2 1/2 Days to Go...& Still Undecided by BrownShirtsRock

REAL WORLD EVENT DISCUSSIONS

2 1/2 Days to Go...& Still Undecided

POSTED BY: BROWNSHIRTSROCK
UPDATED: Wednesday, November 3, 2004 11:20
SHORT URL:
VIEWED: 7939
PAGE 2 of 2

Monday, November 1, 2004 5:31 PM

I will vote for Bush.
MY Reasons:
1.) I do not think that public health care is a good idea. As a partial owner of a medical facility I can tell you that the reason health care costs have gone up so much in the past couple of years is because of insurance companies. They do not pay the entire bill only a percentage and trying to get them to pay that is unpleasant. Medical facilities have responded by raising the prices of procedures in attempt to cover their costs even though costs have increased the profit margin in most practices have fallen. (Elective surgery excluded it is what the market will bear)
Public health care is not free it is paid by all the taxpayers. I do not often get sick and I really don't want to be forced to pay everyone else’s hospital bills. If I want to give I will I just don't feel like being forced to pay more taxes.
2.) Kerry’s eliminating tax cuts and incentives for businesses as a good fund raising idea. He says that he also wants to eliminate the outsourcing of jobs. Well I have to say that taxing corporations more will only encourage outsourcing. If a job can be done overseas for less it is in the companies best profit making interest to move the job. I know that this hurts most people to hear but it is true. Tax incentives have helped keep some jobs here. As for bringing lost jobs back to he US it is really not going to happen unless you can make doing the job cheaper here than to where it was outsourced to.
3.) The tax cuts for the rich. People get rich originally because they are successful. So it is a tax on the successful. (If they want to pass it down to their offspring well that is their choice. I believe most people would if given the chance.) The rich already pay a larger percentage of their earnings in taxes than the middle class even with the tax breaks.
4.) Bush did not ban stem cell research. He just did not federally fund it. Even Mr. Reeves' widow said at a Kerry rally that she believes that it should be taken care of in the privet sector.
5.) The Economy their has been steady growth in every thing but jobs. The US acceptable unemployment rate is much lower than most other countries.
Also the president really can't affect the economy much even in the slightest ways. The only good thing a president can do is realize this and stay out of the economy it will sort its self out. I realize that Bush does not do this but Kerry's plans and comments on the matter frankly frighten me.
6.) The Veterans that served with "Quick John". They are not all Texans and Oilmen and are in fact from all over the country. Kerry was in Vietnam for four months and then came back and profaned those he served with. He claimed that they had committed many atrocities but when asked to bring up any specific incidents that he had witnessed he admitted that he had never seen any.
After beginning his political career he begin to fall back on his Vietnam "buddies" for support having previously denounced them. Which made many of them very upset but as long as he stayed in pretty much inconsequential offices they tried to ignore him.
7.) The now infamous flip flops he plays to his audience when at the auto plant in Michigan he talked about how wonderful SUV's are and how his family owned one and loved it. At the EPA stop he discussed the horrid SUV's and what super polluters they were when asked about his recent stop and praise of the SUV he said that his family had once owned an SUV but upon discovering the polluting horrors had gotten rid of the car. And is voting record is all over the map.
8.) Kerry’s statements about terrorism and the War in Iraq I find disturbing. His statements regarding bringing terrorism back to a nuisance level appalled me. Because when people get blown up it is only a nuisance to those around them. Thinking of any sort of terrorism, as a nuisance is frightening to me for one thing it was never just a nuisance.
He was against having troops in Iraq and talked about pulling them out. Now he talks about waging a harder, smarter war on terrorism.

In the end I pretty much know where Bush stands on the issues though I do not always agree with him I find him an infinitely better choice for my vote than Kerry.
I am also glad to say that I do not have Cable or the Internet where I live or work so have been spared the majority of the smear campaign to which both parties have fallen victim. I do not approve of smear campaign from either camp but as they seem to be so successful I doubt that they will fade away.

It is an opinion. And as an opinion it can’t be wrong. You may disagree but that is your right. That is why America is great everyone is free to have their own opinions and share them freely we may not all ways agree but diversity makes things interesting.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Monday, November 1, 2004 5:34 PM

MOHRSTOUTBEARD

Quote:
Originally posted by Hero:
Liberals are all about speech, just don''t say anything they disagree with or format it in a manner they disaprove of...

I think this topic has reached its generalization quota.

"You've just gotta go ahead and change the captain of your brainship, because he's drunk at the wheel."

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Monday, November 1, 2004 5:41 PM

HARDWARE

For Hero, Jasonzzz and Waddledoodle, especially Waddledoodle. My consulting company was on the 78th floor of tower 1. My client was in WTC 7, so believe me when I say I know where you are coming from.

Here's what your boy George has to say about 9/11.

George Bush forfeited this election when he openly declared the war, the recession, and the deaths on 9/11 to be his lucky trifecta, joking on fourteen occasions about the good fortune those tragedies had brought to him and his wealthy supporters.

The evidence? His own words, published on the White House website.

Two speech transcripts there show Budget Director Mitch Daniels reporting that shortly after 9/11, while discussing the recession, the war, and 9/11, Bush turned to him and said, "Lucky me! I hit the trifecta."

A trifecta, of course, is racetrack jargon for the big payoff you get for picking three winners.

After 9/11 Bush took his trifecta joke on the road, using it as a laugh line at thirteen Republican fundraising events in the winter and spring of 2002. You can find all thirteen speech transcripts on the White House website. Just search "trifecta."

So why did Bush think his audiences would find the recession, the war, and 9/11 so funny? The answer lies in his tax agenda. In the summer of 2001, rising federal deficits caused pressure to rescind the tax cuts. Wealthy contributors were worried. The trifecta joke reassured them.

Bush had promised to never run a deficit, he said, unless "we had a war, or a national emergency, or a recession." Now, to their relief, he would be free to fund the tax cuts with borrowed funds.

That's why the White House transcripts always show the strange notation (Laughter) whenever he lists the three events that others read as tragedy. They knew the punch line in advance. "Never did I dream we'd get the trifecta. (Laughter.)"

For four months he repeated the joke to more than a dozen elite audiences who laughed because they understood the equation. War, recession, and national emergency excused the deficit. Deficit financing made their tax cuts possible. Good luck for all. Funny to some.

Bush's shockingly egoistic response to 9/11 cannot be dismissed as "old news" when his chief political strategist Karl Rove begins the final weekend of the 2004 campaign defending the use of 9/11 families at a New Hampshire campaign rally by saying: "9/11 is one of the great unifying moments, whether we like it or not, for America."

