0
   

The Worst President in History?

 
 
mysteryman
 
  1  
Reply Mon 24 Jul, 2006 06:28 pm
JTT wrote:
Finn d'Abuzz wrote:
Somehow I doubt the Founders would ever have considered child pornography as free speech requiring protection.


Stop with the insipidness, Finn. It doesn't matter a tinker's damn what the "founders" thought. It's such rank stupidity to consider that a group of MEN and their ideas from 200 years ago would have any bearing on this issue today.

With the morals some of them possessed, they could very well have been having sexual realtionships with minors as we know them today.


The Constitution was based on the ideas of these men 200 years ago.
Does the Constitution still have any bearing on today?
0 Replies
 
OmSigDAVID
 
  1  
Reply Mon 24 Jul, 2006 06:46 pm
cicerone imposter wrote:
Also in South America:

Legal naturism or nudity: Not only in Brazil
There are a number of nude and/or naturist beaches and clubs in Central America and the Caribbean, but to date, relatively few in South America.

"Naturism is a way of life in harmony with nature characterised by the practice of communal nudity, with the intention of encouraging self-respect, respect for others and for the environment."
International Naturist Federation

After visiting the famous beaches of Rio de Janeiro where the skimpiest amount of cloth passes for a tanga, thong bathing suit, or the even minuter version called fio dental or dental floss, and beach goers revel in exposing almost their entire bodies, it isn't surprising that Brazil is one of the few South American countries that have legalized nude or naturist beaches and resorts.

Not without a struggle, though.

The traditional and conservative attitudes toward nudity prevail in most countries of South America, and try to set limits, even in Rio de Janeiro: Rio cracks down on nude sunbathers, article from 2000, but not successfully.

So far as I have become aware,
a citizen' s shedding his or her clothes
has not resulted in deleterious effects:
no change in the rates of robbery, nor of murder,
nor of counterfeiting, etc.
0 Replies
 
dyslexia
 
  1  
Reply Mon 24 Jul, 2006 06:48 pm
OmDavid, after reading a few of your posts I conculed that you personally do more to promote gun restrictions than any "liberal' I have ever met.
0 Replies
 
OmSigDAVID
 
  1  
Reply Mon 24 Jul, 2006 06:50 pm
mysteryman wrote:
JTT wrote:
Finn d'Abuzz wrote:
Somehow I doubt the Founders would ever have considered child pornography as free speech requiring protection.


Stop with the insipidness, Finn. It doesn't matter a tinker's damn what the "founders" thought. It's such rank stupidity to consider that a group of MEN and their ideas from 200 years ago would have any bearing on this issue today.

With the morals some of them possessed, they could very well have been having sexual realtionships with minors as we know them today.


The Constitution was based on the ideas of these men 200 years ago.
Does the Constitution still have any bearing on today?

The Constitution is the Supreme Law of the Land, now,
as it was then,
being more important for what it RESTRAINS its child, government,
from doing ( i.e., the Bill of Rights )
than for what it grants government the power to do.
David
0 Replies
 
OmSigDAVID
 
  1  
Reply Mon 24 Jul, 2006 06:52 pm
dyslexia wrote:
OmDavid, after reading a few of your posts I conculed that you personally do more to promote gun restrictions than any "liberal' I have ever met.

Yeah ?
Do u see things backward ?
0 Replies
 
dyslexia
 
  1  
Reply Mon 24 Jul, 2006 07:01 pm
OmSigDAVID wrote:
dyslexia wrote:
OmDavid, after reading a few of your posts I conculed that you personally do more to promote gun restrictions than any "liberal' I have ever met.

Yeah ?
Do u see things backward ?

