# Is America determined to kill us all?



## sebastian (Aug 11, 2004)

http://news.yahoo.com/s/cpress/20050618/ca_pr_on_wo/us_global_warming_g8

I'm sorry for doing a whole post and run thing here, but i don't have a lot of time to get into this. Just came across this story this morning, and i had to communicate my anger to the outside world.

What is wrong with these morons? By morons, I mean Bush et. al. I hope Texas is the first to burn. Seriously, I hope temperatures become so unbearable there that it becomes inhabitable and Alaska becomes the new state of choice for Americans. Just when I was starting to get complacent about international politics I have to read something like this. What a bunch of sickening, money-grabbing, disgusting, hate-mongering, ignorant, myopic, idiots!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

A quick synopsis of the article (which is really short in any case) is that the U.S. are opposing the G8's insistence that global warming is indeed a bad thing. Idiots.

s.


----------



## enigma (Feb 18, 2005)

sebastian said:


> http://news.yahoo.com/s/cpress/20050618/ca_pr_on_wo/us_global_warming_g8
> 
> I'm sorry for doing a whole post and run thing here, but i don't have a lot of time to get into this. Just came across this story this morning, and i had to communicate my anger to the outside world.
> 
> ...


I know.

The entire thing is insane.

I even agree with you about Texas, despite the fact that I'm _in_ Texas.

I had hope last year, when dumbya's poll numbers were sagging.

I really thought we were going to have a new president here as of Jan. '05.

But the creep gets off his duff just long enough to turn his approval ratings around and get himself re-elected.

Spent all of last november just trying not to vomit up my entrails.

e


----------



## Ben (Apr 21, 2005)

Yeah, George Bush is pretty much the most worthless pile of skin and flesh that has ever degraded the name of Presidency. I am a major supporter of scientific endeavors and the pursuit of truth (not Truth) through science - and this mental midget can't seem to realize that fudging numbers and outright lying isn't a good thing.

What's worse is that this country voted him back in again - and mostly because they simply said he was "Good enough" and that he was "At least a known quantity". Basically I would rather have a Chia Pet as my president than this no talent ass clown.

The problem with people in his age group that support his actions is that they'll all be dead by the time OUR children have to suffer for their idiocy - and those in my age group that support him apparently don't like children or something as I can't seem to figure out why anyone would intentionally shit in their own front yard like that.

It's not comforting that the most militarily powerful country in the world has a President that, for all I can reason, probably needs a bib to eat.


----------



## Guest (Jun 18, 2005)

I thought the planet had been warming up since the Ice Age


----------



## terri* (Aug 17, 2004)

How could so many people...that voted for him...be so wrong.

Signed,

Proud to be an American,

but don't know if I'll survive the next *3 and 1/2 friggin' years* till we get another chance.

*3 and 1/2 friggin' years!*


----------



## Guest (Jun 18, 2005)

Well, it's clear as day to ME that the Bush Administration is scary as satan, lol....

but the more interesting point it raises in my opinion is that it forces us face-to-face with how DIFFERENT many many MANY earthlings are from us.

Most of the time, humans walk around with the happy delusion that most other humans are pretty much on the same page we are. oh, Lordy, is that just a joke.

We NEED to think it - hell, it's what most of our defenses spend their time churning out.

But then we see something like a Bush Administration live and thrive with genuine SUPPORT and fans (not victims of tyranny, but people who really and truly believe Bush is a soldier of God)., people who admire him, revere him almost....and it shakes our sense of reality to its core.

Most of us would say "okay, the man is a lunatic and he has his delusions maybe that God is telling him to do these things in Irag.." and we can acecept that - ONE madman we can handle.

But to think that (the genius) Carl Rove created a campaign that brought in the Christian Right in America to vote in busloads.....and that split the reasonably sane conservatives from the rest of the country on the Gay Marriage issue that so played on the profound beliefs and core fears of that many people that it blinded them to common sense...we cannot fathom that so many people could think SO differently from us.

Yet they do.

It also trips the fear circuit in our own psyches that maybe WE are deluded in other areas, just as vulnerable to suggestion as those people who voted Bush. We all want desperately to believe that people who LOOK sane are totally logical and rational. Oh, my.

Another lesson in Reality 101, I'm afraid.


----------



## ret (Aug 10, 2004)

lol; nuff said.


----------



## ret (Aug 10, 2004)

EDIT: NM


----------



## dakotajo (Aug 10, 2004)

Bush is an obvious crooked piece of shit. I dont know if we could have a worse president. Hes thrown the whole world into turmoil. I pity future presidents, that have to try to clean up his path of destruction. Decades down the road when things hopefully calm down, the republican party will look back at bush and claim he was a saint. Like Reagen(another piece of shit), theyll want to put his mug on Mt. Rushmore.


----------



## Guest (Jun 19, 2005)

> Hes thrown the whole world into turmoil


 :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:

Might want to think about that a little harder.


----------



## danny (Sep 2, 2004)

This more than anything in my life scares me the most. Forget terrorists, forget China, forget Russia, climate change within the next few centuries has the possibility to wipe us and all life off this planet. Heavens knows how the dumb arse American leadership can still deny that the world is not warming up, let alone that we have something to do with it.

What I'm looking forward to is when China becomes the most powerful country in the world, within the next 15 or so years. They will then be the biggest pollution admitter, then see how the US faces that. I will have not one ounce of sympathy.

The sad part is that the ones who are not polluting are the ones who are going to be hardest hit, the low lands in Bangledesh, India, Egypt etc.

And the Americans still wonder why the world does not like them :shock:


----------



## Guest (Jun 19, 2005)

America needs to put more resources into education and alternative fuels, no doubt. I read on Reason once that every president since Nixon pledged to reduce America's overreliance on oil, but none of them have done much. Canada is much more succesful at regulating heavy industry, we should take a cue from them.

For the record, I've never been on the same page as any world leader I can immediately think of, so my disagreements with the Bush admin. doesn't bother me that much.


----------



## mcsiegs (Apr 27, 2005)

Ben said:


> Yeah, George Bush is pretty much the most worthless pile of skin and flesh that has ever degraded the name of Presidency. .


Couldn't have said it better myself. His own political party is finally seeing he is a jackass, too.

Cheney scares me even more.

I cannot stand Texas. I am a northeast guy, and thankfully my state voted against Bush in 04. If only Ohio to the west of me could have followed.

Whenever I see a Bush bumper sticker, I want to go up to that person and shake them and scream. Bush is a dictator. We are a hated country. Remember the old 80s movies where America was fun and everybody wanted to be here?

I believe in God and am religious, but I am not republican, nor a fanatic. I believe that the Christian right has ruined this country. I get so sick when I read "God bless America"...why shouldn't God bless everyone? If you are so saintly, and we supposedly have the concept of separation of church and state, God should bless everyone...not based on your nationality.

What I hate the most is how Bush totally goes against anything that has to do with science. Shiavo's autopsy showed that her brain was atrophied and half the size it should be. He still said he would have fought to keep her alive.

Bush should spend his life in prison for war crimes and lying to us all.


----------



## terri* (Aug 17, 2004)

Danny...I don't wonder why the world doesn't like us.  But then again, I think in the past we have had some pretty damn good moments with the rest of the world. Have we been riding on the tailskirts of the past too long? I do think we continue to have good moments around the world, but they are so minimal compared to the havoc we are reeking.

Mike...I would vote for you. Cheney scares me even more, too. :shock:

I really don't want to be hurtful towards people that "get" Bush. It's just that I sooo don't. (shoulder shrug)


----------



## Dreamer (Aug 9, 2004)

OK, I weigh in on this dangerous topic. I'm waiting for Michael Crichton's book on global warming -- he's apparently skeptical about it. I'm not.

I also DID vote for Bush, but mainly because I didn't want to change horses in mid-stream -- during a war. I find he is embarassing, a liar, and an all around irritating person. I'm finding I don't like politicians in general.

However, we didn't sign the Kyoto Treaty a while back for the following reasons:

3 of the most polluting countries in the world will not join in the agreement. Yes, they are worse than we are:

1. *China *and someone else remarked they'll be the next "Empire" anyway)
2. *Brazil *-- has destroyed the rainforest as well
3. *India*

And this debate continues. Also Arab countries that produce oil -- their livelihood -- are a huge source of pollution, especially when sabotaged sp?! and pipelines are set alight for spite... I'm throwing all sorts of things in here as I remember them, forgive.

In Europe, the Green Parties of various types have had a greater influence than in the U.S. The result is a loss of industry and business and subsequent unemployment in Europe which doesn't make every European on the dole happy.

It is known that the CLEANEST fuel is nuclear. (There are homes here in my new town that are all solar. They are marvellous, but they cost several million to build). That scares me. That is a goal here that will not be easy to implement. I'm very torn.

Bottom line, as usual, it isn't ever simple.

For instance, Afghanistan, their main business is poppies/opium/drugs... that is what their economy is based upon. Another example where livelihood of a country depends upon an illegal substance.

These things aren't easy to change.

At any rate. *I hate George Bush*, but we are not the only countries who are not participating in the Kyoto Treaty, for the reasons stated above. It's a standoff -- economical, political, etc., etc., etc. Because of the Industrial Revolution Europe and the US polluted as it created jobs. The former Soviet Union destroyed its environment with its war machine. Subsidized jobs that ended in the disintegration of the entire economy.

OK, no more. Time for bed.
I like this forum better than above these days. And I love keeping busy. I've actually been reading the paper every day.

Reading the paper now makes me nervous. :shock:

I'm slowly building a new "nest". Not bad.

Recent Zen gem -- "After the ecstasy, the laundry"

Cheers,
D 8) 
Also note, I drive a Honda CIVIC w/stickshift and get close to 40mpg.
I also try to recycle.
I also hate Bush.
We all do what we can? :?

Americans are truly irritating, but are we really the worst country in the world? Is Bush the worst President? Close, at least the worst one I can think of in my lifetime. ACH.
It just isn't that simple.
Edited too many times as I think of things I wish I knew more of in detail.


----------



## Dreamer (Aug 9, 2004)

Why do I ALWAYS have a PS

We don't understand Global Warming. I believe it is occuring. However, when Hannibal crossed the Alps in 400 BC, there was hardly any snow on his route. I have no clue what that means, but we talked about it in an enviornment class I had once. I was a member of a PIRG -- Public Interest Research Group, related to enviornmental studies, Earth Day, etc.

Why are there more glaciers NOW in the Alps than in 400 BC.

I know I don't have this 100% correct. I'll try to find a source.

My point. Nothing is cut and dried, or simple. It just isn't.

:shock: 
I'm now doomed and outta here.........


----------



## Dreamer (Aug 9, 2004)

PPPS, to give myself some shred of credibility, LOL.

My husband works with an attorney who has adopted two Chinese children. They are adorable. She and the kids were recently back in China, in Beijing (about two weeks ago). She said it was so polluted there they had to stay indoors most of the time.

It is more polluted than when she got her babies several years ago.

Los Angeles, which is a freakin' nightmare ... glad I moved, is as pristine as Heaven compared to Beijing.

I'm not lying. Jennifer the attorney is a cool woman and a world traveler and frequent visitor to China. It's apparently a nightmare in the big city. But she wants her children to not lose their original connection to their homeland.

Edit: she is not a single working mother! Her husband is a house husband. Now that is cool 8)


----------



## Dreamer (Aug 9, 2004)

OIY, the good the bad and the ugly...

OK: the internet has some cool stuff, now I'm on a research bonanza when I should go to sleep. And Hannibal crossed them Alps with his army and elephants in something like 230 BC... oops, LOL. Well, I tried.

Yup the US is at the top of the list by a country mile.

*Definition: 1999 total CO2 emissions from fossil-fuel burning, cement production, and gas flaring. Emissions are expressed in thousand metric tons of carbon (not CO2).*

Amount 
1. United States 1499846 :shock: CRAP!
2. Russia 392287 
3. Japan 315274 
4. India 293938 
5. Germany 216213 
6. United Kingdom 147199 
7. Canada 119713 
8. Italy 115371 
9. Korea, South 107399 
10. Mexico 103301 
11. Ukraine 102158 
12. France 98168 
13. Australia 94008 
14. South Africa 91316 
15. Poland 85805 
16. Iran 82269 
17. Brazil 82057 
18. Spain 74691 
19. Indonesia 64308 
20. Saudi Arabia 64249 
21. Korea, North 56,946 
22. Taiwan 55333 
23. Thailand 54492 
24. Turkey 54174 
25. Argentina 37609

OK, Dreamer has left the building, on this topic at least. ACH I'm doomed.

I have to say, I don't trust the president, the government, politicians, the media, etc., etc. at all anymore. It's all "Spin City". So damned confusing I can't keep track. Wish I understood politics more. Never will.


----------



## Ben (Apr 21, 2005)

> I also DID vote for Bush, but mainly because I didn't want to change horses in mid-stream -- during a war. I find he is embarassing, a liar, and an all around irritating person. I'm finding I don't like politicians in general


Sounds to me like a good reason to vote for him, then; I usually save my vote for the most embarrasing, lying, irritating, dumbass I can. And, don't forget, this was a war HE started - and something the OTHER people wanted us OUT of. Not to mention the fact, we have had many wars in the past where our Presidents changed midstream - and sometimes for the better: your comment doesn't add up. Okay...I'm being a bit of a jerk myself, but, I'm a bit frustrated with the fact that people voted for him out of "what else do we do?". I tell you what we do - we stand up for what this country was founded on and actually make a bit of noise and tell these piles of crap that they need to stop lying to us, killing thousands, gasing our environment and generally existing with the average intelligence of a light post.

I voted for Kerry because he at least had the common sense to say that Bush was basically a houseplant with Dumbo ears. I mean, this guy is a complete wreck of a mental midget - why do we have to be RULED by someone who could be outsmarted by the pair of socks laying on my bedroom floor? Why do soldiers have to solute someone who seems determined to kill them all off? Why would I want to wave an American flag for the least democracticly minded President I have ever known in my life? I tell you what - America has lost something with this cracker jack toy of a human; he's not better that Saddam (just regulated more - I mean, he rolled into a country on false pretenses, we might as well change the name from Operation Iraqi Freedom to the Operation Blitzkrieg) - I tell you, I seriously think we have a madman as a President. Thank god for checks and balances or this world would be a crisp piece of toast by now.

There is something seriously wrong with each and every one of us if we end up voting for someone - actively CHOOSING someone - simply because we want them to finish screwing up whatever they started screwing up.


----------



## Martinelv (Aug 10, 2004)

Oh..........my........................god.


----------



## Dreamer (Aug 9, 2004)

Martinelv said:


> Oh..........my........................god.


LOL, I assume that was intended for me. I see I threw in everything but the kitchen sink there, LOL.

The point I'm always trying to make is there is more than one reason as to why politicians say what they say. They don't all have wonderful intentions. How many political leaders promise the same things and never deliver -- peace, better healthcare, better insurance, and for many years a change in the policies towards global warming.

Promises, promises.

The average person wants his coffee pot to turn on in the morning, his car to take him to work, and his workplace to function. It all takes energy.

Changing energy sources for some countries -- most -- means $$$$$ -- loss of livelihood in certain sectors, a choice of using more nuclear power which is a HUGE argument.

Then of course, as noted above, a developing country like China is like the US. They want to build and grow right now and have an infrastructure they aren't going to retrofit for the benefit of the enviornment.

In Brazil, the trees of the rainforests are demanded by many coutries, and provide Brazil's livelihood. Do we tell Brazil to stop doing what it needs to do to keep many people employed. As in Afghanistan who tells this country to stop selling Rec drugs essentially and let its economy collapse.

There is always a reason BEHIND the bullshit spin that politicians give.

But I agree, re: Bush. I NEVER would have believed that Bush and his administration had NO PLAN for post-war Iraq. That's the crime there. Iraqis are dying trying to hold down the fort there. More Iraqis than US soldiers and we should havn lost one of the 1,700 that have died so far.

He shouldn't have connected going into Iraq to 9/11 -- there was no connection.

Oh, I'm rambling on. There is more to an article like that than meets the eye. The intricacies of international politics are beyond me. It seems more constructive to examine the layers of problems than to say "Dubya is a peace of shit." That isn't discussing the problem.

