|
Post by Rachael on Sept 8, 2011 11:38:08 GMT -5
Wow, we were totally overdoing it on the last thread, and with a new political season year upon us, it's time for a new thread: BUFFY: New semester, new classes. Whole new vistas of knowledge to be confused and intimidated by.
TARA: I think this one's gonna be kind of fun. Greek Art's gonna touch on so many things -- mythology, history, philosophy...
BUFFY: The professor spit too much when he talked. It was like being at Sea World. The first five rows will get wet.
TARA: That was just, you know, um, enthusiasm.
BUFFY: It seemed very much like saliva.
TARA: We'll sit farther back next time This was an historic political year, no doubt about it. The next four years will be just as historically significant so, we're going to continue our not-so-experimental idea of having a place to talk about everything and anything you want.
Welcome to the Open Topic Discussion- Part 5! So, go to it. All are welcome to talk here about pretty much whatever you want. Religion, politics, philosophy... you name it!
But, before we go any further, here's the deal:While we have relaxed the rules about religion and politics only in this forum, we're still adhering to the "no bashing" rules. There's a little black button up above if you need a refresher on those.
Please keep any disagreements potentially created here from carrying over to the other threads. This forum may be suspended if we feel it becomes detrimental to the harmony of the S'cubies.
Technopagans do reserve the right to reprimand, apply strikes and modify/delete posts if posters don't take the rules seriously.
With that said, we'd also like to address the fact that techs will probably frequently be involved in the discourse. While they will strive to adhere to the rules themselves, it is quite possible that, at some point, the regular members may feel they have stepped out of bounds. If you feel a board admin is out of line, please report this to the other Techs and/or your CoW members. And that's pretty much it! Follow those guidelines and we should all be good. Oh, and to quote Karen, 'cause I love this:
"You know politicians. Bunch of bitchy little girls."
|
|
|
Post by Sue on Sept 8, 2011 17:14:29 GMT -5
Politics! Religion! Bad hair days! Fashion! Liberals! Conservatives! Talk show hosts! Media! (boo-hiss, mostly) I heart Jon Stewart! Atheists! Evangelicals! Abortions! Preachers! Demonstrators! Free Speech! Hate Speech! Politicians! Phony Politicians! Pundits! (gag) Extremists of any and all ilk! (boooooooooooo, hissssssssssssss) Phew, just glad I got that all out there. Oh, and: FIRST! And thanks to Rachael for the cool new playground. I like the opening.
|
|
|
Post by Spaced Out Looney on Sept 8, 2011 18:29:23 GMT -5
So what was Ron Paul's tantrum about? Cause I'm not following this election too closely until all the parties have chosen their candidates, and I'm finding it difficult to get in the right emotional states to deal with politics right now. but I admit I'm kinda curious, cause Ron Paul has had some great moments in the past.
|
|
|
Post by Karen on Sept 8, 2011 18:59:09 GMT -5
Thanks for the new (spit-less) part, Rachael! Glad you liked the Burn Notice quoteage. Bruce Campbell's delivery is spot-on!
|
|
|
Post by Julia, wrought iron-y on Sept 20, 2011 1:50:52 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by Sue on Sept 20, 2011 8:15:51 GMT -5
Well, sorry for dropping out of the conversation, and I can't remember what RP was fulminating about, although I'm sure it would all be better if we just let the churches take care of everything! Anyway, presented without comment: mail.google.com/mail/?hl=en&shva=1#inboxJulia, and I should have been in bed a while ago, anyway. Julia -- maybe you meant to copy a different link?
|
|
|
Post by Karen on Sept 20, 2011 10:24:28 GMT -5
Well, sorry for dropping out of the conversation, and I can't remember what RP was fulminating about, although I'm sure it would all be better if we just let the churches take care of everything! Anyway, presented without comment: mail.google.com/mail/?hl=en&shva=1#inboxJulia, and I should have been in bed a while ago, anyway. Ah..I bet it was the bit where the moderator asked Ron Paul a hypothetical about the 30 year old uninsured man, who had refused to buy insurance, but then got seriously ill. What should be done about him? (Implying - just let him die? - The cheer - YEAH - from the crowd were a bit disheartening. RP was even taken aback by them.) RP kind of sputtered out an answer, like how in the past he would 'just be taken care of'...something like that. Churches, charity. Would Medicare for all really be such a bad thing?
|
|
|
Post by Julia, wrought iron-y on Sept 20, 2011 11:42:21 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by Julia, wrought iron-y on Sept 20, 2011 11:45:07 GMT -5
Well, sorry for dropping out of the conversation, and I can't remember what RP was fulminating about, although I'm sure it would all be better if we just let the churches take care of everything! Anyway, presented without comment: mail.google.com/mail/?hl=en&shva=1#inboxJulia, and I should have been in bed a while ago, anyway. Ah..I bet it was the bit where the moderator asked Ron Paul a hypothetical about the 30 year old uninsured man, who had refused to buy insurance, but then got seriously ill. What should be done about him? (Implying - just let him die? - The cheer - YEAH - from the crowd were a bit disheartening. RP was even taken aback by them.) RP kind of sputtered out an answer, like how in the past he would 'just be taken care of'...something like that. Churches, charity. Would Medicare for all really be such a bad thing? No, this was earlier, and was a disagreement between him and RP, something having to do with Perry's actions as governor. The medical treatment question had more to do with his deer-in-the-headlights "what have I awakened?" look. Julia, because Dr. Paul is at least a sane man, and some of his google-Ron-Paul adherants, maybe not.
