This war is not headed in any "reasonable" direction

[jones]

wow, thats horrible. Ive heard of that stuff, but why was he covered with it?

My grandfather was a commander in the Korean war, Im not sure he was exposed to anything like that. But, he had a long career so he has told me of the atrocities of war.
Actually yesterday, I just found out that my uncle stormed the beaches of normandy during WWII. I had no idea. They are both still alive and only 40 miles away so we still get together.

edit: am I correct about the VA? Ive only had hunches from veterans and their websites. Do you think they purposely try to do whatever they can, to not allow you to get what was promised and well deserved?

 

[Psychoblues]

I think you are alluding to the new immigration policy, jones, and that would be better examined and debated in the General Interest forum. Be that as it is, allowing foriegn illegals to hole up sometimes 20 to 50 in a room or house while they work for $3 an hour is indeed slave labor. This is a subject that will not be understood or appreciated in any great degree in this forum, jones. But that's just an opinion/observation on my part. I'll be very glad to discuss, however.

Don't you think it strange that politicians, Democrat and Repub alike, continue to call the work that they do as "work that Americans don't want to do?" Hmmmmmmmmm. Why do they not want to do it? Is it because they can't support a family or even themselves on that kind of a wage? Or that they've not yet resigned themselves to less than open bay dormitory standards? Hmmmmmmmm? I wonder?

 

[jones]

we overlapped again!

Democrat and Repub alike, continue to call the work that they do as "work that Americans don't want to do?"

Was not aware of this. But, I know that my man Dennis Kucinich has lived those standards you speak of.

 

[Psychoblues]

DK, not Suddeth , is indeed a man of hardship, principle and intelligence beyond his formal education. He is also, sadly, not electable in any national election, IMHO. I won't go into my reasons for believing that here.

I don't think that I exactly understand what it is that you were not aware of?

 

[jones]

Democrats and Repubs saying that it is work americans don't want to do.

Heres my lil rant on dennis. Just so you know why im voting for him in todays(12:01 ahaha) caucus. Maybe I will be the only one voting but I don't care, hes the very best person for president in this whole race in my opinion. Hes proven he can beat republicans in ohio. There is alot more support for him than anyone realizes. He kicked everyones ass in the debates, in a friendly manner I might add, not picking on pety statements either, just issues. He has alot of great ideas! His website is very popular considering those 'polls' everyone likes to look at. president , wow, president+2004

 

[Psychoblues]

I love Dennis Kucinich and I love you too, jones. I hope you'll support the nominee. All the Democratic candidates are far better qualified than what we are having to deal with now, don't you agree?

On edit: Gephardt just stated this morning on one of the Sunday talk shows that the illegals were performing work that Americans don't want to do. That sealed it for me. NO to Dick Gephardt. He obviously doesn't have a clue as to what is happening out here in the bottom of the barrel workforce. It used to be the cotton pickers, now it's the bricklayers. Can you dig it?

 

[jones]

uhh sure. (shhhhh) its corporatism. at its finest from my perspective.

I will support him, but I guess the way our thing today works is that its like instant run-off voting. Unique.

 

[jones]

Was justing thinking about this situation and america.
Could dennis be America's last chance for democracy? We agree that he is practically a reborn founding father. correct? The other democrats are sorta like clinton democrats, this country on life support. They arnt good enough to bring this country back to its roots, I think dennis is. Like he said, hope. our last chance for it maybe.
Man, if hes not nominated, I am going to write, and write to get him on staff of executive branch.

 

[jones]

I can dig it!

Maybe you don't believe that cheap-labor conservatives like unemployment, poverty and "cheap labor". Consider these facts.

"Unemployment was 23 percent when FDR took office in 1933. It dropped to 2.5 percent by time the next Republican was in the White House in 1953. It climbed back to 6.5 percent by the end of the Eisenhower administration. It dropped to 3.5 percent by the time LBJ left office. It climbed over 5 percent shortly after Nixon took office, and stayed there for 27 years, until Clinton brought it down to 4.5 percent early in his second term." CG

 

[Annie]

I just finished this thread and feel like I entered an alternative reality.

