LowerCaseRepublican

Hahahaha -- I'm actually starting the chapter on Jackson and his presidency tomorrow with my 7th grade class that I'm student teaching for. I have set for a couple days of discussions about the way he got us Florida and the way that we went about Indian Removal under his Presidency. It is going to be so much fun playing Devil's Advocate for both sides during those discussions. Edit: Did you ever notice that this guy openly advocated mass murder, killed a bunch of people in duels, threatened to hang other politicians, etc. and yet was still elected to the Presidency? Wow, has America really become pussified when it comes to electing leaders.

I love how people vote for Carter -- despite ignoring the FACT that Reagan, Casey and Bush Sr. used the CIA to negotiate with the Iranians to hold the hostages until after the election, just so they could use Carter's failure to get the hostages out against him. Talk about stacking the damn deck. http://www.consortiumnews.com/2004/110204.html You'd figure that Reagan could make the list: -Arming Saddam -Arming Iran -Iran/Contra -Keeping the hostages in Iran just so he could use it as a political tool to win an election -Funding/arming/training bin Laden and Al Qaeda -Savings and Loans scandals -Ignored AIDS -Supported S. African apartheid -Supported numerous Central/S. American dictators and others throughout the globe I think it is a better laundry list of stupid s*** done in 8 years than Carter could ever dream of having done. And to say that Carter was a bad President is like saying Idi Amin was a people person. Sure, it is true but it isn't the whole story by any stretch of the imagination.

Perhaps this was all part of Cheney's involvement in "The Most Dangerous Game" hunting. Think about it. http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0023238/

Okay gang, I got a site link http://www.suburbanchicagonews.com/heraldn..._LETTERS_S1.htm When you go to it, it 404's because the site got rid of the letter by now. Is there any way that I can still read the letter (via cache or something) Any help would kick much ass.

Dwight D. for his forewarning on the military industrial complex, not going forward with Operation Northwoods in his last years as Prez and not f***ing up too much. He's a close 2nd to my favorite (Harrison -- didn't do a damn thing to hurt the country) And with all this Lincoln love, how can we forget his suspending of habeas corpus? And more here: http://www.civilwarhome.com/pulito.htm

QUOTE(EvilMonkey @ Feb 11, 2006 -> 10:21 PM) Balta, are you saying that domestic spying is ok, as long as there is no law against it? So that would mean that slavery was ok, until there was a law against it? The point I was trying to make is asshat Carter did the very thing he criticized Bush for doing, only worse! Both Carter's and Clinton's administrations defended this very act,but now that it is Georgie-boy doing it, well, it must be the work of the devil! Just because another President did it/does it, does not make what Bush did any less illegal and any less wrong. The equivalent is like saying "Well, my one child misbehaved, so I need to let all my children do that." One can be against domestic spying without being a Clinton/Carter lover. One does not have to love every last aspect of a person/politician to support them. There are parts of politicians that I like and parts that I dislike. It does a dis-service to American politics to try to pigeonhole a person into a bichromatic view of the world based on a D or R near their name. From Glen Greenwald and Crooks&Liars.com true conservative believer Bob Barr -- whose conservative credentials include serving as House Manager of the Clinton Impeachment and being the primary sponsor of the Defense of Marriage Act -- was treated like an evil traitor at the Conservative Political Action Conference held this weekend all because he is critical of The President's violations of FISA. Conservatism in some circles really has morphed into The Cult of George Bush, which is why any criticism of the Leader -- even when the criticism is based on conservative principles -- is deemed to be blasphemous to the Cause. This excerpt from Milbank’s column really tells you all you need to know about what "conservativism" has come to mean in certain circles: Barr answered in the affirmative. "Do we truly remain a society that believes that . . . every president must abide by the law of this country?" he posed. "I, as a conservative, say yes. I hope you as conservatives say yes." But nobody said anything in the deathly quiet audience. Barr merited only polite applause when he finished, and one man, Richard Sorcinelli, booed him loudly. "I can't believe I'm in a conservative hall listening to him say [bush] is off course trying to defend the United States," Sorcinelli fumed. For them, even to be subjected to the idea that "Bush is off course" is traumatic and wrong. Such an opinion has no place at a "conservative" event, where only praise and reverence of the Commander-in-Chief is appropriate. One sees this time and again: "conservatism" these days very rarely has anything to do with actual conservative principles of government and has come to be distorted shorthand for "George Bush follower." The more one agrees with and praises the Commander-in-Chief, the more "conservative" one is, even when his actions aren't even remotely "conservative." That really is the definition of a creepy cult of personality, and it has consumed a large segment of the Republican Party.

