"If you oppose the war in Iraq, fine... [why] use the uniform of a brave American soldier and "lynch" it?"
In this case, the message is definitely overshadowed by the medium used to convey it. I don't agree with the folks who tore the display down, but what did these folks expect, especially in a town that has a lot of military personnel originating from it?
I posted something along these lines before the crash today:
I don't agree with the folks who tore the display down, but what did these folks expect, especially in a town that has a lot of military personnel originating from it?
And there we go: blame the victim.
What was she doing out jogging at night?
What did she expect if she was wearing *that*?
Maybe it's a woman thing, but whenever I hear the words, "What did he/she/they expect?" I get the creeps.
I think that there is no form of speech on someone's private property that would fall into crossing the line of deserving some sort of vandalism as payback. It's your property and you should be able to be as outrageous as you want without other people using that as justification for vandalism.
The homeowners in this case should have expected that some people -- maybe even most people who drove by -- would be upset by the display [I'm not sure why because it wasn't an attack on the military personnel, but on the people who send them overseas to fight], but they should never *expect* that it will lead to vandalism or worse. Sorry, that's just backwards.
And if it *is* a military town, then I'd love to know if a person in uniform was the vandal. If so, then that person has done more to sully the military uniform than the homeowner did.
Victim precipitation, RJ, is the same thing as blaming the victim. The clothes she wore, the color of his skin, the "look" he gave the white woman, etc. -- it's all the "what did you expect" defense of criminal behavior.
I think in the gated community you'd probably get escorted out by security or perhaps get a gardner or cabana boy sicced on you, but I think the chances of getting your ass kicked and beyond are pretty slim.
Didn't say the comparison was perfect. Just trying to make a point to see what comes out the other end.
RJ: >>Try taking a CJ course some time...
I suppose you've been told often that you sound very condescending, right?
Yeah - you'd have to be a wuss to get beaten up in a gated-community. Um, I guess cause they're all weaklings and not big and black and dangerous ????????
It's the same thing, college boy. The victim bascially gets blamed for playing a role in the crime perpetrated against him/her. You know, wearing a short skirt and all that.
I love the how, typically, the personal responsibility of the lawbreakers in this case, the vandals, gets tossed out the window by one of the resident ultra conservative BCs. A.k.a., it was wrong of the vandals, but it's not really their fault. The victim is at fault for "precipitating" the crime -- bringing it upon him/herself -- and therefore deserved it.
37 -
SFC SKI
Feb 11, 2005 at 6:32 pm
I never said these folks deserved it, I just made this point to emphasize why I am not surprised it did happened.
I stll don't condone it destruction.
My take on it is that if you make unpopular statements, you'd better be aware people will confront you about those statements. Of course, if they take the confrontation to an illegal level, they are wrong.
38 -
SFC SKI
Feb 12, 2005 at 12:04 am
Hours later, I realize the word "Confront" might be too strong a word. People who voice a controversial opinion, or in this case, present their displeasure in a way that the presentation overshadows the message should expect criticism, but when that criticism veers into illegal or unlawful means, as it did in this case, that is wronge.
39 -
Matt Gerring
Feb 12, 2005 at 4:21 pm
The headline of this one kinda bugged me- "leftists mock dead soldiers."
I saw the prostest, and there was no mockery. It was a statement- soldiers are dead, and tax dollars are facilitating it. The image of the empty uniform wasn't mockery, it was supposed to make people outraged at the death of the soldier. How is this mockery?
If the soldier had been called a baby killer, or if there had even been the sparest mention of the soldier being at fault, then it would be mockery, but both were absent. This is not mockery, it's objective fact, presented in artistic form.
40 -
HW Saxton
Feb 12, 2005 at 6:11 pm
The brushes with which some people paint
others with are much too broad.I know of
many friends who are staunch Republicans
that do not support the war and I also
know Democrats that have an aversion to
much of Bush's present policy that will
defend the war tirelessly. The tired old
adage "Never assume anything,it makes an
ass of U and Me" could not be any more
applicable when it comes to phrasing in
regards to post such as these.
I thought 'victim precipitation' was when it started raining victims like cats and dogs.
