Just Watched the Democratic Presidential Debate

[Albinonewt]

Originally posted by aaron_mag
Interesting how Clark supports gay civil unions but not marriages. I think I feel similarly. I really have no problem with gay marriage. I definetely don't believe it is an attack on the sanctity of marriage because only my wife and I can destroy our marriage. It has nothing to do with anyone else.

Yeah, I'm not a supporter og gay marriage either, but not because I have any problems with it in theory. The problem is that marriage is a sacred religious institution, and if the religion doesn't want to to recognize it then it is not the state's dity to force them to.

Civil unions I have no problems with at all. Any two non-related adults that love each other and want to live out their lives together should be able to do so under the law of the land.

I'm certain we'll get some sort of decree about it in the next few years (or sooner) and I'm very curious to see how it turns out.

[1stdeadeye]

Originally posted by aaron_mag


As a member of the military what is your feelings on Clark?

His silence speaks volumes does it not?

[Collegeboy]

I am the other way, I don't think that marriage is a religious event necessarily, if you want to make it one you can, but it doesn't have to be. So I have no problem with gay marriages.

As to Clark and the democratic party here is a post by a friend of mine on another board that I found very interesting.

"I'm not too sure that Clark doesn't have a decent chance to get the Dem's nomination. And a Clark/Edwards ticket would go a long way to making in-roads into the Republican stranglehold on the South, all while picking up a de faxto Democrat California and Northeast. And I would imagine he would make in-roads into the military vote, especially when coupled with the disenchantment much of them are currently feeling toward the present administration.

Plus, much of the established Democrat power brokers want someone other than Dean. They feel Dean would be the weakest candidate to run against Bush in the main election, although he is very popular to the left wing base of the Dems.

Clark presents a candidate with many of the views that Dean espouses, mainly the anti-Iraq War views; but who also has a security resume which rivals Bush's.

Clark presents a candidate who is:
1. Attractive to the Dem base
2. Attractive to the Dem power brokers
3. Is strong on national security, the military and foreign policy.

Democrats traditionally win on domestic issues; and it is on the issues of national security, foreign policy and the military where they are being trounced in recent elections. All he has to do is adopt a middle of the road, moderate Democratic domestic policy agenda, and combined with his strengths in the other areas, he creates large problems for the Bush re-election bid..."

[Albinonewt]

[QUOTE]Originally posted by Collegeboy
I am the other way, I don't think that marriage is a religious event necessarily, if you want to make it one you can, but it doesn't have to be. So I have no problem with gay marriages.

Well, marriages are performed in a church (or other similiar structure) by a priest (or other similiar religious official), so I'm going to go out on a limb and refer to it as a religious institution.

As to Clark and the democratic party here is a post by a friend of mine on another board that I found very interesting.

"I'm not too sure that Clark doesn't have a decent chance to get the Dem's nomination. And a Clark/Edwards ticket would go a long way to making in-roads into the Republican stranglehold on the South, all while picking up a de faxto Democrat California and Northeast. And I would imagine he would make in-roads into the military vote, especially when coupled with the disenchantment much of them are currently feeling toward the present administration.

An intersting theory, and Edwards has decided not to run for Senate, so the team up isn't impossible. However, I do not think that Clark is going to get the military vote, despite being an ex-General. I get a real sense that he is rather unloved by the military establishment.

[b[Plus, much of the established Democrat power brokers want someone other than Dean. They feel Dean would be the weakest candidate to run against Bush in the main election, although he is very popular to the left wing base of the Dems. [/b]

And they're right to think that.

Clark presents a candidate with many of the views that Dean espouses, mainly the anti-Iraq War views; but who also has a security resume which rivals Bush's.

Well, Bush's resume now includes 9/11, which is the trump card when discussing secrutiy nowadays. A tough card to beat.

Clark presents a candidate who is:
1. Attractive to the Dem base
2. Attractive to the Dem power brokers
3. Is strong on national security, the military and foreign policy.

2 and 3 I agree with, but 1 I do not.

Democrats traditionally win on domestic issues; and it is on the issues of national security, foreign policy and the military where they are being trounced in recent elections. All he has to do is adopt a middle of the road, moderate Democratic domestic policy agenda, and combined with his strengths in the other areas, he creates large problems for the Bush re-election bid..."

I disagree, but based on supposistions that the economy will be doing ok by the election cycle (which I think it will be but there are no guarantees). Bush is much stronger on security then most presidents, even republicans, have been, because of the 9/11 card. With a decent economy and the war on terror Clark is going to have a tough time. Especially if the current American sentiment towards the UN doesn't soften.

