Registered?
Commenting on WE Blog now requires you to be a Kansas.com member. Use the links above to register, if you haven't already, or to log in.Contact us
Follow us
Daily Archives
-
Recent Comments
- Regular on ACORN stole election?
- thomaswitt on ACORN stole election?
- Daniel on Open thread 11/21
- Daniel on ACORN stole election?
- Phantom on Open thread 11/21
- Daniel on Open thread 11/21
- thomaswitt on ACORN stole election?
- Regular on Open thread 11/21
- Phantom on ACORN stole election?
- thomaswitt on ACORN stole election?
Open thread 7/23
- By Phillip Brownlee
- Posted July 23, 2007 at 1:05 a.m.
- Filed under Open thread
- Permalink
- Comments RSS
- Both comments and trackbacks are closed
246 Comments
Chinese trade trumps Americans’ safety
By James P. Pinkerton – Special to NewsdayJuly 23, 2007
What’s made in China — death? Is the principle of free trade really more important than the health of our citizens? So far, at least, we know the answer.
Let’s make four points:
First, it’s scary to learn that Chinese-manufactured toothpaste on our store shelves could be poisonous. There have been only close calls here, as far as we know — with the long-term health effects, of course, yet to be determined. But in Panama, more than 100 people are known to have died from toxic cough syrup originating in China.
Other countries, too, have discovered import problems from China, including Canada, Spain and Liberia, such as salmonella and outright putrefaction of food, not to mention adulterating tactics such as stuffing buns with flavored cardboard. We find foods and medicines filled with toxic melamine, diethylene glycol, nitrofuran and Malachite green — just for starters.
Second, how many Americans knew that the federal role in inspecting imports has dwindled at the same time that trade with China has ballooned? Today, China accounts for one-third of U.S. imports, worth some $300 billion. And, as everyone knows, China is one of the most polluted countries in the world. So we might ask our, uh, leaders in Washington: “If the Chinese are willing to trash their own country in the name of making a buck, why would they hesitate to trash us?” And yet at a hearing last week on Capitol Hill, we learned that just 1 percent of food imported into America is inspected, down from 8 percent in 1992.
Indeed, according to congressional investigators, inspectors in San Francisco have an average of 30 seconds to make a judgment on each shipment, including such basic questions as whether the shipment is accurately labeled as to country of origin — which many are not.
Third, one of the great political achievements of the 20th century, The Pure Food and Drug Act, is now under assault — assault from overseas. A little more than a century ago, in 1906, muckraking author Upton Sinclair published “The Jungle,” which opened Americans’ eyes to conditions in the meatpacking industry. Within months, President Theodore Roosevelt signed legislation that ultimately led to the creation of the Food and Drug Administration.
But now we are learning that the FDA has shrunk from the task of regulating Chinese imports. Why? Because China falls into the realm of “foreign policy,” in which the well-being of Americans is subordinated to the well-being of trans-Pacific diplomacy, including trade. In other words, the State Department, eager to keep Beijing happy at all costs, is the true arbiter of what gets into your stomach, not some low-level public health expert. Feel better?
Fourth, China’s system is worse than you know — but don’t take my word for it. “China’s regulatory regime isn’t really ready for the 21st century,” said Caroline Smith DeWaal of the Center for Science in the Public Interest, speaking to ABC News. Yeah, a cynic might say, the Center is a Nader-ite outfit that never met a government regulation it didn’t like.
But it’s harder to dismiss this warning: “As a developing country, China’s food and drug supervision work began late and its foundations are weak. Therefore, the food and drug safety situation is not something we can be optimistic about.” That’s from Yan Jiangying, the alarmingly frank spokeswoman for China’s food and drug agency, as recorded by The Washington Post.
So what’s going on? How did we grow so dependent on China? The answer is that America made a conscious decision to outsource manufacturing to low-wage countries overseas, so that we could concentrate on personal training, landscaping and hedge-funding. And now we see the result.
It’s that simple. When you rely on others to do your scut work for you, you get what they want to sell to you — or do to you.
— James Pinkerton’s e-mail address is pinkerto@ix.netcom.com.
Lawmakers say OK to outsourcing jobs to just about anywhere. China,Pakistan,&India and these countries are not really our friends but they do offer slave labor while the USA loses its’ ability to generate wealth. This must stop! Also if there is to be a dramatic change in mideast foreign policy voters must stop returning incumbents that have been serving more than one term.
Considering alI of the above I say approximately 90% must go. Returning incumbents is not making good changes for America. A lot of legislation filled with loopholes.
Bush/Cheney could not carry on as they have without a ton of party support. Bush/Cheney are bad guys however so are all elected officials who continue to support the Republican Neocon agenda.
Voter/taxpayers MUST Stop Special Interest Funding of campaigns!!
Let’s vote on this in 2008!!
Then get on with substantial discussion on the issues of:
*Universal HealthCare
*Bring the troops Home
*Global Warming
*Halting the export of USA Jobs
*Abuse of Presidential Power
*Public Finance of Elections instead of Special Interest Finance of Electionshttp://www.publicampaign.org/
* Implementing http://www.fairvote.org/irv/
*How much are american citizens willing to pay for a barrel of oil?
http://www.icta.org/press/release.cfm?ne…
http://www.progress.org/gasoline.htm
http://www.icta.org/doc/Real%20Price%20o…
http://www.iags.org/costofoil.html
http://nationalpriorities.org/index.php?…
Here the news about the lawsuit against the NEA? Maybe I missed this story OR it was well hidden.
I wonder if Obama being endorsed by the NEA is a good thing?
Kickbacks paid to the NEA are said to have exceeded $2 Million per year.
Also, the NEA (takes care of teachers retirment plans, right!)charges excess fees up to 10.62% per year, depending on the investment fund selected by the teachers.
Now you would think the teachers would notice these fees on their account statements. How smart are these teachers?
http://www.nytimes.com/2007/07/17/business/17suit.html?em&ex=1184817600&en=1fcf1e15602683f9&ei=5087
You Socialist Democrats never consider for your list of top issues:
NATIONAL DEFENSE
ILLEGAL IMMIGRATION including associated problems with ILLEGAL DRUG TRAFFICING and CRIME
ENERGY ABUNDANT AND INDEPENDENT AMERICA
SOLVING THE FISCAL CRISIS AND PENDING CRASH OF SOCIAL SECURITY AND MEDICARE
Instead – you parade out a list of little bullshit issues that appeal to your special interest groups and do nothing to solve the true problems facing America today.
ILLEGAL DRUG TRAFFICKING and CRIME
(3rd times the charm?)
“Instead – you parade out a list of little bullshit issues that appeal to your special interest groups and do nothing to solve the true problems facing America today.”Posted by: Max | July 23, 2007 at 06:41 AM
This kind of crap from a member of the party that’s for sale to the highest bidder.Pot, meet kettle.
Like somebody on one of the other posts said, here’s someone with a big sticker up his ass.
Sensitive Socialist Snuffy Smith said it all about Democrats in this post.
When you are not a taxpayer, when you are on the RECEIVING side of SOCIALISM, you don’t care about:
NATIONAL DEFENSE
ILLEGAL IMMIGRATION including associated problems with ILLEGAL DRUG TRAFFICkING and CRIME
ENERGY ABUNDANT AND INDEPENDENT AMERICA
SOLVING THE FISCAL CRISIS AND PENDING CRASH OF SOCIAL SECURITY AND MEDICARE
Oh, you mean kindof like the fascist republicans whose main issue is whether two men can get married?
Yeah, that’s a problem really facing Americans today. SOOO much more important than…you know, jobs, and eating.
Anybody hear that story about Dick Cheney in his underground bunker on 9/11?? The reporter who wrote the story says Cheney calmly sat there, and did nothing, while that plane/missle/whatever, RAMMED the Pentagon… and said over and over, “same orders as before” when his aide told him how close the plane/missle/whatever was getting… Then he just as calmly blamed it on terrorists… When he had the power to bring it down…
Mega dittos to Richard Heckler.
Today’s Bush Family Evil Empire: Scandal Du Jour is underwritten by the Halliburton Corporation. Halliburton, we don’t fight your wars, we just make money off them . . .
In the immortal words of Scooby Doo, “RUH ROH!”
Looks like more bad news for the RepubliCONs. The sheeple, though force-fed a constant diet of “the rich deserve to be rich because they’re just BETTER than all the rest of us” are starting to awake from the right-wing’s somnambulism.
Bush’s tax breaks for the rich and general encouragement for off-shoring American jobs just aren’t getting the purchase they once had. And once again, we go to the overseas press to get the straight story about what’s happening in America.
http://www.ft.com/cms/s/2a735dd0-3873-11dc-bca9-0000779fd2ac.html
Backlash in rich nations against globalisation
By Chris Giles in London
Published: July 22 2007 18:11 by The Financial Times of London
A popular backlash against globalisation and the leaders of the world’s largest companies is sweeping all rich countries, an FT/Harris poll shows.
