The Politics Thread - Read the First Post

[Kieli]

Quote:

---

My question:

Which is the greater "sin", the draft dodger or the young man who enlists in the National Guard (via money &/or family connections) to avoid serving in Vietnam (or any combat area)??

---

Well, in the case of the draft dodger, it really does depend on their motives (i.e. if their religious, philsophical, etc. principles or beliefs are diametrically opposite the purpose for said war then it's not a "sin" at all). If the person is dodging because he just doesn't want to go into the military, again, not a sin. It really does depend on your hypothetical situation....for example are you counting any wars that are fought on that person's home soil or foreign wars? IMHO, the second man (and I am assuming you are indirectly fingering Dubya), is the greater "sinner". Then again, I am deeply opposed to using wealth and influence to keep one's self from suffering the same fate as any other man without the power. The draft should not be influenced by socioeconomic status, although those in charge of the draft are influenced all the time. An imperfect measure used at a time when it was necessary and is now not so much. There should've been caveats on the use of the draft a long time ago to prevent the abuses that the Vietnam War and now potentially the Iraq War have perpetrated.

Time flies by when the Devil drives.
It's not the pace of life that concerns me, it's the sudden stop at the end.

[Warduke]

From Yahoo...

Quote:

---

Bush's Hometown Newspaper Endorses Kerry





CRAWFORD, Texas (Reuters) - The newspaper in President Bush's adopted hometown of Crawford threw its support behind Bush's Democratic rival, Sen. John Kerry .



The weekly Lone Star Iconoclast on Tuesday criticized Bush's handling of the war in Iraq and for turning budget surpluses into record deficits. The editorial also criticized Bush's proposals on Social Security and Medicare.



"The publishers of The Iconoclast endorsed Bush four years ago, based on the things he promised, not on this smoke-screened agenda," the newspaper said in its editorial. "Today, we are endorsing his opponent, John Kerry."



It urged "Texans not to rate the candidate by his hometown or even his political party, but instead by where he intends to take the country."



Bush spends many of his weekends and holidays at his Crawford, Texas, ranch.



The Iconoclast's publisher and editor-in-chief, W. Leon Smith, said the newspaper is sent to Bush's ranch each week. "But I don't know if he reads it," Smith said.



The White House brushed aside the endorsement. "I feel pretty confident about the people of Crawford and the state of Texas in this election," White House spokesman Scott McClellan said.



The Kerry campaign welcomed the move. "Those who know George Bush the best say it the best: John Kerry will restore dignity to the White House and provide the leadership needed to get America headed in the right direction," said Kerry campaign spokesman Phil Singer.

---

---

Firefox: One Browser To Rule Them All.

[Gatito Grande]

Quote:

---

someone will just say "The bible is against it and that is that."

---

And that, robotguru, is UTTER BULLSH*T!!



I can't tell you how much it p*sses me off to hear someone say (or even read, in an abominably crappy Biblical translation) that "homosexuality"---a concept no more than 100 years old or so---is mentioned at all in the Bible. Aaaaaaaargh!



Mr. and Mrs. Keyes make the Cheneys look like "Parents of the Year," don't they? So very sad. (And if the cheap b*stards refuse to pay for her education . . . ). I trust that, no matter how Kerry does, Barak Obama is still going to kick Keyes' sorry *ss, right?



skittles: it's all about integrity. If someone uses their connections to stay out of the danger of war (an optional war like Vietnam . . . OR Iraq), they're only human. It's if they supported said war---or if they pretend that their obvious safe-haven was in fact "serving their country"---that my BS-ometer kicks in. Bill Clinton used his student deferments to escape (Vietnam) and go to Britain (his Rhodes scholarship). Bill Clinton also publicly opposed the war (though some points off for "trying to protect his political future," as that infamous letter to the draftboard officer said). Dubya did not publicly oppose the war, AND (even worse) tries to pretend that hiding in the Guard (and if he didn't know it was family pull that got him there, he's even stupider than I thought . . . if possible) was "doing his duty" . . .and he didn't even fulfill his cushy Guard responsibililties!



GG So he's a chickensh*t hypocrite on all counts. Out

[robotguru]

I didn't say that that was my opinion Gatito, i hate that also, i am an out gay. I was just saying that that's what people will say, we can't change that.

------------------



There can be no rainbow without rain, you cannot know true happiness until you know sadness first.

