| Topic: |
Sociology > Education |
| User: |
"fred" |
| Date: |
06 Oct 2005 11:35:03 AM |
| Object: |
Conclusion about liberals and choices |
I've concluded that the only reason that liberals fight for choices for
women but then turn around and limit choices for classroom discussion
topics is that liberals are practicing double standards; a form of
slavery.
.
|
|
| User: "Larry Hewitt" |
|
| Title: Re: Conclusion about liberals and choices |
06 Oct 2005 12:26:01 PM |
|
|
"fred" <clarma1@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:1128616503.532982.108150@g14g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
I've concluded that the only reason that liberals fight for choices for
women but then turn around and limit choices for classroom discussion
topics is that liberals are practicing double standards; a form of
slavery.
_Of course_ you do!
You want to base all teachings and decisions on faith, on theology. You are
absolutely incapable of understanding people who base their thinking on
facts.
larry
.
|
|
|
|
| User: " &" |
|
| Title: Re: Conclusion about liberals and choices |
06 Oct 2005 11:41:55 AM |
|
|
"fred" <clarma1@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:1128616503.532982.108150@g14g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
I've concluded that the only reason that liberals fight for choices for
women but then turn around and limit choices for classroom discussion
topics is that liberals are practicing double standards; a form of
slavery.
Sorry Fred, your conclusions are inaccurate. The conservatives are as
selective as anyone when it comes to their agenda.
An example is currently before the Supreme Court as we speak. Conservatives
preach less government until it comes to
our personal freedoms, then they want all the government they can garner to
control the people. Note the issue coming up
in Indiana regarding having/raising children.
Lets end on a positive note and take a moment to thank the folks who have
actually served America:
This could be the last election where military service in Vietnam has any
political currency. But just for the record, it's worth noting who really
served among the heavyweights in each of the major political parties. There
are some surprises here.
Recognizing who served:
Democrats:
* Richard Gephardt: Air National Guard, 1965-71.
* David Bonior: Staff Sgt., Air Force 1968-72.
* Tom Daschle: 1st Lt., Air Force SAC 1969-72.
* Al Gore: enlisted Aug. 1969; sent to Vietnam Jan. 1971 as an army
journalist in 20th Engineer Brigade.
* Bob Kerrey: Lt. j.g. Navy 1966-69; Medal of Honor, Vietnam.
* Daniel Inouye: Army 1943-47; Medal of Honor, WWII.
* John Kerry: Lt., Navy 1966-70; Silver Star, Bronze Star with Combat V,
Purple Hearts.
* Charles Rangel: Staff Sgt., Army 1948-52; Bronze Star, Korea.
* Max Cleland: Captain, Army 1965-68; Silver Star &Bronze Star,Vietnam.
Paraplegic from war injuries. Served in Congress.
* Ted Kennedy: Army, 1951-53.
* Tom Harkin: Lt., Navy, 1962-67; Naval Reserve, 1968-74.
* Jack Reed: Army Ranger, 1971-1979; Captain, Army Reserve 1979-91.
* Fritz Hollings: Army officer in WWII; Bronze Star and seven campaign
ribbons.
* Leonard Boswell: Lt. Col., Army 1956-76; Vietnam, DFCs, Bronze Stars,and
Soldier's Medal.
* Pete Peterson: Air Force Captain, POW. Purple Heart, Silver Star and
Legion of Merit.
* Mike Thompson: Staff sergeant, 173rd Airborne, Purple Heart.
* Bill McBride: Candidate for Fla. Governor. Marine in Vietnam; Bronze Star
with Combat V.
* Gray Davis: Army Captain in Vietnam, Bronze Star.
* Pete Stark: Air Force 1955-57
* Chuck Robb: Vietnam
* Howell Heflin: Silver Star
* George McGovern: Silver Star &DFC during WWII.
* Bill Clinton: Did not serve. Student deferments. Entered draft but
received #311.
* Jimmy Carter: Seven years in the Navy.
* Walter Mondale: Army 1951-1953
* John Glenn: WWII and Korea; six DFCs and AirMedal with 18 Clusters.
* Tom Lantos: Served in Hungarian underground in WWII. Saved by Raoul
Wallenberg.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Republicans -- and these are the guys sending people to war:
* ***** Cheney: did not serve. Several deferments, the last by marriage.
* Dennis Hastert: did not serve.
* Tom Delay: did not serve.
* Roy Blunt: did not serve.
* Bill Frist: did not serve.
* Mitch McConnell: did not serve.
* Rick Santorum: did not serve.
* Trent Lott: did not serve.
* John Ashcroft: did not serve. Seven (7) deferments to teach business.
* Jeb Bush: did not serve.
* Karl Rove: did not serve.
* Saxby Chambliss: did not serve. "Bad knee." The man who attacked Max
Cleland's patriotism.
* Paul Wolfowitz: did not serve.
* Vin Weber: did not serve.
* Richard Perle: did not serve.
* Douglas Feith: did not serve.
* Eliot Abrams: did not serve.
* Richard Shelby: did not serve.
* Jon! Kyl: did not serve.
* Tim Hutchison: did not serve.
* Christopher Cox: did not serve.
* Newt Gingrich: did not serve.
* Don Rumsfeld: served in Navy (1954-57) as flight instructor.
* George W. Bush: failed to complete his six-year National Guard; got
assigned to Alabama so he could campaign for family friend running for U.S.
Senate; failed to show up for required medical exam, disappeared from duty.
* Ronald Reagan: due to poor eyesight, served in a non- combat role making
movies.
* Bob Dornan: Consciously enlisted after fighting was over in Korea.
* Phil Gramm: did not serve.
* John McCain: Vietnam POW, Silver Star, Bronze Star, Legion of Merit,
Purple Heart and Distinguished Flying Cross.
