The 2008 U.S. Election

[T-bone]

And here we go again...

[Sargoth]

Ohh, why am I replying to this thread? Why am I replying to this thread? Why am I replying to this thread?

Alright, here's my reply. Love Bush or hate him, there is one thing you cannot deny: our Nation is more polarized now than it has been in recent history. I guess my "dream team" would run on a true "reunification" platform, not just pay it lip service like some others have. Not to resort to Bush-bashing, but this was one of his promises in 2000. Look at how "divided" the Nation was during the Reagan/Clinton years, and compare it to today.

I guess I was really hoping for a Kerry/McCain ticket in '04. As an Arizonan, I have a lot of respect for John McCain. He's not perfect, but he has fought for many causes that I believe in. Plus, he's a moderate, which is always applealing to me. Had we had a Democrat and a Republican on the same ticket, that would show that the candidates were *serious* about bi-partisan cooperation at the highest levels. It's one thing to say "yeah, I'll work with the other side". It's another to pick your #2 man from the opposing party. Actions vs. words...

For the Dems in '08, I predict we'll see some action from John Edwards. Hillary may run, but I doubt she'll make much traction. John Kerry, if he polishes up his message may take another stab. Another to keep in mind is Barack Obama. He seems to be the Democratic "rising star". If not in 08, we'll surely see him in '12. He's a very young guy, still...

On the Repbulican side, I think if McCain were to run again, he'd probably score the nomination. He has much more experience (and aptitude, imho) than the guy who beat him in '00. Dick Cheney: Fugghetaboutit! Too old, too sick, and too many skeletons in the closet. I'd like to see Colin Powell take a go. Although I think the last four years have disenfranchised him with American Politics. Rudy?? A possibility. I also have this little voice in the back of my head that tells me that Tom Ridge may set his sights on the Presidency.

[Sam Kenobi]

Vader in '08 . . . Whoops, wrong thread. style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/tongue.gif

[Master Cephus]

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE</div><div class='quotemain'>On the Repbulican side, I think if McCain were to run again, he'd probably score the nomination. He has much more experience (and aptitude, imho) than the guy who beat him in '00. Dick Cheney: Fugghetaboutit! Too old, too sick, and too many skeletons in the closet. I'd like to see Colin Powell take a go. Although I think the last four years have disenfranchised him with American Politics. Rudy?? A possibility. I also have this little voice in the back of my head that tells me that Tom Ridge may set his sights on the Presidency.[/b][/quote]

You might argue that McCain had other qualities better than Bush in '00, but you can't argue that he had more experience...Bush had been governer for Texas for two terms before he ran.

Cheney already said he wouldn't run...McCain has said something of this (but I he might run). I think Rudy/Codi ticket would be a nice one...who knows...i

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE</div><div class='quotemain'>For the Dems in '08, I predict we'll see some action from John Edwards. Hillary may run, but I doubt she'll make much traction. John Kerry, if he polishes up his message may take another stab. Another to keep in mind is Barack Obama. He seems to be the Democratic "rising star". If not in 08, we'll surely see him in '12. He's a very young guy, still...[/b][/quote]

I doubt Kerry will run again...but after all he was in Vietnam, so he might run again style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/smile.gif

But seriously, you know Edwards will run (unless something happens), but I think this is Hillary's time. There is no doubt in my mind that she will run...

Barack Obama...Please do not think I am racist with what I am about to say...but he will not be the first black president with a name like he has. Not to sound funny, but I can't think of many southerners (and I am a southern person style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/smile.gif ) voting for a person with that name...

"Obama!!!!" "How is he running for president and I thought we were trying to find him!"

[Sargoth]

Originally posted by Master Cephus@Dec 8 2004, 11:58 AM
You might argue that McCain had other qualities better than Bush in '00, but you can't argue that he had more experience...Bush had been governer for Texas for two terms before he ran.


I most certainly can argue this. McCain has had national political experience dating back to 1982: four years as a Representative, eighteen as a Senator. Bush has 6 years experience as governor. (22 > 6 style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/smile.gif). Prior to this, Bush's experience was running several companies... into the ground.

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE</div><div class='quotemain'>But seriously, you know Edwards will run (unless something happens).
[/b][/quote]

Many democratic strategists are saying that to win the White House, they need a Southern Democrat, not a Massachusetts Leftie. Edwards fits the bill here. However, he gave up his Senate seat to focus on his VP bid. As long as he can avoid becoming politically irrelevant he stands a chance.

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE</div><div class='quotemain'>"Obama!!!!" "How is he running for president and I thought we were trying to find him!"
<div align="right">Quoted post</div>
[/b][/quote]

I'll forgive that tongue-in-cheek humor if you forgive this implied statement concerning "stupid rednecks". style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/tongue.gif

[Master Cephus]

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE</div><div class='quotemain'>I most certainly can argue this. McCain has had national political experience dating back to 1982: four years as a Representative, eighteen as a Senator. Bush has 6 years experience as governor. (22 > 6 smile.gif). Prior to this, Bush's experience was running several companies... into the ground.[/b][/quote]

How many senators have become president?
How many governors have become president?

I think the answers clearly speak for themselves...

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE</div><div class='quotemain'>Many democratic strategists are saying that to win the White House, they need a Southern Democrat, not a Massachusetts Leftie. Edwards fits the bill here. However, he gave up his Senate seat to focus on his VP bid. As long as he can avoid becoming politically irrelevant he stands a chance.[/b][/quote]

I think he will just go away honestly. It's really hard to still be mainstream and not have some type of job in politics...

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE</div><div class='quotemain'>I'll forgive that tongue-in-cheek humor if you forgive this implied statement concerning "stupid rednecks". tongue.gif[/b][/quote]

I don't take offense, for I am not a redneck...not that there is anything wrong with being one...

But really I actually seen this on the tonight show making fun of Bush.

You have to admit it's the truth...

[Sargoth]

Originally posted by Master Cephus@Dec 8 2004, 01:46 PM
How many senators have become president?
How many governors have become president?

I think the answers clearly speak for themselves...


If you have these statistics, I'd like to see them. Recent trends favor govorners, but there have been many successful bids from congressmen.

Did Bush win the governorship because he was sooooooooo qualified for the position (his previous record shows a resounding "hell no" - prove me wrong. Show me just "one" decision he made or one success story that indicates he was qualified to be Governor). Or did he win on the basis of "My Daddy used to be President!"?

Besides, you're answering the wrong question. The question is "who has more experience", not "which position is more likely to lead to the presidency".

[T-bone]

People voted for Bush - get over it, folks.
I mean, really. How long are we gonna do this?

[Sargoth]

Originally posted by Master Cephus@Dec 8 2004, 01:46 PM
How many senators have become president?
How many governors have become president?

I think the answers clearly speak for themselves...



Ya know, MC. Your question, although irrelevant to the discussion at hand, did perplex me. So I did the research (http://www.russpickett.com/ushist/intrpres.htm). The answers "DO" speak for themselves:

National Legislators who became President: 17

Govorners who became President: 10

Presidents who served in both positions: 6

...Soooooo you were saying?????

[Dutch]

Ridge is gonna give it a go, methinks.

[Otis_Frampton]

IMHO . .

Hillary Clinton will be elected president unless Condi Rice runs. Then there's a chance of a fair fight. Otherwise, let's face it, Hill has the demographics to clean up.

-Otis

[Justin]

Originally posted by Sargoth@Dec 8 2004, 01:31 PM
Had we had a Democrat and a Republican on the same ticket, <div align="right">Quoted post</div>

The Constitution states that it is against the law to split a party ticket, so if Kerry wanted McKain to be his VP candidate he would have had to persuade him to become a Democrat.

[Sargoth]

Originally posted by Justin+Dec 8 2004, 08:21 PM--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Justin @ Dec 8 2004, 08:21 PM)</div><div class='quotemain'><!--QuoteBegin-Sargoth@Dec 8 2004, 01:31 PM
Had we had a Democrat and a Republican on the same ticket, <div align="right">Quoted post</div>

The Constitution states that it is against the law to split a party ticket, so if Kerry wanted McKain to be his VP candidate he would have had to persuade him to become a Democrat.
<div align="right">Quoted post</div>
[/b][/quote]


I...was not aware.... of such a law! Do you have a source to back that up?

[DarthSolo]

Is HOward Dean done? I think he hada good shot atwinnign thedem ticket this past election, he just screwed it up for himself. Will he try again and keep his tempor in check?

[Otis_Frampton]

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE</div><div class='quotemain'>I think he hada good shot atwinnign thedem ticket this past election, he just screwed it up for himself.[/b][/quote]

Yeah, because he's a style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/censored.gif nutbar.

The Democratic party needs to move away from the likes of Dean, Hillary, and Mikey Moore.

Until they do, they should get used to watching from the cheap seats.

-Otis

[Master Cephus]

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE</div><div class='quotemain'>Yeah, because he's a censored.gif nutbar.

The Democratic party needs to move away from the likes of Dean, Hillary, and Mikey Moore.

Until they do, they should get used to watching from the cheap seats.[/b][/quote]

and yet Dean could be become the next chairman of the DNC, Hillary could be the next democratic presidential candidate, and MM is making a sequal to his <insert whatever here>

[goodwije]

<sigh> i am NOT ready for this yet, i'll be back when the primaries start.

[Vibroblade]

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE</div><div class='quotemain'>Hillary Clinton will be elected president unless Condi Rice runs. Then there's a chance of a fair fight. Otherwise, let's face it, Hill has the demographics to clean up.
[/b][/quote]

I disagree Otis.

The reps are PRAYING that the dems vote Hillary in as their candidate in 08. The map we just saw in November will be repeated if they do. She if far to liberal to appeal to Southern voters and has a very little chance of carrying any midwest, or southern states.