[sam7777]

I think what people believe the bible says should not become the law of the land in accordance with the separation of church and state written into the US constitution. When they try to make their view of religion the law of the land then that is when folks must oppose those laws and the candidates that pander to them IMHO. Freedom of religion is not license to deny others freedom. But religion has it's own thread so I'll stop as it's OT.



Obama has a 40 point lead in the race so far:

Obama: Not taking Illinois lead for granted

Quote:

---

Barack Obama says he's not taking anything for granted in his race for U-S Senate even though the democrat is up by more than 40 points in some polls. Today Obama responded to criticism that he's been spending more time out of state than campaigning in it.

---

_____________________

I still see dead lesbian cliches

Edited by: sam7777  at: 9/30/04 10:45 am

[Gatito Grande]

robotguru, I'm sorry that I gave the impression that my critique was directed at you personally: it wasn't. However, I have to disagree w/ you that "that's what people will say, we can't change that." It's a major goal of my life---of my calling as a Christian---to change other Christians' minds (and what they then say about it).



GG Also veering OT to Scary Religion . . . Out



Thanks, sam, for the update on Barack Obama (hard name to remember to spell correctly---not that he doesn't know that! )

[Thespia]

Have you guys watched the debate? I'm still concerned about Kerry's campaign, but personally I think he came out extremely well in this first debate.



Bush was smirking, repetitive and, frankly, not very presidential. Kerry was firm, yet warm and conveyed his message.



I'm a little bit more optimistic now.

[Gatito Grande]

Me too, Thespia. I'm glad the networks didn't agree to the "no reaction shots" demand (that both Kerry and Bush agreed to), because they showed Bush very badly (if his mouth was clenched any tighter, his jaw would be in his nose!), while Kerry looked (and I quote Jeff Goldblum on CNN) "more Presidential."



And even when he was directly on camera (responding to a question), several times Dubya began w/ long "Caught Red-Handed" stammers, and "I am speechless w/ defensive indignation" . . . I don't know what to call them (somewhere in-between a guffaw and a grunt): none of it Presidential!



GG Both CNN and MSNBC have insta-vote polls as to who won. Last I checked, Kerry was leading on both . . . but please go to those sites and vote yourself! Out

[The Partisan]

In a word: underwhelming. Neither candidate really scored any decisive strikes. There were a few gaffes on both sides, but since the agreement stipulated that no audio or video excerpts could be used by either side, I really don't forsee a huge impact coming out of tonight's debate.



I'd also expect the two subsequent debates to be even less compelling, with lower TV ratings to boot.

[LunaMuses]

I dunno, I think even if you completly disregard what the candidates were saying, Kerry said it alot better. I saw the poor guy's hands shaking early on But Bush's shuffling, grimacing, and fidgeting, if you ask me, was just plain unprofessional.



Lots of people in one of my classes this morning said things to the effect of, "That's just Bush! He's a bad public speaker, and that's how he connects to the public! Most people are bad speakers, and they relate to him!"



This is the most *SORRY* defense I have ever heard. If there's one man in this country that should know how to be "resolute" and "steadfast" (hehe, can't resist..) in his public speaking, shouldn't it be our freaking president?!



I'm not saying I'd do any better--I've been in front of a (much smaller) crowd, and I did *okay*, but I'm not the one running for president, am I?



I also think it's important to note that Kerry responded to the whole "flip-flopper" (thanks Wiley for the clarification ;P) accusation. He, unlike Bush, acknowledges that he made a *mistake* and wants to try and *fix* it...



Quick question--did anyone hear Bush's nose wheezing when he paused? Maybe my TV was up a bit loud, but it had me rolling in the floor!

"There are three kinds of lies: lies, damned lies, and statistics!" - Benjamin Disraeli

[skittles]

This was published in the Lansing State Journal today...



I'm including it for it's "curiosity" value. If you question its accuracy, read the comment at the end.



I thought it was interesting on the issues... and I fell where I thought I did, too.

Quote:

---

Where do you stand quiz

Are you a Republican, Democrat or Independent?