Dave
42 -
Sydney
Feb 12, 2005 at 7:15 pm
SFCSki says; "Shame on you, our boys are dying over there and the least we can do is show some support."
Protesting the war by reminding the public that lives are being lost is a SUPPORT of the soldiers if anything. How do you twist this around to being an attack on soldiers. On the contrary, it is a call to wise up and quit using human life as a means to a political ends.
SfcSki says; "Since when is being anti-American is ok?"
Why is it "Anti-American" to oppose war? ...to oppose the death of your own citizens and the citizens of Iraq? Quit twisting shit around and making senseless, empty, arguments. Really THink before you repeat that garbage. In effect, what your doing is creating a climate in America where you can't oppose the views of the government. IF you do, your "Anti-American".
In fact, "anti-american" labels are just a convienient way of ignoring the issue and discussing it on its own merits. It's a way of excluding that person from the political discourse by suggesting that he hasn't America's interests in mind. Its cheap, and its ignorant.
I think its damn depressing to see how many people have slipt into this view that "your either with us or against us". It means that George bush's grade school rhetoric is falling on ears that haven't the critical skills to see thru it. It's an insult to reduce this political discourse to being "with us or against us". Why arn't you outraged!
When you decide to make your home a public forum for debate, be prepared for the debate. Is it any more shocking than the visuals of dead marines being hung over a bridge last year? If Steve and Virgina Pearcy spent their money and took out a full size bill board to express their opinion would that also be surpressed? I probably do not agree with their politics, but I do agree with their right to express their opinion. I just would challange their judgement concerning the medium chosen and whether "damaging the environment" for the rest of their community is the right way to express themselves. When you light a fuse to a stick of dynamite, expect the eventual explosion. They will have to deal with it. They choose it.
I noticed the site's filled with all sorts of examples of self destructive behaviors recently. A sign of the times ?
Steve and Virginia Pearcy have made a public display on their Sacramento home at Marty Way, CA 85118. Their phone number is also publicly listed as 67.111.95.37 (Temple ed. Quit fucking around sweet - we aren't going to be posting people's phone numbers).
They have used their home to make a public comment. Therefore, it is legal to post their address, which has been clearly identified by television news reports. Please respond and let them know they are wrong.
SFC Ski, I'm sorry. Those quotes I copy and pasted belonged to SFCa.
Sweet,
I wonder if sweet, SFCa, and Rj are offended by the sight of a uniform in a noose or if they are just offended by ideas that differ from their own. Because, in my opinion, RJ et al. should recognize that this family surely has noble or at least respectable intentions (to put and end to the killing). What does this image mean for Rj? And what does it mean to the protesting family?
The disagreement then, is over which manner of protesting is offensive. Well, to me, once you acknowledge that this family is obviously not trying to offend military people, rather that they are supporting them, than why is it so offensive?
The negative associations that RJ and others have for the display, are the product of their own imagination and are not representative of the protesting family's message or intentions. It would be like judging two ’nudes’, one of eve on the Sistine chapel, and the other of a porn star, and attributing the same meaning to both. In the case of this protester, the image is that of the ‘uniform in the noose‘, and the protesters have created a meaning that symbolizes peace and non-violence (and also outrage). If they are attributing a meaning that connotes violence, or anti-Americanism,?? Then surely they are totally missing the whole point of the demonstration.
If RJ and others find it offensive I think they need to really track the semiotics of this image and justify why they feel it is so offensive.
dude - why did you even answer that dumb comment? Are you in competition with the lady to see who's better? Aaaaah funny. Sorry, it just is.
RJ - can you write some music and book reviews? I know you've likely done one or two for the site but let's see some more. Let's see that education put to greater use than the lowly art of politics. TV even.
"RJ - can you write some music and book reviews? I know you've likely done one or two for the site but let's see some more. Let's see that education put to greater use than the lowly art of politics. TV even."
The beauty of BC is that we can write what we want.
I have written book reviews. I have written movie reviews. I have done the sports thing, and the politics thing.
So, my next post will be...my next post. By my choice. And you ain't my editor.
