Thanks for digitally adding pants to that pic of me. They don't call me "The Velour Fog" for nothing.
Ho ho ho! Thank you for another revelation, Jeff. I'm learning more and more about you each day, Jeff. You provide excellent data. I thank you for your offerings, Jeff.
This new thing you've got going about collecting info on Rockets BBS posters for use in some kind of psychological game (against Rockets BBS posters!!) is about the saddest thing I've read here in a year. p.s. Yes Jorge, my real name is Jason. I know you find it somehow satisfying to 'out' me on a BBS where anyone who's interested already knows my name (and my favorite bar too -- I know Rudyards has its own file in your weirdo file folder). That's pretty sad too.
Our own Hoover!! You don't suppose T_J...well, do you think the similarities extend to fashion tastes? Not that there would ne anything wrong with that, but it might put a whole new spin on T_J's frequenting the peelers. Maybe he's just looking for help with his 'haberdashery'...
I take it back. Anti-govt. teen poetry leads to mod vs. poster wars. It's clearly dangerous, and should be punishable by imprisonment.
Sorry to get in on all this stuff so late. I would like to say that this conservative poster: 1. Does not think that Kent State signature is appropriate or funny (this is also the first time I have seen it as my mind tends to skip over the sigs automatically). I hereby chastise Uncle Tim for such a tasteless message. 2. Does not think that the girl mentioned in the original post should have faced any disciplinary actions for writing that poem (though I agree with TJ that it is factually challanged in places). Freedom of speech is very important, and we don't have enough room in our prisons to outlaw being an idiot. 3. Does not wish for Michael Moore to have a heart attack, though I would like him to admit that BFC was not a documentary. I do wish Kim Jong Il and Yasser Arafat would have heart attacks, because I think the world would be much better off without them. 4. Agrees with TJ that with the very small number of vocal conservatives around here, it is tough to weigh in on all of the issues, especially if you take our posts counts into account . Whenever I see someone ask for a conservative viewpoint (or rarely MY viewpoint) I try to respond, but with the explosion of this board over the past couple of years, I just can't read every thread any more. 5. Loves ClutchFans and appreciates that we have these forums freely available to us.
All this poo-slinging is ridiculous. This is an interesting topic and one that merits ACTUAL debate and ACTUAL discussion. For once we actually have a story that doesn't require or merit a liberal v. conservative stance, just a meaningful debate. Sarcastic and pointless comments from BOTH sides aren't necessary (though you have every right to express them...a point I will bring up). Could it be possible to get back on topic please? First off...One thing our founding fathers resented while writing the Constitution was the system of monarchy in parts of Europe, where a person could be thrown in jail or executed simply for expressing his feelings against the King. Looking at the Constitution now, we see that ONE OF THE MOST IMPORTANT liberties we as people have is the right to criticize our own government...FREEDOM OF SPEECH...FIRST AMENDMENT. Second...In all seriousness, I applaud the principal for his patriotism. I have just as much faith in our country as this guy. It would be nice if everyone were like this. But we are not. And there's nothing wrong with that. So what if she was being "un-American"? Since when is patriotism (or lack thereof) a basis of individual rights? Where is it mentioned in the Bill of Rights that patriotism is a MUST? But more importantly...shut your faces??? His "I'm right and you're wrong and you can just shut your trap if you disagree with me" attitude is pretty similar to some of those here in the D&D. Essentially, I disagree with what the principal has to say...though the idiot may have every right to say it. Third....What I am arguing over are the ramifications of the girl's poem, not to mention how the girl's mom (who worked in the administration, I believe) was ordered to destroy the poem and was threatened to lose her job when she refused to do so (read the editorial). How ludicrous. Like I mentioned earlier, some of you guys say some pretty silly and useless things. And just as I may not agree with what some of you have to say, others may not agree with the girl's poem. The difference is your mom isn't threatened to lose her job when Clutch demands that she "destroys" your posts. All in all, I agree with Cohen's sentiments. Who cares if what the girl said was full of lies and ill-based logic? Don't you think she has the RIGHT to express those feelings?
What am I chopped liver? I'm just messing with you. Cohen said it more succinctly and to the point than I did. I just wanted to find a way to personally attack you and derail the thread while accusing you of being biased against liberal posters.
ER: There are two points about this that can be attacked: I agree with you that, irrespective of content ( beyond certain widely accepted extremes), it is contrary to our system to take the actions that the pricipal took. However, along the way you are blyithe to equate criticism of the administration with un-American, and go on to challenge the right to be unpatriotic as though it were accepted that her actions were such. It may seem like I'm trying to fight a skirmish when we're on the same side in a battle, but unfortunately there are still a great many people who don't agree with you on the first point, and as such the particulars of patriotism and unAmericanism are important. Additionally, while trying to be statesmanlike, you probably offended some by indirectly calling them unpatriotic for doing what they feel is right. Thomas Jefferson said it is the duty of every citizen in a responsible society to challenge their government, and I don't suppose he thought he was advocating un-Americanism, do you? To be a patriot s to fight for your country, and your country is not merely defined on a map; it is defined by what it stands for. Many of us believe that this administration and this war both oppose what we stand for, and criticizing the government is, in and of itself, our way fo fighting for our country. You may not agree, and that's fine, but please take more care in what you causally term un-American, or unpatriotic.
What's the difference between reading these poems aloud and someone reading a religous poem that they wrote allowed. They are both forcing their beliefs on other people. That said I agree that the teacher should not have been fired just as a teacher shouldn't be fired for allowing a child to read a religous poem as situations have occured before.