Right! I'm a gun owner and have been for 50 years. (i've only been a liberal for 40 years.)
0 Replies
 
OmSigDAVID
 
  1  
Reply Mon 24 Jul, 2006 07:01 pm
cicerone imposter wrote:
Japanese Baths

Many Japanese cultural phenomena confound first-time visitors to the country, but few rituals are as opaque to foreigners as those surrounding bathing. Partly because of the importance of purification rites in Shinto, Japan's ancient indigenous religion, the art of bathing has been a crucial element of Japanese culture for centuries. Baths in Japan are as much about pleasure and relaxation as they are about washing and cleansing. Traditionally, communal bathhouses served as centers for social gatherings, and even though most modern houses and apartments have bathtubs, many Japanese still prefer the pleasures of communal bathing -- either at onsen (hot springs) while on vacation or in public bathhouses closer to home.

Japanese bathtubs themselves are different from those in the West -- they're deep enough to sit in upright with (very hot) water up to the neck -- and the procedures for using them are quite different as well. You wash yourself in a special area outside the tub first. The tubs are for soaking, not washing; soap must not get into the bathwater.

Many hotels in major cities offer only Western-style reclining bathtubs, so to indulge in the pleasure of a Japanese bath you'll need to stay in a Japanese-style inn or find an o-furo-ya (public bathhouse). The latter are clean, hygienic, and easy to find. Japanese bath towels, which are typically called (ta-o-ru), are available for a fee at onsen and bathhouses. They are no larger than a hand towel, and they have three functions: covering your privates (and breasts in mixed bathing), washing before you bathe and scrubbing while you bathe (if desired), and drying off (wring them out hard and they will dry you quite well). If you want a larger towel to dry yourself off, you will have to bring one along.

You may at first feel justifiably apprehensive about bathing (and bathing properly) in an o-furo, but if you're well versed in bathing etiquette, you should soon feel at ease. And once you've experienced a variety of public baths -- from the standard bathhouses found in every neighborhood to idyllic outdoor hot springs -- you may find yourself an unlikely advocate of this ancient custom.

The first challenge in bathing is acknowledging that your Japanese bath mates will stare at your body. Take solace, however, in the fact that their apparent voyeurism most likely stems from curiosity.

When you enter the bathing room, help yourself to two towels, soap, and shampoo (often included in the entry fee), and grab a bucket and a stool. At one of the shower stations around the edge of the room, crouch on your bucket (or stand if you prefer) and use the handheld showers, your soap, and one of your towels to wash yourself thoroughly. A head-to-toe twice-over will impress onlookers. Rinse off, and then you may enter the public bath. When you do, you'll still have one dry towel. You can use it to cover yourself, or you can place it on your head (as you'll see many of your bath mates doing) while soaking. The water in the bath is as hot as the body can endure, and the reward for making it past the initial shock of the heat is the pleasure of a lengthy soak in water that does not become tepid. All you need to do then is lean back, relax, and experience the pleasures of Shinto-style purification -- cleanse your body and enlighten your spirit. It seems, in Japan, cleanliness is next to godliness.

-David Miles

What is the temperature ( in Farenheit degrees ) of the water ?
0 Replies
 
Asherman
 
  1  
Reply Mon 24 Jul, 2006 07:12 pm
Actually McG, President Buchanan has an undeserved notoriety. Buchanan was a great power in Pennsylvania, a most important State in the first half of the 19th century. He served with distinction in the Congress and as an ambassador to Spain and Britain. He was a life long bachelor whose whole life was devoted to serving the Nation, the Democratic Party, and his many relatives. Buchanan was a Jackson Man, and a great compromiser between warring wings of the Democratic Party. His greatest fear was that the nation would be torn apart in a civil war over slavery, and he worked very hard to avoid that. After Franklin Pierce, the Democrats turned to Buchanan as the last and best hope of avoiding civil war, but the Party was irreconcilably split.

As Buchanan's administration wound down, it was clear that nothing could prevent the secessionist movement. Buchanan had no military to send down to over-awe and crush the first stirrings of rebellion, and no way to stop officers from turning over their commands, weapons and stores to the South. Buchanan tried to barter a deal to avoid war before Lincoln took office, but it failed. Lincoln thereafter also tried essentially the same strategy to avoid war, but also failed. It was a slander to accuse Buchanan of helping the Southern States to secede. After leaving office, Buchanan lived the rest of his life in Pennsylvania despised by everyone for his peacemaking efforts.