Well, I'd better not come back and look at this thread again as I'm dead meat. What can I say. To make anyone happy, my State was a Kerry State, despite my vote. I lost everything I voted for, though I wasn't going to vote, but felt I should. I voted for allowing same sex marriage -- that was defeated, etc, etc.

There was a thread here at some point about Bush where we discussed our reasons for voting.

I suppose I could say, how did Tony Blair get re-elected? One article said he was "Bush's poodle" LOL.

I hate comments like that as they reduce a complex problem into one sentence that doesn't address the whole problem. It isn't constructive at all.

OK, stuff to do.

Forgive my babbling.
Peace and clean air -- I want both. To be honest, I'll be amazed if we are all around in 50 years. I'm certain someone will press a nuclear button and we won't have a thing to worry about anymore. :?

Peace, really,
D

*PS, I don't know enough about politics and economics to even be making a comment here. I admit it, but simple slogans like "America is killing us" don't cut it with me.*


----------



## Dreamer (Aug 9, 2004)

Oh HELL, another PS to *Ben*

There was no way Kerry was suddenly going to pull us out of the Iraq war. His hands were tied. But I have read that getting Saddam out of Iraq was a goal of MANY presidents including Clinton -- 9/11 was the perfect excuse to go in there. It was NOT right to use 9/11, and it was worse to be ignorant of the fact that we had no postwar plan.

And re Osama (still on the run!) there were many missed opportunities to off him over the past 25 years. Twenty five years, even longer if you count the formation of Israel as a country. The Iraq/Iran/Middle East problem is far from new and is only getting worse.

I didn't even have a clue about this stuff until 9/11 when I started reading about politics more. And... I include myself.... DISCLAIMER... no one can be an expert on international relations unless it's their major in college.

The missteps made re: the Iraq war are pretty well delineated in the 9/11 Commission Report. I agree, it's a disaster.

And I'm sorry I'm ignorant enough to be scared silly, and was wringing my hands before I went to the polls. I disliked Kerry as he was an uncertain quantity, but I KNEW he would be saddled with the war anyway. I literally thought that "staying the course" was the best choice.

I tried, but be assured my state ended up with Kerry winning, so I am not directly responsible for being an idiot. 8)

Though DISCLAIMER -- I only know a fraction of what I should re: politics/economics. And I'm embarassed to say so. It is very difficult for me to follow.

OK, done.
Peace,
D
Not arguing. Disclaimer. 8)


----------



## mcsiegs (Apr 27, 2005)

America also has another HUGE problem, in my eyes.

We have moved from a nation of manufactures to a nation of service. We don't make anything anymore, we just consume what is made. The very little things we do manufacture are not known for their quality (see: Ford, GM, American beer, Wal-Mart).

There is only so far a growing country can sustain themselves without producing anything helpful for that population. If we ever had a gross famine, which country would now be willing to step to the plate and help us? Can you blame them when they see who we "vote" into our offices?

People, don't laugh about the thought of America experiencing issues only other countries do. On a lower level, famine, poverty, and dictatorship is already happening here. You just don't read about famine because there is no money to be made off the homeless and poor.

I always laugh when I hear a statistic that 80,000 jobs were created last month, etc. What they don't tell you is that the jobs were all created at Wal Marts, McDonalds, Best Buy, and Starbucks. So, some poor computer programmer who was making $55,000 per year is now making $8 an hour because his/her job was shipped to India.

That, my friends, is our "growing" economy that the right is spitting down our throats. Soon, the majority of Americans will be forced beyond their knowledge into working fast food, or in the Military.


----------



## Dreamer (Aug 9, 2004)

MCS, I agree with much of what you say.
But the US is NOT the only country that consumes and doesn't export much.

England, France, Germany are all guilty of that. The changing global economy has changed the balance of power. Europe and the US are fading away as I see it.

China and other countries are moving into their own Industrial revolutions.

I can't go on. Gotta go. But yes, it is very complicated, and Ishould shut up as I don't know enough.

A little knowledge, I agree, is a dangerous thing.

Cheers and I'm now running....
L,
D :shock:


----------



## sebastian (Aug 11, 2004)

Ben said:


> > I also DID vote for Bush, but mainly because I didn't want to change horses in mid-stream -- during a war. I find he is embarassing, a liar, and an all around irritating person. I'm finding I don't like politicians in general
> 
> 
> Sounds to me like a good reason to vote for him, then; I usually save my vote for the most embarrasing, lying, irritating, dumbass I can. And, don't forget, this was a war HE started - and something the OTHER people wanted us OUT of. Not to mention the fact, we have had many wars in the past where our Presidents changed midstream - and sometimes for the better: your comment doesn't add up. Okay...I'm being a bit of a jerk myself, but, I'm a bit frustrated with the fact that people voted for him out of "what else do we do?". I tell you what we do - we stand up for what this country was founded on and actually make a bit of noise and tell these piles of crap that they need to stop lying to us, killing thousands, gasing our environment and generally existing with the average intelligence of a light post.
> ...


Very well said.

Dreamer: While i applaud your bravery in being, quite literally, the Devil's advocate in this thread, i'm afraid Ben is correct. Your argument is quite tenuous.



Dreamer said:


> PS, I don't know enough about politics and economics to even be making a comment here. I admit it, but simple slogans like "America is killing us" don't cut it with me.





Dreamer said:


> I suppose I could say, how did Tony Blair get re-elected? One article said he was "Bush's poodle" LOL. I hate comments like that as they reduce a complex problem into one sentence that doesn't address the whole problem. It isn't constructive at all.


I agree that complex issues shouldn't be reduced to catch phrases (like, for example, "Axis of Evil", "War on Terror", "With us or with the terrorists"), but sometimes it's the simple things that encapsulate the message and deliver it to the rabble.

The United States emits over one quarter of the world's carbon dioxide. This administration has destroyed any environmental initiative that crossed it's path. I remember when the republican stacked senate overturned a proposal to lower mandatory caps on mileage per gallon on SUVs. They are whores of the oil companies.

I don't see how you can say that you hate Bush and that you voted for him in the same breath.

Here's that other thread you mentioned. I'd love to go on about all this now but i'm at work now and i really can't.

http://www.dpselfhelp.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=1230&highlight=bush


----------



## dakotajo (Aug 10, 2004)

I believe its no longer possible for pro-bushers/republicans/dreamer to have an intelligent debate.


----------



## mcsiegs (Apr 27, 2005)

I know I sound like I am ranting, but here is another one:

How can anyone female even like the current administration? If they could, they would erase any amendment that gives you any rights. Just wait until the federal judges get appointed by Bush. You'll be able to get a tax deduction by purchasing a chastity belt.


----------



## sebastian (Aug 11, 2004)

mcsiegs said:


> How can anyone female even like the current administration? If they could, they would erase any amendment that gives you any rights. Just wait until the federal judges get appointed by Bush. You'll be able to get a tax deduction by purchasing a chastity belt.


that's funny stuff. unless, of course, you're serious, in which case that's just frightening. :lol:


----------



## Guest (Jun 20, 2005)

One thing I've always wondered since I've been interested in cars is, how come American cars have such huge engines that struggle to do 25mpg? The Aussies are guilty of this too.

I mean, who the hell needs a 5 litre V8 to go down the shops and back?

What gets me is that a modern European/Japanese car with 2 litre 4 pot engine would easily out drag one of the oversized pieces of crap that is common in America, and manage twice as many MPG (Although we have our share of SUV's, and they make even less sense in this country and they do in the USA, with our petrol prices being equivalent to $1.6 a litre)

Any engine nowadays can do 100,000 miles easily, so I don't see the size of the country being relevant. I looked on ebay and the USA cars for sale on there had similar mileages to our cars.

Just seems to be ridiculously excessive to me...(And I'm aware that a UK gallon isn't the same as a USA gallon. There's not much in it though)

Maybe a repeat of the 70's energy crisis will knock some sense back into the USA's car buying population.

Anyway, this is isn't a car forum so I'll shut up now.


----------



## Dreamer (Aug 9, 2004)

dakotajo said:


> I believe its no longer possible for pro-bushers/republicans/dreamer to have an intelligent debate.


God bless you Joe,
I love you so,
You goad so much,
You make me glow. :roll:

*First let me say. Even if I'm wrong. No expert.... expressing my opinion, for the first time in my life on a lot of things has helped me be more "me" -- less DP! I'm not hiding behind a fear of being judged. I'm trying my best to be a decent American that's all, and telling you what's on my mind. Good grief.*

Look, I said, I'm no expert. I have depended a lot on my husband's extensive knowledge of politics. He was a poli sci major at Berkeley, close to getting a Ph.D. (1960s) -- never did -- severe OCD, but he was planning on becoming a Poli-Sci professor, and it would make everyone happy if he was, especially at Berkeley -- as liberal a university as they come.

He reads like a maniac. Not Yahoo news, but "Foreign Affairs" "The Economist", papers from OTHER COUNTRIES INCLUDING THE MIDDLE EAST. There is a lot of good stuff online. Not People Magazine. There are many forms of media that are slanted and plain ignorant and it's hard to sort them out. Microsoft has bowed to the Chinese to censor the internet for them, for crying out loud. Chinese individuals on the internet don't have access to all the information we have.

My husband has also worked for the Federal Government for over 37 years. He finds it a mess. His favorite quip is it has more idiots in it than you can shake a stick at -- but you can't get fired and you have an excellent pension and health care plan (my husband has enough problems, he's doing OK, making the best of this job, and there ARE good people who work for the Feds).

The government always does the stupidist things. "Let's save money." They give the FTC a fancy new computer system, but it crashes as the software isn't up to date. He finds the government incapable of conspiracy as they are so disorganized. The right hand doesn't know what the left hand is doing. It's a bureaucratic sp? nightmare. The CIA don't communicate with the FBI for instance.

Rumsfeld says, "Oh we can save money. Send in fewer troops and finish this Iraq business in a month." DOH! We're in deep. And this war is putting us in tremendous debt. You expect a liberal president to spend, and a conservative to NOT spend and build a deficit, well Bush has managed to create a huge deficit.

I saw Clinton on Letterman the other night, he said this is not Vietnam, not Korea, not like any other war we've fought. He also said, himself, that many politicians have been aching to deal with the Middle East, but they can't run on a platform with that. They run on the usual platitudes. There is an agenda behind the scenes that we can't always know about due to tipping our hand to certain enemies.

We weren't paying attention after The Cold War. We let our guard down. We blew it.

I liked Colin Powell. So sue me. I wish Bush had listened to him. I like Condoleeza Rice (even though some people here have had the lovely idea of calling her some very nasty names such as Oreo -- talk about ignorance, never mind.)

I am NOT a Bible thumper. I am pro-choice, I am pro-enviornment (why the Hell do you think I drive only Hondas, LOL and get spit at in Detroit! for driving a superior Japanese car that was built in Ohio for goodness sake!). I'm pro gay civil unions, etc.

My husband lives in California, where he voted the Libertarian ticket in protest against both candidates. 25,000 in the country voted libertarian, LOL. He knew who would win California.

Here's the thing. Bush being in power has truly not changed MY life in the least. I'm not religious, I haven't found my rights as a woman changed.

I am merely words on a forum. You don't know me personally. The government of my State is causing more problems right now than the President. Jennifer Granholm is in deep shit, as is one of the worst mayors in the country, Kwame Kilpatrick. People are more focused on local crap. People forget that the US is made of 50 States... we are United, yet separate. We are not as homogeneous as many European countries which are also far smaller.

Oh Hell, I've been through all this.

*Joe, you don't believe man landed on the moon. You believe OJ Simpson DIDN'T murder Nicole Brown Simpson.* I was in L.A. during all that crap. I watched the entire trial on TV, depressed, greasy hair, but I may as well have been the jury. The vote was "payback" for the Rodney King incident. Read "Evidence Dismissed" by Lange and Vanatter. Read Bugliosi. Read any book by anyone involved in that travesty. My guess is you haven't.

I am expressing an opinion. It's very hard on a forum. If we could all sit down and talk about these things it would be easier to express our opinions. I grew up Republican. I don't know what party I really am. A little of every party! I didn't feel we had a good choice at all in this election. And I didn't want to NOT vote.

I tried.
I tried here.

I am speaking my mind -- not fully informed in political affairs by a long shot!

I learned more about BUSH AFTER the election. I still don't think I would have voted for Kerry though. I don't know what difference it would have made to be honest.

Joe, leave me alone, and read a book, about something other than conspiracies. I believe it is no longer possible to have an intelligent debate with Dakota Joe, I love him so.

Love,
Dreamer
PS -- swimming is an excellent exercise. I've been swimming in my apartment complex. It exhausts me, and decreases my anxiety and my tremor. This gets my anger out. Feels good.

Truly in the spirit of healthy debate whether anyone cares or not.
8)


----------



## Dreamer (Aug 9, 2004)

PS, I am not pro-Bush. *I voted for him for a few reasons that made me less terrified of the war -- I was grossly misinformed as were most of us about weapons of mass destruction, about how we had NO plan to rebuild post-war Iraq. You can't define me because I voted for Bush.*
I have so many other views, beliefs. I have very religious friends who voted Kerry! Being a Liberal doesn't mean a person is X, Y and Z. Being a Conservative doesn't mean one is P and Q exclusively. Everyone is so worried about labels here, and here we label away.

You don't know anything about my life or values.

In my life I have voted for Democrats and Republicans, at ALL LEVELS OF GOVERNMENT.

Good GRIEF.
:shock:


----------



## dakotajo (Aug 10, 2004)

Dreamer,

Just to set the record straight, Ive never once said that OJ wasnt guilty. Ive always thougt he was guilty as sin.

I think your confusing my belief that Michael Jackson was innocent of child sex abuse. The only thing he was guilty of was being a freak which isnt against the law. Im very happy that the justice system worked in his case.

You did manage to get one right. Im still very confident that man never landed on the moon. You can laugh but rom everything Ive read, 30+ years later we still dont have enough technology for a successful trip to the moon.

Joe


----------



## enigma (Feb 18, 2005)

dakotajo said:


> You can laugh but rom everything Ive read, 30+ years later we still dont have enough technology for a successful trip to the moon.


What got us to the moon was the Saturn 5 rocket (3 stages and 33 stories tall).

We can't go back to the moon because we have nothing like that today.

Also, the 3-man Apollo craft that it sent TLI (trans-lunar injection) was much smaller than today's space shuttles (either the lander or the command modules by themselves could fit into a shuttle cargo bay, in fact).

It was sheer brute force, in effect (as much as high tech) that got us there.

Also, if we never sent astronauts to the moon, who placed those mirrors on the surface that scientists have been bouncing laser beams off of all these years to measure the precise distance between the Earth and the moon?

Apart from that one point, however, I agree with you about most everything else, Joe.

e


----------



## Dreamer (Aug 9, 2004)

> What got us to the moon was the Saturn 5 rocket (3 stages and 33 stories tall).


Enigma, God bless you for that.

Also Joe, I apologize, I looked back at that thread and misread it. And you'll be shocked to know that I agree with you re: the Michael Jackson mess.

1. I believe Jackson is a pedophile BUT....
2. I think this case was not convincing beyond a reasonable doubt. I was always concerned that the mother was being manipulative. This is terribly unfortunate if the child was actually molested.

The reason the jury apparently (hopefully) made an intelligent decision was it would be terrible to set a precedent where a man is accused of molestation in a case where he DIDN'T do it. That would hurt the chances of children with REAL claims.

I do believe Justice was served, in a purely legal sense.

However, have you ever read the lengthy article in Vanity Fair... back in 2003???? The child therein (whose Uncle is still seeking Justice... that boy must be in his 20s now) accused Jackson of molestation. He had facts about Michael Jackson's genitalia that I won't go into that only someone who saw Jackson naked could know. Jackson has a skin condition called vitiligo -- loss of pigment. This is why Jackson had the pigment completely removed from his face and hands and wears clothes covering the rest of his body.

A dark skinned person looks terribly blotchy. Dark patches and purely white (literally albino areas).

He paid an extraordinary amount of money to the other child and his family. A LOT. I don't remember the details. He also threatened the kid, his family, the attorney. I think there was some incident where Jackson's minions sent someone a dead rat.

I believe Jackson is a child molester. I have no doubt in my mind. But the way the law is, you MUST take this on a case by case basis. Justice was served here... sadly, this mother has destroyed the credibility of any other kids (many now grown who don't care to talk about this) who have been or will be molested.