Best President -- William Henry Harrison. He didn't do a damn thing to hurt the United States at all. /case.closed.

QUOTE(Controlled Chaos @ Feb 9, 2006 -> 12:23 PM) Wow...I wish you were my teacher. My dog ate my homework!! That's ok son...it's not your fault. I have high expectations of the students and expect them to meet them. I, however, don't buy into the argument that only teachers should be held accountable for performance of the student in the classroom. For instance, I had a kid throw a punch in my classroom because somebody stepped on his foot. When I wrote him up, he said that his dad says it is fine to throw punches if somebody crosses you. Now -- I'm reinforcing that the behavior is wrong but his parents are telling him it is right. He sees me for 45 minutes (and that 1/2 hour detention) and he sees his parents much more. I wonder which reinforcement is going to win out. But please continue to undercut complex debate about issues of race, socio-economic status and privilege with simpleminded platitudes. It makes you look smart. I swear. And Stossel is great at showing anecdotal evidence without relying on nationwide, scientifically valid statistics for the most part. As Rothstein argues "In both social classes, some students perform well above or below the average performance of their social class peers. If schools can select (or attract) a disproportionate share of lower class students whose performance is above average for their social class, these schools can appear to be quite successful. Many such schools are excellent and should be commended. But their successes provide no evidence that their instructional approaches would close the achievement gap for students who are average for their social class groups."

http://www.gkko.com/videos/2030/super-bowl...sary-censorship

QUOTE(Gene Honda Civic @ Feb 8, 2006 -> 08:03 PM) All thanks to my neatly decorated "Anti-Terrorism Rock." You're welcome, by the way. Lisa, I'd like to buy your rock!

QUOTE(NUKE_CLEVELAND @ Feb 8, 2006 -> 07:43 PM) What has Al Qaeda done since 9-11? Aside from making blustery video tapes they've done a lot of running away, hiding, bleeding and dying. Bush has done more to fight terrorism in 5 minutes than all other Presidents, save Reagan, combined. I dont want to hear it. Yeah and it took 8 years between WTC I and WTC II. And oh yeah, let the revisionist history begin -- Clinton did stop a little thing called Project Bojinka (http://www.thememoryhole.org/911/dia-bojinka.htm)

QUOTE(Cuck the Fubs @ Feb 8, 2006 -> 07:41 PM) I was wondering if you guys know anything about these 2 dudes named Fukuyama and Spengler? I've got to write a paper depicting these 2 guys discussing why the US is in Iraq. My opinion of these men is that they are stupid, b/c they say the US is spreading democracy, but in different ways. My opinion why we're there is b/c this is the US being bent on world domination. Any help would be useful. I'm assuming here that the Fukuyama would be Francis Fukuyama. http://www.antiwar.com/justin/?articleid=3035 "Famous academic Francis Fukuyama, one of the founding fathers of the neo-conservative movement that underlies the policies of US President George W. Bush's administration, said on July 13 that he would not vote for the incumbent in the November 2 US Presidential election. "In addition to distancing himself from the current administration, Fukuyama told Time magazine that his old friend, US Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld, should resign." Once a rising young star in the neocon firmament, Fukuyama signed a 1998 letter to then President Clinton, sponsored by the Project for a New American Century, urging him to take out after Iraq, and another one shortly after 9/11, urging George W. Bush not to be distracted by Osama bin Laden when he should really be going after Iraq, Hezbollah, Syria, and the Palestinians – oh, and don't forget that "a serious and victorious war on terrorism will require a large increase in defense spending." But people can always change their minds – yes, even at the End of History. -- Fukuyama now regrets his backing of the Iraq war. More info here: http://www.pressaction.com/news/weblog/ful...mmings11302004/ Fukuyama’s essay is (as to be expected from the author of the excellent book PostHuman Future in which he is far more implicitly anti-capitalist than most liberals) quite brilliant within its own limited context, specifically in its realization that many neoconservatives (of which he counts himself one proudly)—I am paraphrasing—have a psychological block against seeing “reality” since they see all threats to the United States as existential, much like the Israelis with which they identify. Fukuyama believes that the Iraq war may have been the biggest strategic blunder in American history (duh!) and is especially incensed at the lack of “leverage” gained with Sharon. After Fukuyama’s polemic, it is said to have become (and the current issue is a definite indication) official editorial policy at this influential neocon rag that Israel must not be allowed to hold onto part of the West Bank in exchange for its rope-a-dope with El Presidente Bush in regard to some such Gaza Pullouts. Pause for a second and realize that this is Mr. End of History, on the board of the NED (the real policymakers), one of the most celebrated conservative intellectuals in policy making circles, realizing the unfortunate—and very humanist of him—psychologically rooted power of the Likud/AIPAC nexus. Hope that helps. /totally not writting procedural lesson plans like I should be right now (that is a lesson plan that consists of "Play review game")

