Ah Democrat values at work

[dude1394]

Now that the congress is led by the morals and values of the people of San Francisco, maybe we can finally get rid of those war-mongers one and for all.

You go girl.

SAN FRANCISCO — High schools across the city soon will no longer have Junior Reserve Officers'Training Corps programs after officials decided to eliminate them because of the Pentagon's"don't ask, don't tell"policy regarding gay service members.

The Board of Education voted 4-2 late Tuesday to phase out the JROTC from schools over the next two years, despite protest from hundreds of students who rallied outside the meeting.

The resolution passed says the military's ban on openly gay soldiers violates the school district's equal rights policy for gays.

The school district and the military currently share the $1.6 million annual cost of the program. About 1,600 San Francisco students participate in JROTC at seven high schools across the district.

Cadets and instructors who spoke at the meeting and rallied outside argued that the program teaches leadership, organizational skills, personal responsibility and other important values.

[kg_veteran]

Pathetic.

[Drbio]

Oh good grief......

[dude1394]

More from the Democrat leaders hometown.
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/art..._up_after.html

WASHINGTON -- There should be two Supreme Courts, one to reverse the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, the other to hear all other cases. Last term, more of the Supreme Court's caseload -- 18 of 82 cases (22 percent) -- came from the liberal 9th Circuit, based in San Francisco, than from any other circuit, and the 9th was reversed in 15 of the 18. The 9th's winning percentage (.167) was worse than that of the 1962 Mets (.250). On Monday, in the first decision of this term, the Supreme Court reversed the 9th's fretfulness on behalf of Fernando Belmontes.

In order, as he explained to one of his accomplices, to "take out a witness,'' Belmontes used perhaps 20 blows with a metal dumbbell bar to bludgeon to death Steacy McConnell, whose home he had entered for a burglary. He emerged drenched with her blood and carrying her stereo that he sold for $100. She was 19. Belmontes killed her 25 years ago.

How did capital punishment jurisprudence reach its current baroque condition, in which cases live longer than did the murder victims? At the hands of judges such as Stephen Reinhardt, a residue of Jimmy Carter's presidency, who says Belmontes' "robbery gone wrong'' lacked "especially heinous elements.''
......
Reinhardt, writing for the 9th's divided three-judge panel, overturned Belmontes' death sentence because the trial judge "failed to instruct the jury that it was required to consider'' what Reinhardt considered Belmonte's "principal mitigation evidence'' -- his aptitude for prison life. On Monday, the Supreme Court ruled 5-4 against the 9th.

[dude1394]

I'm not sure if even Mark Twain could have imagined the idiocy of democrats.

JEFF JACOBY
Antimilitary bigotry

By Jeff Jacoby, Globe Columnist | November 19, 2006

"IN THE FIRST place God made idiots," observed Mark Twain. "This was for practice. Then he made school boards." The San Francisco Board of Education's 4-2 vote last week to abolish the Junior Reserve Officers' Training Corps program, which has been active in the city's high schools for 90 years, tends to support his view.

Why is JROTC being done away with? It isn't for lack of interest. More than 1,600 San Francisco students currently take part in its voluntary activities. "Kids love this program as if it's family," notes the San Francisco Chronicle. It is "a program that students and their parents wholeheartedly support."

Finances aren't the problem either. Operating JROTC costs the city less than $1 million out of an annual school budget of $356 million.

Nor is the problem bad management. The Chronicle reports that "no one has offered an alternative as coherent and well-run as JROTC."

Safety? Also not a problem. Though cadets have uniforms, they carry no weapons; the nonviolent programs emphasize leadership, self-discipline, citizenship, and teamwork. "This is where the kids feel safe," says one JROTC instructor, retired Army Lieutenant Colonel Robert Powell.

And the problem certainly isn't an absence of diversity. In a story on JROTC cadets at Galileo High School, Chronicle reporter Jill Tucker writes: "These students are 4-foot-10 to 6-foot-4. Athletic and disabled. College-bound and barely graduating. Gay and straight. White, black, and brown. Some leave school for large homes with ocean views. Others board buses for Bayview-Hunters Point." Several of the students come from immigrant families. At least one is autistic.

