[quote]Magister Ludi wrote:
Vroom, Thanks for mentioning the Cindy Sheehan incident.
I’m appauled by the whole thing. If she were shouting and disrupting the proceedings then sure, eject her. But a T-shirt? Come on!
I don’t agree with her viewpoint, but I sure as hell agree with her right to express it. For Christ’s sake, we’ve got good men and women dying overseas right now in the name of such freedom.
The recurring theme throughout this thread has been that actions speak louder than words. And rightly so. How can we claim the moral highground after a stunt like that?
So the cameras and commentators spend more time on her than the speech. Big deal. That would have done more to show the world that we practice what we preach than any political retoric from the podium.
I’m embarrased.
[/quote]
If Bush had said anything different than what he has said for years, maybe someone would give a flying fuck about his speech.
Instead, we get more rhetoric, more 9/11 references (never mentions the two states that were most affected never, ever vote Republican and rejected him…twice), and more shit to keep us all trembling under our desks waiting for the next attack, praying to our George II idols in hopes that he can protect us.
As for ejecting Sheehan, I think today’s strong wordes are appropriate:
Free people, remember this maxim: we may acquire liberty, but it is never recovered if it is once lost. --Jean Jacques Rousseau
Free people, remember this maxim: we may acquire liberty, but it is never recovered if it is once lost. --Jean Jacques Rousseau
[/quote]
Aw, who cares about liberty…if you have nothing to hide?! All the world should be an open book of private info. What a wonderful “fear-free” world it would be.
[quote]Magister Ludi wrote:
Vroom, Thanks for mentioning the Cindy Sheehan incident.
I’m appauled by the whole thing. If she were shouting and disrupting the proceedings then sure, eject her. But a T-shirt? Come on!
I don’t agree with her viewpoint, but I sure as hell agree with her right to express it. For Christ’s sake, we’ve got good men and women dying overseas right now in the name of such freedom.
The recurring theme throughout this thread has been that actions speak louder than words. And rightly so. How can we claim the moral highground after a stunt like that?
So the cameras and commentators spend more time on her than the speech. Big deal. That would have done more to show the world that we practice what we preach than any political retoric from the podium.
I’m embarrased.
[/quote]
Sheehan should have been ejected. There is a rule against T-shirts/signs etc for this event. She didn’t follow the rules. She was given a chance to cover her T-shirt. She refused and was kicked out.
I am more embarrassed that California would elect a lunatic for a congresswoman that gives the lunatic Sheehan a ticket for this event.
[quote]You were questioning Boston’s objectivity. But why?
He simply made an observation. Did you just assume his hatred of her at that particular time?
Pay attention![/quote]
Oh please.
Boston is more than capable of speaking up for himself, and in fact, he did. Maybe instead of acting as the self-appointed forum police, you could worry about your own interactions with people you disagree with, instead of their interactions with others.
Unlike yourself, watch this…
Boston, I took the comments before yours to be complaining about the air time given to Clinton, so I took your post to be supportive of that viewpoint.
[quote]vroom wrote:
You were questioning Boston’s objectivity. But why?
He simply made an observation. Did you just assume his hatred of her at that particular time?
Pay attention!
Oh please.
Boston is more than capable of speaking up for himself…[/quote]
As is Professor X yet that didn’t seem to stop you. Do you get to operate by different rules?
That’s ironic, you and I had no interaction until you decided to interact with me because of an argument that I had going on with another member!
Again, obey your own rules vroom.
[quote]Boston, I took the comments before yours to be complaining about the air time given to Clinton, so I took your post to be supportive of that viewpoint.
If we could aquire it in the first place how come we can’t recover it?
This makes no sense but it sounds good. This is why I do not like philosophers. Just because they have a fancy way with words doesn’t mean they are correct.
Remember when we gave up the liberty to drink alcohol? Boy I wish we had that back. I could use a cold beer tonight.
[quote]Zap Branigan wrote:
Magister Ludi wrote:
Vroom, Thanks for mentioning the Cindy Sheehan incident.
I’m appauled by the whole thing. If she were shouting and disrupting the proceedings then sure, eject her. But a T-shirt? Come on!