Posting half-assed Drudge Reports - and then not admiting their inaccuracy does not inspire debate. It inspires less faith in your judgment.
This post DID sponsor debate, but it devolved into anger on both sides - as most politics does on the blogs. What did you learn? Anything that didn't support the beliefs you already hold?
I learned that what I saw as an illustration of terrorists hanging an American soldier some took to mean the protestors were hanging the soldier.
I wouldn't like that on my block either.
Sorry, RJ. I'm in a somewhat argumentative mode myself now. I get accurate - and ugly. I'll stop now.
qualifier on my above statement. What most people think of as political questions are really questions about culture. As was this post even though it was in the politics column.
63 -
Patrick
Feb 14, 2005 at 3:08 pm
CANDLELIGHT VIGIL IN FRONT OF THE PEARCY'S HOME
Tuesday, Feb. 15th from 7 to 10 PM
2732 Marty Way, Sacramento, CA 95818
Sponsored by moveamericaforward.org
64 -
Sydney
Feb 14, 2005 at 5:18 pm
Education means fuck all beyond the highschool point. A few years of university might help but really a moron is a moron, no matter how many books he reads. The difference is that the more he reads the more convinced he is that he/she is right.
Ah, you relieve my mind! BTW, I noticed Sydney's comment a few back, and it brought to mind the quote: "People talk about a self-educated man as if there were some other kind."
It's actually a meta-education that should happen in school - learning to learn. Sadly, most people put learning aside post-high-school, and retain only what little they use in day-to-day life, even if they went on to college or university.
70 -
Eric Olsen
Feb 15, 2005 at 10:42 am
and this is yet another reason why blogging is such a positive sign for the culture: "how can the laboring man find time for self-culture"? Blog
71 -
john smith
Feb 15, 2005 at 12:12 pm
I live in the area where the pearcy's did this, I think it's horrible...
It's sad people with their political belief's can't accept that the majority of americans don't want what the left is selling. Put up all the signs of protest you want to, it's your right but don't cry on camera when someone decides to take it down, again the "majority" of the community thinks it's offensive. By the way, I think it's funny that Virgina Pearcy crys on camera about how important the second amendment is, yet I find it odd that the second amendment is open to interpretation by people like them.
72 -
JR
Feb 15, 2005 at 12:36 pm
The best debates are political.
That sounds like a matter of taste. One could easily argue that the most contentious debates aren'tpolitical.
It's sad people with their political belief's can't accept that the majority of americans don't want what the left is selling.
It's more sad that some Americans think that it's okay to curb someone else's freedom of speech if they don't like what's being said.
Put up all the signs of protest you want to, it's your right but don't cry on camera when someone decides to take it down, again the "majority" of the community thinks it's offensive.
So, john smith, it's okay to trespass on private property and destroy someone else's property because the majority in the community don't like it? It's okay to break the law and to stifle someone else's free speech -- you know, one of those key freedoms our soldiers are supposedly fighting to protect here at home -- if you don't like the way they make their political statements?
What if you were a minority member of a community. Let's say you were a Christian living in a mostly Jewish neighborhood. Is it okay for your Jewish neighbors to destroy your "Jesus is the Messiah" Christmas display because they find it offensive?
Don't cry if you find baby Jesus tossed in the street, okay john?
huh? So it's all about whether you have to share your money with the rest of America or not? Wow, it's really all about you isn't it? Well, that does put things like the sacrifices of soldiers, the welfare of your fellow Americans, the ideas of justice and liberty in their proper perspectives doesn't it?
It's all about the taxes? I hope perhaps one day you might form a conscience... Good luck on your journey through life with Money as your guiding principle..
BTP, money is the one quantifiable measure of success there is in the world. The desire to acquire it through hard work is what drives our society, creates jobs, grows the economy, and makes it possible for the government to tax us and get enough money from those taxes to do its good works. Without the desire to earn and produce all the rest of society falls by the wayside. So is it all about money, yes. And for the individual it's all about how much they keep. The government should take enough to do the vital elements of its job and no more, because every cent left in the hands of individuals does more to improve and advance the nation as a whole than it could ever do in the hands of government.
