PlaneShift
Fan Area => The Hydlaa Plaza => Topic started by: Monketh on March 05, 2004, 01:21:30 am
-
Ok people, I\'ve had enough arguing.
Bush is not the perfect president, nor is he a great president.
But-
Unlike some people here think is, he is not evil. Nor is he a bad president. Politics is about choosing the lesser of two evils, no?
The online community is very liberal, both smart and stupid members of the online community are so.
The High-School community is left-leaning, with honors class students being the conservatives. (People here want Bush out of office because he is the one in office, they would say the same thing about Gore if Gore were president. It\'s popular to be anti-Bush.)
Anyway, I\'m fed up with this stuff. So...
I want some real answers, no comparisons to famous historical figures, no evidence-less points, no blog-quoting, none of that.
Anyone saying just \"Iraq.\" will be shot.
Anyone mocking this post and ruining the seriousness of this thread will be shot twice.
-Blogs can not be used as evidence.
-No comparisons to Hitler, Alexander the Great, Conquering Emporers, etc...
-All posts must contain some form of evidence from an article other than this board.
-Things short similar to campaign commercials are, of course, completely off limits
ex:I want to know HOW Bush is under-cutting medicare, not why.
-No conspiracy theorems.
There is no way in h3ll Bush directly caused 9/11, anyone posting something as ludicrous as this will cause the poster to be completely disregarded in this thread. This includes any information in their posts.
-I may at any time require you to post another source to back your argument. I don\'t care if you call that bias.
--Monketh, who wants some thing real
(*sigh* Why are there no moderate parties in America? If only Liebermann could have had a chance...)
-
What is the question?
-
yes i fail to see the point of the thread. Wait wait... I\'ll do the honors myself *shoots himself*
-
With all the horrible stuff that our presidents do, it is a miracle that life goes on................ I really dont care about politics anymore because the figures are all raped to fit the fabricated need of the people. Leave the rat race and hope for an apocolypse, but in the meantime, Im playing some PS.
-
What\'s with all these complaints presidents? The party house controls the country, not the president. They choose the presidents, they fund their campaigns... of course they have these people on a leash.
-
\"Turn on to politics, or politics will turn on you.\" -- Ralph Nader
Even if you don\'t vote ( you should! ) then pay attention to what your leaders are doing and saying.
\"Naturally, the common people don\'t want war
neither in Russia nor in England nor in America,
nor for that matter in Germany.
That is understood. But, after all, it is the leaders
of the country who determine the policy and
it is always a simple matter to drag the people
along, whether it is a democracy or a fascist
dictatorship or a Parliament or a Communist
dictatorship. Voice or no voice, the people can
always be brought to the bidding of the leaders.
That is easy. All you have to do is tell them
they are being attacked and denounce the
pacifists for lack of patriotism and exposing
the country to danger. It works the same way
in any country.\"
I will not attribute this quote as it is more effective if you don\'t know who it came from right away.
-
Bah ... why should I be thinking about america when we have something worse here in europe ... its called EU. ;)
-
Originally posted by Vengeance
What is the question?
Ah, typical Venge post.
Originally posted by acraig
\"Naturally, the common people don\'t want war
neither in Russia nor in England nor in America,
nor for that matter in Germany.
That is understood. But, after all, it is the leaders
of the country who determine the policy and
it is always a simple matter to drag the people
along, whether it is a democracy or a fascist
dictatorship or a Parliament or a Communist
dictatorship. Voice or no voice, the people can
always be brought to the bidding of the leaders.
That is easy. All you have to do is tell them
they are being attacked and denounce the
pacifists for lack of patriotism and exposing
the country to danger. It works the same way
in any country.\"
Good, not quite what I\'m looking for, but good.
Originally posted by Olig
Leave the rat race and hope for an apocolypse,
Err... Without life there can be no joy?
Anywho, as should be obvious, I\'m looking for a justification of Bush-bashing. What makes any of the Democratic candidates better?
