(V) & Tuesday:  Breightbart might can be sued for liable here, but I don't know if there is any precedent for that in the blogisphere.  We don't really have total freedom of speech in the US.  You can be fired from your livelihood based on what you say, etc.  Free speech should be responsible speech, but who decides what is responsible speech? 

Personally, I think telling your listeners that liberals are cock roaches who must be killed is like screaming fire in a theater.  Yes, the person who decides to act in this manner is ultimately the guilty party but the radical radio personality encouraged it.  Its a difficult issue though.  Could turn into a slippery slope where the gov't could take over freedom of speech.

Jim Dandy:  Neither do I.  Lyndon Johnson said a lot of crude and assinine things.  Tapes on him were worse than Richard Nixon at times.  He may have thought he won the black vote with the signing of the Civil Rights legislation, but he also realized that he would loose the Southern white vote for generations to come.  That sadly proved true of my home region.  All of the white racists flocked to the Republican Party in droves.  The GOP did not become the radical right party it is today by accident.  The Weasel is right though, it wasn't always that way.

Say what you want about Johnson being a racist.  It is likely true.  But, he did promote and sign a lot of Civil Rights legislation.  Even my Republican hero, Abraham Lincoln, made some comments that would be deemed as racists today.  He had some doubts about signing the Emancipation Proclamation.  But, the point is that he did it anyway cause it was the right thing to do.  Johnson was also aware of political consequences for signing Civil Rights legislation, but he did it anyway.

I hope none of us who want to see women's rights to have an abortion abridged in these cases never have to experience rape or incest themselves.

Lets start by taking care of the babies that are already born.  I've seen the results of children who are wards of the state at age 16-17 because they were never adopted or had a caregiver apart from the state.  It isn't a pretty sight.

Its nice to see somewhere where consitency abounds in this ever changing world.  It's been over a month since I have viewed this board.  Looks like I have missed very little.  Same obsessions from the far right, and if they are proven wrong it gets personal.

Catch you later.  LOL

Artful Dodger:   We were talking about profiling related to terrorism PERIOD!  And for some reason, some people want to dismiss such profiling in relation to domestic terrorism. 

Frankly, I'm not 100% sure how I feel about some profiling whether its on an airplane or the "ground".  Its a balancing act between the appearance of safety vs. human rights & dignity.  I still maintain though appearances can be deceaving.  I'd check everyone pretty carefully.

Whether its off topic or not, its amazing to me how gov't minimalists rationalize that gov't employees are less terrorist victims than people killed on an airplane because it is done "internally".

Bwild:   Here is the "context" from the Obama's Counsel of Economic advisors regarding the perks to small business & the exemptions from cost.

http://www.whitehouse.gov/assets/documents/CEA-smallbusiness-july24.pdf

Artful Dodger:  Thats not exactly true.  There were 200 Republican amendments that were included in the HC bill.  The Republicans think it will be politically expedient for all of them to vote "No" to make it look like they were not included in the process.  Maybe the public will see through this charade.

Tuesday:  the 34 Dems that voted against the bill are on the dole of the insurance companies just like almost all of the Republicans.

Artful Dodger:   "Most deviations in the texts are grammatical or omissions."  How can you possibly be so sure of this assertion with over 5K copies done by hand?  In addition there was at least 75 yrs of oral before anything was written down.

Tuesday:  The books that went in the Bible were "set" in 4th Century at the Counsel of Nicea by a vote of about 15-14.  Hardly a consensus for something absolutely inspired by God.

Pedro:  The Bible is worth reading for general directions on how to live a spiritual life through profound story telling.  But, IMHO, it is not an accurate historical or scientific compilation.

Artful Dodger: Who made the decision about which copy errors were inconsequential & which ones were not?

(V):  In the 4th Century, the "church" decided what books went in the Bible to prove its agenda.  And, later, it was copied by scribes many times over because there was no printing press.  It only goes to reason that honest mistakes were made through this process.  In addition, some scribes likely had their own agenda.

In addition, many of the Bible stories are very similar to other legends of that time. So, I agree.  It should be considered a compilation of philosophical thought - not the final word on truth. 

Artful Dodger:  What about "scientist" who have a huge financial incentive to disprove man-made global warming on behalf of big oil cos & mfg. poluters?  Their "gravy train" would be gone without financial assistance also.

By the way, I love Cool-Aide.  Yummie.  LOL

Tuesday:   That kind of economics & morality go hand in hand.  Sure slavery was about economics, but it was economy based on racism.

My post was in response to Dan's assumption that all racism resulted from progressivism & the Dems.

Artful Dodger:   You state as the conclusion to this post that, "it's the liberal policies in America that are at fault for ALL the racial problems."

I will certainly grant that neither party can wash its hands of a racist past, & that Dirksen was a hero to the civil rights movement. But, here in the South, we had only 1 political party to speak of until after the Civil Rights Act passed.  Democrats were the only party in this region from Reconstruction to that time.  Senator Thurmond switched parties in '64 because of the Civil Rights Act.  Many of the Dems you mentioned would not be considered "liberals" cuz there was only 1 game in town.

LBJ, whose hands were not clean either, knew he would loose the Dem Party in the South by promoting & signing the Civil Rights Act.  Sure enough, Nixon was able to use a "Southern Strategy" & '68 & '72 to win elections & set up a strong Republican base there.  Many of the Conservative Southern Dems switched parties to the GOP aftewards.  The few that stayed, like Hollins, changed some their positions.  Others like George Wallace & Lester Maddox remained Dems but became loose cannons.  Today, now that all the Party switching has taking place, the Dem. Party, in particular the Progressive wing, is very weak in the Southern states.

But, I agree with you that both parties have a checkered past when it comes to race relations, but there are some compexities, particularly in the South.

Artful Dodger:  My local weather lady, who is quite nice on the eyes I might add, is also a meteorologist & knows the science quite well, also.  But, she does not presume to be an expert on global warming.  Niether, to the best of my knowledge, does she do work for big oil cos.  IMHO qualifications do matter.  Monetary interests does have an influence on opinion.  The fact that these 2 guys appeared on O'Reilly Factor does not make them experts.  My guess is that they were doing it for showmanship.  Or, to represent their moneyed interests.  Same for those people who appear on Keith Olberman (sp?)

As for for the absolute assertion that there has been no global warming since 1998, I'm not a scientist & I can't say for sure (& neither can you).  But, I can say that the vast majority of scientists don't hold that view, or the view that a lot of global warming is not man made.