REAL WORLD EVENT DISCUSSIONS

Brave New World

POSTED BY: DREAMTROVE
UPDATED: Saturday, August 19, 2006 16:27
SHORT URL:
VIEWED: 4050
PAGE 1 of 1

Friday, August 18, 2006 5:58 AM

DREAMTROVE


It think it's time for a brave new debate. Where we really break on this forum is not liberal vs. conservative, but Bush vs. anti-bush, which I admit is a line somewhere in the middle of conservative territory.

A lot of people play moderate, but I don't see a lot of actual concession and compromise going on, which made me start to wonder if what we really have is skilled debaters who aren't really moderate at all, but are really blind soldiers for jesus with a clever disguise.

So, I've decided to launch a new debate for anyone brave enough to try. The rule is, with each post, if you are anti-bush, you have to post something that bush and co have done *right*, and if you're pro-bush, you have to include in your post something that Bush and co have done *wrong*.

I'll start by saying I think the way they set up the parliment in Iraq, and talked some radical factions like Al Sadr into competing in the political arena rather than on the battlefield is something that Bush and co have done right. Kudos. I think it was well thought out and fairly well executed.

I wonder if there will be any takers.



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

Friday, August 18, 2006 7:10 AM

SOUPCATCHER


Okay. I'll play. Although I have some addendums at the bottom.

I thought the following statement by the President, in regards to the various Minutemen groups, was spot on:

"I'm against vigilantes in the United States of America," Mr. Bush said at a joint press conference [with Fox]. "I'm for enforcing the law in a rational way." *

I agree 100% with that statement.


As to the demographics. I'm not a moderate. I'm proud of my liberal views. The only formal debate experience I've had was an undergraduate course in logic (which means I basically know enough to recognize that my arguments are quite often fallacious and what those fallacies are). And I disagree with the vast majority of what President Bush says and does.

I do have a question about the motivation for the thread. Is there an actual debate going on, where in addition to making a point a poster tacks on their pro or con Bush statement, or is it just a collection of pro or con Bush statements? And I'm guessing sarcasm is not a good thing for this thread (we had an earlier thread of things Bush had said or done that we agreed with and that quickly took a turn for the sarcastic which, although funny to me, probably did little to bridge the divide).

* http://www.washingtontimes.com/national/20050324-122200-6209r.htm

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

Friday, August 18, 2006 7:15 AM

DAYVE


This may or may not be germane to this particular Jackson, but it’s worth a couple o’cents anyways.

I’ll have to line up on the anti-Bush side. I’ve watched him climb the political ladder since his oil field days. He used the governorship of Texas merely as a stepping-stone for his rise to power. The fat cats of the state might say otherwise, but George certainly never did much good for this state that I’m aware of.

I grew up in a very conservative family. My father was a Goldwater conservative – my uncle a Precinct Chairman for the GOP in Harris County (Houston) in 1964. I was very young, but still learned the bitterness of political affiliation during that election.

I bring this up because I recently read the book by John Dean (also a self proclaimed Goldwater conservative), Conservatives Without Conscience in which he says that these days, self-described conservatives are right-wing radicals, and Republicans are theocratic. He calls them arrogant, aggressive and self-righteous and wonders what good is served by dividing the nation into polarized camps.

Dean cites the work of Bob Altemeyer, a psychologist at the University of Manitoba and author of Right-Wing Authoritarianism, Enemies of Freedom: Understanding Right-Wing Authoritarianism and The Authoritarian Specter. Altemeyer says that Right-Wing Authoritarians follow established authorities too easily and too long. They don’t question authorities with whom they agree and are aggressive in support of those authorities.

Altemeyer lists the personality traits of right-wing authoritarians as “typically conventional in their ways and highly religious with moderate to little education; their prejudices (particularly against homosexuals, women and religions other than their own) are often conspicuous; they are mean spirited, narrow-minded and intolerant; they are uncritical in their thinking regarding their chosen authority and therefore often hold inconsistent and contradictory positions; they are prone to panic, highly self-righteous, moralistic and punitive; they throw the book at others when punishing and they have little self-awareness These people have no qualms when the president says we must torture our enemies, conduct warrant less surveillance of Americans and engage in preemptive war. “

Yet, he says that the followers are not as troubling as authoritarian leaders who are typically dominating men who constantly seek personal power for themselves; “they have an amoral view of the world; they intimidate and bully as a matter of course; they are faintly hedonistic and generally vengeful, pitiless, exploitive, manipulative and dishonest; they are highly prejudiced (racist, sexist and homophobic), mean spirited, militant and nationalistic; they tell others what they want to hear, they will take advantage of suckers, and they often create false images of themselves to achieve their goals.”

Dean says that authoritarians are conservatives without conscience and they want to take America to a place the great majority of thinking Americans (including Goldwater conservatives) do not want to go. Let’s not follow.

