Skip to main content

Originally posted by KellerDad:
You all need to take off your tin foil hats and enjoy life for a while.

Taking away civil rights? Come on!!!

Same garbage was spouted about Reagan when he was in office.

16 years after he left office, history regards him as American Hero who saved the country.

Draft? Meat Grinder? We've lost 1,100 kids over there. We lost more than that in the first 15 minutes of Iwo Jima. War is dirty.

And I guess the 3-1 majority of troops that voted for Bush must mean he's a terrible commander in chief?

Top 5%? I would gather that most on this board fall into that category.

They started saying the Republicans were going to take away Social Security in the 50's. Has one old person missed a SS check, EVER?

Scare tactics.

Michael Moore'isms.

Tin Foil Hat Crowd.

Blue State nonsense.


I am Proud. Proud to be an American. Proud to be a Republican. Proud to be a Texan. Proud to have voted for George W. and Dick Cheney.

So you should be equally proud to volunteer YOURSELF & YOUR family members to go to Iraq & fight for your heroes. When do you leave? Before or after DUMBYA appoints Pat Robertson to the Supreme Court?
Originally posted by 123KMOM:
Hey, Orlando, and Voodoo

Your rhetoric is precisely why Kerry lost the election yesterday. Kerry asked the country to "find common ground".

Do your party a favor.....drop the hate Frown

Do YOUR party a favor and volunteer YOUR family members to fight for YOUR heroes. It's only fair after all you wanted them in office.

I don't hate you & yours, I pity people who are so fearful & narrow minded.
Last edited by voodoochile
Just so you know, Nobody (Rep. or Dem.) takes their KIDS to the front of the line to volunteer!! What a STUPID comment!!!! The MEN and WOMEN that volunteer are ADULTS and make that decision on their own!!!! And by the way my son that just turned 25 yesterday DID just that about a month ago!!! And I still support G.W. Bush and his decision to fight back.
No, I pointed out the fact that while you choose to define extremists as "willingness to pass laws taking away another citizen's freedom to choose because that choice is offensive to their religious beliefs"

I showed you where the left can be defined as extremist by denying my right to choose because they don't agree with my view of the Second Amendment.

If you are talking about people wanting to change abortion laws because they feel that it is offensive.....then I guess over half of the population of the country is extreme.

If you feel that we, as Conservatives are out of the main stream, I ask you to view this map.

Also, read the exit polls. Seems you are the one out of the mainstream. The mainstream just swept W into office for another 4 years.

The mainstream swept the Senate, the House, the Governors Houses and the State Houses.

The minority, the extreme left, lost.

Lots of Red on that map.
I don't equate being "mainstream" with being right or righteous. For the record, I also don't equate it with being wrong. I prefer to regard any given issue on its own merits. So the old "everybody's doing it" line doesn't mean much to me.

The quote from my post that you used contained the word 'religious', YOU asked what consituted a religious extremist, and I answered with an example. Again, gun control is not a religious issue. Neither is tort reform or mass transit, other issues that are divisive.

I don't believe that everyone who voted for Bush yesterday is anti-abortion; if you have hard evidence to the contrary, please post the link. So the posted map is irrelevant. Personally, I am not in favor of abortion. I am, however, in favor of freedom of choice, unencumbered by someone else's imposed religious beliefs. Wow, what a left-wing whacko that must make me.

All I can say is WOW! You believe that religious persacution is immenent? You no longer believe this is a great country? You actually think your the next supreme court judge is just chomping to take away your civil rights?

And yet, Bush is supposed to find a way to reach out to your side. The fact is that there is no dealing with the angry and irrational people like yourself.

We even have more posts on the poor disenfranchised voters from FL in 2000. Can anyone site a single proven case of legal voters that were actually turned away. The only votes that almost didn't get counted were the military absentee votes and for 5 bonus points, can anyone tell us just which party fought to have those votes not counted?