And I do want to share my money with the rest of America. I want to share it by spending it to buy things so that people can have jobs in retail and in distribution and in manufacturing and in advertising, and so that they can take the money they earn from the money which I and others spend and in turn spend it on things they want and need so that I can also make a living. It's how the economy works. Money makes the world go round - and believe it or not, it's a good thing.
Article comments
— go to most recent comments26 - SFC SKI
"If you oppose the war in Iraq, fine... [why] use the uniform of a brave American soldier and "lynch" it?"
In this case, the message is definitely overshadowed by the medium used to convey it. I don't agree with the folks who tore the display down, but what did these folks expect, especially in a town that has a lot of military personnel originating from it?
27 - bhw
I posted something along these lines before the crash today:
I don't agree with the folks who tore the display down, but what did these folks expect, especially in a town that has a lot of military personnel originating from it?
And there we go: blame the victim.
What was she doing out jogging at night?
What did she expect if she was wearing *that*?
Maybe it's a woman thing, but whenever I hear the words, "What did he/she/they expect?" I get the creeps.
I think that there is no form of speech on someone's private property that would fall into crossing the line of deserving some sort of vandalism as payback. It's your property and you should be able to be as outrageous as you want without other people using that as justification for vandalism.
The homeowners in this case should have expected that some people -- maybe even most people who drove by -- would be upset by the display [I'm not sure why because it wasn't an attack on the military personnel, but on the people who send them overseas to fight], but they should never *expect* that it will lead to vandalism or worse. Sorry, that's just backwards.
And if it *is* a military town, then I'd love to know if a person in uniform was the vandal. If so, then that person has done more to sully the military uniform than the homeowner did.
28 - RJ
BHW:
Have you ever heard of "victim precipitation"?
No? Look it up...
29 - RJ
Here's a thought:
Try going into inner-city Detroit wearing a Klan outfit. I mean, free speech, right? You would certainly have the Constitutional right to do so.
But you'd get your ass kicked in about 10 minutes. Probably robbed. Possibly killed.
Doesn't mean it's RIGHT to have attacked you, but it could be reasonably expected.
Like I said, victim precipitation...
30 - Temple Stark
Here's a thought:
Try going into a gated-neighborhood black, with an afro. I mean, free speech, right? You would certainly have the Constitutional right to do so.
But you'd get your ass kicked in about 10 minutes. Probably robbed. Possibly killed.
Doesn't mean it's RIGHT to have attacked you, but it could be reasonably expected.
Like I said, victim precipitation...
31 - bhw
lol, Temple....
Victim precipitation, RJ, is the same thing as blaming the victim. The clothes she wore, the color of his skin, the "look" he gave the white woman, etc. -- it's all the "what did you expect" defense of criminal behavior.
32 - RJ
TS:
You honestly believe a black dude would get attacked and robbed and maybe killed simply for being in a "gated community"?
What planet are YOU on?
33 - RJ
"Victim precipitation, RJ, is the same thing as blaming the victim."
No, it's not. Try taking a CJ course some time...
34 - Joe
I think in the gated community you'd probably get escorted out by security or perhaps get a gardner or cabana boy sicced on you, but I think the chances of getting your ass kicked and beyond are pretty slim.
Unless you're a total wuss...
35 - Temple Stark
Didn't say the comparison was perfect. Just trying to make a point to see what comes out the other end.
RJ: >>Try taking a CJ course some time...
I suppose you've been told often that you sound very condescending, right?
Yeah - you'd have to be a wuss to get beaten up in a gated-community. Um, I guess cause they're all weaklings and not big and black and dangerous ????????
36 - bhw
It's the same thing, college boy. The victim bascially gets blamed for playing a role in the crime perpetrated against him/her. You know, wearing a short skirt and all that.
I love the how, typically, the personal responsibility of the lawbreakers in this case, the vandals, gets tossed out the window by one of the resident ultra conservative BCs. A.k.a., it was wrong of the vandals, but it's not really their fault. The victim is at fault for "precipitating" the crime -- bringing it upon him/herself -- and therefore deserved it.
37 - SFC SKI
I never said these folks deserved it, I just made this point to emphasize why I am not surprised it did happened.