Michael Jackson is a very curious person. He is a genius. He is a sociopath. He is beyond eccentric. He is Peter Pan. And he is a pedophile. But the jury in THIS case did the right thing, as far as I understand it without sitting on the jury.

I'm glad you believe OJ was guilty. I was never so outraged in my life when I found he was acquitted.

I was also outraged when the police officers that beat Rodney King were acquitted. But on the other hand, there was no need to loot and pillage the entire city. People were backing their BMWs up to stores in Beverly Hills to steal WHEELS -- fancy wheels for cars. That was one of the biggest casualty of stolen goods!

Justice is a precious commodity. It shouldn't be mishandled.

I do believe that Jackson has messed with a lot of young boys, and has left many young men with scars.

I am really not a bitch. I just hate to be insulted and goaded is all.

D

What were Rodney King's words?, especially in light of the Reginald Denny beating -- the truck driver at an intersection who was pulled from his truck and nearly beaten to death -- "Why can't we all just get along?"

"There ain't no good guys, there ain't no bad guys, it's only you and me and we just disagree." Forgot who wrote that song.


----------



## terri* (Aug 17, 2004)

Oh well, I now feel a huge need to come out and admit to a few things...

I voted for George W. the first time round.

I voted for Ronald Reagan.

When I voted for Clinton I let out some kind of primal scream in the voting booth.

I think we all want to do what is right. But the one thing that makes us individuals, the way we take in and facilitate information, is what makes us think one way some days and other ways on other days. I personally cannot think the same way when new information is constantly being fed to me. So I guess that is where healthy debates come in.

Okay, that's it from me. Still hating we have another 3 and 1/2 years with Bush. Still hoping we make it 3 and 1/2 years.

Good Night, Chet.


----------



## terri* (Aug 17, 2004)

p.s. from me...

I stand in solidarity with the running thoughts of OJ and Jackson. Oh yeah, and I think that other actor, Robert Blake, had his wife killed and got away with that, too.

Dreamer, now I'm going to be thinking of that song all night until I get who sung it. Hate it for me.


----------



## Dreamer (Aug 9, 2004)

terri* said:


> Oh well, I now feel a huge need to come out and admit to a few things...
> 
> I voted for George W. the first time round.
> 
> ...


Good Night, David* and Bless you.
The part I underlined. It's brilliant.
Bless ya' woman.
L,
D 8)


----------



## Martinelv (Aug 10, 2004)

Dreamer -  No, it wasn't directed at you. After reading Sebastians article I was just cobsmacked. The world is going to hell, and we've got a neo-con f*****g inbred fundamentalist warmonger as the leader of the most powerful country in the world. It's hopeless...


----------



## Guest (Jun 22, 2005)

You know I'm right.


----------



## Axel19 (Aug 11, 2004)

How would one go about assasinating Dubya?


----------



## Ben (Apr 21, 2005)

Now...now....don't start behaving like this as you'll have the secret service reading our threads. Killing doesn't solve killing.

He's a dumbass but he deserves life like the rest of us.


----------



## enigma (Feb 18, 2005)

Axel19 said:


> How would one go about assasinating Dubya?


Aside from what Ben said, it would only result in Dick Cheney becoming president (and believe it or not, he's even _worse_).

e


----------



## mcsiegs (Apr 27, 2005)

Yep - as Enigma said, Cheney would be worse.

I also agree with Ben - first of all, in case you didn't know, what you just said is a felony in the US. Second of all, as much as I can't stand him, it is no reason to harm him. If I did that, I would be sinking to a level that I couldn't live with. He has the same inalienable right to life as the rest of us.

What is nice about the US (my positive post for the US) is that we get to see him off in 3 1/2 years. I know that some may feel as though he will destroy the human race before then, but it ain't gonna happen. Hitler, Stalin, etc, and the human race lives on. Less civil, more bitter, more trauma, but we live on.


----------



## terri* (Aug 17, 2004)

Agreed Mike, *but* if anything happened to Bush and Cheney did in fact take *control* ( OMG :shock: ), I would go live in the back woods of Arkansas with the ticks and chiggers and not come out till it was over.

Sincerely.
Truly.
Really.


----------



## Guest (Jun 23, 2005)

A lot of the resource-related problems of America seem to be the result of poor planning, as if somebody hurried and threw together the infrastructure of our country as fast as possible. Due in part to the land-mass, population and relative youth of our nation, this may not be too far from the truth.


----------



## Guest (Jun 23, 2005)

A lot of smart people buit this country, but due to the twin doctrines of manifest destiny and technological progress as well as a sort of imperialistic superior psychology we have overstepped our bounds in an industrial and societal fashion. America is kind of like a teenager, large and not quite mature.


----------



## dakotajo (Aug 10, 2004)

Bush is a war mongering moron and is to blame for our current dilemma(Along with the assholes that were foolish enough to vote him in). Stop trying to pass the buck.


----------



## falling_free (Nov 3, 2004)

The future










THANK YOU AMERICA!!!!


----------



## Guest (Jun 24, 2005)

> Bush is a war mongering moron and is to blame for our current dilemma(Along with the assholes that were foolish enough to vote him in). Stop trying to pass the buck.


I appreciate your attempt to oversimplify, and FYI, in my blackest moods, nothing would make me happier than seeing the entire earth destroyed. I personally did not vote for Bush (I voted for Badnarik ha ha ha) but I was laughing when he was re-elected. You Europeans/Caucasians deserve whatever you get for colonizing the Americas bawah ha ha.


----------



## Guest (Jun 24, 2005)

Secretly, I do hope that America kills you all. :twisted:


----------



## Homeskooled (Aug 10, 2004)

Dreamer, 
Your absolutely right about reason the Kyoto treaty was not ratified. Other than premed, my second major is International Relations. Not signing the Kyoto treaty was a purely economic decision. Cutting back on fossil fuels forces the uses of expensive alternative fuel sources. We're getting ready for all out economic war with China in the next twenty years. No way we're going to hamstring our economy unless they do it first.

Beleive it or not, I'm working for PIRG this summer (Public Interest Research Group), eventhough I'm a Republican. Well, eventhough I'm registered Republican. I vote whichever way seems the most intelligent and ethical, Green Party, Independent, Democrat, whatever. We do release a ton of NOX gases in the US, and there isnt much of a way to filter it out. My current campaign deals with mercury pollution, and heavy metals can be absorbed with carbon filtration. Not a whole lot we can do with gases. Michael Crichton has a point. Nothing about global warming is definitive. It is very much a projection. We know that warming and cooling spells in the earth go in cycles. While most people think that global warming eventually leads to a burnt earth, it in fact leads to Ice Ages. We're supposed to have another one within the next 10,000 years, and the medeival ages were considered a "mini-Ice Age". Frankly, I think we're just speeding the cycle up. Now the EPA does a good bit to regulate this kind of stuff...in some ways it outregulates and out-micromanages Europe. But it needs improving and finetuning. Unless we can get other countries on board with the Kyoto treating who have already proven that they will manipulate dollars values, pay their constituents slave wages, and dump goods on our soil to kill domestic industries, we are going to have to regulate such things through our own domestic channels. America isnt always the real bad guy. There are worse fish in the international waters, and they're growing more teeth.

As for the Bush is a moron ranting, honestly, dont listen to the hype. Kerry wasnt a waffler, and Bush wasnt a moron. Its all political spin. I should know. I'm handling PR for PennPirg this summer. I just gave a news conference on Lake Erie. Do you realize that when people are quoted in press releases, the PR agents just make up the quotes? They have me saying things in ways I never would say things in public. Its issues I stand for, so I dont mind. But these political campaigns are huge psychological machines. You know who had higher SAT scores and IQ tests? Bush. Kerry and Bush went to the same college. Both were affluent rich kids. Surprisingly, Bush was the one who swore to never become president. Kerry was running campaigns as a college sophomore, with or without a high IQ. Not that it really matters. Their handlers are making up quotes for them too. And their brain trusts are making their policy decisions. During the Cuban missle crisis, the real worry was that once the miliatary saw that the Soviets were indeed shipping nukes to the Cubans, they would drop as much firepower as they could on the island, with or without Kennedy's express permission. Because, while the final okay rests with the President, most of the pressure to go to war, all of the plans, and great deals of the intelligence come from the military. And the miliatary happened to hate Kennedy. He was rich, affluent, CATHOLIC, and they didnt want a Boston do-gooder putting the land of the free and home of the brave in harm's way. The diplomatic standoff with Cuba was internally very tense for the White House. Nobody knew how long the Joint Chiefs could be kept at bay. So much more is going on behind the scenes than journalists can even guess at. The lines the press gets are just the tip of the iceberg. And I highly recommend that anyone interested in having a well-formed opinion of international politics at least audits a good interantional relations class. It can be life-changing.

Peace
Homeskooled


----------



## Guest (Jun 26, 2005)

Homeskooled, that makes total sense to me.

I also think, in addition to the international relations class, that EVERYONE should take an indepth seminar or course in Public Relations - and the writing of articles, the SPIN that is published world over minute by minute in the name of Information that was written by an excellent PR person, aiming only to please the client.

Great post.
Reality. It is such foreign turf.

J


----------



## Martinelv (Aug 10, 2004)

If I didn't know better, from that post I'd say that Homeskooled is a Neo-Con Catholic. Just a guess....

From Zoo:

_Tony Blair has promised to be resolute and 'fight the UK's corner' in European Union meetings. What Jacques Chirac (President of France) doesn't realise is that George W Bush owes us a favour and is stupid enough to invade France._

:lol:


----------



## sebastian (Aug 11, 2004)

Homeskooled said:


> Surprisingly, Bush was the one who swore to never become president.


The first in a string of lies and broken promises.


----------



## dakotajo (Aug 10, 2004)

I do not believe that bush has a high IQ. The guy has just done way too many interviews that make him look like he has the intelligence level of a rock. If you believe the docmentary fahrenheit 911, any business hes been part of, hes run into the ground and now hes running our country. His daddy probably had his test rigged.


----------



## Dreamer (Aug 9, 2004)

IQ really has no meaning. What one does with one's innate intelligence whatever that is is important.

As I understand it, however, Bush did very well at Yale, grade wise. Kerry got a C average -- same college. I don't have the immediate URL to back this up, but I believe this is true.

And it's true, both were born into significant wealth. Kerry didn't come from a humble beginning.

Also, Bush is a terrible public speaker. Incomprehensible and embarassing, that doesn't make him a moron.

And none of this is truly relevant, however I hate it that a number of Presidents, including Bush say NOO-KEW-LER, instead of NOO-KLEE-ER, for nuclear. Very embarassing. But I believe J.F.K. said this, and/or Lyndon Johnson. OY :roll:

Disclaimer: I HATE BUSH


----------



## Dreamer (Aug 9, 2004)

PS, unless I missed something, no Englishman has come forward to explain why Tony Blair was reelected. Should we call all of you dimwits for voting him back in, or was it more complex as things usually are.

Why didn't you all vote in the Green Party? You FOOLS. 8)

Just asking. :twisted:


----------



## Dreamer (Aug 9, 2004)

It's 3:30 A.M. Can't sleep, and I HAD to find the answer to this, it was driving me crazy. My vote for Bush followed a historical pattern that has never been broken.

Had to respond to Ben and Sebastian....

http://www.usatoday.com/news/opinion/columnist/wickham/2004-10-11-wickham_x.htm
Sorry if the URL doesn't work. Cut and Paste.



Dreamer said:


> I also DID vote for Bush, but mainly because I didn't want to
> change horses in mid-stream -- during a war.





Ben said:


> Not to mention the fact, we have had many wars in the past where
> our Presidents changed midstream - and sometimes for the better:
> your comment doesn't add up.


*Ben, where did you get this info? Are you referring to U.S. Presidents or all World Leaders?and if you're referring to the U.S. ... well, this change of power "sometimes for the better" never happened.*



Sebastian said:


> Dreamer: While i applaud your bravery in being,
> quite literally, the Devil's advocate in this thread, i'm afraid
> Ben is correct. Your argument is quite tenuous.


Dreamer responds....
*Well I had to respond to you fine fellows -- I finally found a 
reputable article. I knew I wasn't alone in my concern. There has 
been NO U.S. President who WASN'T reelected during wartime.*

Also, I'm still curious about another comment. How do you think my 
life as a woman has changed since Bush has been in office? Can you 
give me an example? I'll give you one clue. I live in a Democratic 
State. The President's policies have checks and balances at the 
State and Local levels.

DISCLAIMER: (Martin I love that, LOL) I STILL HATE BUSH.

*This was written weeks before the reelection of Bush. No U.S. 
president has been voted out of office during wartime.*

*Posted 10/11/2004 10:02 PM*

*USA Today
Wartime presidents: Bush has history on his side
By DeWayne Wickham*

*What Paul Boller wrote recently about this election campaign 
probably won't surprise you.*

Its squabbling factions, the presidential historian said, 
included "peace groups castigating the president for taking the 
country into war and calling for a speedy end to the conflict; 
harsh critics harping on the president's mismanagement of the war 
effort and blaming him for reverses on the battlefield; and 
administration supporters insisting that all good patriots should 
rally around the flag and help the president bring the conflict to 
a successful conclusion."

*What may surprise you is that he was talking about the 
re-election of James Madison, and not the effort that President 
Bush is now waging.*

*Madison was this nation's first wartime president to seek 
re-election. Bush is the sixth. Up to now, no American president 
who sought another term during a time of war has been 
defeated.*

This history isn't lost on Bush, who was quick to remind us of his 
special status during the presidential candidates' second debate 
last week. It's one that John Kerry, his Democratic opponent, may 
find difficult to overcome.

Bush focuses on Iraq .... [EDIT, see URL for full article]

......

.....*Bush wants this contest to be a "khaki election" ? one 
that exploits the patriotic sentiments of voters during wartime. He 
wants voters to conclude, as Abraham Lincoln said Republicans had 
when they chose him for a second term during the Civil War, that 
"it is not good to swap a horse while crossing a river."*

Bush wants voters to think of him in the same way that The New York 
Times viewed Franklin Roosevelt after he'd won a fourth term.[/b] 
In Boller's book, Presidential Campaigns, which was published this 
year, he quotes The Times in 1944 as saying FDR "has been 
re-elected in a war year as a war president who could promise the 
country victory in the war and on the basis of victory, a lasting 
peace."

*Emphasis on continuity*

That's why Bush doesn't miss an opportunity to remind voters that 
the nation is at war. He knows that history is on his side. He 
understands that his best chance of winning re-election in November 
? nearly 18 months after he prematurely declared an end to major 
combat in Iraq ? will be in convincing voters that it is not a good 
idea to change leaders during a war.

If he succeeds in doing this ? and he'll attempt to reinforce this 
notion during the final debate Wednesday in Tempe, Ariz. ? Bush 
likely will survive Kerry's challenge.

*Nothing demonstrates the reluctance of voters to kick a wartime 
president out of office more than Richard Nixon's re-election. The 
anti-war movement that four years earlier had caused Lyndon Johnson 
not to seek re-election was strong, and in 1972, the number of war 
dead was growing. Nixon had promised to end the war. Even though he 
didn't get that job done during his first term, he won a landslide 
victory over Democrat George McGovern for a second term.*

[EDIT]......................... see URL for full article

*DeWayne Wickham writes weekly for USA TODAY.*
Best,
D 8)


----------



## Dreamer (Aug 9, 2004)

So, I guess, during the Civil War I would have followed ol' Abe Lincoln's advice. Can't believe I found that article!
It said exactly how I felt... "I didn't want to change horses in mid-stream". So, I'm a sheep. Sigh. :shock:


----------



## M A R S (Jun 24, 2005)

IT GETS MORE CRAZY EVERY DAY! If this was a book written in 1984 about today, no one would believe the state of America would ever be like this. This is just one more step in the direction to hell.

_The US has not made plutonium 238 since the 1980s when production was based at the Savannah River plant in South Carolina with some other work done in New Mexico and Tennessee. Since then it has relied on ageing stockpiles of the material or else on imports from Russia. The new programme will concentrate production at the Idaho facility in an effort to minimise the risk of leakage or contamination involving the 50,000 drums of hazardous and radioactive waste it is expected to make._

http://news.independent.co.uk/world/ame ... ory=650177


----------



## Martinelv (Aug 10, 2004)

Dreamer - put simply, the reason we voted Blair back in is because the horrors of 17 years of Conservative (Thatcher, etc) is still fresh in our minds. And apart from the war, which of course was a big issue, our country is in a fairly healthy state - the economy, the health service is improving, and a lot of things are actually better, despite what the tabloids scream about MRSA and Asylum seekers. So it was a case of 'better the devil you know', really. And if that makes us dimwits, so be it.