Here's a little course that I like to call Taxes 101, it's generally not taught in any schools but out of my tremendous sense of civic duty, I'll offer the quick condensed version for free. People with incomes in the top 5% in this nation pay almost 20% of the collected income taxes, people with incomes in the top 50% account for over 96% of all income taxes. Taxes were never meant to be a vehicle for wealth redistribution but not only has that become precisely what they are, you actually have people that just don't think it's enough. I, as well as every other taxpayer in the country, received a tax cut and even got a one time rebate from Bush. I happily kept mine, did you send yours back based on the moral outrage you seem to have about tax cuts? I'm betting you didn't. (mine was spent on, what else but baseball equipment).

The only difference between us and the Middle East, I'm so afraid, is instead of a country like Afghanistan with infighting between the Muslims it may very well be who's a born-again Christian and who's not

We even have posters (paBBmom) who are, apparently, hard pressed to see a differnece between American and Afghanastan.

How is any president supposed to reach out and find a way to bring people like this together?

There are a number of names of people disenfranchised during the 2000 election in these articles:


Washington Post

And some legal background:

Legal aspects

Just because you didn't hear (or didn't much care) about it doesn't mean it didn't happen. You may also choose to believe that it's having happened in the presidential candidate's brother's state was a coincidence. And I'll believe you'd be every bit as insoucient had it been Gore's brother who was governor with a resultant Democrat win.

And Bush promised all that 'reaching out' and 'bringing together' stuff in 2000 as well. What did he do to make good on that promise?
Last edited by Orlando
You provide a couple of links from the media to sell your point. I’m sure they validate your point. Sorry, I didn’t open them for a reason. We are all being fed a diet of liberalism on a daily basis from the mainstream media. I watched the mainstream media most of the day yesterday and their bias is overwhelming. It has almost reached a level of paranoia. At some point in time their agenda has changed from reporting the news to spinning their opinions. It used to be that you could pick up a newspaper and get the news. Tune on the television to the nightly news and you would understand what was happening at home and abroad. Not so today. Rush Limbaugh is on the right and mainstream media on the left. The problem is everyone knows Rush is a show for entertainment, he advertises it in that manner, and pokes fun and verbal barbs at the liberals. What concerns me is a great portion of the population fails to realize the mainstream media has become the same thing (but with opposing views) except they camouflage their intent and call it unbiased. We're caught between a rock and a hard place. Control the media and you become a police state. Allow the media to go unchecked and we allow a propaganda monster to consume the unsuspecting population. Having “known” you for years on the HSBBW I know you are not part of that unsuspecting population and susceptible to shallow rhetoric, but what about the rest of the population? If they can believe WWF you KNOW they believe the news. How does the population get unbiased news? Maybe we should start our version of Sean Hannity and Alan Colmes show on the internet. We could call it the Fungo Orlando show. Big Grin

It's not as easy as you make it sound."Taking away choices" can sound over-bearing, but a law school professor taught me you often win the argument only if you get to phrase the question. Abortion is a classic example; is the question, "Does a woman have the right to choose what happens with her own body?" or is the question, "Does a woman have the right to take the life of an unborn child"

One of the best talking head comments that I heard yesterday was that the media and foreign countries should now realize that the "American view" of things is not confined to what you hear most loudly from New York, California, or Washington. Some of the analysts need to learn to say "Religious" without automatically trying to marginalize by adding the word "Right". Many of us are sincere and serious about our faith, and try to live it according to Scripture. We all fall short, and none among us is perfect. Far, far from it. Christians in our country are no more 100% zombies blinded by Pat Robertson than Iraq is a country of 100% extreme Islamists. Every Iraqi is not a terrorist in waiting.

We're a blend of a lot of views and all of us have some concerns that are more important to us than others. Attempting to marginalize any sincere view with labels is unproductive, on the right or on the left, and a significant result of this election is that the mainstream media will have to realize that there are sincerely held views by a large segment of the population of Americans that can't be ignored or written off as "extremist". It doesn't mean that every view considered a Christian position will become federal or state law, it just means those views won't be easily pidgeon-holed or written off, and if our national and state leaders will listen to more of their constituents, from all sides, that doesn't seem like such a bad thing.
Bush has to reach out to absolutely nobody........President Bush will not change any of his beliefs to appease anyone......And, the majority of America agrees with his beliefs....