[T-bone]

Yes - but in the next 4 years you can bet your ass that you'll see her moving to the center like Billy did. Then there's the novelty factor of it - 1st woman president, husband was already president, etc. Sounds sick but people like that stuff.

Thing is - will they be fooled into thinking she's not the female Al Gore anymore? She's got that same monotone presentation that Kerry has too. She'll get the fem and maybe some of the minority vote for sure but I don't think anyone else will be able to stand her. Even minorities are drifting right these days though... should be interesting but I don't think Rice will run. She might be a good VP candidate though, depending on what she does this coming term.

[Master Cephus]

Crazy question...

Could Bill be the Vice president nominee for Hillary?

[T-bone]

Nah - I think he's more interested in being the first "First Gentleman" ever.

[The Bandit]

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE</div><div class='quotemain'>The Constitution states that it is against the law to split a party ticket, so if Kerry wanted McKain to be his VP candidate he would have had to persuade him to become a Democrat.[/b][/quote]

Ummm... this would be in the 12th Amednment -- and I don't see it there --

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE</div><div class='quotemain'>The Electors shall meet in their respective states, and vote by ballot for President and Vice-President, one of whom, at least, shall not be an inhabitant of the same state with themselves; they shall name in their ballots the person voted for as President, and in distinct ballots the person voted for as Vice-President, and they shall make distinct lists of all persons voted for as President, and of all persons voted for as Vice-President and of the number of votes for each, which lists they shall sign and certify, and transmit sealed to the seat of the government of the United States, directed to the President of the Senate;

The President of the Senate shall, in the presence of the Senate and House of Representatives, open all the certificates and the votes shall then be counted;

The person having the greatest Number of votes for President, shall be the President, if such number be a majority of the whole number of Electors appointed; and if no person have such majority, then from the persons having the highest numbers not exceeding three on the list of those voted for as President, the House of Representatives shall choose immediately, by ballot, the President. But in choosing the President, the votes shall be taken by states, the representation from each state having one vote; a quorum for this purpose shall consist of a member or members from two-thirds of the states, and a majority of all the states shall be necessary to a choice. And if the House of Representatives shall not choose a President whenever the right of choice shall devolve upon them, before the fourth day of March next following, then the Vice-President shall act as President, as in the case of the death or other constitutional disability of the President.

The person having the greatest number of votes as Vice-President, shall be the Vice-President, if such number be a majority of the whole number of Electors appointed, and if no person have a majority, then from the two highest numbers on the list, the Senate shall choose the Vice-President; a quorum for the purpose shall consist of two- thirds of the whole number of Senators, and a majority of the whole number shall be necessary to a choice. But no person constitutionally ineligible to the office of President shall be eligible to that of Vice-President of the United States.[/b][/quote]

Here's the history of the 12th Amendment, taken from usconstitution.net --

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE</div><div class='quotemain'>The Constitution was written before parties were a player in American politics. When John Adams was chosen for President in the 1795 election, the second-place candidate, Thomas Jefferson, became Vice-President - but Adams was a Federalist and Jefferson was a Democratic-Republican. The two clashed several times during Adams's presidency, though Adams's conflicts with Hamilton, a Federalist, too, probably caused Adams more concern.

In the election of 1799, the flaws of the original system became more than apparent. Jefferson and Aaron Burr both got 73 votes in the Electoral College, forcing the House of Representatives to choose. The problem? Both Jefferson and Burr were candidates of the same party, with Burr chosen to be the Vice-President; some states preferred Burr, and neither was able to get the required majority until the stalemate was ultimately broken.

The result was the 12th Amendment, approved in Congress on December 9, 1803, and ratified on June 15, 1804 (189 days). In the 12th, Electors are directed to vote for a President and for a Vice-President rather than for two choices for President.[/b][/quote]

There may very well be a law stating that a ticket must be members of the same party, but it certainly isn't in the constitution from what I can tell.

[T-bone]

I think it would have came up when there was all that speculation about McCain running with Kerry. It never came up that I know of - in any TV analysis that is. I don't think it's a rule, it just would never float with one of those parties. Democrats wouldn't care because it's like a big FU to the Repubs. Repubs would be pissed the hell off though.

[cj790]

With other important democratic countries (ie. Britain, India) already having had a female Prime Minister, how important is it do you think for America to show it's own top Governmental position to be open to female candidates?
Or candidates from a different ethnic background?

[T-bone]

I didn't say we're not open to it. I just don't think she's a good candidate based on her feelings for the issues - same as anyone else. She hasn't shown me anything great. All I've heard her do the last four years is imitate Al Gore and Michael Moore, yelling that Bush betrayed this country and all that nonsense. Then she stands next to him at events and smiles along with him. I just don't think she'll do a good job - that's all. I can deal with a womain in office but it has to be the right PERSON for the job.

[Master Cephus]

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE</div><div class='quotemain'>With other important democratic countries (ie. Britain, India) already having had a female Prime Minister, how important is it do you think for America to show it's own top Governmental position to be open to female candidates?
Or candidates from a different ethnic background?[/b][/quote]

Just because we don't have have a minority (or never have before) doesn't mean we are not open to it.

It's kind of like Jackie Robinson in baseball. If you look back at the Negro League, there were a few "better" players than Robinson...but Robinson was the better I would call it represenative to be the first black player in the league.

I don't have a problem with any minority becoming president, but I do want the best candidate for the job to get it.

[T-bone]

Ya know - and on a side note, I don't think we should just elect the first woman to run simply because "other nations did it too." That smells like a quote to me so I'm sticking to my guns on this. The right woman comes along, I'll surely cast my vote for her but Hillary Clinton is not her in my opinion.

[Sargoth]

Originally posted by T'bone@Dec 10 2004, 07:51 AM
Ya know - and on a side note, I don't think we should just elect the first woman to run simply because "other nations did it too." That smells like a quote to me so I'm sticking to my guns on this. The right woman comes along, I'll surely cast my vote for her but Hillary Clinton is not her in my opinion.
<div align="right">Quoted post</div>



Yeah, imagine what she would have her intern do. *shudder*

[Obitwokenobi]

Joe Lieberman could try again. He's a fairly moderate Dem, unlike farthest-left-in-the-Senate Kerry. If he won the primaries he probably could have done better than Kerry.

As for Hillary... No. :|

[Otis_Frampton]

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE</div><div class='quotemain'>All I've heard her do the last four years is imitate Al Gore and Michael Moore, yelling that Bush betrayed this country and all that nonsense. Then she stands next to him at events and smiles along with him.[/b][/quote]

Actually, she voted both for the war and for the 87 billion supplement. I'm in no way defending her (and please don't let her near the White House again), but her voting record seems to go against what some of her supporters would like it to be.

-Otis

[T-bone]

which makes her the perfect candidate for them.
i still dont think she's good for the job with her ramblings.

[cj790]

Originally posted by T'bone+Dec 10 2004, 02:36 PM--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(T'bone @ Dec 10 2004, 02:36 PM)</div><div class='quotemain'>I didn't say we're not open to it.[/b]


<!--QuoteBegin-Master Cephus@Dec 10 2004, 02:47 PM
Just because we don't have have a minority (or never have before) doesn't mean we are not open to it.
[/quote]

I never actually said that you were 'not open to it', I asked how important you felt it was that the top positions were shown to be open to female candidates and ethnic minority candidates.


I would agree that it obviously should come down to who was the best person for the job; IMHO there has been one female prime minister of Britain who was categorically not deserving of the title, yet achieved it...

[BoHeDia]

<span style="color:green"><span style="font-size:12pt;line-height:100%">VOTE YODA!!!</span></span>

[T-bone]

Vote T and Brookie

[Master Cephus]

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE</div><div class='quotemain'>I never actually said that you were 'not open to it', I asked how important you felt it was that the top positions were shown to be open to female candidates and ethnic minority candidates.[/b][/quote]


It's not that important to me actually. If it happens, then that person was the best for the job in the race. If it doesn't, then someone better got it.

[Justin]

J. Lo for President.

[Obitwokenobi]

ME 4 PREZ!!!!1111111

OMG LOL WTF?!

[Otis_Frampton]

Sen. Clinton is early presidential favorite among Dems

http://www.usatoday.com/news/washington/20...lary-poll_x.htm (http://www.usatoday.com/news/washington/2005-02-09-hillary-poll_x.htm)

To stop Hillary, draft Condi

http://www.hillnews.com/thehill/export/The...ris/020905.html (http://www.hillnews.com/thehill/export/TheHill/Comment/DickMorris/020905.html)

-Otis

[Bandersnatch]

Vote for Bandersnatch.



Or die.



How's that for Democracy?

style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/holosid.gif

[Greedo Boy]

Sounds like a plan to me.

[leiaorgana]

Me!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Vote for me!!! style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/happydance.gif

[Anguirus111]

Jimmy Carter in '08!

[T-bone]

Republicans Blast Sen. Clinton's Comments
By MARC HUMBERT, Associated Press Writer

Republicans took aim at Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton on Monday for comparing President Bush to Mad magazine's freckle-faced, "What, me worry?" kid, Alfred E. Neuman.

A Republican National Committee official said the former first lady was "part of today's angry and adrift Democrat Party," while a spokesman for one of her potential 2006 Senate rivals said she was guilty of "insulting the president."

"At a time when President Bush and most elected officials are focused on the security of our nation, Mrs. Clinton seems focused on taking partisan jabs and promoting her presidential campaign," added New York's GOP chairman, Stephen Minarik. "Her priorities are clearly out of whack."

Clinton's attack on the president came Sunday during a speech in Colorado.

"I sometimes feel that Alfred E. Neuman is in charge in Washington," Clinton said during the inaugural Aspen Ideas Festival, organized by the Aspen Institute, a non-partisan think tank.

