You can't "get rid" of a taboo or make something socially acceptable, however people might come to accept certain behaviors over time.    Personally, I don't see what's wrong with eating insects, although I would not do so myself.

Brian Lees (R-East Longmeadow), former State Senate Minority Leader
Salvatore DiMasi (D-Boston), Speaker of the General Court

Abortion
Requiring parental notification for women under 18 seeking abortions: Yes
Requiring parental consent for women under 18 seeking abortions: No
Banning interstate travel of women under 18 attempting to obtain abortions: No
Requiring spousal notification for married women seeking abortions: No
Requiring spousal consent for married women seeking abortions: No
Requiring a woman to have an ultrasound before obtaining an abortion: No
Requiring clinics to notify women of a hypothesis linking abortion with breast cancer: No
Banning the sale of metal coathangers: No
Prohibiting public funding of abortions: No
Reimbursing the cost of abortion under your favored health care system: Yes
Banning dilation & extraction ("partial-birth abortion"): No (although this is generally a late-term abortion procedure, which I oppose)
     a.) Life of the mother exemption?
     b.) Health of the mother exemption?
     c.) Life of the fetus exemption?
     d.) Health of the fetus exemption (i.e. birth defects)?
Banning late-term abortions: Yes
     a.) Life of the mother exemption? Yes
     b.) Health of the mother exemption? Yes
     c.) Life of the fetus exemption? Yes
     d.) Health of the fetus exemption (i.e. birth defects)? No
     e.) Rape exemption? Yes
Legalizing the 'morning-after pill' (emergency contraception): Yes
     a.) Requiring a prescription? No
     b.) Requiring parental consent for women under 18? No
Requiring abortion clinics to offer fetal anesthesia to women obtaining abortions: No
Mandatory waiting periods for women obtaining abortions: No
Mandatory pro-life counseling for women obtaining abortions: No
Funding for pro-life "crisis pregnancy centers": No

Adoption:
Allowing same-sex couples to adopt children: Yes
Allowing single parents to adopt children: Yes
Allowing bisexuals or homosexuals to serve as foster parents: Yes
Government reimbursement of all adoption fees: No

Affirmative Action:
Allowing affirmative action on the basis of race: No
Allowing affirmative action on the basis of socioeconomic status: Yes
Banning affirmative action for all universities which receive public funding: Yes

Criminals' Rights:
Capital punishment:
     a.) For treason? Possibly
     b.) For murder? No
     c.) For terrorism? No
     d.) For rape? No
     e.) For kidnapping? No
Requiring sex offenders to have special license plates: Yes
Requiring public notification of rehabilitated sex offenders living in communities: Yes
Banning prisoners from voting: Yes
Banning ex-felons from voting: No

Immigration:
Criminalizing tipping off Mexicans about the Minuteman Project: No
Requiring hospitals providing medical care to illegal aliens to report them to the government: No
Denying medical care to illegal aliens: No
Applying civil liberties and anti-torture laws to non-immigrants: Yes
Guest worker program: Yes
Granting amnesty to illegal aliens: No
Building a fence/wall across the Mexican border: No
Allowing illegal aliens access to social services, including public education: Yes
Including (legal?) immigrants in your health care plan: Yes

Disapprove (vacancy in MA-05)

Yes/Yes

At my school we were never led in the pledge of allegiance, and we did not have American flags in our classrooms until the middle of last year.  From reading other threads I learned that both of these things are required by law.  What are your experiences/views on these issues?

Where are you from in MA? I grew up in MA and we always had them.

I'm from Sudbury.  I understand that this is a thing that doesn't exactly differ by broad regions, but really from school to school.  Every other public school around here that I have seen does have flags, and before high school we did recite the pledge every week.

Doesn't Sudbury go to a regional school? Nevertheless, I'm shocked that Sudbury doesn't have them. I thought you'd say either Amherst or Cambridge.

BTW: I grew up in Medway and I did some vendoring work for Sudbury Farms while in college.

Yes, our high school is called Lincoln-Sudbury Regional HS.  I don't know how long ago you lived in the area, but Sudbury is now pretty liberal and solidly Democratic.  The high school in particular is thought of as very liberal in its policies and attitudes (as well as the politics of its staff and students).

Yes/Yes

At my school we were never led in the pledge of allegiance, and we did not have American flags in our classrooms until the middle of last year.  From reading other threads I learned that both of these things are required by law.  What are your experiences/views on these issues?

Where are you from in MA? I grew up in MA and we always had them.

I'm from Sudbury.  I understand that this is a thing that doesn't exactly differ by broad regions, but really from school to school.  Every other public school around here that I have seen does have flags, and before high school we did recite the pledge every week.

At my school we were never led in the pledge of allegiance, and we did not have American flags in our classrooms until the middle of last year.  From reading other threads I learned that both of these things are required by law.  What are your experiences/views on these issues?