-
ah i see. ive always been a bush compromiser. not a basher and not an avid supporter. really i like where i stand. it suits me. bush hasnt been a bad president, stupid hick americans portray him and then half the country follows.
the lemming effect is very strong in our country, especially in our youth. one person will make a comment and everyone will agree, and i love to dissagree especially publicly in school. most of the people in my school dont think of me as political at all, just another boy who follows the crowd, and its really funny to surprise them and dissagree with the teachers and actually make valid points.
but enough about me, my point is 1 person in america makes a half-valid point and the rest of america follows like a lemming right off of the edge. Idiots. Bassically what has happened is bush stutters in a couple of his speeches and then america thinks hes a complete moron. you have to have some IQ level to be president, you dont just become president.
Now to the darkside, however i have lots of things to say bad about our president. he is too easily influenced by the republican party and is very trigger happy when it comes to starting a war. I like his style, but he comes out to the public about his views way to much.
Being the president and not a social icon is very important to me and basically bush has been being the president, which i like, then trying to be popular afterwards. very dissapointing and hypocritical. Also i dont think he handled 9/11 right. after 9/11 he shoulda sucked up that remourse and pity from everyone like a sponge, at least thats what I woulda done. but instead he acted like a jerk and used it as an excuse to bomb afghanistan. I woulda handled it totally differently and got everyones pity and then invaded afghanistan ONLY after i got 100% agreement with the UN. Same goes with Iraq. Both of those wars had valid points and objectives, but were handled completly wrong and sloppily. Almost half assed really.
So really overall I would say that bush has met par being president. good but not spectacular. many mistakes lead to his downfall popularity wise, but since I could care less about his poularity and im a republican I have to say overall im a bush supporter, but definally not a blind sheep, like so much of america is.
-
Ok I\'m scared to post anything now...but here goes. Be warned, I expect to rant. Also know I put this here because it seemed like a close enough topic, and since no real question was given I threw it in :P I think Bush is a fairly good president. He is not great, but not all presidents can be so, and he is not horrible despite all the empty hate messages aimed at him. As for the calling him stupid jokes that seem to never end, well it is quite redundant. At least around 45% of America voted for Bush, so to call him stupid is to call anyone who voted for him a moron for not knowing who they were really voting for. Also, I would like to see any of you adress thousands of people daily and not make a few slip ups in your speeches. Stupid and immature, if you ask me. Then again, I suppose no one really is asking.
Note: I tried to make this as un-offensive as possible, as I am not in anyway racist or prjeduce, and I am sorry if something appears offensive.
READ ME: As for the war in Iraq, whoever says ANYTHING anti-war about Iraq in my opinion is offending the entire coutnry. The fact is, we are in Iraq. Do you propose we pack up and leave? Pull out all of our troops which cost tax dollars to get there? Forget the troops that already died, let them die for no cause? This is stupid. Get over it, we attacked Iraq. Maybe it wasn\'t the greatest idea, but we sure as hell need to finish what we started! And the terrorist community needs a kicking in its ass, that has been long over-due (and face it, Saddam is a terrorist).
Here come the thought which will undoubtedly cause flamage: The Middle Eastern Arabic culture is dying. Their lifestyle, (for a majority obviously) is not very good, and whether they accept our idea\'s or not, they are not going to be content living on their own. The terrorist attacks are a last wave of resistence against the new \'modern era\', and it is soon to crash. Yes, there will always be terrorism, but I am talking about middle eastern terrorism. Other countries have already reformed to the modern era, and countries such as India and China are starting to make enconomic growth. If you don\'t believe me, look at any major corp. and find out how many execs are from across seas. The idea here is that the countries who have accepted that life is changing (as human life inevitably will) seem to be making better of it by just accepting that things don\'t stay the same forever.