The former first lady drew a laugh from the crowd when she described Bush's attitude toward tough issues with Neuman's catch phrase: "What, me worry?"

As Clinton gears up for a Senate re-election race in New York next year and a possible White House presidential bid in 2008, her attacks on Bush have become sharper.

In her speech Sunday, she accused the president of damaging the economy by overspending while giving tax cuts to the rich, depriving U.S. soldiers of equipment needed to fight the war in Iraq and cutting funds for scientific research.

"Hillary Clinton's opportunistic attempt to market herself as a centrist is like a wolf dressing up in sheep's clothing," said RNC spokeswoman Tracey Schmitt. "Such thinly veiled rhetoric doesn't change the fact she is part of today's angry and adrift Democrat Party."

Thomas Basile, a spokesman for potential Senate challenger Edward Cox, a son-in-law of the late President Nixon, said while Clinton was "busy insulting the president across the country, she is failing to produce the homeland security and transportation funding" the state needs.

Clinton has been accusing the Bush administration of providing inadequate funding for New York's security needs.

While national polls show the former first lady to be leading the pack among potential 2008 Democratic presidential contenders, Clinton has said she is too wrapped up in her Senate work and re-election effort to think about that.

[Justin]

Clinton won't win if she runs. She's way too partisan, there's no way she could get the "red staates" to vote for her.

I really think McCain would have a good shot if he gets the Republican nomination, which he SHOULD have gotten in 2000.

[Mann]

Justin speaks the truth.

[Count Dookie]

Originally posted by Justin@Jul 12 2005, 03:19 AM
Clinton won't win if she runs. She's way too partisan, there's no way she could get the "red staates" to vote for her.

I really think McCain would have a good shot if he gets the Republican nomination, which he SHOULD have gotten in 2000.
<div align="right">Quoted post</div>



Agreed....I think McCain is da MAN!!! It should be an interesting race for the Republicans. Hil...I don't know if she can even get most of the Democrats to vote for her.

[T-bone]

I dig McCain.

[goodwije]

I dig Rudy more.. I think, from interviews i have seen with him, that he would get my vote would he run.

[T-bone]

I like Rudy too but something about McCain screams President to me. Rudy needs some more experience in Washington first, I think. They'll rip him apart. McCain already was ripped apart - everything's out there, nothing's new.

[Master Cephus]

McCain definately could get some democratic people to vote for him. I don't know about him. He would probably be good, but I would rather have Gore than Hil.

But I imagine that Hillary will get quite centric by the time 2008 comes around. I imagine that by late 2007, people will consider her a moderate.

[Krogenar]

Originally posted by T'bone@Jul 12 2005, 10:15 AM
I dig McCain.
<div align="right">Quoted post</div>


I do NOT dig McCain.

My reason: his campaign finance reform bill restricts political speech, and it should not. Political speech (and spending) should remain wild and wooly.

I like Guiliani, however. But my dream candidate would be Condoleeze Rice.

[goodwije]

am i missing something? All i know about her politics is that she supports the president, not that that is a bad thing, i just don't know much about her.

[Krogenar]

Originally posted by goodwije@Jul 12 2005, 12:11 PM
am i missing something? All i know about her politics is that she supports the president, not that that is a bad thing, i just don't know much about her.
<div align="right">Quoted post</div>


She's also a black woman!

Besides that, she's a classical pianist, and I think she'd make a great President or VP.

[T-bone]

Yea but does she have a BA in English from Columbia? Maggie Whatshername is probably smarter than her. Maggie for Prez!

[T-bone]

I think she's more along the lines of a VERY good VP, though.

[goodwije]

Originally posted by Krogenar+Jul 12 2005, 11:16 AM--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Krogenar @ Jul 12 2005, 11:16 AM)</div><div class='quotemain'><!--QuoteBegin-goodwije@Jul 12 2005, 12:11 PM
am i missing something? All i know about her politics is that she supports the president, not that that is a bad thing, i just don't know much about her.
<div align="right">Quoted post</div>
She's also a black woman!

Besides that, she's a classical pianist, and I think she'd make a great President or VP.<div align="right">Quoted post</div>[/b][/quote]Ok i knew about the first part, didn't the pianist thing (although that probably isn't enough to swing my vote) and i still need more. I could add she needs some style and make-up assistance IMO, but i wouldn't not vote for someone for wearing a 60's cut checkered skirt-suit and too much rouge... sorry for getting all 'mo on ya.

[Mann]

Rice is 1) without much personality and 2) Too controversial to win any presidency race.

the Republicans can win the race if they choose someone that WASN'T part of the Bush camp.

[Master Cephus]

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE</div><div class='quotemain'>Rice is 1) without much personality and 2) Too controversial to win any presidency race.

the Republicans can win the race if they choose someone that WASN'T part of the Bush camp.[/b][/quote]

Wrong.

I don't know if Rice will run or not. I think right now she would be a great VP candidate...because like Krog said she is a minority...

But I don't know who will shape up in the next couple of years...just way to much time for people to mold themselves into the persona they want the public to know.

[BobPalpatine]

Originally posted by T'bone@Jul 12 2005, 08:15 AM
I dig McCain.
<div align="right">Quoted post</div>


McCain is my pick too, but in the primarys it will be hard for him to the the Republican nomination due to the fact that he is too much of a moderate. Although the Republicans should look and see that he is probably their best chance of keeping a Republican in office.

I think if McCain does grab the nomination he will become president. That's just my humble opinion though.

[Mann]

Originally posted by Master Cephus@Jul 12 2005, 06:01 PM
Wrong.

I don't know if Rice will run or not. I think right now she would be a great VP candidate...because like Krog said she is a minority...

But I don't know who will shape up in the next couple of years...just way to much time for people to mold themselves into the persona they want the public to know.
<div align="right">Quoted post</div>


Wrong?

Since when have the Republicans gone for the minority candidate? Don't you think there are more Republicans that will cringe at the thought of not onoly a woman...but a BLACK woman being the president? You guys are living in a dream if you think the conservatives will let THAT fly. You think that those extra 3 million people that voted for Bush over Kerry were...how shall we say...not enthusiastic about African Americans?

And yes, Rice would never win anyway. Her performance at the hearings of 9/11 was not strong in the public's view, and her ties to Bush will be too apparent.

[Master Cephus]

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE</div><div class='quotemain'>Since when have the Republicans gone for the minority candidate? Don't you think there are more Republicans that will cringe at the thought of not onoly a woman...but a BLACK woman being the president? You guys are living in a dream if you think the conservatives will let THAT fly. You think that those extra 3 million people that voted for Bush over Kerry were...how shall we say...not enthusiastic about African Americans?
[/b][/quote]

I have to say that I think you are refering that conservatives are prejudice. I have to say that if I am not mistaken, there have been more minorities been appointed to different offices in this conservative admin that was in the moderate prior administration.

It's sad to play the race card.

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE</div><div class='quotemain'>And yes, Rice would never win anyway. Her performance at the hearings of 9/11 was not strong in the public's view, and her ties to Bush will be too apparent.[/b][/quote]

Please, Rice was badgered. That wasn't a hearing, it was a chance for a couple of democrats to pounce on someone in the administration.

Her ties to Bush will help her win in the conservative base, and the fact that she is a double minority will help in her in the liberal base.

[T-bone]

I have to agree - that sounded like Howard Dean rhetoric there.

[Count Dookie]

Originally posted by Master Cephus@Jul 12 2005, 04:29 PM
Her ties to Bush will help her win in the conservative base, and the fact that she is a double minority will help in her in the liberal base.
<div align="right">Quoted post</div>

You're not kiddin' She will help with minorities which are traditionally Democrats

[Vibroblade]

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE</div><div class='quotemain'>Since when have the Republicans gone for the minority candidate? Don't you think there are more Republicans that will cringe at the thought of not onoly a woman...but a BLACK woman being the president? You guys are living in a dream if you think the conservatives will let THAT fly. You think that those extra 3 million people that voted for Bush over Kerry were...how shall we say...not enthusiastic about African Americans?
[/b][/quote]

style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/laugh.gif

So all Republicans are racists? or just most are racist?

News flash, there's as many racist Dems as there are republicans. Believe what you want but I'd betcha it's true.

[Count Dookie]

Originally posted by Mann@Jul 12 2005, 03:51 PM
Since when have the Republicans gone for the minority candidate? Don't you think there are more Republicans that will cringe at the thought of not onoly a woman...but a BLACK woman being the president? You guys are living in a dream if you think the conservatives will let THAT fly. You think that those extra 3 million people that voted for Bush over Kerry were...how shall we say...not enthusiastic about African Americans?


That's a pretty bold statement and actually quit offensive. It sounds like to me that you are calling me a racist. I am not making this personal. I am looking at it from someone that read your post and took it as a general statement.

[T-bone]

Yea that was a bit out of line.

[Mann]

Originally posted by Master Cephus@Jul 12 2005, 08:29 PM
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE</div><div class='quotemain'>Since when have the Republicans gone for the minority candidate? Don't you think there are more Republicans that will cringe at the thought of not onoly a woman...but a BLACK woman being the president? You guys are living in a dream if you think the conservatives will let THAT fly. You think that those extra 3 million people that voted for Bush over Kerry were...how shall we say...not enthusiastic about African Americans?


I have to say that I think you are refering that conservatives are prejudice. [/b][/quote]

And you think there are NO prejudice conservatives? I mean not all conservatives exhibit this. But its not unknown that high ranking members of the Conservative base are not exactly pro women and more pro white. When Howard Dean is talking about the White Christian party...he's not entirely off base.

Trent Lott...Strom Thruman...you can start listing the major players that happen to not like people of color.