Hey, Kerry supporters always have the option of moving to France......You can visit with Arafat, he's there, now......You can all be buddies and feel good together.....Don't worry, we'll still be fighting for your freedom.....
For some reason, "a woman's right to choose what she does with her body" has always seemed like such a silly argument...if that be the case, then why is society concerned with any form of drug use laws. Let 'em just "shoot up" and leave 'em alone, huh? Razz The only seemingly effective argument from the left always drags back around to religious extremism. That's just lame. The nature of laws in society almost always stem from some sort of moral issue. Laws "for the common good" are necessary for a civilization to continue to exist. History has numerous examples of fallen civilizations because morality was tossed out the window...I know, a blanket statement...please don't ask me to cite specifics. Roll Eyes Abortion, same *** marriages, embryonic stem cell research...all have opponents based strictly on moral issues "for the common good"...yet the easiest argument is to label opponents religious extremists. Before you know it seat belt laws will have their origin in the church. Eek

Well said.

Having religious beliefs and a moral code makes you a zealot to many of our friends on the left in this country. Liberals are developing a strange and utterly unwarranted paranoia of people with a strong set of moral beliefs while at the same time their religion seems to have become their own liberalism.
Fungo, of course I understand the concern about biased media. That's why I included the link referring to and quoting the hearings regarding Ms. Harris' actions to show this wasn't just another conspiracy theory; that there were serious questions to be investigated. I felt the comments here regarding the 2000 Florida results were trivializing a serious issue; the question was asked to 'name one disenfranchised voter' (as if it hadn't happened at all), so I offered an answer.

Though I am certainly more liberal than many on this board (I'll pause now while you gasp and whisper "I had no idea" Wink), I share your concern about media bias, though I don't believe it's as all-pervasively left as it is often portrayed. I watched two networks on election night. CNN was almost gleeful as the trend for re-election emerged; ABC, funereal. You could pick your station to match your mood.

Between bajillions (that's the official number Big Grin) of internet news sources and hundreds of cable and satellite stations, people can choose the news source that "talks to them". Unfortunately, this can mean that we're not looking for news, we're looking for confirmation of already-held beliefs. I like your idea of you and I going in on a balanced news show. We could base it on all-baseball-analogies-all-the-time. But I'd really rather call it the Orlando Fungo Show biglaugh.

Good point, Hokie, the question definately colors the answer, (You probably got the old, "Are you still beating your wife?" one as well). And, as we saw during the election, if you get people asking the wrong questions, you really don't have to worry about providing answers.

Both questions are valid ones, and both could even be said to have religious implications, as there are cultures where women are second class citizens. I'd like to think ours isn't one of them. But they are (no kidding!) mutually exclusive, and the ensuing questions about what constitutes life, the repercussions of either stance, and respect for women as thinking citizens are all part of the entire question.

I, too, would like to see our country be the blend that we were all promised in our Social Studies classes. My concern after this election is less for the media, and more for the politicians and their advisors --- adopting whatever view simply in the hopes of getting votes and the chaos, repression, and backlash that could cause.

Blast, had to do some actual work there for a while, and seemed to have missed the "talking reasonably" window. Wink
I told a fellow webster today that I was not going to post anymore on the HSBBW because this site is getting out of control. I am sorry to go back on my word. I know there are others who feel the same.
I realized that I contributed to this thread and I should not have, though I never insulted anyone, or anyone's opinions. I even tried to inject some humor.
I find many comments (from both sides) to be insulting and totally out of line. Even if it the discussion remained civil, this is not the place for it.
There are many sites where one can go to express their views regarding religion and politics. It has nothing to do with freedom of speech. I don't mind (and I think a lot of others)reading arguments regarding should a pitcher throw a curve ball at 9, should one make an early commitment, is hitting over rated,etc. Compared to this, I actually enjoy Limon's posts!
I realize that this is a very difficult time for our country right now, so many people divided on beliefs and opinions. No matter what your "beliefs" are, most of these teach the importance of "tolerance". I have not seen much of that in this thread or on the site for that matter.
Think about it, if your son came looking for information on this site would you have wanted him to stumble upon us arguing over these topics? I would not.
I think it is a very sad day (week) for the HSBBW. JMO
Tiger Paw Mom,

I agree with you 100%. On the other hand - it is just one topic of thousands - and this too shall pass.