[Collegeboy]

I don't see how the 9/11 card helps Bush. But oh well.

I think Clark will bring in the military vote, or that is at least what I can get from my home town.

[Albinonewt]

[QUOTE]Originally posted by Collegeboy
I don't see how the 9/11 card helps Bush. But oh well.

Not the attacks themselves. When I say the 9/11 card I'm talking about his leadership in the crisis, ultimatum to the UN, war in Afghanistan, war in Iraq. Basically the chain of events that unfolded due to 9/11.

I think Clark will bring in the military vote, or that is at least what I can get from my home town.

I don't think the military vote can really be counted on. First Clark is a Democrat and therefore despised by the military (just like being a Republican instantly makes you an enemy of teachers) Second, he was sacked from the military, and that's never good.

[aaron_mag]

An interesting note. If we want to bring back the Hannibal thing it should be noted that Hannibal was eventually forced from Carthage by both the Romans and the established Carthagians who didn't care for the reforms he tried to institute after the war.

Another interesting note is the Scipio Africanus (who defeated Hannibal) died under house arrest by the Senate who accused he and his brother of stealing money from the government. After his death his property was searched and the supposed stolen funds were never found.

Both were actually well learned and intelligent. They were creative in battle and niether were excessively blood thirsty (Hannibal released prisoners once as messengers to Rome that he did not want any more bloodshed and to get them to sue for peace (after his major victory at Cannae). Scipio insisted on trying to get a fair peace settlement for Hannibal and Carthage).

What is the point? Being a military man (even a Military genious) does not guarantee political success. Generals are not used to the compromise and politics necessary for good government. They often end up pissing off powerful people and don't know how to play the compromise game. Scipio, for example, took the finance records that his brother was bringing to the senate for inquiry and tore them up in front of the senate. He expected his past deeds to protect him.

[1stdeadeye]

Originally posted by aaron_mag
An interesting note. If we want to bring back the Hannibal thing

We don't!

'nuff said.

[aaron_mag]

Originally posted by 1stdeadeye


We don't!

'nuff said.

You will read the book Scipio Africanus Greater Than Napoleon! I will keep bugging you about it until you give up and read it!!! Save yourself the trouble and order it from Amazon now!!! :)

[Albinonewt]

Originally posted by aaron_mag


You will read the book Scipio Africanus Greater Than Napoleon! I will keep bugging you about it until you give up and read it!!! Save yourself the trouble and order it from Amazon now!!! :)

Actually, the two books you mentioned are in a deal package at Amazon for $30.

I'm thinking of getting them to read on the flight to Houston.

[Collegeboy]

[QUOTE]Originally posted by Albinonewt

Originally posted by Collegeboy
I don't see how the 9/11 card helps Bush. But oh well.

Not the attacks themselves. When I say the 9/11 card I'm talking about his leadership in the crisis, ultimatum to the UN, war in Afghanistan, war in Iraq. Basically the chain of events that unfolded due to 9/11.

I was referring to that too.

I think Clark will bring in the military vote, or that is at least what I can get from my home town.

I don't think the military vote can really be counted on. First Clark is a Democrat and therefore despised by the military (just like being a Republican instantly makes you an enemy of teachers) Second, he was sacked from the military, and that's never good.

The military doesn't despise the Democrats, the republicans have brainwashed them into thinking that the Democrats are out to get them, which is a bold face lie. They will look up to Clark and think a southerner, 3 star General, supreme commander of NATO, etc.. A lot of Generals are asked to retire, he wasn't pushed out of the military, he was relieved of his duties as supreme commander of NATO forces in Kosovo.

[aaron_mag]

Do that. You WILL NOT be dissappointed. Then we can have a 20 page discussion about it on AO and bore everyone else! (its the little things in life that make it enjoyable )

Seriously they are great books. We'll be arguing if Hannibal and Scipio are inherently liberal or conservative for ages to come!

[Collegeboy]

While you are at it order

Waging Modern War

[1stdeadeye]

Okay, I'll order the book. What was the second one?

CB,
Asked to retire and relieved of his duties sounds kind of like fired does it not?

[Collegeboy]

Originally posted by 1stdeadeye
Okay, I'll order the book. What was the second one?

CB,
Asked to retire and relieved of his duties sounds kind of like fired does it not?

No it does not.

Alot of old time generals are asked to retire. It is not the same as firing.

I am not even sure if he was asked to retire or just did retire.