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE</div><div class='quotemain'> I have to say that if I am not mistaken, there have been more minorities been appointed to different offices in this conservative admin that was in the moderate prior administration.[/b][/quote]

yeah, and still most Blacks vote for democrats, why? because the democrats are the self declared party of the non whites, even though most politicians that are democrats are white...I mean CLinton was named the closest to a black president we've had. Condelezza is made fun of for acting too "white".

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE</div><div class='quotemain'>It's sad to play the race card.[/b][/quote]

And if she runs, you think they WON'T play it? it was a big deal when Bush appointed her.

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE</div><div class='quotemain'><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE</div><div class='quotemain'>And yes, Rice would never win anyway. Her performance at the hearings of 9/11 was not strong in the public's view, and her ties to Bush will be too apparent.[/b][/quote]

Please, Rice was badgered. That wasn't a hearing, it was a chance for a couple of democrats to pounce on someone in the administration.[/b][/quote]

And it made her look like a Bush lackey. If she runs, expect that to come up again and again and again.

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE</div><div class='quotemain'>Her ties to Bush will help her win in the conservative base, and the fact that she is a double minority will help in her in the liberal base.
[/b][/quote]

The fact that she is tied with Bush will make liberals shy AWAY from her. Perhaps you didn't notice that Bush is like in the 40's for his approval.

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE</div><div class='quotemain'>So all Republicans are racists? or just most are racist? [/b][/quote]

http://www.dkosopedia.com/index.php/Republicans_Are_Racist

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE</div><div class='quotemain'>That's a pretty bold statement and actually quit offensive. It sounds like to me that you are calling me a racist. I am not making this personal. I am looking at it from someone that read your post and took it as a general statement<div align="right">Quoted post</div>
[/b][/quote]


Where did I say all are racist? I said that if you are looking for the racist group, its probably form the Bush camp? why? Cause the Republicans pander to the racist tendencies of their states? why are some states more racist than others? I don't know, history? NIxon fall out? I don't know.

[T-bone]

Someone needs a hug.

[Master Cephus]

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE</div><div class='quotemain'>Where did I say all are racist? I said that if you are looking for the racist group, its probably form the Bush camp? why? Cause the Republicans pander to the racist tendencies of their states? why are some states more racist than others? I don't know, history? NIxon fall out? I don't know.[/b][/quote]

Mann, I have to tell you that you have no idea as to what you are talking about.

I don't know where to begin my response.....

[Count Dookie]

Originally posted by Mann@Jul 12 2005, 07:33 PM
I said that if you are looking for the racist group, its probably form the Bush camp? why? Cause the Republicans pander to the racist tendencies of their states? why are some states more racist than others? I don't know, history? NIxon fall out? I don't know.
<div align="right">Quoted post</div>

That is one of the most preposterous things I have seen you post. Statements like that imply that you think republicans and/or Bush camp is a bunch of racists.

[T-bone]

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE</div><div class='quotemain'>That is one of the most preposterous things I have seen you post. Statements like that imply that you think republicans and/or Bush camp is a bunch of racists. [/b][/quote]

Well, let's ask him outright.

Mann, do you think that republicans and/or the Bush camp are a bunch of racists?

[Mann]

Originally posted by Count Dookie+Jul 13 2005, 12:16 AM--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Count Dookie @ Jul 13 2005, 12:16 AM)</div><div class='quotemain'><!--QuoteBegin-Mann@Jul 12 2005, 07:33 PM
I said that if you are looking for the racist group, its probably form the Bush camp? why? Cause the Republicans pander to the racist tendencies of their states? why are some states more racist than others? I don't know, history? NIxon fall out? I don't know.
<div align="right">Quoted post</div>

That is one of the most preposterous things I have seen you post. Statements like that imply that you think republicans and/or Bush camp is a bunch of racists.
<div align="right">Quoted post</div>
[/b][/quote]

What's so preposterous?

That Republicans have racists in their party that run it? As I said Trent Lott, Strom Thurman...You can't deny it.

I have to ask you all who think I "don't know what I'm talking about":

Who do you think the KKK votes for?

[Count Dookie]

Originally posted by Mann@Jul 12 2005, 08:31 PM
What's so preposterous?

That Republicans have racists in their party that run it? As I said Trent Lott, Strom Thurman...You can't deny it.

I have to ask you all who think I "don't know what I'm talking about":

Who do you think the KKK votes for?
<div align="right">Quoted post</div>


I think you want to start an arguement....It can be said that both sides have people with their own agendas and some of that might be racially motivated.

I don't think I should continue because I will not bring myself to a level of someone who is trying to incite an arguement.

Mann, you have a right to your opinion....I don't agree with you.

[T-bone]

Yea - I'm gonna laugh this one off.

style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/laugh.gif

[Sargoth]

Originally posted by Mann@Jul 12 2005, 05:31 PM
Who do you think the KKK votes for?
<div align="right">Quoted post</div>


Actually, they usually vote Populist. Or they'll write in a National Socialist candidate.

[Vibroblade]

Careful Sargoth or you'll be lumped in with the racist Republicans!

[Master Cephus]

Mann I thought you would want to know some things...

First off, the people you named as being racist, you have no idea.

Trent Lott is not a racist. He made a comment saying "I want to say this about my state: When Strom Thurmond ran for president, we voted for him. We're proud of it. And if the rest of the country had followed our lead, we wouldn't have had all these problems over all these years, either."

Now this was at the man's 100th birthday party. Sure it was probably the wrong thing to say but at the time, that was one of the normal thought in the country.

Now it was a bad comment and Lott later apologized and then announced he wouldn't run for senate majority leader because of that.

Not let's look at Strom. Sure he did some bad things and was a segregationist during the time of the civil right's movement. You can't deny that. But what you also can't deny that he was one of the first southern politicians to endorse civil righs.

Now since you mentioned some republicans that you claim to be racist...let's look at the good ol'Dems shall we?

Robert Byrd:
"I am a former kleagle of the Ku Klux Klan in Raleigh County and the adjoining counties of the state .... The Klan is needed today as never before and I am anxious to see its rebirth here in West Virginia .... It is necessary that the order be promoted immediately and in every state of the Union. Will you please inform me as to the possibilities of rebuilding the Klan in the Realm of W. Va .... I hope that you will find it convenient to answer my letter in regards to future possibilities."

"Rather I should die a thousand times, and see Old Glory trampled in the dirt never to rise again, than to see this beloved land of ours become degraded by race mongrels, a throwback to the blackest specimen from the wilds."

Lyndon B. Johnson:

"I'll have those n*ggers voting Democratic for the next 200 years."

Harry Truman:

"I think one man is just as good as another so long as he's not a n*gger or a Chinaman. Uncle Will says that the Lord made a White man from dust, a n#gger from mud, then He threw up what was left and it came down a Chinaman. He does hate Chinese and Japs. So do I. It is race prejudice, I guess. But I am strongly of the opinion Negroes ought to be in Africa, Yellow men in Asia and White men in Europe and America."

George Wallace:

"There’s some people who’ve gone over the state and said, ‘Well, George Wallace has talked too strong about segregation.’ Now let me ask you this: how in the name of common sense can you be too strong about it? You’re either for it or you’re against it. There’s not any middle ground as I know of."

Hillary Clinton:

"You f*cking Jew b@stard."

Jessie Jackson:

'Hymies.' 'Hymietown.'

Now I can keep going...should I?

[Master Cephus]

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE</div><div class='quotemain'>Where did I say all are racist? I said that if you are looking for the racist group, its probably form the Bush camp? why? Cause the Republicans pander to the racist tendencies of their states? why are some states more racist than others? I don't know, history? NIxon fall out? I don't know.[/b][/quote]

Yes you did make the affirmation or the insinuation that republicans are racist.

You don't know anything about this subject except for a couple of articles that you probably read. I imagine that you should read more before you make those types comments.

Now if you want to talk about certain people as racists, sure go ahead. Be advised that it's not a one party discussion.

Since we are talking about of our crevices now, you asked the notion as to why african americans always vote democratic and not republican (you then made the jump that because of that, republicans were/are racists).

I started thinking about that...wondering why. Then I started thinking...and I made some assumptions like you did. I came to the simple conclusion that Dems want it this way. How else do they have a foot in the race if they don't play that race card? I mean after all, this racist administration that you claim has nominated and appointed more minority people than the previous administration...so they can't truly be racists...but if a party who is losing ground, what should they do...play that race card eh?

See. It's really simple. I can make wild accusations about things I know nothing about.

[Count Dookie]

^ style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/bow.gif style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/victory.gif

[T-bone]

Did Hillary really say that? I missed that one.

[Count Dookie]

Originally posted by T'bone@Jul 13 2005, 12:08 AM
Did Hillary really say that? I missed that one.
<div align="right">Quoted post</div>

me2....it would be great to have a sound/video clip of that.

[Mann]

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE</div><div class='quotemain'>Now this was at the man's 100th birthday party. Sure it was probably the wrong thing to say but at the time, that was one of the normal thought in the country.[/b][/quote]

Say what? the Normal thought was "Vote Storm Thurman for President?"

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE</div><div class='quotemain'>Now it was a bad comment and Lott later apologized and then announced he wouldn't run for senate majority leader because of that.[/b][/quote]

Guess he realized it wasn't the "normal Thought" of the country.

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE</div><div class='quotemain'>Not let's look at Strom. Sure he did some bad things and was a segregationist during the time of the civil right's movement. You can't deny that. But what you also can't deny that he was one of the first southern politicians to endorse civil righs.[/b][/quote]

yeah, the progrma that Truman presented was the one he used as a reason to leave the democratic party...

As for your quotes, give me a source. I would love to see where you got those.

