News and Current Events - 2012

[garyd]

Why the hell did they stop making the lemon ones?

I don' think they did.  It just that all flavors are not available in all areas of the country do to the capabilities of the various companies that "bake" them.  One style of lemon cookie had to be recalled last year.  "Lemon Chalet" I think.  There is also a "new" lemon cookie this yea named "Savannah Smiles" though it, too, will not be available everywhere.

[oilgun]

Wow, nothing about the urinating Marines?!

You can watch an uncensured version here but you can't really see the penises unfortunately:
http://motherjones.com/mojo/2012/01/marines-allegedly-urinate-afghans
(I like that" allegedly".  What, allegedly urinating or allegedly urinating on afghans?)

Sadly the golden showering marines will become scapegoats.  I think they should get a slap on the wrist and nothing more.  They're commanding officers, who trained them to be the mindless killing machines should be the ones we go after.  I have completely lost respect for Hilary Clinton.  And, Obama really.

[Tony_]

  There's so much going on.   And news breeds more news.  But it suddenly hit me that the big one pretty much slipped by and few are bothering with the implications.

     Probably everyone here knows that the astronomers had been charting ever more planets in other solar systems.  Past 750, as of last year.  But now, using three separate techniques, they've announced that there are a minimum of 300 billion solar systems, in just our own galaxy.
     It's been over 15 years since I read the books with formulas as to the possibility of intelligent life out there, and the key factor, the frequency of planets, was the determinating part of the equation.  Past that, they already knew that the valences of the carbon atom caused a predisposition to life forming, but have since learned it forms, almost automatically, and begins to develop complexity. And that water is relatively commonplace, in the universe.

  Alien life was never of any particular interest to me.  But this was the Big One.  The stats are now so strong, that it is nearly impossible there isn't life out there, and intelligent, self-aware, life. And we seem to have just burped it off.

 Well, given that carbon-based life forms are aggressive, and yet must defy that very trait to survive, we can only hope......they aren't, well, Jehovah's Witnesses, right?  They would have some ethical code.  Some idiosyncracies.  Hopefully, they have no interest in enforcing theirs upon us.
 And I wonder, do they have their equivalents of Sarah Palin?  Facebook?  Cheeseburgers and fries?

Well, back to the usual.  They are out there.  We are just here.  I hope we don't screw up just here, too very much  .
 

[Ellen (tellyouwhat)]

Why does it matter if it is MY opinion or one I've had expressed to me? I usually find opinions that differ from my own to be interesting and they often have merit. Many are worth considering, even if, in the end, nothing in my mind is changed. Jumping on the bandwagon is not an exercise I excel at, no matter WHO is already up there.

because we are engaged in conversation with you, and because when you post, it is under the name of doodler.

One person has pm'd me and asked if I am modding with these posts responding to doodler. The answer is no. Linda is the moderator of this thread.

But you post provocatively about the Bible and whatever, and then stand back and watch the "fun" -- and it turns out you don't want to stand by your post.

It seems dishonest to me.

What does it matter what you say, what you think?  If it doesn't matter, then why are you posting?

[brokebacktom]

If I were an American and HAD to support a Republican I think I would support Ron Paul despite the fact that he's a, gasp, libertarian.  He's the only one who is anti-war and thinks the "war on drugs" is a failure.  Of course, he would get the JFK treatment before ever getting elected president.

Interestingly, he's popular with the military.

He would be the only one I could vote for too, maybe Jon Huntsman. The others running a big fat NO!!!

[oilgun]

Speaking of Iran...

Marching obediently to war with Iran
The whole world knows the Mossad was behind the latest killing of an Iranian atomic scientist, the Iranians are swearing revenge, and nobody in Israel sounds bothered.
Vibrant democracy, huh? Not one peep has been heard from any Israeli journalist or politician or public figure of any kind against this latest assassination of an Iranian nuclear scientist, which everyone on earth understands was carried out by the Mossad. (The only other possible suspect, the U.S., denounced the killing as “provocative and dangerous.” On the previous day, Israeli military chief Benny Gantz told the Knesset that 2012 would see more of these “events that happen unnaturally” on the Iranian front.)
Wednesday’s assassination in Tehran of  Mostafa Ahmadi Roshan, deputy director of the Natanz uranium enrichment facility, was at least the fifth lethal attack on Iranian nuclear scientists and installations in the last seven months. Even the Americans are now saying that we’re playing with fire, while the Iranians, who usually pretend these things are accidents to avoid being shamed at home into retaliating, are calling out Israel and hollering for revenge. Yet in this country, everybody who has anything to say publicly about this latest killing and the ones that preceded it are all applauding.
[...]

http://972mag.com/marching-obediently-to-war-with-iran/32881/

[fofol]

My point exactly.
And a few days ago when I asked if there was any Republican people HERE could support as president, what response did I get?

