|
Post by Frank Black on Dec 22, 2006 14:33:25 GMT -5
i think that a moderate democrat doesn’t believe in a complete socialist state and is not a racist. Most democrats, or at least the ones who are in the leadership of their party, are not moderates by that standard. I am not sure of the definition of a moderate republican, probably easier to define from the other side (although I loath to identify myself with todays republican party). If I had to I guess such a person would believe there a select few areas where the state does better than the private sector and they don’t vote with the social/religious side of the party on some issues. I guess I answer my own question then since bush doesn’t fulfill the second part of that equation, however, he more than over compensates in other areas. Rant over, back to work. Hoya Saxa I don't want to get into an off-topic rant -- I realize this thread is about a potential Giuliani run for the presidency -- but the discussions above about moderate-this and moderate-that caught my eye. It seems that moderate Republicans are easy (easier?) to identify -- McCain, Giuliani, Lindsey Graham, Colin Powell, et al. But what of the moderate Democrats? Who are they? In what do they beleive? This seems are more difficult question to answer. A harder group to describe... Let me try: While the typical major-media explanation for the recent GOP slaughter at the hands of the rowdy populace was Iraq, GOP corruption and frustration with GWB, the issues that actually got people out of bed, off from work and into the voting booths had more to do with stagnant wages, the ever-increasing cost of healthcare and the fear that low- and medium-tech jobs are going to be exported to China and India. These people, living and voting in fly-over country (or, if you sell trucks, America's Heartland), generally speaking, sent to Washington, DC Democrats who believe (or, at least, profess publicly to believe) in God and guns but distrust big business and free trade. In truth, the lefties in the Democrat party will likely shout the loudest (expect hearings and investigations into oil profits, Big Pharma and the like), but achieve little. In fact, the focus ought to be on bolstering the things they like, not tearing down the things they hate. We will hear rants against oil profits but see increased subsidies for alternative fuels. We will hear D's bashing the wealthy but bolstering the middle class. On trade, many, many Democrats will rail against the imbalance in trade agreements that have long harmed the American worker. The anticipated response? Taking steps to better insure wages and re-educate workers while making health coverage more comprehensive and portable. Many of these center-left ideas have promise. Importantly, they have the support of many of the newly-elected Senators and Congressman. A good number of the frontrunners from the left (Obama, Clinton et al) for '08 espouse these positions. Democrats are to trade what Republicans are to global warming. Free trade harms few and helps many. This is empirical fact. But, as with so many other issues, the beneficiaries of trade are diffuse and the victims concentrated and vocal. So we get the Democrats selling out the majority to help slivers of the electorate that still toil in sectors in which America can't compete. Similarly, the evidence that the earth is warming and that humans are the culprit is overwhelmingly convincing. Yet Republicans resist the fact or ignore its implications for ideological and political reasons. The good of the planet be damned. Politics is a sick sport and I cannot imagine why anyone would involve themselves in it.
|
|
EasyEd
Platinum Hoya (over 5000 posts)
Posts: 7,272
|
Post by EasyEd on Dec 22, 2006 20:09:08 GMT -5
|
|
Nevada Hoya
Blue & Gray (over 10,000 posts)
Posts: 18,668
|
Post by Nevada Hoya on Dec 27, 2006 20:03:10 GMT -5
t and no - giuliani was a very very popular governor...sure his popularity was uneven, but not one new yorker can argue that he made nyc a great place to live again...even in the years since he stepped down i have seen a regression...he was an ass-kicker and that is awesome, plus he was stoic and sensational after 9/11 showing true leadership...his only misstep was probably the whole trying to run for another term thing...and judith nathan. I don't think Rudy made it to governor.
|
|
nychoya3
Diamond Hoya (over 2500 posts)
Posts: 2,674
|
Post by nychoya3 on Dec 27, 2006 23:57:48 GMT -5
Feel free to see this, and I hope it makes you feel better. But you should probably check out the mag's statement of purpose: 21st Century Science & Technology magazine challenges the assumptions of modern scientific dogma, including quantum mechanics, relativity theory, biological reductionism, and the formalization and separation of mathematics from physics. We demand a science based on constructible (intelligible) representation of concepts, but shun the simple empiricist or sense-certainty methods associated with the Newton-Galileo paradigm. Our unique collection of editors and scientific advisers maintain an ongoing intellectual dialogue with leading thinkers in many areas, including biology, physics, space science, oceanography, nuclear energy, and ancient epigraphy. Original studies by the controversial economist Lyndon LaRouche have challenged the epistemological foundations of the von Neumann and Wiener-Shannon information theory, and located physical science as a branch of physical economy. In science policy areas, we have challenged sacred cows, from the theory of global warming to the linear threshold concept of radiation. Finally, someone brave enough to stand up to the Newton-Galileo paridigm. Where did this guy get his PHD in climate sciences again? We're getting far afield, so let me just add that Rudy Giuliani married his second cousin. Discuss.
