Quote:
Instead of realizing that a very large portion of this country disagrees with their views, they have to pull an elitist view that everyone that doesn't live in a major city is stupid, ignorant or a rednecks (actual quotes from editorials at major papers this week) or was tricked into voting not only for Bush, but for Republicans across the board.

Quote:
Eighty-two percent of Bush supporters perceive the Bush administration as saying that Iraq had WMD (63%) or that Iraq had a major WMD program (19%). Likewise, 75% say that the Bush administration is saying Iraq was providing substantial support to al Qaeda.

Quote:
Similarly, 57% of Bush supporters assume that the majority of people in the world would favor Bush's reelection

Quote:
How do you explain these numbers except for ignorance or they were tricked?

Quote:
BTW, what is it that makes Christians (all three descendants of ancient judaism, actually) so obsessed with sex?

Quote:
But yes, I've never liked how the liberal media, which controls near everything we see and hear,

Quote:

Quote:
I think Jim was intending to use that reference to somehow refer to those people who voted for Bush in a serious (but flippant) manner. I think this because earlier in his post he said that those who voted for Bush (according to the 2.5 issues) "listened to the instructions of their pastors". So in his eyes, this places them in "Jesusland".

Do people honestly believe it was only those 2.5 issues that swayed voters? Are those seen as the biggest contributors to the votes or what?

Quote:
Most protestants I know, myself included, have no problem with contraception (as it's pre-conception). The Catholic church has a tradition of being against contraception (except for "natural means") and I know of one protestant minister who is against it (he says he knows of only three others).

Quote:
Now, the flipside is I can certainly remember an opposition to abortion during that time as far as what we learned, and, at least in religion class, we were encouraged in the direction of abstinence. So in that regard, I guess it was rounded, a "here's how you should live your life, here's what you need to know about life" education.

Quote:
The surprising thing is that during high school I had a corporatist, fiscally and socially conservative philosophy, which went against the current of the social justice type of class I took as a junior, and now, years later, I'm on the other side.

I am 31. In view of the quote variously attributed here I am heartless *and* brainless.

So, you saw the light, if I understand correctly

Quote:
Granted, my only source of information were efforts by Bush&Co to supress efforts to popularize use of condoms, to the extent that they witheld aid from AIDS-fighting programs that even mention condoms.

Quote:
Some of it IS willful ignorance:'don't confuse me with the facts...', some is apathetic ignorance--following the issues takes time and thought,

Quote:
and then there's the other half of the normal curve.

Quote:

Quote:
BTW, what is it that makes Christians (all three descendants of ancient judaism, actually) so obsessed with sex?

To some degree, most societies are; it is a very powerful life-force, if not, as in Freud's theories, the dominant one, and hard to separate from survival of the species. The feminist view, which holds a lot of validity, also suggests that, especially in the cultures you mention, the sexual taboos keep women in their place: barefoot and pregnant. The U.S. culture is even more ambivalent about it than most; it's used to sell everything from cars and blue jeans to toothpaste, and these days you can find any deviation or degradtion of it you care to imagine online, but we are if anything becoming even more ambivalent and confused about it as a result. As I think you're suggesting, that ambivalence and fear is at the root of a lot of the cultural values clashes; it's not just Viet Nam we're refighting in a new form, it's the 60's and the Sexual Revolution.

Quote:
President Bush has announced his plan to select Dr. W. David Hager to head up the Food and Drug Administration's (FDA) Reproductive Health Drugs Advisory Committee. The committee has not met for more than two years, during which time its charter lapsed. As a result, the Bush
Administration is tasked with filling all eleven positions with new members. This position does not require Congressional approval.

The FDA's Reproductive Health Drugs Advisory Committee makes crucial decisions on matters relating to drugs used in the practice of obstetrics, gynecology and related specialties, including hormone therapy, contraception, treatment for infertility, and medical alternatives to surgical procedures for sterilization and pregnancy termination.

Dr. Hager is the author of "As Jesus Cared for Women:Restoring Women Then and Now." The book blends biblical accounts of Christ healing Women with case studies from Hager's practice.

His views of reproductive health care are far outside the mainstream for reproductive technology. Dr. Hager is a practicing OB/GYN who describes himself as "pro-life" and refuses to prescribe contraceptives to unmarried women.

In the book Dr. Hager wrote with his wife, entitled "Stress and the Woman's Body," he suggests that women who suffer from premenstrual syndrome should seek help from reading the bible and praying. As an editor and contributing author of "The Reproduction Revolution: A Christian Appraisal of Sexuality Reproductive Technologies and the Family," Dr. Hager appears to have endorsed the medically inaccurateassertion that the common birth control pill is an abortifacient. We are concerned that Dr. Hager's strong religious beliefs may color his assessment of technologies that are necessary to protect women's livesor to preserve and promote women's health. Hager's track record of using religious beliefs to guide his medical decision-making makes him a dangerous and inappropriate candidate to serve as chair of this committee. Critical drug public policy and researchmust not be influenced by anti-abortion politics. Members of this important panel should be appointed on the basis of science and medicine, rather than politics and religion. American women deserve no less.

Quote:
My wife received this in her email recently...

