toastywombel

Wow, so this entails conservatism,

There is No New Thing Under The Sun

 

The philosophical core of conservatism is pessimism about the improvement of mankind. That is not to say that conservatives necessarily regard humans as entirely deplorable. It is rather to say that they agree with Marcus Aurelius that he who has seen the present has seen everything. The accidents may change, but the fundamentals of human nature and the texture of human experience do not.

So even though this is not true, seeing as human behavior has drastically changed and evolved throughout history, I want to skip to, 'if you have seen the present, you have seen everything'. Really what does that mean? Considering that the present is ever changing, I do not think that statement is an accurate description of reality.

When the Mayans saw the night sky five thousand years ago, that means that they saw the future of space travel/machinery, as it is today.

Merged post follows:

And is this something conservatives should be proud of?

Conservatives really do not share the sophisticated insights of the modern man, and they reject not this or that sophisticated theory but sophisticated theorizing as a practise.

Merged post follows:

Thus the conservative says that we didn't take a wrong turn in the free debate. It was its premises that were at fault. This realization in turn requires us to develop not just different public policy but a different and less "sophisticated," if more sophisticated, understanding, and again not just of economics or politics but of the human condition. We must see that the Old Adam, and the Old Eve, are still with us. And we must see that the entire Enlightenment project of redesigning human existence was flawed, not only in its execution but in its basic design.

So the author seems to be making a point that the Enlightenment was a negative on humanity? This must be a joke, I also love the terrible wording

This realization in turn requires us to develop not just different public policy but a different and less "sophisticated," if more sophisticated, understanding, and again not just of economics or politics but of the human condition.

So the author wants a public policy that is less sophisticated yet more sophisticated understanding of the human condition?

The author seems to be arguing against innovation, and stating that not every problem can be solved, therefore we shouldn't try? This is really ludicrous.

When an attack is made on a friend, I tend to respond, however, I completely take your point.

 

Ecoli, jryan, Pangloss - As I mentioned, if you dislike the fact that bascule is trying to encourage discussion regarding a topic about which he genuinely cares, and if you think he is discussing this topic too often, then please either refrain from participating and/or use the report post feature so you guys can discuss in the mod forum (except jryan, who can report a post, but not discuss administrative action) whether or not bascule's actions are appropriate and take action should it be deemed necessary. Otherwise, your comments appear intended only to ridicule, and that's not really helpful for keeping a thread on track. Also, I apologize for "back-seat moderating" here, but I posted in a hurry and also note that you guys are staff members, so I'm really not sure who else is going to request this of you if someone like me does not. Cheers.

 

 

 

Per the thread topic... I take the tea party seriously, only in that I am really concerned with the path down which they seem to be taking political discourse in our country, and how they mobilize to elections in a much "denser" manner than folks more like myself.

 

My primary concern is that what they are doing is more about raw unfocused anger, and that they will exercise that anger in an unfocused way. I take that very seriously, and see it is a definite threat to our collective well-being. For that reason, I've voted "Yes" on the poll.

 

I can appreciate concerns against "big government." I can appreciate a desire for freedoms, and I can appreciate much of what they claim to represent. What I don't appreciate is how often their logic is broken, built on flawed premises, and disconnected with reality.

 

I see the movement as less about government, less about freedom, and more about rage and more about selective ignorance.

Same reason I voted yes on the poll.

I'm very well aware of the double split experiment. Saying they take every path possible seems over the top to me, but nonetheless, to the original question, light is not a probability wave.

But light is a probability wave until it interacts with an observer, that is what collapses the wave function, that is the whole point of the double-slit experiment.

In physics and chemistry, wave–particle duality is the concept that all energy (and thus all matter) exhibits both wave-like and particle-like properties.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wave%E2%80%93particle_duality

Strictly speaking, the term particle is a misnomer because the dynamics of particle physics are governed by quantum mechanics. As such, they exhibit wave-particle duality, displaying particle-like behavior under certain experimental conditions and wave-like behavior in others (more technically they are described by state vectors in a Hilbert space; see quantum field theory). Following the convention of particle physicists, "elementary particles" refer to objects such as electrons and photons, it is well known that these "particles" display wave-like properties as well.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Particle_physics

