Evolution issue tips board's balance / LJWorld.com

Archive for Wednesday, August 2, 2006

Election a moderate success

August 2, 2006

Darwin won.

Moderate Kansas State Board of Education candidates pulled off a victory Tuesday, gathering enough might to topple the board's 6-4 conservative majority.

Reader poll

A victory by incumbent Janet Waugh, a Democrat whose district includes parts of Lawrence, and wins by Republican moderates in two districts previously represented by conservatives left the tables turned heading into the Nov. 7 general election.

"If we change the board around, we'll be able to make decisions that we think are right for our students," Lawrence school board member Craig Grant said.

Grant had worked to defeat the conservatives who attracted international attention and ridicule for the state after adopting science standards critical of evolution.

Waugh held onto her seat in District 1, rebuffing a challenge from conservative Jesse Hall who, according to the last campaign finance report, had raised about three times more money. But Waugh collected 63 percent of the vote.

"Obviously money can't buy elections," she said. "I think the people of Kansas are tired of being the laughingstock not only of the nation but the world."

Wednesday, August 2, 2006: Lawrence school board member Craig Grant takes reader's questions

Not all the conservatives were defeated.

Conservative incumbent John Bacon held his seat in District 3, which includes parts of Johnson County. Bacon won by a slim margin, with 49 percent. Challengers Harry McDonald, Olathe, the former president of Kansas Citizens for Science, and David Oliphant, also of Olathe, split the remaining vote.

Bacon faces Democrat Don Weiss in the general election.

In the District 5 race to represent a large part of western Kansas, conservative incumbent Connie Morris trailed moderate challenger Sally Cauble who at midnight had 54 percent of the vote with 556 of 609 precincts reporting.

See how the voting went in select races

Conservative Ken Willard held his seat in District 7 by a wide margin. He faces Democrat Jack Wempe in November.

And with few votes still to be counted at midnight, moderate Jana Shaver appeared to be the favorite for the District 9 seat. Shaver ran against Brad Patzer, son-in-law of outgoing conservative board member Iris Van Meter. At press time, Shaver had 58 percent of the vote. The winner faces Democrat Kent Runyan in the general election.The five races have attracted national attention as both sides battled for control of the board.Many wanted a shake-up after the 6-4 conservative majority altered the state's science standards, rewriting the definition of science and adding criticism of evolution.

Proponents of Kansas' latest standards say they encourage open discussion.

"Students need to have an accurate assessment of the state of the facts in regard to Darwin's theory," said John West, a vice president for the Center for Science and Culture at the Seattle-based, anti-evolution Discovery Institute.

The conservative board majority changed the rules on sex education, requiring parental permission before students participate in classes, though districts including Lawrence opted not to change their ways.

And the conservative majority pressed the issue further, considering an "abstinence-until-marriage" approach to sex education.

It also filled the state's top education administrative seat with Bob Corkins - a conservative activist with no educational background who lobbied against increased school funding.

Election 2006 - Kansas races

More on the 2006 Elections in Kansas

The Associated Press contributed to this report.

Discussion

LJWorld.com doesn't necessarily condone the comments here, nor does it review every post.
Read our full policy. Also, read about banned accounts and harassing comments.

2 August 2006
at 5:12 a.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

oldgoof (Anonymous) says…

Good Bye Corkins. Don't let the door hit you…..
2 August 2006
at 5:21 a.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

xenophonschild (Anonymous) says…

And this is just the beginning. Wait a few months until the mid-terms in November, and then the big one in '08.

Say bye-bye, you neo-fascist twits.
2 August 2006
at 6:39 a.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

MWIV (Anonymous) says…

Good grief! If you guys act like that when you win, I would hate to see what you would have been like had your guys lost. Tone it down, for crying out loud. You are showing your intelligence, which doesn't appear to be at too high of a level.
2 August 2006
at 6:57 a.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

ASBESTOS (Anonymous) says…

WIllare and Bacon might not still hold on to their seats. Willard garnered less that 49% of the vote. THose that were Republicans were motivated to vote against him and will probably be supporting the Moderate D rather than pulling the lever for a wahcky R.

Same is true but to a lesser extend for Bacon, he may just squeak by. I see a 7-3 majority for our guys.
2 August 2006
at 7 a.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

lukay (Anonymous) says…

Thank God! This is a good thing for the people of Kansas, especially the children.
2 August 2006
at 7:26 a.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

satchel (Anonymous) says…

lukay, The children need more secularism.. Yes, survival of the fittest, not giving a crap about human beings.. We are just accidents, mistakes and although there are no higher beings than us on this earth, so what there is no chance of anything other than Darwin. Praise Darwin and let's bow down to him. That is what I want my kids to learn in a school. Please kids don't come up with any other theory what so ever!! Especially if God is involved some how.

Honestly, I knew this was going to happen, and it is o.k. with me because I didn't care when they tried to change the standards in the first place.. WHY? Because our kids aren't going to public so we don't have to worry about it. Our hope is that some day we will get vouchers.

We have to sacrifice the nice home and boat and car and fund your kids' school while paying for ours out of our pockets because people like you won't allow for vouchers either. We will support the liberal ideology taught in schools as well. It is not our choice. But that is o.k. with people like you.. You want all views 'tolerated' in school, including Islam, except Christianity.
I know because our kids went to public for one year, and came home saying all kinds of stuff like..”we need to make the earth happy”.. “vegetarians live longer than people who eat meat”.. They are just in elementary and the liberal indoctrination gets worse as they get older. THey couldn't even play tag for fear of hurting someone else or 'offending' someone they didn't include. That is a bunch of bunk and if you all want to continue to public school, go ahead.
2 August 2006
at 7:30 a.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

ASBESTOS (Anonymous) says…

Satchel you post made no sense whatsoever.

2 August 2006
at 7:38 a.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

prioress (Anonymous) says…

Satchel: “We have to sacrifice the nice home and boat and car and fund your kids' school while paying for ours out of our pockets because people like you won't allow for vouchers either.”
Interesting points. If, however, you make a choice like this you are on your own. Using public money to support religious schools is, arguably, unconstititional.
Good luck………….
2 August 2006
at 7:46 a.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

bmwjhawk (Anonymous) says…

<–—TWIT who is so relieved that Connie Morris and her backwoods, hillbilly, out-of-touch, out-of-reality, psycho-conservative crap won't affect the children of Kansas any longer. This IS a victory for Kansas and for normalcy. Congratulations to the western Kansans, long perceived as weirdos, for showing up at the polls to show the nation otherwise. Also, congratulations to the sane Kansans for keeping Eric Carter and Kay O'Conner out of positions of power. This is a good day, and it was only just the primary!