"Lucky me!" The president's own words establish a premeditated intention to turn that unifying moment into a divisive campaign weapon. Time and again Bush positioned himself beside the widows and children, and even the coffins, of 9/11 victims. What will those families feel when they discover how often he left their sides to joke about the deaths of their loved ones?

You've probably seen the emotionally charged commercial with George Bush hugging Ashley, a young woman who lost her mother on 9/11. What will Ashley feel when she learns how often Bush laughed about the event that took her mother's life? How do you feel about that?

In the first presidential debate Bush told of his efforts to console the widow of a brave man who died in Iraq. Can she now trust that those consoling words were offered in good faith?

Leadership depends on trust. Can we now trust the judgment of a Commander-in-Chief whose first response to war was "Lucky me! I hit the trifecta?"

Bush has often insisted that the campaign is about character. Please take him at his word. Go back and read the White House transcripts. I don't believe that anyone, Republican or Democrat, can read those tasteless jokes and see the frequent notations of laughter without concluding, as Bush once said of 9/11, that "this changes everything."

http://www.truthout.org/docs_04/103104L.shtml

The more I get to know people the more I like my dogs.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Monday, November 1, 2004 8:18 PM

SIGMANUNKI

Quote:
Originally posted by WaddleDoodle:

Well, since I refuse to spread the 3000 American deaths over the world wide daily total like any other statistic, those Americans lives mean more to me than you. That's fine. You most certainly are in the minority on that point. Even John Kerry isn't as nutty as you are on that issue. To sum up, and I need to be clear:

My opinon, maybe in the US but *not* in the rest of the world.

And I wasn't trying to minimize the impact of the deaths. I was trying to bring some perscpective. ie terrorism isn't a constant horide thread that has personally impacted millions of american lives since 9/11. I mean, how many attacks has the US suffered from outside forces, *1*.

Quote:
Originally posted by WaddleDoodle:

"The war on AIDs, hngaer and cancer are more important than the war on terror"

Is that an accurate statement? If so, you're advocating we subvert our freedom to terrorists. We would have to, otherwise they would threaten terror evertime we expressed a desire that wasn't approved by them.

You generalize past the point of even being close to acurate. They are all noble causes, but when it comes to urgency, the sheer fact of the matter, is that terrorism comes *after* these things.

You say that american death (3000) and world wide deaths from the rest of the world over the past *3* *years* 1000, demand more attention (violent) attention than the millions that die each year from these other issues? Who's nutty now?

Perspective.

Quote:
Originally posted by WaddleDoodle:

Then the spectre of terrorism is an acceptable way of life to you.

I haven't, nor have I ever, even to date, lived in the specture of terrorism. My country has a resonable forgien policy (ie we don't go around the world dropping bombs all the time). We call it DIPLOMACY.

Quote:
Originally posted by WaddleDoodle:

[snip a bunch of moot questions]
Certainly there are other civilized countries working on these problems, but many of their talented minds come here, to live free and work.

Actually, when it comes to scientist going to the US to work, it is because of one thing. There are jobs there (it pays to have a Physicist for a wife).

It has nothing to do with freedom. The government has removed civil liberties from you slowly over the past decades, all in the name of protecting you. Perhaps you should look at what was legal in 30 years ago and see how much of that is illegal now. Perhaps you should do the same when it comes to civil liberites. Your own groups (ie www.eff.org, etc) have noted many, and have been *screaming* for the past few years and *no-one* listened, because it's all in the name of security.

"They that can give up liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety" - Benjamin Franklin 1706-1790

Quote:
Originally posted by WaddleDoodle:

Furthermore, I DEFY YOU to find a more generous country in the world than the United States.

Canada.

Every hear about that treaty that people signed that removes landmines from the field of play in war. There is a reason why it's called the Ottowa Treaty. You know that whole idea of soldiers making peace instead of war (the idea of the peace keeper), yup, a Canadian.

We disproprotionally contribute music, actors, comedians, peacekeepers, diplomats... The list goes on and on. It's called being a peace loving nation that realizes that peace can *rarely* be won by the sword and actually living that philosophy.

There are other countries to be sure. I know that Germany has contributed a lot in the past number of decades. How about the UK?

Quote:
Originally posted by WaddleDoodle:

We feed the world. Have you ever travelled abroad? Ever see the prices people pay for food? Do you know that other countries come nowhere NEAR our capacity to feed.

Indeed, I've left my country. Have you? Or have you just read about these prices?

I must also note here that every other country in the world doesn't need to have an extremely large capacity to feed and we don't eat nearly as much. ie Canadian meal are approx 1/2 as much as american meals, and European meals are about 1/2 as much as Canadian meals.

To give you an example. The wife and I were traveling and had a layover in Miniapolis. We ordered *1* chicken fingers basket for lunch (we learned from the last time we were there) and between the both of us, we couldn't finish the meal. That's how big it was.

That is how much you people eat. That is why you people are so fat. That is why you people need such a capacity of food production. But at this point I must mention that you people eat so bloody much that if the imports were to stop you'd be out of food in a matter of days to weeks. Note: You cannot feed yourself.

Quote:
Originally posted by WaddleDoodle:

The Bush admin pledged BILLIONS of dollars, where the Clinton Admin pledged NOTHING to cure AIDS in Africa.

Ah yes, and most of that money is required to go to programs that teach people to obstain from sex. Try telling that to the mother that only way of earning money is prostitution. Try telling that to anyone that is a "street kid." Yay, wasted money!!!

The money that goes to research has the requirement that it must research HIV which more than a few are doubting that it is the cause. Ever wonder why we don't have a picture of it yet? Been a few decades, you'd think we'd have one by now, eh?

Quote:
Originally posted by WaddleDoodle:

I defy you to find a kinder people on the planet than Americans.

Ask anyone, Canadians are *far* friendlier. Also, the English, Scottish, Spainish... I could go on here, but they are all *far* friendlier than *any* american that I've met. And I lived in the US for an unfortunatly large chunk of time (also traveled to much of the states), so don't attempt an "you don't what you're talking about." argument.

Quote:
Originally posted by WaddleDoodle:

Why is that? Because Americans are made of all colors of people from all walks of life from all around the globe,

That are pretty much required (read: extremely encouraged) to renounce there prior citizenship upon getting there US citizenship.

You people self admittedly live in a melting pot. You require people to assimilate to american culture. You people have a *long* history of oppressing other cultures when they first come to your country. Doesn't sound like a loving people to me.