Large majorities of people in the US and in Europe want higher taxation for the rich and even pay caps for corporate executives to counter what they believe are unjustified rewards and the negative effects of globalisation.
Those polled in Britain, France, the US and Spain were about three times more likely to say globalisation was having a negative rather than a positive effect on their countries. The majority was smaller in Germany, with its large export base.
Corporate leaders fared little better, with 5 per cent or fewer of those polled in the US and all large European economies (except Italy) saying they had a great deal of admiration for those who run large companies. In these countries, between a third and a half said they had no admiration at all for corporate bosses.In response to fears of globalisation and rising inequality, the public in all the rich countries surveyed – the US, Germany, UK, France, Italy and Spain – want their governments to increase taxation on those with the highest incomes. In European countries, a large majority want governments to go further and to impose pay caps on the heads of companies.
The issue of rising inequality is now high on the political agenda of every country and will feature prominently in the 2008 US presidential election.
Copyright The Financial Times Limited 2007
Trickle down economics—The belief that the best way to feed sparrows is to run the grain through the bowels of a draft horse first. Looks like the only people still buying this load of horse dung are the ever-shrinking numbers of folks who still support the Bush Administration, which is clearly in its last throes, if you will.
The vast majority of us can identify a self-serving lie by its smell . . .
This has been your Bush Family Evil Empire: Scandal Du Jour.
Remember, when it comes to spending your tax dollars, nobody does it better than Halliburton, the war-contractor of choice since 1998 . . .
When he had the power to bring it down…
Posted by: chas. | July 23, 2007 at 08:13 AM
And what power was that per say
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GO-9LQDFE2Y
Check this
Planes were scrambled from Langley/Norfolk. They were 10 min away. What do you expect? You want him to deploy the freakin space shuttle?
He gave the order to engage the commercial flight? What more do you want? A nuclear strike?
“When you are not a taxpayer, when you are on the RECEIVING side of SOCIALISM….”
Max, I pay more in taxes than you make.
“NATIONAL DEFENSE”
Repubs are doing a fine job of burning out our military in Iraq.
“ILLEGAL IMMIGRATION”
Isn’t that another issue Bush is trying to push down our throats?
“ENERGY ABUNDANT AND INDEPENDENT AMERICA”
Repubs have a fine record there. More tax breaks for big oil.
“SOLVING THE FISCAL CRISIS AND PENDING CRASH OF SOCIAL SECURITY AND MEDICARE”
I know you’re a young guy and don’t remember the budget surpluses before borrow and spend Repubs took over. Pass a few more tax cuts for the rich.
I. As the number of posts increases on any given thread at the WE Blog, the probability of ad hominem attacks approaches unity.
II. Once the first ad hominem attack occurs, the rate of these attacks grows expoentially.
III. The editors can chide trolls into behaving better, but this effect is temporary (less than one week) in duration.
IV. Posters with zero valid points to make will use the term “You People” (or some equally innane sweeping generalization) in a majority of their posts.
Unlike Martin Luther, I don’t have 99 feces to nail to the door, but is anyone else growing tired of the predictability here?
Yeah Steven. It’s gotten downright boring. It’s wearing to constantly swat ankle biters. And when the fact deniers just spin ’round and ’round, and the sock puppets “debate”, it’s just plain boring.
And if I wanted to be bored? I’d watch more tv.
It’s actually made me wonder about something. I wonder, since some of the cons and repubs are having such a hard time here these days, what with the “facts” having a liberal bias and all, if they’ve decided to just destroy the blog and drive down the posts. So no one will even read it anymore.
If you cant beat ‘em, kill the game?
SOLVING THE FISCAL CRISIS
Why worry?
GW Bush and company are unworried.
Last time we had a Democrat for prez, we also had payed off ourFISCAL CRISIS
Must be a Repugnican thing.You know, crippling our future generations with repug debts.
“they’ve decided to just destroy the blog and drive down the posts. So no one will even read it anymore.
If you cant beat ‘em, kill the game?
Posted by: ksfarmgrrl | July 23, 2007 at 09:13 AM”
KFG I do believe you are onto something there… why dont we “watch” and see?? Could be interesting… After all, thats what Reich wing talk radio is doing… I measn, Hannity is trying to re-open the Vince Foster suicide case of 14 years ago…
He gave the order to engage the commercial flight? What more do you want? A nuclear strike?
Posted by: SolDevVB | July 23, 2007 at 08:54 AM=======================SOL — the problem is that the plane he told them to engage was Flt. 93… he could have stopped the pentagon plane, or whatever it was, as well…
Listen to Mineta’s testimony again…
“You Socialist Democrats never consider for your list of top issues:SOLVING THE FISCAL CRISIS AND PENDING CRASH OF SOCIAL SECURITY AND MEDICARE…Posted by: Max | July 23, 2007 at 06:41 AM ”
I Love this! Slurring someone as a Socialist, then saying the government needs to fix Social Security and Medicare.
Max do you get the irony in that?
Augh, I saw that last night as I was flipping through the channels. You know they’re scared when they’re coming up with Vince Foster now to try to discredit Hillary with that. Faux News seems to have gone on an all out assault on her lately.
Yea, you got that right5 P-Mom… The other day, they were talking about her “cleavage” on some outfit she was wearing… Something tells me women arent going to let campaign smearing over “body parts” get much of anywhere… Of course, with the likes of mAnn Coulter out there, one never knows… LOL
The Cons have GOT to be desparate to take on Hillary’s “figure” or lack thereof…
We’ll try and follow the lib example. I know that they would never comment on a conservatives physical characteristics.
You know, If I was Vince Foster’s family, I would try to suinmg Hannity for something for re-opening that case — It was LONG ago decided by police, medical examiners, and many others that the man KILLED himself… not a mystery death at all… Suicide may be painful to mourners, but it isnt a mystery…
“Interesting” comments on 911 attacks on the Pentagon. It’s too bad they don’t match the 911 Commission reports.
Another case of the misinformed revising History to match the talking points of their ideology?
I agree about the Vince Foster case. It’s a closed case and should remain closed. It was well investigated and in my opinion no cover up.
HANK it was a sexist comment to take a pot shot at “cleavage” that was barely even in the picture… Surely our political scene hasnt crawled that far into the sewer that we can favor those kinds of tactics… Geez, Limbaugh has already gone after Edwards calling him the “Breck Girl” repeatedly… And that is also a sexual slur… And how about some other talk radio moguls who have gone after Obama’s Ears??? Obama came out swinging on that one already…
“It’s too bad they don’t match the 911 Commission reports.”
Kansas — That is why it has made it back into the news again… It has been brought out that Mineta, and two other reporters who were there all have the same memory of what happened in the bunker… And the 9/11 Commission covered it up…
In fact, in one story, the 9/11 Commission even deleted Mineta’s Testimony from their official records of Testimony… That video clip I believe came off of C-Span…
Chas anyone who has to resort to personal attacks on what Hillary looks like is sexist, pure and simple. It shouldn’t be an issue on how someone looks. George Washington had no teeth for crying out loud.
Exactly P-Mom… I think whoever is pushing that story on Hillary ought to be publicly castigated until they shut up about it… But, too many guys like Rush, and Walton & Johnson, think its funny, and they think they are propagating “humor”
But, I guess when Limbaugh can give his almost daily updates of what he calls “chick” news… Well, maybe its the best he can do… Makes Imus look almost tame by comparison
That’s why Keith calls him “comedian rush limbaugh”…
P-Mom — Have you listened to the show that KFH put on to replace Imus??? “Walton & Johnson”??? Those guys use sexist material, racial slurs, and anything else they can think of… like they are rubbing NBC’s nose into the Imus debacle…
Well, I wish Keith would attack him and some of the others more, and let up a little on O’Reilly… we all know he doesnt like O’Reilly… O’Reilly is a stupid idiot…
Well chas,
Thanks for being so dense that you completely missed the point.
Both sides do it.
Hank
No I hadn’t! I guess I’ll have to call them out for it.
At least Imus had some real issues he fought for.
Hey, you all… Change of subject… My wife is disabled… She gets absentee ballots for elections… The DAY she got her ballot for this next voting thing in August… the same DAY… she got a phone call asking her if she got it, and would she be voting against the Casinos…
Then, she got another call Yesterday morning, from some Yahoo wanting to know if she would like for them to come pick up her ballot, and deliver it to the election office..
This sounds like some kind of scam operating… But how would we find out??
Liberals: “Let’s silence anyone who offends us”.
chas: The term “chick news” offends you? “Makes Imus look almost tame by comparison” Chuckle….
What do you think of the term,”you woose”.
Hank, I cannot recall hearing anybody make fun of any Republican candidates physique as a part of a Campaign… But, here come the ad hominem fire backs… just predicted upthread…
Steven Davis,
“95 feces.” Man, you’re KILLIN’ me.
ksfarmgrrl,
You wrote:
“I wonder, since some of the cons and repubs are having such a hard time here these days, what with the “facts” having a liberal bias and all, if they’ve decided to just destroy the blog and drive down the posts. So no one will even read it anymore.