I care nothing for politics, nothing, I think it's a supreme exercise in futility, but I must say that I do believe that Blair always has the right intentions, even if we disagree with how he goes about it. Sure, he lied about the war, but politicians always lie. Conservatives live and breath lies, they'd probably lie about their own skin colour if is suited them. So what you gonna do ? Vote for the least worse alternative, which depsite the protest vote, is what we did.

Whenever I am bored enough to think about politics, I guess I consider myself a liberal socialist, but socialist with a very very small 's', but with secular governance with a very BIG 'S'. I just want to live within a secular, capitalist welfare state, without the church interfering all the time, is that too much to ask ? At heart I think I could handle a Anarchist ideal, but of course - it'd never work !

The african aid thing really sticks in my throat at the moment. America is giving 0.0014 of it's GDP in aid. Americans spend more on face creams than they do with giving aid. :roll: Itsn't it just totally f****d-up ? That's why I try hard not to think about it.


----------



## dakotajo (Aug 10, 2004)

Bushs' daddy probably bought him his grades in college just as he bought his free ride through the service and the ensing coverup. I dont care what anybody says, Ive seen too many interviews with this guy and I still say hes a complete fucking moron and an imberrassment to our country.


----------



## dakotajo (Aug 10, 2004)

Hello. My name is George Bush and I'm running for President. Please consider my accomplishments as set forth in the following resume. 
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
EARLY RECORD 
Please See Attached Page 
POLITICAL RECORD (DOMESTIC)

I ran for President in 2000. My campaign was destined to be a miserable failure until I used a whispering campaign of lies in the South Carolina Presidential Primary organized by my chief political strategist, Karl Rove, to destroy genuine war hero and fellow Republican John McCain, claiming he had fathered an illegitimate ***** child was emotionally unstable due to his torture as a POW in Vietnam and a possible brainwashed Manchurian Candidate.

In July 2001 I appointed Harvey Pitt to be the chairman of a "kinder, gentler SEC" to ease regulation of foreign businesses. The results have been the largest and most miserable failures of corporate accountability in modern corporate history: Enron, Worldcom, and now Fannie Mae.

I am the first President to unconstitutionally restrict my opponents' First Amendment rights by allowing my supporters to remain at the venue while restricting my detractors to "free speech zones," fenced-off areas up to half mile away from the media, the audience, and especially myself.

I've communicated less with the American people than any other president in the history of televised news, holding only one White House press conference every 3.25 months, compared to my father's 1.6 per month.

To prevent activist judges from rewriting the constitution to serve an agenda that Congress would never approve, I attempted to rewrite the constitution to serve an agenda they never came close to approving. My campaign for the Federal Marriage Amendment was a miserable failure: it failed to pass either house of congress. In the Senate the cloture call to end debate yielded only 48 votes, not the 67 required to pass the Senate, not the 60 votes required for cloture, not even the 50 votes of a simple majority.

My 2004 budget set the record for the largest deficit in history: either $477 billion or $521 billion (CBO and OMB numbers, respectively).

The value of the dollar has collapsed 30% during my term.

Nearly every major economic indicator has deteriorated since I took office in January 2001. Real GDP growth during my term is the lowest of any presidential term in recent memory. Total non-farm employment has contracted and the unemployment rate has increased. Bankruptcies are up sharply, as is our dependence on foreign capital to finance an exploding current account deficit. All three major stock indexes are lower now than at the time of my inauguration. The percentage of Americans in poverty has increased, real median income has declined, and income inequality has grown.

POLITICAL EXPERIENCE (FOREIGN)

As president I ignored Clinton's warnings about Al Qaeda, mentioning that organization only once in public statements on national security between January 20, 2001 and September 10, 2001. In the same time period I mentioned Saddam Hussein 104 times and missile defense 101 times.

On August 6, 2001 I received a briefing titled "Bin Laden Determined to Attack Inside the United States" which warned that "the FBI indicates patterns of suspicious activity in the United States consistent with preparations for hijacking." For one month I dealt with numerous other issues until the unfolding of the most successful terrorist attack in US history on September 11, 2001.

With broad international approval I temporarily disrupted the Taliban government, which has now re-emerged to control much of southern Afghanistan after I abandoned this campaign for Iraq.

I campaigned strongly for war in Iraq. I claimed that:

Iraq possessed weapons of mass destruction (none have been found).

Iraq had ties to Al Qaeda (Iraq opposed Al Qaeda and successfully kept their operatives out of the country before September 2001. The strongest claim to support a connection came from Czech intelligence services and is now retracted. The 9/11 commission "did not believe that such a meeting occurred".)

Iraq would give their weapons of mass destruction to terrorists (A secular Saddam would never give his "ace card" to religious elements he opposed throughout his life and could not control)

The war would be "self-financing" through oil sales ($200 billion total has been allocated, and $138 billion has already been spent with more to follow).

The war would end quickly, with troop deployments down to 30,000 troops by Autumn 2003 (March 2004 troop deployment: 114,000 US plus 23,000 Coalition troops in Iraq; 26,000 US and Coalition logistical support troops in Kuwait).

Americans would be greeted as liberators (Public perception of Americans as liberators dropped from 43% at the time of invasion to 2% after Abu Ghraib).

By invading I would make it more difficult for terrorists to obtain Weapons of Mass Destruction (The only WMD 'discovered' in Iraq was successfully obtained by terrorists and used against Americans. As a result of the invasion, nuclear equipment and materials in Iraq formerly monitored by the IAEA has disappeared and may have fallen into the hands of terrorists or rogue countries. The results have been overwhelmingly negative for U.S. interests.)

I punished those who spoke unwelcome truth:

I sent Joseph Wilson to Africa in February 2002 to investigate claims that Iraq had attempted to purchase uranium, where Wilson determined that those claims were based on forged documents. Despite his report I continued to make public Iraq/Nigeria statements as late as January 2003. When Wilson publicly contradicted me, one of my senior officials exposed the CIA cover of Wilson's wife, Valerie Plame, in an article written by Robert Novak and printed in the New York Times on July 14 2003. No one is sure which senior White House official leaked the order or who was aware, but the fact that I hired James Sharp in June 2004 to represent me as a personal criminal defense attorney is significant when you consider that there is no attorney-client privilege between a president and a White House counsel that allows the counsel to withhold information from a Federal grand jury.

I fired Lawrence Lindsey as my economics advisor in early December 2002 for claiming that the Iraq War would cost between $100 and $200 billion. ($138 billion has been spent and $200 billion has been budgeted... so far)

I fired Jay Garner as US Administrator of Iraq in March 2004 for calling for immediate elections instead of allowing American companies to privatize government-owned assets. (American privatization and lack of a legitimate Iraqi government is one of the major reasons for unrest in Iraq.)

I made US Army Chief of Staff General Eric Shinseki a lame duck in June 2003, defying precedent and announcing his successor 14 months in advance of his retirement after he announced that "several hundred thousand troops would be needed in postwar Iraq".

I threatened to have Medicare analyst Richard Foster fired if he replied to Congressional requests and reported that the Medicare Prescription Drug Bill would cost $551 billion, $156 billion over the White House's favored estimate of $395 billion.

After the Iraq Health Ministry released figures showing that US and Coalition forces killed twice as many Iraqis as the Insurgents the Iraqis are supposedly being protected from, I acted decisively by ordering the Iraq Health Ministry to not release any more figures.

I rewarded those who spoke welcome lies, paying Ahmed Chalabi and the Iraqi National Congress $340,000 per month for their false intelligence gathered about Iraq. Although Chalabi and the INC had been dropped from the CIA payroll in 1996 for being an unreliable source and also dismissed by the DIA (Defense Intelligence Agency) for the same reason, I continued to use Chalabi and the INC to support claims of WMDs in Iraq. Even after their information proved false and no weapons were found I remained so close to Chalabi that he sat with Laura Bush as my "Special Guest" during my September 2003 State of the Union address. I continued to pay the INC regularly until May 2004, when allegations surfaced that Chalabi had passed classified American intelligence to Iran.

I put tremendous pressure on the CIA to come up with information to support policies that have already been adopted (as determined by the Senate Report of Pre-war Intelligence on Iraq). When the CIA and DIA refused to verify intelligence items I wanted to believe, Donald Rumsfeld and I created the Office of Special Plans. This independent department within the Pentagon was designed to bypass the CIA and feed the discredited and unreliable information I wanted to believe was true back into the intelligence stream in order to support conclusions that the CIA and DIA could not. The OSP took much of the discredited information from Chalabi and the Iraqi National Congress.

I opposed the creation of the Department of Homeland Security for nine months, before turning around to take credit for its creation.

I opposed the creation of an independent 9/11 panel. After being forced to accept the commission, I gave it only $12 million in funding to do its work (compared to $50 million combined for Whitewater and the Monica Lewinsky investigation) before turning around to take credit for its creation.

My war against Al Qaeda has been a miserable failure:

The International Institute for Strategic Studies' most conservative estimate (May 25, 2004) is that the occupation of Iraq has helped Al Qaeda recruit 18,000 operatives in more than 60 countries.

The Jaffee Center for Strategic Studies at Tel Aviv University has found that The war in Iraq did not damage international terror groups, but instead distracted the United States from confronting other hotbeds of Islamic militancy and actually "created momentum" for many terrorists. On a strategic level as well as an operational level, the war in Iraq is hurting the war on international terrorism.

By my State Department's own estimates, world terror attacks are now at their highest level in 20 years, up 36% since 2001.

I have held 660 prisoners in Guantanamo, Cuba for over two years without trial or formal charge. My prisoners, several of whom were between the ages of 13 and 16, have never been formally charged. They are kept in steel cages, subjected to ongoing torture, and denied access to legal counsel in opposition to Supreme Court rulings (Rasul v. Bush). These prisoners are "the worst of the worst", "hard core, well trained terrorists" and their guilt is beyond doubt, which is why I've set 87 of them free without explanation or apology.

In the past year I claim to have trained 100,000 Iraqi police forces, but only 8,169 of those have passed the required 8-week training course. Another 46,176 are listed as "untrained".

My Secretary of Defense is the first in US history to have acknowledged ordering an intentional violation of the Geneva Conventions, in which Abu Ghraib prisoners were held "off the books" and hidden from the Red Cross. When this order was made public I refused to discipline him in any way, instead complimenting him on his job performance.

After being informed of abuses at Abu Ghraib on January 16 (first reported on January 13) which included "Threatening male detainees with rape" and "Sodomizing a detainee with a chemical light and perhaps a broom stick" I made "freedom from torture chambers and rape rooms" a centerpiece in my speeches until April 29 when the story finally broke on 60 Minutes II.

My administration is the first since the Civil War to imprison US Citizens (Jose Padilla) as "enemy combatants" without charges, trial, or access to legal counsel. In a 5-4 decision (Rumsfeld v. Padilla) the Supreme Court dodged the opportunity to rule on the legality, ruling that the case had been improperly filed.

My administration broke new legal ground by using material witness warrants to give effective life sentences to US citizens without charge, trial, access to legal counsel, or even plans to prosecute.

My justice department was the first in US history to attempt to enforce federal regulations while refusing to disclose what those regulations are.

My legal war against terror has been a miserable failure: I have detained more than 5,000 people on suspicion of terrorist ties, some of whom have been held without charge or without access to a lawyer. I have successfully convicted zero.


----------



## dakotajo (Aug 10, 2004)

Highlights Through the Years.... 
Posted by mr32669
Oct 21, 9:43 pm 
These are some highlights of Bush life and Kerry's life and what they were doing at certain ages in their lives, again, this is all FACT:

Age 2

George W. Bushs' family moves to the oil town of Midland, Texas. George Bush Sr. is a well-connected and wealthy oil man. Midland is an oil-executive enclave, where streets are named for Ivy League schools.

Age 6

In 1950, Kerry's family moves to Washington, where his father begins his career as a salaried foreign-service officer.

Age 16

Bush is a cheerleader at the exclusive Andover School in Connecticut, 1962. His grade point average is in the C range.

Kerry founds a debate club at the exclusive St. Paul's School in New Hampshire, 1960.

Age 18

Despite a C average in prep school, George Bush is accepted at Yale. They see something in the young man, perhaps a resemblance to his father the congressman (Yale, 1948) and his grandfather, former Connecticut senator and now Yale trustee Prescott Bush (Yale, 1917).

Age 20

Bush is arrested for stealing a Christmas wreath from a New Haven hotel and charged with disorderly conduct, 1966. The charges are later dismissed.

Age 21

In May 1968, George W. Bush graduates from Yale with a low C average. Now eligible for the draft, he avoids service in Vietnam by jumping to the front of a long waiting list of young men to join the 147th Fighter Group, the so-called "Champagne Unit" of the Texas Air National Guard. On his application, under the heading Overseas Assignment, Bush checks the box marked "Do not volunteer."

Age 22

John Kerry is chosen to deliver the class oration to the Yale graduating class of 1966. In his speech he questions the wisdom of the Vietnam War, saying: "The United States must, I think, bring itself to understand that the policy of intervention that was right for Western Europe does not and cannot find the same application to the rest of the world." Despite his misgivings, he enlists in the Navy.

Age 24

In the fall of 1968, while serving on the guided missile frigate USS Gridley in the Gulf of Tonkin, John Kerry volunteers to command a Swift boat in the Mekong Delta. The casualty rate among Swift boat personnel is around 75 percent, compared with around 14 percent in the rest of Vietnam. His best friend from Yale, Richard Pershing, has already died in combat.

Age 25

In May 1972, with two years left in his enlistment, Bush requests reassignment to an inactive postal unit of the Texas Air National Guard. The unit has no planes, but he has lost his flight status for not taking a physical.

On Feb. 28, 1969, while on patrol, Kerry's boat comes under attack from the shore. Ignoring generally accepted evasive procedures, Kerry turns his craft directly into the enemy fire, beaches it and single-handedly chases down and kills an enemy armed with a rocket launcher. For this action he receives a Silver Star for gallantry. He may have been in Cambodia at Christmastime in 1968, delivering agents during the secret war, or it may have been a month later.

Age 26

At Christmas 1972, in Houston, Bush is driving drunk when he plows into a neighbor's garbage cans. When his father asks to have a talk, George Jr. challenges him to a fistfight.

Age 27

Bush is granted an early release from the Texas Air National Guard so he can attend Harvard Business School, 1973.

John Kerry becomes one of the leaders of Vietnam Veterans Against the War. In 1971 he attends the Winter Soldiers Conference in Michigan, where he listens to other veterans' accounts of atrocities committed under orders in Vietnam. On April 22, 1971, Kerry testifies before the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, and asks the difficult question: "How do you ask a man to be the last man to die for a mistake?" He relates some of the accounts told to him at the Winter Soldiers Conference.

Age 28

Kerry loses badly in his first run for political office, in the fall of 1972, in Massachusetts.

Age 30

Bush is arrested for drunken driving in Kennebunkport, Maine, September 1976. His teenage sister Dorothy is a passenger in the car. He pleads guilty and pays a $150 fine.

Kerry is earning a law degree at Boston College, 1974.

Age 32

George W. Bush's father sets him up in the oil business, 1978. The company is called Arbusto.

Age 34

John Kerry is working as a prosecutor in Middlesex County, Massachusetts, where he wins a high-profile murder case, and later gains the conviction of a notorious crime figure, George Edgerley. He never loses a case in Middlesex County.

Age 36

Some friends of George Bush Sr., then vice president, bail George Jr. out of his disastrous oil venture, absorbing Arbusto into Spectrum 7.

Age 39

In late 1986, Bush's new oil company, Spectrum 7, is $3 million in debt when it is rescued by Harken Energy, which is owned by friends of his father, the vice president. He is put on the Harken board, has his debts paid, is given another $2.2 million in stock options and a salary of $120,000 a year, with no real duties to perform.

Age 40

In 1986, Bush celebrates too hard at his 40th birthday party. He promises never to drink again.

