willard

You better believe that is the case.. if you supported the war.. you probably thought it was ok to shoot down unarmed civilians who were "rioting" Do you know WHY the protests were happening at the time? I have a very good friend.. who is fairly conservative and is a US Postal Inspector....who at the time was a hippie.. and is a graduate of Kent State University.. as is his wife. Both of them were there that day.. and in the line of fire. Shall we say they have an interesting story to tell and it was that the guard had no justification for opening up on their fellow Americans. It was part of what was tearing us apart as a country at the time.. a stupid war.. halfway around the world supported by a bunch of people who did not have to go to that war..but had no problem sending off others to do their bidding.... for no apparent good reason....based on lies. AND lets not forget.. thinking that deadly force on thier countrymen was completely justified. According to my friends who were there it was a matter of time before something bad happened. The protestors stepped up the level of their violence each time an attempt was made to disperse the crowd, who were already violating the law. As one of them told me, he was surprised the NG kept their heads as long as they did. It's a shame that innocent onlookers were killed and injured, blame that on those who were stupid enough to throw rocks at men with guns.

Damn it I agree with you for once. Society has chosen to forget about oaths taken by people such as politicians, police, etc. so why should doctors be any different? It used to be an oath and a promise meant something, but I fear those days are long gone.

I wasn't at Kent State. Just because they were "there" doesn't mean squat. A lot of people "was there" at Kent State and other places of social tradgedy and "saw" whatever they were later told they saw, or saw what their personal agendas/politics wanted them to see. We have two eyes, which means we can see whatever we want to see from either side of an issue. Some here see the US in a dire position, and others see that everything is pretty much alright. But we're all "there." Being there and watching the events happen in front of you over several days doesn't mean squat?? Maybe not in your reality, but in most peoples', and the court's, it does mean squat. In fact, people can be tried, found guilty, and executed based on eyewitness testimony. Second-hand info, though, usually won't even get an arrest warrant issued. Don't mean squat? I beg to differ. You UTTERLY missed the point. Think about what I posted without your angst in the process, it might make more sense to you. Maybe the story of the 5 blind men and the elephant might help. I believe I got your point the first time. Those who were there know what happened. How and why it happened is what changes according to their own point of view. Both of my teachers who were there and watched history unfold were students at the time. One would think they would try to place all the blame on th NG yet they didn't, instead they told what they saw and let us, the listeners, decide for ourselves who was right and who was wrong. I give them a lot of credit for that, being as it was their classmates and their fellow students...their peers...who were fired upon and died that day. Kinda like a blind man standing at the end of the elephant, holding onto a part that is long and slender when suddenly he is covered with a warm, wet, smelly substance. He could either... a) Be holding the trunk and got vomited on... b) Be holding the tail and got pooped on or.... c) It's a male elephant and he got..you know...

I wasn't at Kent State. Just because they were "there" doesn't mean squat. A lot of people "was there" at Kent State and other places of social tradgedy and "saw" whatever they were later told they saw, or saw what their personal agendas/politics wanted them to see. We have two eyes, which means we can see whatever we want to see from either side of an issue. Some here see the US in a dire position, and others see that everything is pretty much alright. But we're all "there." Being there and watching the events happen in front of you over several days doesn't mean squat?? Maybe not in your reality, but in most peoples', and the court's, it does mean squat. In fact, people can be tried, found guilty, and executed based on eyewitness testimony. Second-hand info, though, usually won't even get an arrest warrant issued. Don't mean squat? I beg to differ.

No, they weren't on the hill with the shooters. One was off to the side app. 200 ft. away when the shooting started, the other was watching the events unfold for the last few days and was keeping well away from the protesters, knowing full well they were hoping to cause trouble and he didn't want any part of it. They DID tell their stories to investigators, but they weren't trying to prove or insinuate any blame in doing so, much less pushing any "conspiracy theory". So, in defense of two people I have a lot of respect for, take your sarcastic attitude toward them and stick it where the sun don't shine. Go ahead and ban me, I don't care. But I won't stand by and let you call my former teachers a couple of liars just because you don't like what they saw.

Yep, you're right, you were there and saw the whole thing. My teachers weren't really there, they just lied to their classes and somehow got fake degrees from Kent State. Thanks for your insight, but no thanks. I'll believe what my teachers, who WERE there, told me.

Hmmmm.... ever hear of the Kent State massacre? Troops fired on and killed a bunch of kids. Don't fool yourself, it can happen. Have you been in the military? Not at all. But they refuse orders, even unlawful ones, at their own peril. And in a state of marshal law, the order to shoot civilians might be lawful. a: No, never been in the military. History of back problems kept me on their "do not include" list. b: Were you are Kent State when the shootings occurred? I had two teachers in high school who were there that day and witnessed what happened. Do not let yourself think it was a case of some poor innocent college kids who did nothing wrong being fired upon by mean spirited national guardsmen. The kids had been allowed to demonstrate freely until they started making threats and refusing to allow others who were NOT demonstrating to go on with their business. When ordered to disburse they instead started throwing rocks, sticks, bottles, and whatever they could get their hands on at the troops. The guardsmen were not without fault themselves, but have no doubt the students carried 90% of the blame for what happened. That statement is not my own, rather the consensus of two eyewitnesses who were there that day. Those kids made two mistakes that day. 1) They pushed a group of confused men with rifles past their breaking point, and 2) They started a gunfight and only brought rocks. Sorry, no sympathy here.

Sure was. Especially if you liked paying taxes and not getting anything in return, etc. And you are free to do those things without fear of being imprisoned, something that wasn't true in the mid 1700s. Do you feel for better or for worse? If GW is so evil then why is he still in office? Are we so stupid as to elect representatives who would allow such an evil person to remain in power? All my bitching is nothing compared to those who dislike our President. I voted for GW...TWICE...and am proud to say so. The alternatives were unimaginable.