If you cant beat ‘em, kill the game?”
This IS exactly what CF2K means by the term “ratf*cking.” When conservatives can’t win, they try to destroy the rules that keep them from winning.
At the moment, we’re seeing this in the assertion of Executive power by the P and VP, as well as in Mitch McConnell’s shutting down of the Senate by filibustering 42 times during the first part of the current session. In each case, if the Constitution stands between the GOP and absolute power, they’ll just as soon do away with the Constitution.
If Right Wingers can’t dominate something, they’d just as soon destroy it–this board included.
Yep… here comes the ad hominem garbage truck again… And…. they’re OFF!!!
Call the Secretary of State’s office Chas. I’d definately report that one.
Liberals apparently define “destroying the board” here at WE Leftyblog as unauthorized posting of viewpoints they disagree with.
Outlander, that is BULLSHIT! It is your go-to position, a meme tossed around by you and repuke and gmc. No one here is trying to shut down dissent. You know it, and YET you throw that damn “shut up anyone who disagrees” meme bullshit.
WILLFULLY obtuse when it flies in the face of fact. And you use it anyway.
Are you just short on original material? I dont think I have EVER seen you call out a poster on the right outie. I think that speaks volumes for you.
Hank,
I am confused – since when if one person does something does that make it okay for someone else to do it?
Isn’t that along the same lines as the whole “if all your friends jump off a bridge” …
Not to excuse anyone who may have previously made derogatory statements against republicans, but seriously, your argument is that “well the libs did it so why can’t we?” Shouldn’t we all strive towards better behavior?
Wow. Truth hurts, huh kfg?
Is that all you have to say for yourself outie? Still pushing that tired old meme?
How’s it working for ya?
No, it’s a fact ksfarmgrrl. CapnAmerica has admitted he has tried to get me banned and his constant attempts to “out” me gets tiresome.
I can pull quotes from today that the Left just not disagree but constantly belittle and generally use ad hominem remarks to shut down debate.
The left appears to be not interested in discussion, but rather in attacking the poster.
Or should I remind you ksfarmgrrl of your one and half day long attack on GMC where you outed him, his place of employment and threatened to call his supervisor.
Are you short of original material ksfarmgrrl to such things?
And yes Outlander has called me on some of my comments, you are wrong again ksfarmgrrl.
Please repost where I threatened to call gmc’s boss. You are a freakin’ liar, but that’s already been noted today.
GMC outed himself by using his WORK addy as his identifying email here. Just like Tom. I so’ nuff didnt threaten to break into gmc’s office like you did Tom’s.
Heheheheh. And if you want to start another two day discussion on how gmc was posting on the taxpayer’s dime, please continue. I dont have much else to do today. Everytime you bring it up, I’m going to jump on it and repeat the FACTS.
And repuke/jm/kansas/whatever?
Yes, there are MANY on both sides of the aisle here who want you banned. For life.
Just keep posting, it will happen. You cant help yourself.
I guess, using Steven Davis’ model, the time on this thread has arrived when the attacks and the number of posts will reach unity.
Argue amongst yourselves repuke. Did you wash the sock puppets over the weekend?
jimmy, jimmy, dont take it so personal… its just a Blog…
Well, KFG… I am off to meetings… be back later!! Take care all!!
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-275577066688213413
Dr. Griffin is hardly some fringe-group conspiracy theorist. He was a professor at the Claremont School of Theology, and the Claremont Graduate University, both very reputable institutions of higher learning, and was America’s leading scholar in process theology.
His book “Christian Faith and the Truth Behind 9/11″ and “The American Empire and the Commonwealth of God” are published by Westminster John Knox Press, the publication house of the Presbyterian Church U.S.A., and are distributed by Cokesbury, the retail division of the United Methodist Church. These are mainstream Protestant churches.
“And yes Outlander has called me on some of my comments, you are wrong again ksfarmgrrl.”Posted by: Kansas | July 23, 2007 at 10:49 AM
I wonder which “me” that would be?
Sock Puppet washing occurs at the end of the month. The kids at church enjoy playing with them, but sticky kool-aid and cookies get them a little clumpy. :)
The big difference about GMC and Tom, is that GMC always posts a mature posts and I have never seen an ad hominem attack from him. He might have dressed some people down, but they usually deserved it.
GMC’s posts are logical, to the point and shows his vast knowledge from a legal viewpoint.
Tom’s posts are well…Tom’s posts. I find zero professionalism in them from any aspect pr subject.
So… you are saying Tom deserves to have his office broken into?
I see. More blame the victim. And I guess that makes YOU the sole arbiter of which posts deserve attacks in real life and which dont?
heheheh. Like I said, just keep posting troll. You will either kill the blog or get yourself banned for life sooner or later.
Hopefully you’ll be banned sooner, rather than later.
I wonder, did the kansas republican party ask you to stop using the name republican here because it was causing them so much grief?
heheheh. Tom deserves an assault. Gmc doesnt. Troll logic…
And with that, troll, the buffet line is closed. Go eat worms somewhere else, ’cause I’m gonna walk on by….
It was a post made in jest ksfarmgrrl. Rifling an office was evidently my failed attempt at humor. Regardless of what you think of me, I would never do such a thing.
I can see the news now:
“A large hulking figure with wrist canes was seen leaving the office (left blank.) Evidently, the intention of visit was to rifle through the office for no other reason than to verify a blog stunt.”
Sorry ksfarmgrrl, I wouldn’t make a very good “cat burglar.”===============No, I change my nic when I feel like it. Kansas is the main theme of my blog, so it was a natural adaptation.
Posting my full name, the general location of my office, and the dates I’m going to be out of town isn’t a “joke,” 4$$w1p3. It’s an attempt to intimidate people who are on to your silly little troll games.
CF2K makes a damn good point.
Not only are the Senate Repubs totally hypocritical on their non-stop use of the filibuster, but the so-called “liberal media” isn’t even reporting it.
Remember when the Senate Repubs kept whining about not “getting an up or down vote?”
Here’s what the Weekly Top Ten Conservative Idiots column has to say about it (actually, they had 30! idiots this week):
Hats off to Senate Democrats, who finally painted warmongering Republicans into a corner last week by forcing them to publicly filibuster the Reid-Levin amendment to the FY08 defense authorization bill. The amendment called for troops to start coming home from Iraq within 120 days, and once Republicans realized that they couldn’t stop the amendment on an up-or-down vote (yeah, I said it), they were forced to filibuster for 30 straight hours in order to prevent the Senate from voting on it.
So, let’s recap – Senate Democrats had the votes to pass an amendment which would effectively end the war, and Republicans obstructed it using a filibuster. Pretty straightforward, right? Sure – unless you’re a member of the media.
“Senate Rejects Iraq Pullout” blared the headline on the front page of the Washington Times. “If the Democrats start blocking every initiative – even in the name of a cause that 70 percent of Americans support – it’ll be hard to peel off the obstructionist label,” noted the Washington Post’s Lyndsey Layton. “Filibuster Fails to Force Iraq Vote” trumpeted the St. Louis Post-Dispatch. “Senators facing an all-nighter now as Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid vows to filibuster,” charged veteran journalist Diane Sawyer.
HELLO???????? IS THERE ANYBODY THERE???????
http://journals.democraticunderground.com/top10/300
Hey, whatever happened to LHG, the old-timer who kept lamenting that “thing’s just ain’t like they used to be”?
Sibyl isn’t channeling him lately . . .
perhaps lhg is back in the UK?
Do the names Tim Osman and the Carlyle Group ring a bell with anyone?
Carlyle Group yes… Osman, no… fill in the blanks???
Chas,
“Ossman” was CIA’s name for bin Laden back in the days when the US was providing Stinger AA missiles to the Afghan insurgents. Think 80s, Soviet Union, mujaheddin.
Sol, you talking about the CIA “cover name” for OBL when you post Tim Osman?
Ok thanks Tom… Hey, welcome back!!
I had a good trip, except I broke my darn speedometer cable on the way out there Saturday… drove on my watch, and mile marker posts all the way home…
VT,Yup. Quite the link up between the Bush family, OBL, the Saudis, Carlyle group…
Interesting research.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HXk0LFVAgHE&mode=related&search=
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arbusto_Energy
I find it amazing that the wichita eagle has nothing to say about this story:
Legislator arrested on suspicion of DUIBy Tim CarpenterThe Capital-JournalPublished Monday, July 23, 2007The Kansas House’s assistant minority leader was arrested in Topeka on suspicion of drunken driving.
Rep. Jim Ward, D-Wichita, confirmed today he was taken into custody at about midnight Friday.
He was booked into the Shawnee County Jail after the Kansas Highway Patrol arrested him for failure to submit to a breath test and driving while intoxicated. Ward was released at 6 a.m. Saturday, according to jail records.
Ward, 49, told The Topeka Capital-Journal that he was arrested on suspicion of driving under the influence, but wouldn’t offer additional details of the incident.