My Historical Opinion: I think that the terrorism war goes deeper than the events of this past decade, or century. Europe and the Arabic coountries have never gotten along well, and much of it is to be blamed on Europe. When the Arabs invaded Europe in centuries past, they were tolerant of European religion and let the people continue their beliefs with perhaps only a small tax. In return, the Catholic community, after winning its freedom decided that Muslims were evil heathen and needed to be wiped from the earth (reminds me of Hitler...Oh boy I can feel the heat from the flames..) so crusades were cast upon the Middle East time and time again. No tolerance, no real reason to do so other than conflicting beliefs (ok, I guess that is a major reason in all warfare, but you get my drift). In return, a hatred grew between the cultures that to this day is in my opinion, burried in the culture of many Arabs; I would even say hidden in it.
So war between Arabic countries and Europe have gone on forever we all know. I therefore think it is quite possible that some of the hatred towards the U.S. might be well deserved, though not for the reasons the terrorist leaders claim, and certaintly the hatred SHOULD be absolete by now. However, we all know hatred that should be long forgotten has a way of hanging around waiting for the right time to strike. And such a strong hatred would be even harder to forgive or forget.
The U.S. is the easier target than European countries because: 1. We are the largest and easiest to make arguments against 2. We are like a melting pot for all European countries (And others, but that is not the point) This makes us a prime target for terrorism, and it is to be expected. For the immediate future, I can only see terrorism getting worse, but such is the wave of terrorism.
I do not know what will come, I do not have all the answers. I only know what I think I know, and what I think I know might be wrong :P (that was just to confuse you)
My opinions; probably stupid ones as well. Keep in mind I\'m only a Junior in High School, and I only know what I have learned :P I consider myself to be somewhat smart so I figured maybe my opinion might matter :)
-
First of all, sorry Monketh. I can\'t speak for the others, but I was just having some fun with you; exagerating my liberal views into paranoia and conspiracy... I apologize as I obviously upset you somewhat. Politics is a strange beast, both personal and public.
Anyway, back to the topic at hand. My hatred of Bush is based on my firm logic and morals:
1) First of all, he has (or rather had) near to no experience. Governor of Texas is not comparable to the prestegious office of President.
2) While Bush may have inherited a minor recession from President Clinton, he turned it into a major economic situation through his poor handling (taxes, to mention one)
3) Bush came into the office with the intention to topple Iraq, September 11th merely provided a means to accomplish this task. Quoth \'Dubya, \"He tried to kill my daddy\". To double up, Haliburton, of which Cheny once had a high rank and still has ties, got multiple contracts without even so much as placing a bid.
4) Most recently is the Gay Marriage \"crisis\". Bush intends to change the constitution, the very pillar of our nation, to, firstly, invade the rights and privacy of citizens, and secondly, and sickenly, to gain votes. Rewriting the constiution to be re-elected is a vile and shameful practice; in fact, the consitution isn\'t intended to be modified or amended except in the most severe of cases, hence the reason its so difficult to do in the first place.
There are other instances, but these are some of the prime examples.
-
Originally posted by Monketh Anywho, as should be obvious, I\'m looking for a justification of Bush-bashing. What makes any of the Democratic candidates better?
They all suck.
And Grak:
1) Then what is? Senator? *snorts*
2) I see no major economic sitation.
3) That may or may not be true, but it\'s a good point. In my opinion, Iraq is better off without Saddam, so I have no problems with that.
4) Most people seem to be in support of it; why shouldn\'t he? Anything you do good can be said to be just to get reelected.
The thing I have a problem with is that America just seems to forget to pull troops out of places. Don\'t we still have soldiers in Japan or something like that?
-
Yeah whats all this talk about Bush ruining our economy? Despite what you may think, and mind you havn\'t given any proof, he has helped our economy a great bit. Tax return policiy: Everyone should know what this was for. It gave everyone a couple hundred spending dollars to feed back into the economy. That seems like a good idea to me. As for that only benefiting the rich...Lol The country is run by the rich! They keep our economy going, and they have the power to bring it to its knee\'s as well. What if Bill Gates and Wal-Mart decided to close down their business for good and not sell? Unlikely, but it would be a blow to the economy. Anyway, the economy is never going to stay up forever. Our economy got extremely high and you can\'t expect it to last forever, there is a point when things being to fall apart no matter WHAT you do. Therefore I think Bush has done a fairly good job of keeping the economy at a reasonable level.