As far as Bush doing something good… this is hard for me, but I think back to when he was managing general partner of the Texas Rangers baseball club. He was there when Sammy Sosa was traded for Harold Baines and Fred Manrique. Probably one of the worst trades in baseball, but I suppose it did keep ticket prices down.




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

Friday, August 18, 2006 7:17 AM

GEEZER

Keep the Shiny side up


What will be interesting will be to see how long the list gets before someone can't resist turning it into a "You can't really believe that's good (or bad)!" fest.

Since I come down on both sides (reports of my Bush-worship are exaggerated...wait that didn't come out right...I'm not sly or anything...anyway...)

Good - I personally thing obtaining call records for domestic calls was worthwhile. It's a lot less intrusive than actual wiretapping, and allows identification of people who talked to already identified bad guys.

Bad - The Federal Marriage Amendment. None of the government's business.

"Keep the Shiny side up"

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

Friday, August 18, 2006 7:22 AM

CAUSAL


Good idea, DT, keep it up and you'll make my short list of Good Guys on this board.

My contributions*:

I think Bush and Co. are playing fast and loose with civil liberties. I may not be in the crowd that believes they're trying to turn the US into a fascist state, but regardless of their motives, they're on a slippery slope.

I think the response in the immediate aftermath of 9/11 was great. Instead of looking for heads within the US government, he looked for the person that was actually responsible and went after him. With how much success is still up in the air, of course.

*I'm neither pro- nor anti-Bush. I can see good and bad, hence I feel free to post on both sides. Hope that doesn't break th rules too much.


________________________________________________________________________
I wish I had a magical wish-granting plank.


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

Friday, August 18, 2006 8:17 AM

NVGHOSTRIDER


Had some good points, but Casual took 'em.

Only a quick add. I don't think it really matters who is in the White House. Sure it may seem someone may have acted differently as president, but the real powers at hand had already determined what will and won't happen.
In the end it is all about money.

Oh, and Dreamtrove, thanks for asking for opposing viewpoints from each person posting. Not many ask for that and get it.




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

Friday, August 18, 2006 8:18 AM

CITIZEN


It's a bit of an unfair question for non-Americans, technically I can only go with Bush's foreign policy and really, I got nothing. That man can do nothing right on the world stage.

I think I can probably fall back on the Minuteman thing, even an idiot can tell it's not a good idea to let morons run around with guns dispensing 'justice'.

I'll go with something good Blair has done though, banning Fox hunting, only a truly barbaric coward could think watching a pack of dogs rip apart a creature that doesn't stand a chance is a sport. I'd say it is as bad as badger baiting, cock fighting or dog fighting, except its worse.


More insane ramblings by the people who brought you beeeer milkshakes!
No one can see their reflection in running water. It is only in still water that we can see.

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

Friday, August 18, 2006 8:28 AM

SOUPCATCHER


Okay. Before my off-topic response to part of Dayve's post I better get my comment on.

I thought creating an award named after Bob Hope was a cool thing to do. Which, IIRC, the President did a couple of years ago.


Dayve,

If you found Dean's book interesting you might like a series of posts on authoritarianism and fundamentalism and ways to encourage authoritarian followers away from leaders.
Part I: Defining the Authoritarian Personality ( http://dneiwert.blogspot.com/2006/08/cracks-in-wall-part-i-defining.ht
ml )
Part II: Listening to the Leavers ( http://dneiwert.blogspot.com/2006/08/cracks-in-wall-part-ii-listening-
to.html )
Part III: Escape Ladders ( http://dneiwert.blogspot.com/2006/08/cracks-in-wall-part-iii-escape-la
dders.html )

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

Friday, August 18, 2006 8:40 AM

DAYVE


Thanks Soup, I will read those. I've just started American Theocracy, by Kevin Phillips....



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

Friday, August 18, 2006 9:07 AM

USBROWNCOAT


Pro Bush

Good - Taking the war over seas, It's about time.

Even better - His legendary oratory skills.

Bad - That whole creepy religious thingy. Talking to god may not be a bad thing when kneeling at the foot of your bed. In political speeches?... maniacal!

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

Friday, August 18, 2006 10:31 AM

DREAMTROVE


Okay, and here's where it all gets tough. I'm goign to answer Soupcatchers quesiton, but first I have to praise Bush (omfg, right?) I've criticized his admin enough, that I'm on the anti-side. (and yes citizen, and everyone, it's okay to go with a near Bush, I think I said Bush and co, and that includes Tony Blair, and also Paul Wolfowitz and people like that.)

I think that the war on terror has won some victories off the battlefield with terrorists in Libya and Ireland sheathing the sword. I think there was a rumor that this was coming along in Spain as well. So, Bravo, well done.

The motivation of this thread is that the divide is too great, and we should really only debate our key disagreements and not just which side is right. No one has a monopoly on answers.