|
|
Filo
Diamond Hoya (over 2500 posts)
Posts: 3,920
|
Post by Filo on Dec 28, 2006 2:45:04 GMT -5
We're getting far afield, so let me just add that Rudy Giuliani married his second cousin. Discuss. Can't really opine on that one unless I have some more information. Specifically, was she hot?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 2, 2007 10:59:51 GMT -5
Feel free to see this, and I hope it makes you feel better. But you should probably check out the mag's statement of purpose: 21st Century Science & Technology magazine challenges the assumptions of modern scientific dogma, including quantum mechanics, relativity theory, biological reductionism, and the formalization and separation of mathematics from physics. We demand a science based on constructible (intelligible) representation of concepts, but shun the simple empiricist or sense-certainty methods associated with the Newton-Galileo paradigm. Our unique collection of editors and scientific advisers maintain an ongoing intellectual dialogue with leading thinkers in many areas, including biology, physics, space science, oceanography, nuclear energy, and ancient epigraphy. Original studies by the controversial economist Lyndon LaRouche have challenged the epistemological foundations of the von Neumann and Wiener-Shannon information theory, and located physical science as a branch of physical economy. In science policy areas, we have challenged sacred cows, from the theory of global warming to the linear threshold concept of radiation. Finally, someone brave enough to stand up to the Newton-Galileo paridigm. Where did this guy get his PHD in climate sciences again? We're getting far afield, so let me just add that Rudy Giuliani married his second cousin. Discuss. Newton and Galileo were a couple of hacks.
|
|
EasyEd
Platinum Hoya (over 5000 posts)
Posts: 7,272
|
Post by EasyEd on Jan 2, 2007 14:10:29 GMT -5
|
|
SirSaxa
Silver Hoya (over 500 posts)
Posts: 747
|
Post by SirSaxa on Jan 2, 2007 14:51:16 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by Frank Black on Jan 15, 2007 19:42:04 GMT -5
Hurricane Predictions Off Track As Tranquil Season Wafts Away"With cataclysmic predictions that hurricanes would swarm from the tropics like termites, no one thought 2006 would be the most tranquil season in a decade." --- Let Cooler Heads Prevail by George F. Will "While worrying about Montana's receding glaciers, Schweitzer, who is 50, should also worry about the fact that when he was 20 he was told to be worried, very worried, about global cooling. Science magazine (Dec. 10, 1976) warned of "extensive Northern Hemisphere glaciation." Science Digest (February 1973) reported that "the world's climatologists are agreed" that we must "prepare for the next ice age." The Christian Science Monitor ("Warning: Earth's Climate is Changing Faster Than Even Experts Expect," Aug. 27, 1974) reported that glaciers "have begun to advance," "growing seasons in England and Scandinavia are getting shorter" and "the North Atlantic is cooling down about as fast as an ocean can cool." Newsweek agreed ("The Cooling World," April 28, 1975) that meteorologists "are almost unanimous" that catastrophic famines might result from the global cooling that the New York Times (Sept. 14, 1975) said "may mark the return to another ice age." The Times (May 21, 1975) also said "a major cooling of the climate is widely considered inevitable" now that it is "well established" that the Northern Hemisphere's climate "has been getting cooler since about 1950." George Will is my favorite columnist, but this is a stupid argument. All he has demonstrated is that people were wrong in 1975. Different world, different circumstances, different data. Will's implicit contention is that we should never trust scientists because sometimes they are wrong. I agree with Will about 98% of the time, which for me is a record for any columnist. But this line of argument is weak.
|
|
EasyEd
Platinum Hoya (over 5000 posts)
Posts: 7,272
|
Post by EasyEd on Jan 16, 2007 13:10:31 GMT -5
Wills' message is that we should be skeptical of what scientists tell us, not that we should never trust them. In 1975 they told us to beware of world cooling. In 2007 they tell us to beware of world warming. Just as more data are available in 2007 than was available in 1975, so more data will be available in 2037 than in 2007 and who knows what it will say or how it will be interpreted.
|
|
HealyHoya
Golden Hoya (over 1000 posts)
Victory!!!
Posts: 1,059
|
Post by HealyHoya on Jan 16, 2007 13:35:06 GMT -5
Yes, and in the meantime, sixty-eight degrees in Washington during the third week of January is lovely. Buy land at altitude and enjoy the weather.
|
|
nychoya3
Diamond Hoya (over 2500 posts)
Posts: 2,674
|
Post by nychoya3 on Jan 16, 2007 15:39:45 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by AustinHoya03 on Jan 16, 2007 17:35:42 GMT -5
While I agree Rudy "cleaned up" Manhattan, I don't know if the regression in terms of seediness can be attributed to the fact that Rudy is no longer the mayor. I'm pretty sure some of that is cyclical/based on other factors. FWIW, I am all for drops in the crime rate, but is the yuppification of the old middle-class neighborhoods really all that cool? I just hope I can still find a bar in New York where I can get a cheap PBR in a can in 10 years. Dropping 9 bucks per on vodka-sodas blows. Thank God I live in a town with an abundance of $2 tall boys. "You may all go to hell, and I will go to Texas." God bless Austin, the greatest town in America. Austin, where you living? I spend a lot of time down there as my fiancee is a grad student at UT. She owns a place over on West Lynn and Enfield over in Tarrytown. I worked over at Clark, Thomas and Winters last summer. Didn't see this until just now. I live just north of Tarrytown, around 35th and Jefferson. Holler at me next time you're in town and we'll drink some of those tall boys.
|
|