Quote:
Originally posted by WaddleDoodle:

all with one common goal, to live free. To live without the spectre of terrorism or Islamo-fascism.

No, they come to live in a free 1st world country. It has nothing to do with terrorism (mostly).

But, then again, you should probably do a google on how many people go to the US for the american dream and then try to come to Canada. The wife is applying for her permanent residency in Canada and found *a lot* of Indians (of the East variety) on forums helping eachother out to get out of the states and into Canada. I'm sure that it doesn't stop at just the Indians though.

Quote:
Originally posted by WaddleDoodle:

They feel the same outrage that I do. The outrage you have reduced to a statistic.

There is a difference between gaining perspecitve and reducing something to a statistic. It is sad that you don't see that.

I was NOT saying that it isn't an outrage nor that something should not be done. I was merely pointing out that there are worse things in this world that have and continue to cause far more damage than terrorism. Just because you were affected by this atrocity doesn't change that fact.

Quote:
Originally posted by WaddleDoodle:

Wahabists want to kill us. It's that simple. Saddam Hussein rewarded families of Homicide Bombers with $25,000. Is that reasonable? Is that sane? Can you fit that into your perspective?

A resonable person would look at the fact that people are out to get you and they would ask the simple question, why?

And we aren't debating what Saddam did or didn't do. We are talking about terrorism, 9/11, which S didn't have anything to do with. Which your own government has stated.

But if you want to talk about it. What about the fact that Saddam tried to negotiate with GW in the days leading up to the invasion but GW would hear none of it? What about the fact that GW didn't have any evidence of any WMD nor anything else that would justify the invasion but went ahead with it anyway (there is more than one reason why the rest of the world objected to the invasion you know)? Why did GW protect the oil and only the oil when they went in? Why is the power/water/etc still off in most of the country and unreliable where it is "on?" Why does GW still insist that everything is fine when clearly it isn't? Why have the US diverted troops from Afganistan to Iraq? Doesn't Afganistan need protecting too? etc

Yes S should've been removed. But NO, not by you, not now. You can't just change the leader of a country b/c you don't like him. There are other ways to do it that require a lot less blood lust.

But, then again, the way of the gun is the american way.

Quote:
Originally posted by WaddleDoodle:

What countries should we stop "pissing around" in? Afghanistan? Iraq? Is the first election in Afghanistans history meanless?

Yes, they are pretty much meaningless. In case you haven't been keeping up (which seems likely by this comment), the UN basically only holds Kabul (and even then, parts of it are unstable). Yay for the president of Kabul. The country side is to dangerous for even the UN to travel. All travel is by air. Yay!

You should have *never* been in Iraq. Your illegal invasion has ended up where? In the middle of chaos it has. Way to go! You brought a stable (allbeit horrible for a few) country to complete anarchy and are unable to stabalize it. Good for you. Now it's horrible for everyone and worse for others. And what about that whole torture thing by the US troops? Kind and loving people my eye.

Quote:
Originally posted by WaddleDoodle:

Perhaps we shouldn't have pissed around in France in WW2. Or Germany? We WERE attacked by the Japanses, not the Germans. How dare we "piss around" in Europe when we had no business being there.

Perhaps you should read a history book. Canada and Britain where there from day one.

http://www.historyplace.com/worldwar2/timeline/ww2time.htm#1939
Aug 25, 1939 - Britain and Poland sign a Mutual Assistance Treaty.
Sept 5, 1939 - United States proclaims neutrality

Dec 8, 1941 - United States and Britain declare war on Japan.

Note: The war stated in mid 1939 but the US didn't become involved until basically the beginning of 1942. Congratulations, your peace loving nation refused to enter the war until it was force in (note: it was basically forced in and if perl harbour didn't happen it was unlikely if the US would've ever entered the war.)

And by the way, you might note these points carefully:
Dec 8, 1941 - United States and Britain declare war on Japan.
Dec 11, 1941 - Germany declares war on the United States.

So, then you were at war with Gemany, b/c they declared war on you. Interesting.

Quote:
Originally posted by WaddleDoodle:

What do mean by "The terrorists might think that we support you and then we'll get attacked too." Aren't we all Americans? No one is trying to represent you. UBL did threaten the States that vote for Bush. He said they are targets. I hope you are safe in a "Red" state.

Nope, just in a liberal province (edit: actually, a liberal part of a province that is NDP). I also find it amusing that you make some attempt to label me a communist. The cold war is over, you know that right?

Quote:
Originally posted by WaddleDoodle:

This is a political discussion thread. You can go and yank my Bush/Cheney 2004 sign if you want to, it won't kill my principles nor my reasons for voting for these fine men. So I'll say whatever I want since that's my right.

Um, OK?

Quote:
Originally posted by WaddleDoodle:

As to this comment:
"Basically, stop, take a breath, and think. *Then* take your next step."

I suggest you do the same. However, I won't rude about it.

Indeed

Quote:
Originally posted by WaddleDoodle:

Signing out, so have fun tomorrow! Don't forget to vote for Nader since he says he'd pull us out of all our "pissing adventures" around the globe, Kerry claims he won't.

Bush wants to war monger more.
Kerry wants to attempt a stabilization and rebuild the tattered remains of the US's international relationships.
Nader wants to pull everyone out in 6 months (source: interview, CBC: Sunday) basically blackmailing Europe (mainly) and the rest of the world to "pick up the slack" and clean up the US's mess. Sound fair?

To me, Kerry sounds most resonable but still scary somewhat. But he, IMO, would do the best all round job. Again, IMO, anyone but Bush would be best.

Anyway, hope you guys can count those votes in less that a couple weeks this time

Have fun

----
"Canada being mad at you is like Mr. Rogers throwing a brick through your window." -Jon Stewart, The Daily Show

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Monday, November 1, 2004 8:29 PM

SIGMANUNKI

I find it interesting that you could comment on any of my actual points.

Quote:
Originally posted by Hero:

Well Bush says that in this post 9/11 world we can't wait for others to approve of how we express our opinions. So if you believe you can quote other posts in whole or in part as YOU choose, then vote Bush.

Again, it's about being polite. If everyone did what Jasonzzz does, these threads would be unreadable for those with dial-up. Be a dick if you want to, I'll be polite to those with a lesser internet connection than mine. After all, if we're all in together, why not play nice?

Quote:
Originally posted by Hero:

But if you want JFK and his liberal buddies submitting your opinions to some "global neteqette" test (ie French) then vote for Kerry.

I find this "French test" of yours absolutely ludicrous. No-one wants nor wishes to dictate the US's security policy. We just know that if you are going outside your border to do things *not* in your country in becomes an international issue. Thus we have a say.