QUOTE(NUKE_CLEVELAND @ Feb 8, 2006 -> 07:13 PM) Now its freedom of the press. Thats a total cop out if I ever heard one. Anti-Christian is a better way to look at it and Hypocrasy is the optimal word to use here. I think the hypocrisy is when the same Danish newspaper refused to print "offensive" Jesus cartoons. http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20060208/wl_nm/...HNlYwMlJVRPUCUl http://www.guardian.co.uk/international/st...1703501,00.html If you're going to pick on religions, do it for all of them, dammit. Doesn't justify the riots in any respect and those rioting are a bunch of asshats -- but it does paint the magazine that published the photos in a different light.

Stossel's argument is "common sense" but it is desperately misleading. Unfortunately, I can't find a e-copy of Richard Rothstein's "A Wider Lens on the Black-White Achievement Gap" but the gist of it is argued here at this site: http://www.pdkintl.org/kappan/k_v86/k0410lew.htm Holding teachers "accountable" for test scores is overly simplistic and ultimately, quite stupid. A teacher sees a kid for 45 minutes to a little over an hour a day in the classroom. The kid is affected by home life, other classes, hobbies, extracurriculars, etc. etc. etc. I have a kid in a class I'm teaching right now that is always very tired when he is at school because he has to stay up late to help his siblings while his parents work. Taking Stossel's line of thought -- it would then be my fault if his test scores aren't up to snuff because he is dead tired when he gets to school. He could know all the information (and he does), his grades just take a hit because he lacks the time to do the assignments due to other things that I mentioned before (his parents working and therefore he has added responsibilities) Then if the parents don't work, they get taken to task for being lazy parents and the whole "leeches on welfare" argument. It is difficult for a teacher to control a student's behavior out of the school and out of the classroom -- yet the teacher becomes "accountable" even though numerous other factors can influence the success of a child in the schoolroom. Stossel's argument is a "feel-good" argument with little substance behind it. It should also be known that his only expertice in the field of education is having attended the public school system with no emphasis on the field of study. And Knolls, averages can be misleading. Try a more accurate stat like the median. It would also help to look at how much goes to administrative costs (i.e. heating, busing, free/reduced lunch programs, etc.) that are not direct instruction costs but are necessary to keep the student in the school so they are able to learn.

And in the "Everybody Knew This Was Coming" department of today's news: http://www.cnn.com/2006/WORLD/meast/02/07/...n.ap/index.html TEHRAN, Iran (AP) -- A prominent Iranian newspaper says it is going to hold a competition for cartoons on the Holocaust to test whether the West will apply the principle of freedom of expression to the Nazi genocide against Jews as it did to the caricatures of the Prophet Mohammed.

QUOTE(Flash Tizzle @ Feb 4, 2006 -> 06:21 PM) Yeah, that's unlikely. Although not even LCR can cite random internet articles from a liberal publication reporting recent bombings of abortion clinics. We just need to come to a consensus here. No more bulls***. Muslims extremists outnumber, and produce vastly more destructive acts of violence than Christian extremists. I mean, can I state this without hearing accusations of hate mongering? If no one supports my position because I can't site a refutable source, than fine. Continue believing "EVERY religion has misguided fundementals" while avoiding the actions of those fundementals.. I'd agree that there are more active Muslim nutbag religious nuts out there but to discount the Christian extremists is myopic. After all, it is all these religions that seem to be causing all these problems in the f***ing first place. "My invisible man in my infalliable book says this!" and we wonder why people grow up with a f***ed up, warped sense of the world that can't appreciate irony, literary humor etc. And the scale of destructive acts of violence by religious extremists in Christianity-- it just depends how far you want to go back in history (and I'm not talking Crusades, I'm just talking less than 100 years) All the religions have a s***load of blood on their hands. It has just been Islam's turn in the limelight getting publicized for their crazy s***. For example (and this is from CNN -- just google the name of the general and you'll find the quote on a bunch of news sites, I just chose CNN) Lt. Gen. William G. Boykin, whose promotion and appointment was confirmed by the Senate in June, has said publicly that he sees the war on terrorism as a clash between Judeo-Christian values and Satan, the Los Angeles Times reported Thursday. Appearing in dress uniform before a religious group in Oregon in June, Boykin said Islamic extremists hate the United States "because we're a Christian nation, because our foundation and our roots are Judeo-Christians. ... And the enemy is a guy named Satan." -- except for the part where Islam actually comes from the roots of Judeo-Christianity as well (they acknowledge the other books as pieces of the puzzle and the status of the prophets in Judaism/Christianity)

