Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'Off Topic [BG]' started by seventhson, May 29, 2011.
I was asking you to clarify the too much of a good thing statement.
You still haven't.
On the previous page.
I believe there was an incident , probably more, that happened some years ago, where a film crew had the ability to warn some of our soldiers of an enemy presence. The press chose not. They filmed the conflict and when questioned about it later on stated something like, "they were there to report on the war"...something like that. It was their right "freedom of the press" but at what cost? Can you understand where I am coming from at all?
I would of warned our soldiers. If you choose to say that's taking away the right of free press, then I can't help you on that.
what rights do you imagine this crowd of obese persons believe are being abused? do you have an example of such an expression of outrage?
I have been searching for it...can't find the event. And that's exactly why I posted it "I believe". I will research it. I also, well, I believe that another similar episode happened as when our soldiers were coming on shore at a beach, the press were there with full lights. It was to be a secret beach assault.
These episodes happen. Now I would say don't put our soldiers lives in danger by exposing them. Others would say..."that's censorship" how dare you.
Can you understand the difference I am trying to clarify for you?
Well, yes...this crowd would include you. You are very upset at me for even suggesting ANY kind of possible amendment that may, could, would protect us from future attacks. The crowd is just a reference word.
Second, and more importantly, the federal government shouldnt be in the business of telling Americans what and what not to eat and drink. Our democracy is founded on the idea that individuals have basic freedoms. Among these, certainly, is the right to choose what we put on our plates and in our goblets. But the anti-food extremists like CSPI would gladly take away that freedom and mandate our diet in order to save us from ourselves. It is time for these zealous anti-food advocates to understand that it is not the federal governments job to save us from ourselves by making our choices for us.
Obesity is a major health concern for all Americans, but should federal government respond?
OK. Hopefully I have made my wishes and opinion more clear. I would rather we just help each other and look out for one another willingly, but many of us just don't any longer.
There's a saying, you don't know whats good for you.
This is becoming more and more true today. Not everyone, but so many.
I can make up all sorts of poopiee as well to support my position.
If such an incident DID happen, I wouldn't call it an example of "censorship" or "freedom of the press". I would call it a misguided interpretation of the press' general policy of not trying to be part of the story. But there are many, many examples of the press being part of the story to save or preserve lives.
Not really lol...
I'm sure you can. I don't. The beach landing was televised. I saw it. Gotta love "live war".
I can't tell which side of the argument you're on. I'm not saying that your position is "left wing" or "right wing", but I'm going to refer to those positions in what I believe to be the traditional meaning...
With regards to mandating a diet to counter rampant obesity in the U.S. Most "right wing" and minimal govt people would classify this as a BAD thing. But you seem to be arguing that it's a GOOD thing and that the obese people are out of line with regards to expressing their freedom of choice in foods.
With regards to protecting the nation, most "right wing" (with the exception of minimal govt proponents) people would classify the Patriot act as a GOOD thing.
So I conclude that you are neither "right wing" or "left wing" in the traditional sense. But rather, you seem to be an advocate of government sponsored policy when the end goal serves the greater societal good. Do I have that correct?
Can you cite the two factions involved and the beach?
"Yeah, he must work out."
OK. Without getting political. I was right for over 20 years. I am now left. I believe in both so I guess if you want to label me, I'm a centrist leaning toward the left.
You asked for information on the obese. what rights do you imagine this crowd of obese persons believe are being abused? do you have an example of such an expression of outrage?I gave you the link.
The link states the benefits of nutrition. The "nutritionally challenge" say (basically) don't tell me what to eat. That's my right. Even though, clearly eating less and exercise helps us live longer. They see the government "telling" them what is good for them.
And in this case, the government is completely right. However, the "right" to be fat and unhealthy.....well...now can you understand?
I will protect this nation at any cost. And if that means adapting to a stricter security at the airports or implementing some different inspection procedures at our harbors...to save lives, so be it.
REASONABLE. That is the word and MUST be the only agenda.
Two? Fox broadcast it live. Die hard right winger then.
No, I meant the two sides of the military conflict at the beach.
This has gotten political.
For the record, the televised beach landing was during Grenada.