|
|
|
Post by Karen on Sept 20, 2011 13:10:25 GMT -5
Ah..I bet it was the bit where the moderator asked Ron Paul a hypothetical about the 30 year old uninsured man, who had refused to buy insurance, but then got seriously ill. What should be done about him? (Implying - just let him die? - The cheer - YEAH - from the crowd were a bit disheartening. RP was even taken aback by them.) RP kind of sputtered out an answer, like how in the past he would 'just be taken care of'...something like that. Churches, charity. Would Medicare for all really be such a bad thing? No, this was earlier, and was a disagreement between him and RP, something having to do with Perry's actions as governor. The medical treatment question had more to do with his deer-in-the-headlights "what have I awakened?" look. Julia, because Dr. Paul is at least a sane man, and some of his google-Ron-Paul adherants, maybe not. Ron Paul had a hissy over not getting much air time. Something like 5 minutes in 2 hours, it turns out. Got his digs in about Perry and his HPV vaccine mandate, for which (off-camera) he got scolded by Perry. I'd like to live in a Ron Paul world. Where everyone helps out those in need, saves for retirement and where bankers and industry and foreign countries have everyman's best interests at heart.
|
|
|
Post by Karen on Sept 20, 2011 13:15:00 GMT -5
"Harper's attempts to make lying legal on Canadian television are a stark admission that right-wing political ideology can only dominate national debate through dishonest propaganda. " I had heard about this a while back. The US got rid of that pesky law. I work with people who only get their 'news' from Fox/R.Limbaug. And they have masters degrees. So, what do I know.
|
|
|
Post by Julia, wrought iron-y on Sept 20, 2011 13:57:29 GMT -5
No, this was earlier, and was a disagreement between him and RP, something having to do with Perry's actions as governor. The medical treatment question had more to do with his deer-in-the-headlights "what have I awakened?" look. Julia, because Dr. Paul is at least a sane man, and some of his google-Ron-Paul adherants, maybe not. Ron Paul had a hissy over not getting much air time. Something like 5 minutes in 2 hours, it turns out. Got his digs in about Perry and his HPV vaccine mandate, for which (off-camera) he got scolded by Perry. I'd like to live in a Ron Paul world. Where everyone helps out those in need, saves for retirement and where bankers and industry and foreign countries have everyman's best interests at heart. Unfortunately, it doesn't scale well.
|
|
|
Post by Spaced Out Looney on Sept 20, 2011 21:19:00 GMT -5
Ah, thanks for the filling me in about Ron Paul, y'all.
And, yeah, healthcare is an entirely different beast from most other industries; acknowledging that seems to be largely missing from the mainstream debate about it.
Also, I keep vacillating between thinking I'm going to vote for Obama again and voting for some 3rd party candidate; it's weird. Not that I'm paying a lot of attention to politics at the moment.
|
|
|
Post by Karen on Sept 20, 2011 22:14:16 GMT -5
Ah, thanks for the filling me in about Ron Paul, y'all. And, yeah, healthcare is an entirely different beast from most other industries; acknowledging that seems to be largely missing from the mainstream debate about it. Also, I keep vacillating between thinking I'm going to vote for Obama again and voting for some 3rd party candidate; it's weird. Not that I'm paying a lot of attention to politics at the moment. I understand how you feel. Most everyone is frustrated. Independents who voted 3rd party (Nadar) in 2000, gave us Bush for 8 years. I don't know if our country would survive that.
|
|
|
Post by Spaced Out Looney on Sept 21, 2011 8:11:07 GMT -5
Ah, thanks for the filling me in about Ron Paul, y'all. And, yeah, healthcare is an entirely different beast from most other industries; acknowledging that seems to be largely missing from the mainstream debate about it. Also, I keep vacillating between thinking I'm going to vote for Obama again and voting for some 3rd party candidate; it's weird. Not that I'm paying a lot of attention to politics at the moment. I understand how you feel. Most everyone is frustrated. Independents who voted 3rd party (Nadar) in 2000, gave us Bush for 8 years. I don't know if our country would survive that. I understand the splitting the vote concept, but I think it only goes so far. It's a question of whether whoever is elected being so constrained by the position that things will progress in the same way no matter who wins. In that case, it would be better to vote on principle than strategy. The thing is, Obama keeps going back and forth between frustrating me and impressing me in what he's able to do in his position. Well, there's still a year left to decide.
|
|