So what is the problem with JROTC? There isn't one. The problem is with the anti military bigotry of the school board majority and the "peace" activists who lobbied against the program on the grounds that San Francisco's schools should not be sullied by an association with the US armed forces.

"We don't want the military ruining our civilian institutions," said Sandra Schwartz of the American Friends Service Committee, a far-left pacifist organization that routinely condemns American foreign policy and opposes JROTC nationwide. "In a healthy democracy . . . you contain the military." Board member Dan Kelly, who voted with the majority, called JROTC "basically a branding program or a recruiting program for the military." In fact, it is nothing of the kind: The great majority of cadets do not end up serving in the military.

But then, facts tend not to matter to smug ideologues like Schwartz and Kelly, who are free to parade their contempt for the military because they live in a nation that affords such freedom even to idiots and ingrates. It never seems to occur to them that the liberties and security they take for granted would vanish in a heartbeat if it weren't for the young men and women who do choose to wear the uniform, willingly risking life and limb in service to their country.

According to The Chronicle, scores of JROTC students were on hand when the school board met last week; many of them burst into tears after the vote. Sad to say, they should probably have seen this coming. For in its trendy anti military animus, the school board was hardly breaking new ground.

In 1995, San Francisco's board of supervisors wiped the city's famous Army Street from the map, renaming it Cesar Chavez Street. Last year, city supervisors refused to allow the retired USS Iowa, a historic World War II battleship, to be docked in the Port of San Francisco. Like the school board vote, the spurning of the Iowa was intended as a slap at the US military and the foreign policy it supports. Supervisor Chris Daly explained his vote against accepting the battleship by announcing: "I am not proud of the history of the United States of America since the 1940s."

In 2005, San Francisco voters handily approved Measure I, a nonbinding ballot question dubbed "College Not Combat," which called for the exclusion of military recruiters from public high schools and colleges. The prevailing political attitude was summed up in a Weekly Standard headline: "San Francisco to Army: Drop Dead."

Not everyone feels that way. To his credit, Mayor Gavin Newsom excoriated the school board last week for "disrespecting the sacrifice of men and women in uniform" and warned that killing JROTC would only accelerate the flight of city residents from the public schools. "You think this is going to help keep families in San Francisco?" he asked. "No. It's going to hurt."

Going to? For 1,600 kids now faced with the death of a program that infused their lives with purpose, camaraderie, and self-respect, the hurt has already begun.

[kg_veteran]

"I am not proud of the history of the United States of America since the 1940s."

That's interesting. Since the 1940's, we have seen an end to segregation, the passage of the Equal Rights Amendment, and many other civil rights achievements.

Not surprising that this moron wouldn't be proud of that.

Having said that, those that spit on our military display the worst form of ingratitude. Our military is fundamental to protecting their right to moan and complain. In other countries, they would be quietly tortured and executed for such criticisms.

God Bless America.

[Drbio]

Those poor kids. God bless them too.

[dude1394]

[supamari0]

Wait a minute, the logic of the above statements is just impeccable.

So you're holding Nancy Pelosi accountable for something the local san francisco school board did and then by extension you're holding the democratic party accountable for something that happened in Pelosi's district.

Good grief, so I guess since Mark Foley was a sexual predator, Republicans must be ok with pedophilia.

I agree what the school board did was stupid, but the logical extension of this to the democratic party is just as ridiculous.

[dude1394]

No just pointing out the politics of the democratic leadership of the house. You know, third from the president and all that.

For example I'm not comparing Murtha's shady dealings to the democrats as a whole, nor the other shady dealings of the democrat membership, just the leadership.

I don't recall Mark Foley being republican leader...did I miss something?

[Mavdog]

Originally Posted by dude1394

No just pointing out the politics of the democratic leadership of the house. You know, third from the president and all that.

For example I'm not comparing Murtha's shady dealings to the democrats as a whole, nor the other shady dealings of the democrat membership, just the leadership.

