Political Potpourri VIII

Palomar · 2005-08-31 09:20:59

19: You might be a Constitutionalist if you believe that the federal government has no business bribing churches and faith-based organizations with federal tax dollars.
I don't see a problem here either.

*My disagreement is based on the seeming disingenuous nature of the statement. The Feds bribe churches and faith-based orgs?? Perhaps there are issues within that I am unaware of (and which the statement list doesn't have the space/wherewithal to give details), but it seems to me that churches and FBO's are more than eager to take Federal $ which they shouldn't IMO be entitled to in the first place because of separation of church from state issues.

The Feds are bribing churches/FBOs...what? It seems anything but that, especially considering all the ministers/clerics always eager to poke their noses in a camera with politicians at their sides or at political events. Never an opportunity missed. Yeah, they're being bribed...ha ha.

Am I missing something, though? Perhaps there is an element or two within the statement which has some basis...I'd be curious to know.

--Cindy

Cobra Commander · 2005-08-31 10:10:35

*My disagreement is based on the seeming disingenuous nature of the statement. The Feds bribe churches and faith-based orgs??

Okay, I see where you're coming from. Yeah, "bribe" may not have been the choice of words.

Interestingly, "separation of Church and State" is somewhat misleading. It's never stated in the Constitution, the federal government is merely prohibited from establishing a national church, favoring or persecuting a particular religion.

So Constitutuionally speaking, you can pray (aloud) in school but the school can't make you pray. That interpretation doesn't seem to allow federal money to be given to religious groups for charitable purposes, but then it doesn't allow federal money to be given to anyone for purposes of benevolence.

Ah well, no one pays any attention to that ratty ol' piece of paper anyway.

SpaceNut · 2005-08-31 13:42:40

Not sure if I an really in the right thread for this but here goes. War on terror as we go is a battle with the unseen in a nation to which the claim of WMD may or may not be materialized any time soon. But bowing out is hard to do now that we are there.
Unseen thou was the chance that terror would strike those very people that the US claimed had been the terrorist location.
[url=http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/9126948/]More than 750 Shiite pilgrims die in Iraq panic
Victims, mostly women and children, killed in stampede on Baghdad bridge[/url]

rumors that a suicide bomber was at large

srmeaney · 2005-08-31 16:46:10

just goes to show, ordinary people are scared to die at the hands of a nutter no matter where what they live with.

Josh Cryer · 2005-09-03 13:59:01

Katrina is Bush's Waco, only it's a billion times worse.

srmeaney · 2005-09-03 17:34:29

It isnt something I could agree over at this stage, Sure its bad. But the WACO Incident was a minor thing compared to the human chaos that this is.

The last thing George W. Bush would need is for petty beureacrats and church leaders like Pat Robertson to start mouthing off that "this is Gods vengance against the black people" or "We'll get through this cause the lord is with us"... That would divide the people on the ground into insulted and idiots in the first ten seconds.

But if Bush could clean this up, repair the infrastructure Damage, Hold Idiots Accountable for their crimes, and revitalise these communities and fix the problem of impoverished black communities, not just help his rich corporate buddies, He might come out of this smelling good. Like the president just prior to Regan-the Democrat who who was into building houses for the poor.

So Americans can look forward to the rebuilding after Katrina being used for propaganda purposes...

DonPanic · 2005-09-05 02:06:29

Some sentences from a french carribean forum site on August 28 2005 at about 03 am

Au mon dieu,le scénario tant redouté pour les states:Katrina est un gros ouragan de classe 5.
Une certaine partie de la région pourrait subir le meme cauchemar que l'ouragan Camille en 1969 qui elle aussi avait atteint la catégorie 5!!
Je pense qu'ils ont bien fait d'évacuer.
Le pire c'est qu'il y a encore un bon nombre de personne dans ces états qui n'ont pas encore pris conscience de l'extrème violence de katrina.
Oh my god, the US such feared scenario: Katrina is a big class 5 hurricane.
Part of the region could suffer the same nighmare as with Camille hurricane which rised to fifth level!!
I think evacuation has been a good decision
Worts is that many in these states are not still aware of katrina's extreme violence

Il ne nous reste plus qu'à souffler des prières de classe 10
pour tous ceux qui en auront besoin dans cette région,
avant, pendant et après la promenade de ce phénomène ...
All we can do now is to blow class 10 prayers
for all those which will need them in this area,
front, during and after of this phenomenon walk...

