Turn Off Ads?
Page 3 of 11 FirstFirst 1234567 ... LastLast
Results 31 to 45 of 157

Thread: State of the Union

  1. #31
    breath westofyou's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2000
    Location
    PDX
    Posts
    43,048

    Re: State of the Union

    Blah blah blah blah blah...
    Constructive stuff.

  2. Turn Off Ads?
  3. #32
    bomarl1969
    Guest

    Re: State of the Union

    Quote Originally Posted by registerthis
    Yeah...if only we could finally get that gay marriage ban in place, that would fix so many of the problems in our country. I am so glad this administration has their priorities in order.
    Trust me its a step in the right direction. This country needs to be cleaned up and that is a major step as far as I'm concerned.

  4. #33
    Harry Chiti Fan registerthis's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Location
    Washington, DC
    Posts
    5,872

    Re: State of the Union

    Quote Originally Posted by Reds/Flyers Fan
    Blah blah blah blah blah...

    Liberating 50 million people in Iraq and Afghanistan; overthrowing a homicidal dictator in Saddam Hussein; presenting Iraqis with their first real chance to have a say in their own country through a free vote (which more than 75 percent of the population participated in despite the threat of violence); eradicating the Taliban;

    and, my favorite, driving looney liberals crazy. :allovrjr:
    Liberate, eh? Too bad that's not why he said we were going there. Only when those mysterious WMDs failed to show up did the mission become one of "liberation." If Iraq were some third-world, oil-starved African nation, do you think we would have "liberated" them? If you say yes, then I have a nice list of countries we can start working on...

    BTW, the election turnout was actually 60%. To contrast, in 1967, Vietnam held an election under threats of violence and reprisals from the VC. The turnout then was 80%, and the U.S. celebrated it as a victory of democracy in the face of threatened tyranny. And lo, a mere 8 years later, we were piloting the last helicopter out of Saigon as the city fell to VC forces, 58,000 dead Amercians later.

    Similarities, anyone?

  5. #34
    Pre-tty, pre-tty good!! MWM's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2001
    Posts
    12,324

    Re: State of the Union

    Name ONE single "problem" a ban on gay marriage would "fix."
    Grape works as a soda. Sort of as a gum. I wonder why it doesn't work as a pie. Grape pie? There's no grape pie. - Larry David

  6. #35
    breath westofyou's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2000
    Location
    PDX
    Posts
    43,048

    Re: State of the Union

    Quote Originally Posted by bomarl1969
    Trust me its a step in the right direction. This country needs to be cleaned up and that is a major step as far as I'm concerned.
    You're right... first thing to do is get Motley Crue and its ilk out of here, disgusting filth that stuff is.

  7. #36
    Harry Chiti Fan registerthis's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Location
    Washington, DC
    Posts
    5,872

    Re: State of the Union

    Quote Originally Posted by bomarl1969
    Trust me its a step in the right direction. This country needs to be cleaned up and that is a major step as far as I'm concerned.
    Just so I'm understanding correctly, banning gay marriage will help this country...how? Will it stop gay people from having sex? Will it end homosexuality? And if it manages to acocmplish both of those things, this country will be better off because...?

    We have a nearly $500 billion debt, we are fighting a war and just finished another one, half the world is pissed at us, medicare and medicaid is collapsing due to budget cuts, the public education system isn't properly funded...but, hell, if we keep Bob and Tom from marrying each other, we're on the right path.

    Sorry, I don't see it.

  8. #37
    Churlish Johnny Footstool's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2001
    Location
    Olathe, KS
    Posts
    13,805

    Re: State of the Union

    I understand what bomarl1969 is saying -- he views the gay marriage ban as a step towards a more moral America.

    I disagree. I don't believe morality depends solely on strictly following religious beliefs. I think morality has a lot to do with tolerance.
    "I prefer books and movies where the conflict isn't of the extreme cannibal apocalypse variety I guess." Redsfaithful

  9. #38
    Member ochre's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2002
    Posts
    4,266

    Re: State of the Union

    Quote Originally Posted by registerthis
    Just so I'm understanding correctly, banning gay marriage will help this country...how? Will it stop gay people from having sex? Will it end homosexuality? And if it manages to acocmplish both of those things, this country will be better off because...?

    We have a nearly $500 billion debt, we are fighting a war and just finished another one, half the world is pissed at us, medicare and medicaid is collapsing due to budget cuts, the public education system isn't properly funded...but, hell, if we keep Bob and Tom from marrying each other, we're on the right path.