All politicians rave about how they are going to improve this and add that. I would like to see a candidate who came out and realized the truth: This is a Damn good country to live in, and besides minor things, we are in good shape. We don\'t need higher taxes, or more government involvement of our privacy. Why can\'t gays get married and have rights? Because religions can\'t handle it? It seems all anyone wants to do anymore is shove more and more control down your throat and everyone seems to be accepting it without question. If this continues, how long before our country is so violated that it is no longer the great country it was? If you ask me, we need less government and we shouldn\'t be so caught up in making more laws and trying to make everything \'safe\'. School should be safe. The Real World is to bite you in the ass and wake you up once you get out of school.
-
I always liked how Bush handled the after 911, at least I thought previous presidents would handled it much worse. The thing is, 911 didn\'t happen because Bush came into office. American intelligence was weak and everyone knew that. It became so bad that people coming to US by plane were not the least bit checked or given an interview, \"welcome to USA\". So, what happenned? Buncha terrorists came along and had a piknic on US ground. CIS, FBI, of course I don\'t work there and don\'t know, but islamic terrorism was thought of a thing of the past, well it\'s that way in USA, if they make a movie about it, that means it won\'t happen again, it\'s history :D But it happenned and I don\'t blame Bush, or anyone for that matter, no pointing fingers.
Bush came out strong, I really liked that. It was time to show terrorist ogranizations that America is capable to do more than film war movies in Holywood.
So, first Afganistan, ok, I think Bush had to finish with Osama first,that\'s when I would act differently. I would have pressed on Saudi Arabia to let US military patrol their borders since Osama is from Saudi and Saudi has lots of terror organization, being a very rich country. Anyway, the war with Iraq was idealogically good(Saddam n all), but in reality, more of our peoplez died, more money was spent, so far no firm control has been established.
So my point is, I\'ll wait till next year to decide who to vote for, right now I\'m sceptical against Bush.
-
Originally posted by sashok20
So my point is, I\'ll wait till next year to decide who to vote for, right now I\'m sceptical against Bush.
*points and laughs* they vote this year ya know... *snort*
-
:D true true I meant I\'ll wait till last month... aah whata hell I probably won\'t vote anywayz
-
Originally posted by sashok20
aah whata hell I probably won\'t vote anywayz
Nononono! Vote! It\'s more important than you think :|
-
Beating on the \"bad\" economy is a mistake for the Democrats.
Here (http://www.cnn.com/US/9607/05/jobless/) is an article from 1996 (Clinton presidency) where CNN says:
Economists didn\'t expect June\'s unemployment rate to be much different from May\'s, which was an already-low 5.6 percent.... But five straight months of strong job gains now have analysts worried more about inflation.
They are saying not only is unemployment historically low, but that it reached that level after 5 months of gains, which means unemployment was even higher under Clinton than that, and that anything lower is potentially inflationary.
Now look here (http://money.cnn.com/2002/03/08/economy/economy/), where CNN says:
The U.S. unemployment rate jumped to 5.7 percent in November - the highest in six years - as employers cut hundreds of thousands more jobs in response to the first recession in a decade in the world\'s largest economy.
Two-face spinmeistering can fool the people who hate Bush into further deluding themselves that we are in a bad economy, but it is simply not the case. And the first quote with a %0.1 difference in unemployment and a Democrat president illustrates that even they really know it.
The Dems need to find a new issue, or they are doomed.
Just one man\'s opinion...
- Venge
-
I\'m very much an extremist, so I expect to be countered by 99% of humanity. In fact, if I were to express my true ideology to you, I\'m sure all of you would hate me... Or at least the US citizens.
Originally posted by Davis
1) Then what is? Senator? *snorts*
Well, Senator is very much a sibling office to Governor, so no, being a Senator alone doesn\'t make one suited to the task either. I support Kerry because of his career, Bush has had none (other than being his father\'s son, obviously). While I do not support combat in any form, Kerry did risk his life for the country, which can\'t be said for Bush, who joined the Reserve to dodge the draft, then didn\'t even show up in the first place.
