|
Post by DPK on Mar 16, 2005 14:08:42 GMT -5
I don't know if this will cause any problem on the server that this board runs on, but on others I'm aquainted with there seems to be a policy of locking threads once they go over 24- 25 pages... so I did.
Nothing's changed on the old thread as far as access to the postings, just carry on in here and have yourselves a high time ;D
|
|
BillL
Full Member
RIGHT ON !!!!
Posts: 172
|
Post by BillL on Mar 16, 2005 19:29:37 GMT -5
I'm guessing Bush is behind our threads being limited to 25 pages! I've been reading the thread but I must say that all we've accomplished is to blow smoke up everyone's back-sides. We all have our beliefs and no matter how verbose I (we) become or educated I (we) sound, I'll most likely not change one persons mind here in this thread. And I don't have a problem with that. However, I love a good arguement and have even started a few with myself . All that being said, I'd like to repeat something I said way back when this thread was just a baby (paraphrased, of course): Any laws broken by a Republican (or Democrat) can, and have, been broken by a Democrat (or Republican). They're both dirty and there are good and bad seeds in both. The bottom line is that we have a fundamental difference of opinion about what is the best way to fix the situation we're in. And while I don't agree with Bush on everything and that he would never have been my first choice for the big gig, I can honestly say that I think we're better off with him than what could have been (considering the events of the last 5 years). Of course, I'm guessing that one or 2 of you may disagree with me Bill L <good to be back posting>
|
|
|
Post by Mike on Mar 16, 2005 23:49:48 GMT -5
"I'm locking up"...sounds eerily like that old familier sound, "last call for alchohol" ;D
Bill L......nah, never mind..., but I sure would like to know about Dubyas wonderful deeds over the last 5 years though. Did we grab Bin Hiden since I last watched the news? I heard he was spotted holding up his purple finger. ;D
I hope I haven't accidently wondered onto a new neo-con thread.
Is this "round 2"? ;D
|
|
|
Post by Scott Hays on Mar 17, 2005 9:38:59 GMT -5
hey bill ... good to see you back
and just a note to let you know that rollin' mark & i tipped more than one drink in your direction down in jamaica (and you were included in the quaffs made in honor of this thread, as well)
you are also correct about the dirty deeds done by both sides of the aisle ... if i remember correctly, it was the dems who were in charge when i first got my protesting feet wet and found myself involved in a conflict between trotskyists and maoists from which i eventually recovered when i found my own footing between the dogmatic rantings of followers of any kind ... i remain significantly to the left of you, so find salvation in the form of capitalist "free-markets" to be just so much mumbo jumbo; but then those things ("free" markets) disappeared a long time ago and are nothing more than myth and propaganda tools (much like "the people" from whom power is derived but to whom it never seems to really go can be found in the realm of the myth makers on the left ...
this president has done a worse job on his watch than my dog would have done if he had been selected ... of course, the only thing that my dog and shrub have in common is that they are both puppets ... this country is no more secure than it was on the day he was elected (but our fear-mongers have done a bang-up job writing directions and operator manuals for would-be terrorists, providing them with all sorts of great ideas and targets if they were so inclined), but is a whole lot closer to surrendering its collective individual rights; most americans have worse working conditions than they did five years ago and everything they purchase is more costly; health care becomes increasingly elusive to all but the most blessed (i.e., wealthy, since money is the overarching god of this supposedly christian nation) while the environmental and social conditions contributing to bad health worsen; the places where those without wealth go to get away from it all -- parks, libraries, ballparks, and the like -- are falling into disrepair or just flat out closing (i.e., being "privatized" as the saying goes) due to neglect and a lack of funding from the public trust (and never mind sewage, road maintenance, police, fire or emergency services); and the quality of life for most but a few is rapidly declining, though you would never know it by watching all the high end furniture and stereo equipment from china and mega-guzzling vehicles rolling off the lots and into downtown salinas (or wherever), purchased with easily acquired credit and/or cold hard cash from the sale of increasingly dangerous and deadly drugs that help numb the mind to watch such scintillating entertainment as "reality" television (about as "real" as the bridge i have for sale) ... god is no longer the opiate for many of the masses; walmart and costco are.