LOL @ Juggs for the left-wing pussification comment...reminds me a lot of the objectivists proclaiming that it is immoral to not attack civilians in Iraq/Afghanistan. http://www.lewrockwell.com/orig5/raimondo1.html From the article... The war in Afghanistan was a letdown for him because we took care not to inflict civilian casualties. This, says Peikoff, is immoral: in Iraq, too, we are far too squeamish about innocent civilians. And I note that Peikoff emphasizes the word "innocent," even as he proclaims that it would be immoral not to condemn these innocents to death. When someone in the audience cried out in horror at this brazen display of naked evil, Peikoff interrupted his talk and imperiously demanded "please throw that man out." A far cry from Ayn Rand herself, who, during the 1930s, took to the stump for Republican presidential candidate Wendell Willkie, and, when confronted by hecklers – of which there were plenty – gave as good or better than she got. But the thuggish, hectoring Peikoff, whose high-pitched voice is in stark contrast to his stern admonitions, will have none of that. Unlike the neocons, whose foreign policy he faithfully echoes, up to and including their iconization of Israel, Peikoff doesn’t hide behind any beneficent-sounding slogans, like "exporting democracy" and implanting free markets and the rule of law. This, he claims, would be "altruism," the worst sin in the Objectivist theology – although why freedom, in the abstract, and not just one’s own freedom, cannot be a value in and of itself is not at all clear to me. And the clear implication is that the Iraqis, like the Palestinians, are considered "savages" by Peikoff, who wouldn’t appreciate such a gift in any case. No, what we must do, says Peikoff, is kill them – enemy soldiers and innocent civilians alike. This same maniacal bloodthirstiness is expressed by Yaron Brook, the executive director of the Ayn Rand Institute, in a recent lecture on "The Morality of War," in which he outdoes Peikoff – and also Cuffy Meigs – in the complete thuggishness of his stance, advocating the wholesale slaughter of innocent civilians in a total war of annihilation against the entire Middle East – except Israel, of course. When one timorous questioner raises the issue of how Mr. Brook reconciles such a view with the central doctrine of individualism, which is that all people are endowed with inalienable rights, Brook brushes this aside with an impatient wave of his hand and declares that all enemy civilians are legitimate targets. The reason is because your government represents you, whether you like it or not. So much for the idea of individualism. Yes, but what about a six-year-old child, asks the persistent – and clearly perplexed – questioner, who complains that he has trouble "internalizing" (his word) this monstrous doctrine of collective responsibility for the crimes of a ruling elite. What, he wants to know, has the child done to deserve such a fate? Brook hems, and haws, apparently reluctant to come right out and advocate child murder on a mass scale – and in the name of "individualism," yet! – but, in the end, he gathers up his courage, and, in a wavering voice that sounds eerily like Elmer Fudd, declares that six-year-old kids suffer all the time because of their parents’ behavior. This instance – in his view – is no different, he says, except in degree, reiterating his crazed view that when a government violates rights, all the citizens of that state are guilty, and can therefore be put to death. How can people who claim to hold "rationality" as their highest value sink to such depths of depravity?

QUOTE(Soxy @ Feb 4, 2006 -> 04:05 PM) Well, they are a little busy protesting the funerals of dead military men. . . And bombing abortion clinics, shooting doctors, taking photos of people and plates of cars that go into clinics and publishing them, etc. Mmmmm... I think he is drawing the comparison that we've got plenty of ready to be violent religious fundies in our own country that it makes no sense to denigrate one group while avoiding others.

On the bright side, at least he did his homework and completed the assignment. That's more than I can say for some of the 7th graders I'm teaching right now.

QUOTE(jasonxctf @ Feb 2, 2006 -> 04:02 PM) why??? coke and walgreens are very liberal companies. Coke in Colombia. 'Nuff said.

Ah, another reason to dislike religious fundamentalists of all religions. Let me look at my offensive cartoons, watch South Park and have a beer while watching "The Book of Daniel" in peace.

"Using the likeness of a service member who has lost his arms and legs in war as the central theme of a cartoon is beyond tasteless," they wrote. Yet referencing death/war injuries in a speech that has become so much pre-scripted political theater and it somehow becomes 'patriotic'. Funny how that works out. What I find reprehensible is the fact that they sent troops into Iraq with no post-war plans that could be put in place and due to their lack of forethought, many more US soldiers, multinational forces, private contractors (that is both the paid mercs on the US bankroll and also the people trying to fix the infrastructure) and Iraqis have died. But I can see how a cartoon would really rustle their feathers. Perhaps if the JC's got off their ass and planned better, they wouldn't have been so enraged at the reality of soldiers losing limbs in Iraq.