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE</div><div class='quotemain'>Yes you did make the affirmation or the insinuation that republicans are racist.[/b][/quote]

That some republicans happen to be racists? Gee, that's funny cause you know its actually true. Didn't Tenessee vote for someone who was a KNOWN racist for Congress? Over a guy who went over and fought in Iraq?

And is it just me, or did 15 senators NOT sign the anti-lynching bill? and weren't all 15...Republican? what were they afriad to lose the lynching vote in their home states? How many WHITE people do you think are being lynched today in MIssissippi?

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE</div><div class='quotemain'>You don't know anything about this subject except for a couple of articles that you probably read. I imagine that you should read more before you make those types comments.[/b][/quote]

And you've done what? Read somemore and copied and pasted it on here? I've heard you say "I don't know what I'm talking about" and you haven't exactly given one solid piece of evidence to disprove the point that some Republicans (ys some, as I've said all along) are die hard racists.

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE</div><div class='quotemain'>Now if you want to talk about certain people as racists, sure go ahead. Be advised that it's not a one party discussion.[/b][/quote]

Sure, that's all well and good. But Senators like Zell Miller who are Republicans in disguise don't mean much.

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE</div><div class='quotemain'>Since we are talking about of our crevices now, you asked the notion as to why african americans always vote democratic and not republican (you then made the jump that because of that, republicans were/are racists). [/b][/quote]

probably has to do with Lyndon Johnson in the 60's being an advocate of Civil rights.

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE</div><div class='quotemain'> How else do they have a foot in the race if they don't play that race card? I mean after all, this racist administration that you claim has nominated and appointed more minority people than the previous administration...so they can't truly be racists...but if a party who is losing ground, what should they do...play that race card eh?[/b][/quote]

its alot simplier than that: Republicans like Strom Thurman exist.

And here's a fact: Blacks used to vote over whelmingly republican

[yodalizard8]

Originally posted by Sargoth@Dec 8 2004, 01:31 PM
On the Repbulican side, I think if McCain were to run again, he'd probably score the nomination.

Not with the republican base being the Far-far-far right evangelicals that they are. Mccain was close in 2000, but he's too much of a washington "insider" now, so he will be called an elitist. Nice to know experience counts for something in this country of ours style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/banghead.gif style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/scratchchin.gif


this is Hil's time to shine, Can't wait for Rush to start calling her feminazi again, that is if he ever stopped style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/wacko.gif

Zell Miller is an old relic from a bygone age from before the parties practically switched platforms. *I wish i could duel him* style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/wink.gif

[Master Cephus]

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE</div><div class='quotemain'>Say what? the Normal thought was "Vote Storm Thurman for President?"[/b][/quote]

What I meant was that in the early 1940's unfortunately that type of thinking was the norm. Black people were treated very harshly. Strom Thurmond thought that way, but he wasn't alone.

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE</div><div class='quotemain'>Guess he realized it wasn't the "normal Thought" of the country.[/b][/quote]

Still have no clue as to what I am talking about. He was trying to be nice to a 100 year old man. He realized that it was the wrong thing to say and apologized. That doesn't mean he is a racist. He just said the wrong thing...can anyone say Durbin?

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE</div><div class='quotemain'>As for your quotes, give me a source. I would love to see where you got those.[/b][/quote]

Sure right here (http://www.rightwingnews.com/quotes/leftwingracists.php). The site is totally tainted right wing...but the quotes are quotes. They are just put together on one page here.

My point for putting them there is that you can find a lot of things that lead you to think that someone isn't what they are. HOWEVER, you can't deny that Robert Byrd was an ex-member of the KKK and some democrats describe him as the "pulse of the democratic party"

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE</div><div class='quotemain'>That some republicans happen to be racists? Gee, that's funny cause you know its actually true. Didn't Tenessee vote for someone who was a KNOWN racist for Congress? Over a guy who went over and fought in Iraq?[/b][/quote]

Mann if you would read what I have been saying, you would see that I don't deny that some republicans through the years were probably racist. But you also can't deny that some democrats were racist as well. That's a fact of life. But what I have a problem with is the fact that you are lumping all republicans together as racists when you can only provide one maybe two people as you describe as racists. And if you check, there is an ex KKK member who is a democrat that is representing West Virginia in the senate.

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE</div><div class='quotemain'>And is it just me, or did 15 senators NOT sign the anti-lynching bill? and weren't all 15...Republican? what were they afriad to lose the lynching vote in their home states? How many WHITE people do you think are being lynched today in MIssissippi?[/b][/quote]

How many black people are being lynched now?

That's true. But did you also notice that there are 20 senators not sponsoring the bill, which out of that 5 of them are dems? What does that mean? Well it could honestly mean a couple of things. One, it might mean that the senator (from either party) doesn't want to work on legislation that really has no meaning now. Lynching doesn't occur that often and there are other laws that are broken when it happens. It's something that should have been passed some 50 years ago...it doesn't matter now.

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE</div><div class='quotemain'>Sure, that's all well and good. But Senators like Zell Miller who are Republicans in disguise don't mean much.[/b][/quote]

Again, this is something you know nothing about. You think because Zell Miller did a speech at the Republican convention, that he has always been this "republican in disguise."

Go here (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zell_Miller) and read a bit about him.

The man supported Bill Clinton, had James Carville as his campaign manager. He has said time after time again that he hasn't left his party...his party has left him. Sure he is conservative, but not all Democrats have to be liberals.

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE</div><div class='quotemain'>probably has to do with Lyndon Johnson in the 60's being an advocate of Civil rights.[/b][/quote]

You probably have some yellow-dog democrats that comes from that. But the bottom line that the Dems keep feeding the beast. I think to some extint it benefits if they portray themselves as the "black" party because it lands them votes.

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE</div><div class='quotemain'>its alot simplier than that: Republicans like Strom Thurman exist.

And here's a fact: Blacks used to vote over whelmingly republican[/b][/quote]

No it's not that simple, because I have shown that just as many democrats throughout history have been racists.

and it's probably true about the Black people overwelmingly voting republican. Big deal, things change...that doesn't mean that it's a good thing. The question we have to ask is what each party did to change that vote, and what they are doing now.

Oh yeah, Abraham Lincoln was a republican...guess he was a racist as well right?

[T-bone]

Yea - that whole "freeing the slaves" thing was just a political move.

style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/tongue.gif

[Vibroblade]

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE</div><div class='quotemain'>Didn't Tenessee vote for someone who was a KNOWN racist for Congress? [/b][/quote]

I pretty sure that Tennessee has a larger democratic population than republican....Actually most Southern states are primarily democratic....Since those are the states generally considered to be the most racist has does that look on the dems?

[Master Cephus]

You are in KY right Vibro?

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE</div><div class='quotemain'>I pretty sure that Tennessee has a larger democratic population than republican....Actually most Southern states are primarily democratic....Since those are the states generally considered to be the most racist has does that look on the dems?[/b][/quote]

You do have a bunch of yellow-dog democrats, but since 1960, I don't think you can say that the south is primarily anything...some states lean one way while others lean another:

I am considering KY, TN, AR, LA, MS, AL, GA, FL, SC, & NC as southern states

2000 & 2004:
---------------
R - Bush carries all southern states

1996:
------
D - Clinton got: KY, TN, AR, LA, FL
R - Dole got: MS, AL, GA, SC, NC

1992:
------
D - Clinton got KY, AR, LA, GA, TN
R - Bush got MS, AL, FL, SC, NC

1988:
------
R - Bush got all southern states

1984:
------
R - Reagan got all southern states

1980:
------
R - Reagan got all southern states but GA
D - Carter carried GA

1976:
------
D - Carter carried all southern states

1972:
------
Nixon carried all southern states

1968:
------
R - Nixon got KY, TN, FL, SC, NC
AI - Wallace got AR, LA, MS, AL, GA

1964:
------
D - Johnson got KY, TN, AR, FL, NC
R - Goldwater got LA, MS, AL, GA, SC

1960:
------
D - Kennedy got AR, LA, .5AL, GA, SC, NC
R - Nixon got FL, KY, TN


Now I can't say much about other states local elections, but Alabama usually has more democrats in power than republicans. This has been true for a very long time here....but I can't say the same for other states...

[Mann]

Originally posted by Vibroblade@Jul 13 2005, 04:25 PM
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE</div><div class='quotemain'>Didn't Tenessee vote for someone who was a KNOWN racist for Congress?

I pretty sure that Tennessee has a larger democratic population than republican....Actually most Southern states are primarily democratic....Since those are the states generally considered to be the most racist has does that look on the dems?
<div align="right">Quoted post</div>
[/b][/quote]

How much larger if they are going to overwhelmingly vote Republican in the last two elections? Didn't democrat from Tenessee Al Gore LOSE his home state. Ouch.

[Master Cephus]

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE</div><div class='quotemain'>How much larger if they are going to overwhelmingly vote Republican in the last two elections? Didn't democrat from Tenessee Al Gore LOSE his home state. Ouch.[/b][/quote]

Again just because the state votes one way in the presidential election doesn't necessarily mean that they vote that way in the thier state and local elections...

[Vibroblade]

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE</div><div class='quotemain'>How much larger if they are going to overwhelmingly vote Republican in the last two elections? Didn't democrat from Tenessee Al Gore LOSE his home state. Ouch. [/b][/quote]

Quite a bit larger in Ky anyway. I think the state is close to 55-60 percent dems and in local and state elections vote democratic to a fault. For instance, Ky has their first rep gov in around 40 years right now.

Also Gore lost his state because Gore was such a liberal that southerners couldn't vote for him

Cephus, it's not my intention to say the south is the most racist. No what I'm saying is the the South is percieved racist, generally votes republican in national elections, and the majority of registered voters are dems.