1. Your best friend is pregnant but isn't sure she wants the baby. You tell her:



A. She should have the baby, which is a precious gift of life that she can either raise herself or give up for adoption.



B. She should talk to a counselor. You simply aren't sure what you would do in her situation.



C. You will support her if she decides to have an abortion. After all, it is her body and she has a choice.



2. You won't retire for another 40 years but part of your paycheck is going to Social Security, which is severely underfunded for your generation. You think:



A. Young workers like you should be able to put part of your payroll tax into a personal retirement account.



B. Benefits for most people should be protected, but we might have to reduce them for the wealthiest.



C. Partial privatization of Social Security will undermine the system for people such as my parents and grandparents.



3. Your neighbors, Heather and Vivian, have been living together for five years. Now they want to marry. You think:



A. Gay marriage is wrong, and there should be a constitutional amendment to make sure the Legislature or judges can't sanction it.



B. I don't really care either way, but I don't think we need a constitutional amendment against it.



C. They obviously love each other, and their love should be legally recognized at least with civil unions.



4. You've just graduated from college and have landed your first job. The real world means taxes. You wish the government would:



A. Cut taxes and cut taxes again to reward hard work and encourage job creation.



B. Leave taxes where they are.



C. Repeal tax cuts to the rich so that the middle class can enjoy additional cuts.



5. The death toll in Iraq continues to climb and there are reports about a possible draft. You think:



A. The war is going well and Iraq will be a prosperous democracy if we stay the course.



B. It's good to see Saddam Hussein out of power but you're not sure it's worth the cost in lives.



C. The war was a huge mistake to begin with, but now that we're there we need more troops and financial support from other countries to finish the job.



6. You're getting ready to start a family and you're thinking about your children's education. You think:



A. Public schools should be held to higher standards and if they fail, vouchers should be available for you to send your kids to private schools.



B. If I don't like my children's schools I'll move somewhere else.



C. Vouchers take money from public schools, which already are underfunded. Teachers should get additional training to help schools achieve higher standards.



7. Congress enacted the Patriot Act in the wake of Sept. 11, 2001 to protect and guard against future attacks. You believe the act has:



A. Increased our security with minimal effects on the lives of law-abiding American citizens.



B. Been necessary as a short-term measure but may need some tinkering to ensure that civil rights aren't unnecessarily infringed upon.



C. Intruded unnecessarily into the lives of law-abiding American citizens.



8. You enjoy camping Up North, hiking the national forests and watching wildlife. You also need your car and your job. You think:



A. Environmental extremists have agendas that would cripple the economy. Drilling in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge could provide a substantial energy source.



B. Preserving the economy and the environment requires a gentle balance that neither party has found.



C. Pro-development policies threaten Earth and her future inhabitants. Drilling inside the Alaskan refuge would jeopardize a pristine area valued for its wildlife.



Scoring:



Add up the number of answers corresponding to each letter and match it to the letter you chose most often.



If you chose A most you lean Republican. You tend to value economic freedom, less government regulation and lower taxes. Your social views are more conservative and you may believe government should legislate morality.



If you chose B most or have a relatively equal mix of As and Cs, you tend to be more independent. You may not totally agree with one particular party and you look more at a candidate's issues and qualifications than party line.



If you chose C most you lean Democratic. You tend to value personal freedom, more government regulation and government oversight of the economy. Your social views are more liberal and you don't think government should legislate morality.



This quiz was created by the Lansing State Journal and approved by two local political analysts. It measures tendencies, not absolutes, and is intended to give you an idea of which of the two major parties agrees with you more. The views stated in the answers do not represent all viewpoints within a party, which can range from moderate to extreme. Most views represented in this quiz are the basic party line.

---

skittles

Prepare the child for the path, not the path for the child.

When life hands you lemons, ask for a bottle of tequila and some salt

[Gatito Grande]

Well, the Lansing Journal can say what it wants to about this survey being vetted by "two local political analysts" . . . but it still sucks. There were a number of questions (for example: 1, 2, 5, 8) where I answered "Why not B *and* C?" (and question 5 certainly should have had option D: "Get U.S. troops out ASAP!")



GG Reveals a certain sloppy shallowness (shallow sloppiness?) of our state capitol's newspaper, don't you think, skittles? Out



And for your DVD collection, new this week:

Quote:

---

the one must-see is "George W. Bush: Faith in the White House," a DVD that is being specifically marketed in "head to head" partisan opposition to "Fahrenheit 9/11."



This documentary first surfaced at the Republican convention in New York, where it was previewed in tandem with an invitation-only, no-press-allowed "Family, Faith and Freedom Rally," a Ralph Reed-Sam Brownback jamboree thrown by the Bush campaign for Christian conservatives. Though you can buy the DVD for $14.95, its makers told the right-wing news service WorldNetDaily.com that they plan to distribute 300,000 copies to America's churches. And no wonder. This movie aspires to be "The Passion of the Bush," and it succeeds.



