FRDB Archives

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.


Go Back   FRDB Archives > Archives > IIDB ARCHIVE: 200X-2003, PD 2007 > IIDB Philosophical Forums (PRIOR TO JUN-2003)
Welcome, Peter Kirby.
You last visited: Today at 05:55 AM

 
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old 01-22-2003, 11:20 AM   #1
atheist_in_foxhole
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Thumbs down Bush appoints Xian who attacked 'gay deathstyle' to AIDS panel

Quote:
AIDS and gay activists in the US have expressed dismay at the appointment of an evangelical Christian who, it is alleged, calls being gay a "deathstyle" to the Presidential Advisory Council on HIV and AIDS. In a move interpreted as being driven by ideology rather than science, President Bush is reported to have invited Jerry Thacker to join the 35 member PACHA which will next meet on 30-31 January.
Article

If there's a hell, Ralph Nader and his idiotic supporters deserve to go there. Bush is making this country a laughingstock.
 
Old 01-22-2003, 12:01 PM   #2
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Posts: 2,842
Default

I was wondering what the PACHA does, so I found their web site. Here's an excerpt from their mission statement:

Quote:
The Role of the Council

The Presidential Advisory Council on HIV/AIDS provides advice, information and recommendations to the Secretary regarding programs and policies intended to promote effective prevention of HIV disease, and advance research on HIV disease and AIDS. The role of the Council is solely advisory in nature.
I think this calls for an .

On the (slightly) brighter side, the committee has 35 members. Hopefully he's outnumbered.
Ab_Normal is offline  
Old 01-22-2003, 12:04 PM   #3
Regular Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: New York
Posts: 453
Default

Dubya is certainly a KKKristian loony, but I fail to see how that's Nader's fault. Especially considering that the race was Gore's to lose. I'm quite glad Gore isn't running again in '04. Is there anyone else who could have won the election and still not been sworn in as president? So long as the Dems continue to keep in reactionary lockstep with the Republicans, I will not support them.

-Jerry
Godless Sodomite is offline  
Old 01-22-2003, 12:20 PM   #4
atheist_in_foxhole
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Quote:
So long as the Dems continue to keep in reactionary lockstep with the Republicans, I will not support them.
Are you nuts? Look at what Bush has done over the past two years. He has started to roll back environmental regulations, he's doing his best to take away a woman's right to choose, he's taken us from peace to war, and he's filling the federal bench with dozens and dozens of right-wing maniacs who will have lifetime tenure. These same maniacs would, if they could, put men like you and me in prison (or worse) simply because of what we do in the privacy of our own homes.

Al Gore wasn't perfect, but he definitely wouldn't have done any of these things.
 
Old 01-22-2003, 01:14 PM   #5
Regular Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: New York
Posts: 453
Default

Quote:
Originally posted by atheist_in_foxhole
Are you nuts? Look at what Bush has done over the past two years. He has started to roll back environmental regulations, he's doing his best to take away a woman's right to choose, he's taken us from peace to war, and he's filling the federal bench with dozens and dozens of right-wing maniacs who will have lifetime tenure. These same maniacs would, if they could, put men like you and me in prison (or worse) simply because of what we do in the privacy of our own homes.

Al Gore wasn't perfect, but he definitely wouldn't have done any of these things.
I agree to an extent. But back in '92 I remember being encouraged to support Clinton primarily due to potential Supreme Court nominations--and I heard the same arguments four years later. And it was the Clinton administration that gave us "Don't Ask, Don't Tell" and the Defense of Marriage Act, which he bragged about on KKKristian radio. Tipper Gore is known for being a pro-censorship loudmouth, and Gore's VP is as much a godbot as Dubya--just a different deity; or maybe it's the same one, depending on who is keeping score. Why on earth would I believe that Gore would have been good for anything? To my sensibilities they are just differently bad. The Dems need to demonstrate they're an effective opposition party before I'll vote for one again.

The damage Dubya is doing globally troubles me because when things get bad enough domestically, I'll get the fuck out of this country--I'm no patriot. I'd just like to know that the rest of the world will be there when I'm ready to leave. In that regard, yes, Gore would probably have been better and less antagonistic than Dubya. But I'm only guessing.

-Jerry
Godless Sodomite is offline  
Old 01-22-2003, 02:15 PM   #6
Contributor
 
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: Los Angeles area
Posts: 40,549
Default

Quote:
Originally posted by Godless Sodomite
I agree to an extent. But back in '92 I remember being encouraged to support Clinton primarily due to potential Supreme Court nominations--and I heard the same arguments four years later. . . . .
You heard the same arguments 4 years later because they were still relevant. If Clinton had not been president, a Republican president would have appointed two members to the Supreme Court. At that point you could kiss church state separation, Roe v. Wade, etc. goodbye.

Unfortunately, the GOP strategy against Gore involved smearing him with people who should have been his supporters (not to mention the campaign contributions to Nader). I think you fell for it.
Toto is offline  
Old 01-22-2003, 02:28 PM   #7
atheist_in_foxhole
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Here in my state the Republicans were caught recruiting and funding young, gullible Green party candidates to run in swing districts. They almost got away with it, too.

Quote:
If Clinton had not been president, a Republican president would have appointed two members to the Supreme Court.
Exactly. If Bush had won in 1992, we would have seen people like Bork and Starr nominated to the Court instead of Ginsburg and Breyer. That would have been an absolute nightmare!

And if we don't work hard to defeat Junior next year, the nightmare will become a horrifying reality.
 
Old 01-22-2003, 03:03 PM   #8
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: May 2002
Posts: 1,578
Default

Gore was uninspiring. Nader didn't lose it for him--Gore just plain lost. I voted for Nader, but I would have rather voted for McCain.

Georgia isn't much of a swing state, so my non-vote for Bush meant next to nothing long in advance. Why not use it to see if we could get a viable third party going? Everytime someone implies that my vote was wasted, I am reminded why I didn't vote for Gore--he and his voters are so whiny. Hard knocks, but Dems lost Georgia by a much larger margin than the Nader supporters in Georgia. Excuse me if I don't feel all that convicted.

But the past is the past. If you don't like the way things are going now, get out there and do something about it. Like post on a message board to keep us informed. Thanks.

--tibac
wildernesse is offline  
Old 01-22-2003, 03:39 PM   #9
Regular Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Bremerton, Washington
Posts: 379
Default

I agree, I would have much rather voted for McCain. This news along with his anti-abortion radio address today convinced me that this country is going to shit at an incredibly fast rate.
gsx1138 is offline  
Old 01-22-2003, 04:19 PM   #10
Contributor
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Lebanon, OR, USA
Posts: 16,829
Default

The Republican-Green shenanigans make me wonder why the Democrats do not perform a similar scam -- supporting the Libertarian Party in order to divide the Republican vote.
lpetrich is offline  
 

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -8. The time now is 06:53 PM.

Top

This custom BB emulates vBulletin® Version 3.8.2
Copyright ©2000 - 2015, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.