Today we bridged from discussion about the Industrial Revolution to the conditions of many production facilities in the developing world being used by different companies. So we were talking about the similarities and differences to the factories during the IR and under what conditions is it moral for companies to leave the US and go to developing countries. The kids are bright -- but many of them are lazy and just have the "You're authority so I'm going to try to be a dick" mentality, somehow thinking that refusal to do their homework is going to hurt anybody but themselves and their own grade/future.

QUOTE(mr_genius @ Jan 31, 2006 -> 05:21 PM) yea, cause there's been so many terrorist attacks in the US since 9-11. Yeah and remember that it was 8 years between the WTC and 9/11.

Message from the political bureau of Hamas: It is widely recognised that the Palestinians are among the most politicised and educated peoples in the world. When they went to the polls last Wednesday they were well aware of what was on offer and those who voted for Hamas knew what it stood for. They chose Hamas because of its pledge never to give up the legitimate rights of the Palestinian people and its promise to embark on a programme of reform. There were voices warning them, locally and internationally, not to vote for an organisation branded by the US and EU as terrorist because such a democratically exercised right would cost them the financial aid provided by foreign donors. The day Hamas won the Palestinian democratic elections the world's leading democracies failed the test of democracy. Rather than recognise the legitimacy of Hamas as a freely elected representative of the Palestinian people, seize the opportunity created by the result to support the development of good governance in Palestine and search for a means of ending the bloodshed, the US and EU threatened the Palestinian people with collective punishment for exercising their right to choose their parliamentary representatives. We are being punished simply for resisting oppression and striving for justice. Those who threaten to impose sanctions on our people are the same powers that initiated our suffering and continue to support our oppressors almost unconditionally. We, the victims, are being penalised while our oppressors are pampered. The US and EU could have used the success of Hamas to open a new chapter in their relations with the Palestinians, the Arabs and the Muslims and to understand better a movement that has so far been seen largely through the eyes of the Zionist occupiers of our land. Our message to the US and EU governments is this: your attempt to force us to give up our principles or our struggle is in vain. Our people who gave thousands of martyrs, the millions of refugees who have waited for nearly 60 years to return home and our 9,000 political and war prisoners in Israeli jails have not made those sacrifices in order to settle for close to nothing. Hamas has been elected mainly because of its immovable faith in the inevitability of victory; and Hamas is immune to bribery, intimidation and blackmail. While we are keen on having friendly relations with all nations we shall not seek friendships at the expense of our legitimate rights. We have seen how other nations, including the peoples of Vietnam and South Africa, persisted in their struggle until their quest for freedom and justice was accomplished. We are no different, our cause is no less worthy, our determination is no less profound and our patience is no less abundant. Our message to the Muslim and Arab nations is this: you have a responsibility to stand by your Palestinian brothers and sisters whose sacrifices are made on behalf of all of you. Our people in Palestine should not need to wait for any aid from countries that attach humiliating conditions to every dollar or euro they pay despite their historical and moral responsibility for our plight. We expect you to step in and compensate the Palestinian people for any loss of aid and we demand you lift all restrictions on civil society institutions that wish to fundraise for the Palestinian cause. Our message to the Palestinians is this: our people are not only those who live under siege in the West Bank and the Gaza Strip but also the millions languishing in refugee camps in Lebanon, Jordan and Syria and the millions spread around the world unable to return home. We promise you that nothing in the world will deter us from pursuing our goal of liberation and return. We shall spare no effort to work with all factions and institutions in order to put our Palestinian house in order. Having won the parliamentary elections, our medium-term objective is to reform the PLO in order to revive its role as a true representative of all the Palestinian people, without exception or discrimination. Our message to the Israelis is this: we do not fight you because you belong to a certain faith or culture. Jews have lived in the Muslim world for 13 centuries in peace and harmony; they are in our religion "the people of the book" who have a covenant from God and His Messenger Muhammad (peace be upon him) to be respected and protected. Our conflict with you is not religious but political. We have no problem with Jews who have not attacked us - our problem is with those who came to our land, imposed themselves on us by force, destroyed our society and banished our people. We shall never recognise the right of any power to rob us of our land and deny us our national rights. We shall never recognise the legitimacy of a Zionist state created on our soil in order to atone for somebody else's sins or solve somebody else's problem. But if you are willing to accept the principle of a long-term truce, we are prepared to negotiate the terms. Hamas is extending a hand of peace to those who are truly interested in a peace based on justice.