Only in recent times have historians begun to reassess and revalue the Buchanan Administration, but the damage to his reputation among the general public may never be corrected.

BTW, Franklin Pierce's administration was far more inept than Buchanan's. Pierce's little claim to fame came out of the small part he played during the Mexican War.
0 Replies
 
xingu
 
  1  
Reply Mon 24 Jul, 2006 07:31 pm
And of course there are those nasty rumors of Buchanan being a homosexual.

Quote:
In 1819, Buchanan was engaged to Ann Caroline Coleman, the daughter of a wealthy iron manufacturer. However, she abruptly broke off their engagement and died from an overdose of laudanum several days later[2]. After his fiancée's death, Buchanan vowed he would never marry. He lived with Alabama Senator William Rufus King for sixteen years in Washington, D.C., but King died four years before Buchanan became president. Rumors and speculation circulated that the two had a homosexual relationship, with references to Buchanan's "wife" and "better half," and former President Andrew Jackson referred to King as "Miss Nancy." The term "Nancy" was used to describe homosexual men in the 19th century. On occasion, Buchanan himself even referred to King as "Aunt Nancy." Buchanan's sexual orientation remains uncertain.

SOURCE
0 Replies
 
xingu
 
  1  
Reply Mon 24 Jul, 2006 07:40 pm
Finn wrote:
Somehow I doubt the Founders would ever have considered child pornography as free speech requiring protection.


At the time of our Founders homosexuality was punishable by death. For those who think we should go backwards in time and believe as our Founding Fathers perhaps they can suggest a site to install a death camp to kill all of America's homosexuals.

Lets see, would that be about 5 to 8% of our population?
0 Replies
 
okie
 
  1  
Reply Mon 24 Jul, 2006 08:24 pm
OmSigDAVID wrote:
cicerone imposter wrote:
Also in South America:

Legal naturism or nudity: Not only in Brazil
There are a number of nude and/or naturist beaches and clubs in Central America and the Caribbean, but to date, relatively few in South America.

"Naturism is a way of life in harmony with nature characterised by the practice of communal nudity, with the intention of encouraging self-respect, respect for others and for the environment."
International Naturist Federation

After visiting the famous beaches of Rio de Janeiro where the skimpiest amount of cloth passes for a tanga, thong bathing suit, or the even minuter version called fio dental or dental floss, and beach goers revel in exposing almost their entire bodies, it isn't surprising that Brazil is one of the few South American countries that have legalized nude or naturist beaches and resorts.

Not without a struggle, though.

The traditional and conservative attitudes toward nudity prevail in most countries of South America, and try to set limits, even in Rio de Janeiro: Rio cracks down on nude sunbathers, article from 2000, but not successfully.

So far as I have become aware,
a citizen' s shedding his or her clothes
has not resulted in deleterious effects:
no change in the rates of robbery, nor of murder,
nor of counterfeiting, etc.


David, I quote this post, but read with interest your last lengthy post as well.

As I've said before, stretching the limit of societal norms can in some cases be positive, but in others, it is not. I think most of the time, not. If you wish to cite conditions in Rio de Janeiro and other garden spots of the world, fair enough, but I would take the good old U.S.A. in many regards now, and in the past. For example, social norms are not all that appealing in many countries. Example being if you don't tie things down, don't expect them to be there tomorrow, as somebody will walk away with it, and robbery is not deemed all that serious in places. In some South American countries, if something is stolen, simply assume they needed it worse than you, don't bother reporting it. This from people who have lived down there. In other countries, perhaps Saudi Arabia, they may remove your right hand for such robbery. Petty crime, blackmail, and kickbacks can be standard operating procedure in many countries. I happen to think that common decency and some recognition of morals lend alot to having a decent country, a country wherein people can trust each other to a large extent. I also happen to think Christianity has contributed a great deal to this moral mindset.