Let's hope that the sane voters don't get lax, like they have in the past, when our state isn't getting horrible publicity in two, four, or six years. That's when the psychos will strike again!
2 August 2006
at 7:49 a.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

44x15 (Anonymous) says…

so satchel, you are instead teaching your kids that we need to piss the earth off?

HEYO!
2 August 2006
at 8:09 a.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

The_Original_Bob (Anonymous) says…

I'm a western kansas weirdo and I say Yipppeeee!!!! Thank goodness. I was a little worried last night watching the returns but it looks all kinds of all right this morning.
2 August 2006
at 8:14 a.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

staff04 (Anonymous) says…

Can't help but giggle a little at the first line of this article!
2 August 2006
at 8:31 a.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

usaschools (Anonymous) says…

Corkins, do you want me to email you job listings? Maybe you could be a surgeon or a nuclear physicist? Perhaps an aerospace engineer? I know that you are as qualified for those jobs as you are for your present position. Then again, maybe the job of driving the little train at the mall will open up. One can only hope.
2 August 2006
at 8:59 a.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

badger (Anonymous) says…

I'm glad to see moderates returned in the primaries.

I think that the majority of politicians holding office should represent the more moderate views of their party, with a few examples of the extreme right and the extreme left in there to spark occasional discussion.
2 August 2006
at 8:59 a.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

weeslicket (Anonymous) says…

i certainly would enjoy less name calling. it really cheapens the language.

that being said, i am pleased that some change has taken place towards a more moderate position in our state. these officials are elected to serve the people of kansas. all the people. that's the covenant. a little more moderation from these leaders can help with that.

2 August 2006
at 9:12 a.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

Agnostick (Anonymous) says…

LOL! Okay, okay… howzabout this:

“Connie Morris… good riddance!”

Agnostick
agnostick@excite.com
2 August 2006
at 9:15 a.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

acg (Anonymous) says…

Yeah, agnostick, good riddance to bad, dumb rubbish. I was so glad to see the results this morning. I can relax a little bit knowing that I won't have to choke on their bible so much now.
2 August 2006
at 9:17 a.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

powershopper (Anonymous) says…

I cringe everytime I see her pic when I visit the kansasmorons.com web site. It is still hard for me to believe she was able to bamboozle her way onto the KSBOE. Or, rather, bamboozle the voters.
2 August 2006
at 9:19 a.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

Agnostick (Anonymous) says…

http://www.cnn.com/2006/politics/08/0…

http://chronicle.com/news/article/789…

http://www.hutchnews.com/news/regiona…

http://www.nytimes.com/2006/08/02/us/…

http://www.mercurynews.com/mld/mercur…

Agnostick
agnostick@excite.com
2 August 2006
at 9:20 a.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

LarryFarma (Anonymous) says…

Could the losing anti-Darwinist candidates run as independents or write-in candidates in the general elections in Novermber? Just wondering. If they do, they could win at least a plurality because the Darwinist vote would be split between the other two candidates.

Other states should make their own independent decisions about the evolution controversy and not take a “monkey see, monkey do” attitude towards what Kansas does on the issue.

I am still wondering why we have not heard more from those who are most affected — the public-school students themselves. If I were a public-school student, I would certainly want to learn the weaknesses as well as the strengths of Darwinism.
2 August 2006
at 9:21 a.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

staff04 (Anonymous) says…

“i certainly would enjoy less name calling. it really cheapens the language.”

Moderates and liberals alike have endured such names as “libtard, scumbag, anti-American, dummiecrats, dumbass, nitwit, anti-semite, vile, rude, and moonbat.” They have been accused of being sexually immoral, drug users and murderers, and that is just this week.

I think they are going pretty easy, considering…
2 August 2006
at 9:30 a.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

75x55 (Anonymous) says…

Chuckle - wait a while. It'll all come around again - this is one of those 'insolvable' situations that won't be tossed aside by a single election. So, pull up a chair and favorite beverage and enjoy the show.
2 August 2006
at 9:31 a.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

powershopper (Anonymous) says…

Agnostik - You beat me to the punch. I have been reading about this on national news sites since early this morning. Though Connie Morris probably is excited that her name was mentioned on fauxnews…errrr, I mean foxnews.

At least “The Daily Show”, or other pundits, won't have cause to make fun of Kansas any more.

2 August 2006
at 9:51 a.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

Agnostick (Anonymous) says…

75x55 (care to explain that handle, please? ), you may or may not be right. I'm reminded of the old adage, “Screw me once, shame on you; screw me twice, shame on me.” Conservative extremists first wormed their way onto the KBOE in the late '90s… made Kansas a joke at the national level… and were quickly voted out. Lather, rinse, repeat, and here we are again.

I didn't have a dog to hunt in this round of KBOE elections, but I will in a couple of years, when Kathy Martin's term ends. She's the one who recently proposed an “opt-in” policy for sex education, as well as proposing an “abstinence-only” policy for sex education…

http://www2.ljworld.com/news/2006/mar…

Hopefully, Mrs. Martin will have a lot more time to focus on her Sunday School classes, starting in early 2009!

Agnostick
agnostick@excite.com
2 August 2006
at 9:54 a.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

rhd99 (Anonymous) says…

Hey, CORKY, can you spell the word FIRED?! Put a Cork in your rhetoric & get lost! Connie Morris, you owe US the money you stole from our TAXES on a trip that had nothing to do with education in Kansas. cough it up, loser! i have one question, ladies & gentlemen, does Sebelius' support for in-state tuition for illegal immigrants set her up for defeat in November? This Kansas primary finally shows that Kansans care enough to vote so that LOSERS like Morris, don't EVER again have the chance to put our kids at risk.
2 August 2006
at 9:55 a.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

75x55 (Anonymous) says…

having more reading issues, hga?

“Chuckle - wait a while. It'll all come around again - this is one of those 'insolvable' situations that won't be tossed aside by a single election. So, pull up a chair and favorite beverage and enjoy the show.”

Also, I'm still waiting for that response - you got the email… Don't bother with the suggestions to 'enroll in classes' - you made a personal offer to guide me to some really interesting learning - how about a reading list? I'm even game to a reading list exchange . I'll read yours if you read mine! It'll be great - a fabulous opportunity for both of us to learn new things.

hga-“You can e-mail me offline if you are truly interested in learning something new. Somehow I don't think you are.”
2 August 2006
at 9:58 a.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

ThomasJefferson (Anonymous) says…

So glad those wingnuts were defeated: Connie Morris for state school board and “Crazy” Kay O'Connor who was soundly defeated for Secretary of State.