What I find most curious that I really didn't expect, is I find people's counter-party opinions (on both sides) actually more interesting then the party line stuff which is usually spouted. I think this thread could spawn whole new subthreads on topics such as "are vigilantes out of control?" or "How creepy is the whole religious thing?"

And this is not a contest, just everyone think how much of a concession is theirs relative to the others, so the whole thing doesn't get too lopsided.

I'm actually not so worried it's going to distract into total war as I am that people will have trouble coming up with them. I think that from any perspective, there still are a fairly large number of things, esp. when you include the whole crew. For instance, I know Scalia just did something democrats would approve of, I think that's close enough.

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

Friday, August 18, 2006 10:43 AM

YINYANG

You were busy trying to get yourself lit on fire. It happens.


Let's see... I'll start with a Bush compliment, then talk about Iraq and stuff (since it was mentioned above, and it relates to Bush).

The fact that Bush responded after 9/11 = good (are we supposed to do something that no one's mentioned? If so, I got nothing).

Whew! Okay, now that that's done, it's time to move on.

That whole, "Let's give the gift of Democracy to the Iraqis" has been both silly and mismanaged. No one can just give a country the workings of democracy and expect it to hold - especially when the Middle East has no real history of democracy. Sure, America is a 'democracy (or, at least, people would like it to be),' but that's because we can trace history back to the Romans.

That's all I have to say about this, because a) I have little to no desire to seek out more information, and b)I can't think of anything else good that Dubya has done.

---

Go to http://richlabonte.net/tvvote/ and vote Firefly!

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

Friday, August 18, 2006 10:45 AM

CITIZEN


Quote:
Originally posted by dreamtrove:
I think that the war on terror has won some victories off the battlefield with terrorists in Libya and Ireland sheathing the sword. I think there was a rumor that this was coming along in Spain as well. So, Bravo, well done.
The peace process in Ireland had nothing to do with the Bush administration.


More insane ramblings by the people who brought you beeeer milkshakes!
No one can see their reflection in running water. It is only in still water that we can see.

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

Friday, August 18, 2006 11:23 AM

RAZZA


Dreamtove:

I'm usually a Lurker and only add my two cents ocassionally, but this is a great topic and had to chime in. Thanks for starting it.

I'm pretty conservative and generally support Bush, but as most conservatives these days, I have some fundamental problems with the administration.

I guess my single biggest problem with Bush and company is their complete and utter inability to recognize, admit, and take corrective action when they make mistakes. Whether it be Katrina, Iraq strategy, or whatever. Now, I understand the reluctance to admit a mistake given todays political climate, but that's no excuse for blind refusal of the obvious.

I have to give Bush and company good marks on their clear recognition of the threat represented by global terrorism, and their steadfastness in trying to do something about it. We can debate their methods in another thread, but I think many of the President's opponents are completely oblivious to the threat and are too willing to undermine the effort while proclaiming a tacit desire to stop it.

-----------------
"History is the version of past events that people have decided to agree upon."

---Napoleon Bonaparte

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

Friday, August 18, 2006 11:42 AM

MISBEHAVEN


Anti-Bush

Good:

Something good Bush has done...........................................still thinking...............................oh, I got one! He accepted the resignation of that loon, John Ashcroft. Anyone recall him draping a curtain over the breasts of the Lady of Justice statue, before he gave a press conference in front of it? So, yeah. I would have to say that was definitely a positive move for the President.

Bad:

Bush replaced Ashcroft with Gonzalez. A man who believes it's alright to torture, and who appears intent on errording our civil liberties. I don't know. Maybe Ashcroft wasn't that bad after all.


But to be fair, Bush has done a couple of good things. He refused to brand Islam as a violent religion, or all Muslims as terrorists. Also, he proposed a temporary work permit for Mexican laborers. Yeah, that's about it. But that's completely overshadowed by an endless list of bad things he has done.





"The only thing that will redeem mankind is cooperation."
-Bertrand Russell

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

Friday, August 18, 2006 11:43 AM

DREAMTROVE


First,

I thank Bush for withdrawing the Harriet Miers nomination.

Citizen,

I disagree. The IRA's announcement to migrate to political life came just days after the US squashed some terrorist or other. I think they thought about it and didn't want to be next on the list.

Yin yang,

I don't think having a history of democracy has much to do with it. I think they're handling it just fine. They elected Ahmadinejad, Hamas, Hezbollah, and the new iraqi alliance all of whom seem to want us out of the ME, which supports their constituents wishes. We're not doing so well over here. We seem to elect people who don't represent us, and do what suits them. Maybe democracy has a life span, and ours is shuffling off to the cursing home.

But in general, and this wasn't the original intention of the thread, but it's turning out well, so I want to stick to it, let's try to stick to some counter-intuitive discussions that might cross our own natural positions. (after all, all other threads are devoted to us ranting our party lines) Let's try to keep in the spirit of the thread. It can be about batman for all I care, but party-line crossfire here will serve to destroy the idea, and we should try to keep from doing that.