Don't get me wrong, there will always be hypocrits and crooks that claim to be religious that are not, and there will always be unethical and crooked people, but at least chances for a better society are improved by Judeo-Christian standards. My perspective comes from going to school, living around, and working for such people from childhood on. A handshake was as good as a written contract, and you could leave your car and house unlocked 24/7 and little or no crime occurred. Not so now.

If enough people are in favor of public nudity and a much coarser society in general, as I've said before, I don't have the answer to it except to say that society will reap what it sows. We live in an increasingly sexualized society now, and the benefits are more children without parents, more irresponsibility, more crime, more problems. Go naked in the streets. Well how about going naked to school? David, I don't think much algebra or geometry would ever get done. Actually, why go to school? Lets just all have a good time. Bottom line David, naturism sounds good, and some might prefer to just return to the caves. One way to solve the perceived global warming problem in some peoples minds, but I am of the opinion that some standards (modern civilization) are good for all of us, and if we don't, we are all victims.
0 Replies
 
OmSigDAVID
 
  1  
Reply Mon 24 Jul, 2006 10:20 pm
okie wrote:
OmSigDAVID wrote:
cicerone imposter wrote:
Also in South America:

Legal naturism or nudity: Not only in Brazil
There are a number of nude and/or naturist beaches and clubs in Central America and the Caribbean, but to date, relatively few in South America.

"Naturism is a way of life in harmony with nature characterised by the practice of communal nudity, with the intention of encouraging self-respect, respect for others and for the environment."
International Naturist Federation

After visiting the famous beaches of Rio de Janeiro where the skimpiest amount of cloth passes for a tanga, thong bathing suit, or the even minuter version called fio dental or dental floss, and beach goers revel in exposing almost their entire bodies, it isn't surprising that Brazil is one of the few South American countries that have legalized nude or naturist beaches and resorts.

Not without a struggle, though.

The traditional and conservative attitudes toward nudity prevail in most countries of South America, and try to set limits, even in Rio de Janeiro: Rio cracks down on nude sunbathers, article from 2000, but not successfully.

So far as I have become aware,
a citizen' s shedding his or her clothes
has not resulted in deleterious effects:
no change in the rates of robbery, nor of murder,
nor of counterfeiting, etc.


Quote:

David, I quote this post, but read with interest your last lengthy post as well.

Thank u.


Quote:

As I've said before, stretching the limit of societal norms can in some cases be positive, but in others, it is not.

Is beauty in the eye of the beholder ?



Quote:

I think most of the time, not. If you wish to cite conditions in Rio de Janeiro and other garden spots of the world, fair enough, but I would take the good old U.S.A. in many regards now, and in the past.

Agreed, with enthusiasm.
How about the case of People v. Santorelli,
from NY 's highest court, defending women 's right to be topless in public ?

Is there some DANGER from American nudist colonies ?



Quote:

For example, social norms are not all that appealing in many countries. Example being if you don't tie things down, don't expect them to be there tomorrow, as somebody will walk away with it, and robbery is not deemed all that serious in places. In some South American countries, if something is stolen, simply assume they needed it worse than you, don't bother reporting it. This from people who have lived down there.

Forgive my skepticism.


Quote:

In other countries, perhaps Saudi Arabia, they may remove your right hand for such robbery.

Yes; LOW rate of recidivism.



Quote:

Petty crime, blackmail, and kickbacks can be standard operating procedure in many countries.

Indeed that is true.


Quote:

I happen to think that common decency
and some recognition of morals lend alot to having a decent country,

but " decency " is an undefined gut feeling
that may be controversial about many things,
e.g., whether decency requires that one 's parents choose one 's wife,
or at what age one can freely drink alcohol, or what a person may believe


Government does not acquire jurisdiction
from anyone 's vague emotions.



Quote:

a country wherein people can trust each other to a large extent.

It is very dangerous to go around promiscuously TRUSTING people.
This shud be avoided as much as possible.




Quote:

I also happen to think Christianity has contributed a great deal to this moral mindset.
Don't get me wrong, there will always be hypocrits and crooks that claim to be religious that are not, and there will always be unethical and crooked people, but at least chances for a better society are improved by Judeo-Christian standards.

