NCclimber

Excellent point, Wendy. One big difference is in the scenario given, your sacrifice is the only way to save the kid's life. On the other hand, it's doubtful that you would be the only resource to pay for a kidney transplant. It's a whole lot easier to not involve yourself.

And who appoints the superintendent and can fire him/her? What's your point? That school boards dictate all policy decisions for their scholl system and all of the individual schools? Getting back to the thread topic, did the school board make the decision to ban tag? My point is obvious. Place the blame for stupid decisions where it belongs. Now. How about answering the other two questions.

And who appoints the superintendent and can fire him/her? What's your point? That school boards dictate all policy decisions for their scholl system and all of the individual schools? Getting back to the thread topic, did the school board make the decision to ban tag?

Wow. You make it sound like we don't hear about car bombs and land mines...the deaths of American soldiers and innocent civilians. I do. It's on the evening news, on a regular basis. I don't recall the mainstream media showing much in the way of insurgents actually being killed. A lot of offensive footage gets aired with the excuse of "equal time" or "an honest picture". We still have cultural norms as to what is or is not appropriate. Most in the media take this into consideration, when deciding what to air.

I'm with you man. School policy is made by elected school boards representing the wishes of the people. School administrators and teachers may be consulted but generally don't make the decisions. In our system, the superintentant sets policy, which includes how much latitude individual administrators have at their own schools. The school board either accepts it or negotiates an alternative. No doubt, the board members have a say, but from what I've seen, the administrators have just as much, if not more.

Every Day is heterosexual day... you only need to watch television to see that all those very personal moments of our lives are splashed on the screen several times an hour. Of course our puritanical censors will not allow for soooo much of what is deemed normal in ourt society.. hell.. I saw boobies on CBC just the other day... now the Canadians are all going to hell for sure. Seriously.. I wonder how many of our right wingie boys here.. might have touched another male when they were in those formative years and are now so homophobic because of all that guilt...... studies show the most vocal ones are usually afriad that they in fact may harbor homosexual feelings so they go into overreact homophobia to PROVE they are not. Could the same rationale explain why so many liberals have such a high level of disdain for conservatives? Conservatiphobia? So liberals are those who were improperly touched by conservatives in their childhood? That must be it. I'm sure someone could construct a study to support this premise.

Every Day is heterosexual day... you only need to watch television to see that all those very personal moments of our lives are splashed on the screen several times an hour. Of course our puritanical censors will not allow for soooo much of what is deemed normal in ourt society.. hell.. I saw boobies on CBC just the other day... now the Canadians are all going to hell for sure. Seriously.. I wonder how many of our right wingie boys here.. might have touched another male when they were in those formative years and are now so homophobic because of all that guilt...... studies show the most vocal ones are usually afriad that they in fact may harbor homosexual feelings so they go into overreact homophobia to PROVE they are not. Could the same rationale explain why so many liberals have such a high level of disdain for conservatives? Conservatiphobia?

If only we'd bought Halliburton stock. It's up over 300% in the last five years.

Saw it. According to slave accounts and the accounts of others, she was a willing partner. According to discription of her she appeared to be white and not black as her mother was half white. Not sure if her father was white or black. Maybe in Jeffersons saw her as being a white woman and not black or mulatto. Which is why I asked how kallend knew she was raped. Maybe Jefferson just saw her as an attractive woman. I'm still waiting to hear why he thinks Jefferson was an adulterer.

Apparently, the FBI still has not found anything they can arrest him for. http://blogs.abcnews.com/theblotter/2006/10/fbi_yet_to_find.html Has GLAAD made any public statements on this issue?

Uhm, they gave nearly 2 billion to two guys for a website that does basicly nothing. Actually, they bought a company for 2 billion dollars. Considering the price tag, I'd guess some pretty smart people were involved in determining its worth. Here's a classic quote that might put things in perspective: "There is no reason anyone would want a computer in their home."

I'm sure Google's stockholders would be pleased if management gave away 2 Billion dollars. It's about capitalism.

Nice post, Nightingale. Peggy Noonan's article was good, too. however, I don't see this "lack of civility" issue being exclusively the problem of liberals. It's on both sides. One nice thing about this Forum is the enforced policy regarding personal attacks. Other sites I've visited have a no holds barred approach. Unmoderated forums tend to bring out the worst in people. And then there are the pundits on TV. Reasoned debate? Fuggedaboudit. It's about conflict. Let's see some bared teeth. Politics seem to be particularly nasty. Ten or fifteen years ago, we'd hear about the few mudslinging campaigns. Now, they're all nasty. It's as if we, as a society, are stuck in the eighth grade.

Jefferson was an adulterer? How so?

How? SPECIFICALLY? And I'm not interested in the percent of GDP costs in other countries. We pay additional taxes for education and roads. Or don't they pass school bonds every election and charge gas taxes where you live? You are only looking at one side of the equation. No. I'm asking about one side of the equation that so many people don't want to discuss. It's the elephant in the room. The philosophical aspects of this are irrelevant if we can't figure out how to implement a program, at a reasonable cost.

NEO-CON STANCE ON HEALTHCARE: It should be given only to those that can afford it. You really should learn the definition of Neocon.

For someone to dishonestly interpret by today's standards. More to the point, The North was economically opposed to slavery.

You both are ignoring the context in which it was written. Go back and read my second post.

How? SPECIFICALLY? And I'm not interested in the percent of GDP costs in other countries. We pay additional taxes for education and roads. Or don't they pass school bonds every election and charge gas taxes where you live?

It was implied that the statement was about white men. If you can provide an unbiased historian who says this is incorrect, please do so.

Ah yes.. applying today's standards, values and mores to a different era. Intellectual dishonest? Not at all. We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness. written by a slave owner who fathered (at least one) child by his slaves. Explain how that is not hypocrisy by the standards of any age. Are you saying he raped one of his slaves? If so, how do you know that? I'm wrote what I wrote; it is quite clear for anyone who chooses not to misunderstand. Reading a biography on Jefferson might clear things up for you.

Like it or not, it is the standard that widely accepted. Rising home ownership is considered a sign of a good economy. This is the point I was trying to make. If you "own" the house you don't have this problem: NATIONAL FORECLOSURES INCREASE 22 PERCENT IN AUGUST By RealtyTrac Staff Foreclosures Up Nearly 50 Percent from August 2005, 38 Percent Year-to-Date Nice article. Unfotunately, its analysis only compares August numbers to other months over the past year. Tip of the iceberg? Maybe. But the article doesn't say anything, either way.

You omitted an important bit: where were the Republicans? Why didn't Shimkus do anything? We KNOW when he knew something. Shimkus (R) admitted in testimony that he did NOT inform the Dems on the committee. We KNOW when Hastert's office knew something, and they kept it quiet. The Page Program was controlled by Republicans, and they kept the scandal quiet. What seems be getting little attention is what exactly was reported to the other Congressmen about Foley's IMs? Does anyone know if any of them knew more than "Foley was sending overly friendly messages and the recipient would like it to stop"? WTF does that mean??? It's pretty open ended and definitely doesn't sound like anything deserving more than a private rebuke. This whole "why wasn't it investigated?" grandstanding is just so much posturing. Life in the US Congress is quite different from life in a hypothetical vacuum.

What is the Neocon stance on universal healthcare? I didn't really think healthcare was a part of their platform?