Maybe Crazy Kay will get defeated in 2008 and no longer be in the state senate. Unfortunately the wingnut Susan Wagle is now the Republican nominee for Lt. Governor.
2 August 2006
at 10:03 a.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

rhd99 (Anonymous) says…

ThomasJefferson, Wingnut WAGLE is not off the hook, not by a long shot. Dr. Barnett of Emporia mis-diagnosed the school funding problem. Robin Jennison had issues with the court deciding the fate of school funding. Well, guess what?! If these Right wingnuts did their job in Topeka, the court would not have to get involved in the first place! Too bad Sebelius supported illegal immigrant in state tuitition, because had she not, she would have nothing but smoothe sailing, laughing all the way to the bank from now until the end of elections in November.
2 August 2006
at 10:07 a.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

mooseamoose (Anonymous) says…

all i gotta say is “Praise da Load!” goodbye wackos!!!
2 August 2006
at 10:26 a.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

Agnostick (Anonymous) says…

rhd99 sez:

“If these Right wingnuts did their job in Topeka, the court would not have to get involved in the first place!”
======================================

Agreed!

And the main blame for not getting the job done in the statehouse belongs squarely on the shoulders of Doug Mays. An example of Mays' priorities can be found here:

http://cjonline.com/stories/070305/op…

Agnostick
agnostick@excite.com
2 August 2006
at 10:29 a.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

powershopper (Anonymous) says…

Logic - Great article, and very informative.

2 August 2006
at 10:29 a.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

Klickhammer (Anonymous) says…

Morris has swapped God for heroin and sex. It doesn't seem to have prevented her from harming herself and others.
2 August 2006
at 10:34 a.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

rhd99 (Anonymous) says…

All I can say is this, EXCEPT for Dr. Barnett & wingnut wagle, yesterday's primary election results show why Kansas is a great place to live. When people come together & use some common sense especially at the voting booths, good results come to those who wait & are informed.
2 August 2006
at 10:37 a.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

75x55 (Anonymous) says…

hga-“You can e-mail me offline if you are truly interested in learning something new. Somehow I don't think you are.”

This isn't an offer to 'go-to-school' (already have advanced degrees). This was an offer to contact offline if I was “truly interested in learning something new.” I (along with others, as you've so generously pointed out) was previously informed of the educational option of “going to classes”.

It only shows again that your offer is for something other than “taking classes”, but some other more direct instruction or resource recommendations for “learning something new”.

Oh, please don't tell me you were lying to me. I'd be crushed. :^(

So, how about the reading list exchange? I'll read yours if you read mine… :)
2 August 2006
at 11:02 a.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

GOPConservative (Anonymous) says…

Praise Jesus!

The Antichrist has been defeated in at least two of his KBOE seats, and in the fall two more Antichrist KBOE members will fall..

All that remains is to get rid of the rest of the whacko extremists this fall, especially Congressman Jim Ryun and Attorney General Phill Kline, and it will be a clean sweep for Jesus and a smashing defeat for the Antichrist.

I'm tired of hearing these extremist totalitarian nutcases referred to as “conservatives.” Why in hell does the media use this label for those who believe in big repressive government, invasion of personal privacy and contempt for the Constitution? Why is being a liar, padding your expense account or ripping off Indian tribes to buy a home at a discount like Jim Ryun did considered “Godly?”

I hope we can finally excise this immoral, corrupt, extremist cancer from our Party and return to calling Republicans “conservatives” because they believe in principles like ethics, free enterprise, privacy, limited government, tax equity, etc., not because they belong to some crazy extremist cult.

Kline, Ryun, Morris, Bacon, Willard, O'Connor and the other totalitarian extremists would be much more at home in the Democratic party with their soul-mate, Fred Phelps. Please switch parties, whackos. Please!
2 August 2006
at 11:05 a.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

rhd99 (Anonymous) says…

GOP, don't forget Pat Roberts, the man who said back in November that the Intelligence Report his committee was about to submit would be completed. He is a LIAR just like kline, morris, & RYUN!
2 August 2006
at 11:09 a.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

Jayhawk226 (Anonymous) says…

From a CNN article yesterday:
“…Board member Connie Morris' race in western Kansas was the most closely watched. The retired teacher has described evolution as “an age-old fairy tale” and “a nice bedtime story” unsupported by science.”

Oh boy, oh boy, oh boy, oh boy….

This primary election didn't even bother me much on the whole—Democrat-Republican, Liberal-Conservative stances.

What did bother me…is as an educator, school districts are required to implement research-based, evidence-backed instructional techniques, methods and curriculum in the classroom, in order to comply with the No Child Left Behind Act and Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (reauthorized in 2004). Who wouldn't agree with this?? Surely this makes sense and is best for educators and learners!

But when a state elects a State Board of Education member(s), who is aligned with 5-6 other members that discredit and eliminate evidence, data and research to back policies voted and approved for Kansas schools….and instead work off a religiously-fueled ideology, that reflects the religion of those 6….there is a major problem in kansas!

The State of Kansas has been down this road before…voting radicals in, voting radicals out.

Let's just hope the constituents of this state are also intelligent and logical enough to choose candidates that make political decisions and laws that utilize fact-based, hard research and evidence…and not just commonalities upon their own personal and respective religious and societal ideologies.
2 August 2006
at 11:16 a.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

rhd99 (Anonymous) says…

Folks, I part today with this thought: Yesterday's victories in the primary are not just the candidates' victories. They're OUR victories. Now comes the kicker, the kicker as in, how are the candidates going to do down the road come November? Personal attacks like that of which Sandy Praeger had to endure by that wingnut carter show why Extremist Conservatives in Kansas lost. They have ideas that make us tread down towards a dangerous path & cause. Is Kansas better off today than it was two days ago? of course it is because people got out to vote & we sent a message that says this: We the people of Kansas are no longer putting up with destructive policies & people behind those policies. You who are elected hold a trust of the people, & if YOU violate that trust, you will be out of a job. end of line! a new day has dawned on all of us, now let's make sure that we do NOT repeat the past EVER again!
2 August 2006
at 11:31 a.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

75x55 (Anonymous) says…

hga-“You can e-mail me offline if you are truly interested in learning something new. Somehow I don't think you are.”

It only shows again that your offer is for something other than “taking classes”, but some other more direct instruction or resource recommendations for “learning something new”.

So, how about the reading list exchange? I'll read yours if you read mine… :)

Are you afraid?