* Dana Rohrabacher: did not serve.
* John M. McHugh: did not serve.
* JC Watts: did not serve.
* Jack Kemp: did not serve. "Knee problem, " although continued in NFL for
8 years as quarterback.
* Dan Quayle: Journalism unit of the Indiana National Guard.
* Rudy Giuliani: did not serve.
* George Pataki: did not serve.
* Spencer Abraham: did not serve.
* John Engler: did not serve.
* Lindsey Graham: National Guard lawyer.
* Arnold Schwarzenegger: AWOL from Austrian army base.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Pundits & Preachers
* Sean Hannity: did not serve.
* Rush Limbaugh: did not serve (4-F with a 'pilonidal cyst.')
* Bill O'Reilly: did not serve.
* Michael Savage: did not serve.
* George Will: did not serve.
* Chris Matthews: did not serve.
* Paul Gigot: did not serve.
* Bill Bennett: did not serve.
* Pat Buchanan: did not serve.
* John Wayne: did not serve.
* Bill Kristol: did not serve.
* Kenneth Starr: did not serve.
* Antonin Scalia: did not serve.
* Clarence Thomas: did not serve.
* Ralph Reed: did not serve.
* Michael Medved: did not serve.
* Charlie Daniels: did not serve.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Please keep this information circulating --Illinois State Sen. Howard W.
Carroll
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "ouroboros rex" |
|
| Title: Re: Conclusion about liberals and choices |
06 Oct 2005 12:04:49 PM |
|
|
"fred" <clarma1@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:1128616503.532982.108150@g14g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
I've concluded that the only reason that liberals fight for choices for
women but then turn around and limit choices for classroom discussion
topics is that liberals are practicing double standards; a form of
slavery.
You concluded that before you ever got here - and have been completely
blind to any and all evidence to the contrary since you've been here.
You are nothing but a troll.
I suggest you take your thinly disguised whines for government money to
talk.origins, where your ridiculous anti-science crap may be properly
disassembled and lubed for storage. Your 'talents' are wasted here.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Rich Travsky " |
|
| Title: Re: Conclusion about liberals and choices |
09 Oct 2005 11:48:25 PM |
|
|
"fred" <clarma1@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:1128616503.532982.108150@g14g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
I've concluded that the only reason that liberals fight for choices for
women but then turn around and limit choices for classroom discussion
topics is that liberals are practicing double standards; a form of
slavery.
You seem to confuse superstition with fact...
RT
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "fred" |
|
| Title: Re: Conclusion about liberals and choices |
06 Oct 2005 08:13:27 PM |
|
|
ouroboros rex wrote:
"fred" <clarma1@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:1128616503.532982.108150@g14g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
I've concluded that the only reason that liberals fight for choices for
women but then turn around and limit choices for classroom discussion
topics is that liberals are practicing double standards; a form of
slavery.
You concluded that before you ever got here - and have been completely
blind to any and all evidence to the contrary since you've been here.
You are nothing but a troll.
I suggest you take your thinly disguised whines for government money to
talk.origins, where your ridiculous anti-science crap may be properly
disassembled and lubed for storage. Your 'talents' are wasted here.
Nothing but unsubstantiated generalizations. I evidently hit the nail
on the head.
.
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Cary Kittrell" |
|
| Title: Re: Conclusion about liberals and choices |
06 Oct 2005 01:07:22 PM |
|
|
In article <1128616503.532982.108150@g14g2000cwa.googlegroups.com> "fred" <clarma1@gmail.com> writes:
I've concluded that the only reason that liberals fight for choices for
women but then turn around and limit choices for classroom discussion
topics is that liberals are practicing double standards; a form of
slavery.
If the time comes that someone can freely sell your children,
and your wife has to sleep with him if he so wishes, than
you can start making claims about "slavery".
Until such time, you're merely being presumptious.
-- cary
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "" |
|
| Title: Re: Conclusion about liberals and choices |
07 Oct 2005 11:19:48 AM |
|
|
Is it your position that "classroom discussions" should be totally
without limit or are protected by the first amendment? Isn't it
actually your position that teachers should be compelled to talk about
intelligent design and provide information on it to balance what you
consider an unfair emphasis on the overwhelming scientific consensus
understanding of the origin of species through natural selection. Is
your "free speech" argument that teachers should be free to say what
they are told to say by their school board or someone else, regardless
of their own views?
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "" |
|
| Title: Re: Conclusion about liberals and choices |
06 Oct 2005 02:46:37 PM |
|
|
On 6 Oct 2005 09:35:03 -0700, "fred" <clarma1@gmail.com> wrote:
I've concluded
Well right away I see your problem, Freddie
... that the only reason that liberals fight for choices for
women but then turn around and limit choices for classroom discussion
topics is that liberals are practicing double standards; a form of
slavery.
Well, There ya go
A "womans choice" is a matter of PRIVACY. The foundation of making a
"choice" of what medical procedures any person faces should not be
subject to government approval.
Limiting "classroom debate" isn't connected to privacy---and the
connection (speech) has been adjudicated to death.
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "" |
|
| Title: Re: Conclusion about liberals and choices |
07 Oct 2005 06:31:59 PM |
|
|
fred wrote:
I've concluded that the only reason that liberals fight for choices for
women but then turn around and limit choices for classroom discussion
topics is that liberals are practicing double standards; a form of
slavery.
slavery n.
1. The state of one bound in servitude as the property of
a slaveholder or household.
2. a. The practice of owning slaves.
b. A mode of production in which slaves constitute the
principal work force.
3. The condition of being subject or addicted to a
specified influence.
4. A condition of hard work and subjection: wage slavery.
.
|
|
|
|
|
Related Articles |
|
|
