I'm just going to paste the link, because a) I don't want to plagerize by posting it here claiming it as my own, and b) y'all should have to do some work. Link Cheers
jeblackstar
Just out of curiousity, am I right in assuming your name is from A Portrait of the Artist as a young man ? Sorry, if that question came out of the blue, I had thought it looked familiar, and then it struck me as to why.
3 Cheers to Steven for 200 posts. Though we've found our selves on the same side, and opposite sides often enough, I enjoy the well thought out and intelligent blogs. Cheers Cheers Cheers
You're right Miss, Paul and I have certainly done nothing to try and disseminate facts in this blog. By the way, we're not calling Brad wrong, just not entirely correct. Cheers
Unfortunately Brad I can "have it both ways". If the US was not done fighting then Bush shouldn't have declared major combat operations complete. The fact that there is more fighting now then during the "war" makes Bush look out of touch and an idiot. I know the Bush team cringes everytime Kerry uses the words "Mission Accomplished". Cheers
The US supplying Afghanistan is a lot like the British supplying Afghanistan, it happened under different circumstances. The leaders at the time mistakenly believed that the enemy of my enemy is my friend, and that turned out bad for the two countries. Cheers
Brad, tell me the number of Americans who died of combat fatilites after the signing of the peace treaty with the Japanese in Japan? If that number exceeded 500ish, and the killings have actually escalated, so we'll see where the number ends, then I'll apologize. Cheers
Brad, while I, in general, agree with what you said, here's somethings that amuse, and ashame me about American Foreign Policy. The US sent millions of tons of grain to starving african nations, and then failed to provide any security for that grain, so it was immediately seized by African warlords. The US gives billions of dollars to "AIDS research", which principally goes to pharmaceutical companies. Not
I agree with Brad, that would have been a more "fair and balanced" view of the two people's positions. The best one of course would be numbers, or a "fair" view of the pros and cons of both sides. How Bush's tax cuts would necessitate spending cuts in programs that help the poor and defenseless, and how Kerry's programs viciously take money away from the American people. Cheers
You're right, it's one about hunger, I should have been more careful in my phrasing, unfortunately, hunger, malnutrition, and the other demons that go along with it are just as bad as hunger. The root causes of hunger, as listed by the article, are insufficient food stamps, and lack of money. Since food stamps cannot be used to buy alcohol or cigarettes, then obviously 3000 dollars a year is insufficient, either that or your numbers fail to ac
Sorry, the statistic comes from the National Center for Health Statistics and Cornell Univiersity: Link Cheers
Brad, I invite you take a look at certain statistics by the Department of Health and Human Services. There are a lot of starving people in The United States. Cheers
Very few Americans die in Japan and Germany, and we're there because part of our treaty with them stated that they couldn't have an army over a certain number and the US would provide basic protection. Cheers
I can show you a lot of rich people that don't work, and, as we've argued about before, the poor people I know tend not to be able to get jobs, because either the economy is slow, or the field they've been trained in is lagging. Oh, and I know a half a dozen farmers that make below the poverty line, all of whom, I can almost guarantee work longer, and certainly more arduous hours than you. No offense. Cheers
This email post presupposes that everyone who is rich works hard, and that everyone who is poor is a bum. Shame that reality doesn't fit this email. Cheers
Thanks for the support Brad and Crash. Cheers
Now, hold on, some pro-choicers are pro-life, they just feel a woman has the right to choose Cheers
I understand what it says, I understand how that works under the courts current interpretation of the constitution, and I know how eager beaver DAs can twist it. That doesn't change what I said. Cheers
No, it doesn't change it across the nation. A fetus is still not a person, the law simply states it is a more heinous crime to harm a pregnant woman. Cheers
The problem I see, and I'm relatively young, not as young as many on this post, but not old enough to have lived in the "Leave it to Beaver" world, but the problem I see, is that there is a serious lack of pride in the workplace. This goes on through all levels, from bagboys to sports stars. It's all about "the money" and not about doing a good job, or making a good product. Cheers
And who is to say whether it is just "self-mutilation"? Stabbing oneself in the stomach, is not like getting a tatoo. If you stab yourself in the stomach you will bleed to death unless you get medical attention. Cheers
But, and this is to forestall the next question, the state has determined that a fetus before a certain stage of development is not a person, therefore it's simply a surgical procedure, like removing an appendix. Cheers
The interesting thing, stabbing oneself is considered Suicide, which is against the law because the state has the responsibility to protect it's citizens, if even from themselves. Cheers
Now, Brad, I'm actually, sortof agreeing with you. Cheers
Again, Oregon has no tolls onthe roads. Cheers