alt.education

on Wed 05 Mar 2008 11:45:25p
PseuDoeCyAnts posted
in news:Xns9A58F1ACD2661OriginaliseThisThief@198.186.190.161:

> on Sun 02 Mar 2008 11:03:40p
> Pisano posted
> in news:ql8ns31k9vosidrjjgfvclhcsj61nghrnh@4ax.com:
>
>> On 2 Mar 2008 22:59:02 -0500, adykes@panix.com (Al Dykes)
wrote:
>>
>>>In article <3jmms3tka9ul697uiapfs4nucgicj2hqra@4ax.com>,
>>>Pisano wrote:
>>>>
>>>> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PYLVgMF9R9g
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>Ron Paul rejects evolution
>>>
>>> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yPoCsC8VT9g&e
>>>
>>> AUDIENCE MEMBER: I saw you in one of the earlier debates,
>>> all of the candidates were asked if they believe the theory
>>> of evolution to be true and they had a show of hands, but I
>>> didn.t see which way you voted, and I was wondering if you
>>> believe it to be true, and should it be taught in our
>>> schools.
>>>
>>> PAUL: First, I thought it was a very inappropriate
>>> question, you know, for the presidency to be decided on a
>>> scientific matter. And I, um, I think it.s a theory, theory
>>> of evolution, and I don.t accept it, you know, as a
>>> theory.. I just don.t think we.re at a point where anybody
>>> has absolute proof, on either side.
>>>
>>>Here's a summary of all the legislation that Paul has not just
>>>voted for but sponsored. The anti-war folks that back him just
>>>for troop withdrawal should be in for a surprise. His gold
>>>standard stuff is k00k economics according to essentially all
>>>economists.
>>>
>>> http://dneiwert.blogspot.com/2007/11/ron-pauls-record-in-
>>> congress.html
> -- Tiny Url: --
>>>
>>>He's been a busy little legislator.
>>>
>>
>> You left this one out:
>>
>> http://www.ronpaul2008.com/issues/
>>
>>
>> Then there's this . . .
>>
>> =-=
>>
>> What Gunny Had To Say:
>>
>>
>> Interestingly enough, the 'explanations' of Paul's record which
>> this blogger provides, contradict the facts of his record
>> posted right with them.
>>
>> For example, the blogger posts a bill sponsored by Ron Paul to
>> allow Congress to prosecute people who destroy flags OWNED BY
>> THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT. But in the bloggers analysis, he
>> claims that Paul's bill would make it illegal for people to
>> burn flags which they themselves own.
>>
>
> Well gunny seems to have a very significant problem with reading
> comprehension. Was he home-schooled?

What the blogger said in reality:


-- Even though he claims to be a "libertarian", he opposes
people's freedom to burn or destroy their own copies
of the design of the U.S. flag

H.J.RES.80: Proposing an amendment to the Constitution of
the United States authorizing the States to prohibit the
physical destruction of the flag of the United States and
authorizing Congress to prohibit destruction of federally
owned flags.

H.J.RES.82: Proposing an amendment to the Constitution of
the United States authorizing the States to prohibit
the physical destruction of the flag of the United States
and authorizing Congress to prohibit destruction of federally
owned flags.

>
> From Library of Congress' Thomas legislative database:
> H.J. Res. 80:
>
> H.J. Res. 82
>
> -----------------------------------------------
>
> H.J. Res. 80 Proposing an amendment to the Constitution of the
> United States authorizing the States to prohibit the physical
> destruction of the flag of the United States and authorizing
> Congress... (Introduced in House)
>
> 105th CONGRESS, 1st Session
>
> H. J. RES. 80
>
> Proposing an amendment to the Constitution of the United States
> authorizing the States to prohibit the physical destruction of
> the flag of the United States and authorizing Congress to
> prohibit destruction of federally owned flags.
>
> IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
>
> June 10, 1997
>
> Mr. PAUL introduced the following joint resolution; which was
> referred to the Committee on the Judiciary
>
> JOINT RESOLUTION
>
> Proposing an amendment to the Constitution of the United States
> authorizing the States to prohibit the physical destruction of
> the flag of the United States and authorizing Congress to
> prohibit destruction of federally owned flags.
>
> Resolved by the Senate and House of Representatives of the
> United States of America in Congress assembled, (two-thirds of
> each House concurring therein), That the following article is
> proposed as an amendment to the Constitution of the United
> States, which shall be valid to all intents and purposes as part
> of the Constitution when ratified by the legislatures of
> three-fourths of the several States within seven years after the
> date of its submission for ratification:
>
> `Article--
>
> `SECTION 1. The States shall have power to prohibit the
> physical destruction of the flag of the United States and
> Congress shall have the power to prohibit destruction of
> federally owned flags.'.
>
> -----------------------------------------------
>
> H.J. Res. 82 Proposing an amendment to the Constitution of the
> United States authorizing the States to prohibit the physical
> destruction of the flag of the United States and authorizing
> Congress... (Introduced in House)
>
> 105th CONGRESS
>
> 1st Session
>
> H. J. RES. 82
>
> Proposing an amendment to the Constitution of the United States
> authorizing the States to prohibit the physical destruction of
> the flag of the United States and authorizing Congress to
> prohibit destruction of federally owned flags.
>
> IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
>
> June 12, 1997
>
> Mr. PAUL introduced the following joint resolution; which was
> referred to the Committee on the Judiciary
>
> JOINT RESOLUTION
>
> Proposing an amendment to the Constitution of the United States
> authorizing the States to prohibit the physical destruction of
> the flag of the United States and authorizing Congress to
> prohibit destruction of federally owned flags.
>
> Resolved by the Senate and House of Representatives of the
> United States of America in Congress assembled (two-thirds of
> each House concurring therein), That the following article is
> proposed as an amendment to the Constitution of the United
> States, which shall be valid to all intents and purposes as part
> of the Constitution when ratified by the legislatures of
> three-fourths of the several States within seven years after the
> date of its submission for ratification:
>
> `Article --
>
> `SECTION 1. The States shall have power to prohibit the
> physical destruction of the flag of the United States and
> Congress shall have the power to prohibit destruction of
> federally owned flags.'.
>
> -----------------------------------------------
>
> Are you sure the poster's pseudo wasn't "gunny-sack"?
>