2 August 2006
at 11:32 a.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

acg (Anonymous) says…

Me too, logic. I would definitely look harder at the republican party if they didn't drape the flag and the bible over every single one of their stances on the issues.

Either way, Morris is out. I really couldn't stand her. Oh happy day, oh happy day!!
2 August 2006
at 11:40 a.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

usaschools (Anonymous) says…

Jayhawk226,
Great post! I agree! The board is not the place for culture wars. Teachers need to use research-based practices, and the standards should be based on research as well.
2 August 2006
at 12:01 p.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

Jamesaust (Anonymous) says…

'”If we change the board around, we'll be able to make decisions that we think are right for our students,” Lawrence school board member Craig Grant said.'

This comment (and others) is a bit too triumphalist. All that has happened is to set the stage to return to the same sorry situation that existed before:

A) Kansas science teachers will still be too afraid or too tired to teach evolution whatever the science standards may say - in part to avoid complaints from the likes of “satchel”: 'My kid came home the other day and told me 'Teacher says we're all monkeys!'' The average Kansas student failed to master this foundation of biology before and will continue to do so, which is a barrier to a state that sometimes dreams of making itself a center for biotech.

B) This dejÃ vu situation will happen all over again in the next election when the public averts its gaze from such an obscure race. A priority for the next Legislature should be to amend the Constitution to create a single, state-wide, elected Board Commissioner, with the remaining Board members appointed by the Governor for fixed, staggered terms.
2 August 2006
at 12:17 p.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

xenophonschild (Anonymous) says…

I'd settle for fiscal conservatism, a basic level of competency in determining a realistic domestic agenda, and a foreign policy based on realities in the world, not rosy, self-centered plans to plant democracy around the globe.

You used to be able to trust Republicans with a buck. They were snide twits with little to recommend them as human beings, but they knew and appreciated the value of money.

Not anymore. We Democrats used to secretly deplore the tax-and-spend penchant of our party, and sighed with relief when William the Great brought fiscal conservatism and monetary competence to the federal government. William left a budget surplus; we'll need to see another long Democratic administration before our fiscal house in put into order again.

BTW, what has happened to the local contingent of trog idiots - conservativeman, rightthinker, and the liar-Arminianus? Thought they would at least have the courage to show up and say a few kind things about their recently departed standard-bearers.
2 August 2006
at 12:19 p.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

nekansan (Anonymous) says…

The sad thing is the entire BOE will devolve in to a single issue political war for the foreseeable future. The candidates will have to focus on their stance on the evolution issue which even the Vatican seems to leave room for, instead of focusing on actually improving the education for the kids in Kansas.
2 August 2006
at 12:42 p.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

Jayhawk226 (Anonymous) says…

Thomas Jefferson can be considered the “father of modern education” and had very strong opinions about public education. It was his drafting of laws and influence that led to compulsory education and boards of education—that were supposed to be entirely mutually exclusive of politics and fanatacism. Education is to be pure and untouched, for that's how a nation's republic will advance itself.

When a 1780 bill proposed placing education in the hands of state officials, Jefferson said, “If it is believed that these elementary schools will be better managed by the governor and council or any other general authority of the government, than by the parents within each ward, it is a belief against all experience.”

“Education not being a branch of municipal government, but, like the other arts and sciences, an accident [i.e., attribute] only, I did not place it with election as a fundamental member in the structure of government.” —Thomas Jefferson to John Taylor, 1816. ME 15:45

“I now think it would be better for every ward to choose its own resident visitor, whose business it would be to keep a teacher in the ward, to superintend the school, and to call meetings of the ward for all purposes relating to it; their accounts to be settled, and wards laid off by the courts. I think ward elections better for many reasons, one of which is sufficient, that it will keep elementary education out of the hands of fanaticizing preachers, who, in county elections, would be universally chosen, and the predominant sect of the county would possess itself of all its schools.” —Thomas Jefferson to Joseph Cabell, 1820. ME 15:293

He also had strong convictions on what students at elementary, secondary and university levels studied—always being aware of how to grow the republic and maintain logical, reasoning citizens so we never cater to an oppressive or monarchical government.

“Science is more important in a republican than in any other government.” —Thomas Jefferson to –—, 1821. ME 15:339
2 August 2006
at 12:48 p.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

drewdun (Anonymous) says…

“Good grief! If you guys act like that when you win, I would hate to see what you would have been like had your guys lost. Tone it down, for crying out loud. You are showing your intelligence, which doesn't appear to be at too high of a level.”

Uhh, yeah. Perhaps you were sleeping in November 2004. After the Republicans 'mandate' victory, we heard from the likes of Tom DeLay that what we were seeing was the beginning of a 'permanent majority.' We were told, by media and GOP figures alike, that this was a 'conservative' nation, all other opinions bedamned (ignoring the fact that 59 million people voted for Kerry, and that Democratic Senate candidates recieved a far greater nationwide aggregate vote-total than the Repubs). The gloating by the right-wingers was disgusting and unbearable (at least for 'America-haters' like myself). Hell, when W announced his victory the day after the election at the RNC headquarters in Washington, I saw the Republican elephant morphing into an American flag, with another GOP elephant placed ABOVE the American flag (it was at that point that I knew we were dealing with unadulterated fascism).

Now that the tide appears to be turning (back to sanity), we hear crying from the likes of MWIV. Well, I got news for ya, son: payback's a b1tch, ain't it? i guess this new rough-and-tumble, nothing's-sacred politics, that YOUR party unleashed, is not working for you anymore, now that reality is trumping partisanship again, and so you want to call it off. too late.

Actually, to be more accurate, you just want your opponents to call it off; your side obviously hasn't - look at that moral, family-values Repuke in Missouri, Talent, basically spitting in the face of the family of the dead McCaskill staffer. Typical f'ing Republican swine.

And you think its bad now? When you are crushed, crushed in November, come back here and take your medicine like the good little Hitler Youth that you are.
2 August 2006
at 12:51 p.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

Jamesaust (Anonymous) says…

“I'd settle for fiscal conservatism, a basic level of competency in determining a realistic domestic agenda, and a foreign policy based on realities….”

That's precisely why either Party may find itself in trouble come 2008. The scenario isn't all that difficult to imagine: a Democrat Party consumed with purging itself (a la, the MooreOns, MoveOns, Deaniacs, etc.) of anyone voters might find trustable on national security issues and believing that power will just fall into their laps; and a GOP unable to divorce itself from the Bush Administration and denying the nomination to any one of their most popular members (McCain, Giuliani, etc.).