I stll don't condone it destruction.
My take on it is that if you make unpopular statements, you'd better be aware people will confront you about those statements. Of course, if they take the confrontation to an illegal level, they are wrong.
38 - SFC SKI
Hours later, I realize the word "Confront" might be too strong a word. People who voice a controversial opinion, or in this case, present their displeasure in a way that the presentation overshadows the message should expect criticism, but when that criticism veers into illegal or unlawful means, as it did in this case, that is wronge.
39 - Matt Gerring
The headline of this one kinda bugged me- "leftists mock dead soldiers."
I saw the prostest, and there was no mockery. It was a statement- soldiers are dead, and tax dollars are facilitating it. The image of the empty uniform wasn't mockery, it was supposed to make people outraged at the death of the soldier. How is this mockery?
If the soldier had been called a baby killer, or if there had even been the sparest mention of the soldier being at fault, then it would be mockery, but both were absent. This is not mockery, it's objective fact, presented in artistic form.
40 - HW Saxton
The brushes with which some people paint
others with are much too broad.I know of
many friends who are staunch Republicans
that do not support the war and I also
know Democrats that have an aversion to
much of Bush's present policy that will
defend the war tirelessly. The tired old
adage "Never assume anything,it makes an
ass of U and Me" could not be any more
applicable when it comes to phrasing in
regards to post such as these.
41 - Dave Nalle
I thought 'victim precipitation' was when it started raining victims like cats and dogs.
Dave
42 - Sydney
SFCSki says; "Shame on you, our boys are dying over there and the least we can do is show some support."
Protesting the war by reminding the public that lives are being lost is a SUPPORT of the soldiers if anything. How do you twist this around to being an attack on soldiers. On the contrary, it is a call to wise up and quit using human life as a means to a political ends.
SfcSki says; "Since when is being anti-American is ok?"
Why is it "Anti-American" to oppose war? ...to oppose the death of your own citizens and the citizens of Iraq? Quit twisting shit around and making senseless, empty, arguments. Really THink before you repeat that garbage. In effect, what your doing is creating a climate in America where you can't oppose the views of the government. IF you do, your "Anti-American".
In fact, "anti-american" labels are just a convienient way of ignoring the issue and discussing it on its own merits. It's a way of excluding that person from the political discourse by suggesting that he hasn't America's interests in mind. Its cheap, and its ignorant.
I think its damn depressing to see how many people have slipt into this view that "your either with us or against us". It means that George bush's grade school rhetoric is falling on ears that haven't the critical skills to see thru it. It's an insult to reduce this political discourse to being "with us or against us". Why arn't you outraged!
43 - Dave Nalle
>>Why arn't you outraged!<<
I thnk he is, Sydney.
Dave
44 - Z.Z.Bachman
When you decide to make your home a public forum for debate, be prepared for the debate. Is it any more shocking than the visuals of dead marines being hung over a bridge last year? If Steve and Virgina Pearcy spent their money and took out a full size bill board to express their opinion would that also be surpressed? I probably do not agree with their politics, but I do agree with their right to express their opinion. I just would challange their judgement concerning the medium chosen and whether "damaging the environment" for the rest of their community is the right way to express themselves. When you light a fuse to a stick of dynamite, expect the eventual explosion. They will have to deal with it. They choose it.
I noticed the site's filled with all sorts of examples of self destructive behaviors recently. A sign of the times ?
45 - bhw
Yet another person excusing the vandals' behavior as something to be expected.
Great country we live in: publicize your political opinion on your own private property, and *expect* to have it vandalized. That's the American Way.
46 - SFC SKI
Sydney, I did not say either of the things you haved attributed to me.
47 - sweet
Have you seen this soldier’s uniform hung by a noose?
http://www.thekcrachannel.com/news/4184282/detail.html
Steve and Virginia Pearcy have made a public display on their Sacramento home at Marty Way, CA 85118. Their phone number is also publicly listed as 67.111.95.37 (Temple ed. Quit fucking around sweet - we aren't going to be posting people's phone numbers).