    Sorry, I don't see it.
    Actually, the debt is much higher than that.

    according to this site

    I think the $500 billion number refers to the budget deficit, this fiscal years contribution to the debt.
    4009



  10. #39
    For a Level Playing Field RedFanAlways1966's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2001
    Location
    Oakwood, OH
    Posts
    11,760

    Re: State of the Union

    Quote Originally Posted by registerthis
    BTW, the election turnout was actually 60%. To contrast, in 1967, Vietnam held an election under threats of violence and reprisals from the VC. The turnout then was 80%, and the U.S. celebrated it as a victory of democracy in the face of threatened tyranny. And lo, a mere 8 years later, we were piloting the last helicopter out of Saigon as the city fell to VC forces, 58,000 dead Amercians later.

    Similarities, anyone?
    Are you saying that 58,000 Americans died in Vietnam after the election there? If so, you are wrong. That is how a reader might take your above comment.

    In the face of threatened tyranny? According to my history books, a cease-fire agreement was in place from both sides. And this was initiated by the North Vietmanese b/c the US messed their logistics up real bad once we started destroying their stocks in Cambodia. Then the North lied and broke their own agreement that they initiated. They infiltrated the South and took Saigon after our troops were long gone from Vietnam. Hopefully our country learned a lesson and will not leave so soon or trust a non-trustworthy enemy.

    Let's be clear on something else, since your message is not too clear... that last helicopter was getting US citizens out of Saigon. Not military as a reader may think when reading your message.

    Similiar from your view maybe, but not from my view. 58,000.... long-long-long way to go to match that number. But I'll let you tell us how many US military have been killed in Iraq.

    Just want to make sure that readers are clear on Vietnam.
    Small market fan... always hoping, but never expecting.

  11. #40
    Hey Cubs Fans RFS62's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2000
    Location
    New York
    Posts
    16,601

    Re: State of the Union

    Quote Originally Posted by bomarl1969
    *deleted*

    Forgive me also for being blunt, and I'm not gay, but this kind of intolerance and hatred does nothing but make things worse.

    You don't like gays. We get it.
    Last edited by zombie-a-go-go; 02-03-2005 at 12:06 PM.
    "Twenty years from now you will be more disappointed by the things that you didn't do than by the ones you did do. So throw off the bowlines. Sail away from safe harbor. Catch the trade winds in your sails. Explore. Dream. Discover."
    ~ Mark Twain

  12. #41
    breath westofyou's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2000
    Location
    PDX
    Posts
    43,048

    Re: State of the Union

    Hate the new family value.... and strippers too.....good family stuff, we're installing a pole in our dining room next week.

  13. #42
    Harry Chiti Fan registerthis's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Location
    Washington, DC
    Posts
    5,872

    Re: State of the Union

    Quote Originally Posted by ochre
    Actually, the debt is much higher than that.

    according to this site

    I think the $500 billion number refers to the budget deficit, this fiscal years contribution to the debt.
    Sorry, I meant DEFICIT. You're right, the DEBT is astronomical!

  14. #43
    Harry Chiti Fan registerthis's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Location
    Washington, DC
    Posts
    5,872

    Re: State of the Union

    Quote Originally Posted by bomarl1969
    *deleted*
    You know what? Sex with another man makes me ill too. I would never partake in it myself. (I love the girls too much... tee-hee)

    But I fail to see why banning homosexual marriage is going to solve *anything*. We've established that you don't like it, fine. There's plenty of things *I* don't like...doesn't mean the government should ban them.

    There are plenty more IMPORTANT issues to be dealt with right now that will actually help *solve* problems. Banning gay marriage...really doesn't solve anything. Just puts the government in a place it has no business being.
    Last edited by zombie-a-go-go; 02-03-2005 at 12:07 PM.

  15. #44
    Harry Chiti Fan registerthis's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Location
    Washington, DC
    Posts
    5,872

    Re: State of the Union

    Quote Originally Posted by RedFanAlways1966
    Are you saying that 58,000 Americans died in Vietnam after the election there? If so, you are wrong. That is how a reader might take your above comment.
    Sorry, no, my statement was unclear. Between the years of 1968 - 1975, there were 26,364 deaths in Vietnam (out of a total 58,000+ killed in total). So slightly less than half of the total number of casualties occured after the 1967 elections.