A new party (shall we call them the American Party?) combining fiscal prudence, social moderation, realistic rather than ideological goals both domestically and abroad might well manage to do something not seen for some while in U.S. politics — capture the broad center of votes and leaving both Democrats and Republicans fighting for the “long tail” of exclusionary voters, unable to pursue their normal strategy of divide-and-conquer.

2 August 2006
at 12:52 p.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

Jayhawk226 (Anonymous) says…

wow….I'm not sure what to say to that.

Drewdun—you must be passionate about your beliefs, eh?!!?
2 August 2006
at 12:55 p.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

Jayhawk226 (Anonymous) says…

Jamesaust—

I may have to agree with you…I have found that I am actually more aligned with the Libertarian Party than the Dems or Repubs.

I can't believe I would ever even admit that, but my politic ideologies seem to draw from both parties, but chiefly from assuring liberty and true freedom for all citizens.

Both parties pander so much to special interests…and I'm sure it'll be a matter of time before Libertarians did as well. But until then, I want my pure political reasonings, logic and persuasions to benefit our entire society.

I am a changed man…who woulda thought. A libertarian I am.
2 August 2006
at 1:16 p.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

powershopper (Anonymous) says…

http://www.forwardtogetherpac.com/vir…
2 August 2006
at 1:20 p.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

Jayhawk226 (Anonymous) says…

Thanks for the link powershopper…interesting information.
2 August 2006
at 1:33 p.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

powershopper (Anonymous) says…

No problem Jayhawk. Keep an eye out for Mark Warner in 2008. ;)
2 August 2006
at 1:38 p.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

75x55 (Anonymous) says…

hga-“You can e-mail me offline if you are truly interested in learning something new. Somehow I don't think you are.”

It only shows again that your offer is for something other than “taking classes”, but some other more direct instruction or resource recommendations for “learning something new”.

Why, I'm beginning to think you may have been prevaricating in your previous message. I'm truly interested, and yet - nothing.

And actually, it is sad for me to say this, but you keep referring to a thread that is fairly clearly an example of how your proclaimed victory of theological debate is … well… something else. Anyone is free to review it here ( http://www2.ljworld.com/news/2006/may…)

Still waiting…. Don't assume my reading list until you see it :^)

––––––––––––-

And to answer your question (“You mean you want to try for three defeats in a row???”) - it's not any skin off my nose one way or the other. I was stating that this current tempest-in-a-teapot (education standards re: evo) is not one that is going to be definitively resolved, so might as well pull up a chair and enjoy the fireworks. I certainly am.
2 August 2006
at 2:18 p.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

Agnostick (Anonymous) says…

Wow, several things to comment on here…

1) It's not that odd that the usual band of “paleo-Cons” (why reinvent the wheel?)—arminius, conservativeman, rightthinker, erichaar—aren't around to take their medicine. That would require a certain amount of character to acknowledge, “Yeah, the voters picked somebody other than us.” And as “character goes, well….

2) Jamesaust, not sure I agree entirely with your idea for a new KBOE; I *do* think another seat needs to be added, and districts be redrawn, so that we get out of this even number of seats we currently have. No need for “ties” in an already confusing situation.

3) Relish the victory, folks… but don't go overboard too much. See Item #1 about “character”… ;)

4) New political party? http://www.centristcoalition.com/

Agnostick
agnostick@excite.com
2 August 2006
at 2:30 p.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

bmwjhawk (Anonymous) says…

I'm a libertarian, too. However, I find that it's pretty easy to be one, because they've never been powerful enough to be corrupted.

2 August 2006
at 2:31 p.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

neopolss (Anonymous) says…

The only thing I find sad is that the only turnout garnered was to vote against people on the school board. What is sad about it? That people here didn't care who replaced them, just as long as it wasn't the current holder. The road ahead is still bumpy. We need to get candidates to talk about issues that Kansas actually care about, instead of creating dividing lines over BS crap like ID and stem cells. Let's talk housing, taxes, agriculture, roads, jobs, etc. anything but these fluff issues. It's a BIG part of the reason turnout is low. I myself refuse to vote on the basis of something so stupid, when there is much more important matters at hand.
2 August 2006
at 2:53 p.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

penguin (Anonymous) says…

I have an idea that stem cells will not be a big issue because of this statement about Lt. Gov Candidate Susan Wagle that is on the Barnett/Wagle website:

“Susan's youngest son Paul went through a successful stem cell transplant for relapsed leukemia last year and has fully recovered.”

So here's hoping that real issues will be discussed because this one has been knocked out for the fall.
2 August 2006
at 3:37 p.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

Agnostick (Anonymous) says…

So what you're saying, parkay, is that when there are fertilized eggs leftover from invitro fertilization procedures (IVF)… it's more “ethical” to throw those zygotes in the waste basket, rather than donating them to research labs?

Understand that a lot of those “leftovers” are either a) cryogenically frozen for future use; or b) sold to other couples wanting to have children.

Since you're interested in preaching, parkay, I'd like to hear more. It's the only reason I ask. :)

Thanks

Agnostick
agnostick@excite.com
2 August 2006
at 3:55 p.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

Agnostick (Anonymous) says…

Oh, and while I've got your attention, parkay:

BUTTER!! :p~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
2 August 2006
at 4 p.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

srj (Anonymous) says…

2008 will be hell in this county. McCain will split apart his party, and maybe so will Hilary.
2 August 2006
at 4:13 p.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

75x55 (Anonymous) says…

“McCain will split apart his party”

That presumes that he will be able to control his psychotic spit-flying-red-faced displays of anger through more than three primary speeches, which hasn't happened yet.
2 August 2006
at 4:24 p.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

oldgoof (Anonymous) says…

I guess Parkay things it is ethical to continue to flush down the drain unused thousands of embryos in pregnancy clinics instead of using them to extend lives for the already living. Some ethics.

Barnett & Wagle do not support stem cell research.
2 August 2006
at 4:31 p.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

75x55 (Anonymous) says…

“Barnett & Wagle do not support stem cell research.”

'Stem cell research' or 'embryonic stem cell research'?

Or just the government funding of embryonic stem cell research?

Just trying to make sure I understand your comment clearly.

2 August 2006
at 4:40 p.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

penguin (Anonymous) says…

I was just noting that it is on the website and as you can see it says nothing about “ethical” stem cell usage:

http://www.barnettforgovernor.com/sus…

I am just suprised that this hasn't been the subject of a 1001 news stories…yet.

I definetly agree with oldgoof. Better to use the embryos than see them have them flushed.
2 August 2006
at 5:13 p.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

powershopper (Anonymous) says…

Mark Warner for President.
2 August 2006
at 6:54 p.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

Calliope877 (Anonymous) says…

Correct me if I'm wrong, but isn't embryonic stem cell research done on (or was proposed to be done on) embryos that were dead already due to natural causes? I don't think scientist are going to start ripping embryos out of the womb, or grow them in test tubes just to disect them.

