tigermoth comments

Posted in: U.S. judge orders 'don't ask, don't tell' injunction on gay troops See in context

I guess I just don't see why everybody gets so wrapped up with this issue. What are people so afraid of with someone being gay? Are they afraid they'll substitute the GI issue curtains with Channel drapes? Are the soldiers afraid they'll get raped in the showers? Come on, you have more of a chance of that as a twelve year old going to your local catholic church. What's the big deal - what are Americans so afraid of? Is it really that we still cling to some outdated moralistic code doled out by adherence to 'good Christian beliefs'? In reality porn sites record the most hits for a reason. All of these good old hypocritical christians are mostly the ones looking. If someone finds happiness in a person of the same sex, or for that matter a tree - if they aren't doing anything lewd in public or hurting anyone - who gives a sh*t. Why don't we spend more time focusing on the important things.

I'm not gay, and yes the idea of it grosses me out frankly. But what people do in the privacy of their own homes, and who they choose to be with is their own business, and should remain that way. Is it such a great fear that male soldiers will rape female soldiers serving along side them? Aren't they supposed to be adults and professionals? So why think someone who is gay will act as anything but a professional soldier? If someone is willing to fight and die for their country, my country, I say good on them and support them 100%. They're more 'manly' - whatever that is - that most of us. Just shows that for all of our progress we still have a very long way to go.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Posted in: NYC police arrest 9th suspect in anti-gay beatings See in context

Eh. I think the idea that anyone who hates gays must be, to some degree, a closet case, or otherwise "not comfortable with their sexuality" is highly overplayed.

Maybe - are you a sociologist? They do study such things - I don't. But I don't totally discard this view. For some - too many perhaps - there is a tendency for far too much anger for it simply to be a matter of some perceived manliness. Sure, when you're a kid in the schoolyard calling someone a 'fag' and having a laugh - while not behavior to be condoned - is is perhaps asserting this move to a supposed 'manliness'. But that's different than beating someone with a baseball bat because they're gay. Perhaps it's just gross ignorance, but I hate mimes and clowns - doesn't mean I'd beat one to death with a bat. Well, maybe.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Posted in: NYC police arrest 9th suspect in anti-gay beatings See in context

Although you're probably right - is there any proof to that other than the liberal media looking for sensationalism? I've seen lots of accusations of racism, issues with sexual preference, etc - but mostly from the press and the left; opponents of the tea party. Unless you're just going strictly by the likely demographic make-up. But the comment above seemed to imply that NY might have a great propensity for an anti-gay stance due to some hazy and ill-founded reference to the tea party. While I don't live in the City, I can say that upstate NY - from what I've seen as a transplanted southerner - has fairly liberal and even progressive ideas about folks being gay these days. The point of view I see most often is a big 'so what?'. Do your thing - I'll do mine and who cares?

The incident above is gang related - what do you expect from a NYC gang? If compassion was on your list, don't bother. To somehow equate that with a general denunciation of NY and the tea party seems more than a stretch.

My wife studied is a sociologist and studied the whole lesbian, gay, bi/transgendered thing and makes a valid point. The guys that so vehemently anti-homosexual are often that way due to some inward psychological issue/problem/misgivings with there own sexuality and view of manhood that seemingly makes them angry. Why else would anyone care? I'm secure in being hetero, but have no issue what-so-ever with people being gay. As long as you're happy in life, what difference does it make - and why should anyone care what someone else does as long as it doesn't hurt them? Human pettiness at it's worst.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Posted in: NYC police arrest 9th suspect in anti-gay beatings See in context

And this is happening in a state where a Tea Party candidate is calling gays disgusting. I wonder if there is any connection there.

Only if you choose to make such a ridiculous connection. What does a Hispanic gang beating up a prospective member that they discovered might be gay have to do with the tea party, other than an obsession with tying anything evil to their ranks to satisfy your personal political agenda? C'mon. Why not go the full route and blame it on GWB as well.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Posted in: In Obama's 'backyard' visits, Republicans are the absent foe See in context

All of us (in the US) will be soon enough. As all of you are so fond of saying - he hasn't been in office long enough for his measures to take effect. With that idiotic health care bill and what lies ahead, make no mistake that you will very soon be paying higher taxes under President Obama.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Posted in: White House, Dems see tax cut vote after election See in context

“And I think it’s an untenable position to say, “We’re going to allow your taxes to go up on January 1st unless the president agrees to give tax cuts to millionaires and billionaires.”'