Razza

Thanks. I've been amazed at Bush's reluctance to admit a mistake, even when it's politically expedient to do so, but this thread is making me begin to understand why that happens. Most of us are a little afraid to let our guard down lest we be attacked. I think Bush is over his head, I don't think there's a question of that, he's not a man with a resume that screams 'president' and so he's a little less secure about letting his guard down than most of us, which is also understandable. But I agree, it does sometimes defy reason.

I'm not oblivious to the threat of terrorism, btw, I jsut think it's been exaggerated for political gain. I also don't think the Bush crowd is the only ones doing it. I've notices that some of Bush's chief opponents in congress (not just members of the team as I call it, ie. lieberman, hillary, but regular democrats) are making much of the imminent threat that I don't think is that strong. I also think our media is in love with the idea because it loves trauma. Baby's arms cut off, big news everywhere, baby's arms sewn back on, not such big news.


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

Friday, August 18, 2006 11:50 AM

YINYANG

You were busy trying to get yourself lit on fire. It happens.


Okay, another Bush compliment (I found one, I found one): he managed to get himself re-elected.

Dreamtrove:

I agree with the 'we're not doing so good ourselves' sentiment. Of course, it would help if we were an actual democracy, instead of a republic deomcracy (or whatever it's being called these days).

---

Go to http://richlabonte.net/tvvote/ and vote Firefly!

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

Friday, August 18, 2006 12:10 PM

PAGANPAUL


I'm neither for nor against Bush. He is insignificant.



* - * - * - * - * - * - * - * - * - * - * - * - * - * - * - * - * - * - * - * - * - * - * - * - * - * - *

* - * - * - * - * - * - * - * - * - * - * - * - * - * - * - * - * - * - * - * - * - * - * - * - * - * - *

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

Friday, August 18, 2006 12:18 PM

DREAMTROVE


Yin Yang

Bush, who did actually try to privatize social security, is just the latest result in a series of mis-steps. Actually, if this were a republic, and not a democracy, I think it would work a lot better.

Oh No! I think we just hit the quintessential Democrat vs. Republican argument!

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

Friday, August 18, 2006 12:21 PM

CITIZEN


Quote:
Originally posted by dreamtrove:
I disagree. The IRA's announcement to migrate to political life came just days after the US squashed some terrorist or other. I think they thought about it and didn't want to be next on the list.
The Bush administration had nothing to do with the peace process in Ireland.

The Bush administration had nothing to do with the peace process in Ireland.

It was the end of along lengthy process and had nothing to do with the IRA getting scared over the possibility of the US coming to 'kick their ass'.

Firstly most administrations wouldn't even lift a finger to prevent US citizens funding the IRA, so by no stretch of the imagination can you believe that the Bush administration would lend military support to the British government.

I'd also be surprised if the British government would accept, what could you guys do exactly? Launch cruise missiles at Dublin?

If any recent American president did anything for the peace process in Ireland it was Clinton who helped get both sides around a bargaining table, which is where and how the process started.

The IRA afraid of what the Bush administration might do, that's really quite amusing.


More insane ramblings by the people who brought you beeeer milkshakes!
No one can see their reflection in running water. It is only in still water that we can see.

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

Friday, August 18, 2006 12:40 PM

DREAMTROVE


Citizen,

You broke from the tradition. You failed to say something good about Bush and co., who have made a govt. in Iraq which was just recognized by Jordan, who opened an embassy.

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

Friday, August 18, 2006 12:42 PM

YINYANG

You were busy trying to get yourself lit on fire. It happens.


Lol, dreamtrove.

Oh no! Um... Bush has good public speaking skills (although what he chooses to say, is, as always, up for debate).

---

Go to http://richlabonte.net/tvvote/ and vote Firefly!

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

Friday, August 18, 2006 12:56 PM

CITIZEN


Dream, I said something good about Clinton, since according to you Clinton IS Bush you are wrong, I did say something good about Bush.

Under Blairs Labour government the British economy is better than ever.


More insane ramblings by the people who brought you beeeer milkshakes!
No one can see their reflection in running water. It is only in still water that we can see.

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

Friday, August 18, 2006 1:01 PM

FINN MAC CUMHAL


I’m not sure how many pros and cons I can come up with. I don’t tend to look at things from a Pro-Bush or Anti-Bush perspective. I’ll start off with these two:

BAD: Marriage Amendment. This is was just dumb. I understand that the desire was to counter judicial legislation (for some), but it was the wrong way to go about it. If prohibition taught us anything, it is that the Constitution should not be used for social engineering.

GOOD: Faith based initiatives. These are good ideas. We need more like them. Religion is an excellent tool for helping the needy and constructing positive responsible attitudes in a community. It is a tool that the government should exploit to more effectively accomplish what costly government programs attempt to do without broadening government control over a sector they were never supposed to be in control of.