Originally posted by Davis
3) That may or may not be true, but it\'s a good point. In my opinion, Iraq is better off without Saddam, so I have no problems with that.
I just don\'t see how we have the right to go in and change another soverign nation, especially one that poses no direct threat to the US. All nations have the same innate right to exist independantly and under their own rule of law.
Originally posted by Davis
4) Most people seem to be in support of it; why shouldn\'t he?
The President has a moral right to uphold and defend the constitution, which should be beyond one\'s desire to be reelected. This situation just proves how little respect Bush has for this nation.
As for the condition of the economy, its not terrible, but its not great either. Despite his best, feeble, attempts, Bush has not been able to squeltch this situation. Jobs have actually been lost under this administration. And as for taxes, the average joe has recieved very little of Bush\'s promises, most of which going to the rich. The rich don\'t need more money in their coffers.
You people also can\'t be so greedy, you sometimes have to take a hit for the greater good. We as individuals don\'t matter, its the species -- the community -- that matters...
I do agree with you, Venge, the Democrat\'s economy campaign could backfire on them, but the situation would have to change...
The plain and simple is the United States and everything it stands for disgusts me these days. We\'ve fallen from our old graces on which this nation was founded. The US was founded on the prospects of freedom, yet more and more of our freedoms are taken away... How has our population become so bigoted?
As I forgot to earlier, I should also mention that even more than I hate Bush, I hate Ashcroft, but he\'s very much a product of Bush. The \"Patriot Act\" makes our nation no better than Iraq. I once expressed my views openly, but now I do not for fear of what they can do to me. If my opinions don\'t coincide with what is \"normal\", or even if they don\'t coincide with Ashcroft, all my freedoms can be taken away for no reason, other than I used the freedoms in the first place. The Patriot Act binds this nation, you call it a Democracy?
If only it was so simple, I\'d move to Canada; now that\'s a country.
Ah well, that\'s just my 2 cents; not that they\'re worth anything considering inflation...
-
Your right Grakim, in my humble opinion, its becoming like Vietnam again. I see the news and read newspapers and U.S Soldier\'s in \"a certain middle-eastern country\" have lost faith in their mission, all they want to do is to just come home, but they\'re in a \"certain middle eastern country,\" protecting what? I honestly have no idea.
As for the economy, I live in California where it\'s being hit just about the low as it can get. Look I can whine and moan all day and it won\'t do a damn thing. I\'m saying the President has to do the best he can do no matter what the circumstances are. At least Bush is trying to accomplish something, for the better or for the worse? I can\'t say...because I honestly don\'t know.
-
well, i really didn\'t dislike bush about anything untill a really read about his \"no child shall be left behind\" thing.... thats the worst idea ever. What about the kids that dont want to even try-25% of my school? might want to change it to \"No child Shall Stand Ahead\".
another thing in school, the state cut the textbook fund...why?....to fund the war.
Every year they raise the Curriculem (however its spelled) to a new level.. why would they do that if they just cut the textbook funds?...the \"war\".
The Media has alot of people turned against Teachers, at least here in Texas, for wasteing money and such.. Wrong... every year schools get less and less funding, mostly when bush is in office.
The Ends had better justify the means.
Another thing is the media, does anyone see how doubled sided it is? Anyone who says something against the Media is immediatly double crossed, spyed on.. or some way made a bad figure publicly, when everyone is the same way. at this point anything the \"media\" says, do the opposite.
-
Well this conversation was actually taking place in the #planeshift room on IRC yesterday... All of Bush\'s actions are maybe not what everyone else wants, but it is what he wants. He is not doing things for personal money benefit (The mans family is rich enough as it is!) He is doing what he thinks is right, and since no one is standing up to stop him and tell him he is wrong, NOTHING WILL CHANGE!! I can say alot more relating back to past events within his family and such but it all seems pointless....
(I didn\'t even understand what the question was Monketh so I just put down my personal opinion. Sorry if it wasn\'t what you wanted! *discharges a bullet into his head* :) )
-
Ok, political talk and I have homework to do, So, I?ll talk politics.