Someone earning $250K a year is a millionaire? By who's math?

Because Republican voters in particular are extremely fickle, and not very bright.

Bright enough to know that 250K isn't a million, which apparently trumps some. What makes you so ruddy brilliant, and why does your party so arrogantly think that they are the intelligentsia while the rest are knuckle-dragging simpletons?

Liberals tend to fail to see the whole picture because their self-perceived 'intelligence' and self-righteous 'mine is the party of the down-trodden' don't allow them to see beyond their hatred of the other side. Perhaps it's because so many of you quite obviously do have a secret desire for a more socialist form of government that you're so quick to scurry away from. In our capitalist democracy, making money is the name of the game. Tax breaks for the wealthy, rather than being the evil tool of the conservatives that you so desperately wish to vilify is merely a tool for allowing the so-called wealthy to pump more of their money back into the economy to strengthen it. It's not rocket science. If people have more money, they will spend more money which makes infinitely more sense than giant spending bills that just increase problems rather than providing long-term growth and stability. Yes, it certainly can lead to abuse in some cases, but generally it's a sound principle. The knee-jerk liberal reaction is towards the mega corporations that they see as exploitative in nature. What tends to be forgotten that many of the so-called 'rich' are small business owners who employee a good number of our citizenry, but require these breaks to do so.

I tire of the 'punish the rich' mentality anyway. Because someone has the stones and determination to make money doesn't make them inherently evil. Isn't that what our free-enterprise system is all about?

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Posted in: Obama: Money alone cannot solve U.S. school problems See in context

The problem is perception - and whether you like it or not that plays a huge role. I was doing work for the USMC and my boss - a dyed in the wool Marine - would not hire a kid because he had an earring. It had nothing to do with his actual prowess as a worker, just didn't like the earring. Blindfold a boss to prevent judgment on colour, then get them to interview a person speaking correct English - not Old English - and one who uses 'axe' and 'flo'. Who do you think will get the job? Who would this company want representing them?

It starts in the schools and with the parents. All I'm saying is give these kids a chance so that white society doesn't judge them based upon how they speak. It's easy to say that people shouldn't be judgmental - but they are. And frankly, if I'm in the business world and dealing with customers, I don't want my company represented by people who cannot speak English in the grammatically acceptable way. You might call that racist but most of us would call it common business sense.

In short, why teach and promote bad grammar? Who does it serve other than detractors?

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Posted in: Obama: Money alone cannot solve U.S. school problems See in context

Success in the world requires drawing on a combination of the nine types of intelligence identified by scholarly observers such as Howard Gardner: 1) naturalist, 2) musical, 3) logical-mathematical, 4) existential, 5) interpersonal, 6) body-kinesthetic, 7) linguistic, 8) intra-personal, and 9) spatial.

That may be, but again I'm talking about basics just to start leveling the playing field a bit. You really don't need to be either lyrical or existential to be able to speak coherently and properly to give yourself a fair chance in competition with your peers.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Posted in: Obama: Money alone cannot solve U.S. school problems See in context

No, I don't believe intelligent people are the product of an "education system" - but having a decent one that actually teaches something of note can't hurt. I think to point the system rather does dumb people down. Part of the problem is the school systems, part is the parents and part is environment. I certainly think the President is correct, and more money needs to go into our schools; it's a high-tech world and kids need to have that advantage.

But it's not all about money. Forgetting the intelligentsia/future leaders comment, for your average kid to get a decent job to support themselves and possibly a family one day, they need certain skills. The most important of these in my mind is the ability to speak and communicate - in English if in the US - clearly. This is most often where kids are failed at home. The ability to speak English correctly and put together intelligible sentences and understand the basic grammatical structure is possible by mostly everyone. To refuse to do so is usually a choice, perhaps perpetuated by the parents or peer groups in order to fit in - but a choice none-the-less.