Photons, like all quantum objects, exhibit both wave-like and particle-like properties. Their dual wave–particle nature can be difficult to visualize. The photon displays clearly wave-like phenomena such as diffraction and interference on the length scale of its wavelength. For example, a single photon passing through a double-slit experiment lands on the screen exhibiting interference phenomena but only if no measure was made on the actual slit being run across. To account for the particle interpretation that phenomena is called probability distribution but behaves according to the Maxwell's equations.[47] However, experiments confirm that the photon is not a short pulse of electromagnetic radiation; it does not spread out as it propagates, nor does it divide when it encounters a beam splitter"[48]. Rather, the photon seems to be a point-like particle since it is absorbed or emitted as a whole by arbitrarily small systems, systems much smaller than its wavelength, such as an atomic nucleus (≈10−15 m across) or even the point-like electron. Nevertheless, the photon is not a point-like particle whose trajectory is shaped probabilistically by the electromagnetic field, as conceived by Einstein and others; that hypothesis was also refuted by the photon-correlation experiments cited above. According to our present understanding, the electromagnetic field itself is produced by photons, which in turn result from a local gauge symmetry and the laws of quantum field theory (see the Second quantization and Gauge boson sections below).

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Photon#Wave.E2.80.93particle_duality_and_uncertainty_principles

So light can be described as a wave, but at times can also be described as a particle, to simply say that light cannot a wave is not accurate. Especially if you point out from above,

To account for the particle interpretation that phenomena is called probability distribution but behaves according to the Maxwell's equations.

This thread wasn't about putting faith in straw polls, it an attempt to show that some like CBS NEWS, and FOX NEWS seem to be minimalizing Ron Paul, with opening statements to articles like,

"New Orleans -- Former Massachusetts Governor Mitt Romney ® won the Southern Republican Leadership Conference straw poll with 24% of the vote. It was an impressive display of organizational ability for the 2008 presidential candidate, especially considering he didn't even attend the event"

It glorifies Romney, who won by one vote in a poll that means very little, on his impressive organizational abilities, please.

bascule; What I think your not understanding; Those involved are for the most part, all upset with one or more issue, certainly not the same issue or are they necessarily on one side, either the Dem/Rep platforms. There are just as many opposed to Republicans, as Democrats, IMO depending on how far they went off target to their constituents wishes. Charlie Crist and John McCain, each very popular in their States (Florida/Arizona) in 2008, will likely not even be the Republican Candidates, after the primary much less win an election in November.

 

No, those involved will vote for the ONE, best promoting whatever their one or more grievance, whether their is a 'TEA' party. This could well be a Democrat, Republican and yes a few seem to be swinging toward Libertarianism. If there is a Tea Party, very unlikely in 2010 (not enough time) or in 2012 (possible), it would split mostly the Republican Part, defeating their own purpose. Keep in mind Unions, with their grievance are planning much the same thing in 2010, which I'd suggest is also not going to benefit their agenda or purpose;

 

 

 

http://www.independentpoliticalreport.com/2010/04/major-labor-union-working-against-democrats-forming-third-party-in-north-carolina/

 

 

 

 

I don't believe you really could justify the spending of the current Administration, compared to the last one, much less try and justify projected spending and deficits through the next decade. Frankly I don't think you even understand how much ONE Government Employee, under Union Contract (over a million $ per), is and will be costing taxpayers, then calculate into the equation the numbers increased over the past 15 months alone, much less those proposed increases into the future. It's simply unsustainable and if my own figures are correct, will cause a total restructuring of the US Government, with in the next 10-20 years. I don't believe the Republicans, Libertarians or any 'Party' can be elected to reverse, what has already been done by this administration, which completely ignored (along with the last one) pending financial problems dating back to 1965, with what I still believe should have been a minor recession.

 

 

 

No sir, I don't think so. It's somewhat amazing to me, being from the 'Do Nothing' generation (now in our 70's/80's) and screaming this pyramid scheme, first by the Unions (50's-60's), then by Governments, was not sustainable. Our big error was not JFK, but not knowing his VP Candidate, Lyndon Johnson who effectively made FDR look like a ranting conservative, my opinion. I'll repeat this again...You are paying me 1200$/month (more than my annual income while in the service 1950's), for doing absolutely nothing and though I paid in the maximum for years, whether self employed or working for others, I have long since received every penny donated, interest and all. No less is going on TODAY with some Government employees and or Union Workers, who are receiving near or over 100K$/year in retirement.

 

 

 

toasty; Why am I NOT surprised you agree with bascule...