That said, Psycho, I'm very sorry about your brother. Jones, Agent Orange was somewhat routinely sprayed on the troops who were in heavily foilaged areas, it worked very fast at clearing the foilage, as Psycho reported about his brother's rain poncho.

 

[jimnyc]

Originally posted by Kathianne
I just finished this thread and feel like I entered an alternative reality.

I believe this is a meeting place for some moveon.org diehards.

 

[Annie]

Uh, yeah. Jones actually considers this a place to find information? Would be like our citing Ann Coulter as a professional journalist, unbiased of course!

 

[DKSuddeth]

Originally posted by Kathianne
Uh, yeah. Jones actually considers this a place to find information? Would be like our citing Ann Coulter as a professional journalist, unbiased of course!

careful, I'm sure that RWA will disagree with you on the coulter part

 

[Annie]

Which would only confirm that both sides have their 'partisans'.

 

[bamthin]

Originally posted by wonderwench
ABC, NBC, CBS, CNN, Time Magazine, New York Times, NPR for a start.

You don't understand much about the gamesmanship and theatre of negotiations.

Bush's use of "with us or against us" etc. was necessary in order to break the world out of the inaction of the U.N. - and it worked.

CBS Blocks PETA, MoveOn Super Bowl Ads
author: Peter Henderson
LOS ANGELES - U.S. football fans will not see ads featuring scantily clad vegetarians or a political attack on President Bush during February's Super Bowl after CBS said on Thursday that advocacy advertisements were out of bounds on professional football's biggest day.


Courtesy of CBS

The network, over the years, has rejected dozens of advertising proposals by advocacy groups, who argue that the network only airs controversial messages that it agrees with.

"We just want to be able to present our jiggly women," said Lisa Lange, spokeswoman for People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals, asking to join advertisers like beer brewers who has boosted sales with images of scantily-clad women.

Liberal group Moveon.org, known for its Internet funding power, told members this week that it hoped to have the first political Super Bowl ad.

But its hopes were dashed when CBS said the spot, which asks "Guess who's going to pay off President Bush's $1 trillion deficit?" was an issue piece and could not run.

In a letter, CBS told PETA that it would not run advertisements on "controversial issues of public importance."

CBS spokesman Dana McClintock said the policy had been in place for years. "We have a policy against accepting advocacy advertising," he added. CBS, a unit of Viacom Inc., does run political advertising for and against candidates.

CBS came under criticism in November when it decided not to run a two-part made-for-television movie, "The Reagans," after conservatives complained that it was unflattering to former president Ronald Reagan and his wife, Nancy.

PETA spokeswoman Lange said that CBS's broadcast of anti-smoking advertisements and even hamburger chain spots were controversial, advocacy pieces, as well.

"In essence, CBS is saying we will air an advocacy ad if we agree with the viewpoint," she said.

The PETA ad shows two scantily clad women snuggling up to a meat-eating pizza delivery man. "Meat can cause impotence," the screen reads after the rendezvous fails.

CBS also said the PETA spot raised "significant taste concerns.

Copyright 2004 Reuters Ltd

LINK


I read what you're posting WW, but I think you are wrong. I might also add that CBS does run anti-smoking ads and anti-marijuana ads.

-Bam

 

[DKSuddeth]

well, I wonder how they came to that decision and how many people will believe thats political censorship now?

 

[jimnyc]

CBS just applied the idiot filter and PETA and moveon.org were caught up in it. Sort of like spam.

There's a huge difference between anti-smoking and anti-marijuana ads, and organizations shoving their beliefs down your throat. One serves to save lives while the other serves a political agenda.

I think political ads should be limited to the respective candidates.