I use the prime example - the African American community - to illustrate my point. Label me racist, but there is point to my arguments and there comes a time when pulling punches to be PC is more detrimental than useful. I do understand that throughout the years of slavery education was nearly impossible, or at best unlikely. And given segregation and racism through the 1950's, 60's and even well beyond it was difficult. But in today's society, even in inner-cities, everyone has access to an education that will at least teach basic grammar rules and the ability to effectively and clearly communicate. What do I hear everyday on the bus on the way to work? 'I ain't got no idea what you is talkin' 'bout ni____'. These kids are in my community and go to the same school system my kids do. Problem then? Parents and cultural expectations.

So then we get white racist scholars who try to conclude that black people aren't as smart as white people (total idiocy) and black people trying to excuse it away with 'ebonics' rather than addressing the fundamental problem. It's 'Uncle Tom' to 'talk white' and so the problem is perpetuated and we have generations who can't get jobs and catch up due to the unwillingness to just simply learn the damned language correctly. Now as other ethnic groups pour in and the more liberal chime in with 'oh, we should all learn Spanish to accommodate these children' rather than teaching them English, the problem becomes more complex and the educationally elite are the white kids that go to private schools (or the non-white kids if your father happens to be President).

I would say that intelligent people are possible to a large degree products of genetics, but in the real world certainly our education system play a role in either nurturing or dumbing down, depending upon several factors.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Posted in: Obama: Money alone cannot solve U.S. school problems See in context

And this is a typical example of why our education system is not great, and why it never gets fixed. Even on this small forum we can see a microcosm of the norm. Every one plays partisan politics and avoids the real issues of our educational system. The children suffer and we get statistically dumber. Wouldn't it be great if all could stop pulling out the Bush or Carter cards and simply think 'hey, having smarter kids who will one day run this place and work on solving the challenging issues that we have might be a good thing, no matter who I choose to vote for'. Personally I don't think any administration from either party has done a very good job for a very long time, and I think it would be a difficult sell to argue otherwise.

Schools are horribly under-funded. We spend more money in killing people than we do in educating our children. I've been on here griping about tax increases. Hey, if you were increasing my taxes to pay for my kid's education, I'd be fine with that. Instead my taxes will go for some ill-conceived health care bill (that will also increase my insurance premiums by the way) and money spent on things like art programs so some guy can pee in a jar with a crucifix and say he's at artistic genius. Yes, that happens all the time.

They need to stop teaching to test. Here in NY they teach specifically so the kids can pass the state tests (which makes the school look good). It effects what they learn and wastes time teach to a result without real substance. There's a lot of griping about inner-city schools and the issues therein. Parents, specifically of other races - stop saying things like 'axe', 'flo' (for floor), 'waz up' and stupid crap like that. Kids repeat what they hear and 'ghetto talk' while perhaps cool in your world screws your kid from ever really getting ahead. It's not racist; perpetuating ignorance is stupid no matter what race, creed or color that you are. And behavior. In my day the principal of my school could crack you with a paddle. We were afraid of him, and what would happen when we got home if we got in trouble at school. Now the liberals all tell us how traumatic it is for our children to be disciplined, so there is none for far too many kids. Teachers spend their days trying to control kids that are uncontrollable, and all suffer because of it.

The truths and answers do go beyond just dollars. But they are truths that people don't want to hear, or that are too politically incorrect to utter without being labeled racist, archaic and all sorts of other things. It's difficult for a kid to learn when they have to worry about just surviving.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Posted in: U.S. walks out on Ahmadinejad U.N. speech after 9/11 remark See in context

It somewhat surprises me - although it really shouldn't - that so many on here seem willing to at least in form agree with what he said. This is a man who keeps a firm boot on the throats of his own people, and as an avid anti-Semite has stated that he would quite happily liquidate Israel. Sort of reminds me of a jackbooted little corporal with a funny mustache.

It also surprises me that the conspiracy theorists re 9/11 are so widespread - although that shouldn't surprise either as it gives US haters in other nations someone to blame other than radical Islam (be it the twisted followers thereof) and the rabid Bush haters further cause in their minds to frame him the anti-Christ.