In 1984, Kerry is the lieutenant governor of Massachusetts, a post he uses to champion better air and water regulations. On the retirement of Paul Tsongas, Kerry runs for his Senate seat, and wins.

Age 41

In 1985, Kerry bucks his party to support the Gramm-Rudman Balanced Budget legislation.

Age 42

Sen. Kerry employs his prosecutorial experience to investigate and uncover the Reagan administration's covert dealings with Islamic terrorists and the secret, illegal funding of guerrillas in Central America. The Iran-contra investigations result in convictions of several high Reagan administration officials.

Age 43

In June 1990, Bush sells two-thirds of his stake in Harken Energy at 2.5 times the original value of the stock, netting $848,560 two weeks before Harken announces a disastrous quarterly report. The SEC investigates the president's son in association with the sale of his stock.

Age 45

With an investment of $500,000 of borrowed money, Bush becomes a part owner of the Texas Rangers. He is given a $200,000 salary.

In 1989, Kerry votes to end the Apache Helicopter program, agreeing with Secretary of Defense Dick Cheney's recommendations to do so.

Age 46

In October 1990, Kerry votes to follow Cheney's recommendation to end the wasteful B-2 Bomber program. Kerry votes to stop making the F-14, which Cheney is growing skeptical of as well. Cheney proposes cutting the Trident submarine program and the Bradley Fighting Vehicle program, and Kerry, again, votes to support the defense secretary's wishes. Fourteen years later Kerry's support on these defense cuts will emerge as Vice President Cheney's bitterest criticisms of Kerry in the presidential campaign.

Age 47

In May of 1991, following the roadmap to normalization laid down by President George H.W. Bush, John Kerry visits Vietnam. As chairman of the Senate committee charged with investigating the POW/MIA issue, he works closely with a Republican senator and former POW, John McCain.

Age 48

With the help of wealthy friends, most notably Enron Chairman Ken Lay, George Bush is elected governor of Texas in 1994. While in office, he will set the record for executions by any governor in American history.

Age 51

In 1998, Bush sells his shares in the Texas Rangers, which he purchased for $500,000. The shares net $14.9 million. The biggest reason for the large profit is the fancy new stadium he helped persuade the state of Texas to build for the team.

Age 53

Running for president in early 2000, Bush loses to McCain in the New Hampshire primary but beats McCain in the South Carolina primary, after a very successful phone campaign in which Bush's people suggest McCain fathered a black child out of wedlock.

Age 54

Bush wins the Republican nomination for president. In November 2000, Bush claims victory in the presidential election, despite winning 500,000 fewer votes than opponent Al Gore. The Electoral College deadlock is broken when the U.S. Supreme Court stops a recount of votes in Florida. Bush receives liberal use of the corporate attorneys and corporate jets of Enron Corp. during the Florida vote-count litigation. He is the first U.S. president to be sworn into office with a criminal record.

Age 59

In early December 2003, most observers think Kerry's chances of winning the Democratic nomination for president are slim to none.

Age 60

Kerry accepts the Democratic nomination for president, July 2004.

Eric Hanson is a Minneapolis Star Tribune writer, the above is a selection from his forthcoming book, "The Political Book of the Ages."

I can't add anything to this except it speaks for itself.

A male cheerleader??!?!?!!


----------



## Dreamer (Aug 9, 2004)

Martin said:


> Dreamer - put simply, the reason we voted Blair back in is because the horrors of 17 years of Conservative (Thatcher, etc) is still fresh in our minds. And apart from the war, which of course was a big issue, our country is in a fairly healthy state - the economy, the health service is improving, and a lot of things are actually better, despite what the tabloids scream about MRSA and Asylum seekers. So it was a case of 'better the devil you know', really. And if that makes us dimwits, so be it.


Dear Martin,
I appreciate your answer. I don't believe you folks are dimwits! I was just making the point that your country and the U.S. frequently have to "pick the lesser of two evils", or vote for SO many reasons. If you guys aren't dimwits, and I would never call you that, why does the U.S. get ripped into repeatedly for every darned person we put into office?

Just making an observation, and want to say the U.S. is made up of SO many different nationalities, is far bigger than any of the European nations. We are less homogeneous in many ways than it would seem. We are much bigger in population and land mass.

I won't call you folks dimwits (I don't believe you are) if you folks don't call us idiots. There were MANY reasons, many DIFFERENT reasons people chose to vote for whom they do.

Also, Googling is fun. I WAS misinformed as to Kerry and Bush's college performance. Both were equally poor, LOL. I am astounded that I did better in college (B.A. and M.A.) than both of them. All I can say is, if someone doesn't do well in college it doesn't look good, especially if one has been accepted to a prestigious university. I find it rather disappointing.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Kerry

Over four years, *Kerry maintained a 76 grade average and received an 81 average in his senior year.* Under Yale's grading system in effect at the time, grades between 90 and 100 equaled an A, 80-89 a B, 70-79 a C, 60 to 69 a D, and anything below that was a failing grade. *He received four D's in his freshman year out of 10 courses, but improved his average in later years. In addition to Kerry's four D's in his freshman year, he received one D in his sophomore year. He did not fail any courses. His overall Grade Point Average was actually similar to that of President George W Bush's, despite the strong public opinion that Kerry was the more intellectual of the candidates.*

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/George_W._Bush

Like his father, Bush attended Phillips Academy (September 1961?June 1964) and later Yale University (Sept. 1964?May 1968). At Yale, he joined Delta Kappa Epsilon (of which he was president from October 1965 until graduation) and the Skull and Bones secret society. *He was a "C" student, scoring 77 percent (with no As and one D, in astronomy) with a grade point average of 2.35 out of 4.00.* He played baseball and rugby union during his freshman and senior years. He received a Bachelor of Arts degree in history in 1968.

I guess these boys had too much extracurricular activites. Seems a shame to go to Yale and basically get by by the skin of their teeth.

Sigh.

Finally, it is so difficult to discuss foreign sp? relations. We all come from very different POVs simply from growing up in the political systems we did.

No one has to apologize. Should we be angry with the Germans for voting Hitler into power? There were many reasons that catastrophe occurred. I don't hate the Germans for that. It was a group mentality gone awry in a country that had been completely demoralized in WWI

*Life is complicated. We are all unique. I am now TIRED of politics! But I do find it fascinating on the whole. Far more than when I was younger.*

Best,
D
As always in the spirit of healthy debate 8)


----------



## Axel19 (Aug 11, 2004)

> Just making an observation, and want to say the U.S. is made up of SO many different nationalities, is far bigger than any of the European nations. We are less homogeneous in many ways than it would seem. We are much bigger in population and land mass.


True. One thing we can't do with Ameerica is generalise, although us Europeans usually do. America probably is the most culturally diverse country in the world. A New Yorker is probably more dfferent from an Alabamian (???), than A Dutchman is from a Dane, or a Spaniard from an Italian. Well actually I don't know that, but it's certainly a possibility.

It's a shame we in Europe are concerned mostly with the more negative elements of Ameerica.

I think what Britian is most proud of these days is the little what seperates us from the Americans, which in reality is relatively little. We are annoyingly alike.


----------



## gimpy34 (Aug 10, 2004)

I haven't read this article but it is obvious we (America) are denying the existence of global warming so we can drain the world of oil but secretly create high-tech alternative energy sources which the rest of the world will soon be helpless but to demand and be at our mercy. It is part of our 100 year plan for global domination and peace in the Middle East.


----------



## Dreamer (Aug 9, 2004)

gimpy34 said:


> I haven't read this article but it is obvious we (America) are denying the existence of global warming so we can drain the world of oil but secretly create high-tech alternative energy sources which the rest of the world will soon be helpless but to demand and be at our mercy. It is part of our 100 year plan for global domination and peace in the Middle East.


Oh Dear Lord, *Gimpy,*
I hope you are joking as you will recall we have some things in common politically. Otherwise, well, who knows you may be right, but it wasn't MY idea, LOL
L,
D

And *Axel*

I also appreciate what you said. A suburban farmer in Alabama is going to vote very differently from a Jewish banker in New York, from an assemblyline worker in a declining industrial area, to a wealthy doctor, to an Hispanic houskeeper, to an Asian businessman, etc., etc., etc.

Yup. I said in the old Bush thread that who one is here in America will affect someone's vote AS an American. Here in Detroit, we have the largest Middle Eastern population of any U.S. city in the U.S., if I'm not mistaken, and that includes Iraqis.

Many, many Iraqis here were FOR the war, they had escaped Saddam's regime years ago, leaving family members behind. THEIR views are as varied on this mess as everyone else's. They are certainly not happy about things now, but I would guess a good number of them voted for Bush. Some are very wealthy, others are not.

I wish I knew more about the Middle Eastern community here. It has grown significantly since I left this state for 16 years.

Best,
D 8)


----------



## Ben (Apr 21, 2005)

Dreamer,

I'm growing a bit weary of this conversation, I feel you're starting to display the signs of someone who is fairly insecure on her decisions and so is trying to throw back as much as you can at a particular point to purely maintain your status on it - for example, why do you feel it necessary to end your posts with reminders that you're just debating for friendly reasons yet you're up to a point of exhaustion trying to find points to counter-claim the points we're making. It sounds to me like you're doing a whole lot of going back and grabbing for information to prove to yourself that your decision was right at the time - and yet at the time you didn't have the information you have now. Stop trying to convince us that it's okay for you to have your opinion - we know it's okay for you to have your opinion (and quite frankly, I don't care that you have it), I'm simply stating mine and don't expect to burn hours trying to grab facts AFTER THE FACT to prove I'm right.

You made your decision - great, I don't agree with it, great - now let's move on.



> Ben, where did you get this info? Are you referring to U.S. Presidents or all World Leaders?and if you're referring to the U.S. ... well, this change of power "sometimes for the better" never happened.


Well, I think you're wrong. Do you remember a minor conflict between a couple nations back in the early part of the twentieth century that was commonly referred to as World War II? Truman gained presidency after Roosevelt died and was particularly responsible for the early end to the war by approving the drop of the atomic bombs on Japan at the time. For those who wish to disagree that dropping the bombs was a good thing - sometime think about how many millions more would have died invading the Japanese mainland. The Japanese culture was such that they were prepared to fight to the death to preserve the land, especially in the face of American soldiers taking their soil. Anyone who has ever talked to someone who fought in the South Pacific knows this. It's hard to say what would have happened had Roosevelt not died and had maintained his Presidency, but the amount of pressure that suddenly fell upon Truman far, far, far outweighs what Kerry would have had to hold down as the entire world was in shambles at his time; the balance of power was far more spread out amongst the countries involved in the conflict at the time than it is now - with the American military being, quite obvious, the super power today. He had a war to end and then clean up - not an easy thing for a president to do, yet he did it.

Then there was the acquisition of the Vietnam war by Nixon, who pulled us out of it. It was not the most successful removal of a army from a land, but it got us out - something that was not happening at the time with the previous president (Johnson), and the war was doing damage back home too. He also made things a bit better between us and Russia and us and China (only Nixon could go to China).

It's my opinion that shifts in Presidency have happened during wars, and those shifts led to good things (the ending of at least two wars).

There are many policies that are underway when a president leaves office - and the entire cabinet changes directly under our feet when this occurs. To focus on war as the only one that should hold a president in office is not good thinking, in my opinion.

I'm growing tired of this debate as it's turning into a melee of wild attempts at rebuttle.

....let's also stop arguing about grade point averages too. Einstein failed school, and Disney was told by his boss that he had no imagination. The ability of the modern school system to judge someone's real-world abilities is quite flawed as many people have left, never graduated, or plain never went to school and made millions, sometimes even billions (Gates, for example - who left Harvard and never returned).


----------



## dakotajo (Aug 10, 2004)

Excellent post Ben!!


----------



## dakotajo (Aug 10, 2004)

I still say its completely insane that a man(Bush) who basically ran from war is now the Commander in chief of our entire military. Its even more insane that every business venture hes been involved with has been driven into the ground and now he runs our country. Its no wonder we are on our way to a complete and total economic meltdown. The difference now is his daddy isnt going to be able to pull any strings or buy his way out of this mess.


----------



## Dreamer (Aug 9, 2004)

Well, Ben, you just cut me to the core. Yes, I like to feel understood. This is a psychological issue I had as a child. My mother was a psychiatrist who knew I was ill, yet either said I was lying, acting, incurable, or a little bitch ruining her life.

*I don't apologize for actually enjoying my research here though. You don't have to participate in the discussion anymore if you're tired of it. And I have legitimate questions. Thank God for my new move to my old uni town where I WILL talk with people in person about such issues. The internet is often a painful, confusing place.

This forum is meant as a distraction from DP. I'm distracting myself. *

Also, why don't you tell everyone else to stop carrying on?

Last comment on the Presdents in wartime issue and I won't go on. I have vacation coming up. Getting out of town, have a visitor.

I learned a lot from this. I hope others did too. And you'll note I've accepted where I was wrong in what I said.

I give up. :roll:



Ben said:


> Stop trying to convince us that it's okay for you to have your
> opinion - we know it's okay for you to have your opinion (and quite
> frankly, I don't care that you have it), I'm simply stating mine
> and don't expect to burn hours trying to grab facts AFTER THE FACT
> to prove I'm right.


*"Stop..." that's an order?* Sigh, sigh, sigh.

http://ask.yahoo.com/ask/20040130.html

From Yahoo "ASK"
How many wartime presidents were reelected to a consecutive term? 
Answering your question proved a bit tricky, but using a 
combination of methods we managed to get to the bottom of the 
matter.

First, we looked for presidents who sought reelection when America 
was at war. We compared election results from 1789 to 2000 with the 
dates of major wars in which the United States was involved. Then 
we consulted the Columbia Encyclopedia on Yahoo! Reference for 
specifics about war dates and how elections were affected. Finally, 
we cross-checked Yahoo!'s Presidency and Presidential Elections 
categories to round out our research. Here's what we learned:

*Abraham Lincoln* was elected president in 1860, and the Civil 
War began in 1861. Lincoln was reelected by a large majority in 
1864. *The war ended in April 9, 1865, and the president was 
assassinated on April 14, 1865.*

*William McKinley* led the U.S. through the Spanish-American 
War in 1898 and was reelected in 1900 during the 
Philippine-American War (1899-1902). *McKinley was assassinated 
in 1901.*

In 1941, during *Franklin D. Roosevelt's* third term, Japan 
attacked Pearl Harbor, and the U.S. entered World War II. *The 
president was easily reelected to a fourth term during the war in 
1944, but he died before the war ended in 1945. *

*Richard Nixon inherited the Vietnam War from his predecessors 
when he was elected in 1968. Nixon continued the war in Southeast 
Asia while pursuing peace talks, and he was reelected in 1972. The 
next year, the U.S. withdrew troops from the area.*

Thus, four out of four wartime presidents were reelected. This only 
counts presidents whose reelection campaigns were during wartime.

*The Persian Gulf War occurred in January and February 1991 under 
the watch of George H. W. Bush. However, he wasn't up for 
reelection until the following year, well after the conflict had 
ended.* He ran but was not reelected to office.

*In addition, several presidents presided over wars, but did not 
seek reelection.* The War of 1812 began after *James 
Madison* started his second term, and he chose not to run again 
in 1816. *James Polk* declared the U.S.-Mexican War 
(1846-1848), but declined a second term. *Harry S. Truman* got 
the country into the Korean War in 1950 but didn't run for 
reelection. *John F. Kennedy* started the U.S. involvement in 
Vietnam in 1961. This led to war under the administration of Lyndon 
Johnson, who did not run for reelection.

Interestingly, war hero *Dwight D. Eisenhower's promise to get 
America out of Korea helped elect him president in 1952. Woodrow 
Wilson was also in the anti-war camp. World War I broke out in 
Europe in 1914, during Wilson's first term. He won reelection in 
1916 with the Democratic campaign slogan, "He kept us out of war." 
But sadly, Wilson couldn't uphold the policy indefinitely, and 
German attacks forced him to ask Congress for a declaration of war 
in 1917. *

*Well, Ben. I feel I'm slowly becoming more informed, and won't vote in a President who will blow up the world next time. You really hit me in a sore spot. But I'll get over it. I have other issues other than chronic DP/DR for 30 years. Doing the best I can.*

Cheers,
In the spirit of healthy debate.
D 8)


----------



## Dreamer (Aug 9, 2004)

PS, reread Axel's post, it's in the spirit of a cooperative debate, not mudslinging.