Do you think that GW or Rumy or Condy watched gulf weather forecasts ?

Palomar · 2005-09-05 15:10:49

*I really, really hate to ask this ... but it's a specific and pointed question [and no desire for the pro- or anti- discussions, which we've done a hundred times already (world without end, amen -- amen )]:

What are the chances Pres. Bush will begin more actively/quickly pulling troops out of Iraq in order to cut costs and buoy up greater $$ for Katrina relief/rebuild efforts? He wanted to stay another 2 years, perhaps even 4 (can't recall which...brain pan a bit low today) in Iraq.

Considering the enormous costs of both combined...something's got to give. U.S. wealth isn't inexhaustible.

Troops home sooner than anticipated? I'd be surprised if not...but I've been surprised before.

--Cindy

srmeaney · 2005-09-05 18:34:57

What are the chances Pres. Bush will begin more actively/quickly pulling troops out of Iraq in order to cut costs and buoy up greater $$ for Katrina relief/rebuild efforts? He wanted to stay another 2 years, perhaps even 4 (can't recall which...brain pan a bit low today) in Iraq.
Considering the enormous costs of both combined...something's got to give. U.S. wealth isn't inexhaustible.

Considering the monstrous amount of money owed to Saudi Arabia by the USA, US wealth was exhausted before the fall of the Soviet Empire. You have been paying rent to the Saudi Landlords since...

Grypd · 2005-09-06 04:59:08

*I really, really hate to ask this ... but it's a specific and pointed question [and no desire for the pro- or anti- discussions, which we've done a hundred times already (world without end, amen -- amen )]:
What are the chances Pres. Bush will begin more actively/quickly pulling troops out of Iraq in order to cut costs and buoy up greater $$ for Katrina relief/rebuild efforts? He wanted to stay another 2 years, perhaps even 4 (can't recall which...brain pan a bit low today) in Iraq.
Considering the enormous costs of both combined...something's got to give. U.S. wealth isn't inexhaustible.
Troops home sooner than anticipated? I'd be surprised if not...but I've been surprised before.
--Cindy

Cindy with the political situation in Iraq as it is and with the likehood that the constitution will fail in the referendum it is unlikely that any pull out will be possible. Actually the reverse may well be needed as the Sh'ite and Kurds are beginning to stress there intolerance of the mostly Sunni terrorists. The recent stampede at the the bridge is being openly blamed on Sunni inspired insurgents and there is serious talk of civil war. We also have the openly cancerous sore that is afghanistan where most of the country is still in the hands of Taliban inspired warlords. These Warlords are using there almost complete dominance of the heroin drug market to finance there operations and since the locals support the growing of these crops we will have a very nasty police action to reduce the power of these Warlords and deal with the drugs.

The problem also is that the strong Alqhaeda prescence still in Afghanistan is causeing the Pakistani goverment a lot of problems. The attacks on London where inspired from Pakistan and it is likely Afghanistan too.

So troops cannot be called home in fact the opposite we will need a lot lot more soon and they will be there for a minimum of at least 5 years.

DonPanic · 2005-09-06 06:04:34

What are the chances Pres. Bush will begin more actively/quickly pulling troops out of Iraq in order to cut costs and buoy up greater $$ for Katrina relief/rebuild efforts? He wanted to stay another 2 years, perhaps even 4 (can't recall which...brain pan a bit low today) in Iraq.
Considering the enormous costs of both combined...something's got to give. U.S. wealth isn't inexhaustible.
Troops home sooner than anticipated? I'd be surprised if not...but I've been surprised before.
--Cindy

LO
I think there will be much more money spent for rebuilding oil rigs than for that all the New Orleans miserables, all which couldn't have an own house a car, an insurance will be left behind when emotion risen by the catastrophe will will be forgotten.