Your twisting of my words is amusing none-the-less. I will trust in my fellow browncoats to see through such things and laugh at it as I do.

----
"Canada being mad at you is like Mr. Rogers throwing a brick through your window." -Jon Stewart, The Daily Show

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Tuesday, November 2, 2004 6:18 AM

JASONZZZ

Maybe you could point out that in "fact" *ALL* AMERICANS EAT LIKE FUCKING FAT PIGS, and *ALL* FUCKING AMERICANS ARE GROSSLY OVERWEIGHT AND FAT.

you are making at least two huge assumptions that are so completely ignorant that it borders on prejudice.

1. there are a huge segment of the American population that are health conscious and do not injest the average amount hamburger patties, french fries, and sugar laden beverage every single moment of the day.

2. not everyone who has obesity issues are a result of a complete lack of mental discipline - and I am not even talking about folks who cannot truly have a mental defect where they cannot stop themselves from eating. There are many many folks I know who's bodies are simply out of whack no matter how little food they put into their body.

and just b/c a segment of the country are really brainless heifers doesn't mean that we are all glad to have our rights shredded. Thanks.

and why continaully badger American way of live and politics and economy when you are given up on it? You have a nice comfortable life where you believe that turning a blind eye to the problems facing the entire world will effectively solve the entire problem. Why why why? Why continually inject your opinion into a wasted effort?

Quote:
Originally posted by SigmaNunki:
Quote:
Originally posted by WaddleDoodle:

Well, since I refuse to spread the 3000 American deaths over the world wide daily total like any other statistic, those Americans lives mean more to me than you. That's fine. You most certainly are in the minority on that point. Even John Kerry isn't as nutty as you are on that issue. To sum up, and I need to be clear:

My opinon, maybe in the US but *not* in the rest of the world.

And I wasn't trying to minimize the impact of the deaths. I was trying to bring some perscpective. ie terrorism isn't a constant horide thread that has personally impacted millions of american lives since 9/11. I mean, how many attacks has the US suffered from outside forces, *1*.

Quote:
Originally posted by WaddleDoodle:

"The war on AIDs, hngaer and cancer are more important than the war on terror"

Is that an accurate statement? If so, you're advocating we subvert our freedom to terrorists. We would have to, otherwise they would threaten terror evertime we expressed a desire that wasn't approved by them.

You generalize past the point of even being close to acurate. They are all noble causes, but when it comes to urgency, the sheer fact of the matter, is that terrorism comes *after* these things.

You say that american death (3000) and world wide deaths from the rest of the world over the past *3* *years* 1000, demand more attention (violent) attention than the millions that die each year from these other issues? Who's nutty now?

Perspective.

Quote:
Originally posted by WaddleDoodle:

Then the spectre of terrorism is an acceptable way of life to you.

I haven't, nor have I ever, even to date, lived in the specture of terrorism. My country has a resonable forgien policy (ie we don't go around the world dropping bombs all the time). We call it DIPLOMACY.

Quote:
Originally posted by WaddleDoodle:

[snip a bunch of moot questions]
Certainly there are other civilized countries working on these problems, but many of their talented minds come here, to live free and work.

Actually, when it comes to scientist going to the US to work, it is because of one thing. There are jobs there (it pays to have a Physicist for a wife).

It has nothing to do with freedom. The government has removed civil liberties from you slowly over the past decades, all in the name of protecting you. Perhaps you should look at what was legal in 30 years ago and see how much of that is illegal now. Perhaps you should do the same when it comes to civil liberites. Your own groups (ie www.eff.org, etc) have noted many, and have been *screaming* for the past few years and *no-one* listened, because it's all in the name of security.

"They that can give up liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety" - Benjamin Franklin 1706-1790

Quote:
Originally posted by WaddleDoodle:

Furthermore, I DEFY YOU to find a more generous country in the world than the United States.

Canada.

Every hear about that treaty that people signed that removes landmines from the field of play in war. There is a reason why it's called the Ottowa Treaty. You know that whole idea of soldiers making peace instead of war (the idea of the peace keeper), yup, a Canadian.

We disproprotionally contribute music, actors, comedians, peacekeepers, diplomats... The list goes on and on. It's called being a peace loving nation that realizes that peace can *rarely* be won by the sword and actually living that philosophy.

There are other countries to be sure. I know that Germany has contributed a lot in the past number of decades. How about the UK?

Quote:
Originally posted by WaddleDoodle:

We feed the world. Have you ever travelled abroad? Ever see the prices people pay for food? Do you know that other countries come nowhere NEAR our capacity to feed.

Indeed, I've left my country. Have you? Or have you just read about these prices?

I must also note here that every other country in the world doesn't need to have an extremely large capacity to feed and we don't eat nearly as much. ie Canadian meal are approx 1/2 as much as american meals, and European meals are about 1/2 as much as Canadian meals.

To give you an example. The wife and I were traveling and had a layover in Miniapolis. We ordered *1* chicken fingers basket for lunch (we learned from the last time we were there) and between the both of us, we couldn't finish the meal. That's how big it was.

That is how much you people eat. That is why you people are so fat. That is why you people need such a capacity of food production. But at this point I must mention that you people eat so bloody much that if the imports were to stop you'd be out of food in a matter of days to weeks. Note: You cannot feed yourself.

Quote:
Originally posted by WaddleDoodle:

The Bush admin pledged BILLIONS of dollars, where the Clinton Admin pledged NOTHING to cure AIDS in Africa.

Ah yes, and most of that money is required to go to programs that teach people to obstain from sex. Try telling that to the mother that only way of earning money is prostitution. Try telling that to anyone that is a "street kid." Yay, wasted money!!!

The money that goes to research has the requirement that it must research HIV which more than a few are doubting that it is the cause. Ever wonder why we don't have a picture of it yet? Been a few decades, you'd think we'd have one by now, eh?

Quote:
Originally posted by WaddleDoodle:

I defy you to find a kinder people on the planet than Americans.

Ask anyone, Canadians are *far* friendlier. Also, the English, Scottish, Spainish... I could go on here, but they are all *far* friendlier than *any* american that I've met. And I lived in the US for an unfortunatly large chunk of time (also traveled to much of the states), so don't attempt an "you don't what you're talking about." argument.

Quote:
Originally posted by WaddleDoodle:

Why is that? Because Americans are made of all colors of people from all walks of life from all around the globe,

That are pretty much required (read: extremely encouraged) to renounce there prior citizenship upon getting there US citizenship.

