Senate in closed session

[Jaime]

[quote name='Raphael' date='Nov 1 2005, 05:58 PM']There's hay in there.  It would be an occasion to sin.
[right][snapback]776207[/snapback][/right]
[/quote]


So would you say a general rule is "When you see hay, bale?

[Sojourner]

[quote name='hot stuff' date='Nov 1 2005, 06:09 PM']So would you say a general rule is "When you see hay, bale?
[right][snapback]776228[/snapback][/right]
[/quote]

[StColette]

[quote name='hot stuff' date='Nov 1 2005, 06:09 PM']So would you say a general rule is "When you see hay, bale?
[right][snapback]776228[/snapback][/right]
[/quote]

ROFLLLLLLLLLLLLLL dork!

[Thy Geekdom Come]

[quote name='StColette' date='Nov 1 2005, 07:13 PM']ROFLLLLLLLLLLLLLL dork!
[right][snapback]776232[/snapback][/right]
[/quote]
Ditto...hot stuff you dork!

[photosynthesis]

oh no, now the puns are coming... everyone run for your lives!!!!

[toledo_jesus]

[quote name='Iacobus' date='Nov 1 2005, 06:52 PM']HAHA! Frist talking about precedents. HAHAHA! What is this, the thermonuclear? Hey, Bill, you can't have it both ways. Either the senate rules ALWAYS stand or they NEVER stand. So don't whine to me.

"Pure stunt?" Yeah, like the Clintion impeachment (Did I mention that Clintions apporval ratings during his impeachment were 2 to 3 times HIGHER then Bush's current ratings? Hmmm). And if it is an affront to you, and to the leadership, how is it to the US? Last I check the US was made of some huge number of people, I want to say around 238 million, but I am not sure. So this is offending 238 million people, because we know the state is only made from the people, because the Dems want to discuss something about how Bush lied about the war?

What a second, who was offending who? The 2000+ plus American deaths (and who knows how many Iraqis) in an unjust war based on lies or the Seante going into closed session to discuss how that happened?
[right][snapback]776198[/snapback][/right]
[/quote]
295 million people as conservative estimate of US population.

You are silly. Take a poli sci course this year (International Relations) and stop raving. If you are a reader, I would suggest Goldstein and Stoessinger for your enrichment.

[Socrates]

OHHHH if only Kerry and all those wonderful, pure, truthful pro-life Dems were in power!!!!
Then little Iacobus would not have to cry so.

[Iacobus]

[quote name='toledo_jesus' date='Nov 1 2005, 06:27 PM']295 million people as conservative estimate of US population. 

You are silly.  Take a poli sci course this year (International Relations) and stop raving.  If you are a reader, I would suggest Goldstein and Stoessinger for your enrichment.
[right][snapback]776245[/snapback][/right]
[/quote]

Last I check was a few weeks ago in the SA of the US for 1980 and the total population wasn't what I was looking for (I was looking for the murder rate which was 10.2 per 100,000 people in 1980, the highest on record) and just happened to see that the total population was in the 200's, I thought. But like I said, it was one of those things I saw while scrolling down a pdf and wasn't going to download a 40 some mb file to find if I was right or wrong.

And I was close to the 1980 value of 226,542,199 and the 2000 value, according to the US Census, was 281,243,231.

I am a reader, and I would suggest Marx, Hobbes, Locke, Malthus, Ricardo, Jefferson, Adams, Alexander Hamilton, Adams, et al.

And this session would likely not be occuring if they were in power in 2003, because we most likely would have NOT invaded Iraq. Moreover, when the GOP loses control, it will happen it is only a matter of time, what are you going to cry if some power crazied ends justify the means fascist ruler tries to steam roll your party and the American people?

[toledo_jesus]

[quote name='Iacobus' date='Nov 1 2005, 08:18 PM']I am a reader, and I would suggest Marx, Hobbes, Locke, Malthus, Ricardo, Jefferson, Adams, Alexander Hamilton, Adams, et al.

And this session would likely not be occuring if they were in power in 2003, because we most likely would have NOT invaded Iraq. Moreover, when the GOP loses control, it will happen it is only a matter of time, what are you going to cry if some power crazied ends justify the means fascist ruler tries to steam roll your party and the American people?
[right][snapback]776281[/snapback][/right]
[/quote]
Yes, those men you listed have had very influential ideas, but they do not dominate the current system of international relations, including the US policies which you are at odds with. They form a base of understanding, but they aren't current. Like I said, take a poli-sci course and all shall be explained to thee. Remember, International Relations.

I will cry my widdle eyes out when we elect a democrat. Those guys have already forced abortion on the American people, and if they had fascist power...why, I do believe I would shed a single manly tear.

Here's a hint: Vitriole will not serve your ideas. Calm yourself and form cogent thoughts, being sure to rely on other scholarly works for backup.

