# As a nation are we too P.C. ?



## Rustycompass (Jun 25, 2006)

This thought came to mind when I saw Dustoff 's pic of the day with young Israeli girls addressing a couple of shells ... (good pic)

~ Is the importance that our country places on Political Correctness hurting us as a nation or make us united & stronger ...? 

My thoughts are that "Yes" we place way too much importance on the idea of P.C. I realize it's "nice" & "kind" to respect other cultures views & opinions & traditions but ... the term "overkill" comes to mind.

~ Has Patriotism become the opposite of Political Correctness ?

~ What do you think...?

~ I am willing to take any heat that may come my way ... :smt023


----------



## Hal8000 (May 8, 2006)

Too PC...?

Yup!

With out a doubt!


----------



## 2400 (Feb 4, 2006)

Hal8000 said:


> Too PC...?
> 
> Yup!
> 
> With out a doubt!


+ eleventybillion


----------



## Guest (Aug 17, 2006)

*I think about all the outstanding soldiers, sailors, and airmen discharged before their time because of PC....I think of all the frivilous lawsuits inundating the court system because of PC....I think of the thousands of stellar reputations destroyed because of PC...I think back in 1967, Ft Jackson, SC, while inboot camp, a DI would use every expletive deletive in the universe, all the while kickin' your butt and dissin' your momma....made for a better soldier, if you ask me...same DI today would probably wind up in Leavenworth. I think of all the firehouses in NYC, where 2 generations of my family worked, replete with Playboy pinup fotos, locker room humor, "calendar" girls everywhere...it was a fun time when I was a kid to hang out with one of my uncles at the station house...no more today. A friend of mine who recently retired tells me the ready room is no longer a fun place to be....in fact, a LCDR who was selected for promotion to CDR, lost the promotion, because of a barely off-color remark in front of female aviators, who went out of their way to insure the LCDR was retired out of the USN ricky tick...I can't use the word I want to use to describe PC, but let's just say we are becomng a country of pansey fruit.:smt076 *

And before I forget, you can thank that useless garbage profession who call themselves "lawyers"....all scum...for the way the country is turning into a fruitopia.!!!


----------



## Rustycompass (Jun 25, 2006)

~ :smt038


----------



## Baldy (Jun 21, 2006)

Count me in with Dustoff. Man I wish I could write like that. I get all worked up and make a mess of it. I am with you man 100%.


----------



## travelinman (Aug 17, 2006)

amen, you all are so right. It seems the rights of the many are being taken away by the few who 'might' be offended:smt076 :smt076 :smt076


----------



## jwkimber45 (May 6, 2006)

travelinman said:


> amen, you all are so right. It seems the rights of the many are being taken away by the few who 'might' be offended:smt076 :smt076 :smt076


+gazzilion


----------



## scooter (May 9, 2006)

jwkimber45 said:


> +gazzilion


What he said........:smt1099


----------



## Guest (Aug 18, 2006)

Too PC? I don't think so.


----------



## Buckeye (Jul 13, 2006)

+1 Dustoff

And if we didn't need any more dire signs of it, the Federal Circuit Court in Detroit today struck down America's right to defend itself as being unconstitutional...It's *unconstitutional* for America to Defend Itself???!!!! last time I read the constitution it said something about the Govt having the duty to protect this country from all enemies foreign or domestic in the preamble or somewherew thereabouts (it's also in the President's sworn Oath of Office) :smt011 :smt011 :smt011 :smt076 :smt076 :smt076

*Judge Finds NSA Program Unconstitutional *

By SARAH KARUSH, Associated Press Writer
27 minutes ago

A federal judge on Thursday struck down President Bush's warrantless surveillance program, saying it violated the rights to free speech and privacy, as well as the separation of powers enshrined in the Constitution.

U.S. District Judge Anna Diggs Taylor in Detroit is the first judge to rule on the legality of the National Security Agency's program, which the White House says is a key tool for fighting terrorism that has already stopped attacks.

"Plaintiffs have prevailed, and the public interest is clear, in this matter. It is the upholding of our Constitution," Taylor wrote in her 43-page opinion.

The administration said it would appeal to the 6th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in Cincinnati.

"We're going to do everything we can do in the courts to allow this program to continue," Attorney General Alberto Gonzales said at a news conference in Washington.

White House press secretary Tony Snow said the Bush administration "couldn't disagree more with this ruling." He said the program carefully targets communications of suspected terrorists and "has helped stop terrorist attacks and saved American lives."

