posted on February 21, 2001 09:59:30 PM new"oddball supporter of "extreme right-wing politics"
I like that. If we draw a conclusion from it that anyone who is a proponent of extreme right-wing politics is more likley than others to be commie pinko spies for the Russians where would we be?
posted on February 21, 2001 10:31:20 PM new
I wonder if those photos will produce the same physiological reaction as four quivering shafts in the kill zone?
posted on February 21, 2001 10:41:25 PM new
I heard on the 6:00 news that he was far too smart to catch & only caught now because he was exposed by a Russian Agent.
posted on February 21, 2001 11:01:51 PM new
When I opened this thread, I established that my opinion of an appropriate sentence was based on, 'If the agent is found guilty..' I also stated that certain indictments were 'purported' and 'alleged.'
Since my leadoff statement remains and is unedited, I do not consider it necessary to repeat the qualifiers in every follow-up comment. That (repeating) is what Dan Rather must do.
Helen:
Depends on the type and degree of liberal reasoning and motive being applied to (each) circumstance.
I said 'bleeding-heart liberal.' My definition of a "bleeding-heart liberal" someone who is always emotionally irrational regarding such matters, and base their decisions and motives on selfish "feely-good" rationale, rather than intelligent and undeniable facts.
You said:
"You infer that a liberal point of view politically will lead to an increased crime rate. That inference cannot be validated."
How wrong you are. However, there are too many variables regarding "view vs. application vs. category" to rebut your belief in a simple and concise manner.
You said:
"Education is the best crime fighting tool that we have."
Enhancing education is an important factor in reducing crime, but is not the only answer nor always the "best," as you imply.
The uneducated or the under-educated do not commit (all) crimes. In fact, some of the most violent crimes are committed by individuals of superior intelligence, as are most "white-collar" crimes where millions or billions of dollars may be involved.
To say that "Education is the best crime fighting tool we have," is too simplistic and just not true.
You said:
"Locking people up or killing them will not make a dent in the crime rate."
Sorry, you are (again) greatly mistaken, it does.
It is too complex to explain how the emphasis on arresting and incarcerating, expeditiously and consistently, "repeat offenders" for the longest period possible, will reduce crime, if only to prevent the incident of certain crimes from being higher than is usual.
I once arrested a repeat offender, who is very educated, who committed 65 home invasions (occupants present) in a 90-day period. At that rate, how many home invasions do you believe he could have averaged in 1 year?
You might argue, "Well, someone would just take his place!" That would be true, but maybe the next person might not be as cunning, and would not be on the loose as long. Moreover, though a person (could) take his place, that person would be a replacement, not in addition.
Therefore, incarceration, especially long-term incarceration, does reduce the incident of crime by removing from the populace a person whom is a contributing factor in the number of crimes occurring.
As for the death sentence, it is indisputable that the person being put to death will never maim or kill again. As for the death penalty being a deterrent, I am convinced that most that oppose the death penalty believe it does not stop others from killing because killings still occur. That gauge is not intelligent or realistic. The factual number of killings that are prevented because a person fears the consequences, will never be known.
How many people would be willing to come forward and admit that he or she would (actually) kill someone, or would have (actually) killed someone, if not for the fear of being put to death himself or herself?
There is one thing most law enforcement officers soon realize; he or she will never know how many times during his or her career, someone they stopped would have killed them, or tried, if the person(s) thought he or she could "get the drop" and believed he or she could get away with it.
If, as you imply in your posts, your desire to have a liberal Democrat such as Gore and Clinton in office is realized, those toys will be a gut-wrenching memory and you will be reduced to collecting Beanie Babies or wood-burning art.
posted on February 22, 2001 12:11:31 AM newyour desire to have a liberal Democrat such as Gore and Clinton
With Facts, if you please, demonstrate how it is that I have indicated a desire to have either or both of those persons in office. With facts, not misinterpretations. With facts, not implications. With facts, uncolored by your own antagonisms.
Also, descriptively respond to Xardon's last post.
I'll remove those photos now that you've seen them, for I cannot imagine many things more threatening to an outspoken and belligerent conservative than the idea that there may be a horde of bleeding heart liberals armed and ready to shoot him just to shut him up.
posted on February 22, 2001 12:35:27 AM new"With Facts, if you please, demonstrate how it is that I have indicated a desire to have either or both of those persons in office. With facts, not misinterpretations. With facts, not implications. With facts, uncolored by your own antagonisms."
By consistently, and in full view of the world, riding a yellow horse.
You are actually questioning why all would not assume you prefer yellow horses?
re: "....to an outspoken and belligerent conservative..."
I know I do not use a lot of yellow smileys and little bouncing blues to illustrate what my (real) attitude might be, but I prefer candid or free-spoken rather than "outspoken," and challenging rather than 'belligerent.""Conservative" is fine.
posted on February 22, 2001 06:19:47 AM new
Sgtmike,
My answer to your question stands.
You have debunked my opinion on every issue in an authoritative manner but without any facts.
I stated that education was the "best"...
not the "only" tool that we have to fight crime. Of course there will always be crime
but with improved education and living
conditons I believe that a significant decrease in crime rate is possible.
The questions that you ask me cover a lot
of territory...morality, espionage, liberal versus conservative politics, criminology, and the death penalty.
I give you some dubious credit for getting all that into one question.
posted on February 22, 2001 10:51:49 AM new
Well with 'improved education and living conditions I believe that a significant decrease in crime rate is possible.'
But the thing is we do not live in that almost perfect society that you talk about.
I say almost perfect, as nothing could be perfect.
I say send this guy to Russia, if he's a double agent, what do you think Russia will do with him, can they trust him?
posted on February 22, 2001 11:16:29 AM new
OT-but will Clinton every be out of the spotlight? The guys on TV almost everyday.
All the people that do not like Bush or rather 'Dubya', on his inaguaration day, there was more news footage of the Clinton leaving. And the media saying 'he leaves as the most beloved President'
I wonder if Gore was President now, would there be so many threads about him being President, or any 'flub ups' he could make.
With Facts, if you please, demonstrate how it is that I have indicated a desire to have either or both of those persons in office. With facts, not misinterpretations. With facts, not implications. With facts, uncolored by your own antagonisms.
Well whom did you want in?; Nadar? Buchannan, Write in? None?
posted on February 22, 2001 11:26:15 AM new
I'm sure its jealousy.... and a little anger mixed in, after all, all the 'W' keys were gone from the keyboards.... and some other stuff from the White House and Air Force One
posted on February 22, 2001 11:49:23 AM new
Oh I don't know, could be.... ya know the 'retired rich Republican' thing.. ya it can be boring LOL!
And that great tax break I'm gonna get, shoot, what the heck..... thought I'd 'try' to bug ya!
edited to ask-geez how'd ya guess? I know the 'i before e' now LOL!! plus I try really hard to keep away from the word thier
LOL
[ edited by NearTheSea on Feb 22, 2001 11:55 AM ]
posted on February 22, 2001 12:18:17 PM new
Send the dude back to Russia, with no chance to retuen to the US., and FORCE him (under duress, of course ) to admit to the Russian Government that ALL of the information was incorrect and useless, and that all along he was actually spying on the RUSSIANS...and see how kindly the Russians take to a three-timing double agent...
********
Gosh Shosh!
posted on February 22, 2001 12:23:50 PM newHere's an interesting point. Louis Freeh all but convicted Hanssen on TV the other day. Did he have a right to do that?
) to admit to the Russian Government that ALL of the information was incorrect and useless, and that all along he was actually spying on the RUSSIANS...and see how kindly the Russians take to a three-timing double agent...