I don't recall Mark Foley being republican leader...did I miss something?

no, that is not accurate at all.

you are posting the politics of people in the CA bay area and then, by manner of being in the same geographic area as pelosi, ascribing those politics to pelosi. we don't even know what party the people opposing jrotc are...

where is a quote from pelosi, or from ANY of the dem leadership, that speaks to the jrotc issue?

supermari0 is correct.

[kg_veteran]

Originally Posted by Mavdog

supermari0 is correct.

About what?

The first person to mention Pelosi in this thread was -- you guessed it -- supermari0.

Talk about setting up a straw man.

[Mavdog]

Originally Posted by kg_veteran

About what?

The first person to mention Pelosi in this thread was -- you guessed it -- supermari0.

Talk about setting up a straw man.

I suppose that innuendo doesn't apply?

from the very first post on this thread of "AH Democrat values at work"

hmm, what democrat you ask as the article mentions NOTHING about a democrat?

let's see...

Now that the congress is led by the morals and values of the people of San Francisco, maybe we can finally get rid of those war-mongers one and for all.

You go girl

so, who is the "girl" who "led congress? the post is referencing?

it must be, yes it is, ms. pelosi.

no "straw man" (or woman) in this discussion.

[kg_veteran]

Originally Posted by Mavdog

I suppose that innuendo doesn't apply?

from the very first post on this thread of "AH Democrat values at work"

hmm, what democrat you ask as the article mentions NOTHING about a democrat?

let's see...


so, who is the "girl" who "led congress? the post is referencing?

it must be, yes it is, ms. pelosi.

no "straw man" (or woman) in this discussion.

Fair point. I missed that comment.

I wonder if Pelosi's constituents will be happy with her if she tries to "govern from the middle"?

[Mavdog]

I'm not an expert in CA politics, but it seems a fair assumption that her constituents would be mostly in the middle politically. she has more far left and fewer on the right than the nation as a whole typically has, but the middle is where most people, and that includes the "left coast" imho.

[kg_veteran]

Originally Posted by Mavdog

I'm not an expert in CA politics, but it seems a fair assumption that her constituents would be mostly in the middle politically. she has more far left and fewer on the right than the nation as a whole typically has, but the middle is where most people, and that includes the "left coast" imho.

I have a friend who lives in San Jose, and his take is that San Francisco is pretty liberal all the way around.

I disagree with the notion that the middle is where most people are politically, unless your definition of middle is different than mine.

[Mavdog]

Originally Posted by kg_veteran

I have a friend who lives in San Jose, and his take is that San Francisco is pretty liberal all the way around.

I disagree with the notion that the middle is where most people are politically, unless your definition of middle is different than mine.

clearly the phrase "middle" conjures different things to different people depending upon where their perspective begins...

for instance, a person who is on the far left sees the middle as left of center, while the person on the far right sees the midddle as right of center.

that being said, imho the majority of americans aren't extreme either way, and are in the middle on most issues.

do you disagree?

[Usually Lurkin]

right, banning a military organization is completely unrelated to the ideals of the Democratic party.

[Mavdog]

Originally Posted by Usually Lurkin

right, banning a military organization is completely unrelated to the ideals of the Democratic party.

it's not the military that's the problem to the board of education, it's the discrimination against homosexuals the board is objecting to.

so, if the miltary changed the "don't ask" policy to a "we don't care" policy the jrotc should be welcomed back on campus.

and standing up against discrimination IS an "ideal of the democratic party". it was the ideal of the republicans, too.

[Usually Lurkin]

Originally Posted by Mavdog

it's not the military that's the problem to the board of education, it's the discrimination against homosexuals the board is objecting to.

so, if the miltary changed the "don't ask" policy to a "we don't care" policy the jrotc should be welcomed back on campus.

and standing up against discrimination IS an "ideal of the democratic party". it was the ideal of the republicans, too.

The program had been around for 90 years. I think it's limiting effect on the gay community in San Francisco is pretty evident.

I found these paragraphs from the school board meeting minutes pretty telling:

During one particularly heated exchange, Commissioner Wynns accused the measure’s supporters of not really wanting to adopt a replacement program. She went on to propose an amendment that the district cut off all relationships with other groups that “discriminated,” including those who gave scholarships specifically to students of color — the “logical extreme” Wynns said, of eliminating JROTC because of its relationship with the military, which discriminates against gays and lesbians.