Taylor ordered an immediate halt to the program, but the government said it would ask for a stay of that order pending appeal. The American Civil Liberties Union, which brought the suit, said it would oppose a stay but agreed to delay enforcement of the injunction until Taylor hears arguments Sept. 7.

The ACLU filed the lawsuit in January on behalf of journalists, scholars and lawyers who say the program has made it difficult for them to do their jobs. They believe many of their overseas contacts are likely targets of the program, which monitors international phone calls and e-mails to or from the U.S. involving people the government suspects have terrorist links.

The ACLU says the 1978 Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act, which set up a secret court to grant warrants for such surveillance, gave the government enough tools to monitor suspected terrorists.

The government argued that the NSA program is well within the president's authority but said proving that would require revealing state secrets.

The ACLU said the state-secrets argument was irrelevant because the Bush administration already had publicly revealed enough information about the program for Taylor to rule. The adminstration has decried leaks that led to a New York Times report about the existence of the program last year.

Taylor, a Carter appointee, said the government appeared to argue that the program is beyond judicial scrutiny.

"It was never the intent of the framers to give the president such unfettered control, particularly where his actions blatantly disregard the parameters clearly enumerated in the Bill of Rights," she wrote. "The three separate branches of government were developed as a check and balance for one another."

Administration officials said the program is essential to national security. The Justice Department said it "is lawful and protects civil liberties."

In Washington, Republicans expressed hope that the decision would be overturned, while many Democrats praised the ruling.

"It is disappointing that a judge would take it upon herself to disarm America during a time of war," Rep. Pete Hoekstra, R-Mich., chairman of the House Intelligence Committee, said in a statement.

West Virginia Sen. Jay Rockefeller, the top Democrat on the Senate Intelligence Committee, said the decision shows the executive branch needs more external reviews.

"The administration is wrongly convinced that it can run the country without Congress or oversight. This is their tragic failure, and the courts understand it," Rockefeller said.

ACLU executive director Anthony Romero called Taylor's opinion "another nail in the coffin in the Bush administration's legal strategy in the war on terror."

"At its core, today's ruling addresses the abuse of presidential power and reaffirms the system of checks and balances that's necessary to our democracy," he told reporters.

One of the plaintiffs in the case, Detroit immigration attorney Noel Saleh, said the NSA program had made it difficult to represent his clients, some of whom the government accuses of terrorist connections.

Saleh, a leader in Michigan's large Arab-American community, also said he believes many conversations between people in the community and relatives in Lebanon were monitored in recent weeks as people here sought news of their families amid the violence in the Middle East.

"People have the right to be concerned about their family, to check on the welfare of their family and not be spied on by the government," he said.

Sen. Arlen Specter (news, bio, voting record), R-Pa., the Senate Judiciary Committee chairman, is championing a compromise that would allow Bush to submit the surveillance program to the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court for a one-time test of its constitutionality. But under Thursday's ruling congressional approval would not be enough, said Richard Pildes, a professor at New York University School of Law.

Taylor suggests in her ruling that the program "would violate the Constitution even if Congress authorized it," Pildes said. "Until Congress actually addresses these questions, I would expect most appellate courts to be extremely reluctant to address many of the questions this judge was willing to weigh in on."

While siding with the ACLU on the surveillance issue, Taylor dismissed a separate claim by the group over NSA data-mining of phone records. She said not enough had been publicly revealed about that program to support the claim and further litigation would jeopardize state secrets.

The lawsuit alleged that the NSA "uses artificial intelligence aids to search for keywords and analyze patterns in millions of communications at any given time." Multiple lawsuits have been filed related to data-mining against phone companies, accusing them of improperly turning over records to the NSA.

The data-mining was only a small part of the Detroit suit, said Ann Beeson, the ACLU's associate legal director and the lead attorney on the case.

___

Associated Press writer Katherine Shrader in Washington contributed to this report.


----------



## Thor (May 11, 2006)

I think that we, as a Nation, have become too thin-skinned, refuse to accept responsibility for one's actions, and look to place blame and find fault on /with anybody we can. It's all excuses any more. Look at the reality, if a white or hispanic person uses the "N" word, they are accused of "hate". When I grew up, it was a mild epithet, at worst. Now, it's "hate", and YET, I heard a rap song (not by choice) where the N word was used repetetively. Minorities seem to almost LIVE to be able to play the "race card". Lord forbid that we actually "profiule" a terrorist". It's not PC, you know. 