I don’t agree with her viewpoint, but I sure as hell agree with her right to express it. For Christ’s sake, we’ve got good men and women dying overseas right now in the name of such freedom.
The recurring theme throughout this thread has been that actions speak louder than words. And rightly so. How can we claim the moral highground after a stunt like that?
So the cameras and commentators spend more time on her than the speech. Big deal. That would have done more to show the world that we practice what we preach than any political retoric from the podium.
I’m embarrased.
Sheehan should have been ejected. There is a rule against T-shirts/signs etc for this event. She didn’t follow the rules. She was given a chance to cover her T-shirt. She refused and was kicked out.
I am more embarrassed that California would elect a lunatic for a congresswoman that gives the lunatic Sheehan a ticket for this event.[/quote]
That’s a very good point. Why would anyone give her a pass to attend that event? Well we know why…
Free people, remember this maxim: we may acquire liberty, but it is never recovered if it is once lost. --Jean Jacques Rousseau
If we could aquire it in the first place how come we can’t recover it?
This makes no sense but it sounds good. This is why I do not like philosophers. Just because they have a fancy way with words doesn’t mean they are correct.
Remember when we gave up the liberty to drink alcohol? Boy I wish we had that back. I could use a cold beer tonight.[/quote]
For some strange reason, I don’t think privacy will be so easily regained. With many people in authority one step away from being alcoholics themselves, I think it made that one much easier.
It’s probsbly fair to say that Hillary is a senator that would get alot of face time no matter what. She’s widely regarded as the democratic front runner and is “married” to slick willie.
However it is sad to watch the dems portray themselves on national tv as the obstructionist party when they were dumb enough to actually stand and applaud the fact that they “blocked” reforms to social security. Their great big accomplishment is that they were able stop reforms, not that they have a plan of their own, but that they stoped Bush. They have no direction and no vision and are a party on defense. Sad.
I personally think they took Rove’s bait hook, line, and sinker as the Repubs will no doubt get mileage out of that one. I would think that they would be smarter than that but hey, were talking about the dems here
As far as Sheehan goes, I don’t think the state of the union address is an appropriate place to be wearing a protest t-shirt no matter what party is in office or who the president is. She no doubt would have gotten alot of face time and made a point in simply being there. She’s already made her point very publicly, she really just needed to be visible IMO.
Sheehan should have been ejected. There is a rule against T-shirts/signs etc for this event. She didn’t follow the rules. She was given a chance to cover her T-shirt. She refused and was kicked out.
I am more embarrassed that California would elect a lunatic for a congresswoman that gives the lunatic Sheehan a ticket for this event.[/quote]
Zap,
Yes, I understand there was a rule. I just disagree with the rule. As for the congresswoman, I’m not too fond of her either. Yeah, it was grandstanding and a cheap shot. And I would prefer that everyone observe a certain decorum for events like this. But I still think that the rule that allowed Shehan to be ejected does this country a disservice.
Think about the Iraqis, Afgans, etc. whom we implore to risk their lives daily to establish freedom of speech in their nation; with the promise that their sacrifice is necessary because the foundation of democracy is the right to public dissent.
Personally, I think we missed a golden opportunity to make believers out of doubters.
Free people, remember this maxim: we may acquire liberty, but it is never recovered if it is once lost. --Jean Jacques Rousseau
If we could aquire it in the first place how come we can’t recover it?
This makes no sense but it sounds good. This is why I do not like philosophers. Just because they have a fancy way with words doesn’t mean they are correct.
Remember when we gave up the liberty to drink alcohol? Boy I wish we had that back. I could use a cold beer tonight.[/quote]
Because the slow erosion of personal liberties is exactly that- slow.
So by the time people wake up and realize it, it cannot be changed the other way- except by revolution. Especially poignant in Rousseau’s time. Maybe poignant for us sometime in the future.
If we could aquire it in the first place how come we can’t recover it?
This makes no sense but it sounds good. This is why I do not like philosophers. Just because they have a fancy way with words doesn’t mean they are correct.
Remember when we gave up the liberty to drink alcohol? Boy I wish we had that back. I could use a cold beer tonight.[/quote]
Interesting point, Zap - and on that note, I think we should let out all the civilian prisoners of the Civil War held without habeas relief.