The state legislator said he had never previously faced charges related to drunken driving.
Ward said prosecutors in Topeka hadn’t made a determination about whether to proceed with a case against him. The city’s attorney wasn’t immediately available to comment on status of Ward’s case.
Ward, elected to the House in 2002, represents the 88th District in Wichita. It is an east Wichita district bordered by Interstate 35.
He is an lawyer who serves on the House Judiciary Committee, the Joint Committee on Corrections and Juvenile Justice Oversight and the House Health and Human Services Committee.
Wanted to comment on the Hillary cleavage story. This Washington Post article nearly eulogizes her for her “statement”:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/07/19/AR2007071902668.html
Surely we can think of something else to talk about?
In 1978, Bush and Osama bin Laden’s brother, Salem bin Laden, founded Arbusto Energy, an oil company based in Texas.Several bin Laden family members invested millions in The Carlyle Group, a private global equity firm based in Washington, DC. The company’s senior advisor was Bush’s father, former President George H.W. Bush. After news of the bin Laden-Bush connection became public, the elder Bush stepped down from Carlyle.Interestingly, on Sept. 11, 2001, members of the Carlyle Group – including Bush senior, and his former secretary of state, James Baker – were meeting at the Ritz Carlton Hotel in Washington, D.C., along with Shafiq bin Laden, another one of Osama bin Laden’s brothers.http://www.denverpost.com/rodriguez/ci_4319898http://www.guardian.co.uk/Archive/Article/0,4273,4293682,00.htmlhttp://www.uni-muenster.de/PeaCon/global-texte/g-notes/BinLaden-Carlyle.htm
Sean Hannity has shown his TRUE colors today, when he made the statement that no man should be ruled by a woman… So, his whole rant is about Women serving in any kind of public office… Gee, just like many fundamentalistic christians, and even the Catholic Church, where women are not allowed to be ordained ministers…
And then, he went back on his rant about hillary’s cleavage, and the Vince Foster mysterious death… LOL LOL ha ha ha!!
This flowchart is the best way to understand,
‘HOW BUSH REALLY MADE HIS MILLIONS.’http://bushwatch.org/bushmillions.html
Here’s a nice link that documents some GOP ratf*cking of the 2004 election in Milwaukee. Ballot-stuffing and name-forging, anyone?
http://www.bradblog.com/?p=4830
Chas, where is a link to what Hannity said about women?
Wow…
It must be true when you are linking to “brad’s blog”
LOL
Oh yes, I sometimes forget that you liberals suffer from irrationality.
You believe that all Republicans must be closet Racist, Sexists, bigots. On rare occasions we slip up and say something you can contrive is proof of this!
“IV. Posters with zero valid points to make will use the term “You People” (or some equally innane sweeping generalization) in a majority of their posts.”
Nathan is my one of my proofs of this postulate. Thank you, Nathan.
Nathan,
The informal fallacy you’re using is called the “Ad Hominem.” Here is an explanation of it:
An ad hominem argument, also known as argumentum ad hominem (Latin: “argument to the person”, “argument against the man”) consists of replying to an argument or factual claim by attacking or appealing to the person making the argument or claim, rather than by addressing the substance of the argument or producing evidence against the claim. It is most commonly used to refer specifically to the ad hominem abusive, or argumentum ad personam, which consists of criticizing or personally attacking an argument’s proponent in an attempt to discredit that argument.”
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ad_hominem
To attack the argument in a valid way, Nathan, you would need to attack its evidence–all of which is posted in the form of pdf files and screen caps on Bradblog’s site. And on the basis of this evidence, you would then have to show that Bradblog draws an unjustified inference on its basis.
Obviously, the hard work needed to understand the evidence and to render a judgment seems, judging by your avoidance, well beyond your abilities. So…presto! Issue an Ad Hominem attack, and let your brain avoid all that pesky cognitive dissonance.
Nathan, the fact that you are unable or unwilling to comprehend arguments doesn’t render them invalid. Republicans appear to have added votes for Bush where none were cast, and US Attorney, Steven Biskupic has blocked access to the records.
The moral: Republicans steal elections, and other Republicans–like Biskupic and Nathan–are cool with it.
“Sean Hannity has shown his TRUE colors today, when he made the statement that no man should be ruled by a woman… So, his whole rant is about Women serving in any kind of public office… Gee, just like many fundamentalistic christians, and even the Catholic Church, where women are not allowed to be ordained ministers…” -chas
chas: I don’t believe you. Please post a transcript or some proof that Hannity said that women shouldn’t hold public office.
The poster who refers to himself in third person is giving logic lessons.
Something insanely hilarious about that. :D
CF2K,
Looks like Steven needs to take heart of you little message CF2K.
Seriously though. It you want to have an actual debate, while implementing true rules and avoiding argument fallacies, then I am game.
Meanwhile, you are comparing us to the Nazis in the other thread while talking about Ad hominem tactics over here….
LOL
You lefties are too much.
Outlander, I dont really care if you dont believe me… That is what he said on the AIR this afternoon… on his radio show, on KNSS…. Maybe you can find the streaming link to his show on Hannity.com
Nathan,
Then please make a “reasonable” and “factual” post, explaining how the U.S. preemptive attack on Iraq in 2003 has provided “stability” to the Middle East.
Nathan,
When X does Y and Z also does Y, likening X to Z makes sense, provided one gives reasons for asserting the similarity. CF2K did so.
The fact that you don’t want to acknowledge the similarity doesn’t expose CF2K to accusations of committing an ad hominem fallacy.
This is what Hannity said:
“No man should be ruled by a woman… Thats the way it should be.”
And that IS the same belief as the Catholic Church, and many Christian fundamentalists, who do not believe in ordaining women, for the same reason…
If you dont believe it, I dont care… I know it is true…
CF2K: The problem with posting something like what you are taking Nathan to task for criticizing is just what you said, the amount of time and effort necessary to refute it.
It could be the truth or it could be the biggest lie in the world, yet if it has enough layers of crap, you are saying that one should be only be able to question it if he digs through and analyzes all the evidence? I disagree. You got time to refute all the outrageous stuff that I could go find and post here?
Otherwise, this blog will become nothing but who can post the most links to other people’s work. That’s just plain lazy. This especially applies to partisan sources, which I note are being linked more and more often, mostly by liberals like yourself.
Chas you are way off base with that Hannity statement. In fact someone from Wichita was talking to Sean when the actual statement was made. I’ll let you figure out what he really said. He was in fact very complementary to women. Where do you make this stuff up from?
You lose your credibility when you post this garbage as fact.
outlander,
Ascertaining the truth takes time and is a messy business that often winds up inconclusively. We know that. But it doesn’t release us from the burden of doing so.
You object to the providing of evidence and the judging of arguments on…what grounds, exactly? That doing so is cumbersome? That sourcing one’s factual assertion lards the blog? That arguments are too hard to follow?
What are you suggesting, outlander? That evidence and arguments are passe? While I agree this is FACTUALLY the case, I absolutely reject the idea that it NORMATIVELY should be the case.
What are we left with, then? Pure relativism: no way to adjudicate truth claims.
Though we don’t agree, outlander I don’t think you’re cynical enough to want the kind of relativism you’re proposing.
But I am quite convinced that your ideological brethren salivate at the prospect of pure force untethered by facts or argument. Speaking power to truth has been a winning Right Wing tactic at least since Nixon. And it has reached its apotheosis in Bush and Cheney.
chas: Why should those churches allow the ordination of women? Because you think they should?
And what does this have to do with women in public office?
The answer to that chas, is”nothing”.
Let me ask you this CF. Did you carefully review the evidential basis of the story? Did you look at it with a critical eye? Did you make absolutely sure that the evidence that was presented was from reliable sources? I would venture to say that the answer is no.
Yet you posted it because it agreed with your personal beliefs and agenda. And now for someone to criticize and discard it for the same reason, well that is somehow wrong.
It’s a problem. Do you have a solution?
It is a part of Hannity’s agenda… If those churches dont want to ordain women, nobody is forcing them to do so… However, I dont think their internal agenda on women should influence who is elected to public office, in the way Hannity implied in his broadcast today… I am not going to play your name calling games… so dont even try it…
YOUR answer might be nothing… but that doesnt mean that is the answer for everybody… including in this case, Hannity, and some of the religious right, and some of the neo con agenda…
YOUR answer might be nothing… but that doesnt mean that is the answer for everybody… including in this case, Hannity, and some of the religious right, and some of the neo con agenda…
CF2K,
I didn’t say you were actually committing an Ad hominem fallacy.
Regardless of whether or not I admit to the similarities the Right has to the Nazi’s is not the point.
The point is the introduction of so called similarities into the discussion.
Which is/was an obvious attempt on your part to indeed make a statement calling the Right Nazi’s.
It had nothing to offer in the furthering of the discussion other than to personally attack those on the right.
Call it whatever you want to. It was pretty pathetic.
You sit here talking to me about a logical fallacy while you do the same crap in a different way in another thread.