Guess which companies will get the money ?
little help :"H.......ton" and friends

reddragon · 2005-09-06 08:25:27

LO
I think there will be much more money spent for rebuilding oil rigs than for that all the New Orleans miserables, all which couldn't have an own house a car, an insurance will be left behind when emotion risen by the catastrophe will will be forgotten.
Guess which companies will get the money ?
little help :"H.......ton" and friends

Sadly, that is probably true.

As for Iraq, I doubt that Bush will either remove or add troops for a while since there would be strong opposition to either move.

Palomar · 2005-09-06 10:49:09

*I'm also worried that now when we're particularly vulnerable another terrorist strike akin to 9/11 will occur. I've not had an alcoholic beverage in 2 months' time...but what with all this going on and concern for what's in store, I had a hit of vodka. My nerves are rattled, frankly.

All the $ going for homeland security, Iraq, Afghanistan, now the Katrina aftermath (and yes, those people DO need the $ and help)...if another 9/11 occurs we are screwed. I'm terribly worried for our economy.

Another swig of vodka might be in order later today. When I get to this point...it's bad.

--Cindy

srmeaney · 2005-09-06 15:40:43

Homeless? Good time to pitch a tent by the reflecting pool just down from 1600.

reddragon · 2005-09-07 15:24:41

All the $ going for homeland security

The really bad thing is that all that money hasn't helped them respond to Katrina. Although homeland security was intended particularly for terrorist attacks, it is also supposed to help with natural disasters. And I doubt it would have done better in a terrorist attack. If Katrina can be considered a test of homeland security and government disaster response, the gov and homeland security have failed it.

DonPanic · 2005-09-11 02:27:12

LO
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/co … 01053.html
More and more loony administration. : Pentagon Revises Nuclear Plan .
Simply means that Saddam's Iraq could have been nuked on virtual and unproven WMD possession.

reddragon · 2005-09-11 12:20:18

So basically they're scrapping the no first use idea. Let's hope all the other nations with nuclear weapons don't follow suits. Even the Soviet dictators realized that they didn't have the right to attack first with nukes. And Bush still doesn't get it. Unbelievable.

The draft also includes the option of using nuclear arms to destroy known enemy stockpiles of nuclear, biological or chemical weapons.

What a great way to spread radiation, germs, or chemicals all over the place.[/i]

Grypd · 2005-09-11 14:37:56

I can only hope this is the use of nuclear weapons to ensure the destruction of other WMDs

In the case of Biological and Chemical weapons it has been thought that only incredible heat could ensure complete destruction.

Then again it does not sound nice when the principles of MAD are removed especially when it has been the unwritten rule that he who launches the first bomb will be attacked by everyone else in retaliation.

DonPanic · 2005-09-11 16:49:41

LO

I can only hope this is the use of nuclear weapons to ensure the destruction of other WMDs
In the case of Biological and Chemical weapons it has been thought that only incredible heat could ensure complete destruction.

In the case of a biological attack, half a dozen terrorists with biological knowledge and producing germs in any cellar can do tremendous wastes.
Is there even a way to retaliate at ?

srmeaney · 2005-09-12 17:31:49

Grypd wrote:
I can only hope this is the use of nuclear weapons to ensure the destruction of other WMDs
In the case of Biological and Chemical weapons it has been thought that only incredible heat could ensure complete destruction.
In the case of a biological attack, half a dozen terrorists with biological knowledge and producing germs in any cellar can do tremendous wastes.
Is there even a way to retaliate at ?