Perhaps we should just put out trust in Nostradamus. Sorry if I put a bit more faith in truth and fact rather than theory and hocus pocus. But a do know a scumbag when I see one, and one leads Iran.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Posted in: U.S. walks out on Ahmadinejad U.N. speech after 9/11 remark See in context

should have said 'truth is stranger than fiction'.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Posted in: U.S. walks out on Ahmadinejad U.N. speech after 9/11 remark See in context

Ask about that fact and people start raving about "lunacy", equating scientific facts with Bigfoot. Many thanks, Tigermoth, for illustrating my point so clearly.

And just how do you know these 'facts'? Too often in these cases, myth becomes fact. Someone who claims they were there, or that they were a 'metallurgist' working at the site, or 'saw a report' - whatever - turn out to be nothing of the sort. People have sworn for years that information is true that in fact turned out not to be. It's in human nature - and particularly in American nature - to assume conspiracy in everything or to not believe what seems incredible. Often times truth isn't stranger than fiction. Just because you tend to believe the conspiracy theorists does not make it then the truth.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Posted in: U.S. walks out on Ahmadinejad U.N. speech after 9/11 remark See in context

Yes, we did perpetrate the 9/11 attacks. The holocaust was a fabrication done by Steven Spielberg in Hollywood. Bigfoot does indeed exist, and despite the question of how only badly faked grainy film and plaster casts of footprints exist of an eight foot creature that would surely have seen by someone without a defective camera, they live in large numbers in Utah. Space aliens who joined the Taliban were responsible for actually carrying out the 9/11 attacks in conjunction with GB, who is actually using the brain of Walt Disney that was preserved after his 'death'.

The point being that the degree and depth of human lunacy knows no bounds. Quite obviously some of you and Mr. Ahmadinejad seem to have delved into the world that keeps the National Enquirer and Weekly World News going.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Posted in: Violence in east Jerusalem clouds peace efforts See in context

You know, I've never been able to figure this whole thing out. I mean, I get the whole thing, that Israel was given/took land owned by Palestinians and that has caused endless strife in a never ending hatred/feud between Arab and Jew (over-simplified a bit, but basically the gist). But if you look at the region and the population one can't help but wonder why one area of crappy desert rock and scrub is any better than the next. There is more than enough land for Palestinian and Jew to live on and never get in each others way. But instead they must squabble and fight over it and make everyone else's life miserable.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Posted in: Bill Clinton asks voters to give Dems more time See in context

What they will hate most is seeing the economy continuing on the upswing for the next two years.

Personally I don't get this 'economy on the upswing bit and that the 'recessions is over'. Is it? Sure doesn't seem that way.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Posted in: Bill Clinton asks voters to give Dems more time See in context

Actually when I asked 'but how long does it take to clean up the damage?' I was referring to the damage to done by two more years of the Obama administration, particularly without any checks/balances.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Posted in: Bill Clinton asks voters to give Dems more time See in context

Consider if someone sells to a smashed up car. You are implying that people are getting freaked out because they won't be able to drive it to work tomorrow.

Of course they won't be able to - it's smashed up.

Ditto the U.S. economy that was handed to Obama.

Surely you can understand that.

Yes, but my local body shop can fix the car rather than just continuing to tell me it's broken and blaming it on the guy that hit me.

If we’re wrong, throw us all out

Famous last words. But how long does it take to clean up the damage?

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Posted in: Republicans block bill to lift US military gay ban See in context

I think I would prefer a gay barracks-mate. They would keep the place immaculately clean, exchange the uncomfortable bunks with furniture from Pottery Barn and likely be able to entertain with a good show tune now and then.

Seriously, in this day and age does anybody really care? And if so why? Is the worry that they'll be accosted in the shower? If you're secure in your own 'manliness' - or 'womanliness' then you've nothing to fear. I say that if a gay man is willing and able to put his life on the line for his country then good for him. If the fear is an AIDS thing due to the chance of blood in combat injury I would counter that likely just as many 'straight' troopers might be so infected. If so paranoid force them to undergo more frequent blood screenings. I'm quite certain the troops copulating with everything that moves in foreign ports of call aren't bringing in anything dangerous [note: sarcasm}.