end rant (for now), since it is off to aforementioned salinas to attempt to instruct 126 kids who are more concerned about coolio and wearing the right colors than they are about sums and punctuation (which is really not any different from the 1960's, from which we all survived, even if 2/3 of us who actually made it into college -- a mere 1/3 of the total student population -- couldn't write our way out of a paper bag but no one bemoaned the fact of how poorly we were prepared by our public k-12 system ... they just rolled up their sleeves and actually taught us OR flunked us and sent us packing unless we figured out for ourselves that the only person who can learn is the learner, when the learner is ready to do so)
|
|
|
Post by jashley on Mar 17, 2005 18:48:25 GMT -5
Did you all think that we would be long winded enough to completely exhaust a thread ? BillL, I was starting to think we would never hear from you again as this bunch of radicals had offended you. We need your intelligent arguments to keep us on our toes and our minds sharp. Great to have you back! Now back to arguing, no rest for the wicked . If you think I'm going to argee that we're better off with Jr than we would have been without him, I think you know that you got another think coming. Read my bizarro post on the last page of Poitics I. One of my biggest giggles of the day is listening to Rush try to bend "conservative" thought to excuse this president's actions (he sounds like JFK on crack, and yes I remember you don't like Rush). As a lapsed republican I can't think of a president who has subverted the priciples of conservatism more than Jr. How out of control does Jr have to get before people realize this guy is no conservative. Brief recap: destroying the constitution, breaking down the separation of chuch and state, huge federal government growth, the transfer of power form the states to the feds (before Jr gets done the states aren't going to control anything-see the feds arresting Californians for buying state legal medical marijauna), huge deficits, U.S. intervention into foriegn country's affairs, and turning over government power to special interests esp. big business and the religious right. Unless the only criteria left for being a conservative is being a military hawk (or in this admin.'s case a chicken hawk) How can you consider Jr a conservative or a republican? I will agree with you that both the democrats and the republicans have their share of the blame for our currrent state of affairs. And if it was a democrat doing the things this president is doing I would be just as mad. After all, the first president I really hated was LBJ. I think this president has managed to become the worst president in my lifetime and we will be paying for his actions (including an $8 Trillion deficit, but not limited to) for generations to come and goodness help us if Scalia becomes chief justice. Peace j
|
|
BillL
Full Member
RIGHT ON !!!!
Posts: 172
|
Post by BillL on Mar 18, 2005 13:39:31 GMT -5
J writes: Bill L......nah, never mind..., but I sure would like to know about Dubyas wonderful deeds over the last 5 years though. Did we grab Bin Hiden since I last watched the news? I heard he was spotted holding up his purple finger.
I hope I haven't accidently wondered onto a new neo-con thread.
Please, my friend, tell me of the wonderful deeds of Clinton, Bush I, Reagan, Carter, Ford, Nixon, Johnson, Kennedy, et al. I dare say that there are very few memorable things from many of these administrations (excepting, of course, stupid blunders, misquotes and other silliness. I'm talking about substance.) Did we grab Bin Laden? No. Is that a major blunder on Bush's part? Yes. Would any/most of what has happened been different had he been captured? I doubt it, but we'll never know. And no, you haven't wandered into a new neo-con thread. I've mentioned before that I find myself more civil libertarian than neo-con, but you may have your own opinion of me and I really don't mind one bit.
Scott says: and just a note to let you know that rollin' mark & i tipped more than one drink in your direction down in jamaica (and you were included in the quaffs made in honor of this thread, as well)
I was wondering why I was getting tippsy back then! Thanks to both of you for thinking of me (and the rest of us from the thread that couldn't make it).
and continues: <major snip> ;D
While I understand your point about free markets, I fail to see how they are different than they were 50 years ago. If anything, the only thing not making them free is government regulation. The arguements could be made in either direction and we could go on forever but I really don't think we'll actually accomplish anything.
Your comment about Bush and your dog...well, I found it humorous. I also noticed your choice of words. Had Gore been "selected" we probably wouldn't be in that much of a different situation. I could be wrong here, but didn't Clinton miss a bunch of opportunities to capture Bin Laden as well? Wouldn't that have prevented a lot of this? Just asking.
J asks: Did you all think that we would be long winded enough to completely exhaust a thread
Yes, I did!
BillL, I was starting to think we would never hear from you again as this bunch of radicals had offended you. We need your intelligent arguments to keep us on our toes and our minds sharp. Great to have you back!
Now back to arguing, no rest for the wicked . If you think I'm going to argee that we're better off with Jr than we would have been without him, I think you know that you got another think coming. Read my bizarro post on the last page of Poitics I.