[Ron Paul]

1) Ron Paul ran for vice-president against Lloyd Bentsen in 1988
2) Lloyd Bentsen contested the Democratic nomination for president in 1976 against George Wallace
3) George Wallace ran for President against Hubert Humphrey in 1968
4) Hubert Humphrey served as vice-president under Lyndon Johnson
5) Lyndon Johnson served as vice-president under John F. Kennedy
6) John F. Kennedy authorized the Bay of Pigs invasion against the government of Fidel Castro

Strom Thurmond and Abraham Lincoln

How could this be murder?  Is there any reason to believe that Sen. Kennedy did not just accidentaly drive off a bridge?  Having a fatal car accident isn't murder (even if you're drunk), and failing to rescue a drowning person is also not murder.

Massachusetts is a clear case that once a place legalizes SSM, the people will eventually support it. I am guessing that when it was first legalized, most opposed it- or at least it was closer. Same thing here. Peoples' opinions have dramatically shifted since before and after legalizing SSM. Once people realize how harmless it really is, they accept it.

Indeed you'd be correct.

In fact, I'd argue that the surge in support is totally a consequence of gay marriage becoming "cool," and enticing soccer moms by the truckload to embrace a new gay lifestyle choice and get one of those "gay marriages" they keep hearing about on Oprah.

The thing is, DWTL could have posted this seriously.

I would because the main reason for support of gay marriage stems from fear of being labeled homophobic and wanting to fit in

And if so few people support gay marraige because they think it's a good idea, who is everyone else trying to "fit in" with?

I wonder if it would help the gay marriage issue to have it come up for an election vote in Massachusetts, so that the Republicans are stuck whining about "activist voters".

Around here I haven't seen that much talk about "activist judges" recently.  The local gay-marraige opponents (it's not that partisan here, I believe the state GOP has not taken a stance at all on gay marraige, because there is conflict among the local Republicans.  The 4 Catholic bishops in the state have all come out strongly against gay marraige, however) have taken to complaining that the legislature is "anti-democratic" because they voted down having the gay marraige ballot question.  One of their major slogans was "Let the People Vote", and they stopped writing letters to the newspaper denouncing homosexuality, but rather tried to portray their movement as the defenders of democracy against the legislature.

No, I don't know of anyone at my school who is or ever was anti-semitic.  This may be due to there being a lot of Jews in my town, but I think it is generally true of society today.

I got the governor to veto my map in the minorities one, by swapping the districts of the represenatives of his party, so they though I had redistricted them out of their disctricts.

US President: George HW Bush
Monarch of the UK:  Elizabeth II
French President: Francois Mitterand (2nd term)
UN Secretary General: Javier Perez de Cuellar (2nd term)
Pope: John Paul II
Australian PM: Bob Hawke
Soviet Leader: Mikhail Gorbachev
Canadian PM: Brian Mulroney
German Chancellor: Helmut Kohl
Japanese PM: Kaifu Toshiki
Italian PM: Giulio Andreotti
UK PM: Margaret Thatcher

Wiki says that:
In order to become an MP, one must be a citizen of the UK or one of its territories, the Republic of Ireland, or of a member of the Commonwealth, so Clinton would need to become a citizen of one of these countries first. (There are many other requirements, which basically require that one be a competent citizen in good standing) 

One can gain British citizenship after a five-year period as a legal alien there, as well as passing a test and some other requirements.  So if Clinton moved right after his term ended, he could have been a UK citizen in 2006, and if he had stood in and won a by-election he could be an MP right now.

The prime minister is technically just the chief advisor to the monarch, so anyone can become PM (one does not need to be an MP first, or even a citizen).  In practice, the PM is always the leader of the largest party/bloc in the House of Commons.

While in general this sounds like a good idea, this does mean that they'd be stuck going to grad school in MS. Ouch.

hey now, our grad schools aren't THAT bad.

In fact, 4 of the top 6 people at NOAA went to meteorology grad school at Mississippi State.

But if you want to study in some field where the best grad schools are not in MS (most fields), then you're screwed.

Looking at the matchups, it certainly seems that way.  However, you should remember that this time last year no-one other than Dem. hacks were projecting the Senate to switch hands.

What did you forget?

hot communist rebels

Sen. John Kerry (D-MA) "may have competition for the Democratic Senate nomination in 2008," reports the Gloucester Times. Defense attorney Edward O'Reilly "said yesterday he will formally announce his bid at this weekend's Democratic Party convention in Amherst."

"The former Gloucester city councilor and School Committee chairman said Kerry's vote to authorize force in Iraq in 2002 is one reason why he's running."

http://politicalinsider.com/

So he's going to campaign on that Kerry originally voted for the Iraq war, no matter how much he opposes it today?  I see no reason why this would work- it's nothing like Connecticut, where Lieberman lost the primary because he was actually pro-war.

If the Republicans were to put forward a credible candidate, it would have to be someone outside of state politics, as none of the Rep. state senators/representatives have any name recognition outside their own district.  And Mitt Romney has talked insulted Massachusetts enough that he will not be a help to anyone lower down the ticket and certainly could not run on his own here.

Hi,
Are there any rules/laws for re-registration by old members? Assuming not,

Blerpiez
Progressive
Massachusetts

All on KS.  Attack KS-MO, do-or-die.  End turn

End turn

All in NE.  Attack NE-SD, do-or-die.  If this works, tactical move 5 from KS-NE.

Attack IA-NE, end turn w/o tactical move

All on Arkansas.  Attack AR-LA, do-or-die.  Await orders