YOUR answer might be nothing… but that doesnt mean that is the answer for everybody… including in this case, Hannity, and some of the religious right, and some of the neo con agenda…
ooops the darn thing double posted on me again…
Chas,
Until we get the actual context of what Sean Hannity said, I will have to assume you are being less than truthful.
You seem all to eager to jump right onto your “The Right” hates women crap as usual.
LOOK… I gave you the quote… IF you want to go look it up on the Streaming thing on his web site, go for it… YOU want to claim my quote is less than truthful, based on what??? Because you WANT it to be false?? I dont think YOUR church bans ordination of women… any more than mine… but many do… Catholics, most Baptists, and some others… And Hannity is saying basically, a woman should not rule over a man…
Now, if that is right hates women, that is what YOU said… I didnt say that… So, you better quit while you are ahead, because you are close to your little games again, and I am NOT going to play… GOT IT???
ALL I am saying is that Hannity is allowing his religious preference for the role of women, to dictate his choice for being opposed to a woman for President… I cant help but wonder however, if he would say the same thing if it was Condi Rice running as a Republican, or Kaye Baily Hutchinson running as a Republican for President…
I guess we wont know the answer to that one this time around…
I base your being less than truthful on the fact that your quote has … in it.
It doesn’t give us the full context of what he was sayinge before or after.
And to top it off you are up to your usual Republicans hate women crap again and using this as evidence.
You are drawing radical conclusions based on an imcomplete quote about a man you know little about.
So, I think LESS THAN TRUTHFUL suits you rather well in this instance.
Well, as usual, you are wrong again… Republicans dont hate women… at least not that I know of… I am saying that Hannity, on his program, now watch close, said “no woman should rule over a man” That was his sentence… He was talking in the context of Hillary Clinton running for President… His next sentence after that was:”And that’s the way it should be”PLEASE read what I post… Leave my punctuation style to ME…
And YOU Nathan, are back to you old games of calling people liars, when you cant find anything else to rebutt what is being said… And THAT is why nobody is playing you game any more… NO MORE AD HOMINEM GARGAGE TRUCKS ANY MORE!!!
You have no literary, or other basis, on which to call me a liar…. If you can prove me wrong about what I said about Hannity’s program, then DO IT… Dont call me a Liar… Folks on this blog are sick and tired of that kind of CRAP!!! So learn to debate or just go away!!
Nathan:
A challenge for you: see if you can identify the problems with the conclusions of this report from Georgetown University wherein they show that the Gonzalez/DOJ disproportionally prosecutes Democrats over Republicans. They conclude that the distribution of prosecutions suggests bias against Dems. There are reasons to think they are missing the point. Answers such as: “They are dumb” will result in a grade of F- ; maybe, you can do better than that. I, frankly, am not holding my breath…
http://www.epluribusmedia.org/columns/2007/Table%203%20Only%20Local%20Investigated.pdf
Steven, he is still looking to try to find someplace where I said Republicans hate women, which he has accused me of saying twice now…
Nathan, the man who wants to debate the bible and the existence of God, complains about logical fallacies. PLEASE give me a break, will ya…
Nathan, makes Kansas/Republican/etc, etc, look like the blog’s most honest poster ever, I am telling ya…
Steven,
Before I answer any of your challanges, I would like to see your comments as to why you posted this:
Nathan,Sorry. Do you suppose your father ever loved you? I don’t think he was capable of doing that. You can do something else with you life, if you’d accept this obvious truth. The easist things, are sometimes, the most difficult.
You’ll note, my response was much shorter and more parsimonious than yours. Sorry again. The truth is always pretty simple, but also difficult.Posted By darwinsdisciple | 4/6/07 11:06 PM
You used to go by the nic DarwinsDisciple did you not?
Nathan defends his father AND Ann Coulter. Enough said.
Yes. Sorry, the truth hurts, doesn’t it?
Steven,
I am quite capable of debating things logically. When you guys want to have a logical discussion, free from all the sillyness, I am game.
What the existence of God and my discussing the Bible has to do with my ability to comprehend logic, escapes me.
LOL
Thats the old Steven I know.
The mean and decrepit old man comes out rearing his ugly head.
It seems to me that you seem a bit too preoccupied with trying to personally insult me.
You are one sick puppy.
“What the existence of God and my discussing the Bible has to do with my ability to comprehend logic, escapes me.”
Me too. At least we agree on that.
Umm..chas, funny you should bring Condi Rice up. Hannity has said a number of times how he wished Condi would run for president. Another reason that you either misheard or are misrepresenting what Hannity said.
Ah yes Steven Davis -
epluribusmedia.org/
heh heh
Founded by a former DailyKos member, Susan G. in real life known as Susan Gardner.
Didn’t it bother you Steven Davis to propose a test of logical skills when you provided a far left source PDF?
I mean come on now, at least you could have done is gotten the real information from the Justice Department and not pre-compiled list of mostly Democrats showed on a EXCEL – worked over Data sheet.
There is no challenge in that PDF Steven Davis.
It’s a skewed source, no scientist or logician would even take a second look at it for evaluation.
‘The mean and decrepit old man comes out rearing his ugly head.
“It seems to me that you seem a bit too preoccupied with trying to personally insult me.
“You are one sick puppy.”
Love it, when you avoid those ad hominem arguements you are against. Thanks.
You used to go by the nic DarwinsDisciple did you not?
Posted by: Nathan | July 23, 2007 at 10:34 PM
Ya, he always posted that email on another Blog. :)
Sorry, Republican – F- for you. You are correct there are problems with the conclusions, but you were unable to find them. Big surprise there.
Outlander, I am NOT wrong about what Hannity said… I heard it myself… I have also heard him say what he has said about Condi Rice… But that doesnt mean he is logical when it comes to talking about Hillary, now does it??
He simply said that no woman should rule over a man, and then he said that is the way it should be… I just sort of take that to mean his Catholic faith is speaking louder than his political biases…
Now, you all telling me I am WRONG about what Hannity said… Just suppose one of you shows that I am wrong, instead of either A) calling me a liar, or B) defending Hannity…. GO LOOK IT UP FOR YOURSELVES… I told you where to check on the actual show…. http://www.hannity.com
Steven,
I don’t think I said I was against them or pretended to be. I pointed out to CF2K that he should avoid calling me on the fallacy when comparing us to Nazi’s in another thread.
I think we could do without them, but I hardly resort to the crap you do.
No Steven Davis.
I always check my source material before I make a conclusion.
The source material was skewed.
You didn’t identify the source author.
You didn’t state the question specifically you wanted answered.
You made pre-qualifying statements before the premise so your expectation of an unbiased answer would be all but impossible.
Learn about giving tests of logic Steven Davis before you ask someone to come to a logical conclusion.
There are people that have PhD in Logic/Philosophy that find test giving in this field very difficult. This is not for amateurs and you’re definitely an amateur Steven Davis.
Anybody know about Democrat Jim Ward getting busted for a DUI?
Hannity – yuck
I’m sorry, but I just can’t listen to the guy. Guess I’m too old and cranky for that. :)
Think of it like Court: If the prosecutor says you DID something, you arent allowed to just tell him/her, No I didnt, You are a liar… THAT is not a defense….
Same thing on the Blog… I made a statement… You dont agree with it… That’s fine… Go prove me wrong… Dont call me a liar, or say I am being less than truthful (which is the same thing as calling me a liar) Gee, I dont think some Blog manners is too much to ask… Cause I for one am not going to play the silly Ad Hominem Game on here any more!!
Yeah Joe, read about it here on the Blog and the WE Eagle.
Joe, according to the story, it is alleged that Jim Ward got arrested for DWI… And that is all that is known, so far as I know…
The evening news said that he refused to take a breathilizer test.
He is a lawyer. I’ve heard people getting themselves off the hook by refusing the test and then taking it to court saying their isn’t any proof.
I like the dude though. He’s a good guy. He was once on the School Board.
Funny http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=k4ZzWiTWA0k
He might be an amateur in logic, but at least he knows that you dont give “logic tests” Kansas..
I dont know where you get the idea that anybody gives “logic tests” especially not professors of logic…
And ummmm… just for what it’s worth, Kansas, I would HOPE that no professor of Philosophy would EVER give anything CLOSE to a logic test… He or she would most likely not be qualified…
Do you want to know why???
Chas,
The point I believe Kansas and myself are trying to make is this:
I listen to Sean Hannity rahter regularly.
I have read his books.
I watch his TV show.
I have met him in person.
I don’t find it in his character or anything I have ever seen from him which would indicate to me that:
“ALL I am saying is that Hannity is allowing his religious preference for the role of women, to dictate his choice for being opposed to a woman for President… ”
or
“I dont think their internal agenda on women should influence who is elected to public office, in the way Hannity implied in his broadcast today…”
or
“No man should be ruled by a woman… Thats the way it should be.”
So when you come here saying these things and drawing these conclusiong, I am naturally a bit disinclined to believe you.