Nihil est incertius vulgo, nihil obscurius voluntate hominum, nihil fallacius ratione tota comitiorum.

Nothing is more unpredictable than the mob, nothing more obscure than public opinion, nothing more deceptive than the whole political system.

-- Cicero

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

Friday, August 18, 2006 1:06 PM

DARKJESTER


Strongly anti-Bush, but....

His ideas (pre 9/11) about guest worker status for Mexicans and the deal he was working on with Vicente Fox... Brilliant!

MAL "You only gotta scare him."
JAYNE "Pain is scary..."

http://www.fireflytalk.com - Big Damn Podcast

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

Friday, August 18, 2006 1:19 PM

USBROWNCOAT


Quote:
Originally posted by DarkJester:
Strongly anti-Bush, but....

His ideas (pre 9/11) about guest worker status for Mexicans and the deal he was working on with Vicente Fox... Brilliant!

MAL "You only gotta scare him."
JAYNE "Pain is scary..."

http://www.fireflytalk.com - Big Damn Podcast



Where is the bad?

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

Friday, August 18, 2006 1:23 PM

USBROWNCOAT


Simple. State if you are pro or anti bush.
Give a pro
Give a con


Would be better if we didn't have this: Good________ah still thinking______ah?
We get it when you state pro or anti.
Play fair people.

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

Friday, August 18, 2006 1:28 PM

USBROWNCOAT


Quote:
Originally posted by PaganPaul:
I'm neither for nor against Bush. He is insignificant.



* - * - * - * - * - * - * - * - * - * - * - * - * - * - * - * - * - * - * - * - * - * - * - * - * - * - *

* - * - * - * - * - * - * - * - * - * - * - * - * - * - * - * - * - * - * - * - * - * - * - * - * - * - *



That is the best sig I've seen in sometime! Bravo.

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

Friday, August 18, 2006 1:33 PM

DREAMTROVE


Citizen,

fair enough, except that the pro-bush people here for the most part don't support clinton, so it doesn't work. Blair I do accept as a substitute. Really, the rule here is for you to break out of your mold. If you thought of clinton as a good guy, or on your side, then say something good about him is not worth anything.

Finn,

Glad to see you joined us. I think you were sort of being rough on my position there.

I agree on both points. I wasn't always a Hezbollah-loving Bush-hater. Before I sacraficed goats to the prophet I used to support him. He lost me after a collection of these, I think torture was the final straw, but the spending had been getting to me for a while, and the patriot act, though it was more of a bipartisan effort, Viet Dinh is a republican partisan.

There were a lot of good things on the domestic agenda which haven't gotten as far as I'd like to see, certainly faith based initiatives are a much better idea than clinton's faith based initiative in waco.

As for Bush, he invited Stephen Colbert to give the media dinner address, which shows that he actually does have balls and is willing to put someone up who will really tear him down. Which is my compliment for the post.


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

Friday, August 18, 2006 1:39 PM

USBROWNCOAT


Quote:
Originally posted by dreamtrove:
Citizen,

fair enough, except that the pro-bush people here for the most part don't support clinton, so it doesn't work. Blair I do accept as a substitute. Really, the rule here is for you to break out of your mold. If you thought of clinton as a good guy, or on your side, then say something good about him is not worth anything.

Finn,

Glad to see you joined us. I think you were sort of being rough on my position there.

I agree on both points. I wasn't always a Hezbollah-loving Bush-hater. Before I sacraficed goats to the prophet I used to support him. He lost me after a collection of these, I think torture was the final straw, but the spending had been getting to me for a while, and the patriot act, though it was more of a bipartisan effort, Viet Dinh is a republican partisan.

There were a lot of good things on the domestic agenda which haven't gotten as far as I'd like to see, certainly faith based initiatives are a much better idea than clinton's faith based initiative in waco.

As for Bush, he invited Stephen Colbert to give the media dinner address, which shows that he actually does have balls and is willing to put someone up who will really tear him down. Which is my compliment for the post.



'Trove, The beauty of the Colbert thing is watching Bush sit there. Could he be any cooler? Say what you want about him. I say cowboy tough!

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

Friday, August 18, 2006 1:51 PM

ANTIMASON


anti-Bush

Good: he is affecting change globally, for better or worse; and he is a good motivational speaker

Bad- without getting into my normal diatribe, i just want to respond to someone elses comment:

we wouldnt need the minutemen, if the Federal government would fullfill its responsibility and secure our borders itself; what are Americans supposed to do in this case? let the whole of south America come across? maybe it hasnt quite registered with most Americans what slave labor does to an economy like ours...