I can't remember where I read that….
2 August 2006
at 6:55 p.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

Calliope877 (Anonymous) says…

Agnostik,

I think you answered my question in a previous post. :)
2 August 2006
at 7:22 p.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

yourworstnightmare (Anonymous) says…

JA,

Your “American party” exists. It is part of both dems and reps. Vote by issues, not by party.
2 August 2006
at 7:27 p.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

ASBESTOS (Anonymous) says…

GOt this on a forum. They got it right. There is no stem cell ban. The “Ban” in on federal funding. You also have to differentiate between stem cells and embroynic stem cells that are only that way for 5-7 days in the originating cell mass. Here is a GREAT explaination of the process, and the HUGE amount of embroys that are killed anyway.

“Embryonic stem cells (ESCs) are found in the inner cell mass of the human blastocyst, an early stage of the developing embryo lasting from the 4th to 7th day after fertilization. In normal embryonic development, they disappear after the 7th day, and begin to form the three embryonic tissue layers (which means they start to differentiate and stop being stem cells). ESCs extracted from the inner cell mass during the blastocyst stage, however, can be cultured in the laboratory and under the right conditions will proliferate indefinitely in this undifferentiated state.

Currently, all embroynic stem cell lines (in privately funded labs) have been derived from “spare” embryos created from in vitro fertilization (IVF). Embryos that otherwise would have been destroyed.

There are about 400 IVF clinics in the U.S. The procedure involves:
-Giving special medication to the woman that results in the development, growth, and maturation of eggs in a woman's ovaries.
-Extracting perhaps 24 mature mature ova (aka oocytes) from the woman's ovaries.
-Fertilizing the ova with sperm, typically from her husband or an anonymous donor.
-Placing the embryos in a special incubator which encourages their growth.
-Selecting two to four healthy-looking embryos and implanting them in the woman's uterus.
-Disposing of the remaining 20 or so surplus embryos/per woman in some manner
2 August 2006
at 7:28 p.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

ASBESTOS (Anonymous) says…

(cont.)

There are only two options for the surplus embryos. First, cryopreservation (deep freezing in liquid nitrogen) in which case some die during the freezing process and then some die while they are subsequently thawed (about 25% of frozen and thawed embryos do not survive between a first and second impregnation procedure). Those embryos that are not preserved in liquid nitrogen (a woman may not want to pay to keep them stored) will inevitably die. They have no chance of living or developing into a newborn. Many clinics simply discard or destroy them. Some embryos are flushed down a sink drain while alive. Some are transferred to a medical waste bin where they are later incinerated, while alive. Some simply expose the embryos to the air and let them die naturally; this normally takes up to four days.

So, in addition to the hundreds of thousands of embryos that have been deep-frozen in fertility clinics, there are hundreds of thousands of additional unused embryos that have been actively destroyed.

I find it very interesting that very few of pro-life demonstrations are directed at the labs that have killed these massive numbers of embryos. Instead their attention has been concentrated on the few dozen embryos whose stem cells were removed and used to create cultures in medical research labs.

I get very angry when they start taking about morality. It is unethical to impede potential advances that could heal disease, relieve the suffering, and save lives of fully developed human beings. The moral status of a 150-to-200-cell mass should not take precedence over responsible scientific inquiry.

Edit:

ES cells are more useful than adult stem cells due to their pluropotency - a unique capacity of seemingly limitless reproduction and ability to develop into any type of cell, tissue, or organ as they mature.
At the same time, embryonic stem cells cannot themselves develop into a full organism.
Adult stem cells on the other hand are unspecialized cells found among differentiated cells in a tissue or organ that are capable of renewing themselves and differentiating to yield the major specialized cell types of the tissue or organ. The primary roles of adult stem cells are to maintain and repair the tissue in which they are found. Unlike embryonic stem cells, which are NOT defined by their origin. Most available evidence indicates that adult stem cells do not possess the same capacity to give rise to any cell type as embryonic stem cells do. Restricting research on embryonic stem cells and relying solely on adult stem cell studies would severely hamper medical progress.”
2 August 2006
at 7:59 p.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

BABBOY (Anonymous) says…

What an intense series of posting. Doesn't anyone work for a living anymore???

Hmmm — Connie Morris won't be! At least anytime soon as a would be bully on the school board. I sure some other nut job will hire her to preach the claims of the fundamental religious right. She is a hero to them. I have some friends who used to call themselves conservatives. But, the insanity of the religious right has caused them to qualify their stance. They now tell me that they are fiscally conservative but liberal or moderate on social issues.

No one wants government telling them how act with their own personal issues. That is what religious right does not get. They do not want to be told what to do anymore than anyone else, but the difference is they want you to do what they do or they will try to change the rules so you have to do as they do. They are just fine with the 1st Amendment as long as their version of religion or their ideas are followed. If you are different or have independent thoughts, then they will use their lobbying power to legislate away your own personal power or free will. Free will or even fair play means nothing to them. What they really do not get is that they cannnot do that and people will resist them which is why we are starting to see some changes in these stances.

Incidentally, how stupid do you have to be to lose a republican incumbent seat in Garden City, Kansas?

2 August 2006
at 8:03 p.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

CheyenneWay (Anonymous) says…

Just throwing this out here for everybody to ponder.

A friend of mine is researching planarians. These neat little creatures have the ability to regenerate body parts when cut except in a few specific areas. This research is trying to investigate the usefullness of stem-cells derived from insulin genes. Its going to be a long time before they are used for humans but the basic idea is that stem cells can be found in other life forms on this planet besides our species and furthermore used for the regeneration of human tissue.

My other friend is researching the regeneration of bodyparts by tadpoles. You cut off an arm and it grows back, kinda like a lizard tail. Thier research deals with the regrowth of amputee patients though and not stem cells.

I think science today has dogded a bullet and hopefully tightend its helmet. If this type of analytical debate about science and relegion can be constructed out of pure emotional responses then why cant we take that ideal to the classrooms? Not bringing in pseudoscience but just questions in general. I guess it boils down to the teacher.