My reply to your post was poorly worded as your post had little (little) to do with Republians in general. Just Christian Republians.

  Can you tell me the difference between a Christian Republican and ALL of the Republican candidates who are campaigning in South Carolina?  I stopped listening to them totally yesterday because they're all trying to be more Christian that the next candidate because the evangelical Christians in South Carolina have selected the 'right' Republican since Reagan.  These people must have their heads where the sun don't shine, or else they just don't know that ALL of the suicide bombers, ALL the IED makers, and ALL the criminals who blow up mosques are ALL deeply religious people, so deeply ridiculously religious that it causes them to kill one another!!  I doubt if Jesus or Mohammad would be thrilled to see their adherents murdering thousands of noncombatants in the name of religious sectarianism.

[doodler]

because we are engaged in conversation with you, and because when you post, it is under the name of doodler.

One person has pm'd me and asked if I am modding with these posts responding to doodler. The answer is no. Linda is the moderator of this thread.

But you post provocatively about the Bible and whatever, and then stand back and watch the "fun" -- and it turns out you don't want to stand by your post.

It seems dishonest to me.

What does it matter what you say, what you think?  If it doesn't matter, then why are you posting?

How 'bout to HAVE a conversation rather than a blanket condemnation of everything Republican and how disappointing the US and its policies are to every so called intelligent person in the universe (inluding all of Tony's new ones?) There ARE other opinions and whether I agree with them or not, there is no reason NOT to bring it up.

[Ellen (tellyouwhat)]

^^^

There are plenty of challenges coming from the Republican candidates, and at least when Mitt Romney makes a statement, he pretends to believe it.

By your own posts here, you're saying you just like to stir the pot.

And I know very well you're not going to change.*  Carry on.  I understand you a little better now.



*sorry, don't mean to predict. I don't expect any change to be because of my posts.  peace.

[fofol]

How 'bout to HAVE a conversation rather than a blanket condemnation of everything Republican and how disappointing the US and its policies are to every so called intelligent person in the universe (including all of Tony's new ones?) There ARE other opinions and whether I agree with them or not, there is no reason NOT to bring it up.

1. Republicans - no others - want to extend the Bush tax credits to the richest, at the same time denying the same extensions to the working people of the country, the people who pay for the environment that lets the richest make their money.  Trickle down was a mean-spirited joke and a harsh reality during the Reagan years, and still is: richer Americans don't create new jobs for Americans, but they do a nice service for German auto-makers, call-centers in India, and any other place in the world where child-labor laws can be bought...

2. Republicans want to end social security, unemployment benefits, and medicare, not that they have any plans to end homelessness, hunger or physical misery FOR THE VERY PEOPLE WHO PUT THEIR MONEY INTO THE SYSTEM JUST FOR SUCH CONTINGENCIES.  No one knows who the fates will frown on next - could even be the self-righteous (it's a hypocrisy to claim Christianity and self-righteousness) who get hit with job loss, home loss, health loss.

3.  Republicans want to see homosexuals cast out onto the heap.  Is there one Republican candidate who can win in South Carolina who will fight for gay rights?  Not one.

More money for those who will create superPACs for Republican candidates.
Less money for those who make less, but whose taxes actually pay most of the bills - when Republican Presidents borrow trillions from the Chinese while exporting all kinds of jobs from the people whose money goes to pay the bills.
Blanket condemnation for each Republican candidate?  This time, yes, and for these briefly stated reasons among many others:
We ended up with billions in surplus dollars from Bill Clinton.  We got hundreds of trillions of dollars of debt from George Bush.
Republicans demonstrably hate fags.  As I have said, these self-deceivers can say 'love the sinner, hate the 'sin' ' all they want, no one can do that.  If you think they can, tell me the difference between what a person does and who a person is.  

Where in this mess is a gay working man supposed find any reason behind Republican support that isn't hateful of workers and homos?