My issues with Bush, are based on two areas, China and personal freedoms. We have not been hard on china because there is money to be made (both parties are guilty as hell about this)
As for the loss of personal freedoms again both parties (or we can say both this president and the former are guilty of this, same with China)
In essence many of the things thrown Bush?s way in this thread can be said of Clinton.
Bombing in Sariavo (no idea how to spell it) was not supported by the UN, Somolia was a terrible disaster and contributed to many countries thinking the US is weak. During the Clinton administration the CIA and Military where both downsized and lost major funding. We bombed Iraq without UN support, We bombed Sudan without UN support. Syria offered the US Osama Bin Laden, we refused. A Deal was brokered with North Korea to give them oil and Nuclear Reactors as long as they don?t make bombs, that was a poor choice of action as we see now.
The economy, is pretty harsh, mainly because of our having to adjust to a cheaper workforce due to free trade, that is not really free both Bush?s and Clinton Championed that cause.
I mean not free because other countries work much cheaper or have forced labor, and much worse environmental/workplace safety then the US does.
Our power infrastructure is old and in vital need of modernization, yet no one wants a power plant near them. (Democrats are mainly to blame for this one, but Republicans share in this).
Governor is probably the closest thing to being president available, and Texas, New York, California are probably the best example states to do it in due to small cities and large ones and the diversity in the states. But I think no job can train you to be President of the US.
Senators are legislative, they make law and budgets, the president and governors must lead, push the legislation to get what they want, but deal with what they get. Yet Presidents and Governors are held accountable for both the good and the bad that from both, Senators are almost never held accountable.
Kerry is an interesting fellow, though I think the best Democratic candidate to challenge Bush would have been either Edwards or Lieberman. Overall we have two establishment candidates now, both are beholden to ?special interests? as is every politician, but both of these especially so.
The only points of contention is our ?war? on terror and taxes. On the war on terror I truly think we could do better then we are doing in Iraq and that we have made many mistakes, but it is going forward and we have about 250 years at this rate to equal the losses we had in Vietnam. I truly think that improving the lives of the people in the middle east and showing strength when wronged is a good policy and works well, the biggest failure so far has been PR or Propaganda, Bush and his team just don?t get how to do it.
On Taxes, I am a strong believer that less taxes the better, the federal government needs to get smaller in a big way, they have one major job, keeping the US safe They are failing in some ways in more ways then terrorists, but improving. Where the big failure seems to be is good Jobs. And that comes in phases, the boom of the 90s we will likely only see in 20 years time. Getting us to a good point is going to take some craftiness and quite possibly some sacrifices. Allowing oil to be drilled throughout the US including off the coast of Florida and California and in Alaska could drive gas prices down and lower the cost of energy across the board, but we would have to put a no export clause on that drilling and use much of the money saved to build the infrastructure for an oil free economy.
For me this election is more about who is more likely to lead us in the direction I hope we go?
My major fear is what if Janet Reno had the powers available in the patriot act, and who is the most likely to use them abusively.
Also to consider, is who is a better person to lead this nation in a time where we are at war and in a truly new economy.
Sadly the choice is between a guy who lacks any ability as an orator, and a guy who seems to never held to a core decision or opinion in his life. I will not vote for a person simply because he is not the guy in power, I will and have voted for third parties. The sad thing is, our two party primary system of late creates extremists and not centrists?but what the hay it?s politics as usual.
So for the long and short of it, I will likely vote for Bush, but I will not vote for Kerry no matter what happens, I am not as vehement in this as I was with Gore, Gore scared me and his wife really scared me?but that is for another day, I have homework to do.
-
Presidents are just avatars to represent ideals that are all the same at the core and only exist to provide the illusion of democracy. Which is fine. That\'s key to the image the nation needs for it to have such a thriving diverse populace. All the power of how the nation handles it\'s affairs is incredibly spread out over all the facets that make it such a force. This means the country will never be able to reach any new heights of civilization, but should keep it adaptable and survivable. America isn\'t the ideal gig, but neither is humanity.