 

[Moi]

Originally posted by bamthin
CBS Blocks PETA, MoveOn Super Bowl Ads
author: Peter Henderson
LOS ANGELES - U.S. football fans will not see ads featuring scantily clad vegetarians or a political attack on President Bush during February's Super Bowl after CBS said on Thursday that advocacy advertisements were out of bounds on professional football's biggest day.


Courtesy of CBS

The network, over the years, has rejected dozens of advertising proposals by advocacy groups, who argue that the network only airs controversial messages that it agrees with.

"We just want to be able to present our jiggly women," said Lisa Lange, spokeswoman for People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals, asking to join advertisers like beer brewers who has boosted sales with images of scantily-clad women.

Liberal group Moveon.org, known for its Internet funding power, told members this week that it hoped to have the first political Super Bowl ad.

But its hopes were dashed when CBS said the spot, which asks "Guess who's going to pay off President Bush's $1 trillion deficit?" was an issue piece and could not run.

In a letter, CBS told PETA that it would not run advertisements on "controversial issues of public importance."

CBS spokesman Dana McClintock said the policy had been in place for years. "We have a policy against accepting advocacy advertising," he added. CBS, a unit of Viacom Inc., does run political advertising for and against candidates.

CBS came under criticism in November when it decided not to run a two-part made-for-television movie, "The Reagans," after conservatives complained that it was unflattering to former president Ronald Reagan and his wife, Nancy.

PETA spokeswoman Lange said that CBS's broadcast of anti-smoking advertisements and even hamburger chain spots were controversial, advocacy pieces, as well.

"In essence, CBS is saying we will air an advocacy ad if we agree with the viewpoint," she said.

The PETA ad shows two scantily clad women snuggling up to a meat-eating pizza delivery man. "Meat can cause impotence," the screen reads after the rendezvous fails.

CBS also said the PETA spot raised "significant taste concerns.

Copyright 2004 Reuters Ltd

LINK


I read what you're posting WW, but I think you are wrong. I might also add that CBS does run anti-smoking ads and anti-marijuana ads.

-Bam

There's a huge difference between censorship and a company deciding what causes to support. CBS wasn't censoring news. They were exercising their free speech by not airing advertisements - not news items. Were they to claim that news events pertaining to those groups were not valid topics for their news agencies, than maybe that's censorship. But limiting advertisements is just common sense, not censorship.

Besides, every single news agency and newspaper practices censorship. There isn't a single one who can claim otherwise.

 

[bamthin]

Originally posted by jimnyc
CBS just applied the idiot filter and PETA and moveon.org were caught up in it. Sort of like spam.

There's a huge difference between anti-smoking and anti-marijuana ads, and organizations shoving their beliefs down your throat. One serves to save lives while the other serves a political agenda.

I think political ads should be limited to the respective candidates.

WW said CBS was "elite liberal media". I was illustrating that they weren't. What is your point?

By the way, how does airing a anti-marijuana ad save lives? Marijuana decriminalization is a political issue. Kucinich is an advocate of this. Also, I am sure the tobacco lobby would like to debate with you the pros and cons of smoking. These are issues and the fact that CBS airs ads for/against them makes them hypocrites for not airing PETA and MoveOn.org ads. The bottom line, is that an "elite liberal media" outlet would wholeheartedly run ads by PETA and MoveOn.org and they don't. An "elite liberal media" outlet like CBS wouldn't pull a Reagan documentary because it was upsetting to conservatives.

Do you just read what I post now and not bother reading the context of the thread it is in now jimnyc? In this case, it certainly appears that way.

-Bam

 

[bamthin]

Originally posted by Moi
There's a huge difference between censorship and a company deciding what causes to support. CBS wasn't censoring news. They were exercising their free speech by not airing advertisements - not news items. Were they to claim that news events pertaining to those groups were not valid topics for their news agencies, than maybe that's censorship. But limiting advertisements is just common sense, not censorship.

Besides, every single news agency and newspaper practices censorship. There isn't a single one who can claim otherwise.

OK Moi, fair enough, then you prove to me that CBS is "elite liberally biased media". That is what WW labeled them as.

-Bam