Wrath of Dagon

Even if that was true, a deist still believes in God, no? And how can the use of the word "God" be figurative exactly?

Not sure what you guys are basing that on, China is still NK's patron and the only thing keeping them afloat. No way they could get away with all their crap if it wasn't for China.

Sukov means he's a son of a bitch.

True, but that alone does not legitimize a war against them. I disagree. I believe we have a moral obligation to act and remove a regime in instances where a people are brutally oppressed. North Korea is a complex case. It's not immediately evident how we could act while minimising loss of life, but action is certainly necessary. They're under Chinese protection, and even without that casualties would be staggering, especially on the North Korean side. NK knows war is out of the question, unless they launch a full scale assault on SK.

True, but his philosophy was altered to omit his passionate support of the separation of church and state. Do you have any evidence for this? For a secular nation, the founders sure used the word "God" a lot. And again, what evidence are you basing this on? Btw, the final curriculum hasn't been adopted yet, they're still holding public hearings.

Time to cut off all aid and communication with those lunatics.

We already had a thread on this, and I would suggest the Guardian is not the most objective source on this kind of subject. For example the "sidelining of Thomas Jefferson" is a lie, he was taken out of one sentence in world (not American) history listing Enlightnment philosophers, since it was argued he wasn't an Enlightnment philosopher himself, but influenced by them.

If he's a government employee, then yes. Normally the government doesn't employ plumbers though.

That isn't quite right. Schools are in the same category as fire and police departments and hospitals. The government pays the school districts to perform a service. The reason I think it is important to understand the difference is that when a school does very poorly, the government can intervene and take over operations. This is considered about the worst thing that can happen to a school. It was part of the No Child Left Behind act. It has also proven ineffective, as the schools taken over have yet to show any improvement and struggle to attract employees. All of those are the government, including hospitals if they're public. There are different levels of government, and the examples you gave are generally at the local level. As far as First Amendment rights of students, they exist, but not to the same extent as for others. The reason being a) These are minors b) School is compulsory, so all the students are required to be there. So the school can typically regulate threatening or hostile material, but not material that is merely politically offensive.

Public schools are the government, children.

And you don't even understand what freedom of speech is, there's no point of protecting non-offensive speech. Though that's not even the issue here. The issue is people so wrapped up in their nationalistic feelings towards another country and against the US, that they find the very symbol of US offensive.

That's your interpretation. My interpretation is they were showing their national pride, just as the hispanics were showing their national pride, even if it was to the exclusion of their own country. Edit: I find your statement about the ban hard to believe, as the Supreme Court held that students still have First Amendment rights. Trying to dissuade them from expressing their views would still be a violation of their rights when done by a person of authority.

How is that relevant? Is baiting only prohibited on national holidays? Also we've established Cinqo de Mayo is not a national holiday, though it may be a nationalist holiday for some people. And you'd be sued for violating their first amendment rights. Also there was no disturbance, and even if there were, it's the people who are causing the disturbance that need to be punished.

I'd like to see if Hurlshot would send someone wearing a gay rights shirt home because they're baiting rednecks.

The crux of the matter is that wearing your own country's flag in your own country is now considered baiting. Are blacks also baiting KKK by being black, or should they all be like Michael Jackson?

Why should you be decent to people who find your flag offensive? That's the kind of self flagellation that's become so popular in the West, and will probably be its doom.

No it's not, there's a fundamental difference between a national flag and yellow polka-dots (unless the national flag happens to be yellow polka-dots of course).

Apparently there was an ROTC student who got suspended for removing a Mexican flag which was flying above the American flag, which is a violation of protocol. I heard that on the radio but couldn't find the story to link to. Why'd the kid remove it instead of put them in their proper order? There is no proper order. You cannot fly one national flag above the other, it's an insult. You either have to have 2 flagpoles, or 1 flag. Here's an interesting article I just saw which has some thoughts about immigration and the situation in the US: http://news.yahoo.com/s/csm/20100511/cm_csm/300687

Our politicians are quite scared of the hispanic vote actually.

Apparently there was an ROTC student who got suspended for removing a Mexican flag which was flying above the American flag, which is a violation of protocol. I heard that on the radio but couldn't find the story to link to.

Ebert is deliberately comparing something that really would be provocative to something that shouldn't be provocative to any American citizen. None of the celebrations he mentioned would be offended by someone wearing an American flag. Here's another editorial: http://pajamasmedia.com/victordavishanson/...at-morgan-hill/

Roger Ebert, I think he's become an internet troll in his old age.

They are a purer, better species than we are.

You hire staff when your existing staff can't deal with the work load, not before. Anyway, we're talking about government debt, the government is usually an obstruction to growth, not the cause.