More than any other campaign artifact, it clarifies the hard-knuckles rationale of the president's vote-for-me-or-face-Armageddon re-election message. It transforms the president that the Democrats deride as a "fortunate son" of privilege into a prodigal son with the "moral clarity of an old-fashioned biblical prophet." Its Bush is not merely a sincere man of faith but God's essential and irreplaceable warrior on Earth. The stations of his cross are burnished into cinematic fable: the misspent youth, the hard drinking (a thirst that came from "a throat full of Texas dust" ), the fateful 40th-birthday hangover in Colorado Springs, the walk on the beach with Billy Graham. A towheaded child actor bathed in the golden light of an off-camera halo re-enacts the young George comforting his mom after the death of his sister; it's a parable anticipating the future president's miraculous ability to comfort us all after 9/11. An older Bush impersonator is seen rebuffing a sexual come-on from a fellow Bush-Quayle campaign worker hovering by a Xerox machine in 1988; it's an effort to imbue our born-again savior with retroactive chastity. As for the actual president, he is shown with a flag for a backdrop in a split-screen tableau with Jesus. The message isn't subtle: they were separated at birth.



*****



Past presidents have rarely, if ever, claimed such godlike infallibility. Mr. Bush never admits to making a mistake; even his premature "Mission Accomplished" victory lap wasn't in error, as he recently told Bill O'Reilly. After all, if you believe "God wants me to be president" - a quote attributed to Mr. Bush by the Rev. Richard Land of the Southern Baptist Convention - it's a given that you are incapable of making mistakes. Those who say you have are by definition committing blasphemy. A God-appointed leader even has the power to rewrite His texts.



*****



A Newsweek poll shows that 17 percent of Americans expect the world to end in their lifetime. To Karl Rove and company, that 17 percent is otherwise known as "the base."

---

selections from Frank Rich, 'Now on DVD: The Passion of the Bush'



Be very afraid! (and Vote Kerry! )



*****************************************



ETA: Voter registration DEADLINES



Today, Oct. 4 Registration Deadline: AZ, CO, FL, LA, MI, OH, and PA



Tomorrow, Oct. 5 Registration Deadline: NM



Make sure you are registered at your current address!



*****



kukulaka: I haven't made up my mind re "How soon to get U.S. troops out of Iraq" (it all depends on how "as soon as possible" is defined, wouldn't you agree? )

Edited by: Gatito Grande at: 10/4/04 7:31 am

[kukalaka]

Quote:

---

and question 5 certainly should have had option D: "Get U.S. troops out ASAP!"

---

Um, is that what you think?



Because I never wanted them to be there, but they sure as hell can't just leave now. Someone's gotta clean up this mess. Sorry, but leaving now would just make things worse.

[LunaMuses]

heh, I 'leaned' democrat/independent on all of the questions except social security XD



quick note for NC kittens (if there are any of you out there? o.O")



Voter Registration deadline is Oct. 8th. get it in the mail!! ^^



I'm looking forward to the VP debate tomorrow night...

"There are three kinds of lies: lies, damned lies, and statistics!" - Benjamin Disraeli

[Kieli]

Quote:

---

Someone's gotta clean up this mess. Sorry, but leaving now would just make things worse.

---

I strongly disagree. I think if we leave now, chances are the situation might reach a homeostatic point...that is, things might start evening out to a point where a balance could be struck. 98% of the violence going on in Iraq is due to strong opposition to the US trying to lay everything out according to our political system, trying to influence the course of events there. The Iraqis clearly don't want that. However, we are just too undermanned and outgunned by all of the splinter factions that are cropping up in Iraq. At this point, we are at a loss for what to do. Our continued presence in Iraq will not change that in the future, IMHO. Although it does seem logical that if we make a mess we should clean it up, but that line of thinking only works if a) we have even the remotest clue on how to fix things (which we don't), b) we have almost complete support of the Iraqi people and not just the interim government per se (which we don't have) and c) the resources to do a thorough job of cleaning up said mess (which we sure as hell don't have and won't have in the foreseeable future if our economy continues on its road to ruin). If I may ask, what is your argument for your above quote?

Time flies by when the Devil drives.
It's not the pace of life that concerns me, it's the sudden stop at the end.

[darkmagicwillow]

Quote:

---

Someone's gotta clean up this mess. Sorry, but leaving now would just make things worse.