It'll take a bigger man than you to shut me up ;D. Just kidding. I know we won't agree on being better off, but think of how boring it would be if we all agreed and just followed the masses. It'd be like living in RI where if you're not a Dem you haven't got a shot in hell of getting anywhere (including work in some cases).
Does anyone else find it amusing that when Republicans disagree with each other on something it's portrayed as the splintering of the party and when they are together it's they're all in lock step but when the Dems are together on something they're unified or when they are divided it's because they offer their members freedom to have their own opinion?
And how about Fox News signing up Terry Macauliff (sp?). I must admit that I think he and Clinton together have absolutely destroyed the Democratic Party. Now, all of their candidates will be compared to Bill on appearence and presentation and most will fall very short. On substance, however, they really won't have a problem. Even Kerry was more substanative than Clinton. On the other side, who could be a worse public speaker than Bush? The only ones that come to mind are all on the left (Ted Kennedy, John Kerry {I'm sure I'll take some heat for that one}, Charlie Rangle, Al Sharpton and more).
Ta for now, Bill
|
|
|
Post by chadgumbo on Mar 18, 2005 13:53:36 GMT -5
On March 18, 2005 at 1:39 PM BillL wrote 1.) Be careful here fellas, as I recall Bill used to play hockey ;D 2.) Are we better off? Hmmm. My employers, Republicans both, have given me 3 raises in the last four years, after raise #1 they took away a secondary form of income, after raise #2 they required me to start paying a portion of my own healthcare premiums, and after raise #3 they again took away another form of secondary income. These weren't raises, they were a balancing act, the kind I used to do as a kid on a see-saw with a friend on the school playground. Over the last 12 years I've been "on-call" an average of 1 out of every 6 nights. Beginning April 1st I will now be "on-call" 1 out of every 5 nights. I'm not complaining, just laying out my observations , such as they are. 3.) As far as us all agreeing and following the masses, the late Chuck Hogan (a former employer) once said of his business partner "If he and I agreed with each other all the time, one of us wouldn't be necessary." I'm glad to see you're back as well Bill. Keep posting away -chadgumbo
|
|
|
Post by featphoto on Mar 18, 2005 15:58:52 GMT -5
BillL writes: It'd be like living in RI where if you're not a Dem you haven't got a shot in hell of getting anywhere (including work in some cases). as the (probably) only other Rhode Islander here, I just had to chime in on this ... granted, most all of local RI politics is democratic, but we have a republican governor, and one of our two senators is republican (chafee); granted, he's been voting as much against bush's pet legislation as for it lately (thankfully, particularly in the medicare and environmental areas, plus this whole fantasy bush has about privatizing a portion of SocSec), and more conservative republicans think chafee is very blue-ish (funny, he doesn't look blueish), but he's on that side of the aisle none-the-less. hank
|
|
|
Post by Scott Hays on Mar 18, 2005 21:09:40 GMT -5
hi hank ... i'm blue because i strangle over the environmental, health, legal and retirement plans this particular president offers to me (and my three grandchildren, who will be more impacted than i over choices made today about expenditures in the name of romantic adventures overseas and those enabling the "free" enterprise corporate henchmen/pirates -- choose your poison -- to control our health, educational and environmental policies). I'm glad you live in Vermont (who is about to knock off east coast lovely syracuse), where I think a person can still speak coherently and logically about whatever it is that they believe in (as opposed to walking thinly drawn party lines of propriety).
To Bill L -- yeah, I chose those words carefully, and had Al Gore been "selected", the world we live in would have been signficantly different. Not the large things ... there would still be terrorists out there trying to crack our borders and do damage (and Al would have done just as good a job as keeping the score 0-0 as this President has), but we would not be engaged in a war that is going to drain our resources for no real apparent reason (and screw the notion of Iraqi "freedom" or "self-determination" ... they are no more free today than they were when the British chased out the Ottoman sultans, who were themselves brutal dictators), we would not be sacrificing science for issues of political expediency in just about every issue that you want to discuss, and the focus would continue to be on what can we do as opposed to the prevailing mantra of the neo-con strangling view of what it is that we shouldn't do.