 

Yes, Bush ventures into socialism were errors. Prescription Drug Plans are rapidly equaling Medicare/Medicaid in deficit obligations and there seems to be no end to his 'Compassion' where the 'Conservative' simply got lost and his 'Faith Based Initiatives' has taken on a life, even he couldn't have imagined, by Congress. He did double the Education Department Budget and did nothing to reduce spending by HIS CONGRESS (Republican) or very much of his last two democratic Congress, until the last year. Think he VETOED ONE spending bill in his first seven years.

 

However, this is where those involved were mislead, thinking Obama and those elected in 2008 several senators/50+ House members), would change things. Not only did NOTHING CHANGE, these programs and others were built on and we have many new ones, all built on other programs that caused the problems. If your expecting different results, I'll leave it to the proverbial definition of insanity. 'If you do the same things over and over, expecting different results..."

So if Obama, and the new congress have not changed anything, then what are the tea party people protesting?

Merged post follows:

nixon kissinger secret bombing cambodia laos

reagon supplying arms to terrorists to finance secret war in nicaragua

bush/cheney/rummsfield trashing the seperation of powers and the constitution

 

where were the teapeople for all of that? cheerleading as far as i can tell.

 

the constitution,seperation of powers,and a free press are what these people can't stand. are the tp standing up for the truth about iraq wmd? what the hell was going on in cheney's office with the cia?, anything? no they just whine about losing an election.

better they lose elections than u.s. lose all our protection from corrupt polticians.

 

as much as i would like to ignore these people i think thats how we wound up with gwbush.

I agree, they really are just protesting losing the election, and that Obama is black, I mean many of them are doing just that, lets face the facts.

Is it true that one's capacity to study things is independent of the knowledge acquired through education?

No, its not totally independent. For example it is necessary to know algebra before going into calculus. Or it is necessary to know how to use a computer (through being taught) before you can study anything on the internet.

Is balls to the wall really that awesome? It sounds painful, or at least uncomfortable and socially awkward, especially if the wall is stuccoed.

Balls to the wall can be somewhat awesome as long as you aren't too hasty at getting to the wall.

http://firstread.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2010/04/10/2264694.aspx

NEW ORLEANS -- In the presidential-preference straw poll here at the Southern Republican Leadership Conference, Mitt Romney won by ONE vote over Ron Paul -- out of 1,806 cast.

 

Romney received 24% of the vote (439 votes) to Paul's 24% (438 votes).

http://liveshots.blogs.foxnews.com/2010/04/10/romney-wins-srlc-straw-poll/?test=latestnews

New Orleans -- Former Massachusetts Governor Mitt Romney ® won the Southern Republican Leadership Conference straw poll with 24% of the vote. It was an impressive display of organizational ability for the 2008 presidential candidate, especially considering he didn't even attend the event.

http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-503544_162-20002208-503544.html

NEW ORLEANS -- Mitt Romney won the straw poll at the Southern Republican Leadership conference here Saturday in a victory that will be taken as a sign of the former Massachusetts governor's strength as a 2012 presidential candidate.

http://www.cnn.com/2010/POLITICS/04/10/republican.conference/index.html?iref=allsearch

New Orleans, Louisiana (CNN) -- Former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney defeated Texas Rep. Ron Paul by a single vote in the Southern Republican Leadership Conference's 2012 straw poll on Saturday.

Hmm. this is a comparison of this news headline from several different sources, it seems much of the media is minimalizing Ron Paul.

Yeah I am going to agree with bascule on this one, many of the tea party groups seem to be very ignorant of the actions of Republican Administrations, but highly alerted of the actions of Democratic Administrations.

I saw a guy driving down the road the other day in a big red truck, he had a sign in the window about 2'x2' and it read, "Obama Sucks".

I think these people should be taken seriously, but in reality I cannot understand their stance. They are essentially going to protest everything Obama proposes at this point. I think they are a heavily polarised group, much like many far left anti-war groups.

However, the comparison is different. A vast majority of Bush policy decisions were obviously failures and/or errors. The Obama Administration has not had much of a chance to produce results before the tea party protesters started up. I mean if you judged President Bush from just is first year you would be leaving so much out.

One could also propose that the tea party movement can also be attributed to the rise in the popularity of libertarianism. (Ron Paul)

Here is possibly how.

http://astronomy.swin.edu.au/sao/guest/knebe/

Most colonial America, abolished Slavery in the 18th Century (1700's) and as mentioned, the US outlawed importation of Slaves in 1808. We're talking a very few land owners, in a very few States, that were very aware of what was heading there way. Do you really think, it was all worth a few years.....