---

Are you sure that the US occupation isn't what's causing the mess?



"Baghdad Year Zero" is an interesting article that argues that the resistance is fueled largely by the problems such as unemployment and nonfunctioning utilities caused by the US occupation's economic "reforms."

--

"Omnia mutantur, nihil interit." -- "Everything changes, but nothing is truly lost."

Edited by: darkmagicwillow at: 10/4/04 3:57 pm

[maudmac]

My two cents:



What a mess, what a mess. It seems to me that the people of Iraq generally supported the removal of Saddam Hussein, but have not been so keen on what's happened since - namely, that the so-called rebuilding of Iraq is being done largely by US corporations. What should we expect an out-of-work Iraqi to do when he sees a truck driver from the US doing a job he could have done and would have done for a fraction of what the US truck driver is being paid? When Iraqis running businesses are ready, able, and willing to do the bulk of the rebuilding, yet cannot because Dick Cheney's buddies are in there doing it and billing the US government billions of dollars.



I'd say a compromise would work best for most of the parties involved - leave (at least some of) the troops, but get rid of the US "contractors" except those who are doing work of which no Iraqi businesses are capable. The way things are being done now, this "stay the course" nonsense, it's never going to get better for anyone in Iraq, civilians, contractors, US military personnel, no one. The troops and the "insurgents" will continue to butt heads, with blood flowing on both sides and people who just want a meal or a job getting caught in the crossfire, while Iraq as a nation suffers from neglect.



It's just rude to go into someone else's country and overstay your welcome whilst you milk and milk and milk everything you can get from them because Dick Cheney's buddies don't think they are quite rich enough yet. Go in, do what you gotta do, leave enough people behind to keep things safe and get the country running again, and return Iraq to her people.

---

when i hear music it makes me dance

[Gatito Grande]

As we saw last week, post-debate spin is critical: please let your voice be heard, and tell them Edwards won.



From the DNC, please respond at all of these news forums following the debate:



CNN: www.cnn.com/

MSNBC: www.msnbc.msn.com/

Wall Street Journal: www.wsj.com/

LA Times: www.latimes.com/

Akron Beacon-Journal: www.ohio.com/

Minneapolis-St. Paul Star-Tribune: www.startribune.com/

Orlando Sentinel: www.orlandosentinel.com/

Philadelphia Inquirer: www.philly.com/

South Florida Sun-Sentinel: www.sun-sentinel.com/



GG Loved the part where Cheney talked about how Bush picked him. Exsqueeze me? Cheney headed the Veep selection committee: he picked himself!! (Not the last time he made up Dubya's mind for him ) Out



ETA: the "objective" pundits are mostly calling this a draw . . . which equals "Edwards held his own." (My favorite factoid of the post-debate analysis: CNN's focus group of undecided voters, with their little second-by-second approval-meters: Cheney's highest numbers was when he was disagreeing with Dubya on gay marriage! Of course, that high point was not nearly as high as Edwards' highest, when talking about outsourcing---and how K/E would stop underwriting it via tax-breaks )

Edited by: Gatito Grande at: 10/5/04 8:42 pm

[skittles]

I'm sorry, but this article just got to me a little too much... the whole thing... where is the barf bag & the anger management room... I need them both right now.



CNN Article

Quote:

---

Candidate: No single, pregnant teachers in classroom



CHARLESTON, South Carolina (AP) -- A U.S. Senate candidate who said recently that homosexuals should not be teaching in South Carolina's public schools has added another group to his list of poor role models for children -- pregnant women with live-in boyfriends.



Jim DeMint, a Republican third-term congressman running for the Senate, made the comment about homosexuals during a debate Sunday with his Democratic opponent. Some gay organizations immediately demanded an apology.



On Tuesday, in an interview with the Aiken Standard, DeMint said: "I would have given the same answer when asked if a single woman, who was pregnant and living with her boyfriend, should be hired to teach my third-grade children. I just think the moral decisions are different with a teacher."



The Log Cabin Republicans, a national organization of gay conservatives, were among several activist groups that asked DeMint to apologize for his comments on openly gay teachers. The DeMint campaign said the candidate stands by his beliefs and there would be no apology.



At the debate, DeMint said he agreed with the state GOP platform that openly gay men and women should not be allowed to teach in public schools.



"We need the folks that are teaching in schools to represent our values," he said.