I know many young adults who have recieved their eductation degree and when asked what they would do if forced to adhere to certain rules the majority laughed a little and said what would be expected. Why did I go to college and pay thousands of dollars to become a preacher? The parents can deal with that.
2 August 2006
at 8:08 p.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

CheyenneWay (Anonymous) says…

swbsow you should worry more about english 101 and proper grammer before discussing intro courses to sociology. Kids should be introduced to that but i think focused knowledge of mathmatics and good language skills should come to our children first then let them discover find their own personal journey in spirituality from the entire world around them. Even if that means handling snakes from time to time.
2 August 2006
at 8:25 p.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

ASBESTOS (Anonymous) says…

Winner quote of the day:

“Incidentally, how stupid do you have to be to lose a republican incumbent seat in Garden City, Kansas?”

very very good babboy
2 August 2006
at 8:31 p.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

75x55 (Anonymous) says…

swbsow - sure, as soon as the person who started all this follows through. I cannot for the life of me imagine what the delay with hga is - he/she is obviously such an intellect that I have so much good stuff to learn…

And the deal is an exchange - no 'test drives'! :^)
2 August 2006
at 9:09 p.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

xenophonschild (Anonymous) says…

Mark Warner certainly does look like a promising candidate for '08, although I'd like to see him as a vice-presidential candidate with Hillary, give him some seasoning in the Washington cooker before he stands for the presidency.

Fiscal competence is a big plus.
2 August 2006
at 9:33 p.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

ASBESTOS (Anonymous) says…

I would like to take credit for the information but it was not mine. I just googled the “Embroynic Stem Cell Research Ban” not in quotes and landed on a forum that the information set in a much better explaniation than I can muster on the topic. I widh I had copied the persons name.

But, it is NOT my information, tho' I like it a lot.
2 August 2006
at 10:32 p.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

75x55 (Anonymous) says…

Aww. I'm sorry I won't jump like a little monkey for you, swbsow. Did you inject yourself into the offer unilaterally? Why, yes… I believe you did.

Unless you're actually hga in disguise. Then, of course, I'll have the good grace to apologize. Hugs and kisses!
2 August 2006
at 11:01 p.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

75x55 (Anonymous) says…

Lol! Don't be peevish, sbwsow. Just stickin' to the plan - I'll be happy to include ya, when our mentor deigns to join us :^)

2 August 2006
at 11:11 p.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

Kodiac (Anonymous) says…

Hey 75x55,

I am kind of interested in this reading list too. Can you send it to me as well. You know me I am always looking to broaden my horizons. I can also prove to you I am not HGA…

See it where it says Posted by…that's me Kodiac….See not HGA….or swbsow….or jgt…..or conman…..or crazyks….or Gr……or asbestos…..or xenophonschild…..or the devolved brunfeldt….or…….

I think you get the picture. So if you would please send it, I would love to see your reading list…..

Thanks
Your buddy Kodiac

President of the International Conspiracy to Appear As Different Aliases on the LJW Discussion Boards

:-P
3 August 2006
at 6:53 a.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

75x55 (Anonymous) says…

I'm a loon? I looked in the mirror today, and there was no beak, bleary flaming red eye on each side of head, funny waterbird feet… Not saying anything about the attractiveness of what I did see, but that's a whole 'nuther issue.

Look at all the folks who waiting on you now, hga. We're all interested, and looking forward to 'learning something new' - c'mon, be a sport! Pitch in. Grab an oar. Be a man/woman/whatever.
3 August 2006
at 10:40 a.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

75x55 (Anonymous) says…

hga-“You can e-mail me offline if you are truly interested in learning something new. Somehow I don't think you are.”

It only shows again that your offer is for something other than “taking classes”, but some other more direct instruction or resource recommendations for “learning something new”.

Which is why I think a reading list exchange would be top notch - so do others (sbwsow, Kodiac, [anyone else?]).

I was hoping for something different from you than three emails of exactly what was posted here - which is really old news. You see, I'm 'truly interested in learning something new', and rehashed snippets of months old thread aren't new. Besides, that thread only makes sense if people take the time to go through the whole thing - little bits and pieces from here and there don't do it justice, don't you think so? Anyone is free to review it here ( http://www2.ljworld.com/news/2006/may…).

C'mon, don't be skeered!

Hopefully, other readers here won't be too upset with this diversion - you see folks, we're really trying to help hga out with his/her 'trust' issues.

Kind of like the trust I have in this evolution teaching standards debate never going away - certainly not in any of our lifetimes.
3 August 2006
at 11:38 a.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

75x55 (Anonymous) says…

Gracious sakes. Are you alright, hga?

“No doubt you will continue to insist that you haven't received what everyone can see I have provided for you online.”

I happened to mention that I received copies of exactly what you posted before…old info that isn't what you promised, actually. My exact words: “I was hoping for something different from you than three emails of exactly what was posted here - which is really old news. ”

How nice it is of you to try to offer a X-treme Cliff notes version of that thread - I think a link to the WHOLE content would be more… illuminating…for interested readers (http://www2.ljworld.com/news/2006/may… not to mention more user-friendly way to present it since it won't waste 'landscape' for readers of this thread who aren't so enthused.

“yet 75 “multiple degrees” X55 thinks the movement is just about ready to “take off”.”

When exactly did I say that? I only recall posting here that I don't believe it will be going away any time soon. But now that you mention it, I do think the scope of the debate will continue to 'take off' - though I don't expect any definitive conclusion to it.

So, how bout that reading list? You know, so we can all get into learning “something new”? Can't wait to get my teeth into something new!
3 August 2006
at 12:56 p.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

75x55 (Anonymous) says…

hga - “I'll give you a chance to review my post to see what all others can see for themselves.

I'll give you a hint: They're very famous books.”

Read those already - I recall that you said “learning something new”…?

“You can e-mail me offline if you are truly interested in learning something new. Somehow I don't think you are.”
3 August 2006
at 4:40 p.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

75x55 (Anonymous) says…

Reorientation? Oh, yes, I remember - 'reorientation'='delusional belief that hga won the point'

–––––––––—

hga - “I'll give you a chance to review my post to see what all others can see for themselves.

I'll give you a hint: They're very famous books.”

Read those already - I recall that you said “learning something new”…?

“You can e-mail me offline if you are truly interested in learning something new. Somehow I don't think you are.”

––––––––––—

Will have possible option that even you, hga, might find as an acceptable way to fulfill your promise. Stay tuned - xoxoxo
3 August 2006
at 6:24 p.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

75x55 (Anonymous) says…

How disappointing - instead of offering to fulfill his/her promise to provide me with the opportunity to “learn something new”, hga continues to re-hash old threads and dredge up old news as though that is sufficient to dissuade me from my great interest to 'learn something new'.

This is so … well, disappointing is the most accurate word for the situation.

“”You can e-mail me offline if you are truly interested in learning something new. Somehow I don't think you are.”“

You shouldn't be so presumptive. Never know - you might learn something yourself.