 

You might like to read this article, those wanting to celebrate their heritage, may not be who you think they are...

Yeah most of colonial America, except every state south of the Mason Dixon Line, Texas and east of.

Well I wouldn't say it was a few landowners, considering there were around 3.9 million slaves by 1860, so a few? Each of the landowners controlled 300,000 slaves or what.

The truth is there were many slave owners in the south, not just a few.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Slavery_in_the_United_States

And I looked up that article, I liked it. But look I don't support everything the North did, but the South wasn't right either. Both sides made the wrong moves and it ended up being the bloodiest war in American History. Although it was a bloody war, I think it was a key part in the History of the United States, cementing the states as part of one Union, indivisible.

Can anyone tell me how close to reality this bit of information is:

 

---

 

The distance between the Earth and Moon is 108 times the diameter of the Moon

 

The distance between the Earth and Sun is 108 times the diameter of the Sun

 

The diameter of the Sun is 108 times the diameter of the Earth

 

---

 

Appreciate your help...

Diameter of Earth is 12,756.2 kilometers

"If you take the above number and multiply it by 108 you get 1,377,669.6 km that is about 20,000 kilometers off, or about 1.5 diameters of the earth off."

Diameter of sun is 1,391,000 kilometers

take sun divided by earth and you get around 108, its like 109 ish so that part is somewhat accurate.

diameter of moon is 3,474.8 kilometers

distance between moon and earth is 384,403 Km

do the same thing, divide and you get around 110. So its off by a bit there, plus its good to note that the moon is moving away from us very slowly, so a set in stone number like 108 will get ever less accurate.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Moon

I'm not going to do the last one, because I think you can, but by the way this is not totally accurate, if you consider that the orbits of these objects are elliptical, therefore there are fluctuations in the distances between these objects.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Astronomical_unit

Usually nothing in nature is mathematically that pretty. So that 108 thing, is around right, but not totally right and really a slew of numbers such as 115- 105 could be put forth and have the same point, and be considered by some as accurate, especially if thrown into a poem like you sited. It is easy to twist numbers, by just changing them a little.

I have to say, by far, the coolest t-shirt would be the biohazard. It's one I would wear without feeling like a pretentious intellect. It doesn't say, "look at me, I'm smarter than you." It's more of a declaration. "I like to take risks."

I agree, I think the bio-hazard would be the best out of all the choices on a t-shirt. I think as a website logo, the text should be to right the side, not the bottom.

You know, now that I think about it, even though I voted for mine, I have come to the conclusion that I like the biohazard the most.

Merged post follows:

I agree, I think the bio-hazard would be the best out of all the choices on a t-shirt. I think as a website logo, the text should be to right the side, not the bottom.

 

You know, now that I think about it, even though I voted for mine, I have come to the conclusion that I like the biohazard the most.

I mean really, the biohazard logo, is just balls to the wall awesome.

Um I don't know if you misunderstand. I'm pretty sure a system does not physically take every possible path, but it is described by the superposition of all possible states.

Particles behave like waves until observed or measured, so yes at some level it does physically take place. Again I reference the double slit experiment.

There is a variation of the double-slit experiment in which detectors are placed in either or both of the two slits in an attempt to determine which slit the photon passes through on its way to the screen. Placing a detector even in just one of the slits will result in the disappearance of the interference pattern. The detection of a photon involves a physical interaction between the photon and the detector of the sort that physically changes the detector. (If nothing changed in the detector, it would not detect anything.) If two photons of the same frequency were emitted at the same time they would be coherent. If they went through two unobstructed slits then they would remain coherent and arriving at the screen at the same time but laterally displaced from each other they would exhibit interference. However, if one or both of them were to encounter a detector, time could be required for each to interact with its detector and they would most likely fall out of step with each other—that is, they would decohere. They would then arrive at the screen at slightly different times and could not interfere because the first to arrive would have already interacted with the screen before the second got there. If only one photon is involved, it must be detected at one or the other detector, and its continued path goes forward only from the slit where it was detected.[9]

From there you can go by the different interpretations. A widely accepted one is the Copenhagen Interpretation.