That being said, what RR stated is quite true. The bill had additions tacked onto it that made it unpalatable and not passable, as often happens with legislation from either side. So the liberals on hear can scream all they want about the 'evil, intolerant Conservatives' when in fact Reid sabotaged the bill from ever being able to pass.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Posted in: Holocaust denier tours Nazi sites in Poland See in context

This jackass isn't the only one. Iran's leader comes to mind. And therein lies the problem. You get people with influence over others to repeat and spread these denials and people do start to question the realities. History is littered with cases where the subsequent passing of time totally eradicated or twisted what truly happened. It's easy to say 'harmless lunatic' but too often their results are not harmless.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Posted in: Dems to voters: You may hate us, but GOP is worse See in context

You are CORRECT, sir! (Ed McMahon voice). This is what a lot of us predicted before Obama was elected -- that he would win by a landslide, as he did, but that bush had actually been devious enough to screw the country up SO BADLY, and take it from a surplus to the worst economic crisis in decades, that there would be no possible way the Dems could clean up the mess in four years that the fickle public would vote the GOP in again next election cycle. Your comment seems to mirror those predictions.

So you're pretty much admitting that the dems had no real plans that could remotely be effective in fixing the economic mess we find ourselves in? What kind of party faith is that?? To just throw up your hands and say 'the evil Bush screwed us up so bad that we can't begin to fix in four measly years' is hardly effective government nor the type that we need now. Being non-party affiliated, I look back at examples like FDR. I wouldn't necessarily agree with many of his policies and ideas, but damn it if the man didn't have a plan. By the time he was done with the WPA, the CCC and some other rather revolutionary ideas at least Americans felt something was happening and they were moving back from the abyss. The current president has done none of this except to force through unwanted legislation that most didn't read and that will hurt very many in the end. And spend. Wow. Liberal/Conservative/Independent - whatever. We need a President who has vision, imagination, intelligence and a workable plan, and someone who speaks for the common man no matter which party, not just his own supporters. In his day, when FDR died there was hardly a dry eye in the house, liberal or conservative for at least the man had a plan that actually accomplished something. Now we've devolved to 'we suck, but so do they..'. WTF

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Posted in: Obama reaches out to skeptical voters See in context

Your off the cuff comment leaves out 2 critical components. The first is that an excellent President followed JC and undid much of the damage that JC managed to do. The other thing, is that JC spent the next 20 years building houses for the homeless. So, to compare him to JC, Obama will have to spend his next 20 years, doing something selfless for others, and of course, be followed in office by a truly great President.

Good points. Unfortunately I fear neither is very likely. I hope for the latter, but no standouts in my mind as of yet.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Posted in: O'Donnell makes light of witchcraft comment See in context

I find it interesting that you attempt to make a moral analogy between witchcraft and dating a member of the Jewish faith. How's about she dated a skinhead and tried on his swastika armband? Does that make her a skinhead? Not necessarily -- but there is a judgment issue that looms here that doesn't surface by dating a Jewish man.

And I find it interesting that you choose to say that one superstitious religion has any more validity than the others simply based upon the number of practitioners. There is debate on whether Wicca is indeed a religion, but I should think that anyone with common sense not clouded by the teaching forced up on them from birth might be able to recognize that one belief in the supernatural is not so very different than the other. Is it any more ridiculous to believe that it is possible to cast a spell upon someone than it it to believe a man can walk on water and turn said water into wine? Your reference to skinheads and swastikas is irrelevant and nonsensical as it's hardly the same thing.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Posted in: O'Donnell makes light of witchcraft comment See in context

How is being a witch - which one date with a practitioner hardly makes you so; if you briefly dated a Jewish man and put on his skull cap (sorry, can't spell the proper term) does that make you a Jew(??) - really interesting? If she had been a hooker or a Manson follower, that's at least interesting. Even given the public's need for sensationalism this is a lame mole hill/mountain attempt.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Posted in: Obama reaches out to skeptical voters See in context