You people self admittedly live in a melting pot. You require people to assimilate to american culture. You people have a *long* history of oppressing other cultures when they first come to your country. Doesn't sound like a loving people to me.

Quote:
Originally posted by WaddleDoodle:

all with one common goal, to live free. To live without the spectre of terrorism or Islamo-fascism.

No, they come to live in a free 1st world country. It has nothing to do with terrorism (mostly).

But, then again, you should probably do a google on how many people go to the US for the american dream and then try to come to Canada. The wife is applying for her permanent residency in Canada and found *a lot* of Indians (of the East variety) on forums helping eachother out to get out of the states and into Canada. I'm sure that it doesn't stop at just the Indians though.

Quote:
Originally posted by WaddleDoodle:

They feel the same outrage that I do. The outrage you have reduced to a statistic.

There is a difference between gaining perspecitve and reducing something to a statistic. It is sad that you don't see that.

I was NOT saying that it isn't an outrage nor that something should not be done. I was merely pointing out that there are worse things in this world that have and continue to cause far more damage than terrorism. Just because you were affected by this atrocity doesn't change that fact.

Quote:
Originally posted by WaddleDoodle:

Wahabists want to kill us. It's that simple. Saddam Hussein rewarded families of Homicide Bombers with $25,000. Is that reasonable? Is that sane? Can you fit that into your perspective?

A resonable person would look at the fact that people are out to get you and they would ask the simple question, why?

And we aren't debating what Saddam did or didn't do. We are talking about terrorism, 9/11, which S didn't have anything to do with. Which your own government has stated.

But if you want to talk about it. What about the fact that Saddam tried to negotiate with GW in the days leading up to the invasion but GW would hear none of it? What about the fact that GW didn't have any evidence of any WMD nor anything else that would justify the invasion but went ahead with it anyway (there is more than one reason why the rest of the world objected to the invasion you know)? Why did GW protect the oil and only the oil when they went in? Why is the power/water/etc still off in most of the country and unreliable where it is "on?" Why does GW still insist that everything is fine when clearly it isn't? Why have the US diverted troops from Afganistan to Iraq? Doesn't Afganistan need protecting too? etc

Yes S should've been removed. But NO, not by you, not now. You can't just change the leader of a country b/c you don't like him. There are other ways to do it that require a lot less blood lust.

But, then again, the way of the gun is the american way.

Quote:
Originally posted by WaddleDoodle:

What countries should we stop "pissing around" in? Afghanistan? Iraq? Is the first election in Afghanistans history meanless?

Yes, they are pretty much meaningless. In case you haven't been keeping up (which seems likely by this comment), the UN basically only holds Kabul (and even then, parts of it are unstable). Yay for the president of Kabul. The country side is to dangerous for even the UN to travel. All travel is by air. Yay!

You should have *never* been in Iraq. Your illegal invasion has ended up where? In the middle of chaos it has. Way to go! You brought a stable (allbeit horrible for a few) country to complete anarchy and are unable to stabalize it. Good for you. Now it's horrible for everyone and worse for others. And what about that whole torture thing by the US troops? Kind and loving people my eye.

Quote:
Originally posted by WaddleDoodle:

Perhaps we shouldn't have pissed around in France in WW2. Or Germany? We WERE attacked by the Japanses, not the Germans. How dare we "piss around" in Europe when we had no business being there.

Perhaps you should read a history book. Canada and Britain where there from day one.

http://www.historyplace.com/worldwar2/timeline/ww2time.htm#1939
Aug 25, 1939 - Britain and Poland sign a Mutual Assistance Treaty.
Sept 5, 1939 - United States proclaims neutrality

Dec 8, 1941 - United States and Britain declare war on Japan.

Note: The war stated in mid 1939 but the US didn't become involved until basically the beginning of 1942. Congratulations, your peace loving nation refused to enter the war until it was force in (note: it was basically forced in and if perl harbour didn't happen it was unlikely if the US would've ever entered the war.)

And by the way, you might note these points carefully:
Dec 8, 1941 - United States and Britain declare war on Japan.
Dec 11, 1941 - Germany declares war on the United States.

So, then you were at war with Gemany, b/c they declared war on you. Interesting.

Quote:
Originally posted by WaddleDoodle:

What do mean by "The terrorists might think that we support you and then we'll get attacked too." Aren't we all Americans? No one is trying to represent you. UBL did threaten the States that vote for Bush. He said they are targets. I hope you are safe in a "Red" state.

Nope, just in a liberal province (edit: actually, a liberal part of a province that is NDP). I also find it amusing that you make some attempt to label me a communist. The cold war is over, you know that right?

Quote:
Originally posted by WaddleDoodle:

This is a political discussion thread. You can go and yank my Bush/Cheney 2004 sign if you want to, it won't kill my principles nor my reasons for voting for these fine men. So I'll say whatever I want since that's my right.

Um, OK?

Quote:
Originally posted by WaddleDoodle:

As to this comment:
"Basically, stop, take a breath, and think. *Then* take your next step."

I suggest you do the same. However, I won't rude about it.

Indeed

Quote:
Originally posted by WaddleDoodle:

Signing out, so have fun tomorrow! Don't forget to vote for Nader since he says he'd pull us out of all our "pissing adventures" around the globe, Kerry claims he won't.

Bush wants to war monger more.
Kerry wants to attempt a stabilization and rebuild the tattered remains of the US's international relationships.
Nader wants to pull everyone out in 6 months (source: interview, CBC: Sunday) basically blackmailing Europe (mainly) and the rest of the world to "pick up the slack" and clean up the US's mess. Sound fair?

To me, Kerry sounds most resonable but still scary somewhat. But he, IMO, would do the best all round job. Again, IMO, anyone but Bush would be best.

Anyway, hope you guys can count those votes in less that a couple weeks this time Have fun

----
"Canada being mad at you is like Mr. Rogers throwing a brick through your window." -Jon Stewart, The Daily Show

Like Fireflyfans.net?
Haken needs a new development system. Donate.
http://www.fireflyfans.net/thread.asp?b=5&t=3283

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Tuesday, November 2, 2004 6:24 AM

JASONZZZ

Quote:
Originally posted by SigmaNunki:
I find it interesting that you could comment on any of my actual points.

Quote:
Originally posted by Hero:

Well Bush says that in this post 9/11 world we can't wait for others to approve of how we express our opinions. So if you believe you can quote other posts in whole or in part as YOU choose, then vote Bush.