The probability "wave" can be said to "pass through space" because the probability values that one can compute from its mathematical representation are dependent on time. One cannot speak of the location of any particle such as photon between the time it is emitted and the time it is detected simply because in order to say that something is located somewhere at a certain time one has to detect it (of course, since photons travel at a known speed (the speed of light) at any given time (stated to Planck accuracy) you can calculate (to within Planck distance) where the 'probability' field is 'centered', but until the particle is detected, you can not be certain 'exactly' where it is).

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Double-slit_experiment

Not to derail but this couldn't pass without comment.

 

 

Much like the current US with regard to Capital Punishment? Or Universal Health Care?

I think capital punishment is a different issue. Slaves had no choice in becoming slaves. People on death row are convicted in a court of law because they have committed crimes of the worst form. (Not always, but it is what we hope from our justice system)

Universal Healthcare is a somewhat comparable issue. However I don't think we should comment on it here, maybe a new thread?

On my science HW, I'm completely stuck on these questions. Some one help please?

1.discuss at least three features of a hominin's post cranial skeleton (does not include skull) which suggest that it was bipedal. Any hints guys?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bipedalism

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Human_skeletal_changes_due_to_bipedalism

Can it get really any easier than that?

I'm going to have to disagree.

 

I don't believe electrons take every possible path (I would like to know where you heard that from or why you know this), though they have the ability to take certain paths and based on its wave function you can find the probability of where it will be, but it does have a definite location.

 

The wave function (or its probability wave) is not the actual wave-like property of light or matter. The wave function is merely a mathematical model of what you are describing, in the case of an electron, its usually position, but can also be spin or something of the like. Depending on how you construct the hamiltonian (energy of the system) of Schroedinger's equation is what determines the physical entity you are describing.

 

So as far as I know: No light is not a probability wave, because the probability wave is not something physical, but a description of something physical.

 

Edit: Also, anything can have a probability wave if you want it to.

 

lol how did this one get get pulled out of the stack, just realized this is from 2007, gah I dislike posting on old stuff.

Have you ever heard of the double slit experiment?

That video may seem juvenile but it is accurate.

Also I think Richard Feynman was the one responsible for the Sum over histories. Every system takes every possible path (or history) from A to B. You might also want to look up superposition.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Path_integral_formulation

In physics and chemistry, wave–particle duality is the concept that all energy (and thus all matter) exhibits both wave-like and particle-like properties. Being a central concept of quantum mechanics, this duality addresses the inadequacy of classical concepts like "particle" and "wave" in fully describing the behavior of quantum-scale objects. Orthodox interpretations of quantum mechanics explain this ostensible paradox as a fundamental property of the Universe, while alternative interpretations explain the duality as an emergent, second-order consequence of various limitations of the observer. This treatment focuses on explaining the behavior from the perspective of the widely used Copenhagen interpretation, in which wave–particle duality is one aspect of the concept of complementarity, that a phenomenon can be viewed in one way or in another, but not both simultaneously.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wave%E2%80%93particle_duality

/me glares at all the people voting for supernova

/me glares at you.

Yes. I think that our exchange is a prime example of this difficulty. It was very easy for you to copy my words (ie, my behavior), but you needed to ask me to explain my thoughts to you.

 

;)

“I know you believe you understand what you think I said,

but I am not sure you realize that what you heard is not what I meant.”

;)

Well our language is very well adapted at allowing us to communicate ideas and thoughts. Humans also are very well adapted at copying, so I don't think it is as hard to copy a thought process as you may think.

Take into account that the vote now is more about the direction to go. Whatever logo we pick, we will need to tweak a bit, so if you like a style but dislike a specific issue in the logo, you can still vote for it and raise the issue later.

 

We just need to pick a direction now so we're more focused in designing a new logo.

 

~moo

Haha so you decided to use the one with the light glow or did that happen by accident?

ParinioA, is correct, IMO; For Lincoln and maybe the movement of the day, was to free the Slaves, but to the those that permitted Slavery and I have to add "Indentured Servants", which was prevalent in most every State, the argument was one or more of several rights, including the right to succeed from the Union. Remember Virginia, with such names as Jefferson, Washington, Harrison, Richard Henry Lee (two large plantation owners), led the fight for independence, the Constitution and all that is/was the US, 70-80years earlier, then the MAJOR user of slave labor/indentured servants (tobacco farms)...