[Socrates]

[quote name='Iacobus' date='Nov 1 2005, 07:18 PM']I am a reader, and I would suggest Marx . . .
[right][snapback]776281[/snapback][/right]
[/quote]

Ah yes, first on the list is Marx, of course, the founding father of Communist "thought."
Why does this (sadly) not surprise me?

The man whose godless ideas led to more death, suffering, and evil than any other's remains the idol of Lefty self-proclaimed "intellectuals."

Follow the god that failed!

[Iacobus]

[quote name='Socrates' date='Nov 1 2005, 08:57 PM'] Ah yes, first on the list is Marx, of course, the founding father of Communist "thought."
Why does this (sadly) not surprise me?

The man whose godless ideas led to more death, suffering, and evil than any other's remains the idol of Lefty self-proclaimed "intellectuals."

Follow the god that failed!   
[right][snapback]776335[/snapback][/right]
[/quote]

I listed him first because I am working on an essay right now for class about the extent to which Marx's ideas impacted the working class before 1914. Maybe it is because I have been 3 hours today, before making that post, engulfed in all things Marxist. Maybe it is because I think Marx has some good criticisms of capitalism. I don't discount Adam Smith and the Wealth of Nations because Lassiez-Faire capitalism lead to a lot of bad things. But then again, I mean it was only about 10 years ago when JPII wrote that there was something rotten in the state of capitalism. And communionism.

And I would argue that Socialism did not fail. Socialism, barring revesionist Fabian society socialism, has not yet been tried. What drove down the Russian socialist state? A lot of things and they didn't have any help from their manic leaders. Moreover, the socialism Marx espoused was not created with a slightly industrialized state, like Russia, in mind, therefore, following that plan would have lead to failure. Much like we see in Africa right now. Because states that tried free enterspire are failling are we to discount capitalism as well? I mean, clearly, both "gods," as you said, are fallen under that logic. Therefore, we shall do what, may I ask?

And my I further ask if you read the rest of that list? Hobbes, Locke, Malthus, Ricardo, Jefferson, Adams, Alexander Hamilton, Adams all strike me as being something, esp Malthus and Ricardo, two of the men whose writings promoted the response that was the Communist Manifesto, of an anti-Marx. Locke, Hobbes, Jefferson and Hamilton all thought that private property was an inherant right of all people. Wow, I hope you read that right. Ricardo and Malthus were both classical liberals. But I can't expect you know what that is, if you can't read the list and if you did clearly none of the names, other then your boogie man Marx, had any meaning in your short list of "Who's Who in Political History."

Edited November 2, 2005 by Iacobus

[toledo_jesus]

[quote name='Iacobus' date='Nov 1 2005, 10:21 PM']I listed him first because I am working on an essay right now for class about the extent to which Marx's ideas impacted the working class before 1914. Maybe it is because I have been 3 hours today, before making that post, engulfed in all things Marxist. Maybe it is because I think Marx has some good criticisms of capitalism. I don't discount Adam Smith and the Wealth of Nations because Lassiez-Faire capitalism lead to a lot of bad things. But then again, I mean it was only about 10 years ago when JPII wrote that there was something rotten in the state of capitalism. And communionism.

And I would argue that Socialism did not fail. Socialism, barring revesionist Fabian society socialism, has not yet been tried. What drove down the Russian socialist state? A lot of things and they didn't have any help from their manic leaders. Moreover, the socialism Marx espoused was not created with a slightly industrialized state, like Russia, in mind, therefore, following that plan would have lead to failure. Much like we see in Africa right now. Because states that tried free enterspire are failling are we to discount capitalism as well? I mean, clearly, both "gods," as you said, are fallen under that logic. Therefore, we shall do what, may I ask?

And my I further ask if you read the rest of that list? Hobbes, Locke, Malthus, Ricardo, Jefferson, Adams, Alexander Hamilton, Adams all strike me as being something, esp Malthus and Ricardo, two of the men whose writings promoted the response that was the Communist Manifesto, of an anti-Marx. Locke, Hobbes, Jefferson and Hamilton all thought that private property was an inherant right of all people. Wow, I hope you read that right. Ricardo and Malthus were both classical liberals. But I can't expect you know what that is, if you can't read the list and if you did clearly none of the names, other then your boogie man Marx, had any meaning in your short list of "Who's Who in Political History."
[right][snapback]776354[/snapback][/right]
[/quote]
they are still no more relevant to the current political climate than as a base on which the ideas of today have been built. That's the point you're not addressing. But this whole tangent is

[homeschoolmom]

[quote name='Raphael' date='Nov 1 2005, 05:58 PM']There's hay in there.  It would be an occasion to sin.
[right][snapback]776207[/snapback][/right]
[/quote]
and sneeze....

[Sojourner]

The Saw Doctors have a song about baling hay. I'm listening to it now in honor of this thread.