Since Mann seem to be indicating that reps are racist more than dems, I'd like for him to explain why the dems in the south keep votin rep in national elections? Is it because they think the reps are the most likely to keep minorities down? If so, wouldn't that mean dems where just as much responsible for racism as reps?

Look it how you want. Dems and Reps are equally responsible for racism.

[Iknis]

One thing I never understood: why does the USA have a strange electoral college system where someone can win even if he hasn't got the majority of the population on his side? Surely it would be simpler and safer to have a 'normal' direct suffrage vote, no? So why isn't it?

[Vibroblade]

I'm in the minority but I like the Electoral College system. The simple route of majority voting puts too much power in the hands of large states. In a country as diverse as the USA, having major metropolitan areas control the outcome of elections would lead to serious issues in more rural areas ( particularly in the south ).

[Mann]

Originally posted by Vibroblade@Jul 13 2005, 07:08 PM
Since Mann seem to be indicating that reps are racist more than dems, I'd like for him to explain why the dems in the south keep votin rep in national elections? Is it because they think the reps are the most likely to keep minorities down? If so, wouldn't that mean dems where just as much responsible for racism as reps?

Look it how you want. Dems and Reps are equally responsible for racism.
<div align="right">Quoted post</div>


Why do Dems in the South vote for Reps? Gee let's think about that term, Southern Democrat...

Seems like I recall that the southern democrats were the ones that were in FAVOR of cededing from the Union in the Civil War...

Many SOuthern Democrats are Republicans in disguise, ie Zell Miller.

[Mann]

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE</div><div class='quotemain'>What I meant was that in the early 1940's unfortunately that type of thinking was the norm. Black people were treated very harshly. Strom Thurmond thought that way, but he wasn't alone.
[/b][/quote]

And that makes it better? Strom Thurmond was against blacks for years...and even after that he has a black child out of wedlock...ouch.

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE</div><div class='quotemain'>Still have no clue as to what I am talking about. He was trying to be nice to a 100 year old man. He realized that it was the wrong thing to say and apologized. That doesn't mean he is a racist. He just said the wrong thing...can anyone say Durbin?
[/b][/quote]

He apologized? Ok, so you hold people like Jesse Jackson accountable for his actions, but he also appologized.

Doesn't mean Trent Lott isn't a full on racist any less.

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE</div><div class='quotemain'>Sure right here. The site is totally tainted right wing...but the quotes are quotes. They are just put together on one page here.[/b][/quote]

Its not JUST tainted...its called RIGHTWINGNEWS.com! politically biased and with very few actual sources.

Truman's quote was made in 1911, and since that time he actually started the Civil Rights movement which Strom Thurmond opposed!

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE</div><div class='quotemain'>Mann if you would read what I have been saying, you would see that I don't deny that some republicans through the years were probably racist. [/b][/quote]

A Fact that I have been saying. Some, not all.

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE</div><div class='quotemain'>But you also can't deny that some democrats were racist as well.[/b][/quote]

You keep using the one example of a former KKK member who is a SOUTHERN democrat. And that whole "conscience of the Democratic party" is right wing bull. I can name about 3 senators who were given that title.

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE</div><div class='quotemain'>But what I have a problem with is the fact that you are lumping all republicans together as racists when you can only provide one maybe two people as you describe as racists. [/b][/quote]

NO, I never have lumped them all together. I've said some are probably racist and wont vote for Condellezza Rice. Sorry, but its not an untruth.

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE</div><div class='quotemain'>How many black people are being lynched now?[/b][/quote]

the numbers don't matter, the fact that it still happens does!

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE</div><div class='quotemain'>It's something that should have been passed some 50 years ago...it doesn't matter now.[/b][/quote]

Take note everyone. Lynching shouldn't be banned by Cephus' decree that it "doesn't matter".

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE</div><div class='quotemain'>Again, this is something you know nothing about. You think because Zell Miller did a speech at the Republican convention, that he has always been this "republican in disguise." [/b][/quote]

And didn't ask for reelection...because he's not exactly enthusiastic about th eparty right now...meaning he would probably have switched.

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE</div><div class='quotemain'>Oh yeah, Abraham Lincoln was a republican...guess he was a racist as well right?[/b][/quote]

yeah, cause if you actually READ UP on your party policies...the Republican Party back then is more like the democratic party is today. Its the Republican tactic to say "We have Lincoln" and that's bull.

[T-bone]

What a mess.

Who knows how many racist people there are out there in the government, eh?

Move on.

[BoHeDia]

I'm gonna put my money on yoda...

[BobPalpatine]

Mann I lived in the south 8 years. Not once did I hear on the news of anyone getting lynched. It is not a common occurence anymore.

You speak as someone who sounds like they have never lived in the south or maybe not even visited. My high school down there was 50% Black, 35% White, 10% Hispanic, and 5% Asian. It was a very diverse school. It had over 2000 students and guess what? Most everyone got along. There weren't a whole lot of racists (there were some, but I assure you if you went to the north it'd be the same way). Most groups had a dash of different kinds of people in them.

I think if you went down South you'd be suprised to find its not really all that different. People just have a different accent.

[P-Ray]

Originally posted by BobPalpatine@Jul 13 2005, 03:29 PM
Mann I lived in the south 8 years. Not once did I hear on the news of anyone getting lynched. It is not a common occurence anymore.

You speak as someone who sounds like they have never lived in the south or maybe not even visited. My high school down there was 50% Black, 35% White, 10% Hispanic, and 5% Asian. It was a very diverse school. It had over 2000 students and guess what? Most everyone got along. There weren't a whole lot of racists (there were some, but I assure you if you went to the north it'd be the same way). Most groups had a dash of different kinds of people in them.

I think if you went down South you'd be suprised to find its not really all that different. People just have a different accent.
<div align="right">Quoted post</div>

In my experience, I have lived in NY, FL and now NC.

In my 39 years, I have observed more racism in the north so far.

[Master Cephus]

That's pretty interesting thoughts P-Ray and Bob...

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE</div><div class='quotemain'>Take note everyone. Lynching shouldn't be banned by Cephus' decree that it "doesn't matter".[/b][/quote]

Oh someone is starting the attack siren. If you read what I am saying, you will realize that I mean that there is no need for useless legislation on something that barely (if ever) happens now. There are other laws that can be used to prosecute people who do this.

Do take note everyone...Cephus is against useless legislation...

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE</div><div class='quotemain'>And didn't ask for reelection...because he's not exactly enthusiastic about th eparty right now...meaning he would probably have switched.[/b][/quote]

AGAIN Mann, please read what I have been saying...

Zell Miller has stated MANY times that he won't leave the democratic party. He believes that the democratic party has left him...not the other way around. He decided to not run again because he is getting old and wants to retire. I would suggest you read up on the guy. Very classy guy I think. Stands for his morals. Lifetime democrat who feels betrayed by his party.

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE</div><div class='quotemain'>yeah, cause if you actually READ UP on your party policies...the Republican Party back then is more like the democratic party is today. Its the Republican tactic to say "We have Lincoln" and that's bull.[/b][/quote]

Still called a Republican style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/wink.gif
----------

I am going to leave this discussion (hopefully) with this. Yes I do believe that there are some racists that call themselves republicans. But I do also believe that there are democrats who are the same. It's a fact of life. I don't think one party is more racist, and I don't think anyone can give any proof of that.

[Cassus Fett]

Darth Vader

[Mann]

Originally posted by BobPalpatine@Jul 13 2005, 08:29 PM
Mann I lived in the south 8 years. Not once did I hear on the news of anyone getting lynched. It is not a common occurence anymore.

You speak as someone who sounds like they have never lived in the south or maybe not even visited. My high school down there was 50% Black, 35% White, 10% Hispanic, and 5% Asian. It was a very diverse school. It had over 2000 students and guess what? Most everyone got along. There weren't a whole lot of racists (there were some, but I assure you if you went to the north it'd be the same way). Most groups had a dash of different kinds of people in them.

I think if you went down South you'd be suprised to find its not really all that different. People just have a different accent.
<div align="right">Quoted post</div>


When you say South, what state? You can't say "I lived int he south" and not say what area.

My highschool was:

50% hispanic, 37% White, 18% black can't remember the asain population but it was like 6% and the rest "mixed"

In California this isn't uncommon. But DO I see/experience racism? yes. why? NOt sure, but it happens. I find it really hard to believe that you spent 8 years in a place and saw NO signs of racism.

Lynchings still happen. They used to florish in the 60's however. But still I ask WHY not ban it? even if its not a "big deal" can't you just ban it for the sake of saying its illegal?!

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE</div><div class='quotemain'>If you read what I am saying, you will realize that I mean that there is no need for useless legislation on something that barely (if ever) happens now. [/b][/quote]

I ask again, who cares if it doesn't happen as often now. Its still something people can do to other people...why not outlaw it?!

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE</div><div class='quotemain'>Zell Miller has stated MANY times that he won't leave the democratic party. He believes that the democratic party has left him...not the other way around. [/b][/quote]

Yes I know that what he says...somethingalong the lines of *shock* Stom Thurmond who LEFT the party when Truman introduced the Civil Rights Act.

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE</div><div class='quotemain'>Still called a Republican [/b][/quote]

Probably not by today's standards. I don't think either of use can rely on him speaking for himself, since he's dead.

[Master Cephus]

Fine Mann, you're right. I concede every Republican is a racist...especially in the south.. You're from there so you know what you are talking about. I forget that you are so wise in your age that you know most things....

It's like talking to my dog...I think he listens, but when he barks, I know he hasn't heard a word I said.

[BobPalpatine]

Mann, I lived in Mississippi for 8 years of my life. I was born in Texas. The rest of my life has been spent in St. Louis, MO. I have lived in the South a good portion of my life and I haven't seen all these lynchings you speak of. Post articles to these lynchings.