I don 't wish to involve myself
in a discussion of the relationship
between theology and political ideology.




Quote:

If enough people are in favor of public nudity and a much coarser society in general, as I've said before, I don't have the answer to it except to say that society will reap what it sows. We live in an increasingly sexualized society now, and the benefits are more children without parents, more irresponsibility, more crime, more problems.

That does not curtail the freedom
of any citizen to lead his life as he chooses,
or to think of what he prefers to think about
or to tell anyone who is willing to listen
( or willing to read his writing ) of his thoughts,
including those with sexual involvement.

Government has never been granted authority
to regulate what any person can think,
nor to regulate his free expression of those thoughts.

Being that jazz has caused me painful headaches,
suppose that I hear some fellows discussing jazz:
do I have a right to stop them from discussing it, because I don 't like it ?
or to get government to make them stifle themselves,
because I do not like the subject matter,
so thay cannot discuss it ??



Quote:

Go naked in the streets.
Well how about going naked to school?
David, I don't think much algebra or geometry would ever get done.

It wud be like swimming in cold water:
after the initial shock,
it wud soon be forgotten.


Quote:

Actually, why go to school?

With the advent of computers on-line,
I doubt that there is much of a future
for brick n mortar schools.
Commuting is too much hassle;
maybe for advanced education, like M.I.T.



Quote:

Lets just all have a good time. Bottom line David, naturism sounds good, and some might prefer to just return to the caves. One way to solve the perceived global warming problem in some peoples minds, but I am of the opinion that some standards (modern civilization) are good for all of us, and if we don't, we are all victims.

The exercise of the power of government
shud be confined to those powers that were actually granted to it;
USURPATIONS ( e.g., telling us what we cannot think or talk about,
or write to each other about ) shud not be tolerated.
David
0 Replies
 
revel
 
  1  
Reply Tue 25 Jul, 2006 06:07 am
Update on the presidents plans.



Quote:
Violence in the Middle East continues to escalate. Iraq has descended into a civil war, with more than 6,000 Iraqi civilians killed in May and June. North Korea just launched seven missiles into the Sea of Japan, and Iran is aggressively developing its nuclear program; Afghanistan is "close to anarchy," and al Qaeda "has not only regrouped, but it is on the march."

Sounds like the perfect time for President Bush to host the cast of American Idol at the White House this Friday:

President Bush will come face-to-face with the one man who has his voting record beat. Bush plans to host "American Idol" Taylor Hicks and the other Top 10 finalists next Friday in the Oval Office. It will be the first time contestants from the hit television show have been invited to meet the president.

After that, President Bush starts his vacation in Crawford, Texas, which is expected to last from August 3-14 and August 23-27.
0 Replies
 
blatham
 
  1  
Reply Tue 25 Jul, 2006 08:01 am
Quote:
Guess Who?

He's a graduate student at one of America's most prestigeous business schools.

He is the leader of his class basketball team.

Without provocation, he hits the leader of the opposing team in the jaw to stop him from making a shot. A few minutes later, he blocks another shot by the same man by smashing his legs on a jump shot.

Years later after both had become successful businessmen, the fellow who'd been struck twice was still wondering what the hell all that had been about. One day he happened to run into the man's brother, now the governor of a state. Could he explain it?

Well, yes. You see, in Texas there are people who get satisfaction from being hard. This was an example of Texas hardness.

This explains a lot, I think.

Source: Ron Suskind's new book, The One Percent Doctrine.

http://hnn.us/blogs/entries/28141.html
0 Replies
 
okie
 
  1  
Reply Tue 25 Jul, 2006 10:43 am
OmSigDAVID wrote:

The exercise of the power of government
shud be confined to those powers that were actually granted to it;
USURPATIONS ( e.g., telling us what we cannot think or talk about,
or write to each other about ) shud not be tolerated.
David


David, I agree with that. One of the reasons that so-called "hate crimes" are a joke. Crimes should be judged by what a person does, not what he thinks. I realize intent, malice, and motives are already considered with criminal acts, but the idea of a hate crime in terms of thought and words alone is fairly ridiculous. If you kill somebody, it doesn't seem to matter if you did it out of hate or not, and in fact why would you kill someone if you didn't hate them? However, characterizing speech or thought as a hate crime is definitely going down the wrong road in my opinion. If it constitutes a physical threat, then thats different.