Kelly called the amendment insulting, saying it “confuses discrimination with affirmative action.”

confused, indeed.

These quotes from a SF Chronicle story are telling, as well:

Their position was summed up by a former teacher, Nancy Mancias, who said, "We need to teach a curriculum of peace."

..."We don't want the military ruining our civilian institutions," said Sandra Schwartz of the American Friends Service Committee, an organization actively opposing JROTC nationwide. "In a healthy democracy ... you contain the military. You must contain the military."

[Usually Lurkin]

Here's some more of the values that put the Democrats in power
Global orgasm for peace.

yeah, you read that right.

[supamari0]

Originally Posted by Usually Lurkin

The program had been around for 90 years. I think it's limiting effect on the gay community in San Francisco is pretty evident.

I found these paragraphs from the school board meeting minutes pretty telling:


confused, indeed.

These quotes from a SF Chronicle story are telling, as well:

And yet these still have nothing to do with the Democratic party. These are small interest groups in San Francisco that you are using a large leap in logic to connect with the Democratic party and their agenda.

This is just partisan nonsense. Also, the program hasn't been around for 90 years. Don't ask dont tell was instituted by the Clinton administration (Democratic administration?). Previously, the military had an outright prohibition on gays in the military.

I personally am not a fan of the military's DADT policy but I don't agree with banning ROTC from schools. However, this illogical leap of faith that somehow the Democrats embrace this or somehow this is a reflection of the Democratic party is just ridiculous.

Trent Lott said that Strom Thurmond (who supported segregation) should've been president years ago and that all of our problems today wouldn't have existed with Strom in power. I don't think its fair to extend that seemingly racist assertion to the entire Republican party. And what's worse is that the example you cite with ROTC is even more of a stretch than the Trent Lott example.

[dude1394]

a. Policy under discussion from San Francisco...
b. SanFrancisco constinutents elect Nancy Pelosi to represent their viewpoints.
c. Nancy Pelosi is speaker of the house.
d. Speaker of the House is elected by Democrat Representatives.

Sure it's partisan but too damn bad. Those are are the values of the leadership running the democrat party.

[dude1394]

Originally Posted by supamari0

Trent Lott said that Strom Thurmond (who supported segregation) should've been president years ago and that all of our problems today wouldn't have existed with Strom in power. I don't think its fair to extend that seemingly racist assertion to the entire Republican party. And what's worse is that the example you cite with ROTC is even more of a stretch than the Trent Lott example.

.

Actually imo Lott's comment was a purely accidentaly off-the-cup remark effecting NOTHING. Whereas the readicals that Nancy Pelosi represents (and that continue to vote her into office to represent their views) actually IS policy and hurts people.

Note as well that Lott was drummed out of the leadership, primarily by republicans. I don't expectd much comment from dems however.

[supamari0]

Originally Posted by dude1394

.

Actually imo Lott's comment was a purely accidentaly off-the-cup remark effecting NOTHING. Whereas the readicals that Nancy Pelosi represents (and that continue to vote her into office to represent their views) actually IS policy and hurts people.

Note as well that Lott was drummed out of the leadership, primarily by republicans. I don't expectd much comment from dems however.

Hahaha,

so Trent Lott's ACTUAL remarks about Strom Thurmond (in which he said he would have voted for him and that our problems today would not exist if Strom were president) were just accidental and don't mean anything but a decision by a local schoolboard and some statements by some local interest groups should be directly tied to Pelosi and the Democratic party.

Come on buddy.. let's try to stay objective.

[dude1394]

Originally Posted by supamari0

Hahaha,

so Trent Lott's ACTUAL remarks about Strom Thurmond (in which he said he would have voted for him and that our problems today would not exist if Strom were president) were just accidental and don't mean anything but a decision by a local schoolboard and some statements by some local interest groups should be directly tied to Pelosi and the Democratic party.

Come on buddy.. let's try to stay objective.