They have used their home to make a public comment. Therefore, it is legal to post their address, which has been clearly identified by television news reports. Please respond and let them know they are wrong.
Who are they?
48 - Temple Stark
>> noticed the site's filled with all sorts of examples of self destructive behaviors recently. A sign of the times ?
A sign of what attracts a blogger most. Negative media my ass ;-)
49 - bhw
What's your point, sweet? Seems like a good story: a girl raised in the welfare system pulls herself up by her bootstraps. Sounds like success to me.
50 - Temple Stark
And your understanding of cause and legality is flawed sweet.
bhw - not to mention she seemed a smartypants college at 14?
51 - bhw
No kidding!
I bet she took more college courses than RJ.
52 - Sydney
SFC Ski, I'm sorry. Those quotes I copy and pasted belonged to SFCa.
Sweet,
I wonder if sweet, SFCa, and Rj are offended by the sight of a uniform in a noose or if they are just offended by ideas that differ from their own. Because, in my opinion, RJ et al. should recognize that this family surely has noble or at least respectable intentions (to put and end to the killing). What does this image mean for Rj? And what does it mean to the protesting family?
The disagreement then, is over which manner of protesting is offensive. Well, to me, once you acknowledge that this family is obviously not trying to offend military people, rather that they are supporting them, than why is it so offensive?
The negative associations that RJ and others have for the display, are the product of their own imagination and are not representative of the protesting family's message or intentions. It would be like judging two ’nudes’, one of eve on the Sistine chapel, and the other of a porn star, and attributing the same meaning to both. In the case of this protester, the image is that of the ‘uniform in the noose‘, and the protesters have created a meaning that symbolizes peace and non-violence (and also outrage). If they are attributing a meaning that connotes violence, or anti-Americanism,?? Then surely they are totally missing the whole point of the demonstration.
If RJ and others find it offensive I think they need to really track the semiotics of this image and justify why they feel it is so offensive.
53 - RJ
Sooo...
Lynching a US GI's uniform over a roof is all about "peace" and is pro-US military?
Interesting...
(What's even more interesting is that most US military personnel in Iraq voted to re-elect Bush...)
54 - RJ
"I bet she took more college courses than RJ."
Unless she has a graduate degree, that would be unlikely...
55 - bhw
As of 1996, according to the article, she had completed a bachelor's degree in math and was in law school.
56 - Temple Stark
dude - why did you even answer that dumb comment? Are you in competition with the lady to see who's better? Aaaaah funny. Sorry, it just is.
RJ - can you write some music and book reviews? I know you've likely done one or two for the site but let's see some more. Let's see that education put to greater use than the lowly art of politics. TV even.
57 - RJ
"RJ - can you write some music and book reviews? I know you've likely done one or two for the site but let's see some more. Let's see that education put to greater use than the lowly art of politics. TV even."
The beauty of BC is that we can write what we want.
I have written book reviews. I have written movie reviews. I have done the sports thing, and the politics thing.
So, my next post will be...my next post. By my choice. And you ain't my editor.
TYVM... :)
58 - RJ
Oh, I've done music reviews too. And music news. And...
Etc.
Why bitch about my politics posts? Because you disagree?
59 - Temple Stark
I am if you write book and music reviews - LOL.
OK. Whatever. I'm just saying, you must aspire to more than just getting an argumentative reaction. Maybe not.
60 - RJ
One of my goals at BC.org is to inspire debate.
The best debates are political.
QED...
61 - Temple Stark
... and ultimately the most meaningless. QED ...
Posting half-assed Drudge Reports - and then not admiting their inaccuracy does not inspire debate. It inspires less faith in your judgment.
This post DID sponsor debate, but it devolved into anger on both sides - as most politics does on the blogs. What did you learn? Anything that didn't support the beliefs you already hold?
I learned that what I saw as an illustration of terrorists hanging an American soldier some took to mean the protestors were hanging the soldier.
I wouldn't like that on my block either.
Sorry, RJ. I'm in a somewhat argumentative mode myself now. I get accurate - and ugly. I'll stop now.
62 - Temple Stark
qualifier on my above statement. What most people think of as political questions are really questions about culture. As was this post even though it was in the politics column.