    EDIT: My math, or rather, my editing skills were wrong. The actual number of U.S. troops killed during 1968-1975 was 37,789. The figure I listed above was only for the Army. In fact, the highest U.S. casualty toll occured in 1968, the year immediately following the elections.

    In the face of threatened tyranny? According to my history books, a cease-fire agreement was in place from both sides. And this was initiated by the North Vietmanese b/c the US messed their logistics up real bad once we started destroying their stocks in Cambodia. Then the North lied and broke their own agreement that they initiated. They infiltrated the South and took Saigon after our troops were long gone from Vietnam. Hopefully our country learned a lesson and will not leave so soon or trust a non-trustworthy enemy.
    Beg pardon? From the looks of your above post, it appears you're implying that there were virtually NO hostilities after the 1967 election. If that is indeed your position, you could not be more wrong. There was the infamous Tet offensive in spring 1968...and numerous battles and fighting after that. As I mentioned, over 37,000 casualties. U.S. involvement in active fighting in Vietnam did not honestly diminish until 1972, when *only* 373 troops were killed (versus 2,131 in 1971).

    Regarding the alleged "cease fire", it doesn't appear that one was expected to be honored, if you can trust the New York Times. Below is an excerpt from an article which ran on September 4, 1967:

    "United States officials were surprised and heartened today at the size of turnout in South Vietnam's presidential election despite a Vietcong terrorist campaign to disrupt the voting.

    According to reports from Saigon, 83 per cent of the 5.85 million
    registered voters cast their ballots yesterday. Many of them risked
    reprisals threatened by the Vietcong.

    The size of the popular vote and the inability of the Vietcong to
    destroy the election machinery were the two salient facts in a
    preliminary assessment of the nation election based on the incomplete
    returns reaching here."


    Let's be clear on something else, since your message is not too clear... that last helicopter was getting US citizens out of Saigon. Not military as a reader may think when reading your message.

    Similiar from your view maybe, but not from my view. 58,000.... long-long-long way to go to match that number. But I'll let you tell us how many US military have been killed in Iraq.
    The only reason we have a long, long way to go to match the 58,000 killed is because we fight "smarter" wars now. Meaning our bombs can be sent from remote locales, and less infantry and ground troops are used. So, my question to you is: How many casualties IS acceptable? 2,000? 5,000? 10,000? At what point do we pull out and count our losses? How many dead Iraqis is acceptable? 100,000? 500,000? A million?

    The fact is, the U.S. was downright giddy after the 1967 Vietnam elections...only we would continue to sustain heavy casualties for the next 4 years, and would maintain a presence there until 1975, when the war was officially "lost."

    The Bush administration would like people to think that an election which drew out 60% of the population, and which did not contain sizeable participation from a significant minority population (the Sunnis) somehow validates his actions and shows a light at the end of the Iraq tunnel. Recent history seems to say otherwise.

    Just want to make sure that readers are clear on Vietnam.
    Indeed, I certainly hope they are. It might actually help people understand the situation we are in now.
    Last edited by registerthis; 02-03-2005 at 12:31 PM.

  16. #45
    Member
    Join Date
    May 2000
    Location
    The Bush Leagues
    Posts
    9,257

    Re: State of the Union

    Any Democrat who defects on Social Security needs to be run out of the party.
    The widow is gathering nettles for her children's dinner; a perfumed seigneur, delicately lounging in the Oeil de Boeuf, hath an alchemy whereby he will extract the third nettle and call it rent. ~ Carlyle


Turn Off Ads?

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  

Board Moderators may, at their discretion and judgment, delete and/or edit any messages that violate any of the following guidelines: 1. Explicit references to alleged illegal or unlawful acts. 2. Graphic sexual descriptions. 3. Racial or ethnic slurs. 4. Use of edgy language (including masked profanity). 5. Direct personal attacks, flames, fights, trolling, baiting, name-calling, general nuisance, excessive player criticism or anything along those lines. 6. Posting spam. 7. Each person may have only one user account. It is fine to be critical here - that's what this board is for. But let's not beat a subject or a player to death, please.

Thank you, and most importantly, enjoy yourselves!


RedsZone.com is a privately owned website and is not affiliated with the Cincinnati Reds or Major League Baseball


Contact us: Boss | GIK | BCubb2003 | dabvu2498 | Gallen5862 | LexRedsFan | Plus Plus | RedlegJake | redsfan1995 | The Operator | Tommyjohn25