Again, it's about being polite. If everyone did what Jasonzzz does, these threads would be unreadable for those with dial-up. Be a dick if you want to, I'll be polite to those with a lesser internet connection than mine. After all, if we're all in together, why not play nice?

I think if we had moved the board to Canada, all of the posting would be nicer and the bandwidth would be much more generous. Problem solved. Let's petition Haken for he and his family to move out of his Paradise and into the Canadian Paradise instead.

Quote:
Originally posted by SigmaNunki:

Quote:
Originally posted by Hero:

But if you want JFK and his liberal buddies submitting your opinions to some "global neteqette" test (ie French) then vote for Kerry.

I find this "French test" of yours absolutely ludicrous. No-one wants nor wishes to dictate the US's security policy. We just know that if you are going outside your border to do things *not* in your country in becomes an international issue. Thus we have a say.

Your twisting of my words is amusing none-the-less. I will trust in my fellow browncoats to see through such things and laugh at it as I do.

----
"Canada being mad at you is like Mr. Rogers throwing a brick through your window." -Jon Stewart, The Daily Show

Like Fireflyfans.net?
Haken needs a new development system. Donate.
http://www.fireflyfans.net/thread.asp?b=5&t=3283

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Tuesday, November 2, 2004 6:28 AM

JASONZZZ

Quote:
Originally posted by SigmaNunki:
Quote:
Originally posted by WaddleDoodle:

Well, since I refuse to spread the 3000 American deaths over the world wide daily total like any other statistic, those Americans lives mean more to me than you. That's fine. You most certainly are in the minority on that point. Even John Kerry isn't as nutty as you are on that issue. To sum up, and I need to be clear:

My opinon, maybe in the US but *not* in the rest of the world.

And I wasn't trying to minimize the impact of the deaths. I was trying to bring some perscpective. ie terrorism isn't a constant horide thread that has personally impacted millions of american lives since 9/11. I mean, how many attacks has the US suffered from outside forces, *1*.

Quote:
Originally posted by WaddleDoodle:

"The war on AIDs, hngaer and cancer are more important than the war on terror"

Is that an accurate statement? If so, you're advocating we subvert our freedom to terrorists. We would have to, otherwise they would threaten terror evertime we expressed a desire that wasn't approved by them.

You generalize past the point of even being close to acurate. They are all noble causes, but when it comes to urgency, the sheer fact of the matter, is that terrorism comes *after* these things.

You say that american death (3000) and world wide deaths from the rest of the world over the past *3* *years* 1000, demand more attention (violent) attention than the millions that die each year from these other issues? Who's nutty now?

Perspective.

Quote:
Originally posted by WaddleDoodle:

Then the spectre of terrorism is an acceptable way of life to you.

I haven't, nor have I ever, even to date, lived in the specture of terrorism. My country has a resonable forgien policy (ie we don't go around the world dropping bombs all the time). We call it DIPLOMACY.

Quote:
Originally posted by WaddleDoodle:

[snip a bunch of moot questions]
Certainly there are other civilized countries working on these problems, but many of their talented minds come here, to live free and work.

Actually, when it comes to scientist going to the US to work, it is because of one thing. There are jobs there (it pays to have a Physicist for a wife).

It has nothing to do with freedom. The government has removed civil liberties from you slowly over the past decades, all in the name of protecting you. Perhaps you should look at what was legal in 30 years ago and see how much of that is illegal now. Perhaps you should do the same when it comes to civil liberites. Your own groups (ie www.eff.org, etc) have noted many, and have been *screaming* for the past few years and *no-one* listened, because it's all in the name of security.

"They that can give up liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety" - Benjamin Franklin 1706-1790

Quote:
Originally posted by WaddleDoodle:

Furthermore, I DEFY YOU to find a more generous country in the world than the United States.

Canada.

Every hear about that treaty that people signed that removes landmines from the field of play in war. There is a reason why it's called the Ottowa Treaty. You know that whole idea of soldiers making peace instead of war (the idea of the peace keeper), yup, a Canadian.

We disproprotionally contribute music, actors, comedians, peacekeepers, diplomats... The list goes on and on. It's called being a peace loving nation that realizes that peace can *rarely* be won by the sword and actually living that philosophy.

There are other countries to be sure. I know that Germany has contributed a lot in the past number of decades. How about the UK?

Quote:
Originally posted by WaddleDoodle:

We feed the world. Have you ever travelled abroad? Ever see the prices people pay for food? Do you know that other countries come nowhere NEAR our capacity to feed.

Indeed, I've left my country. Have you? Or have you just read about these prices?

I must also note here that every other country in the world doesn't need to have an extremely large capacity to feed and we don't eat nearly as much. ie Canadian meal are approx 1/2 as much as american meals, and European meals are about 1/2 as much as Canadian meals.

To give you an example. The wife and I were traveling and had a layover in Miniapolis. We ordered *1* chicken fingers basket for lunch (we learned from the last time we were there) and between the both of us, we couldn't finish the meal. That's how big it was.

That is how much you people eat. That is why you people are so fat. That is why you people need such a capacity of food production. But at this point I must mention that you people eat so bloody much that if the imports were to stop you'd be out of food in a matter of days to weeks. Note: You cannot feed yourself.

Quote:
Originally posted by WaddleDoodle:

The Bush admin pledged BILLIONS of dollars, where the Clinton Admin pledged NOTHING to cure AIDS in Africa.

Ah yes, and most of that money is required to go to programs that teach people to obstain from sex. Try telling that to the mother that only way of earning money is prostitution. Try telling that to anyone that is a "street kid." Yay, wasted money!!!

The money that goes to research has the requirement that it must research HIV which more than a few are doubting that it is the cause. Ever wonder why we don't have a picture of it yet? Been a few decades, you'd think we'd have one by now, eh?

Quote:
Originally posted by WaddleDoodle:

I defy you to find a kinder people on the planet than Americans.

Ask anyone, Canadians are *far* friendlier. Also, the English, Scottish, Spainish... I could go on here, but they are all *far* friendlier than *any* american that I've met. And I lived in the US for an unfortunatly large chunk of time (also traveled to much of the states), so don't attempt an "you don't what you're talking about." argument.

Quote:
Originally posted by WaddleDoodle:

Why is that? Because Americans are made of all colors of people from all walks of life from all around the globe,

That are pretty much required (read: extremely encouraged) to renounce there prior citizenship upon getting there US citizenship.

You people self admittedly live in a melting pot. You require people to assimilate to american culture. You people have a *long* history of oppressing other cultures when they first come to your country. Doesn't sound like a loving people to me.