Ah, here it is Joe,
http://blogs.kansas.com/weblog/2007/07/open-thread-723.html#comment-76942268
captain poindexter, the Blog’s nose for news was on it first and he pegged it for sure.
And so still, you call me a liar, instead of attempting to prove me wrong… Way to go Nathan!!
I don’t know Chas, but you better rush down to the University where I took courses in Symbolic Logic and three Philosophy courses to let them know they should give tests on Logic.
Dang Chas, you mean I wasted all that time in College taking bogus tests?
er shouldn’t give tests
Chas,
Also, Both Kansas and I have heard Sean about Condi running for President.
So the conclusions you are drawing and the incomplete quote you provide us seems out of character for Sean as well.
Could you at least tell us during which hour of the show he said this? Help us narrow it down so we don’t have to listen to 3 hours of a Radio show to figure out where he said this?
Thanks Kansas. I don’t read every post, so I often miss what others are saying.
Well! He’ll probably get off. So it’s not big deal. Time to move on.
Umm Kansas said: Hannity, yuck
If I am not mistaken, it would have been during the second hour of the show…
It could have been towards the very end of the first hour, but I think it was the second hour…
On top of that, what church doctrine even says:
“No man should be ruled by a woman”
I am not Catholic, but I don’t recall any of my Catholic friends believing this or hearing the church preach it.
I know of several denominations which do not ordain woman and why they don’t.
None of their reasons are because:
“No man should be ruled by a woman”
So even there, when you say:
“And that IS the same belief as the Catholic Church, and many Christian fundamentalists, who do not believe in ordaining women, for the same reason…”
I wonder where you get your information?
What church denomination are you talking about preaching that: No man should be ruled by woman?
You sit here making these dramatic accusations based on what? And then wonder why I would say you are being less than truthful?
Well no offense to anyone, but I just don’t listen to Sean Hannity. Might be some philosophical differences, but the guy irks me for some reason.
He appears to be a decent guy and all that and have no problem with him, I just don’t listen to his radio or TV show.
Since I don’t believe that Nathan or Republiblank will have the intellectual honesty to figure out the problem with the data I posted, I will tell those intellectual giants what the problems are.
The Georgetown study looked at the proportion of cases lodged against democrats v. republicans by the Bush/Gonzalez DOJ; most of the cases are against people in small government venues across the U.S.
The Chi-Square statistical test requires that the distributions one is looking at are evenly distributed along a normal distribution (a bell curve – for you undergraduates).
The problem is that a non-normal curve distribution occurs with local government positions. Democrats are more likely to occupy those positions. Hence there are more Democrats to investigate. There is not a normal distribution to begin with, hence the basic assumptions of the test are not met. Therefore it is bogus.
But, you clowns resort to ad hominem attacks and arguments, big, big surprise there. [See, my predictive model above...]You dudes are so bogus it is pathetic. Go get a life, Please.
RepubliKahn calls me an amatuer. I consider that a compliment from that bogus asshole (which is clear to anybody who has eyes and a brain)
Joe, if he was guilty of DWI, then he should pay the price for it.. doesnt matter if he is Republican, Democrat, or Martian.
Oh please Nathan. We know many Christians say women shouldn’t hold power for whatever biblical verses they base it from.
Why is it you don’t believe Hannity would say that? He’s a jerk, or didn’t you know that?
In all fairness, I simply refuse to subject myself to a test by someone who does little more than follow me around and say some very disparaging things about my familiy and I.
Good post Steven… Now tell them why there is no such thing as a “logic test” especially not one given by a Professor of philosophy… LOL
Political Mom,
How do you know this? Who are these “many” Christians you know who think this?
P-Mom, he would rather call me a liar, instead of prove me wrong…
Nathan’s church, I believe, ordains women… The ones I know of that dont, are Roman Catholic, most Baptists, and a few of the Lutheran groups. There may be others, but I am not sure of any but these…
MANY do ordain women… Hannity’s comment was a direct comment aimed at Hillary, as a woman, and he said that “No woman should rule over a man, and that is the way it should be.”
Now, Nathan says that is an incomplete quote. Looks like a whole sentence to me…
Nathan, I already named a long list upthread… and again now… is that good enough for you??
Chas,
I recieved an A in my introduction to logic class.
I took several tests which tested my ability to look at the logic in arguments, to solve problems based on logic and to identify common logical fallacies and equations.
I don’t know what you mean by “logic test” but I did take tests about logic in my class.
Yes chas and Steven Davis please do tell me why there are “tests of logic.”
I would have like to have my college money refunded me for taking courses in philosophy in logic.
You know the pathway to digital science…Symbolic LogicBoolean AlgebraLogical Gate ConstructionSemanticsMetaphysics (Western Influence)
I said there are NO tests of logic, Kansas… please go read it again… There is no such thing as a “test” in logic… Just isnt there…
By the way, Kansas, is there any subject that you HAVENT take a class in???
Chas,
You have yet to back up your statement that:
“And that IS the same belief as the Catholic Church, and many Christian fundamentalists, who do not believe in ordaining women, for the same reason…”
Another religion, or I should say cult, that doesn’t ordain women is the Mormons.
They have a belief that only men are the ones that will become gods and go to heaven. Women do not go to heaven without the discretion of her husband.
That is why there is a very high suicidal rate among Mormon women and very high rates of depression drug use also.
That’s because asshole husbands of these faiths, will often time tell their women (for total control purposes) that they aren’t going to heaven, unless you do this and that or they will just flat out say they aren’t going to heaven.
People like Harry Reid, Democrat Leader of the Senate is just this asshole. Why do you think he such a control freak in Congress? Because he’s a shovenistic pig. Women staffers hate working with him.
But this is the face of the Democratic Leadership.
“[Sean Hannity] appears to be a decent guy and all that and have no problem with him, I just don’t listen to his radio or TV show.”
Posted by the many-named troll | July 23, 2007 at 11:05 PM
Hannity lies, crops quotes, etc.http://mediamatters.org/issues_topics/people/seanhannity?f=h_hot
Hannity is definitely a Kansas “values” “decent guy”! /sarcasm OFF
Nathan, I already backed that up TWICE so far… do you really need me to do it again???
Good grief…
JOE — You are only partially correct… The Mormons do not ordain ANY clergy… none at all… They dont have any “pastors” in the usual sense…
Nathan, I already backed that up TWICE so far… do you really need me to do it again???
Good grief…
JOE — You are only partially correct… The Mormons do not ordain ANY clergy… none at all… They dont have any “pastors” in the usual sense…
Nathan, I already backed that up TWICE so far… do you really need me to do it again???
Good grief…
JOE — You are only partially correct… The Mormons do not ordain ANY clergy… none at all… They dont have any “pastors” in the usual sense…
By the way, Kansas, is there any subject that you HAVENT take a class in???
Posted by: chas. | July 23, 2007 at 11:16 PM
Yeah Chas, I stayed away from French Language classes, didn’t care to take comparative anatomy; wasn’t fond of taking comparative religions; nor anything that had English in front of its title; Speech Classes of any kind; any class that had some adjective before Quantum and Physics; Literature classes in general.
Probably a lot more, that I would soon forget or even think about. :)
Joe — Oren Hatch(R) Utah is ALSO a Mormon… Mitt Romney(R) Mass, is ALSO a Mormon… If Harry Reid is an asshole, I should think it might not be his religion, unless yo want to put Romney and Hatch into that same mold you just depicted…
chas,
I may indeed be blind. I may have missed it. But I have looked and I do not see where you have becked this statement up at all:
“And that IS the same belief as the Catholic Church, and many Christian fundamentalists, who do not believe in ordaining women, for the same reason…”
Who are these Christian Fundamentalists who believe that or have stated that:
“No Woman should have power over a man”
Where has the Catholic church said this or have it as part of thier doctrine:
“No Woman should have power over a man”
Call me crazy, but I don’t see the answers to any of those questions.
Anything to take a shot at me eh cosmos? :)
RepubliKhan–
I have gone on record that The Eagle can check my IP address to see if I am multi-nic-ing and make the results publicly KNOWN.
Will you do the same?
Posted by: CapnAmerica | July 23, 2007 at 09:43 PM
Well, it’s pointless Capn. I change the IP of my router every two weeks as a matter of practice.
Posted by: Kansas | July 23, 2007 at 10:21 PM
So then you don’t mind?
You’re willing to give The Eagle permission to publicly reveal whether two nics are coming from the same IP address as I am, correct?
Posted by: CapnAmerica | July 23, 2007 at 11:23 PM
They do have Priest and Bishops chas. And they only can be held by men.
I was just wondering, Kansas… cause it seems like no matter what subject matter comes up on the Blog you have taken a course in it, or else, you have read something about it, or in some way you feel expertise…
That’s all…
But on this matter of Logic, you are just a bit off the mark…
Capn, what’s your point?
I’m not giving or allowing my IP of my router to be given out so my router can be subjected to DOS attacks. I like my server too much for that.
No thank you.