Yes. Feed the Masses, Educate the masses, heal the masses, employ the masses, and shoot anyone who uses the phrases: "God is with us", "God is Great", "God is on our side", "They are with God now", and "You wont get into heaven".

srmeaney · 2005-09-15 00:29:34

British pound sold short by unknowns in lead up to Terrorist Bombings.
http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/artic … E_ID=45312

This is what they were looking at after September 11 when the US economy collapsed. Scared to death that terrorists with more money than the impoverished poor were getting away with the financial wealth of Billions.
Almost as bad as the relocation of Taliban government's gold reserve to Sudan, just after Afghanistan fell to the Americans.

Grypd · 2005-09-15 05:44:40

Of course they will do this Osama wants his Islamic Caliphate but actually he will need a lot of money to do this and so he uses the western free trade system.

srmeaney · 2005-09-16 17:06:34

Beubonic Plague Rats go missing in US.

Apparently the lab guys are hoping the mice ate em...

srmeaney · 2005-09-19 21:13:39

British troops ramraid Basra Prison to bust out British , accidentally freeing numerous criminals, getting themselves firebombed by an angry mob of Iraqi...I Guess they decided the rule of law doesnt apply to them either.

Help! I'm on a planet with six billion stupid people and the Worst case scenarios are in charge.

evilcitizen · 2005-09-19 21:42:26

*I'm also worried that now when we're particularly vulnerable another terrorist strike akin to 9/11 will occur. I've not had an alcoholic beverage in 2 months' time...but what with all this going on and concern for what's in store, I had a hit of vodka. My nerves are rattled, frankly.
All the $ going for homeland security, Iraq, Afghanistan, now the Katrina aftermath (and yes, those people DO need the $ and help)...if another 9/11 occurs we are screwed. I'm terribly worried for our economy.
Another swig of vodka might be in order later today. When I get to this point...it's bad.
--Cindy

Don't forget about the massively overheated real estate market that could soften or tumble any time now. And the fact that the debtload for American households is the highest it has ever been in US history because of artificially low interest rates.

The good news just keeps on coming doesn't it?

And check this out, the Cato Institute (a libertarian think tank) wants to cut NASA's budget to pay for Katrina damage.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/usatoday/200509 … squestions

New Mars Forums

Announcement

#301 2005-08-31 09:20:59

Re: Political Potpourri VIII

#302 2005-08-31 10:10:35

Re: Political Potpourri VIII

#303 2005-08-31 13:42:40

Re: Political Potpourri VIII

#304 2005-08-31 16:46:10

Re: Political Potpourri VIII

#305 2005-09-03 13:59:01

Re: Political Potpourri VIII

#306 2005-09-03 17:34:29

Re: Political Potpourri VIII

#307 2005-09-05 02:06:29

Re: Political Potpourri VIII

#308 2005-09-05 15:10:49

Re: Political Potpourri VIII

#309 2005-09-05 18:34:57

Re: Political Potpourri VIII

#310 2005-09-06 04:59:08

Re: Political Potpourri VIII

#311 2005-09-06 06:04:34

Re: Political Potpourri VIII

#312 2005-09-06 08:25:27

Re: Political Potpourri VIII

#313 2005-09-06 10:49:09

Re: Political Potpourri VIII

#314 2005-09-06 15:40:43

Re: Political Potpourri VIII

#315 2005-09-07 15:24:41

Re: Political Potpourri VIII

#316 2005-09-11 02:27:12

Re: Political Potpourri VIII

#317 2005-09-11 12:20:18

Re: Political Potpourri VIII

#318 2005-09-11 14:37:56

Re: Political Potpourri VIII

#319 2005-09-11 16:49:41

Re: Political Potpourri VIII

#320 2005-09-12 17:31:49

Re: Political Potpourri VIII

#321 2005-09-15 00:29:34

Re: Political Potpourri VIII

#322 2005-09-15 05:44:40

Re: Political Potpourri VIII

#323 2005-09-16 17:06:34

Re: Political Potpourri VIII

#324 2005-09-19 21:13:39

Re: Political Potpourri VIII

#325 2005-09-19 21:42:26

Re: Political Potpourri VIII

Board footer