Quote:
Originally posted by WaddleDoodle:

all with one common goal, to live free. To live without the spectre of terrorism or Islamo-fascism.

No, they come to live in a free 1st world country. It has nothing to do with terrorism (mostly).

But, then again, you should probably do a google on how many people go to the US for the american dream and then try to come to Canada. The wife is applying for her permanent residency in Canada and found *a lot* of Indians (of the East variety) on forums helping eachother out to get out of the states and into Canada. I'm sure that it doesn't stop at just the Indians though.

Quote:
Originally posted by WaddleDoodle:

They feel the same outrage that I do. The outrage you have reduced to a statistic.

There is a difference between gaining perspecitve and reducing something to a statistic. It is sad that you don't see that.

I was NOT saying that it isn't an outrage nor that something should not be done. I was merely pointing out that there are worse things in this world that have and continue to cause far more damage than terrorism. Just because you were affected by this atrocity doesn't change that fact.

Quote:
Originally posted by WaddleDoodle:

Wahabists want to kill us. It's that simple. Saddam Hussein rewarded families of Homicide Bombers with $25,000. Is that reasonable? Is that sane? Can you fit that into your perspective?

A resonable person would look at the fact that people are out to get you and they would ask the simple question, why?

And we aren't debating what Saddam did or didn't do. We are talking about terrorism, 9/11, which S didn't have anything to do with. Which your own government has stated.

But if you want to talk about it. What about the fact that Saddam tried to negotiate with GW in the days leading up to the invasion but GW would hear none of it? What about the fact that GW didn't have any evidence of any WMD nor anything else that would justify the invasion but went ahead with it anyway (there is more than one reason why the rest of the world objected to the invasion you know)? Why did GW protect the oil and only the oil when they went in? Why is the power/water/etc still off in most of the country and unreliable where it is "on?" Why does GW still insist that everything is fine when clearly it isn't? Why have the US diverted troops from Afganistan to Iraq? Doesn't Afganistan need protecting too? etc

Yes S should've been removed. But NO, not by you, not now. You can't just change the leader of a country b/c you don't like him. There are other ways to do it that require a lot less blood lust.

But, then again, the way of the gun is the american way.

Quote:
Originally posted by WaddleDoodle:

What countries should we stop "pissing around" in? Afghanistan? Iraq? Is the first election in Afghanistans history meanless?

Yes, they are pretty much meaningless. In case you haven't been keeping up (which seems likely by this comment), the UN basically only holds Kabul (and even then, parts of it are unstable). Yay for the president of Kabul. The country side is to dangerous for even the UN to travel. All travel is by air. Yay!

You should have *never* been in Iraq. Your illegal invasion has ended up where? In the middle of chaos it has. Way to go! You brought a stable (allbeit horrible for a few) country to complete anarchy and are unable to stabalize it. Good for you. Now it's horrible for everyone and worse for others. And what about that whole torture thing by the US troops? Kind and loving people my eye.

Quote:
Originally posted by WaddleDoodle:

Perhaps we shouldn't have pissed around in France in WW2. Or Germany? We WERE attacked by the Japanses, not the Germans. How dare we "piss around" in Europe when we had no business being there.

Perhaps you should read a history book. Canada and Britain where there from day one.

http://www.historyplace.com/worldwar2/timeline/ww2time.htm#1939
Aug 25, 1939 - Britain and Poland sign a Mutual Assistance Treaty.
Sept 5, 1939 - United States proclaims neutrality

Dec 8, 1941 - United States and Britain declare war on Japan.

Note: The war stated in mid 1939 but the US didn't become involved until basically the beginning of 1942. Congratulations, your peace loving nation refused to enter the war until it was force in (note: it was basically forced in and if perl harbour didn't happen it was unlikely if the US would've ever entered the war.)

And by the way, you might note these points carefully:
Dec 8, 1941 - United States and Britain declare war on Japan.
Dec 11, 1941 - Germany declares war on the United States.

So, then you were at war with Gemany, b/c they declared war on you. Interesting.

I really don't know what this part was all about.

Are you saying that Canada did the right thing by jumping into WWII right from the get go so that they can beat the Axis into "peace". That the US did the right thing by staying the heck out of it? You didn't happen to mention the isolation mentality that the "US" had at the time to not muddle in other people's affairs.

Quote:
Originally posted by SigmaNunki:

Quote:
Originally posted by WaddleDoodle:

What do mean by "The terrorists might think that we support you and then we'll get attacked too." Aren't we all Americans? No one is trying to represent you. UBL did threaten the States that vote for Bush. He said they are targets. I hope you are safe in a "Red" state.

Nope, just in a liberal province (edit: actually, a liberal part of a province that is NDP). I also find it amusing that you make some attempt to label me a communist. The cold war is over, you know that right?

Quote:
Originally posted by WaddleDoodle:

This is a political discussion thread. You can go and yank my Bush/Cheney 2004 sign if you want to, it won't kill my principles nor my reasons for voting for these fine men. So I'll say whatever I want since that's my right.

Um, OK?

Quote:
Originally posted by WaddleDoodle:

As to this comment:
"Basically, stop, take a breath, and think. *Then* take your next step."

I suggest you do the same. However, I won't rude about it.

Indeed

Quote:
Originally posted by WaddleDoodle:

Signing out, so have fun tomorrow! Don't forget to vote for Nader since he says he'd pull us out of all our "pissing adventures" around the globe, Kerry claims he won't.

Bush wants to war monger more.
Kerry wants to attempt a stabilization and rebuild the tattered remains of the US's international relationships.
Nader wants to pull everyone out in 6 months (source: interview, CBC: Sunday) basically blackmailing Europe (mainly) and the rest of the world to "pick up the slack" and clean up the US's mess. Sound fair?

To me, Kerry sounds most resonable but still scary somewhat. But he, IMO, would do the best all round job. Again, IMO, anyone but Bush would be best.

Anyway, hope you guys can count those votes in less that a couple weeks this time Have fun

----
"Canada being mad at you is like Mr. Rogers throwing a brick through your window." -Jon Stewart, The Daily Show

Like Fireflyfans.net?
Haken needs a new development system. Donate.
http://www.fireflyfans.net/thread.asp?b=5&t=3283

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Tuesday, November 2, 2004 9:00 AM

SIGMANUNKI

@Jasonzzz:
Um, I've lived in the US. I've walked the streets and eaten at many resturants. I've traveled across the US over the years. I've seen the vast majority of americans overweight. I've seen the amount of food the average american eats.