“who does little more than follow me around and say some very disparaging things about my familiy and I.
“Posted by: Nathan”
Clearly bogus. I have never followed you around. So, you are admitting that you don’t have shit. REAL BIG SURPRISE THERE!
Beautiful.
Thank you, RepubliKhansas, for proving that you are as big a coward as you are a liar.
Plan on having this re-posted to every Open Thread from now until eternity . . .
Chas,
You are arguing semantics and you know it. If you would just allow yourself to think on a matter before typing, you would find life much more pleasant.
Steven,
Perhaps when I have more time, I could go back to the Wichita Voice and pull up all the threads which you would pop into only long enough to insult me and then leave?
Chas! I do not trust Romney nor Hatch. They believe they are the superior people and that all members of other Christian faiths are not Christians.
Reid is the worst of them all, but people say somebodies religion doesn’t make a difference. Oh yes it does! When that religion gives no respect to other peoples faith and feel that all other people who are not in their faith as lost souls, going to hell, and underneath them, then yeah it it should be seriously considered in a candidate.
It’s like being a member of the KKK folks. Yeah! I know LDS are a bit different, but it’s the same line of thinking. By the way! LDS didn’t even allow minorities in their church until late 1978, when the public started to outcry against them.
Okay Capn, it won’t be any different than any other post that you made towards me. (attack, attack, attack, ad hominem, insult, lies, deceipt, etc.)
Except that now I have proof positive.
What you just said is totally bogus and you know it–The Eagle doesn’t have to post the IP address to verify that two posters have the same address.
I am willing to allow The Eagle to check on me and publicly post the results.
You are not.
There’s only one explanation for that: you’re the biggest TROLL on the WEBlog.
What an absolute jody puke you are!
Lie your way out of this one, TROLL.
Let’s see you squirm, jody puke.
You are not.
Actually, Kansas, it isnt semantics(which is a part of linguistics) Its a bit more than that… You wont find a Logic course in the philosophy department(err, humanities dept.)
Of course, you probably already know that, but you wont admit it…
Oh and Chas, my part of my personal library is behind me as I type. It consists of six shelf columns, there are three of them. In the spare bedroom there are four more shelves of the same construction and I have some boxes stored with books – read them all.
Yes, I read and study a lot, although not as much as I used to. I was a Library bookworm for awhile. I would make visits to the Library about four times a week.
That’s how he found that 8th grade test from 1896 that made the rounds on the internet, remember?
Thats nice… books are wonderful friends… last count, I have somewhere near 3,000 volumes in my personal library… Most are in storage presently, as I dont have room for them right now… I only keep about 900 handy for fast references…
Oh yea, CapN I have a copy of that somewhere… on my old Win98 hard drive, I think…
Really Chas? No courses can be found in Philosophy Departments on Logic?
You need to ring up Wichita State then, they are on the wrong path!!!
125Q Introductory Logic. (3). General education introductory course. Deals with the uses of logical concepts and techniques to evaluate and criticize reasoning, Studies some elementary systems of formal logic. Arguments evaluated are drawn from such diverse fields as law, science, politics, religion, and advertising.
325 Formal Logic. (3). Cross-listed as Ling. 325. A study of systems of formal logic including sentential and predicate logic. Emphasizes the uses of these systems in the analysis of arguments.
http://webs.wichita.edu/?u=Philosophy&p=/startingfolder/coursedescriptions
Nathan. Sorry. You know not what you are talking about. Anybody following this blog knows that. I will decline calling you what I think fits. Anyone who can read, already knows, chump.
What’s the matter, RepubliKhansas?
Can’t come up with a plausible lie?
http://www.snopes.com/language/document/1895exam.asp
Well, sir, I can oly tell you that Logic is not a part of the Humanities… It is sometimes falsely thought to be so, but in reality, LOGIC is a branch of Higher Mathematics… Out there beyond Calculus, and those type courses… I think you better go checking again!!
Chas–
Excuse me, but I’ve got the TROLL caught in a TROLL trap.
Don’t let him pretend to be distracted with some BS crap du jour.
Thank you,
CapnA
Chas,
Odd that you would think that.
WSU’s Introductory Logic class is part of the Philosophy Department.
http://webs.wichita.edu/?u=Philosophy&p=startingfolder/philprograms
I am still waiting for your answers to my previous questions.
Kansas, philosophy is a part of the Humanities department… Start there, and then work off of that… HUMANITIES…
Still waiting RepubliKhansas . . .
Philosophy is a part of the HUMANITIES department… It doesnt have its own department… I have attended 1 College, and 3 different Universities… Philosophy has been in the HUMANITIES department in every one except the small College… At that school Philosophy was tossed in with Religion… Of course, a College and University arent set up on the same model anyway…
“I. As the number of posts increases on any given thread at the WE Blog, the probability of ad hominem attacks approaches unity.
“II. Once the first ad hominem attack occurs, the rate of these attacks grows expoentially.
“III. The editors can chide trolls into behaving better, but this effect is temporary (less than one week) in duration.
“IV. Posters with zero valid points to make will use the term “You People” (or some equally innane sweeping generalization) in a majority of their posts.”
Unlike Martin Luther, I don’t have 95 [thanks CF for the correction] feces to nail to the door, but is anyone else growing tired of the predictability here?”
Unfortunately, I participate in this insanity more than I want to. Fortunately, I do have choices and will exercise them – unlike many of you here.
“Anything to take a shot at me eh cosmos? :) “Posted by: Kansas, the multi-named troll | July 23, 2007 at 11:25 PM
The troll wisely choses to attack me (”messenger”), instead of defending his indefensible claim of “[Sean Hannity] appears to be a decent guy and all that”.
Chas, elementary logic is taught in all Philosophy classes and in advanced Philosophy classes.
Now there is Logic that is related to mathematics and logic related to digital technology which is mathematically based.
The introduction I had into logic were all from Humanities courses in the Philosophy Department. Then I branched off to the digital world.
To say that there are no Logic classes taught by Philosophy Departments is an insult to every University Professor on the planet.
Well, then, can one of you geniuses explain what a course in HIGHER MATHEMATICS is doing in a philosophy department??? Huh???
Yeah cosmos, I don’t know Hannity at all, but he appears to be a decent guy. You are probably a decent guy in real life as well. But you sure don’t present yourself that way on the Blog.
Me? I’m a rogue. :)
Nathan,
I’m still waiting…
Then please make a “reasonable” and “factual” post, explaining how the U.S. preemptive attack on Iraq in 2003 has provided “stability” to the Middle East.
Crickets chirping… chirp… chirp…
Chas give a specific example of what you think is a Higher mathematics course that involves LOGIC.
I took a few, but nothing I would want to test my knowledge on currently as it has been a very long time since I took the courses.
Every new guy who goes into digital electronics takes Boolean Algebra and Gate Logic. After that, all the courses are for the double “E’s” and Software Engineers which I had no desire to get into.
Logic has always been part of Mathematics… ALWAYS A good friend of mine is a Department Head in Humanities, and teaches several philosophy courses… He would never attempt to even try to teach Logic… nor would many…
And as to “tests” in logic… There ARE NONE… They are called Arguments… An Argument is presented… and then it is either defended, or rejected… based on the various formulae for determining the logic(or not) of the argument…
Whatever you are referencing as elementary logic, in philosophy, is somewhat of a misnomer…. at least academically… Logic is done with numerous formulae, and strange equations of sorts… and then conclusions, based on those are presented as either defended, or rejected…
Chas,
Logic plays a vital role in argument. Which is a significant part of philosopy.
When someone is forming an argument or presenting something it is rooting in logic.
It is essential that a student of philosphy understand logic.
One of my best friends is a Philosophy major at WSU working on his masters.
He uses logic routinely in this writings.
Ummmm Kansas…. LOGIC is its own course… what is it that you are not seeing here??
Ummm Nathan, if you insist, but please, dont tell that to Vincent Punzo, or Bertrand Russell, or Jeremy Bentham, ok?? They might not like that much… Not to mention Des Carte
“… I don’t know Hannity at all, but he appears to be a decent guy.”
Posted by: Kansas, the many-named troll | July 23, 2007 at 11:48 PM
Thank you for admitting that you “don’t know Hannity at all”.
“1. As the number of posts increases on any given thread at the WE Blog, the probability of ad hominem attacks approaches unity.”
Unity in mathematics = 1.0; a probability of 1.0 means it will definitely happen.
Will explain more as it becomes necessary…
Which seems likely here.
Chas,
Why don’t you just tell us what your point is?
So far we keep showing you how you are wrong.
You said logic is not taught in philosophy. It is.
“You wont find a Logic course in the philosophy department”
We did, and I took it too.
Yeah okay Chas, you’re arguing Philosophy 101 crap.
Whenever you get that PhD in Philosophy behind your name, please do come back and teach us all about logic.
Chas,
You said:
“You wont find a Logic course in the philosophy department”
We did find one in the Philosopy Dept and I have taken it.
So what is your point?Besides being wrong.