I do not like anyone telling me what it is that I should do, since I am fully capable of making my own choices, and suffering/enjoying the consequences of those choices.
|
|
|
Post by featphoto on Mar 18, 2005 23:38:52 GMT -5
I'm glad you live in Vermont (who is about to knock off east coast lovely syracuse), where I think a person can still speak coherently and logically about whatever it is that they believe in (as opposed to walking thinly drawn party lines of propriety). Vermont? where in my post does it say anything about Vermont? I'm blue too, kiddo, but I don't live in Vermont ...
|
|
|
Post by Scott Hays on Mar 19, 2005 9:17:36 GMT -5
sorry about the mislocation error, hank ... caught it just as soon as i hit the post button, but then it was (of course) too late to correct ... the only explanation i can offer for such profound geographic confusion is temporary (march) madness inspired by profound joy in actually having picked vermont to defeat syracuse and to be caught up in the moment even while i was trying to coherently explain why this president is an anathema to my sweet grandchildren (if not to me) ... perhaps increasing age makes it more difficult to focus on two things at once as i once took pride in being able to do
|
|
|
Post by featphoto on Mar 19, 2005 11:54:51 GMT -5
... perhaps increasing age makes it more difficult to focus on two things at once as i once took pride in being able to do uh, well ... what were we talking about? <g>
|
|
|
Post by Mike on Mar 19, 2005 15:08:28 GMT -5
J writes: Bill L......nah, never mind..., but I sure would like to know about Dubyas wonderful deeds over the last 5 years though. Did we grab Bin Hiden since I last watched the news? I heard he was spotted holding up his purple finger.
I hope I haven't accidently wondered onto a new neo-con thread. Please, my friend, tell me of the wonderful deeds of Clinton, Bush I, Reagan, Carter, Ford, Nixon, Johnson, Kennedy, et al. I've mentioned before that I find myself more civil libertarian than neo-con, but you may have your own opinion of me and I really don't mind one bit. Ta for now, Bill Clinton-Shminton...we're talking about Dubya! I really don't view any of this as a "contest" of who did the best job as President. JFK wins that one, contest over!!! The responsibility of the welfare of this nation is in Bushs hands currently. Bush..not Halliburton, not Chevron, not the Saudis, not Wall Street, not Dick (such an appropriate name) Cheney, not Clinton, Carter, or Reagan (thank God). Bush wanted the job, and now he's got it. Rehashing what Clinton or Carter did serves no purpose other than to divert attention from what a wise man should be concerned about...today. Bush is a Nixon multplied by 1000, that has the powerful organization in place to not be even questioned (so I guess impeachment or being asked to resign is out of the question. ;D) Question is why does he need such a "manipulative" form of governing if he is really on our side? I'm not interested in changing anyones mind on this because frankly, if a person can't see it by now they either really can't figure it out, or for some reason, doesn't want to (which means they have actually, but have personal/selfish reasons to go along with it; screw the less fortunate, they're just not aggressive enough ). And the rats keep winning the rat race, all the way up until nobody is winning anymore. Eventually, even Cheney is shit out of luck, with tons of money and power, but no soul and forced to kiss the Chinese asses. And just in case he has a conscience, knowing that when it came time to serve and protect the people of his country, he and his sidekick Dubya whored themselves out completely. This an extremely destructive administration, and I'm seriously begining to wonder if the USA will ever regain our place in the world scope, or if the majority (middle class) of the USA will ever regain their place in our own country. I can understand that it easier for some people to keep their heads in the sand and just not question, but eventially it comes down to survival, and..."either you're with us, or you're with the administrative terrorist!". Sorry, I just had to throw that in to "slant drill" Dubyas own way of thinking. ;D This is really not a poor mans "sour grapes" way of thinking. A couple of extremely wealthy PATRIOTS, Warren Buffett and Bill Gates have expressed many similiar thoughts about this so-called group of leaders. Actually, not knowing you, I have no opinion of you Bill. I just have an opinion of what you say. Later, Mike
|
|
|
Post by Scott Hays on Mar 20, 2005 12:25:33 GMT -5
China!
Dustin Hoffman was encouraged to think only about "plastics" ... I encourage you to start thinking about "China".
The oldest "country" on the planet, and arguably one of the oldest advanced civilizations ... most Americans, in a typical display of naivete and brash ignorance, know absolutely zilch about China. You can bet your last bippy that we all will be hearing a lot about China in the next decade or so. When "terrorists" disappear into the woodwork and the places we thought they were prove to be havens for nothing more than toothless old women and one-armed children; when the one leg of the evil tripod on which we chose to focus our righteous wrath turns out to have had no weapons of mass destruction and even less ability to deliver the null set of annihilation upon us; when the perhaps non-existent bin laden falls off the face of the earth only to appear in surreal anti-christ vignettes of intercepted audio tape messages to surrogates and instant name recognition most-wanted listees ... perhaps the defined enemy needs a new face.