That's okay - he can just be as crappy a president as Jimmy Carter, then proclaim himself the most brilliant ever of former presidents as JC did. People will forget what a disaster his administration truly was and the left will still canonize him as god.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Posted in: Seattle cartoonist goes into hiding on FBI advice See in context

Ah, that tolerant Islam. The great religion of peace. Nothing to see here. Nothing to worry about or question. Just extremists after all.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Posted in: French Senate passes ban on full Muslim veils See in context

I'm sure this debate will come to the US soon enough. It is illegal in the US to wear masks in public in some states (VA and West VA come to mind). So it begs the question that if a Muslim woman wearing a full bur qua goes out in public, is it illegal? I'm talking one of those Ninja type things (for lack of a better term). Is that considered a mask, and if so would they be ticketed in a state where it is illegal to wear masks, or do we make exceptions for religious/cultural considerations - and where do you draw the line? If I'm a snake handler can I bring a snake on the subway with me?

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Posted in: French Senate passes ban on full Muslim veils See in context

I cringe when it comes to banning articles of traditional clothing, but I can't see that I disagree with France's point of view. Put it this way, sunbathing in bikinis is popular and the norm on many beaches in the US, but if you went to a beach an in Islamic country and did the same, you would be insane and likely killed. There is a degree of assimilation without losing total regard to ethnic and religious custom. Wear a headscarf that modestly covers the hair and neck. Sometimes you have to bend a little when you decide to move to another life in another culture and enjoy the benefits of your adopted country.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Posted in: Coast to coast, tea partiers promote their cause See in context

Good question-- but what about a woman's rights lobby (Emily's List for example)and then the homophiles? Would you have any reason to be suspicious of their choices too?

Quite possibly. But it depends if the group had a defined agenda that was particularly bent as unfavorable or even mean spirited. Other than accusations that the tea party is racist based it seems solely upon a very few random instances of supposed racial slurs (that I think were ill proven) and the actual majority makeup of the group (white folks) I have yet to see proof - other than the accusations of their opposition - that this party has any agenda based upon race. It seems more likely based upon ideals and opinions on government rather than any agenda of minority suppression. The accusations seemed more designed to imply impropriety rather than provide proof of it. Unless someone can show otherwise - and that proof could not be simple word of the opposition.

There doesn't always have to be evil agenda just because it is supposed. I'll use my Hollywood example since I loathe the hypocrisy of that lot so much - but this time in their defense. Proportionally there are very few successful actors and actresses that are black. Is this because of rampant racism in Hollywood (and if so, why would all of these supposed liberals be part to that - and the film industry is definitely ruled by liberals)? Or is it simply the case of proportionally fewer folks of color interested in pursuing this as their career (be it due to socio-economic factors or whatever)? I would bet the latter. The detractors could quite easily make the case for the former, but is that fair or accurate? Actually, I'm not sure on that one!

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Posted in: Coast to coast, tea partiers promote their cause See in context

Thank you Yabits, while your comments were meant (perhaps) with a degree of sarcasm, or at least smugness, you did illustrate the truth that has always been bothersome. Liberal democrats think that their poop doesn't stink and that they are yards smarter than any of their conservative adversaries. This of course was perpetuated by the most worthless and harmful generation of them all, the 60's freakazoids who somehow came to the conclusion that drug use and loose morals really does bring enlightenment. Well, Tim Leary was a fool and we've paid for that madness many times over. Yes, the liberal cause did attract many professors and intelligentsia at one time, but I wouldn't say that is necessarily true anymore. Particularly not after this administration. And certainly you don't count those Hollywood morons as the intelligent by any means.

No, I'm not buying it. There are morons across the spectrum, right or left. The really stupid ones follow party line no matter what - even if they don't really agree.

I can see other parties like the tea party cropping up from time to time as normal Americans get tired of the partisan crap which leads to the government's inability to get much legislation passed, good or bad. Since people tend to ridicule what they fear, I wonder if some of you perhaps fear this party as a threat to the status quo of good old us versus evil them.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Recent Comments

Popular

Articles, Offers & Useful Resources

A mix of what's trending on our other sites


©2021 GPlusMedia Inc.