*This thread isn't just for you. I AM LEARNING SOMETHING WITH MY RESEARCH FOR GOD'S SAKE. Either we're all ignorant fools, or we research too much! I give up.*

I could list a lot of other crap, but for instance the French are miffed that they can't sell Nuclear material to the Iraqis now.

No one in this WORLD comes out smelling like a rose.

I can't help it that I was born in the U.S. anymore than anyone else here can help being born where they were born. And sure, I'll move to Switzerland, loan me a couple a billion bucks and I'll do just fine.

Yeah, I explain too much. I know I do. It comes from many years of being disbelieved and attacked for trying to be understood.

My bad.


----------



## terri* (Aug 17, 2004)

I know I don't have a dog in this hunt, but I am always glad when you guys start pulling in facts from all over to help explain your points. I'm not a researcher, but really appreciate anyone that will take immense amounts of time in interest not just for themselves, but for everyone reading.

It's not a timed debate...I'm finding it all very interesting.

As for me...I jest don't like his looks. :evil:


----------



## mcsiegs (Apr 27, 2005)

Dreamer - take heed. Do not try and debate with Ben. Being one of his biggest fans, he is one bright guy. Nothing against ya, Dreamer, but his post was dead on.


----------



## Dreamer (Aug 9, 2004)

OK, boys, stick together. I forgot my place in society. I see Bush didn't changed that, it never changed.

This isn't a contest, it's a debate, a discussion, an exchange of ideas. I love it when the guys get together against one stupid woman.

*Roosevelt was reelected AFTER Pearl Harbor and his declaration of war on Japan. He died in office. Truman, his Vice President, dropped the atomic bombs on Hiroshima and Nagasaki.*

Everything I found I learned something about. I learned things I didn't know. This particular part of the debate was that someone said, I'd have to look but don't feel like it at the mo -- I'll be accused of supporting my argument, MY GOD, SIMPLY *that US Presidents were not reelected during wartime. That statement was untrue and I backed it up with facts. THEY ARE REELECTED. ELECTED BEING THE KEY WORD HERE.*

Ben shifted the focus of the debate:


Ben said:


> It's my opinion that shifts in Presidency have happened during wars, and those shifts led to good things (the ending of at least two wars).


It is "of my opinion that shifts have happened during wars" ... that wasn't the POINT. The point was, "How common is it that incumbent sp! Presidents are reelected during wartime?" THAT WAS IT. I found that it is a pattern in US history for Americans (stupid or not) to keep the incumbent in office during wartime. Go back and read the two sources, both very repuatable, that I found to back this up.

I don't take the word that he must be right because he's "smart" -- what does that mean?

I also dislike the fact that he makes it sound as if I brought up IQ.... I DIDN'T .... and I admited being wrong re: Kerry and Bush's academic records. Joe brought up IQ. Go back and read the thread! The thread has changed direction a number of times.

Oh I give up.
I see this is clearly the Men's Debate club.
I learned something! Did you? And I again, I admit to my explaining things, and trying to give "evidence." So sue me. Read the Scientology thread. I had nothing to "prove" there, I was just interested in Scientology. (The Tom Cruise thread).
Cheers. :roll:
Have a cigar. Start scratching. I'll make some cookies for you.


----------



## Guest (Jun 29, 2005)

Dreamer said:


> Have a cigar. Start scratching. I'll make some cookies for you.


Don't forget my pint.

:twisted: :lol:


----------



## Guest (Jun 29, 2005)

First off, W is not a real Texan, he is a fake Texan! I am not proud of what is happening to this state as I am a strong liberal who lives in the only tolerable city in Texas, which is Austin.

Texas has become so conservative that they even tried to pass legislation against giving gay couples the right to take care of foster children, we are not even talking adoption here. (And they would spend so much money on trying to witch hunt orientation......can you say they should spend money on actually helping children?)

On top of this, there was even a politician who wanted to bar "sexy dancing" from cheerleading. Don't these people have better things to champion like education and health care?

I work for the University and I actually had the opportunity to get to know the Professor (S. Weddington) who was the lawyer in the Roe Vs. Wade case.

It is sad as a woman how many men without uteruses are trying to implement restrictions on women's reproductive rights. They want unwanted children to be born so badly but where are they when the child is neglected and needs health care, a decent education, clothes, or a safeplace to live?

Okay, that is my rant. I like Texas but I hate what is going on with our country. It makes me sad sometimes (especially with Bush administration and his cronies that are planted everywhere) not just to be a Texan but also an American--ignorantly butting into other people's business like we own the world.

Alright, I'm off the soap box now


----------



## gimpy34 (Aug 10, 2004)

Being one of two Republicans on this board (the other we know), can I just say that some of us should pick fair fights. And if this assuages any fears, just remember that Reagan was full into dementia in the second half of his term and brought down Communism. The crazy and fanatical run the Earth, people. Of all people, we should support this !!!!!


----------



## dakotajo (Aug 10, 2004)

Reagen was one of the worst presidents this country has ever seen. I think bush is giving him a damn good run for his money.


----------



## Dreamer (Aug 9, 2004)

gimpy34 said:


> Being one of two Republicans on this board (the other we know), can I just say that some of us should pick fair fights. And if this assuages any fears, just remember that Reagan was full into dementia in the second half of his term and brought down Communism. The crazy and fanatical run the Earth, people. Of all people, we should support this !!!!!


LOLOLOLOL. Thank you Gimpy.

Also clarification, this is for MY benefit, damnit, LOL.

F.D.R. died after his reelection to his 4th term in office. He had already declared war on the Japanese as they had bombed Pearl Harbor on 12/7/1941.

He died 4/12/1945. His Vice President at the time, (his 3rd), Harry Truman, followed through on F.D.R.'s declaration of war and dropped the atomic bombs on Hiroshima and Nagasaki on 8/6 and 8/9, 1945.

*PRESIDENT ROOSEVELT'S
ADDRESS TO CONGRESS
(Asking for a Declaration of a State of War
between the United States and Japan, December 8, 1941)

"Yesterday, 7 December 1941-a date which will live in infamy-the United States of America was suddenly and deliberately attacked by naval and air forces of the Empire of Japan."*

Yes, it sickens me what happened. Interesting, I read that Truman was under the impression that either or both Hiroshima or Nagasaki were miliatary bases. Sound familiar?


----------



## gimpy34 (Aug 10, 2004)

please explain your declaration with hard evidence, Joe.


----------



## Homeskooled (Aug 10, 2004)

Hmmmm.......hmmmmm......

Okay guys. Lets stop taking out *our* insecurities on Dreamer. Yes, she is a research-a-holic. Maybe a little too much information sometimes. But she's educated, she cares, and that carries some weight. So she wants to be accepted, to have a socially accepted voice - So? Who doesn't? To not care what others thinks takes either guts, cruelty, or stupidity, and thats totally dependent on the situation.

Ben, you are absolutely correct. Changing a horse in midstream has had benefits in the past. Dreamer is correct, in that Americans hate to do that. We may like change, thrive on innovation, and champion the underdog, but Americans are still very cautious, and very self-reflective. Many Europeans have a much more homogenous view of their countries. Thats understandable. They're societies are usually more closely knit, more rich in history. But you wont find a whole lot of Frenchmen apologizing to the world about past French colonialism, lamenting the current administration's narrowminded or immoral policies, and bending over backwards to sympathise with world opinion. Whether or not you beleive the current administration has these traits, the American people do. We dont wait for the rest of the world to yell out "America is Evil!". We beat them to the punch. And Americans do this with gusto. We've always had a love-hate relationship with ourselves. It first showed itself in the civil war, and it continues to this day. And we are a young country. Yes, we have the cocky exuberance of a teenager. Our country is only in adolescence. But we have the idealism and insecurity of one as well, and the possilbility of drastic change, if we think the cause is right.

Nationalism is stronger in most European countries, and that in and of itself makes the county's self-image much more homogenous and less divise, or reflective. Europeans in general seem more jaded regarding political processes or policies. America is classified as an idealist country. We dont like things as they are. We're always looking for that "shining city on the hill". England is a neo-idealist. Yeah, they like shining cities, but if the hill is too tall, well, they've been to the top before anyways, and the pub at the base is just fine. France is a neo-realist. De Gaulle said they had a "special destiny". France does what is best for France, but they also like to lead. They'll punch you in the nose, but apologise for it. A couple of years ago, Greenpeace sailed a ship to a French island to protest. The French asked them to please leave. They didnt. The French sent special forces aboard the boat while the protesters were gone, and sank it. Then they paid Greenpeace for the cost of the boat. Solved the issue with the boat rather well, though, didnt it? German is a realist, plain and simple. We expect the fact that we nurtured them in the Cold War to make us their best buddies. They'll be our allies becuase we're all friends. Wrong. Germany is an ally of convenience, and most countries are. Its very rare to have a diplomatic alliance with true altruism. But we're young and idealistic, and we really havent figured that out.

I'm proud of America. With time, we too will probably lose our self-reflectance and exuberance. I guess that happens with age and mixed experiences. If one checks back with us in 500 years time, you may find a homogenous, nationlistic public opinion. We may become allies of convenience only. And that wont be unexpected, and it might not be all bad. We'll be world-weary and wise. We'll be realists and not idealists. But then we wont be listening to our critics anymore either. And we wont want to change. The status quo will be good enough for us.

I didnt beleive the Iraq War to be a just war. Pre-emptive striking can be construed as protecting yourself from an aggressor, but in this case, I dont think we we're in imminent danger. Yes, we did beleive that there we're WMDs. We purchased millions of of emergency injection vials of atropine to protect our troops from nerve gas. But thats not why we went. There is an old geopolitical theory named after a British General, General Mckinder . Its called the Mckinder peripheral analysis. He beleived that anyone who controls a land mass's geographic center, influences or controls the rest of the land mass. Notice how Germany is in the thick of every major war in the past 200 years. What country is in Europe's center. Now look at the middle East. What country is the cradle of civilization? The dead center? Thats right. Iraq. Regime change has been our official policy there since 1992, even through Clinton's administration. In fact, under Clinton, we attempted to assasinate Sadaam twice through the CIA. At this point, that is all that has been declassified. We were going to get him out under any pretext. We dont need his oil. We want public opinion in the middle east. We want more pro-Israel allies. We dont want a regime which in 1992 had the capacity to disseminate bioligical weapons, nuclear weapons plans, and nerve gasses to our enemies. In the Mckinder peripheral analysis, he's spreading ill will. And he has the greatest likelihood of conquering other middle eastern countries, as the geographic center. To put it bluntly, he de-stabilized the region. Does that give us the moral right to enter his country? No. If he had gotten worse, maybe. But UN regulations were the way to go in my opinion. Now that we are there, will Iraqi's be better off economically, etc...in about 10 years than they were under Sadaam? Sure. I dont think they will be worse off. Now that we are there, I think we actually have an obligation to make the country better than when we entered. But that didnt give us the right to trample on their sovereignity. A bit of my geopolitical flow of consciousness...

Peace
Homeskooled


----------



## dakotajo (Aug 10, 2004)

10 Reasons Why Ronald Reagan Was a Terrible President
Introduction

For a full week after the death of former U.S. President Ronald Reagan, the American media ran what amounted to non-stop advertisements for his legacy. If you relied on these accounts, you would believe that Mr. Reagan was one of the most virtuous, noble, fair and decent men who ever walked the earth. And, you would be totally, categorically and demonstrably wrong. In fact, Mr. Reagan, judged by his policies and statements, was one of the most provincial, bigoted, bloodthirsty, hypocritical, unethical people anywhere, anytime in human history. His true legacy was that he destroyed tens of millions of lives around the world, brought down democratically elected governments, reversed many of the gains of the US Civil Rights movement and ignited class, religious and racial tensions that had begun to heal in the 1960's and 1970's. Here are ten reasons why he was arguably one of the worst Presidents ever.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

1. He was a racist who aggressively opposed affirmative action in America.

Fact: Reagan filed dozens of lawsuits to overturn affirmative action plans that numerous states and cities had negotiated with various police departments and fire departments.

Fact: He appointed William Bradford Reynolds as Assistant Attorney General for Civil Rights to seek reversal of voluntary affirmative action plans and to fight against affirmative action goals and timetables.

Fact: He opposed the federal Civil Rights Act and later fired members of the Civil Rights Commission because they supported affirmative action and enforced civil rights laws.

Fact: In addition to slashing the budget of the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, he appointed Clarence Thomas to head (and sabotage) it because Thomas was an alleged Black man who said that affirmative action was reverse racism, just as Reagan had said repeatedly.

Fact: Just as Reagan opposed affirmative action, he also opposed the Voting Rights Act because, in his words, it was ?humiliating to the South? and was ?bad legislation? that infringed on the rights of (white) citizens.? Moreover, in an early attempt to defeat the movement for a national holiday to honor Reverend Dr. Martin Luther King Jr., he joined rabid racist North Carolina Senator Jesse Helms in accusing Dr. King of being a communist. Also, he supported racism at Bob Jones University by attempting to reverse the IRS?s policy of denying tax-exempt status to private schools that discriminate. And after receiving the Republican nomination, he gave a major campaign speech in 1980 at the Neshoba County Fair near Philadelphia, Mississippi- the exact location where civil rights workers Cheyney, Schwerner, and Goodman were brutally murdered by the KKK in 1964.

(Fact: In terms of his racism, it is no coincidence that the Ronald Reagan Presidential Library is in Simi Valley, California where a bigoted white jury saw the videotape of the brutal police beating of Rodney King but decided on April 29, 1992 that the ****** deserved it and therefore concluded that the police were ?not guilty.? Moreover, as governor of California, he publicly vowed to bar Angela Davis from ever teaching again as a college professor in that state, despite the fact that on June 4, 1972 she had been found ?not guilty? of all charges in connection with a 1970 shoot-out involving Soledad Brothers/Black Panther Party associates at the Marin County courthouse where a judge was killed and a prosecutor was wounded.)

2. He was a racist who passionately supported apartheid in South Africa.

Fact: Despite the modern day slavery of South Africa, despite the United Nations? declaration of apartheid as a ?crime against humanity,? despite the United Nation?s economic embargo of South Africa, Reagan created the policy of ?constructive engagement,? which held that America should embrace the racist South African government economically, militarily, and politically.

Fact: He vetoed a bipartisan congressional bill calling for economic sanctions against South Africa.

Fact: Archbishop Desmond Tutu stated ?Apartheid will be dismantled and its victims will remember those who helped to destroy this evil system. And President Reagan will be judged harshly by history.?

3. He was the Dr. Baron von Frankenstein who created the Saddam Hussein monster and the Osama bin Laden monster.

Fact: Reagan armed Hussein of Iraq with biological military weapons and other weapons of mass destruction to fight Iran (whom Reagan was arming at the very same time). And he gave semtex chemical bombs and other military weapons to bin Laden to fight the Soviets in Afghanistan.

4. He established Reaganomics, which was a ?reverse Robin Hood? economic policy.

Fact: Reaganomics, also known as the ?trickle down-from-the-rich? policy was really nothing more than the ?tinkle on-the-poor? policy. Reagan claimed that it was a nationally beneficial program that stemmed from ?tax cuts for? the rich, but it was actually ?throat cuts to? the poor.

Fact: He attacked the Black poor with an often repeated story about an African American ?welfare queen? from Chicago who ripped off American taxpayers by using 80 fake names, 30 fictitious addresses, and twelve fraudulent social security numbers to receive hundreds of thousands of dollars in federal benefits and $150,000 in cash as well as to purchase a late model Cadillac. The problem with this story, as reporters later discovered, is that it wasn?t just a partial exaggeration, it was a complete fabrication!

Fact: By 1989, his final year in office, he had increased the Black poverty rate to three times that of the white poverty rate. Also, during his entire eight years in office, he stubbornly and cold-heartedly refused to increase the minimum wage.

Fact: Because of his widespread and deep cuts to social programs, homelessness for all Americans increased to three million.

Fact: He slashed the Housing and Urban Development?s (HUD?s) budget by 33 percent and cut federal housing assistance by 66 percent. And the one Black person in his cabinet, HUD Secretary Samuel Pierce, was so ineffective that he was known privately and publicly as ?Silent Sam.? In fact, he was such a rarely seen and even more rarely heard official that, at a National Conference of Black Mayors meeting at the White House, Reagan mistakenly greeted him with a ?Hello, Mr. Mayor.? (As governor of California from 1967-1975, Reagan opposed that state?s Fair Housing Laws and claimed that Black people really did not want to live in nice houses near white folks but instead just wanted to cause integration trouble for white folks in white neighborhoods.)