And that's almost without mentioning the lies and dirty tricks the Republicans have been using to gain power instead of solving the problems of the country.

[dejavu]

He would be the only one I could vote for too, maybe Jon Huntsman. The others running a big fat NO!!!

I could definitely vote for Jon Huntsman.  He seems authentic and honest.

And of the other Republicans, Romney might not be too bad in practice, although his biggest problem on the campaign trail may be with seeming authentic and honest.

[Lyle (Mooska)]

oh for heaven's sake.  another little grenade.

All we are asking is that you own your opinions or not.  If you mean what you say, we have asked you to explain it.  If you want to duck responsibility for what you say, then why bother?  Why ask us to bother?

and ETA, your words above are hyperbole, meant to change the subject.  You said it, but we didn't.

Why does it matter if it is MY opinion or one I've had expressed to me? I usually find opinions that differ from my own to be interesting and they often have merit. Many are worth considering, even if, in the end, nothing in my mind is changed. Jumping on the bandwagon is not an exercise I excel at, no matter WHO is already up there.

It's hard to answer you without seeming you already know the answer.  If you are presenting opinions as your own
that are really someone else's, how are we to know?  Most people give their own opinions or state what they are
saying is something others think.  They don't just throw it out for others to guess.  It becomes a matter of trust or
a waste of time.

[Marge_Innavera]

I could definitely vote for Jon Huntsman.  He seems authentic and honest.

I could definitely not vote for any of them unless someone held a gun to my head -- and even then, it would depend on how I was feeling that day.

If you want to support Huntsman, I hope you like the buzzword "sacrifice" -- yours, of course, not his.

[Lyle (Mooska)]

Wow, nothing about the urinating Marines?!

You can watch an uncensured version here but you can't really see the penises unfortunately:
http://motherjones.com/mojo/2012/01/marines-allegedly-urinate-afghans
(I like that" allegedly".  What, allegedly urinating or allegedly urinating on afghans?)

I have seen and read enough from other wars to know that this stuff goes on all the time
on all sides of the equation.  Just watch the miniseires THE PACIFIC.  Read Studs Terkel's
book THE GOOD WAR.  I read an article several years ago about some soldiers in one of
the Baltic countries who would go and dig up old WWII enemies bodies and urinate on them
because they were bad men.  For things like this to happen and then all sides get so offended
I have to laugh.  I remember talking to my cousin around 1970 when he came back from being
in Vietnam and some of the things he was saying went on would make your hair stand on end.
Nowadays where anything can be filmed and shown to the world in a minute, I have no doubt
there's countless atrocities on all sides that one can use to paint how horrible we all are.  And it's
not that I condone these things and when they arise they shouldn't be condemned for what they
are, but there's a lot of wisdom in the "You can't handle the truth," line made famous by Nicholson.
What are we to expect when we train our military to do unspeakable things and then send them to
places for years on end to carry out what they're taught and then we get so offended when they
act up.  I know--why don't we not send out troops into areas we have no business being in for
decades?

Sadly the golden showering marines will become scapegoats.  I think they should get a slap on the wrist and nothing more.  Their commanding officers, who trained them to be the mindless killing machines should be the ones we go after.  I have completely lost respect for Hilary Clinton.  And, Obama really.

I don't see how this incident equates with losing whatever respect you had for Clinton and Obama.
I am curious as to how that translates?

[dejavu]

I could definitely not vote for any of them unless someone held a gun to my head -- and even then, it would depend on how I was feeling that day.

If you want to support Huntsman, I hope you like the buzzword "sacrifice" -- yours, of course, not his.

I didn't say I was "supporting" Huntsman.  I'm a registered Democrat (so can't vote in Republican primary here) and he'll long be out of the running by the time the primaries come to Pennsylvania, anyway.

But I like him as a person, from what I've seen, at least compared to the other candidates.  Integrity was the word I was trying to think of earlier.  He does support "bipartisanship" and he doesn't seem tied to standard party or religious rhetoric.  Although he doesn't support gay marriage (none of them do, Republicans or Democrats) he supports same-sex civil unions and isn't afraid to say so, despite being a good Mormon.  I applauded him when he said that "they (same-sex civil unions) are no threat to my marriage."  Because that's how so many politicians (and others) argue against gay marriage or even civil unions:  saying they're a threat to the institution of marriage.