Given that it is a free internet site - I think you will always get some people who must share their opinion - however inappropriate. It is not about what is good for the site - or its members. It is about their insatiable selfish desire to spew opinion.

The lack of civility - and the obsessive desire to spew opinion unrelated to the intent of the site - is (IMO) simply a reflection of the world we live in today.

I wish Bob wouldnt allow the nonsense either - but this site has prospered under his guidance -and I am sure it will continue to prosper.

When it gets that bad - just flip to another topic. Its pretty easy to do.
I find some dark irony that the Canadian government is expecting a small exidious of US Democrats will move to the Northern tundra to enjoy socialized government while at the same time professional baseball is moving from Canada to Washington DC because of economic woes and will play in a stadium named after a democrat.
The map KellerDad shows, shows nothing. The majority of those states in red have very low populations and represent 5 or fewer electoral votes. One red state, North Dakota, on that map has 385,000 registered voters total. The St. Louis Metro East Area far surpasses that state's total population. We would be a very small speck on that map.

You can find maps that represent population and not area. Those maps look much different.

KellerDad took the opportunity to take a shot at me. Nice shot. Where in my post did I insinuate how I voted or what party represented my political views? Also, the phrase MANDATE - TO QUOTE ONE OLD GUY, "ME THINKS HE PROTEST TOO MUCH." Must have stepped on his toes. The post you attacked stated that this election came down to one state. So you declare that a mandate? Who are you kidding? I went on to state that the Democratic Party must change. Seemed like a non-biased and accurate assessment. Since you have attacked me, I very desperatly want to continue this. However, I wish to remain positive on any activity that I do for fun as with this site. What would arguing with you prove? Nothing! Hey, enjoy gloating in YOUR victory. Again, I feel that certain actions by the President of the United States can either forge unity or division. That was the purpose of my posts. Gosh, I sorry I took you toy call MANDATE away from you. Seems you really like playing with it.
Last edited by CoachB25

posted November 04, 2004 09:07 AM
Bush has to reach out to absolutely nobody........President Bush will not change any of his beliefs to appease anyone......And, the majority of America agrees with his beliefs....

Hey, Kerry supporters always have the option of moving to France......You can visit with Arafat, he's there, now......You can all be buddies and feel good together.....Don't worry, we'll still be fighting for your freedom.....

Credentials are in the eye of the beholder..Words speak louder than credentials!

The reality is that our freedom to renounce US citizenship is not as accessible as you think it is. It is actually very difficult and generally takes about 5 years to accomplish, all the while having to pay US income taxes along with whatever foreign personal taxes are due. Also, most western countries make it very difficult for US citizens to obtain citizenship in their country. (Mostly these policies came about during the Viet Nam war)

To others on the religion discussions - whatever you religious beliefs, or lack thereof, we have a constitution, bill of rights and several hundred years of tradition in this country that, among other things, guarantee the separation of church and state. I don't believe that the "liberals" are any more misguided about not wanting government sponsorship of religious "morals" or religion then "rednecks" are about having the right to blow the **** out of something on a moments notice with any kind of firearm they want to buy.

Religion, God and the bible have no more role in our government then guns have in religion!!! Seek spirituality in church and find governance in government. To do otherwise is to accept an autocratic theocracy as our form of government.

Nothing makes me more sick (or frightens me more) right now than to hear Pat Robertson debating a pro-choice Catholic Nun this morning on CNN and telling her in so many words, in response to her asking what gives him the right to tell someone else what to believe, that he can and will do this because his religious beliefs demand that he do so and are the RIGHT ones.

The fathers of our country and the authors of our constitution and bill of rights were amazingly bright and forward looking in there ability to provide protections for all citizens that prevent the majority from running ram shod over out voted minorities. Giving up ones civil rights does not protect the country and once forfeited are very difficult if not impossible to get back. (Ashcroft, Patriot Act) The bill of rights is the only protection any US citizen has against political evils and wayward policies. TAKING THEM AWAY WILL NOT MAKE YOU SAFER! Protect and cherish them because if you allow them to be taken away, you will never get them back.