63 - Patrick
CANDLELIGHT VIGIL IN FRONT OF THE PEARCY'S HOME
Tuesday, Feb. 15th from 7 to 10 PM
2732 Marty Way, Sacramento, CA 95818
Sponsored by moveamericaforward.org
64 - Sydney
Education means fuck all beyond the highschool point. A few years of university might help but really a moron is a moron, no matter how many books he reads. The difference is that the more he reads the more convinced he is that he/she is right.
Thats the sad truth of it all...
65 - Temple Stark
So would it be de classe of me to point out high school is two words?
Just joking of course.
- Temple "Typo" Stark
66 - RJ
BUSCH IZ HITLUR!
67 - DrPat
Sigh.
RJ, I hope you meant that last in a satirical way. As political commentary, it fails to meet a minimum requirement of coherence and relevance.
68 - RJ
It was a parody of Leftists...
69 - DrPat
Ah, you relieve my mind! BTW, I noticed Sydney's comment a few back, and it brought to mind the quote: "People talk about a self-educated man as if there were some other kind."
It's actually a meta-education that should happen in school - learning to learn. Sadly, most people put learning aside post-high-school, and retain only what little they use in day-to-day life, even if they went on to college or university.
70 - Eric Olsen
and this is yet another reason why blogging is such a positive sign for the culture: "how can the laboring man find time for self-culture"? Blog
71 - john smith
I live in the area where the pearcy's did this, I think it's horrible...
It's sad people with their political belief's can't accept that the majority of americans don't want what the left is selling. Put up all the signs of protest you want to, it's your right but don't cry on camera when someone decides to take it down, again the "majority" of the community thinks it's offensive. By the way, I think it's funny that Virgina Pearcy crys on camera about how important the second amendment is, yet I find it odd that the second amendment is open to interpretation by people like them.
72 - JR
The best debates are political.
That sounds like a matter of taste. One could easily argue that the most contentious debates aren't political.
73 - bhw
It's sad people with their political belief's can't accept that the majority of americans don't want what the left is selling.
It's more sad that some Americans think that it's okay to curb someone else's freedom of speech if they don't like what's being said.
Put up all the signs of protest you want to, it's your right but don't cry on camera when someone decides to take it down, again the "majority" of the community thinks it's offensive.
So, john smith, it's okay to trespass on private property and destroy someone else's property because the majority in the community don't like it? It's okay to break the law and to stifle someone else's free speech -- you know, one of those key freedoms our soldiers are supposedly fighting to protect here at home -- if you don't like the way they make their political statements?
What if you were a minority member of a community. Let's say you were a Christian living in a mostly Jewish neighborhood. Is it okay for your Jewish neighbors to destroy your "Jesus is the Messiah" Christmas display because they find it offensive?
Don't cry if you find baby Jesus tossed in the street, okay john?
74 - Big Time Patriot
"IMO it's still all about taxes" ?
huh? So it's all about whether you have to share your money with the rest of America or not? Wow, it's really all about you isn't it? Well, that does put things like the sacrifices of soldiers, the welfare of your fellow Americans, the ideas of justice and liberty in their proper perspectives doesn't it?
It's all about the taxes? I hope perhaps one day you might form a conscience... Good luck on your journey through life with Money as your guiding principle..
75 - Dave Nalle
BTP, money is the one quantifiable measure of success there is in the world. The desire to acquire it through hard work is what drives our society, creates jobs, grows the economy, and makes it possible for the government to tax us and get enough money from those taxes to do its good works. Without the desire to earn and produce all the rest of society falls by the wayside. So is it all about money, yes. And for the individual it's all about how much they keep. The government should take enough to do the vital elements of its job and no more, because every cent left in the hands of individuals does more to improve and advance the nation as a whole than it could ever do in the hands of government.
And I do want to share my money with the rest of America. I want to share it by spending it to buy things so that people can have jobs in retail and in distribution and in manufacturing and in advertising, and so that they can take the money they earn from the money which I and others spend and in turn spend it on things they want and need so that I can also make a living. It's how the economy works. Money makes the world go round - and believe it or not, it's a good thing.
Dave