cheney, and other Executive Branchers on torture, to the tune of torture being bad, not a sound policy. Why do you think he supports torture? ETA: Hmmm, seems my files of articles are on another PC. May not be able to access them today. From Sourcewatch Quote: Congressional torture ban Senator McCain, as a former POW, is particularly sensitive to the issue of detention and interrogation of detainees from the War on Terror. On October 3, 2005, Senator McCain introduced the McCain Detainee Amendment to the Defense Appropriations bill for 2005. On October 5, 2005, the United States Senate voted 90-9 to support the amendment. [18] This amendment would establish the US Army Field Manual on Interrogation as the standard for interrogation of all detainees held in Department of Defense custody, including those held by the Central Intelligence Agency. The amendment would prohibit cruel, inhumane, and degrading treatment and follow sections of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. The Amendment was initially opposed by the Bush administration, particularly Vice-President Dick Cheney. Before the vote supporting the amendment, the White House threatened to veto any language limiting the use of torture on suspected terrorists. However, due to the size of the majority voting in favor, this was not an option. The White House then sought alternative language which would exempt CIA operatives from the torture ban. The Senate refused the compromise. On December 15, President Bush announced that he accepted McCain's terms and will "make it clear to the world that this government does not torture and that we adhere to the international convention of torture, whether it be here at home or abroad."[19] Nevertheless, President Bush can interpret the law "in a manner consistent with his own constitutional authority." In his signing statement, or interpretation of the law, President Bush reserves what he interprets to be his constitutional right to torture in order to avoid further terrorist attacks. [20] From his article on 'The Terrible Toll of Torture" Our commitment to basic humanitarian values affects—in part—the willingness of other nations to do the same. Mistreatment of enemy prisoners endangers our own troops who might someday be held captive. While some enemies, and Al Qaeda surely, will never be bound by the principle of reciprocity, we should have concern for those Americans captured by more traditional enemies, if not in this war then in the next. Until about 1970, North Vietnam ignored its obligations not to mistreat the Americans they held prisoner, claiming that we were engaged in an unlawful war against them and thus not entitled to the protections of the Geneva Conventions. But when their abuses became widely known and incited unfavorable international attention, they substantially decreased their mistreatment of us. Again, Al Qaeda will never be influenced by international sensibilities or open to moral suasion. If ever the term "sociopath" applied to anyone, it applies to them. But I doubt they will be the last enemy America will fight, and we should not undermine today our defense of international prohibitions against torture and inhumane treatment of prisoners of war that we will need to rely on in the future DR
	__________________ Helicopters don't so much fly as beat the air into submission. "Jesus wept, but did He laugh?"--F.H. Buckley____"There is one thing that was too great for God to show us when He walked upon our earth ... His mirth." --Chesterton__"If the barbarian in us is excised, so is our humanity."--D'rok__ "I only use my gun whenever kindness fails."-- Robert Earl Keen__"Sturgeon spares none.". -- The Marquis Last edited by Darth Rotor; 21st February 2007 at 03:25 PM.

21st February 2007, 03:28 PM	#89
luchog Neo-Post-Retro-Revivalist Join Date: Aug 2005 Location: The Emerald City Posts: 16,201	Originally Posted by pipelineaudio Just so Im clear, "drugs" is one thing but coke requires a brain so malformed to do it is without excuse or pardon Complete crap and pure prejudice. Cocaine has a lower physical dependence profile, and is far less damaging in the long term than, say, heroin or methamphetamine; nor does it affect behaviour to quite the same degree. As far as behavioural modification, it's on the low end of the "hard drug" spectrum, roughly equivalent to, say, alcohol or MDMA. The only thing that sets cocaine apart from other "hard" recreational drugs is its unique political characteristics, due entirely to an accident of geography and botanical biology.
	__________________ When you say that fascists should only be defeated through debate, what you're really saying is that the marginalized and vulnerable should have to endlessly argue for their right to exist; and at no point should they ever be fully accepted, and the debate considered won.

