California Congressmen Pete Stark owes American soldiers an apology v.ugh

[David Octavius]

Originally Posted by WickedLou9

No the arguement is tha the persons pointing this out and making a big deal out of it don't actually care and are just doing it for political gain> they aren't outraged, they aren't offended. They could care less when some stupid congressmen said. But instead the hipocrites pretend to be offended while at the same time turning a blind eye when someone in thier own party does the same or worse.
He is basically saying. " Oh come off it, you don't give a shit, stop pretending to be offended".

Oh I have no doubt that some - even many - might genuinely be offended but this is about our republic and democracy, if our politicians are outraged over what he said, they should be abhorred by the actions of our adminstration that has undermined the ideals it was supposed to protect.

I don't care about one being worse than the other or "measuring against right or wrong". What I care about is what harms freedom and makes us less secure - what Stark said did nothing to harm either, what Bush has done clearly has and it this this our leaders should focus their attention on - not mere words.

[DosEquis]

Originally Posted by 7960

-what he said was inappropriate
-he shouldn't be forced to resign
-i'd have more respect for him if he did resign
-it will be an issue in his re-election
-depending on his district that statement either guarantees his re-election or his defeat

qft.

I dont think he should be forced to resign nor do i think they should vote 'officially' on what he said.

His consequences will come naturally. We do have free speech but there are times when what we say has consequences. In this case he may lose his job.

[David Octavius]

Originally Posted by DosEquis

qft.

I dont think he should be forced to resign nor do i think they should vote 'officially' on what he said.

His consequences will come naturally. We do have free speech but there are times when what we say has consequences. In this case he may lose his job.

A general comment about the 24-7 congressional coverage:

I wish we could go back to the good old days when sessions of congress was either closed or not taped so that all we had to judge them by were their actual voting records...

Or is what you say more important than your actions?

[DosEquis]

Originally Posted by David Octavius

A general comment about the 24-7 congressional coverage:

I wish we could go back to the good old days when sessions of congress was either closed or not taped so that all we had to judge them by were their actual voting records...

Or is what you say more important than your actions?

Its not that it is more or less important, but depending on what you say there can be consequences. Most of the time actions will trump words...it all just depends on how it works out.

[JaJae]

Stark finally apologized. Too much pressure from the outside forced him into it.

Stark apologizes - First Read - msnbc.com
Embattled Democrat Pete Stark has just publicly apologized to "the president and his family."

He took the floor after his fellow Democrats successfully killed a motion to censure him in the wake of his remarks last Thursday asserting that American troops were fighting in Iraq to have their "heads blown off for the president's amusement."

"I want to apologize to my colleagues, many of whom I have offended," Stark began. He then apologized to "the president and his family" and "the troops."

"I hope that with this apology, I return to being as insignificant as I should be," he concluded though a voice cracking with emotion.

Somebody please vote this man out of office.

[WickedLou9]

i would respect the douche more if he went out there and said

F-you, i meant what I said. If you were offended by it, tough shit. Get over it.

[JaJae]

Originally Posted by WickedLou9

i would respect the douche more if he went out there and said

F-you, i meant what I said. If you were offended by it, tough shit. Get over it.

That's what he initially said essentially, when he refused to apologize after the incident. But then after a week of pressure he finally caved and apologized. He was almost in tears.

[Stylerod]

Originally Posted by WickedLou9

i would respect the douche more if he went out there and said

F-you, i meant what I said. If you were offended by it, tough shit. Get over it.

Unlike tough talk in anonymous forums, he is actually accountable for what he says.

[WickedLou9]

Originally Posted by JaJae

That's what he initially said essentially, when he refused to apologize after the incident. But then after a week of pressure he finally caved and apologized. He was almost in tears.

He was worthless and weak.

[Stylerod]

Originally Posted by WickedLou9

He was worthless and weak.

He's had a cushy government job for 35 years. He doesn't want to take a chance losing it and will say what he needs to to keep it.

[WickedLou9]

Originally Posted by Stylerod

Unlike tough talk in anonymous forums, he is actually accountable for what he says.

I see what you did there. your point was made without the first part of the post, and I could have done without the thinly veiled insult.

I don't respect the apology because he didn't mean it. He only apologized because people wanted him to. He didn't do it voluntarily. Apologizing only brings more attention to it anyway and to the fact that he will put aside personal conviction and bow to public pressure and lie to people just to appease them.

[Stylerod]

Originally Posted by WickedLou9

I see what you did there. your point was made without the first part of the post, and I could have done without the thinly veiled insult.

I don't respect the apology because he didn't mean it. He only apologized because people wanted him to. He didn't do it voluntarily. Apologizing only brings more attention to it anyway and to the fact that he will put aside personal conviction and bow to public pressure and lie to people just to appease them.

He probably did it to keep his job. Or, maybe he did it because he meant it. Who knows. Strange it pisses you off so much. But here is what I see you saying. First he told the truth, then he lied. How can you believe anything he says? Maybe he always says what he thinks people want to hear and never says what HE really feels. He thought the people wanted him to rip the president a new one. When that backfired he apologized.

How do YOU know when he lies and when he doesn't? Only when it fits what YOU want to hear?

[Scrum]

Originally Posted by WickedLou9

i would respect the douche more if he went out there and said

F-you, i meant what I said. If you were offended by it, tough shit. Get over it.

I hope he gets the boot and they elect someone with some balls.

[hereticzero]

I am not in favor of the war in Iraq. Today's military is voluntary, so far. The troops are in the service by choice, not because they were forced to enlist. They took an oath to defend the Constitution, which means defending us by going where they are sent, like it or not. If people do not want to be in war, then they need to quit volutarily joining the military during wartime. Let the govt. force the people to go to war with a draft and see how much war they make. It costs more money to force citizens to go to war than to depend on a volunteer military. Back to the point: I don't criticize anyone in the military for doing their jobs but the war in Iraq does have to end for us at home. Wars against terrorism will always go on and we will be forever at war with someone somewhere.

[7960]

Originally Posted by hereticzero

It costs more money to force citizens to go to war than to depend on a volunteer military.

You have any proof of this or is this just your assumption?

[motivez]

Originally Posted by 7960

You have any proof of this or is this just your assumption?

I'd think the amount of money involved in compelling service for draftees, dealing with some sort of draft-lotto system, etc, would cost more than 0 dollars

[7960]

Originally Posted by motivez

I'd think....

Still waiting.

[Scrum]

Originally Posted by 7960

Still waiting.

The Dynamic Cost of the Draft

We propose a dynamic general equilibrium model with human capital accumulation to evaluate the economic consequences of compulsory services (such as military draft or social services). Our analysis identifies a so far ignored dynamic cost arising from distortions in time allocation over the life-cycle. We provide conservative estimates for the excess burden that arises when the government relies on forced labor rather than on income taxation to finance public expenditures. Our results suggest that eliminating the draft could produce considerable dynamic gains, both in terms of GDP and lifetime utility.

Cost of Reviving Draft Put at $1 Billion a Year - New York Times

LEAD: A consulting company advising the Defense Department has concluded that it would cost the United States more than $1 billion a year to return to military conscription while maintaining a force as qualified and effective as that of today.

[Stylerod]

Originally Posted by Scrum

The Dynamic Cost of the Draft