Wrong on both counts. Circumstances then were much worse than today. They had no way of getting rid of a ruler who they had no voice in choosing, we do. Don't like the pres? The longest you'll have to endure is 8 years. That is just one expample. What "unbelievably harsh transgressions" are you referring to? The state militias being sent out to quell the insurection? Who do you think did the uprising before? If things ever got to the point of a significant portion of the population rising up against the government, since our military is all volunteer the chances of them firing upon large masses of their own friends and family is virtually nonexistent. Unless, of course, you feel our boys in uniform are just a bunch of deaf-dumb-and blind idiots who can't make an intelligent choice for themselves. I know they are capaple of making such a decision and have faith that they would make the right one.

Amazing how some people bitch about everything they don't agree with. Do you really have it so bad?? Do you actually think our lifestyle today has more than just a superficial similarity to that in the mid 18th century? Back then the colonies were ruled by a government not elected by it's citizens, the government was across a great ocean and was pretty much permanent. No matter how much you dispise your elected officials you can rest assured that they can be elected out of office. In other words, if you don't like this country the way it is, then change it or move. You're free to do either or both. I don't care which, but just quit bitchin'. It's giving me a flippin' headache.

If they want quick, seems like the guillotine would be the ultimate in quick but probably too gruesome for most people. Walt Very quick indeed. When they work properly, that is. Being a mechanical device they were known to mess up on occasion, the gravity powered ones being the worst. Their blades often wouldn't slide smoothly and leave the victim badly mutilated yet still alive. Even when working perfectly the victim's head would sometimes remain conscious for a few brief moments after being severed. Even I feel that is "cruel and unusual".

Ah yes, falling back on sarcasm. BC did a lot more than just lie about a bj. I'll assume you are intelligent enough to know that and are just ignoring that point.

Nope, not kidding.

The answer to your immediate question is: Yes. A sitting President may pardon or commute the sentence of any individual. I'm not aware of any exception. To answer the context of your question: There was no unlawful action on the part of the people whom this aide worked with. There was no unlawful leak. The Vice-President didn't cover anything up. The President didn't cover anything up. In fact, the person who "leaked" the name, Richard Armitage, didn't cover anything up either (so much so that he was charged with nothing in violation of any law). Scooter Libby was convicted of lying to a prosecutor. His conviction stands, his fine stands, his prison term was commuted. I would like to know if he is still able to continue his appeal. I'm guessing yes. I guess lying to a prosecutor is worse than lying to a Grand Jury since Libby got jail time (commuted) and a fine, but that POS Bill Clinton, who brought more shame to the office than all others combined, only got his wrist slapped and we are all supposed to kiss his ass afterwards. Well, then there was Richard "I am not a crook" Nixon. Even Tricky Dick's actions were tame compared to Slick Willy.

If states insist upon executions then they should take a serious look at nitrogen. The condemned is placed in a sealed room into which nitrogen is pumped in and all air containing oxygen is pumped out. Death is fairly quick and absolutely painless. Anyone who has passed out from fumes displacing oxygen can attest to how quickly one loses consciousness.

The answer to your immediate question is: Yes. A sitting President may pardon or commute the sentence of any individual. I'm not aware of any exception. To answer the context of your question: There was no unlawful action on the part of the people whom this aide worked with. There was no unlawful leak. The Vice-President didn't cover anything up. The President didn't cover anything up. In fact, the person who "leaked" the name, Richard Armitage, didn't cover anything up either (so much so that he was charged with nothing in violation of any law). Scooter Libby was convicted of lying to a prosecutor. His conviction stands, his fine stands, his prison term was commuted. I would like to know if he is still able to continue his appeal. I'm guessing yes. I guess lying to a prosecutor is worse than lying to a Grand Jury since Libby got jail time (commuted) and a fine, but that POS Bill Clinton, who brought more shame to the office than all others combined, only got his wrist slapped and we are all supposed to kiss his ass afterwards.

A poll for those who feel other than absolute yes or absolute no.

It will either rain today....or it will not. I will either retire rich....or I will not. The cat will either catch the mouse....or he will not. Of course it will either happen or it will not! What other alternative is there????

I don't know..is there? If you don't know I would suggest you find out before going to class wearing a dress that doesn't match your pumps.

Whether you or I, or the employees for that matter, consider the dress code a good idea or not is irrelevant and a matter of opinion. The fact is there is a dress code and the employer chooses to enforce it. I have one where I work and signed a legal contract that includes an agreement to abide by that code, and I am sure you did the same where you work.

I don't think that pestering or otherwise distracting people engaged in such a vital public safety function as ATC is a good idea. Furthermore, I believe that such interference in the performance of their duties does not serve the public interest. Leaving them the hell alone does. mh . Since when has enforcing workplace rules been considered "pestering"? If the man signing your check says you are to wear plain brown slacks and no sneakers, and you agreed to it when you signed the contract, then you wear what he tells you. Pretty clear cut the way I see it. If abiding by a dress code makes one unable to safely perform the job then he should make way for someone who can.

This asshat gave up his rights when he decided to take another person's life. If he wants to be a woman then put him in with Bubba over in cellblock C. I'm sure Bubba will train him to be a proper bitch in a matter of a few days.

Employers have every right to establish a dress code for their employees. That includes the FAA. Don't like the dress code at work? Try to get it changed or find another job. However, what people wear on their own time is their business and nobody elses.

I'll second your suggestion for ibuprofin and tape. I would just add half a dozen asperin tabs. Those will treat any small cuts or even a broken finger/toe. Anything more serious can be helped with improvised gear such as a belt, webbing, etc.