Democrat Inez Tenenbaum replied during the back-and-forth that DeMint's comments were "un-American."



The candidate's comments came less than a week after a DeMint staffer was reprimanded for using a slur about lesbians in an e-mail.

---

skittles

Prepare the child for the path, not the path for the child.

When life hands you lemons, ask for a bottle of tequila and some salt

[Kieli]

Again, these politicians are making the classic mistake of asserting values that never truly existed as an all-around norm in ANY society, even our own. He would have his constituents think that unless a Christian woman is married with kids and subservient to her husband, that she is not a good moral model for students. Apparently, his grasp of history (especially American history) is a more than a bit weak. Some of the most influential women in our history were among the groups he singles out as immoral targets. What a complete moron. He can't apologise for being so blatantly ignorant and stupid; he barely even knows that his comments are sad on so many levels. Hopefully his potential constituents will see that and do the right thing at the polls. Then again it IS the South so...*shrug* Granted not all Southerners are as ignorant as he is but there are still quite a few with the power to vote. Scary, isn't it?

Time flies by when the Devil drives.
It's not the pace of life that concerns me, it's the sudden stop at the end.

[sam7777]

I wonder how long it will be until they decide you have to be CHRISTAN to be a good role model to teach and then only a certain kind of christian and then only married. Then this will extend to other kinds of work that require "moral" people whose morality is defined by a thin and biggotted criteria. This is why we SHOULD have separation of church and state and why Bush is so bad for this country.



Edwards clealy won the debate as Kerry did. The problem with Bush/Cheny is that they look like dictators who hate to be questioned. Not a good thing in a democracy. If they can'yt even control their emotions for a 90minute debate, how can they run the coountry.

_____________________

I still see dead lesbian cliches

Edited by: sam7777  at: 10/6/04 9:37 am

[Culzean]

I always wondered why these ultra-conservatives go after gays with such enthusiasm and ignore adulterers.



They like to cite the bible. The bible only has a few references to homosexuality (and their interpretation is hotly contested). There's a commandement about adultery.



Not that I want anyone to persecute adulterers. I just don't get the utter lack of logic.



I have got to learn how to switch out of Spock mode. I just get a headache.

[Kieli]

I found this rather interesting: Pope Calls Communism "Necessary Evil"



The man needs to retire. He's no longer firing on all cylinders.

Quote:

---

By Philip Pullella



VATICAN CITY (Reuters) - Communism was a "necessary evil" that God allowed to happen in the 20th century in order to create opportunities for good after its demise, Pope John Paul (news - web sites) says in his new book.





"Memory and Identity," which is due to be published early next year, is the ailing 84-year-old pontiff's latest and perhaps last book intended for a mass circulation audience. All of his previous books have been international bestsellers.





In one chapter, the pope, who lived through both Nazism and Communism in his native Poland, reflects on the meaning of evil in life and in history.





"I have personally experienced the reality of the 'ideologies of evil'. It remains indelibly fixed in my memory," he says in the book, which is a series of conversations he had in Polish with fellow philosophers in the summer of 1993.





Excerpts of the book, which was announced Wednesday at the Frankfurt Book Fair, were made available by the Italian publisher Rizzoli.





The pope, who has been credited with helping bring about the fall of Communism after his shock election in 1978, reveals that even an optimist like him had moments of pessimism during his life under Communist oppression.





"To me it was quite clear that Communism would last much longer than Nazism had done. For how long? It was hard to predict," he writes.





"There was a sense that this evil was in some way necessary for the world and for mankind. It can happen, in fact, that in certain particular human situations, evil is revealed as somehow useful inasmuch as it creates opportunities for good."





Many historians believe it was his support for Poland's free trade union Solidarity after he became pope in 1978 that helped the union go on to form the East Bloc's first free government.





NAZI "BESTIALITY"





The pope, whom Jews have credited with improving Catholic relations with them more than any pontiff in history, also reflects on Nazism, which he calls a "bestiality."





"The Lord God allowed Nazism 12 years of existence ... evidently this was the limit imposed by Divine Providence upon that sort of folly," he says.





"The full extent of the evil that was raging through Europe was not seen by everyone, not even by those of us who were living at the epicenter. We were totally swallowed up in a great eruption of evil," he says.





"Both the Nazis during the war and, later, the Communists in Eastern Europe, tried to hide what they were doing from public opinion. For a long time, the West did not want to believe in the extermination of the Jews," he writes.