5. He spawned the Savings and Loans (S&L) fraudulent bailout, costing the American taxpayers more than $200 billion.

Fact: As part of his scheme to deregulate the banking industry, Reagan in effect unlocked the U.S. treasury for his thieving friends in the Savings and Loan (S&L) industry to raid like kids in a candy store. By terminating the requirement that S&L?s lend money only in their own communities, by allowing them to offer 100% financing with absolutely no down payments, by permitting real estate developers to operate their own S&L?s, and by letting S&L owners lend to themselves- all with up to $100,000 in federal insurance coverage on S&L accounts even though the average account was a mere $6,000- Reagan caused thousands upon thousands of struggling middle-class and low-income American citizens to lose every penny in savings they had. At the same time, Reagan?s fat cat friends got even fatter.

Fact: In 1989, his last year in office as president, he persuaded Congress to spend more than $157 billion (and still counting) to bailout the S&L?s.

6. He was anti-worker, as evidenced by his 1981 lifetime firing of 11,500 air traffic controllers who struck for fair wages and working conditions.

Fact: Although Reagan banned these workers for life, President Bill Clinton in 1993 reversed that ban. Because of Reagan, there are fewer air traffic controllers in 2004 than there were in 1981, despite much more air traffic now.

7. He shredded the U.S. Constitution in the Iran/Contra scandal.

Fact: Reagan blatantly and repeatedly lied to Congress and to the American people about his illegal arm sales to Iran that were designed to illegally finance his CIA-created Contras in Nicaragua to the tune of one billion dollars. His criminal war not only caused genocide there but ultimately created the completely overwhelming and ongoing crack epidemic here in America, which led to unprecedented gang warfare and rampant gun violence throughout many poor Black neighborhoods. (For more facts, read Dark Alliance by Gary Webb.)

8. He was a criminal hypocrite who talked ?law and order? but engaged in and encouraged frequent criminal activity with other members of his conspiratorial administration.

Fact: While advocating a ?law and order? platform, Reagan and his administration were involved in more criminal scandals and corruption charges than any other president and administration of the last half of the twentieth century, including Richard Nixon and his administration.

9. He was a right-wing conservative religious zealot who turned his back on

HIV/AIDS research because he considered it to be the gay disease caused by sinful behavior.

Fact: In 1981, which was Reagan?s first year in office, there were only 199 AIDS cases reported in the U.S. However, by the time he left office in 1989, more than 46,000 Americans had died of AIDS. Moreover, it was not until late in his second term in 1987 that he delivered his first formal (and quite weak) speech on the disease, despite the fact that federal researchers knew by 1985 that AIDS was an immune disorder caused by HIV and despite the fact that a test had been developed to detect HIV. He allowed his close-minded religious convictions to stop him from using his powerful presidential position to raise awareness about the virus and the disease and to call for increased funding for research to control, treat, and ultimately eradicate HIV and AIDS.

10. He was anti-education, especially for those who could not afford private school tuition.

Fact: Reagan actually promised to kill the federally funded Education Department, despite the fact that a 1983 report entitled ?A Nation At Risk,? which was commissioned by his own administration, declared the nation?s schools to be in crisis.

Fact: He cut the federally subsidized school lunch program and even formally defined ketchup as a vegetable so that his government could save money by snatching real vegetables off the plates of America?s schoolchildren.


----------



## Martinelv (Aug 10, 2004)

> Nationalism is stronger in most European countries, and that in and of itself makes the county's self-image much more homogenous and less divise, or reflective.


 :roll:

There is a difference between nationalism and an overpowering sense of false esteem. You don't see many europeans performing the frankly quite grotesque chest thumping, flag waving, WOO-HOO dance that you do in America.

It often makes me wonder if Americans are ashamed to be American. I've never met an 'American'. They are always 'Scots-Irish', or 'Irish-Scot-Welsh' or something, usually from their great-great-great-great-great-great-uncles dog, twice removed. If that isn't insecurity then I don't know what is. I guess it's a cultural thing...or lack of one, I should say. :



> What country is in Europe's center.


Er, Poland.


----------



## Lilymoonchild (Jun 18, 2005)

Let's assume for a second that the science is wrong, and global warming really isn't a problem. Would it hurt the country, or the world, if we were all driving a little less, reduced our reliance on foreign oil (which would then also prevent some of the oil-well burnings, because they wouldn't have that to hold over us) and plant some trees? And as far as energy goes, wind power has been harnassed rather effectively, and would definitely be a better option than nuclear power or coal power. 
Would it really hurt us to take a little better care of our planet, even if science is wrong about it being in imminent danger?

Oh, that's right. Then Bush wouldn't have his oil money, and the kickbacks I assume he's getting from some of the other non-environmentally sound agencies that he obviously favors. Looking into alternative energy sources would COST money (at least in the short run), and he's in the business of MAKING money. 
After all, isn't it money that makes the world go 'round? So as long as there's money, why worry about all that other silly global stuff? When the global warming hits hard, just turn up the air conditioning.


----------



## Martinelv (Aug 10, 2004)

> Let's assume for a second that the science is wrong, and global warming really isn't a problem


Ah, but that's the problem Lillymoonchild, they really don't believe it's true. I'm telling you, Bush is the new Saint Ignatius Loyola. If his 'faith' (or cronies) tells him that black is white, then he believes it and forces a gun to the head of the rest of the world until they promise to believe it too.


----------



## gimpy34 (Aug 10, 2004)

Martinelv, you obviously haven't heard the song "God Bless the U.S.A." by Lee Greenwood. Pump that sh*t up at any large gathering, sports event, etc. and there won't be a dry eye in the house.

"I'm proud to be an American 'cause at least I know I'm free/ and I won't forget the men who died who gave that right to me/ so I proudly stand up (everybody in the crowd stands up) next to you and remember 'til this day/ that there ain't no doubt I love this land/ God Bless the U.S.A."

We use our heritages to make fun of one another or to provide explanation for our vices.

Person 1: You're a drunk
Person 2: Can't help it. I'm Irish. Live with it.

Person 3: Damn, you're cheap.
Person 4: Can't help it. I'm Jewish. Live with it.


----------



## Ben (Apr 21, 2005)

> Ah, but that's the problem Lillymoonchild, they really don't believe it's true. I'm telling you, Bush is the new Saint Ignatius Loyola. If his 'faith' (or cronies) tells him that black is white, then he believes it and forces a gun to the head of the rest of the world until they promise to believe it too.


Brilliant. It's probably a good idea to start walking around with "Love Jesus" t-shirts now as the witch-hunts are scheduled to begin anytime.

...that's right, I am still reading this thread. Those of us who can't stand the heat from a political discussion ought to grab their kleenex.



> Interesting, I read that Truman was under the impression that either or both Hiroshima or Nagasaki were miliatary bases. Sound familiar?


Yup - one major difference though, we were already at war with them.

And on the topic of picking fair fights - um, nobody is trying to gang up on anyone here, these are simply discussions where people are making their points made. I'm not going to stop making my voice heard because people are too sensitive to take it as it truly is - a stance on a political issue, and nothing more. I'm not going to neuter my abilities for thought because it rubs someone wrong.



> I see this is clearly the Men's Debate club.


This is absolutely the most pathetic statement I have heard in a while - maybe I should leave this damn thread as it's doing nothing more than driving me up the wall with it's clear lack of reasonable thought. What the hell does manhood have to do with this? I don't give a crap if the person I'm talking to is an African Basenji so long as they have a brain and can communicate with me - what, am I suppose to start being sweet to you and tip-toeing about my opinions and thoughts because I'm a male and you're a woman! The single most intelligent person I have ever met is a woman, and the number of intelligent people I know is far heavier on the side of females. Stop dragging nonsensical points into this argument and stop crying because the numbers are not on your side. I'm glad you feel like you're learning something on this thread - but don't insult my abilities to communicate with someone based off of their mind and not their sex.



> OK, boys, stick together. I forgot my place in society.


Man, that was the single most insulting comment I have received in a long time. Thanks for simply assuming that I was ganging up on you, and thanks for simply assuming that I'm trying to stick together with the boys. This is what I mean about a dragging in every piece you can to this discussion to make your point.

Maybe this discussion isn't for me....I thought I could join in on this thing again and pick up with reasonable enjoyment the thoughts moving around; so far all it's done is made me depressed about the state of thought in this nation.



> Have a cigar. Start scratching. I'll make some cookies for you.


If you put as much thought into your baking as you do your social commentary, no thanks.


----------



## Homeskooled (Aug 10, 2004)

Dear Martin,

I have no idea what the true geographic center of Europe is. That was Mackinder's thought on the matter.

When you talk of this stuff, Martin, you often remind me of Simon Cowell. I'm not a fan of American idol, and I dont really care about Cowell. But his comments about America speak volumes about the differences between Brits and Americans. He said that over in England, people are naturally cynics. When somebody else is successful, they get jealous. To them America is just "corny"...he probably could have just as well said we were corny flag waving, chest-thumping,woo-hoo dancers. When he came to America, he said he realized everything is larger than life, and that when people are successful, that makes other people happy as well. And he said "thats the way it should be." Really, though, I think thats it in a nutshell. Brits are more reserved. Whats all the up-to-do about? Keep some dignity about you and a stiff upper lip old chap....

I dont know exactly where your analogy with Ignatius of Loyola is going, Martin. He never proselytized because the body of his work was done in Europe. You may be thinking more along the lines of Frances Xavier, as he proselytized the far east. Surprisingly, though, without guns.

Peace
Homeskooled


----------



## dakotajo (Aug 10, 2004)

Ben,

As a member of the good ol' boys club Id just like to say that I really enjoy reading your posts. Your very witty and are obviously very intelligent. Dont let Dreamer drive you up a wall. Try to get used to it. I just simply skip over reading her ridiculous rantings.

Joe


----------



## Dreamer (Aug 9, 2004)

Dear *Ben* and Dearest *Joe*,

It seemed like y'all needed cigars and a pint (for Mr. Mole, LOL) -- as MCS said:



mcsiegs said:


> Dreamer - take heed. Do not try and debate with Ben. Being one of his biggest fans, he is one bright guy. Nothing against ya, Dreamer, but his post was dead on.


*Ben*, MCS was warning me about how tough a guy you are. You and he seem really tight. You and Joe too -- he really likes you! Joe is really tough to debate too -- especially with all of *his* explaining and posts. How can a girl go toe to toe with the likes of you two? MCS was right, it wasn't a fair fight. I have to give up!

Ooooooooooooooooooooooo :shock:

*Wow, you brilliant guys make me really hot when YOU get so hot & bothered over a little gal like me.* 8)

*Churchill, Stalin, and Roosevelt had agreed upon an "unconditional surrender" during WWII -- "winner take all" -- we would accept nothing but compete defeat and surrender from our enemies.* Truman's use of the atomic bombs at that time I believe was less controversial than it is now in hindsight -- it seemed to be the answer to forcing the hand of the Japanese Empire and scare the Hell out of Germany -- perhaps the only key as we and our allies saw it.

*I guess you got me with an Unconditional Surrender! I have to obey!*

I wish we weren't the first country to use atomic weapons. Someone else will use atomic weapons again. I hope I'm long gone by then.

We will never know what Roosevelt would have done. There were only four months between his death and the destruction of Hiroshima and Nagasaki.

*Ooops, unconditional surrender to you hunks!!!. :shock: I'm so sorry!*

Love you guys SO much,
You cheeky, arrogant gits,
Try a little tenderness, it'll take you to greater places guys.
Cheers,
D
Happy Canada Day, Happy Independence Day
Time for vacation! Off I GO!

PS *Ben*, Joe doesn't believe we ever went to the moon. Maybe you two genius' could hash that out for a few days?


----------



## Dreamer (Aug 9, 2004)

Disclaimer: The above applies only two the two individuals named -- Joe and Ben.

I love all you other guys in this thread. Homeskooled, you're brilliant. Gimpy, you're the man. Terri*, bless ya'. Martin .. what can I say...

Ciao!


----------



## dakotajo (Aug 10, 2004)

Dreamer,

I have no time to read your reply. Im too busy right now scratching my nuts and puffing on my cigar..cough!


----------



## Ben (Apr 21, 2005)

> Wow, you brilliant guys make me really hot when YOU get so hot & bothered over a little gal like me.


You have really done all Bush supporters and women a justice here Dreamer; let's hope nobody judges either on your behavior so far.

This has definitely become the Dreamer-gets-her-spotlight thread and unfortunately I have become too much a part of it. Like your website, a lot of text that really doesn't say much and basically is your way of wallowing in your own self-pity.

And, just to set the record straight - I never once proclaimed superior intelligence over anyone. I'm not tight with anyone on this board, I come here, I read the threads, I try to respond and become helpful, and I try to enjoy my time here, and then I leave. I have friends and a life outside of this board and the people I meet here, mostly, brighten my day (with the exception of some). I was a bit upset when mc mentioned me being a "tough fight" or whatever he said, because I knew that would immediately get you all spitting and spinning like Donald Duck on crack - and I was right. Your repressed past is coming out on this thread like a volcanic eruption and, unfortunately, you're projecting your mother onto me (I presume she was an intelligent woman who argued with you, and here I am, arguing with you, and you're trying to turn me into your Mom and "finally win the fight").

Dreamer (and anyone else), as much as it would make your day to think you've got a gang fight on your hands, I could just as easily disagree with anyone - absolutely anyone - on this board the same was as I have with you. I have my own mind and my own opinions, and I certainly don't need anyone to help me in my disagreements. You have invented your own story and your own soap opera on this thread, spun it all up in your web of bizarre imaginings. I would appreciate it if people would simply state their own minds from here on out and not "warn" anyone about me being tough - just let me do my own talking.

Go ahead and "win" the fight here Dreamer (if you can actually win something like this), and all who are seeing me as the last chance to get back at someone from your past. All that's going to happen is you'll spout your words, get all hopping mad and feel somewhat good as you chase your demons and direct your attetion out of the myre that is your insides right now. Truth be told, though - your demons will still persist and you'll just keep living a cyclical and depressed existence so long as you find enjoyment in childhood mudslings like this.

I'm off....I'm done with this thread of discussion, it's just disgusting.


----------



## dakotajo (Aug 10, 2004)

Dreamer,

Think you know everything?
PEOPLE WHO THINK THEY KNOW EVERYTHING ARE VERY IRRITATING TO THOSE OF US WHO DO.

SO YOU THINK YOU KNOW EVERYTHING?

A dime has 118 ridges around the edge.

A cat has 32 muscles in each ear.

A crocodile cannot stick out its tongue.

A dragonfly has a life span of 24 hours.

A goldfish has a memory span of three seconds.

A "jiffy" is an actual unit of time for 1/100th of a second.

A shark is the only fish that can blink with both eyes.

A snail can sleep for three years.

Al Capone's business card said he was a used furniture dealer.

All 50 states are listed across the top of the Lincoln Memorial on the back of the $5 bill.

Almonds are a member of the peach family.

An ostrich's eye is bigger than its brain.

Babies are born without kneecaps. They don't appear until the child reaches 2 to 6 years of age.

Butterflies taste with their feet.

Cats have over one hundred vocal sounds. Dogs only have about 10.

"Dreamt" is the only English word that ends in the letters "mt".

February 1865 is the only month in recorded history not to have a full moon

In the last 4,000 years, no new animals have been domesticated.

If the population of China walked past you, in single file, the line would never end because of the rate of reproduction

If you are an average American, in your whole life, you will spend an average of 6 months waiting at red lights.

It's impossible to sneeze with your eyes open.

Leonardo Da Vinci invented the scissors.

Maine is ! the only state whose name is just one syllable.

No word in the English language rhymes with month, orange, silver, or purple.

On a Canadian two dollar bill, the flag flying over the Parliament building is an American flag.

Our eyes are always the same size from birth, but our nose and ears never stop growing.

Peanuts are one of the ingredients of dynamite.

Rubber bands last longer when refrigerated.

"Stewardesses" is the longest word typed with only the left hand and "lollipop" with your right.

The average person's left hand does 56% of the typing.