21st February 2007, 03:34 PM	#90
steverino Illuminator Join Date: Jul 2006 Posts: 3,686	Originally Posted by luchog Of course, Democrats are too busy apologizing for everything to ever get around to actually having sex. Also worth doing are uptight Catholic girls, many of whom are repressed Republicans and have daddy issues. Just don't knock them up.* *Every Sperm is Sacred (Eric Idle)
steverino Illuminator Join Date: Jul 2006 Posts: 3,686	__________________ "Ferchrissakes I am not Jewish..."- Darth Rotor "Well, my nipples are pink. I've never looked at my own butt-hole, but I hope it's pink too." Mycroft "In the military, a gay man might see a wiener, and we all know that when a gay man sees a wiener, he goes into an uncontrollable frenzy of lust."- Marquis de Carabas

21st February 2007, 03:41 PM	#91
Darth Rotor Salted Sith Cynic Join Date: Aug 2006 Posts: 38,527	Originally Posted by luchog Of course, Democrats are too busy apologizing for everything to ever get around to actually having sex. WJ Clinton voice I am sorry Hillary, I was so drained by Monica that I can't service you tonight. Honey, what is that lamp doing in your hand? Quote: Libertarians, on the other hand are pretty hot in bed, and generally don't come with all the extraneous baggage. Although the extensive contractual negotiations required beforehand can tend to kill the mood (unless you're a lawyer, in which case it's considered foreplay). Isn't foreplay where the you sit on the bed and tell her how good it is going to be, since the free market empowered her to make the choice for your superior goods and servicing? Uh, sorry, goods and services . . . oh never mind! DR
	__________________ Helicopters don't so much fly as beat the air into submission. "Jesus wept, but did He laugh?"--F.H. Buckley____"There is one thing that was too great for God to show us when He walked upon our earth ... His mirth." --Chesterton__"If the barbarian in us is excised, so is our humanity."--D'rok__ "I only use my gun whenever kindness fails."-- Robert Earl Keen__"Sturgeon spares none.". -- The Marquis

21st February 2007, 05:23 PM	#92
pipelineaudio Illuminator Join Date: Feb 2006 Posts: 4,863	Originally Posted by luchog roughly equivalent to, say, alcohol or MDMA. are you on coke?
	__________________ Don't fear the REAPER, embrace it

22nd February 2007, 08:22 AM	#93
Kaylee Illuminator Join Date: Feb 2005 Posts: 4,254	Originally Posted by Vorticity It does surprise me how little mention Bill Richardson gets in these lists. He has a number of points going for him: He probably has the best resume of anyone to declare so far: 15 years in the US House of representatives US Ambassador to the UN Secretary of Energy Governor of New Mexico Also, he's the only Hispanic to enter thus far, and I've been told this is a political advantage right now. Apparently polls show that he has some cross-party appeal, as well. Even Libertarians like him (compared to other Democrats, at least). I thought he did well at the Carson City, NV Forum yesterday. Anyone know if there is a transcript available for that on the web?
Kaylee Illuminator Join Date: Feb 2005 Posts: 4,254

27th February 2007, 05:17 PM	#94
Merko Graduate Poster Join Date: Nov 2006 Posts: 1,899	Originally Posted by Darth Rotor Meph, this is weird: Why are you slandering Senator McCain? What is your evidence that he supports torture? Maybe he's referring to how McCain more or less folded in his attempt on the so-called 'torture ban'. Though I have no political reason to support McCain, I don't think this is accurate. Even though he may be a very convinced opponent of torture, there might still come a point where he'd allow himself to be pragmatic. And in a sense the no-ban was still an partial win for McCain, I think it is better to leave it as a gray area, which I think is what happened, than to explicitely allow torture, which was also clearly on the table.
Merko Graduate Poster Join Date: Nov 2006 Posts: 1,899