[Mann]

Originally posted by BobPalpatine@Jul 13 2005, 11:10 PM
Mann, I lived in Mississippi for 8 years of my life. I was born in Texas. The rest of my life has been spent in St. Louis, MO. I have lived in the South a good portion of my life and I haven't seen all these lynchings you speak of. Post articles to these lynchings.
<div align="right">Quoted post</div>


You lived in MIssissippi and never heard of lynchings?

http://www.philly.com/mld/inquirer/news/ed...al/12009043.htm (http://www.philly.com/mld/inquirer/news/editorial/12009043.htm)

[BobPalpatine]

Originally posted by Mann+Jul 13 2005, 05:42 PM--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Mann @ Jul 13 2005, 05:42 PM)</div><div class='quotemain'><!--QuoteBegin-BobPalpatine@Jul 13 2005, 11:10 PM
Mann, I lived in Mississippi for 8 years of my life. I was born in Texas. The rest of my life has been spent in St. Louis, MO. I have lived in the South a good portion of my life and I haven't seen all these lynchings you speak of. Post articles to these lynchings.
<div align="right">Quoted post</div>


You lived in MIssissippi and never heard of lynchings?

http://www.philly.com/mld/inquirer/news/ed...al/12009043.htm (http://www.philly.com/mld/inquirer/news/editorial/12009043.htm)
<div align="right">Quoted post</div>
[/b][/quote]

Now find one that didn't happen in 1964. I never said they didn't happen back then, but now lynchings just really don't happen.

[Mann]

And I'm saying if they do or don't, why are you against creating legislation that would enforce its demise?!

[BobPalpatine]

Originally posted by Mann@Jul 13 2005, 06:25 PM
And I'm saying if they do or don't, why are you against creating legislation that would enforce its demise?!
<div align="right">Quoted post</div>


I'm not actually. Although at this point I do agree it is a null point. It is a legislation that should've been brought up in the 60's, not now.

[Mann]

Originally posted by BobPalpatine+Jul 14 2005, 12:37 AM--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(BobPalpatine @ Jul 14 2005, 12:37 AM)</div><div class='quotemain'><!--QuoteBegin-Mann@Jul 13 2005, 06:25 PM
And I'm saying if they do or don't, why are you against creating legislation that would enforce its demise?!
<div align="right">Quoted post</div>


I'm not actually. Although at this point I do agree it is a null point. It is a legislation that should've been brought up in the 60's, not now.
<div align="right">Quoted post</div>
[/b][/quote]

Better late then never when outlawing murder, right?

[BoHeDia]

Originally posted by Cassus Fett@Jul 13 2005, 03:31 PM
Darth Vader
<div align="right">Quoted post</div>


dude, what does your campaign follow me whereever i post...

...i lived in florida for my senior year in high school, it was like 50 black, and the other 50 was evenly balance btw white, cubans, puertoricans, and asians, and from my experience there, i personally didnt see too much racisim, seeing as how my step father and brother are both african american, and the black kids in school knew it and took me in, well, at least didnt bother me, but there were gangs, and a puertorican kid at my school got knifed in the throat cause he was walking home through a cuban neighborhood, and we had bomb threats almost every week, eventually they had to bring in a police force of about 30 cops for the rest of the year...

now i agree that they should ban lynching, why, cause its something harmful that people can do to other people, and i dont think that it would be a waste of legislation when they make stupid laws like in florida you cannot sing (perform) in a public place in a bathing suit, thats the stupidest law i have ever heard of, so if they can wast time making laws like that, why cant they make a law that would protect people...

...now, in my first year being in the Air Force so far, i have lived in central california and frequently visited LA, and i am now in Louisiana, and i still see racisim, and the base that i am on now, we are banned from going into certain neighborhoods near base, why, because those neighborhoods are full of guns, drugs, and gangs, all ready to put violence first...

[P-Ray]

Originally posted by Master Cephus@Jul 13 2005, 03:59 PM
I am going to leave this discussion (hopefully) with this. Yes I do believe that there are some racists that call themselves republicans. But I do also believe that there are democrats who are the same. It's a fact of life. I don't think one party is more racist, and I don't think anyone can give any proof of that.
<div align="right">Quoted post</div>

People can be racist in general. It has nothing to do with the person's political party.

[Sargoth]

Originally posted by Vibroblade@Jul 12 2005, 07:59 PM
Careful Sargoth or you'll be lumped in with the racist Republicans!
<div align="right">Quoted post</div>


Noone here's labeled me in over a week, so I suppose I'm due. style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/ohwell.gif

[goodwije]

This is just personal experience here but most of my family is from West Virginia and you cannot go to more than 1 house a day if you don't want to hear some kind of racist remark. Which to me is pretty amazing because my grandmother was over 50 before ever seeing a black person. My sister used to live in Virginia and it was pretty bad there too. Thing is, I live in Ohio, and racism for me is everyday occurence. That is not exageration one little bit. At work, at the grocery store, where ever.

At work I am a member of our diversity council and people still are unafraid to make racist and sexist comments right to my face. I heard several, just last night. I stopped by the gorcery store a couple days ago, the guy behind me in line was talking with a black friend who came in the store. As soon as he walked away another guy with him piped up with how do you know that n----r, and the first guys reply.. oh he isnt a bad one.

My ex-boss was very big into the republican party and was arguably one of the bigest racist i have ever met. He flat out would tell you no black person would ever work for his company. You know what is really odd though, he sponsered this young republican. This 17 year old kid who was into JA and government and stuff. Anyways this kid was from a local (inner city) school and was black. My boss would talk to him for an hour, supporting his decisions, telling stories, just mentoring the kid... and as soon as he would leave you would hear some comment about the bid dumb ni---r. I never could understand that.

I guess is what i am trying to say is that racism exists, and that it is everywhere.

[Master Cephus]

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE</div><div class='quotemain'>I guess is what i am trying to say is that racism exists, and that it is everywhere.[/b][/quote]

You know the more I think about it, I think everyone is of some form of racist now and then. Sometimes you say things that you don't really know what it means, but it's degrading noneoftheless. Case in point, my wife and I have actually talked about doing our best about not saying things that would be degrading to race, culture, etc. So we are talking about buying something and my wife uses the phrase "we can jew him down" I told her that probably wasn't the best phrase to use. She didn't understand...it's just something she has heard all her life in different places, situations, etc. I then preceded to explain it to her and she was blown away...she just didn't know.

That being said, I think we all say some pretty degrading things at some points. That doesn't necessarily mean that you are racist. I think we have all made fun of, talked about other people and we don't really mean it, it's merely for fun...even if it is in poor taste.

But I do recognize that their is racism still in the world today, and it doesn't have to be white-black either. Racism goes the other way, applies to other cultures and races. We just see it usually one way...but it's a pandora's box that has been opened and it's hard if not impossible to contain.

[goodwije]

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE</div><div class='quotemain'>it's a pandora's box that has been opened and it's hard if not impossible to contain[/b][/quote]no it's not easy, and it certainly is not going to just happen majically. It takes a lot of little, fustratingly so, baby steps.

Also from the earlier posts. You know I could care less what culture someone was raised in. Like Strom Thrumond or Robert Byrd. Wrong is wrong, ignorance is ignorance. I can accept it when people say, "you know i made mistakes when i was younger" or whatever but to just sit there and say well it is because i was raised that way, or it was the culture i was raised in. Dangit that just doesn't fly for me. If you live in America and you are above the age of 30 we all where raised that way.

I remember a John Cougar Meloncamp video being controversal because it showed a black man and white woman dancing romantically with one another.. ok maybe that is not flat out racism, but it certainly shows just dramatically our culture has shifted.

[T-bone]

I have a newsflash for you people - racism isn't regional. It's everywhere and unfortunately, it's a side affect of human nature. Sure it's not cool, but those feelings are part of humanity - someone different from me is weird.

The "other" racism is the bad one - the one where people manifest it in their daily language, their actions at work, hiring practices, and what not. That's definitely sucky and I think that's the kind of stuff you're all referring to here. Just know that it's not like certain states are racist-free like northern, southern or whatever. It's pervasive and probably worldwide as well. There is nowhere in the world where everyone gets along and there's no one calling another race some other name, unfortunately.

Sad, but true.

[T-bone]

sorry - i did that before you guys all replied style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/smile.gif

[goodwije]

well.. your from Jersey so we expect those kind of things from you! style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/wink.gif

OK.. i just realized we are majorly off topic. Myself included.

[Krogenar]

Originally posted by goodwije@Jul 14 2005, 10:44 AM
At work I am a member of our diversity council

Just curious... what is the function of the 'diversity council'?

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE</div><div class='quotemain'>and people still are unafraid to make racist and sexist comments right to my face.[/b][/quote]

What should they be afraid of? Afraid that they'll offend you with their remarks? Maybe afraid that they'll look like fools, because their 'racist' opinions are foolish? Or should they be afraid that they'll lose their job for expressing their opinion? Which kind of fear are hoping for here?

[Count Dookie]

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE</div><div class='quotemain'>What should they be afraid of? Afraid that they'll offend you with their remarks? Maybe afraid that they'll look like fools, because their 'racist' opinions are foolish? Or should they be afraid that they'll lose their job for expressing their opinion? Which kind of fear are hoping for here?[/b][/quote]

I think there is a time and place for your own opinion. At work there are laws that govern what and how you can do things. I think the fear he is looking for is people knowing that they are not following the rules of the work place they can be reprimanded.

In my job you can actually loose your job if you go too far with "freedom of speech". People think because of the 1st admendment that it applies everywhere anytime...not true.

[Mann]

Freedom os Speech should NEVER be limited no matter where.

I'm sure that in your job dookie, the fre speech that gets you fired is NOT the kind where you mouth off to your boss.

