Please Help Me Understand : LUSENET : A.M.E. Today Discussion : One Thread

Let me see the war on Iraq for the end to terrorism current cost over $200 Billion in supplemental spending, which means Debt Financing, Let's see the privatization of social security hmmm, take money out of a system that has been fiscally mismanaged by republicans and democrats alike, and how do we pay current recipients when the well runs dry? Oh a supplemental spending plan or more debt.

RP in a post that accurately reflected his moronic cognitive abilities says that President Bush is reflective of the "values" of evangelicals.

Could he possibly mean that evangelicals believe that spend now pay later is really the best way to provide for their children?

How can we begin to address the mounting deficit with this kind of spending?

I am so confused, President Bush is strongly against reparations for slavery, he says that it is unfair to inflict punishment on the sons for the sins of the fathers.

That being so, why should my children and their children potentially be responsible for paying for the presidents's ill advised attack on Iraq?

-- Anonymous, January 26, 2005


Here is an article I copied off of 'Fox News.'

2nd Columnist Admits Being Paid to Back Bush

Wednesday, January 26, 2005

WASHINGTON President Bush on Wednesday ordered his Cabinet secretaries not to hire columnists to promote their agendas after disclosure that a second writer was paid to tout an administration initiative.

The president said he expects his agency heads will "make sure that that practice doesn't go forward."

"All our Cabinet secretaries must realize that we will not be paying commentators to advance our agenda. Our agenda ought to be able to stand on its own two feet," Bush said at a news conference.

Bush's remarks came a day after syndicated columnist Maggie Gallagher (search) apologized to readers for not disclosing a $21,500 contract with the Health and Human Services Department (search) to help create materials promoting the agency's $300 million initiative to encourage marriage.

Bush also said the White House had been unaware that the Education Department paid commentator and columnist Armstrong Williams (search) $240,000 to plug its policies. That contract came to light two weeks ago.

Bush said there "needs to be a nice independent relationship between the White House and the press, the administration and the press."

And he noted that "we have new leadership going into the Department of Education."

Education Secretary Margaret Spellings started this week, replacing first-term Education Secretary Rod Paige. Paige had ordered an investigation into whether Williams should have disclosed the deal to produce television and radio ads promoting the No Child Left Behind Act (search).

Williams has apologized, calling it a mistake in judgment to not disclose that he was being paid by the administration but insisting he broke no laws.

Gallagher apologized to readers in her column Tuesday, saying that she was not paid to promote marriage but "to produce particular research and writing products" -- articles, brochures, presentations. "My lifelong experience in marriage research, public education and advocacy is the reason HHS hired me," she wrote.

She said it never occurred to her to tell readers about her work for the government. "I should have disclosed a government contract when I later wrote about the Bush marriage initiative. I would have, if I had remembered it. My apologies to my readers."

In 2002, Gallagher contributed to an essay promoting marriage that appeared in Crisis magazine under the byline of Wade Horn (search), HHS assistant secretary for children and families.

Horn said Wednesday Gallagher was never paid to promote the president's marriage initiative in her column.

"We hired her because of her expertise in the area of marriage research in order to draw upon that expertise to help us develop materials related to healthy marriage," he said, adding that Gallagher drafted brochures and helped draft the article that was ultimately published under his name.

"At no time was she paid to go outside of HHS and promote the president's healthy marriage initiative," he said. "The federal government hires experts all of the time. There's nothing insidious about that."

Gallagher got another $20,000 -- part of which was approved while President Clinton was still in office -- from a private organization called the National Fatherhood Initiative (search), using money from a Justice Department grant. For that 2001 grant, she wrote a report on the institution of marriage, entitled "Can Government Strengthen Marriage?"

On Wednesday a report released by the House Committee on Government Reform looked into the use of taxpayer dollars to fund public relations campaigns.

The Bush administration spent a record $88 million on government- funded public relations contracts in 2004 -- a 128 percent increase over 2000, according to the report prepared for House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., and other Democrats. More than 40 percent of the public relations contracts weren't awarded on a competitive basis, the report said.

-- Anonymous, January 26, 2005

Dear Moderator,

The language Harold Gibson uses on me would get him suspended on other boards.

How about a little discipline? It's one thing to state a view, but he's bringing down the level of the board.

-- Anonymous, January 26, 2005

I want to apologize for leaving out a few words instead of

RP in a post that accurately reflected his moronic cognitive abilities says that President Bush is reflective of the "values" of evangelicals.

I should have proffered

RP in a post that accurately reflects his moronic cognitive abilities at understanding the breadth and depth of African American politcal and religious thought says that President Bush is reflective of the "values" of evangelicals.

I believe that RP's ability to process anything about African American Christian culture is severely challenged by his inability or failure to understand any history other than what happened last week at work. Thus in my opinion his posts reflect a thought process that is somewhat challenged.

It cannot be personal because I am blessed not to know this human.

-- Anonymous, January 26, 2005

Dear Moderator,

Time to step up and do your job. Personal insults are not tolerated on respectable web boards. At least a word of reprimand is in order to Mr. Gibson with a warning of suspension should the practice continue. This is the norm on other boards. I'd hope AME Today is at least as quality a product as they are.

One difference is other web boards post rules. I think the time may have come for this here.

-- Anonymous, January 26, 2005

I should say personal insults are not tolerated on Christian web boards. Anything goes on a lot of secular ones. And this is a Christian board.

-- Anonymous, January 26, 2005

The governor of Missouri just announced in his state of the state address that he wants to close a mental health center that employs a large number of people and serves many families. Their developmentally delayed and mentally ill patients would have to find other "private" facilities. What kind of value does this represent? In addition, there is a move afoot to cut Medicaid and other programs that support the lowest income families across the state. What kind of values are these?

-- Anonymous, January 27, 2005


I believe the "moronic" was not warranted. Some of the opinions expressed on the board range from the sublime to the ridiculous, but I don't think anyone should be tagged with that term.

RP, unfortunately, this board does not have suspension abilities.

-- Anonymous, January 27, 2005

Thank you sir. On another board I witnessed a poster call another poster "pig ignorant". I protested to the moderator, the moderator admonished the offender, and the offender apologized.

I said that I really was not passionate about that particular thread. I just didn't like seeing those terms used on anyone, whoever they were. Same case here.

-- Anonymous, January 27, 2005


What-ev-er! If you would like me to stop posting on this board simply ask and it shall be done. I certainly do not want to assume that in your response to RP that I would be suspended, but if you think my use of the term moronic rises to that level, I will be more than happy to leave this board.

Simply state what you mean

-- Anonymous, January 27, 2005

Simply stated:

I have not suspended your posting. I can't do it.

I am suggesting that "moronic" went a little too far.

If you said "misguided", "ignorant" (in its proper use of the word), "sadly optimistic", that does not speak to the person, just the tone of their opinion.

For example, if you called your pastor's sermons "moronic", you are judging him or her, NOT what they said.

I actually need you for another project, and I need your wit, sarcasm, and intelligence......

-- Anonymous, January 27, 2005

Moderation questions? read the FAQ