im not sure why this doesnt set off alarms with those who think muslim extremist terrorism is the greatest threat facing America and the world...yet Bush calls the minutemen vigilantes; nevermind that theyre doing what the Fed. refuses to do

maybe we should secure our borders before we start wiretapping everybodys phone calls? nah thats rediculous; its not like it worked in Berlin

but im afraid its all an afterthought by now..the Bush agenda is to keep the borders as free-flowing as possible..hence NAFTA superhighway that begins construction next year, connecting Canada to Mexico.
http://www.humanevents.com/article.php?id=15497

its strange, the Dubai ports deal was all over the news, and we seemed to atleast have prolonged it(everyones forgot about it by now), but where was the media when Bush met with Fox and Canadas prime minister to forge this pan-American Union? isnt that an issue of national security?

ahh sovereignty..well, better luck on the next planet

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

Friday, August 18, 2006 1:56 PM

MISBEHAVEN


Quote:
Originally posted by USBrowncoat:
Simple. State if you are pro or anti bush.
Give a pro
Give a con


Would be better if we didn't have this: Good________ah still thinking______ah?
We get it when you state pro or anti.
Play fair people.


*****************************************************************
Anti-Bush


I was just trying to keep it light and humorous. But it never fails. When I'm trying to be funny, people always think I'm being sarcastic and when I'm being sarcastic, people generally think I'm being funny.

Perhaps you noticed that I not only stated one positive thing, I listed three things. And in the spirit of sticking with the rules, here's number four:

His interest in furthering space exploration. I think it's an excellent idea.

Also, you didn't state a pro or con with your complaint.....I mean post.

Edited to list the con I forgot to add:

On the home front, He took the country’s economy from A-OK to IOU, turning a projected, 10-year $5 billion surplus into a projected $5 billion deficit and, in the short term, replacing Bill Clinton’s balanced budget with a 2004 budget deficit of $374 billion, the largest in history. According to projections issued by the White House Budget Office in January 2004, Bush will set an all-time new deficit record of $520 billion in 2005. At the same time, Bush rewarded his favorite constituency, those Americans making over $320,000 a year, with two back-to-back tax cuts that they didn’t need and we couldn’t afford.

*****************************************************************
Not rich enough for a tax break

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

Friday, August 18, 2006 1:59 PM

FINN MAC CUMHAL


Quote:
Originally posted by dreamtrove:
Finn,

Glad to see you joined us. I think you were sort of being rough on my position there.
If you’re referring to the other thread, I really don’t agree with your position there, but I’m sorry if I was being rough. If you think I’m hard to get along with here, you should work for me.
Quote:
Originally posted by dreamtrove:
I agree on both points. I wasn't always a Hezbollah-loving Bush-hater. Before I sacraficed goats to the prophet I used to support him. He lost me after a collection of these, I think torture was the final straw, but the spending had been getting to me for a while, and the patriot act, though it was more of a bipartisan effort, Viet Dinh is a republican partisan.
Well if it’s any consolation, the spending has been the major thorn in my side for some time now. And while, I’m happy to see that efforts are now being made to curtail spending, those efforts are impacting on my funding.


Nihil est incertius vulgo, nihil obscurius voluntate hominum, nihil fallacius ratione tota comitiorum.

Nothing is more unpredictable than the mob, nothing more obscure than public opinion, nothing more deceptive than the whole political system.

-- Cicero

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

Friday, August 18, 2006 2:14 PM

FREDGIBLET


Quote:
Originally posted by citizen:
Quote:
Originally posted by dreamtrove:
I think that the war on terror has won some victories off the battlefield with terrorists in Libya and Ireland sheathing the sword. I think there was a rumor that this was coming along in Spain as well. So, Bravo, well done.


The peace process in Ireland had nothing to do with the Bush administration.


Probably why it's actually working (at least last time I checked).

Oops, guess I have to say something nice now...Bush has given my favorite local DJ's an insane amount of material to work with. Almost worth having four more years.

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

Friday, August 18, 2006 2:14 PM

DREAMTROVE



Quote:
If you’re referring to the other thread, I really don’t agree with your position there, but I’m sorry if I was being rough. If you think I’m hard to get along with here, you should work for me.


Politics does breed a special sort of animosity. I think on the left-right scale if left is (1) Marx, Lenin and Teddy Kennedy and right (10) is Adam Smith, William F. Buckley and Pat Buchananm then you're probably somewhere around (8) and I'm somewhere around (7) since there are a decent number of republicans to the left of me. And if we get into it, then it seems like there's no hope of ever having (1) and (10) working together in the same govt., (like the Levin-Inhoffe bill?)

Quote:
Well if it’s any consolation, the spending has been the major thorn in my side for some time now. And while, I’m happy to see that efforts are now being made to curtail spending, those efforts are impacting on my funding.


Sadly, there's never a logic to where the cuts are made. Except on the old pork basis, ie. you didn't have a team of lobbyist protecting the project. I suppose it would make more sense if the cutting priority we put in when the spending program was created, like you could create a Priority 9 spending bill which would be a lot easier to pass than a priority 1 spending bill, and then they could get curtailed in that order. Something like that.