Quote: {another trainwreck and imposition on women's health courtesy of the shrub and his cronies}

Quote:

Quote:
Now, the flipside is I can certainly remember an opposition to abortion during that time as far as what we learned, and, at least in religion class, we were encouraged in the direction of abstinence. So in that regard, I guess it was rounded, a "here's how you should live your life, here's what you need to know about life" education.

I am not against mentioning advantages of abstinence at all, just against preaching it as the only possible way. For example, a few months ago an African politician (I don't remember who) drew fire from some liberals because he was 'too reserved' towards use of condoms in anti-AIDS campaign. What the guy was saying was, essentially: "The best way to avoid AIDS is through abstinence or strict monogamy; failing that, and I know many of you will, *please* make sure to always use condoms!". Fair enough, I would say (needle sharing was not mentioned because his country is not rich enough for that kind of vice).

Quote:

Quote:
The surprising thing is that during high school I had a corporatist, fiscally and socially conservative philosophy, which went against the current of the social justice type of class I took as a junior, and now, years later, I'm on the other side.

I am 31. In view of the quote variously attributed here I am heartless *and* brainless.

So, you saw the light, if I understand correctly

Quote:
While I've started looking harder to find American-made things, or at least things made where I know the working conditions are likely to be reasonable, I know I'm guilty of buying things on price, recently even.

Quote:

Quote:
I am a moderate conservative. I believe in personal responsibility. If you mess up, it's your own fault.

Did these people screw up by not being able to foretell the oncoming collapse of these industries? Did they screw up by not being able to keep their medical insurance when they lost their jobs and had to find positions which would pay for either that coverage, or their food and shelter, and then got sick? Where is the line as far as personal responsibility?

Quote:

Quote:

I do not like my tax dollars going towards social programs that are ineffective or inefficient.

Me either. But, I prefer they be made efficient, and others seem to prefer they just be cut. (for instance, in another post:

Quote:

I was stating this as a reason I am/vote conservatively. It was not a complaint, just a reason for my viewpoint. You are free to vote for the candidate that doesn't want to drop bombs, and I will vote for the one that cuts welfare.

and not for instance one who fixes welfare.)

Quote:

Quote:
I should not be forced to give to what is basically charity. I can do that just fine on my own.

After considerable thought I came up with the concession I'd offer towards Libertarians if I were in power: codify in law that social programs would be reduced and eliminated, and taxes dropped accordingly, as charity met social needs. Like, if charity can help, when that's proven, then we let charity do it, and give you your money back. When charity has no pants, everyone else gets to bend over, too.

Quote:
While I've started looking harder to find American-made things, or at least things made where I know the working conditions are likely to be reasonable, I know I'm guilty of buying things on price, recently even.

Quote:

Quote:

Quote:
I am a moderate conservative. I believe in personal responsibility. If you mess up, it's your own fault.

Did these people screw up by not being able to foretell the oncoming collapse of these industries? Did they screw up by not being able to keep their medical insurance when they lost their jobs and had to find positions which would pay for either that coverage, or their food and shelter, and then got sick? Where is the line as far as personal responsibility?

Hey, shat happens. I myself am from a family where we lived below the poverty line for many years. My wife is the same. I grew up in northern Maine where I witnessed the decline of the small time farmer (grandfather and uncles included), the poor job market, and the closure of an Air Force base. All of these factors affected the local economy negatively. My father, a contractor, began having health problems when I was about 12. What he did was quit the construction business, go to college and get a degree in mathematics (my mom supported our family with a job as an administrative assistant). He then started teaching school as an alternative to his old labor-intensive job. In the 70's my dad moved to North Carolina where there was a construction boom so he could support his new family. You have to have your own backup plans. I'm sure you aren't relying on Social Security for your retirement, are you?

Quote:
I don't think anyone will buy it

Quote:

Quote:
I don't think anyone will buy it

More than that, I think it would be difficult to determine exactly what the magic number for each program is that means it has "enough". I fear the arguments would simply relocate rather than go away.

Quote:
Well, there's some defined number (or other metric) that the government is throwing at it now.

Quote:
Sure, but even if they meet it, your tax money would instead be allocated out of the general fund for something else, not be returned to you.

Sure. He wasn't arguing against your idea, only my argument against your idea.

And he's right, but I'd still bet those figures would come under a lot of fire.

Quote:

Quote:
After considerable thought I came up with the concession I'd offer towards Libertarians if I were in power: codify in law that social programs would be reduced and eliminated, and taxes dropped accordingly, as charity met social needs. Like, if charity can help, when that's proven, then we let charity do it, and give you your money back. When charity has no pants, everyone else gets to bend over, too.

This is an interesting viewpoint. I think this would actually be a good start.

Quote:
In other cases they give you a tax credit, e.g. your taxable income is reduced, and there are weird rules and games you can play.

In this case you simply wouldn't be charged tax for this purpose. You'd be eligible for whatever tax credit you might otherwise, the point is not to change the tax code, the point is to meet a need, if possible outside the government's budgeting powers, and having done so, allow reaping of the reward for it.

Quote:
No, I think Jim got it wrong, there... he missed the "I'm the only one that can keep you safe" issue, so it's really 3.5 issues that I think people were voting on.

Quote:
Because everything else he's done has been a failure when you look at the facts? (Those have been hashed out so many times before that I'll not repeat them here.)