It is good to point out that Jefferson initially wanted to abolish slavery.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thomas_Jefferson#On_slavery

And in all reality indentured servitude is just as bad as slavery. In a sense it is practically slavery through economic restraints. So I am not quite understanding what your pointing out. That outlawing of indentured servitude was not as justified as outlawing slavery? (in the 13th amendment)

The Southern States had a better idea, before the war;

 

http://www.civilwar.com/forum/archive/index.php/t-130.html

Well some would argue that the south did not have a better idea, because the legislation for the abolishment of slavery failing over and over again in all these southern states, and in Virginia as you pointed out. Plus it is good to note that this made the United States appear as somewhat a brutish country to other comparable countries such as Great Britain. They abolished slavery in 1833, without a war, and started a movement to outlaw slavery worldwide called Anti-Slavery International a few years later.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Slavery_Abolition_Act_1833

There were many other countries, which abolished slavery long before the United States did, and many without wars like Canada, Mexico, Bolivia, Prussia, Russia, and more.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abolition_of_slavery_timeline

The point is the Southern States were a long way off from abolishing slavery and were already far behind much of the civilized world in doing so.

I also like to point out that I followed your link and I just wanted to let you know you quoted a guy from a civil war forum, named kevin. Who, by the way, showed no credible links to back up his claims. I'm not saying all of what he says is wrong, what I am saying is maybe its best to only quote forums when really necessary, and not using that as proof of a historical event, as you did.

Now to make it perfectly clear, I am not trying to argue Lincoln's objective, the need for a civil war or the Emancipation Proclamation, only to suggest there was a great deal more to the Civil War, than Slavery. Now we seem to be at it again, at least here, when a States as a State wants to honor those that fought and died for a cause (not necessarily slavery) no less equal to their history, than anything else celebrated by all States or what many States celebrate independently.

I will agree the religious differences, cultural differences, and political differences were all on heightened alert. The differences between the North and the South certainly did extend beyond slavery. Good points to make.

Now to make it perfectly clear, I am not trying to argue Lincoln's objective, the need for a civil war or the Emancipation Proclamation, only to suggest there was a great deal more to the Civil War, than Slavery. Now we seem to be at it again, at least here, when a States as a State wants to honor those that fought and died for a cause (not necessarily slavery) no less equal to their history, than anything else celebrated by all States or what many States celebrate independently.

john; I'd certainly disagree that the leaders of the Confederacy and the leaders of Nazi Germany, had anything in common. If I felt the German Army, was aware of what their Government was doing in total (don't feel they did) then I'd have to add the German Military and/or Society.

Totally agree, the South believed in States rights, and although that may have implied slavery to some degree, they did not gas millions of people and they also didn't attempt to invade any other countries. Robert E. Lee for example is no where comparable to anyone in the SS.

Also the Nazi's did what they did in the 1930's and 1940's, the Confederate States have the argument of 'different times' on their side somewhat, but if it was known throughout the world that what the Nazi's were doing to many of their own citizens (Jews, Homosexuals, and other minority groups) it would have been completely unjustified even at that time.

Sadly religion is often used for that but if you think back so has economic systems, race, and even where you are from.

 

 

So while religion is used for that it does not have a strangle hold on mans inhumanity to man for sure.

Good point Moon, it really doesn't matter what type of system it is, what matters is that a few people gain control of that system and use it for just what you described.

OP claiming he was quoting a Fox News headline (even Fox News isn't that bad)

That was the headline on the front page of Fox.com at the time that I linked to this article.

There were several other forums/ websites that commented on the article and mentioned the headline that was featured on the Fox.com homepage.

http://cmkxunofficial.proboards.com/index.cgi?action=display&board=mofo&thread=4955&page=1#52578

http://forum.gatorsports.com/viewtopic.php?f=5&t=991&p=14403

http://story.newsclicker.com/index.cgi?id001=mjmjtucart7apom&ADN&pub-5921050296885253

http://knowthebuzz.com/2010/04/06/obama-no-nukes-even-in-defense/

Even though they were morally wrong, were the confederate solder's any less American? I think you can celebrate their service without celebrating their cause.

Plus it is somewhat unfair to imply that Confederate solders were on the wrong side of the fight, or fighting for slavery. Sure it was pro-slavery state governments that seceded from the union, but many of the 'boys in gray' were fighting against the North because the North invaded the South.

Just an interesting tidbit, to inform the reader, when Abraham Lincoln made the Emancipation Proclamation, he only freed the slaves south of the Mason Dixon line. This was to an appeal to the border states that were still sided with the union, but in reality had huge slave based economies. This was to make sure they didn't secede as well.

Hmmmm.. my theory busted.

Well lets hope so for the sake of our planet.