-
Originally posted by paxx The sad thing is, our two party primary system of late creates extremists and not centrists?but what the hay it?s politics as usual.
But then, \"politics as usual\" is exactly what is destroying and will destroy the county. You\'re exactly right, and extremists of any type have been the people who cause most of the evil in the world.
-
The \"Patriot Act\" is unpatriotic, and as far as I understand the term, un-American. How else can you describe a law that allows the government to spy on, arrest, and put on trial its citizens without paying any attention to the Constitution? (What happened to \"liberty and justice for all?\")
You may say that it\'s OK because it was passed by congress, but the fact is that most of the congress had no idea what exactly they were voting on. The review of the Act was made one evening, and Bush\'s cronies changed it during the night. In the morning, when the congress voted, they assumed it was the same thing they had argued over the previous day. But of course it wasn\'t...
And then there\'s the issue of gay marriage, or rather Bush\'s opposition to it. It\'s one thing to not like it, or even to ban it, but to ALTER the CONSTITUTION merely to disallow it?! Is gay marriage so wrong that it is as important to Americans as their right to bear guns? (That was another thing which resulted in a constitutional ammendment.) Or is it only that important to Bush, as he seeks to gain the full conservative vote?
I think it was best said by Pierre Elliot Trudeau:
\"The government has no place in the bedrooms of the nation.\"
Whatever else he has or hasn\'t done for the United States, George Bush Jr. is, in my opinion, going against everything the US stands for.
Please don\'t read anything into this little speech... I\'m not anti-American, just anti-Bush. I think the US is an incredible country, but with a leader who\'s too anxious to follow in his daddy\'s footsteps for his own good.
I\'m just curious about something, though. Do you think that the US has been discriminating against those of Middle Eastern descent since 9/11?
-
I haven\'t had time to carefully read all of the posts in here, so I\'ll just give my input on the America\'s \"Thief in Chief\".
George W. Bush is a danger to himself, to America and to the whole world. I fear that we will not survive four more years of Bush-administration.
I just read \"Stupid white men...\" by Michael Moore, so this might seem like propaganda to you... oh well, its late and I\'m tired.
Bush is destroying every good connection that the US has with middle-east countries and so on. The fact that he invaded Iraq without any kind of proof is horrible. The fact that he got away with it is even more terrifying. What if EU suddenly launched an attack on the US? We have all the evidence we need.
1.) America has nuclear weapons.
2.) America could pose a threat to us in the future.
3.) America has oil and other resources.
Enough about Bush, let\'s go on to democrats.
They\'re just as horrible as the republicans. They want the exact same thing, and they are founded by the exact same companies. Clinton refused to sign the Kyoto-treaty, which again demonstrates the arrogance of America.
Democrats, just like republicans, supports the big companies, wants to exploit the nature and help themselves on the cost of the people.
Ralph Nader might not be a good politician, but it can\'t get much worse can it?
-
Caldazar we aren\'t going to be invaded for one major reason you must have over-looked. We are the world super power, we have more political control and military power than any other country. If we were to be invaded, we still have a large list of allies who would support us. We have a more stable government than most as well. We have become big brother, and therefore it is redundant to say we will be invaded because we have nuclear weapons. Not to mention, any country that would be worth fighting would have nukes of their own.
I agree on one thing though, The republicans and democrats both have their own evils.
-
Gay marriage: This is an example of the government being too intrusive into people\'s lives. I get really pissed off every time I see another way the government tries to get into your everyday lives. A long time ago, the government took up less than 10% of our nation whoojimawhatsit, and now it takes up over 40% (if you don\'t know what I mean by whoojimawhatsit, you can at least notice the increaing numbers). Whenever we have a problem, the immediate response is to pass a law. People can solve their own problems, we don\'t need more and more laws.
Size of government: See previous.
Pariot Act: This allows the government to moniter normal people, but not terrorists who would take more care to keep secret. It\'s useless and infringes on people\'s privacy.
War in Iraq: Saddam Hussain is out, the people of Iraq aren\'t oppressed, and we get cheaper oil. What\'s everyone complaining about?