On the Judge....... I think she did what was right. This is one of the many things I disagreed with in the Patriot Act. Did the tactics work?? Yes, without a doubt. Are we safer because of it?? Probably. Are they truly within the Constitution?? I doubt it. I have to reflect on what Franklin and Jefferson (I think Jefferson said something similar); "Those that are willing to sacrifice essential liberties for some security, deserve neither". I do have some concerns with the past & current administrations and their ongoings. Clinton made Carnivore & Echelon a reality and who knows what else he allowed while in office (let's not go with the Monica thing, either). Bush has circumvented our Constitutional rights in several cases, too.


----------



## tony pasley (May 6, 2006)

after 56 years i have finally learned 1 pc phrase" corperate Better System" just read the caps


----------



## SuckLead (Jul 4, 2006)

I'd have to say we are too PC. When you say something to someone that you can't figure out what was offensive about it, yet they still go insane that you said it... too PC.


----------



## 2400 (Feb 4, 2006)

Maser said:


> Too PC? I don't think so.


Of course not. :smt082 :smt082


----------



## jwkimber45 (May 6, 2006)

Maser said:


> Too PC? I don't think so.


This coming from a punk living in the peoples republic of kalifornia:smt076 :smt076

:smt011 :smt011

I feel sorry for you man


----------



## Guest (Aug 18, 2006)

:smt082 :smt082 :smt082


----------



## js (Jun 29, 2006)

jwkimber45 said:


> This coming from a punk living in the peoples republic of *kalifornistan*:smt076


There... I fixed it...


----------



## Guest (Aug 18, 2006)

jwkimber45 said:


> This coming from an awsome and expert shooter living in the peoples republic of kalifornia:smt076 :smt076


No, there I fixed it better.
:mrgreen: :smt082 :mrgreen:


----------



## jwkimber45 (May 6, 2006)

Maser said:


> No, there I fixed it better.
> :mrgreen: :smt082 :mrgreen:


Your attitude is wearing me out boy.:smt011 :smt011


----------



## Mike Barham (Mar 30, 2006)

Heh heh. I find the people who claim "awesome" and "expert" status are usually neither.

*Never pay again for live sex! | Hot girls doing naughty stuff for free! | Chat for free!*


----------



## jwkimber45 (May 6, 2006)

Mike Barham at Galco said:


> Heh heh. I find the people who claim "awesome" and "expert" status are usually neither.


+1

Those who have 'something' to brag about usually don't


----------



## Maximo (May 26, 2006)

jwkimber45 said:


> +1
> 
> Those who have 'something' to brag about usually don't


If you have to brag about it yourself it didn't warrent being bragged on in the first place.


----------



## Todd (Jul 3, 2006)

We are way too PC and have been for a long time. I remember back in college (early 90's) I got my grade lowered on 2 papers. On one I used the term "manhole cover" instead of "sewer cover". The second one, I had the nerve to call the headmaster of my prep school the "Headmaster" instead of some other, non-gender defining title (the teacher couldn't even give me an acceptable alternate term). I've come to the conclusion that no matter what you do and how careful you are, if you speak or type something, some thin-skinned person is going to be upset at the words you use.


----------



## scooter (May 9, 2006)

Todd said:


> We are way too PC and have been for a long time. I remember back in college (early 90's) I got my grade lowered on 2 papers. On one I used the term "manhole cover" instead of "sewer cover". The second one, I had the nerve to call the headmaster of my prep school the "Headmaster" instead of some other, non-gender defining title (the teacher couldn't even give me an acceptable alternate term). I've come to the conclusion that no matter what you do and how careful you are, if you speak or type something, some thin-skinned person is going to be upset at the words you use.


All of us thin skinned people resent your terminology

:mrgreen: :mrgreen: :mrgreen:


----------



## Rustycompass (Jun 25, 2006)

scooter said:


> All of us thin skinned people resent your terminology
> 
> :mrgreen: :mrgreen: :mrgreen:


 :smt043 now, that wuz funny.... :smt043


----------



## scooter (May 9, 2006)

rustycompass said:


> :smt043 now, that wuz funny.... :smt043


Unfortunately its kinda true too tho...
If ya stuc two knives into a cardboard box with the tips ending up 6 inches apart and I put my hand between them palm facing one tip and back facing the other,dead center between them ,when I pull my hand out Ill probably be bleeding on both sides:numbchuck: :numbchuck:


----------