Oh, I almost forgot. Bush had a great state of the union including a promise to move ahead on alternative fuels, which is a big admission for someone who's support is so solidly based in oil.

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

Friday, August 18, 2006 2:19 PM

USBROWNCOAT


Quote:
Originally posted by misbehaven:
Quote:
Originally posted by USBrowncoat:
Simple. State if you are pro or anti bush.
Give a pro
Give a con


Would be better if we didn't have this: Good________ah still thinking______ah?
We get it when you state pro or anti.
Play fair people.


*****************************************************************
Anti-Bush


I was just trying to keep it light and humorous. But it never fails. When I'm trying to be funny, people always think I'm being sarcastic and when I'm being sarcastic, people generally think I'm being funny.

Perhaps you noticed that I not only stated one positive thing, I listed three things. And in the spirit of sticking with the rules, here's number four:

His interest in furthering space exploration. I think it's an excellent idea.

Also, you didn't state a pro or con with your complaint.....I mean post.

Edited to list the con I forgot to add:

On the home front, He took the country’s economy from A-OK to IOU, turning a projected, 10-year $5 billion surplus into a projected $5 billion deficit and, in the short term, replacing Bill Clinton’s balanced budget with a 2004 budget deficit of $374 billion, the largest in history. According to projections issued by the White House Budget Office in January 2004, Bush will set an all-time new deficit record of $520 billion in 2005. At the same time, Bush rewarded his favorite constituency, those Americans making over $320,000 a year, with two back-to-back tax cuts that they didn’t need and we couldn’t afford.

*****************************************************************
Not rich enough for a tax break


Well sarcasm and humor can easily be mistaken. My apologize.

Good - His hair

Bad - His daughters!

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

Friday, August 18, 2006 2:30 PM

FREDGIBLET


Quote:
Originally posted by dreamtrove:
Oh, I almost forgot. Bush had a great state of the union including a promise to move ahead on alternative fuels, which is a big admission for someone who's support is so solidly based in oil.


Promises and actions are two different things.

Bush and co. started moving the military away from the Cold War and more towards the organization that will be needed to fight the kind of wars we are actually likely to get into.

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

Friday, August 18, 2006 2:31 PM

USBROWNCOAT


Quote:
Originally posted by fredgiblet:
Quote:
Originally posted by dreamtrove:
Oh, I almost forgot. Bush had a great state of the union including a promise to move ahead on alternative fuels, which is a big admission for someone who's support is so solidly based in oil.


Promises and actions are two different things.

Bush and co. started moving the military away from the Cold War and more towards the organization that will be needed to fight the kind of wars we are actually likely to get into.


Must give a good and bad..Moderator..thank you

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

Friday, August 18, 2006 2:36 PM

FREDGIBLET


Quote:
Originally posted by USBrowncoat:
Quote:
Originally posted by fredgiblet:
Quote:
Originally posted by dreamtrove:
Oh, I almost forgot. Bush had a great state of the union including a promise to move ahead on alternative fuels, which is a big admission for someone who's support is so solidly based in oil.


Promises and actions are two different things.

Bush and co. started moving the military away from the Cold War and more towards the organization that will be needed to fight the kind of wars we are actually likely to get into.


Must give a good and bad..Moderator..thank you


My first comment was (IMHO) neutral, I was pointing out that she/he/it was saying that a politician making a promise (*snicker*) was a good thing when in reality what a politician says is unimportant, the only thing that is important is what the politician does.

My second comment was intended to be positive, while I will miss the Cold War style stuff, the military needed an overhaul and Bush and co. started one.

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

Friday, August 18, 2006 2:45 PM

MISBEHAVEN


Quote:
Originally posted by USBrowncoat:


Well sarcasm and humor can easily be mistaken. My apologize.

Good - His hair

Bad - His daughters!


Still keepin' it light:

Good - His daughters

Bad - His hair

Morbid and creepifying I got no problem with, so long as you do it quiet like.

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

Friday, August 18, 2006 2:52 PM

YINYANG

You were busy trying to get yourself lit on fire. It happens.


Alright, one more for today.

Good: His wife.

I have no idea why. I don't know where she stands on political issues; but, I saw on TV that she read to childred. That earns her a gold star, even if she's pretending to care.

Bad: The fact that he thought he was "misunderestimated."

---

Go to http://richlabonte.net/tvvote/ and vote Firefly!

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

Friday, August 18, 2006 11:55 PM

CITIZEN


Quote:
Originally posted by Dreamtrove:
fair enough, except that the pro-bush people here for the most part don't support clinton, so it doesn't work. Blair I do accept as a substitute. Really, the rule here is for you to break out of your mold. If you thought of clinton as a good guy, or on your side, then say something good about him is not worth anything.
You said say something good about people I didn't support.

Sometimes Bush leaves the room (it's on a par with the bad things some of the Bush supporters have said, sue me).

Plus Dream, you didn't say anything good about bush.