In regard to nudist colonies, I am not in favor of outlawing those. Those have been around forever. However, I would be against going to school nude, and I don't think kids would ever get that used to it, to the point of being able to study anything or accomplish anything. Schools are not excelling to their best now, due in part to relaxed standards, in my opinion.

You said
Quote:
I don 't wish to involve myself
in a discussion of the relationship
between theology and political ideology.

Thats fine. However, to be totally honest with ourselves, I think we need to acknowledge the influence of traditional religious beliefs, or lack thereof, on cultures and governments, and that includes ours as well. After all, lets face it David, our whole system of government is based on the basic foundational premise that our rights come from God, not government.
0 Replies
 
Advocate
 
  1  
Reply Tue 25 Jul, 2006 11:01 am
The Janet Jackson affair was very interesting. The right acted like the world was ending when Janet's little, pastie-covered, boob was exposed. Large fines were imposed.

The hypocrisy here is that murder and other real obscenities are displayed on TV every hour, and nothing is said. But a display of the nude human body, nature's creation, is deemed obscene. This, I think, is pitiful.
0 Replies
 
cicerone imposter
 
  1  
Reply Tue 25 Jul, 2006 11:06 am
It's all part and parcel of the right-wing hypocrisy.
0 Replies
 
okie
 
  1  
Reply Tue 25 Jul, 2006 12:09 pm
Advocate wrote:
The Janet Jackson affair was very interesting. The right acted like the world was ending when Janet's little, pastie-covered, boob was exposed. Large fines were imposed.

The hypocrisy here is that murder and other real obscenities are displayed on TV every hour, and nothing is said. But a display of the nude human body, nature's creation, is deemed obscene. This, I think, is pitiful.

We actually agree on something to a point. The Janet Jackson event merely is a symptom, not the problem. However, I think the main objection was taking cheap entertainment that is so pervasive and thrust it into a prime event, an event perceived to be mainstream America, family, and apple pie. So if the cheapsters do their thing around the fringe, fine with most people, but when they thrust their cheap garbage into the heart of prime time, people get upset. It isn't the idea of the human body being obscene, but it is the manner in which it is presented.
0 Replies
 
Advocate
 
  1  
Reply Tue 25 Jul, 2006 01:07 pm
I am annoyed all the time by things that are thrust at us. But that is one of the perils of living in a free society. I think we have to be tolerant. But I deeply resent that a group of Bush right-wing, uptight, FCC appointees can impose huge fines on the media, which will cause them to limit free expression in the future.
0 Replies
 
BernardR
 
  1  
Reply Wed 26 Jul, 2006 01:24 am
Advocate wrote:


But I deeply resent that a group of Bush right-wing, uptight, FCC appointees can impose huge fines on the media, which will cause them to limit free expression in the future.
***********************************************************
There is no problem here. I am sure that Hillary Rodham Clinton( after she is elected President) will appoint a new group to the FCC. Will the new group open the floodgates? I think not. I will be on these threads to note that there will be few if any changes.
0 Replies
 
 

Related Topics

HAPPY ANNIVERSARY, EVERYONE! - Discussion by OmSigDAVID
WIND AND WATER - Discussion by Setanta
Who ordered the construction of the Berlin Wall? - Discussion by Walter Hinteler
True version of Vlad Dracula, 15'th century - Discussion by gungasnake
ONE SMALL STEP . . . - Discussion by Setanta
History of Gun Control - Discussion by gungasnake
Where did our notion of a 'scholar' come from? - Discussion by TuringEquivalent
 
Copyright © 2025 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.05 seconds on 05/18/2025 at 11:29:29