The pope's royalties from "Memory and Identity" will go to charity as have his previous titles.

---

Time flies by when the Devil drives.
It's not the pace of life that concerns me, it's the sudden stop at the end.

[Diebrock]

Quote:

---

"There was a sense that this evil was in some way necessary for the world and for mankind. It can happen, in fact, that in certain particular human situations, evil is revealed as somehow useful inasmuch as it creates opportunities for good."

---

I don't know, isn't he in a way describing evolution?



And, being a product of both the evil of Nazism and Communism (take one or the other away and I would not exist...hey, stop cheering ), I can even understand where he is coming from. Without all that god and destiny stuff, of course.



Without Nazism and the catastrophe that was WW2, Europe wouldn't be as united, peaceful and pacifistic as it is. Without Communism there wouldn't have been a Soviet Union to check US power after the war and no reason for the US to encourage European unity as an added bulwark against it. So, Nazism and Communism were necessary for Europe to come to where it is today.

But then that is history; everything had to happen as it did for us to be where we are now. History is not always straightforward progress but it always builds in some way on what came before.



I like where we are today. It's not perfect but we're going in the right direction. I'm glad that I never had to be afraid of war with our neighbors, in fact the thought alone seemed absurd; though there was the fear of the Russians/Soviets.

I like that real nationalism/patriotism doesn't have a chance in Germany anymore. I could go on and on. Last, but not least, I really like that I'm alive.



But I'm not saying that it's good that Nazism and Communism happened. And I would never dare try to determine if it was worth it.

All I can say is that since it did happen, I'm glad that some good things which probably wouldn't or couldn't have happened without it, developed from it.



And I think that is what the Pope is saying as well, only he has to bring god and providence into it since that is his gig.



Now Kieli look what you've made me do! You have made me defend the Pope.

_________________

Independence is my happiness, and I view things as they are, without regard to place or person; my country is the world, and my religion is to do good.

I've kissed her best friend. I've reached into her best friend's pocket and fished around for keys. And I gave her best friend my number. I must be doing something totally, totally wrong... - TBSOL by Dreams

Edited by: Diebrock at: 10/7/04 2:29 pm

[kukalaka]

Sorry for taking so long.



Actually, I'm sure US occupation is what really started this mess. But the mess is there now and it won't go away just because the US troops do.



There'd be a vacuum of power and I for one am not too keen to see another Taliban-like regime. Or another Saddam-like, for that matter.



I agree with everything maudmac said. Stop getting foreign companies there to do jobs the Iraqis could and should do on their own.



It would probably be best to really have international troops there (instead of that impressing coalition Bush built), but surprisingly (I bet Bush really thinks it is) there aren't a lot of states willing to clear the mess caused by others. It's not like they were standing at the sidelines cheering... It's shortsighted, but not exactly impossible to understand either.



Maybe Kerry (as he wasn't the one who started this) would be able to convince other states to help. Maybe not. Maybe he doesn't even want to. I don't know.



Such a mess.



The funny (in a totally not funny way) thing about this is that I used to argue with people about the war before it started saying "Suppose there is a reason for war, You'd still need to know what to do after having won the war. And they don't." And I actually thought I was exaggerating there...

[kukalaka]

Just something I found to be rather amusing:



Cheney slip sends Net surfers to anti-Bush site

Quote:

---

WASHINGTON (AP) -- All he wanted were the facts. But Dick Cheney ended up generating confusion-- and lots of it.



A slip of the tongue by the vice president during Tuesday night's debate with Sen. John Edwards led Web surfers to a site run by George Soros, a billionaire who makes no secret of his opposition to the Bush administration.



In answering a question about his involvement with Halliburton, Cheney meant to direct people to FactCheck.org, a nonpartisan site run by the University of Pennsylvania's Annenberg Public Policy Center. He urged people watching the debate to go to the site for facts countering Edwards' statements about the corporation Cheney used to run.

But Cheney cited FactCheck.com, a for-profit advertising site based in the Cayman Islands.



The company decided to redirect traffic to the Soros site after it became inundated with hits -- about 100 a second after the debate, John Berryhill, a Philadelphia lawyer for FactCheck.com, said Wednesday.



"This was to relieve stress on the service and to express a political point of view," said Berryhill, who spoke with the site's administrators shortly after the debate ended.



They picked Soros not only for his political views, Berryhill said, but because the billionaire could afford the costly deluge of hits the site would receive in the wake of the debate. Plus, the site administrators didn't want to point surfers to a candidate's site that was asking for money.