More insane ramblings by the people who brought you beeeer milkshakes!
No one can see their reflection in running water. It is only in still water that we can see.

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

Saturday, August 19, 2006 3:50 AM

FREMDFIRMA


I can name three.

#1 - He sent Ashcroft packing, man that guy was nuts!
#2 - He didn't renew the idiotic and misnamed "assault weapons ban".
#3 - His wife is way less crazy than Tipper Gore!

Thank you, Paganpaul, for making me laugh so hard I almost choked on my coffee, I needed that more than you know!


There's no word in any language I know of that would go low enough to describe the man and his entire administration.. I suppose if I were christian, they'd be the antichrist - they stand against every single principle that I have ever stood for or believed in, and they do so in absolute, explicit detail down to the Nth degree.

I mean, honestly, how else can I react to them, once you realize this ?

I'd settle for tar, feathers and out of town on a rail, mind you... but anything past that would be nice too.

-Frem

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

Saturday, August 19, 2006 4:05 AM

KANEMAN


Quote:
Originally posted by yinyang:
Alright, one more for today.

Good: His wife.

I have no idea why. I don't know where she stands on political issues; but, I saw on TV that she read to childred. That earns her a gold star, even if she's pretending to care.

Bad: The fact that he thought he was "misunderestimated."

---

Go to http://richlabonte.net/tvvote/ and vote Firefly!


Hi dingaling, call me!

Chris eatsshitisall

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

Saturday, August 19, 2006 4:09 AM

CHRISISALL


Weigh me in as anti(Big surprise)

Good: I have to go with Bush's not completly demonizing the whole of Muslim after 911, which woulda been the easy way to go.

Bad: It's a buffet.

Too many to choose Chrisisall

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

Saturday, August 19, 2006 3:10 PM

ANTIMASON


Quote:
Originally posted by Fremdfirma:

There's no word in any language I know of that would go low enough to describe the man and his entire administration.. I suppose if I were christian, they'd be the antichrist - they stand against every single principle that I have ever stood for or believed in, and they do so in absolute, explicit detail down to the Nth degree.

-Frem


i just wanted to say i appreciate this comment, whether it was sincere or not. i have argued time and again that saying your a Christian does not make it so, and that his actions are more indicative of his occult background with Skull and Bones than any doctrines i know of Jesus'

hint-hint people

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

Saturday, August 19, 2006 4:27 PM

DREAMTROVE


While. sure I agree for those of us on the anti-side, it's an all you can eat moron buffet in the million things we hate about the bush admin, again, that's what we have every other thread for. I think this has turned into an interesting place for new discussions that can be born, such as if we all wanted to talk about something we all agree is a positive or a negative, for any admin. Some of thes problems are things are things where it's been getting worse with each successive administration, such as the failure to think things through, correct mistakes or the overspending. Some of the positive things are things maybe people would like to see more of in the future.

Bush, btw, has the most diverse cabinet ever (am I wrong?) Two blacks, two hispanics, an asian, a jew, two catholics, a mormon, a christian scientist, and a few other white protestants. I think this came out to an exact racial distribution of the country, more or less. Only four women though, so no gender distribution. I generally say 'the best man for the job' is more important, but a distribution like this is an achievement, no question about it. It does show, also, that contrary to his image of selecting only yesmen extremely close to him, that either he got very lucky, or he has either a large selection of friends, or is willing to select people who may disagree with him. Anyway, whatever the reasons, kudos.


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

YOUR OPTIONS

NEW POSTS TODAY

USERPOST DATE

OTHER TOPICS

DISCUSSIONS
An American education: Classrooms reshaped by record migrant arrivals
Thu, December 12, 2024 08:17 - 4 posts
CNN, The Home of FAKE NEWS
Thu, December 12, 2024 08:16 - 3 posts
The Hill: Democrats and the lemmings of the left
Thu, December 12, 2024 08:11 - 13 posts
Elections; 2024
Thu, December 12, 2024 01:38 - 4931 posts
COUP...TURKEY
Wed, December 11, 2024 21:38 - 40 posts
Dana Loesch Explains Why Generation X Put Trump In The White House
Wed, December 11, 2024 21:21 - 7 posts
Alien Spaceship? Probably Not: CIA Admits it’s Behind (Most) UFO Sightings
Wed, December 11, 2024 21:18 - 27 posts
IRAN: Kamala Harris and Biden's war?
Wed, December 11, 2024 19:34 - 18 posts
Countdown Clock Until Vladimir Putins' Rule Ends
Wed, December 11, 2024 19:32 - 158 posts
A.I Artificial Intelligence AI
Wed, December 11, 2024 19:04 - 251 posts
Who hates Israel?
Wed, December 11, 2024 19:02 - 77 posts
In the garden, and RAIN!!! (2)
Wed, December 11, 2024 17:59 - 4839 posts
 VIEW MORE TOPICS 

FFF.NET SOCIAL