Chas,
The multi-named troll Kansas doen’t even understand the logic of the word “and” in a sentence.Don’t waste your time on it.
Well, I see a couple of those last posts made it to Steven’s predictability ratio in a hurry… I knew it would…
Try to participate in the discussion cosmos without insult or get out.
Nathan, YOU have taken logic??? And because YOU have not seen or heard the quote I told you about Hannity from earlier today, YOU, who have taken a course in LOGIC, have the audacity to question my truthfulness??? If you have nothing to offer by way of comparison, then you have no BASIS on which to call me less than truthful, unless you can post something to the contrary…. Now, didnt they teach you that in your LOGIC class??? And did they teach you how you arrive at that point?? And if so, what happened to that knowledge that you are so sure you took???
Nathan, YOU have taken logic??? And because YOU have not seen or heard the quote I told you about Hannity from earlier today, YOU, who have taken a course in LOGIC, have the audacity to question my truthfulness??? If you have nothing to offer by way of comparison, then you have no BASIS on which to call me less than truthful, unless you can post something to the contrary…. Now, didnt they teach you that in your LOGIC class??? And did they teach you how you arrive at that point?? And if so, what happened to that knowledge that you are so sure you took???
“Cogito ergo sum” by Des Carte was one of the first things I learned in Philosophy 101. :)
It’s also been re-invented for certain marketing phrases. :D
Blog is sticking tonite… sorry about that double post…
This is almost too funny.
We have Steven (the guy who routinely insults me) talking to us about the predictability of Ad hominem attacks.
Then we have Chas who refuses to prove his statement:
“”And that IS the same belief as the Catholic Church, and many Christian fundamentalists, who do not believe in ordaining women, for the same reason…”
All the while Cosmos and CapnAmerica badgering Kansas while he and I are still trying to figure out what on earth Chas’s point is (if he even has one) when he tells us that:
“”You wont find a Logic course in the philosophy department”
When in fact there is a logic course in the Philosophy dept…
Too funny
No Chas, Nathan asked you for proof that Hannity said that statement.
You provided none and still haven’t provided any proof.
Very good Kansas… Des Carte is one of the foundational philosophers in the modern era… And which argument was he making with that profound statement??
Chas, if you would stop double clicking when you post, you won’t have that problem of double posting.
Chas,
Allow me to repost it, if you missed it:
Chas,
The point I believe Kansas and myself are trying to make is this:
I listen to Sean Hannity rahter regularly.
I have read his books.
I watch his TV show.
I have met him in person.
I don’t find it in his character or anything I have ever seen from him which would indicate to me that:
“ALL I am saying is that Hannity is allowing his religious preference for the role of women, to dictate his choice for being opposed to a woman for President… ”
or
“I dont think their internal agenda on women should influence who is elected to public office, in the way Hannity implied in his broadcast today…”
or
“No man should be ruled by a woman… Thats the way it should be.”
So when you come here saying these things and drawing these conclusiong, I am naturally a bit disinclined to believe you.
NATHAN I already proved my statement yhou referenced above… Did you not READ it???
THIS statement has already been proven… >>>
“”And that IS the same belief as the Catholic Church, and many Christian fundamentalists, who do not believe in ordaining women, for the same reason…”
chas let me repost another one of my posts:
chas,
I may indeed be blind. I may have missed it. But I have looked and I do not see where you have becked this statement up at all:
“And that IS the same belief as the Catholic Church, and many Christian fundamentalists, who do not believe in ordaining women, for the same reason…”
Who are these Christian Fundamentalists who believe that or have stated that:
“No Woman should have power over a man”
Where has the Catholic church said this or have it as part of thier doctrine:
“No Woman should have power over a man”
Call me crazy, but I don’t see the answers to any of those questions.
Sorry Chas, it’s been too long, I’m too tired and too disinterested to answer questions from someone who probably has an elementary philosophy book setting on his lap pretending to be a philosophy AND logic expert.
There are some nice Philosophy discussion boards on the Web, if you care to go there and get your butt kicked by real Philosophers and Logic Experts.
I ALSO said I heard Hannity’s remarks on the RADIO… I dont even think YOU can post from a RADIO…. I told you if you didnt believe me, I didnt really care, because I know damn well what I heard… And I told you where you go to find it… Now, WHAT MORE DO YOU WANT???
There arent very many, if ANY of us on this Blog who could hold a candle to a Logic Expert on a Logic Blog… Not YOU Kansas, or YOU Nathan, or ME… NONE of us… MAYBE Steven, and MAYBE GMC… but I am not even sure of them… Ahhh perhaps Vaughn Tolle…
Forget it Nathan, Chas is off on another one of his weird mind trips again.
He’ll start one direction then pivot to another. He simply cannot stay focused.
A good night’s sleep is calling me instead of the ravings of a madman.
Ummm Kansas, I usually hit up the Philosophy Discussion boards around the end of October… and spend a couple of weeks catching up… Especially when I am asked to teach a unit of Philosophy over a Winter Course unit somewhere…
Good for you Chas. I sure hope it isn’t for an accredited University as they would lose their accreditation from what I saw you demonstrate tonight.
Well, once again, you come here, you play your ad hominem games again, and then toddle off to bed, assured that all is right with the world, because you think you have won… well, if that makes you happy, then go hit the sack… And since Nathan still cant prove me wrong about Hannity, well, I guess he will keep on calling me a liar, just like always….
Bedtime for me (poof)
I dont think you would know accreditation if it bit you on your butt, sir… But think on all you want…. I have taught numerous courses in Humanities departments over the years… I dont need your approval or endorsement to be an adjunct faculty member….Sorry!!!
Kansas, the many-named troll,
You did attack one of my posts a while back, because you ignored the “AND” in one of my sentences. Prove me wrong.
NATHAN,
I’m still waiting…
Are you UNABLE to make a “reasonable” and “factual” post, explaining how the U.S. preemptive attack on Iraq in 2003 has provided “stability” to the Middle East?
Crickets chirping… chirp… chirp…
Chas,
Have you even read the last 50 posts?
It is not as simple as what you heard. It is the conclusions you drew and the statements following that draw most of my ire.
“And that IS the same belief as the Catholic Church, and many Christian fundamentalists, who do not believe in ordaining women, for the same reason…”
Which I keep asking you to prove and you keep saying it has been proven.
Why don’t you make this simple on all of us and show me where you proved it.
cosmos,
First of all, it has never been an argument of mine ( at least not recently) that our invasion of Iraq made the middle east more stable.
The reason I do not answer your question is because I have no idea why you are challanging me with it.
That portugese guy was being cute with a comment and then you jumped on the bandwagon and here we are.
So what is your point?
ONE MORE TIME, for those of you in Rio Lindo… MANY churches prohibit the ordination of women… Roman Catholic, most Baptists, several Lutheran Groups, and as Joe pointed out, Mormons, and a few others… MANY DO NOT prohibit the ordination of women..
Hannity’s statement that “A woman should never rule over a man, and that is the way it should be,” is a direct tie in to his own religious belief regarding the efficacy of not ordaining women as Clergy….
Now, I KNOW that my denomination ordains women… and Nathan, I believe yours does as well… It’s a little hard for us to understand those that dont…
My point is that Hannity seems to be allowing something from the religious side of his life, to dominate his feelings that “no woman should rule over a man, and that is the way it should be.”
You do not have to agree with my conclusions…. But I am basing my conclusion only on what HANNITY said, and on what I know of women’s ordination in certain churches…
Just dont call me a LIAR because you cant find the audio clip of where he said those words… He was talking directly to the issue of Hillary Clinton being elected as a woman President… THAT was HIS context… not mine!!
Pesonally, I thought he was fairly far out in right field… And also surprised that he would say such a thing… But I guess after he attacked her “cleavage” he didnt have much left to avoid…
BTW, the cleavage issue was first printed in the Washington Post, so dont even start on me about that one…
Chas,
Here is where the problem begins:
You based your conclusions on this statement:
“No woman should rule over a man”
Which is my entire point. Of course there are churches which do not ordain woman.
I know this.
The point is that you conclude that they do because:
“No woman should have power over a man”
Which is still something you have yet to prove.
Nathan,
Thank you. You answered your own question, in your 12:28 AM post.
Ricardo’s comment was accurate.
http://blogs.kansas.com/weblog/2007/07/the-french-are-.html#comment-76973486
WHY must you split words?? “rule over” “have power over” They MEAN the same thing… If one rules over another, they have power over that person… HANNITY is the one who is saying that “No woman should rule over a man, thats the way it should be.”
I did NOT agree with Hannity… I think thats where you are having a problem… I totally disagree with him… and it doesnt matter if it is Hillary, or Condi, or Kaye Hutchinson, or Liddy Dole…
And yes, Nathan, the churches that do not ordain women, do not believe that women should exercise power over men… That is THEIR theology… not mine… So, they refuse to ordain women, because if they did, then women would have power over men, and they believe that is not according to God’s Law…
I dont have any idea why you guys feed this damn troll!