Web site operators typically pay fees to the companies that host their sites. The more hits a site receives, the more its operator pays.



Soros was not advised of the switch and did not know it had taken place until Wednesday, said a spokesman, Jeremy Ben-Ami.



"We are as surprised as anyone by this turn of events but certainly encourage voters to visit both of these valuable sites," Michael Vachon, a senior aide to Soros, said in a statement.



An unprecedented number of visitors to FactCheck.org caused the site to crash several times Wednesday, said Brooks Jackson, the site's director.

---

---

IDIC

[Kieli]

Quote:

---

Without Nazism and the catastrophe that was WW2, Europe wouldn't be as united, peaceful and pacifistic as it is. Without Communism there wouldn't have been a Soviet Union to check US power after the war and no reason for the US to encourage European unity as an added bulwark against it. So, Nazism and Communism were necessary for Europe to come to where it is today.

---

I disagree. It's an untenable argument to say that without Nazism and Communism the world wouldn't be the way it is because we really have no evidence to support that. No one really knows what other events might have taken place to bring us to our present course of history. Heck, they might have even been relatively peaceful events that might have made the present changes.



To say that level of evil was "necessary" to bring about change disturbs me greatly.

Quote:

---

But then that is history; everything had to happen as it did for us to be where we are now. History is not always straightforward progress but it always builds in some way on what came before.

---

Again, I don't see the logic in, nor the supporting evidence for, this statement. I do agree with the latter part of this statement, however.

Quote:

---

All I can say is that since it did happen, I'm glad that some good things which probably wouldn't or couldn't have happened without it, developed from it.

---

This I can agree with to a point. Like I said, we can never really know what OTHER things might have happened in the course of past history that would have not been quite as drastic in order to bring about present changes. Maybe I'm being a bit hard on the Pope but wording and crafting of argument is everything. I don't see how he can possibly defend his assertation realistically other than to use religious belief as the basis for it. There just isn't any other evidence to make this argument plausible.

Quote:

---

Now Kieli look what you've made me do! You have made me defend the Pope.

---

Sorry, luv, you know how that is. It's not like you and I to agree on everything It's been awhile since we had a good debate anyways

Time flies by when the Devil drives.
It's not the pace of life that concerns me, it's the sudden stop at the end.

[maudmac]

Vote and win cool stuff:



GET OFF THE INTERNET AND VOTE

---

when i hear music it makes me dance

[Diebrock]

Quote:

---

To say that level of evil was "necessary" to bring about change disturbs me greatly.

---

I'm not saying that at all. But I am saying that I can't imagine the changes that did occur would have happened at least in this magnitude without it.



If I take myself as an example (not because I'm egoistic but because I often thought about all the little (often historical) things that, if changed, would have prevented my parents from meeting), can I be sure that I wouldn't exist without WW2 (Nazism) and Communism (and WW1, for that matter)? No of course not. But the chances of any of my pretty much 'rooted-to-the-soil' family leaving their home and voluntarily moving somewhere else are not good. That they would move from one small town to just the one where my other parent lives across the country does not seem any more likely. And then they would have to meet. And be single at the time. It's possible but highly unlikely.



I can't prove it of course; the only thing I can know for certain is that the past events resulted in today.

But you also don't have any more evidence to support your reasoning that other events would or could have culminated in our current situation. So we're at an impasse and it comes down to our 'beliefs', I guess. Which is okay since we'll never know who's right, anyway.

_________________

Independence is my happiness, and I view things as they are, without regard to place or person; my country is the world, and my religion is to do good.

I've kissed her best friend. I've reached into her best friend's pocket and fished around for keys. And I gave her best friend my number. I must be doing something totally, totally wrong... - TBSOL by Dreams

[Kieli]

Quote:

---

So we're at an impasse and it comes down to our 'beliefs', I guess. Which is okay since we'll never know who's right, anyway.

---

Agreed....now if you'd only put that incredible German engineering to use and make us a Time Machine, we can settle this once and for all Of course, you'd have to lock it in my garage. Can't have anyone other than Americans find out about it Ok sorry, that was a bad joke. It's Friday, I just turned 35 and my sense of humour has hit a bump in the road, apparently. Verzeihen Sie mich, Diebrock.

Time flies by when the Devil drives.
It's not the pace of life that concerns me, it's the sudden stop at the end.