Bi-partisan system: Having too parties breeds extremeism and defeats common sense. They have become so philosophically opposed that they have to disagree with each other even when the other is right to maintain popularity. We need more than two political parties, this system is stupid. This is what will ultimately destroy the country.
Kyoto treaty: It bans teeth whitening. Of course we aren\'t signing it.
To answer Half-Pint\'s question, I have not noticed any discrimination against Muslims and Arabs and such.
-
Originally posted by Dalec
Caldazar we aren\'t going to be invaded for one major reason you must have over-looked. We are the world super power, we have more political control and military power than any other country. If we were to be invaded, we still have a large list of allies who would support us. We have a more stable government than most as well. We have become big brother, and therefore it is redundant to say we will be invaded because we have nuclear weapons. Not to mention, any country that would be worth fighting would have nukes of their own.
I agree on one thing though, The republicans and democrats both have their own evils.
I was just making an example, to show how silly I found America\'s newfound Big Brother-style.
The american goverment has become to paranoid.
You\'re wrong about one thing though, how many allies does the US have outside the EU?
I said that the EU would invade the US, and I don\'t think that you have that many allies outside western Europe, not counting Israel.
-
Originally posted by Caldazar
I was just making an example, to show how silly I found America\'s newfound Big Brother-style.
...
I said that the EU would invade the US...
Newfound? It\'s about 50 years USA are, as Dalec said, super power. The only important difference is that during many years there were TWO Big Brothers incessantly fighting against each other. Finally, one was the winner, and got a control over ex-enemy\'s territories. The Berlin Wall was the border. European Union - a perfect way to have a global control - is a child of USA.
-
Originally posted by Ellarion
Originally posted by Caldazar
I was just making an example, to show how silly I found America\'s newfound Big Brother-style.
...
I said that the EU would invade the US...
Newfound? It\'s about 50 years USA are, as Dalec said, super power. The only important difference is that during many years there were TWO Big Brothers incessantly fighting against each other. Finally, one was the winner, and got a control over ex-enemy\'s territories. The Berlin Wall was the border. European Union - a perfect way to have a global control - is a child of USA.
Maybe I phrased it to vaguely.
The Bush-administration is no longer hiding the fact that they\'ll do practically anything for money and wealth, that\'s what I wanted to say.
-
\"Don\'t vote - it only encourages them\"
=)
as Michael Moore once said \"the only choices left on the menu are cottage cheese and fried breadsticks\" Most ppl dont vote because theres nothing but crap on the menu.
-
And that\'s because both parties have degraded into organization\'s who\'s job is to disagree with each other.
-
The reason behind the constitutional amendment for marriage is to protect marriage from lawless judges and mayors.
I am all for reducing the size of government, but Marriage is already an intrigal part of our government. Marriage is where church and state overlap and should overlap. Marriage is defined and a union between a man and a woman period. There is no room for interpretation. That is the way it is. A constitutional amendment will not increase the size of govenment one bit. However, it will save us from countless class action lawsuits from ultra liberals who think that this will some how improve our lives.
It is not about rights! There is nothing in our constitution that grants you the right to marry! There is in fact several laws that LIMIT who you can marry! The argument that the current law discriminates against Gay couples, completly ignores the fact that marriage is ment to discrimate. Not just anyone can get married! There are rules, one of them happens to be that you must be a male/female coulple. The Mormans tried to change it and the government put them in jail!
Bush is 100% right on this one!
-
I think your all crazy. The government doesnt need less power... it needs more power and more control over the people.
Its power should not be limited by the freedoms of the people.
I\'m gonna let you all in on a little secret. (You can thank me later)
Freedom = Liberty
Too much Liberty = Libertarianism
Too much Libertarianism = Anarchy
With this in mind, I call for total dictatorship!
And my vote goes to Maddox!
Buhahahahaha, tremble in fear goths!!
-
Those are both extremes. You are trying to avoid one extreme by going to the other. Extremes are bad. There is a happy middle ground somewhere.