New Mars Forums

So you admit that it is her economic position that keeps her where she is, not her sex or gender, correct?

This hypothetical woman's problems aren't mine.  She screwed up, and that's her fault.  I don't ever recall the law that states I have to provide a way for people who failed in the past to be able to become a CEO of a Fortune 500 company.

What are you talking about, clark?  Our economic system doesn't FORCE people to stay where they were raised, and if they do it's their own fault for not acting upon the opportunities offered to them.

The funny thing about life is, you only get one shot at it.  You can't go back to high school and get better grades after you've graduated.  You can't go back and not do drugs, or be involved with a gang, or have a teenage pregnancy.  All bad decisions on this unfortunate soul's part.  That's the ONLY reason she's stuck there is because she didn't act upon the opportunities that were possible.

I believe that I am not worthy of God, therefore I am effectively at the level of "pet".  But my religion teaches that God gave part of himself up to give me my undeserved salvation, and to turn down that gift (that is free to anyone at any time) is worthy of punishment in hell.

If I didn't choose to accept his gift, and was forced to believe, then I would be more of a pet than believing out of free will.  Your pet doesn't hop out of the kenel at the pet store and say "Hey clark!  I want to stay couped up in your apartment all day!  Let's go!"  Rather, you force him to go with you.  That's not what my God wanted.

I wouldn't mind being a woman for a day.  Men open the door for no apparent reason, they smile at you, an umbrella is assured when it's raining... oh wait... that's only when nice guys like me who respect women are around.

As for the rest of you, I'm sorry you feel that way.  I really don't know who the mud-slinging is directed at, considering that Cindy bashed my point with her "socioeconomic fact".  I suppose if all this forum is good for is getting your Jerry Springer "if-that-was-my-man-I'd-throw-his-butt-out" time, then maybe I will leave this behind.  I'm tired of people saying I have it easy because I'm white.  You're wrong.

I get the NASA channel on Satellite TV, but it only shows Earth views about 10% of the time.  The other 90% is an off-air picture with an astronaut in front of a galaxy, and those old 1960's films about the Apollo mission.  It's kind of a techie format, with the film running length and a fill-in-the-blanks cover page about the film.  It's really not very entertaining, but I do enjoy some of the Mars programing they show every once in a while.

As for the Earth views channel, it would probably be cool to watch while you're chilling out, or reading a book, or being generally calm, but for everything else I have to admit that it's like watching the paint dry.  I'm talking about just a wide-angle view of the whole planet.  The zoom feature would be cool, but if you had 500 million people using it at once, it creates a traffic problem.  Would you suggest that they have different "zoom" channels you could tune into (ie hemispheres, oceans, continents, states, large cities, etc?  You could feasibly put them on an interactive network, but there would have to be some pretty high access fees to make it worth anyone's time and investment.

We had the chance to stop China back in the 1960's.  All it would have taken was a few strategic thermonuclear detonations at their key facilities and the whole program would have been lost.  Nixon (or maybe it was Johnson) felt that China couldn't pose that much of a threat, especially when Asia was as hostile of a place as it was.  I guess that short-sightedness really leaves us in a bind...

And we can invade North Korea because we're not a rogue state.  The US wouldn't launch our missiles if we were being invaded (which would never happen, but it's something we need to think about, nonetheless).  North Korea has questionable integrity, they will use their weapons to create an uncomfortable amount of leverage on our allies in Asia, and if they continue to starve and experience economic destruction like they have up until now, who knows what kind of "blackmail" North Korea may be able to get away with.  We will be the prisoners of North Korea's threat because we didn't act swiftly now while there's still time.

Without WMD's, we would have gone to war with the Soviets back in the 1960's.  This whole planet would have been devestated by the Cold War, instead of being a peaceful rivalry between two nations that ultimately diffused itself, with us on top.

And we have a right to keep tabs on people because they are living in OUR country, and they pose a threat to OUR safety.  We should keep tabs on nukes because it's our ass on the line.

Why shouldn't we take all precautions necessary to keep terrorists out of this country?  Why shouldn't we protect our interests and keep a nation hostile to us from getting nuclear weapons?  Why WOULDN'T they nuke us if they got caught in a hole?  Who says they wouldn't launch 50 ICBM's as they were overrun?  It's a lot easier to keep tabs on a non-nuclear nation than an armed one.

Your first point I didn't understand.  How did I justify any criticism because I live in Colorado?  We have an 8% black population, and 15% hispanic, so don't talk to me about racism.

Your second point I believe clark debunked very well, thank you.

Your third point was gibberish as well.  Do you have lynchings in the Bronx?  Do you have cross burnings in Queens?  I can tell you that we don't have them here, either.  And Cindy pretty much called me a chauvanist pig who got .24 cents more than her because I have a penis.  I rest my case.

Bravo, clark 

What "Republican crap"?  Why should we not be able to keep tabs on people that are living in this great country but for the grace of God!?  Why should we allow people (who could be potential terrorists, or else we wouldn't care) remain in this country if they don't abide by the laws?  The funny thing about terrorism is, it only takes one success by their side to win.  99.99% of the time, the immigrant won't be a terrorist.  But that .01% can harm a LOT of people.  We can't take chances; it's better to be safe than sorry...

Propaganda is the publishing of biased documents that favor the opinions of the entity creating the publications.  It's stuff like a war poster depicting the enemy in a bad way, etc.  It's an effort to rally the public to the government. (or any other entity) actions.

As for OUR government creating propaganda, I suppose everyone making fun of Bush for being "stupid" and making up words (like misunderestimate) would look pretty shady to me... (**HINT**--) the media is more liberal than anyone cares to admit-- the Republicans only control talk radio, which nobody listens to anyway)