Still working on that idea for a real learning exchange - you know, REAL reading lists (and not dredging up of old conversations that have been done) and ability to let other folks interested in 'learning something new' participate.

Whatcha say, sport? Game?
3 August 2006
at 7:18 p.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

75x55 (Anonymous) says…

Hmm. Change is scary, isn't it? I'll be along directly…

After all, you have 'something new' to share… your words.

3 August 2006
at 9:14 p.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

Lepanto1571 (Anonymous) says…

grail,

“Why in the world you would want to post a link to a thread where you four ( 75X55, gr, Lepanto1571 and conservativeman ) bounced around the walls like the Four Stooges on meth is beyond me but, hey, knock yourself out.”

Pathetic ultramaroon.

You are so desperate to eek out some sort of face saving victory. I don't know what's worse, that you truly take yourself serious or that you have yet to come to the realization that most here have that you are a disengenuous triumphalist with a high recidivism rate.

You've shown me all I need to know about your “great search for truth.”

Can anyone say “stem cells” (cough, cough). Now that was one limp performance on your part. But then again, I am, (what did call me?), oh yeah “a waste of time.” Pretty much the only fall back position for you, as I was getting ready to smack you into tomorrow, once you realized the extremely weak foundation of your argument.

hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha

Hey, don't blame me grail, when you can't answer tough questions. Of course, it is quite hard to actually answer questions when you're busy posturing yourself as the forum professor.

hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha

You get back with me doc when you actually want to debate. Until then, keep up the facade.

Oh yeah, please try to lump me in with the creationist crowd. That'll be yet another gross embarassment for you!

xenophon:

Please explain the comment regarding Penrose and Hawking. What are trying to say?
3 August 2006
at 9:18 p.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

Lepanto1571 (Anonymous) says…

grail:

“Reorientation was a constant task I had to perform for you four at http://www2.ljworld.com/news/2006/may/14…, as any reviewer can confirm.”

What they can really confirm is how many times you dodged and ducked tough questions. Add to that, the number of times you attempted to posture yourself with some sort of self-annointed philosophical neutrality. Now there's a big number!

Keep trying grail, you still remind me of the little engine that could.

Amusing.
3 August 2006
at 11:11 p.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

75x55 (Anonymous) says…

“holygrailale (anonymous) on August 3, 2006 at 8:33 p.m. (Suggest removal)

75X55:

That's 277 pages of posts (as of today)!!!!

That's a lot of reading.”

–––––––––––––––––––––––––

Non - I'll let you waste your time digging through old dusty exchanges in vain search of past glories.

–––––––

Getting back to more recent promises:

“”You can e-mail me offline if you are truly interested in learning something new. Somehow I don't think you are.”“

hga - how about I set up a blog, and reading lists, as well as reviews of read books, can be posted there as we progress?

That way others could participate as they wish? Anonymity could be maintained by participants.

Would that be amenable?
sbwsow, Kodiac, anyone else?
3 August 2006
at 11:14 p.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

Kodiac (Anonymous) says…

75X55,

I'd be up for that…
3 August 2006
at 11:47 p.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

Lepanto1571 (Anonymous) says…

grail,

“”you have yet to come to the realization that most here have that you are a disengenuous triumphalist with a high recidivism rate.” –– Lepanto1571
hahaahaahahahahahahahahahahahahaahahahhaha
You didn't mean to say that but what you just told me is that I don't realize that most participants on the blogs realize that I have a high rate of triumph over you.
You need an editor.”

Actually I did genius. Add inability to comprehend, along with poor citations and an inability to answer questions that involve more than sound bites to your growing list of challenges.

Actually you need the editor professor.

hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha

You're not too bright grail. Why don't you try some of that “reorientation.”

That worked out real well for you!

hahahahahahahahahahahahhaahahahahahahahaha

grail:
“I don't know how others see our little debates, but I AM aware that I “triumph” over you without much effort and at a pretty regular clip.”

Proof positive that you are grappling with insanity.

hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha

Publish much?

hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahhahahahahahaha

You know as much about philosophy as you do stem cell ethics!

hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha

Have another try at it.

Chugga chugga, choo choo. You can do it!
3 August 2006
at 11:54 p.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

Lepanto1571 (Anonymous) says…

graill

“What are trying to say?”–-Lepanto1571

Perhaps you'd like to stand in for xenophon and explain his intent in referencing Hawking and Penrose in the manner he did. I notice you didn't actually wish to answer for him.

I look forward to your next feat of 'dodge and weave.'
4 August 2006
at 12:05 a.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

75x55 (Anonymous) says…

“holygrailale (anonymous) on August 3, 2006 at 11:47 p.m. (Suggest removal)

75X55:

So you're presently on a blog, announcing that you want to start a blog because……..???”

–––––––––––––—

Just trying to help you out - no need to keep subjecting the good people here to your continued promise-avoidance strategy. If you wish to set up some other vehicle, feel free - seems like everyone but YOU is interested in “learning something NEW”.
4 August 2006
at 3:19 p.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

75x55 (Anonymous) says…

hga-“fulfilled my promise, using both online and offline vectors, at 9:48 a.m. this morning but you're so disoriented that you asked for the list almost two hours after it had been delivered.”
–––––––––––––
Lie. You cut-n-pasted old hash - not the 'something new' you proclaimed to be offering.
–––––––––––––
hga-“I even indicated that you had missed the book list but you continue to “act the fool”, even 14 hours later.”
–––––––––––––
Silly. You cut-n-pasted old hash involving two books already read and discussed - again, not the 'something new' you proclaimed to be offering.
–––––––––––––
hga-“The Lawrence Journal World forum is fine with me. I have no need to start a blog. You feel like you don't want to learn here, in front of everyone, for some reason.”
–––––––––––––
Only trying to assist you by offering a venue where disinterested LJW readers don't have to be forced to wade through it. You see, I try to be courteous.
–––––––––––––
hga-“I attempted to provide an avenue where you could have a dialogue without the embarrassment of losing an argument in front of the entire Internet but you wanted the dialogue to be on the forum.”
–––––––––––––
Lie. You cut-n-pasted old hash and emailed the same three cut-n-pasted sections (posted August 3 at 9:24 a.m., August 3 at 9:46 a.m, August 3 at 9:48 a.m.) verbatim - not the 'something new' you proclaimed to be offering.
–––––––––––––

Step up sport - still waiting to 'learn something new'. You don't have to use the blog - email is fine… It's your call, all things said, as it was your offer.

I'll be waiting.