Russia (oops, the U.S.S.R) served us well for a long long time. Many powerful careers (not to mention fortunes) were built upon fear of what the Soviets could do to us. Even the architect of containment (George Kennan) recanted on its efficacy shortly before his death, stating all the billions/trillions spent on defense against a bogeyman (on both sides of the aisle) could have actually been spent to improve people's lives, engage in commercial, intellectual and artistic intercourse, and perhaps made the current stalemate between the developed nations and the undeveloped nations unnecessary (footnote: the former need to keep the latter in a condition of needing "more", the latter resent and detest the pompousness of the former even as they sell their souls for a bigger and better chevrolet).
Fear.
The new fear, and probably rightfully so, will be China. It's already floating in trial balloons issued by the mouthpieces and lackeys of the administration (just why are you paying $2.69 for a gallon of gasoline ...? ... whatever happened to the Republican cry to "buy American" ...? been to Walmart lately to see who is making your inexpensive goodies?).
We owe it to ourselves to learn more about China. But then, "learning" is not a thing that the folks in charge really want to happen (be they democrat or republican) ... have you ever stopped to think about what you really knew about world history when you left high school? Taking a course based on memorizing the names of dynastic leaders and the dates when who fought whom is not "learning".
But that's another thread
|
|
BillL
Full Member
RIGHT ON !!!!
Posts: 172
|
Post by BillL on Mar 20, 2005 14:44:48 GMT -5
Scott writes: and screw the notion of Iraqi "freedom" or "self-determination" ... they are no more free today than they were when the British chased out the Ottoman sultans, who were themselves brutal dictators
Maybe, but they are a great deal closer to freedom than they were 3 years ago. And I think the turn out for the election shows that. And given enough time to develope, freedom will be entrenched in their culture and become what we call an unalienable right.
Hank says: granted, most all of local RI politics is democratic, but we have a republican governor, and one of our two senators is republican (chafee)
Of course Hank is correct. Our Gov is (and has been for years) a Rep. and I must admit to not being able to reconcile that. Chaffee, however, is an embarassment. Not because he votes against his party but because he wont just stand up for what he believes in.
Scott also says: and the focus would continue to be on what can we do as opposed to the prevailing mantra of the neo-con strangling view of what it is that we shouldn't do.
I do not like anyone telling me what it is that I should do, since I am fully capable of making my own choices, and suffering/enjoying the consequences of those choices.
So your saying that the neo cons are telling you what you shouldn't do? And what would that be, exactly? However, you end with something I truely believe in, no one can tell you what to do and there are consequences to our decisions. That is why I find I lean more Civil Libertarian. Both parties are allowing the intrusion into our daily lives where they don't belong. I'm a firm believer in limited government.
Mike says: Clinton-Shminton...we're talking about Dubya!
I really don't view any of this as a "contest" of who did the best job as President. JFK wins that one, contest over!!!
I believe the original query was presented in tongue-in-cheeck context. J was asking me to name some of Bush's memorable accomplishments. Of course, that would be determined by which side of the aisle you lean. So my reply, also in jest, was name me some memorable accomlishments from etc. The truth of the matter is that people will remember things that have nothing to do with politics when they remember presidents. Ford was clumsy, Bush I threw up on a Japanese diplomat (or whoever it was), Clinton and his cigar, Carter for his lust in his heart, Reagan for jellybeans. Stupid shite. We'll probably all remember Bush as having the public speaking ability of a nervous three year that has to pee really badly. I would like to point out that public speaking ability and intelligence have nothing in common. Just becuase someone can talk a dog off a meat truck doesn't mean he's worth listening to or even knows what the hell he's talking about.
Chad says: 1.) Be careful here fellas, as I recall Bill used to play hockey
Still do Chad. Last game before the playoffs start is tonight. I've noticed lately that my hockey are ending up an awful lot like a feat show. And that's a good thing.
Scott also said: who is about to knock off east coast lovely syracuse
Well, this is way off topic but the kid that scored the winning is from East Providence, RI and his father was the gym teacher at the high school around the corner from where I grew up. His son was told he's too short to play with the big boys and he's consistently proved them wrong over his years at Vermont. I don't follow basketball, but congrats to him.
Bill L
Thanks for all the well wishes. I'll try to keep posting with you clowns. ;D
|
|