After all, if a resturant can get away with charging more for the same amount of food, this equals higher profits. In a capitalist society isn't this the goal? So, then most american will eat that much. Sorry, but the evidence doesn't end up in your favour.

Especially since:
http://www.obesity.org/subs/fastfacts/obesity_US.shtml

You americans do fat well.

And I don't turn a blind eye to the problems of the world. I just have a *very* different way of attacking them (ie not with bullets). Perhaps you should actuallly read what I type instead of impressing what you *think* that I said.

----
"Canada being mad at you is like Mr. Rogers throwing a brick through your window." -Jon Stewart, The Daily Show

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Tuesday, November 2, 2004 9:03 AM

SIGMANUNKI

Quote:

Quote:
Originally posted by Jasonzzz:

Again, it's about being polite. If everyone did what Jasonzzz does, these threads would be unreadable for those with dial-up. Be a dick if you want to, I'll be polite to those with a lesser internet connection than mine. After all, if we're all in together, why not play nice?

I think if we had moved the board to Canada, all of the posting would be nicer and the bandwidth would be much more generous. Problem solved. Let's petition Haken for he and his family to move out of his Paradise and into the Canadian Paradise instead.

Uh huh

----
"Canada being mad at you is like Mr. Rogers throwing a brick through your window." -Jon Stewart, The Daily Show

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Tuesday, November 2, 2004 9:10 AM

SIGMANUNKI

Quote:
Originally posted by Jasonzzz:

I really don't know what this part was all about.

Are you saying that Canada did the right thing by jumping into WWII right from the get go so that they can beat the Axis into "peace". That the US did the right thing by staying the heck out of it? You didn't happen to mention the isolation mentality that the "US" had at the time to not muddle in other people's affairs.

Well, if you would've read the conversation, you would realize that Waddledoodle was getting at that the US was so great and did so much in WWII and was the heros, etc, etc, etc.

(S)He also attempted a path of "logic" that stated that (since I basically said stop pissing around the world killing people for no reason) the US had no reason for attacking Germany. I pointed out that this wasn't the case. WD is clearly uneducated on such matters.

And you're still posting in a way that pervents dial-up browncoats from viewing these long threads. Please at least attempt to be polite, at least in this regard.

----
"Canada being mad at you is like Mr. Rogers throwing a brick through your window." -Jon Stewart, The Daily Show

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Wednesday, November 3, 2004 7:38 AM

JASONZZZ

I am quite well aware that Some people in the world and then again also Some Americans overeat. Who is this average American? When you American earlier, you do not say average. And even when you say average American in this past post, you are still applying it in a way to All Americans. There are "fat" people all over the world, not just in America.

If you read the links that you sent, you would be quite well aware that not all "fat" people have eating problems. Many of these people who do not have eating problems are astigmatized by your type of narrow view "Oh, why don't you just stop stuffing your face - you big fat pig".

In addition, you should also be quite aware that obesity (from over eating in particular here) in general is not uniquely an American problem, it is
on the rise in the world. It is a human problem, not an American one.

Lastly, I am quite well aware of the portion sizes that are served in most American restaurants nowadays. I am an average American and I take half of my meal home for later consumption.

Quote:
Originally posted by SigmaNunki:
[B]@Jasonzzz:
Um, I've lived in the US. I've walked the streets and eaten at many resturants. I've traveled across the US over the years. I've seen the vast majority of americans overweight. I've seen the amount of food the average american eats.

After all, if a resturant can get away with charging more for the same amount of food, this equals higher profits. In a capitalist society isn't this the goal? So, then most american will eat that much. Sorry, but the evidence doesn't end up in your favour.

Especially since:
http://www.obesity.org/subs/fastfacts/obesity_US.shtml

You americans do fat well.

And I don't turn a blind eye to the problems of the world. I just have a *very* different way of attacking them (ie not with bullets). Perhaps you should actuallly read what I type instead of impressing what you *think* that I said.

----
"Canada being mad at you is like Mr. Rogers throwing a brick through your window." -Jon Stewart, The Daily Show

Like Fireflyfans.net?
Haken needs a new development system. Donate.
http://www.fireflyfans.net/thread.asp?b=5&t=3283

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Wednesday, November 3, 2004 11:20 AM

SIGMANUNKI

Quote:
Originally posted by Jasonzzz:

If you read the links that you sent, you would be quite well aware that not all "fat" people have eating problems. Many of these people who do not have eating problems are astigmatized by your type of narrow view "Oh, why don't you just stop stuffing your face - you big fat pig".

And you are still reading what you put on my words and not what I actually typed.

But, as Dr. Phil said (and this is one of the few things that I agree with him on), they just have a steeper hill to climb.

Quote:
Originally posted by Jasonzzz:

In addition, you should also be quite aware that obesity (from over eating in particular here) in general is not uniquely an American problem, it is
on the rise in the world. It is a human problem, not an American one.

Yes it is the rise in the rest of the world too. But (again but), americans are leading the world by far.

UK ( http://www.annecollins.com/obesity/uk-obesity-statistics.htm)
"
and an additional 17% of men and 21% of women are obese (a body mass index of more than 30 kg/m2 ).
"
I only quote this b/c the link provided above only stated stats with a BMI >= 30. Also, England has the fast growing rate of obesity ( http://www.news-medical.net/?id=2011) and (I believe) leads Europe in this regard.

Unfortunatly Canada, being much like the americans when it comes to many day-to-day things, is trailing the americans by only ~15-20% (from what I remember).

This is something that must be worked on if anyone in North America wishes to have a long life.

Quote:
Originally posted by Jasonzzz:

Lastly, I am quite well aware of the portion sizes that are served in most American restaurants nowadays. I am an average American and I take half of my meal home for later consumption.

Then you are one of the select few that actually do this (I'm looking to the stats to say this). I congratulate you on the self control that you have that clearly the bulk of your country doesn't have.

My wife and I (also I assume) rarely eat out and make Thai and East Indian (read: Heathly) dishes at home. They also tend to be tastier

But if this battle is to be won, the world at large must make it feasible for people to have time to make meals at home. As well, people must not be lazy and actually make the meals at home if they have the time.

Somehow though, I think that this fight against obesity is (unfortunatly) just beginning instead of ending.

I think that this fight must start by stopping pointing the finger of blame and starting to do something that will actually affect change (ie exercise, eating healthy instead of McDonalds, reducing stress, etc).

----
"Canada being mad at you is like Mr. Rogers throwing a brick through your window." -Jon Stewart, The Daily Show

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

YOUR OPTIONS

SHARE THREAD

NEW POSTS TODAY

USER	POST DATE

USER

POST DATE