That said if its a government office, limiting speech is illegal. If its a private institution you cannot.

take the local Community Colege in my home town. Since its a community sponsored college funded by the government, people can come and protest there about anything. Abortion for one...with graphic pictures. They can't make them leave though, cuase it goes against the first amendment.

[BoHeDia]

when i joined the military one of the first things they told us is that we are giving up our st amendment right, nd that it is now our duty to protect the people who still have those right...in the military, taking the free speech thing can get you lots of things, like stripes taken away, forfieghture of pay, and maybe even a courtmashall...

[Count Dookie]

Originally posted by Mann@Jul 14 2005, 08:42 PM
Freedom os Speech should NEVER be limited no matter where.

I'm sure that in your job dookie, the fre speech that gets you fired is NOT the kind where you mouth off to your boss.

That said if its a government office, limiting speech is illegal. If its a private institution you cannot.

take the local Community Colege in my home town. Since its a community sponsored college funded by the government, people can come and protest there about anything. Abortion for one...with graphic pictures. They can't make them leave though, cuase it goes against the first amendment.
<div align="right">Quoted post</div>

Ok, here's a lesson in the real world. When you work somewhere they have the right to tell you what you can an cannot do on work time. Your basic rights are always there but an employer can restrict what you do.

For instance...when not at work you can look at a hot chick and make comments to her on how she looks and what you want to do with her. You can be crude and it is not against the law. It may be inappropriate but not again the law.

You do that at work and it is called sexual harrassment. You can loose your job! Do you need anything more to be proven this point?

[Mann]

yes, and Dookie: Sexual harrassment is a CRIME. The first amendment doesn't say yes to criminal acts. yOu can get charged with Harassment outside of work as well.

Your point has yet to still be proven.

[Mann]

Originally posted by BoHeDia@Jul 15 2005, 12:58 AM
when i joined the military one of the first things they told us is that we are giving up our st amendment right, nd that it is now our duty to protect the people who still have those right...in the military, taking the free speech thing can get you lots of things, like stripes taken away, forfieghture of pay, and maybe even a courtmashall...
<div align="right">Quoted post</div>


The military is an organization where you give up your rights when you join. You make that choice when you join.

[BoHeDia]

oh i know, and i dont regret it at all, im just saying that there are jobs that you dont have those rights anymore...

[Count Dookie]

Originally posted by Mann@Jul 14 2005, 09:32 PM
yes, and Dookie: Sexual harrassment is a CRIME. The first amendment doesn't say yes to criminal acts. yOu can get charged with Harassment outside of work as well.

Your point has yet to still be proven.
<div align="right">Quoted post</div>

It depends on the type of harrassment. You can say what ever you want to a woman outside of work. That is our right under the first admendment. As long as you only use words.

Inside of the work place those same words will get you into trouble.

[Mann]

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE</div><div class='quotemain'>It depends on the type of harrassment. You can say what ever you want to a woman outside of work. That is our right under the first admendment. As long as you only use words.
[/b][/quote]

um, exactly what country do you live in? You can't just say whatever you want to someone. If you harrass them verbally, its a crime. Sexual harrasment isn't restricted to just the work place.

[Blizzard]

Originally posted by Count Dookie@Jul 14 2005, 08:27 PM
It depends on the type of harrassment. You can say what ever you want to a woman outside of work. That is our right under the first admendment. As long as you only use words.

Inside of the work place those same words will get you into trouble.
<div align="right">Quoted post</div>

And get your eyes scratched out!!

Mental abuse in a crime, too.

[Count Dookie]

You are right. If you harrass someone out of the work place it could be stalking. But, the point I was trying to make is: A construction site. A woman works near by and has to walk by every day. Guys at the construction site make sexual comments but make not attempt to approach her. She does not like it.
As long as these guys don't approach her or impead her in anyway their comments are protected by the first admendment.

Take the same senario and it is a guy at a desk that the same woman passes everyday in her building and the guy works for the same company. He makes comments only and she is offended. Those same comments are not protected and he can be fired or sued for sexual harrassement.

Mental abuse is only a crime when a stalking charge can be made. In order for stalking a person must make personal contact with someone in person, in writing, or by phone. The person must be in distress.

The construction site example does not constitute stalking because the woman can walk another way and not have comments made. Those guys are not leaving their site to track down the woman.

[T-bone]

Originally posted by Mann@Jul 15 2005, 03:28 AM
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE</div><div class='quotemain'>It depends on the type of harrassment. You can say what ever you want to a woman outside of work. That is our right under the first admendment. As long as you only use words.


um, exactly what country do you live in? You can't just say whatever you want to someone. If you harrass them verbally, its a crime. Sexual harrasment isn't restricted to just the work place.
<div align="right">Quoted post</div>
[/b][/quote]


You can't just "say what you want" is exactly what these guys are trying to tell you. There is really no such thing as true "free speech." It has limits and rules like anything else.

[Master Cephus]

this thread has gotten comical....

Now who's running for Prez in '08?

[T-bone]

Tom Cruise.

[goodwije]

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE</div><div class='quotemain'>Just curious... what is the function of the 'diversity council'?[/b][/quote]

Mostly it is about team building, and finding ways for all of us to interact better. There are a few corporate wide diversity councils that are specificly geared towards one minority or another, and they.. i guess lobby would be the right word, to assure that the needs of their particular community are met.

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE</div><div class='quotemain'>What should they be afraid of? Afraid that they'll offend you with their remarks? Maybe afraid that they'll look like fools, because their 'racist' opinions are foolish? Or should they be afraid that they'll lose their job for expressing their opinion? Which kind of fear are hoping for here?[/b][/quote]

We do have non-harrasment policies throughout Owens Corning and at my specific location that consider it harrasment to use "Stereotypical, Racist, sexist, or other deragatory comments in regards to etc." What i mean is that most of the people i work with know that i am someone who is working to try and break down the barriers, and they also know i am less than likely to be receiptive to those kind of comments and jokes. If i so chose i could take to my leaders, and more than likely the offender would face some type of punishment, probably not termination unless it was a way out of line.

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE</div><div class='quotemain'>when i joined the military one of the first things they told us is that we are giving up our st amendment right, nd that it is now our duty to protect the people who still have those right...in the military, taking the free speech thing can get you lots of things, like stripes taken away, forfieghture of pay, and maybe even a courtmashall...[/b][/quote]

This isn't true. What you give up when you join the military is certain rights while you are in uniform, on duty (especially when you are on guard), living in a government building, that kind of stuff. Even then, there are countless ways you can voice an opinion or deal with a problem. You are expected to utilize your chain of command, but you can even take your complaint to the Inspector General who's staff and sole purpose is to ensure enlisted and junior officer voices are heard. Anyways the military today really isn't all that different than many large corporations, in that while you are at work a certain amount of professionalism and restraint is expected of you.

[Mann]

Originally posted by T'bone+Jul 15 2005, 01:55 PM--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(T'bone @ Jul 15 2005, 01:55 PM)</div><div class='quotemain'><!--QuoteBegin-Mann@Jul 15 2005, 03:28 AM
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE</div><div class='quotemain'>It depends on the type of harrassment. You can say what ever you want to a woman outside of work. That is our right under the first admendment. As long as you only use words.


um, exactly what country do you live in? You can't just say whatever you want to someone. If you harrass them verbally, its a crime. Sexual harrasment isn't restricted to just the work place.
<div align="right">Quoted post</div>
[/b][/quote]


You can't just "say what you want" is exactly what these guys are trying to tell you. There is really no such thing as true "free speech." It has limits and rules like anything else.
<div align="right">Quoted post</div>
[/b][/quote]

No there is a freedom of speech. Saying crude things to people is abusing that right, not exercising it.

[T-bone]

Then it's not truly "free" then - is what they're saying. I know the difference, just playing advocate here but I'll let them take this up.

[Count Dookie]

Saying crude things is not a vilolation of free speach. It may be inappropriate but it is not against the law. It is when you begin to impose yourself on someone with more than just words that it can become illegal.

There are very few times when just words can get you into trouble. If you make any threats to a public official such as the President of the US it does not matter what context you meant them that is criminal.

But, if you get into an arguement with a friend or neighbor and say your an a**hole and I'm going to kick your a** and do nothing to carry that threat out then you have not committed a crime. In order for it to be a crime you would have to make an overt act towards the person you are saying it too in .

People say stupid things all the time. If saying stupid things were a crime then there would be a whole lot of people getting arrested.

[Mann]

You can gt arrested for motivating someone through verbal abuse. If you call someone and style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/censored.gif and mean it in a derogatory way and they start something, you are at fault just as much, Believe me, its happened before where people get time for this sort of thing.

Now calling someone an style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/censored.gif and nothing happens...well that's it. But if it causes a problem...

[Count Dookie]

Threats over the phone are not concidered a crime because there is not way to carry the threat out. Now if you continue to call someone and talk crap you have harrassing phone calls. That is a different crime than utilizing free speach.

[Mann]

THe point is that free speech does not protect criminal acts.

[Trilogist]

Originally posted by Mann@Jul 15 2005, 06:45 PM
You can gt arrested for motivating someone through verbal abuse. If you call someone and style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/censored.gif and mean it in a derogatory way and they start something, you are at fault just as much
<div align="right">Quoted post</div>


That's a very interesting thought.

[Justin]

Today at comic-con someone asked Jack Black if he would run for President. He declined.

[T-bone]

Hillary Clinton Campaign Acknowledges Violation

Hillary Clinton's 2000 Senate campaign committee likely violated the law when it underreported $1 million-plus in campaign contributions from Hollywood mogul Peter Paul, according to a four-year investigation by the Federal Election Commission.

The FEC found "there was probable cause to believe New York Senate 2000 and An