Just so you know, I am, have always been and still am a conservative. I was a republican before the so-called "moral majority" kidnapped the party and now I am watching the neocons kidnap the party from the evangelicals. The most amazing thing, if it wasn't so disturbing, is watching the neocons use the evangelicals and their moral sensitivities and paranoia in such a Machiavellian campaign for power and control. The result is that the Republican Party is already starting to pull itself apart due to competing conservative agendas.

I'm not sure where I will turn in the future for political companionship. Education, forethought and consideration are no longer valued traits in the party. Republican thought and philosophy is now so shallow, so that it can be easily obtained in 30 second chunks, that political actions today are driven by least common denominators and so based on end justification of the means that it no longer is representative of anything other than war, projection of violence and maintenance of power. In other words, the Republican Party behaves like the schoolyard bully.

I'm just grateful that playing baseball is our constitutional right guaranteed in the bill of rights. Cool
Last edited by Wheelhouse
How many of you don't realize that most of what is said during an election is rhetoric? A lot of you keep on spewing it out after the election is over. Personally, I wasn't thrilled with either candidate. I simply voted for the one that was, IMO, the least likely to cause major problems.

The real fact is that the economy is cyclical and the president has little impact on the economy, while the economy can have a significant impact on the choice for president.

We don't know what the long term effect of the war in Iraq is going to be. Only time will tell. The only thing that we know for certain is that a too rapid or too prolonged pullout would have negative ramifications.

Appointing conservative or liberal supreme court judges tends to be moderated by congress and in any case once judges end up on the supreme court it is not unusual for them to change their ideology over time.

In other words, the choice of president will probably have very little impact on our lives in general, although it may affect some individuals. That is the way it is in a democracy.

Time to give up on the rhetoric and get back to trying to earn enough to get tax breaks on the money we've earned over the amount on which we pay most of the taxes taken in by the IRS.
Last edited by CADad

Dont feel so bad Coach. LOL

Lets use Kellerdad as an example.

Ask yourself this question - why would anyone post a picture of the burning towers on a baseball web site? Would you?

IMO - As in many areas of our current society - there is a total disregard for others views. Kellerdad reminds us of all of that.

His complete lack of sensitivity - on a baseball web site mind you - for those who are members of this site that have lost loved ones, friends and/or colleagues in that tragedy is mind numbing.

In addition to the pictures - he will go even further. He will tell folks who were directly affected by that tragedy that they need a reminder of it. The callousness of his words is almost beyond belief.

Unfortunately - the Kellerdad's of the world simply do not care. To them, this is not a baseball web site devoted to the betterment and assistance of youth athletes. Rather - it is a forum. They will spout their views - in any way they see fit - regardless of whom it offends. They will exercise their right to have themselves heard. And there isnt much you or I can do about it - except call them on it.

Life goes on.
Originally posted by PhoenixDad:
It is time to go back to baseball....

NLI's signings is one week away ... surely there is a better topic for this board.

I repeat ... ANYTHING is a better topic that this since the election is over. Nothing posted on a message board is going to change anyone else's opinion.

Pick a topic ..... ANY BASEBALL TOPIC ...
Bluedog, are you now suggesting that members of the Democratic Party do not pray? Be careful how you answer this. You will be asked someday to explain to someone more powerful than any poster on this site. I think it ironic that there are those Christians out there that sit in judgement of others. Guessed they could take time to read that little black book since they were so busy throwing stones at everyone else.
Easy does it there CoachB...I agree with you that BlueDog's tact leaves something to be desired; Frown but, it appears that in your reply you have played an all too common card...judjmental Christians. Roll Eyes Let it be known that I agree there are those Christians out there who sit in judgment of others...but I also believe there to be judgmental Jews, Muslims, athiests, agnostics, blah blah blah. Your specificity seems to be a is it phrased?...oh yeah, "narrow-minded". Big Grin
Link copied to your clipboard.