Does pelosi not represent the values of her constituents? Does Pelosi not lead the democrat party?

My point in bringing up lott was
a. He was removed from a leadership postions.
b. His comments had no policy impact whereas the democrat policy in san francisco did.

[supamari0]

Originally Posted by dude1394

Does pelosi not represent the values of her constituents? Does Pelosi not lead the democrat party?

My point in bringing up lott was
a. He was removed from a leadership postions.
b. His comments had no policy impact whereas the democrat policy in san francisco did.

In the last election, Arizona voted down a measure to ban gay marriage. Do John McCain and John Kyl support gay marriage since their constituents just shot down the proposal to ban it. Years ago, the state of Alaska decriminalized marijuana. (although they reversed it recently) Does that mean that Frank Murkowski and Ted Stevens supported legalizing pot?

This is just silly. Come on, you know better than this. Pelosi may represent her district but that doesn't mean she has to be held accountable for what a school board does. Besides, there's no evidence to even indicate that a majority of people in her district supported this move, just that a school board unilaterally did this. And the Democratic party has a diverse make up of some more liberal members and some more conservative members. (same with the Republican party) It is stupid to just say Democrats hate the military because a local school board in San Francisco kicked out the ROTC from high school.

There's a reason why political discourse in this country is so poisonous today and its because of illogical conclusions like this one that detract the debate from real issues so we can discuss what one local school board did.

[dude1394]

Originally Posted by supamari0

In the last election, Arizona voted down a measure to ban gay marriage. Do John McCain and John Kyl support gay marriage since their constituents just shot down the proposal to ban it. Years ago, the state of Alaska decriminalized marijuana. (although they reversed it recently) Does that mean that Frank Murkowski and Ted Stevens supported legalizing pot?

This is just silly. Come on, you know better than this. Pelosi may represent her district but that doesn't mean she has to be held accountable for what a school board does. Besides, there's no evidence to even indicate that a majority of people in her district supported this move, just that a school board unilaterally did this. And the Democratic party has a diverse make up of some more liberal members and some more conservative members. (same with the Republican party) It is stupid to just say Democrats hate the military because a local school board in San Francisco kicked out the ROTC from high school.

There's a reason why political discourse in this country is so poisonous today and its because of illogical conclusions like this one that detract the debate from real issues so we can discuss what one local school board did.

I find it tougher to compare state-wide elected senators to local congressional districts. You might make the case for alaska but the populace is too diverse it seems to draw much of a conclusion, like you can in a congressional district. Not to mention one as notroriously nutso as San Francisco.

You are correct that the rhetoric gets pretty horrific, but I think we just went through an election where the republicans were tarred and feathered for the ribald emails of a Florida congressman. I don't quite recall many democrats criticising that rhetoric. You can always take the high road but sooner or later you get your ass kicked by folks who don't.

[Usually Lurkin]

. . . and of course, more idiocy from the leadership of those loons in SF

Pelosi pushes for Murtha for House Majority Leader. Murtha was involved in a bribery scandal in the 80s.
Pelosi nominates judge Hastings to chair the House Intelligence Committee. Hasings was at one point impeached for taking bribes and for perjury. Pelosi herself had voted for impeachment.

I'm sure this idea of a clean house doesn't represent Democrats as a whole, either. It's just some local fringe group that is sitting at the head of congress.

[Mavdog]

pelosi has NOT selected hastings, that is a rumour at this point in time.

murtha was "involved" an abscam? he refused to accept the bribes offerred him.

a question however: if a person such as hastings, who was removed from the bench but subsequently elected to congress, has been put into the job of a legislator by their constituents should they be barred from serving on committees? should their constituents not have their elected representitives serve them?

surely the answer is yes.

[mcsluggo]

Originally Posted by dude1394

.

Actually imo Lott's comment was a purely accidentaly off-the-cup remark effecting NOTHING. Whereas the readicals that Nancy Pelosi represents (and that continue to vote her into office to represent their views) actually IS policy and hurts people.

Note as well that Lott was drummed out of the leadership, primarily by republicans. I don't expectd much comment from dems however.

Wow.

just. plain. wow.