The cruise liner, QE2, moves only six inches for each gallon of diesel that it burns.

The microwave was invented after a researcher walked by a radar tube and a chocolate bar melted in his pocket.

The sentence: "The quick brown fox jumps over the lazy dog" uses every letter of the alphabet.

The winter of 1932 was so cold that Niagara Falls froze completely solid.

The words 'racecar,' 'kayak' and 'level' are the same whether they are read left to right or right to left (palindromes).

There are 293 ways to make change for a dollar.

There are more chickens than people in the world.

There are only four words in the English language which end in "dous": tremendous, horrendous, stupendous, and hazardous

There are two words in the English language that have all five vowels in order: "abstemious" and "facetious."

There's no Betty Rubble in the Flintstones Chewables Vitamins.

Tigers have striped skin, not just striped fur.

TYPEWRITER is the longest word that can be made using the letters only on one row of the keyboard.

Winston Churchill was born in a ladies' room during a dance.

Women blink nearly twice as much as men.

Your stomach has to produce a new layer of mucus every two weeks; otherwise it will digest itself

.............Now you know everything


----------



## Guest (Jul 2, 2005)

Go Dreamer! Go Dreamer! Kick their asses! :twisted:


----------



## bat (Aug 18, 2004)

hi joe

how do you know that a goldfish can only remember something for 3 seconds?

pdr


----------



## person3 (Aug 10, 2004)

Oh my god...the arguing style of the males on here reminds me of an ex boyfriend of mine. He still doesn't have a real job yet. 

Leave Dreamer the fuck alone!

None of us really know shit about this war thing, we all have opinions. Personally, Dakota Joe, half the shit I see you posting pisses me off because it's all stuff I get in crappy e-mail forwards anyway. Say something based on some good scholarly research instead of cutting and pasting and then maybe we'll talk.

We really don't know what the hell is going on, unless we are there or in D.C. We don't even get the same NEWS as people in the Middle East, did you know that? So what's going on there and the attitudes of the people there or in Europe are not even necessarily formulated on the same sources that you and I get!

And from an account I heard of someone actually in Iraq, they say it's startlingly peaceful compared to the news. They just zoom in on the 'splosions or the fifteen rioters on an otherwise empty street. That's his report of it all. Different from the news. So none of us are getting the same information here.

Also everybody loves to be anti Bush for some reason and i'm not really for or anti him (hell, I had a lot of fun at the Tulsa november 2 republican state counting party where I even got to see my favorite asshole, Tom Coburn, in person!...but at the same time I also get my moments of "god, why did bush DO THAT???")..but it's like this big united thing. That bush totally brought down our country. which is bullshit! Do we forget so easily that all the stuff leading to economic slowdown and foreign problems was building up under the Clinton administration? God, you guys are so freakin' stupid. Not looking at the whole damned big picture.

Anyway, personally I am pleased as punch that Saddam is out of Iraq, because that is the person we should be comparing to Hitler, not Bush. (I swear some of you pansy liberals should read up on a little German History before making the wrong assumptions...no, I didn't see anybody do that on this thread btw.)

oh what else...i don't know...this subject is so god damned stupid on both sides that I think we should all sit and laugh about it and get high rather than try to be serious or scholarly about it and make ourselves feel important with some solid opinion or some hatred of the president. We've been through way worse prezzes, folks. So in the words of my personal idol Paula Abdul: Shut up and dance!


----------



## Guest (Jul 2, 2005)

dakotajo said:


> Go Dreamer! Go Dreamer! Lick their asses!


Joe, never thought you could be that funny! Well, I guess we learn something NEW everyday huh?


----------



## Guest (Jul 2, 2005)

Wow, Ben, you really stooped to a very low level in your post. Disgusting. :shock:


----------



## Ben (Apr 21, 2005)

> Go Dreamer! Go Dreamer! Kick their asses!


Yes, and I see your posts are the pure definition of high class.

Ugh. Okay - yes, I'll admit that I'm getting a bit pissy myself so I'm sorry if I simply went overboard on this thread. I get moving when I feel a debate is at hand and enjoy a good argument back and forth. I can honestly say that Dreamer's statements of "us boys" and "her baking cookies" were some of the most brat-like I've had directed at me in a long time. I responded strongly, so I apologize - I should have been the more mature one and left everything alone. Next time I'll know better.

Nonetheless, I neither appreciate nor really need you and Dreamer trying to kick anyone's ass, or sitting there complaining how the boys are trying to beat you up. I believe it's possible this thread displayed everyone's immaturity as its worst, so let's pick up the pieces and move on....


----------



## Guest (Jul 2, 2005)

Ben said:


> > Go Dreamer! Go Dreamer! Kick their asses!
> 
> 
> Yes, and I see your posts are the pure definition of high class.


Dont you see the humor in it, Ben?


----------



## Martinelv (Aug 10, 2004)

Wow - how quickly this has descended into a slanging match..and without my involvement ! Quickly Martin, back into the gutter...



> I have no idea what the true geographic center of Europe is.


Me neither to be honest, thinking about it. It's probably somewhere near Bohemia...or Luxemborg.



> When you talk of this stuff, Martin, you often remind me of Simon Cowell. I'm not a fan of American idol, and I dont really care about Cowell.


My life is complete.



> I dont know exactly where your analogy with Ignatius of Loyola is going, Martin.


  Me neither, I just like the sound of my own voice. (Martin walks off, whistling 'Brave Jesuits Marching....')



> I swear some of you pansy liberals should read up on a little German History


Which parts ?



> Brilliant. It's probably a good idea to start walking around with "Love Jesus" t-shirts now as the witch-hunts are scheduled to begin anytime.


I thought you all did already ? Anyway, you'd better believe it !! :lol:

Oh, mercy. Too much too young. Sorry, I'm so hysterically unhappy today that I'm finding everything morbidly amusing.


----------



## dakotajo (Aug 10, 2004)

Person2,

quit your bitching. I dont have time for scholary research. Im not like certain members of this board who have all day to sit in front of a computer screen and type out well researched posts(I think you know who Im talking about.) I have a fucking job. Actually I have 2 of them. When my 60+ hour work week is done I spend time with my family. I only come to this board for a break when Im online doing stuff for my part time business. I dont think you say anything. Your certainly not going to win any awards with your pissy-moany posts.


----------



## Dreamer (Aug 9, 2004)

dakotajo said:


> I dont have time for scholary research. Im not like certain members of this board who have all day to sit in front of a computer screen and type out well researched posts(I think you know who Im talking about.).......


 :?: :!:

OOOOOOKAAAAAAAAAY...... ummmmm......

So.... knowledge and facts... don't.... matter... in a... debate... or in understanding.....never mind.

I'll have to remember that ... I think .... :shock:


----------



## person3 (Aug 10, 2004)

DJ is just pissed b/c he knows what he's saying is crap. You know, if you're going to have a point, and then attack people and be an ass, for crap's sake at least say something worth saying!

Besides, I remember a time when you had so much to say about Benzos...practically drove half the board to want to OD on them just to tolerate your existence.

Martin-
That was a huge tangent on my part. I was starting to think about people who compare bush to hitler. Because I was thinking about bush haters. And i think they should read up on who hitler was and what he did before they go into this whole thing about comparing bush to hitler. but that's not anyone that i've seen on this debate. wait..what the hell...GO SOMEWHERE ELSE!


----------



## Martinelv (Aug 10, 2004)

> I was starting to think about people who compare bush to hitler


Ingore them, it's an intellectual cop-out. However, Hitler wasn't stupid...evil, but not stupid - as is Bush. Whatever you say, the guy is an idiot, it's plain for all to see, and stupidity and neo-conservative politics combinded with quasi-religous-imperialism is a dangerous mix.


----------



## dakotajo (Aug 10, 2004)

Person,

Im not pissed about anything. I just stated what I believe to be true. You are right about one thing. Im simple minded and Im never goona be a rocket scientist, like you and dreamer.

As I stated before, I simply dont have the time to write out long "well researched" posts. If I did have the time, it wouldnt be wasted with bullshit like this. Those "individuals" that do, should get a life.

I also wanted to mention that I dont believe that you should have alot to say about somebody ranting over and over(benzos). If I had a dollar for everytime you had a post pissing and moaning about men and all your relationships, Id be a fucking millionaire. Spare us PLEASE.

Joe


----------



## dakotajo (Aug 10, 2004)

I dont think its right for Dreamer to abuse her moderator priviledges, to help fight her battles. Ive had a couple of posts deleted that were no more offensive than others that were written here. Actually, I dont think anybody who is constantly involved in one dispute of another should be a moderator PERIOD. In the past this woman will get her lasts shots in and then close a thread. What a bunch of bullshit.


----------



## terri* (Aug 17, 2004)

hmmm...all I see going on is a friendly game of kickballs.

It appears no post have been deleted here, although one player has left the field.

The playing field seems pretty level to me. Anybody gets to play and that's fair.

Well, while the actual debate has slowed down, I think I'll just play thru.


----------



## Guest (Jul 6, 2005)

http://www.dancingbush.com/

The guy's got some fly moves though.


----------



## dakotajo (Aug 10, 2004)

Terri,

You are wrong. 2 of my posts have been deleted. One of the posts was advice to Ben about wresting a pig and the other was a humourous alteration I made to one of Wendys cheerleading posts. As I stated before, in my opinion, they were no more offensive than any of the other crap thats been posted. Im only ASSUMING they were removed by dreamer.

Regardless of who removed them I dont think dreamer should have the ability of removing any posts being shes alot of times in the center of these disagreements. Repeatedly in the past shes closed threads just after shes got her last parting shots in which is an abuse of her priviledges. In my opinion a highly oppinionated, irresponsible individual like herself should not be a moderator period, but what the fuck do I know.

Joe


----------



## Dreamer (Aug 9, 2004)

dakotajo said:


> Terri,
> 
> You are wrong. 2 of my posts have been deleted. One of the posts was advice to Ben about wresting a pig and the other was a humourous alteration I made to one of Wendys cheerleading posts. As I stated before, in my opinion, they were no more offensive than any of the other crap thats been posted. Im only ASSUMING they were removed by dreamer.
> 
> ...


LOL.

I haven't deleted a post in ... I don't recall when. I believe I've deleted a few duplicate posts. I tend to merely make mention of something is inapprorpriate to another moderator or James if I'm concerned about it. I'll have to check the Deleted Post section to see what you said.

Oh, and I agree with Terri. I am ashamed of a few snide comments in this thread, but they are not as vicious as some I've seen from a number of folks who are here or who have left the board, and I admit to one the specifically after Ben attacked my website (for which he apologized in a PM -- I appreciate that, we've settled our differences).

All is fair in love and war. But you don't attack people personally. I felt I was being ganged up on. I was attacked personally. I don't do that.

My bad.

I don't care anymore, LOL. I agree with one thing Ben said to me... get a thicker skin. I'm working on that. But it is sad to see that often people will come on this board with NO EMPATHY. They haven't walked in someone else's shoes. You simply can't compare your own experience to someone else's, especially re: mental illness.

Also, Joe, don't talk about me as if I'm not here. I have noted the "veiled references" to "some people". At least you finally came out and said whom you were referring to, LOL. Good grief, I'm such a topic of conversation. Say it to my face. Well you finally did.

*Also, consider, Janine has a full time job, goes to school -- at least 3 classes a semester I believe, and is able to read and study AND post regularly on the Board. A better woman than I.*

Also, I agree, I have no children, which is a sad part of my life, and I don't watch TV very much. That leaves more time for reading and talking with folks who TEACH me things. I used to take uni courses after my M.A. when I moved to LA. (I have 60 credit hours concurrent enrollment at UCLA). I love school. What's wrong with that? Also volunteering.

*These are things that Ben advocates to keep going in life. I've recommended them myself on my site, under "Coping".* My goodness, one person says I'm doing nothing wallowing in pity, and another says I read too much, and spend too much time learning. What would you have me do! LOL. I also am a NAMI volunteer!

*Also, Googling takes about 2 seconds.* I found info about the wartime presidents by typing in "US Presidents wartime reelections" or something stupid like that. Google had a million sites for me. Go to Wickipedia, plug in ANY topic and you'll find reams of info.

As Andy once told me "Search engines are cool." That's what the internet is really great for.

Wikepedia is a good place to go for quick info on anything as well.

Just FYI.

*I don't bite. Unless someone bites me. And "once bitten, twice shy, or twice ticked off."*

D

Let's have the conversation continue. I'm finished here. Or let it go. Whatever. You can debate ideas, you don't attack individuals. My guess is the posts that were deleted were specific personal attacks.


----------



## Revelation_old (Aug 9, 2004)

This has been going on for over a year.

How hard is it to ignore someones post? 
You two (Dreamer/DJ) don't agree on ANYTHING and probably NEVER will.

Stop talking to each other or get married for heavens sake.


----------



## Dreamer (Aug 9, 2004)

Revelation said:


> This has been going on for over a year.
> 
> How hard is it to ignore someones post?
> You two (Dreamer/DJ) don't agree on ANYTHING and probably NEVER will.
> ...


Dear Rev,
I agree. I will try to be the better woman.
Best,
D 8)


----------



## Captain_K (Aug 22, 2004)

You can all come down to the Euphoria.

Tonight is mud wrestling night.

Sincerely,
Captain K


----------



## terri* (Aug 17, 2004)

I have challenged Janine to a good old fashioned wrasslin match before but she weenied out. Maybe she would be more in favor of mud wrestling. Her name could be Mean Janine...Bad Witch of the North. 8)

If you're out there, Neeny, meet me on the Euphoria. :twisted:

 I loovvvee wrestlin'.


----------



## Guest (Jul 7, 2005)

> Also, consider, Janine has a full time job, goes to school -- at least 3 classes a semester I believe, and is able to read and study AND post regularly on the Board. A better woman than I.


I am yes, extraordinary. It's due to nearly 2 decades of daily benzo use. It preserved my cognitive and intellectual acuity as that of a perpetual 19 year old. I like to think of myself as a valium prodigy.

:twisted:

Terri*, now you're annoying the theory witch. My family called me "Neeny" when I was a kid. I was insulted then, and am insulted now.
bewarned


----------



## Martinelv (Aug 10, 2004)

Excuse me for butting in, but it me who is getting married to Dreamer. So hands off.



> I like to think of myself as a valium prodigy.


 :lol: Priceless Janine. Hee hee.


----------



## terri* (Aug 17, 2004)

:shock:

( terri* goes off to wander elsewhere on the board as she is really not sure Janine is sharing some past history that did in fact upset her, or is she merely trying to act like a butterfly, sting like a bee.  )

Dreamer, Martin has asked for your hand in marriage...or at least a quick fling. Could be interesting and entertaining.

Hey Martin, I sware I don't know why you didn't try out for Jerry Hall's boy toy. You'd have been a shoo in.


----------



## person3 (Aug 10, 2004)

> Also, consider, Janine has a full time job, goes to school -- at least 3 classes a semester I believe, and is able to read and study AND post regularly on the Board. A better woman than I.


Janine is able to READ? Crap, I knew I was missing a skill. Better fix that one.

DJ, you're right. I do rant a lot about men. Boys, maybe, not men. But at least I don't get in others faces telling them that men will give them DP or withdrawal symptoms and I don't tell other people to stop dating men immediately and give them websites that back up my proof of men toxicity.

Oh and another thing. I'm tired of everyone getting into an arguement, then backing off with "Well, I work 60 hours a week and I have 20 children and I'm writing a bestselling novel and therefore I AM TOO BUSY FOR THIS!" oh, whatever! A) you assume that all the rest of us aren't busy? and B) if you weren't so busy you wouldn't have said anything in the first place. So whatever. Please use a different excuse from now on, such as " my dog at it" or "I just got AIDS so I can't participate in this argument anymore" or "talk to the hand bitch you got sometin' SAY IT TO MY FACE yo!" or "I just pissed myself, I must get up from this chair". Not the classic "I am A SUPER IMORTANT ADVERTISING EXECUTIVE (or whatever else you are that makes you so damn busy)" copout. please. I want to read something more entertaining.


----------



## Dreamer (Aug 9, 2004)

person3 said:


> Please use a different excuse from now on,* such as " my dog at it" or "I just got AIDS so I can't participate in this argument anymore" or "talk to the hand bitch you got sometin' SAY IT TO MY FACE yo!" or "I just pissed myself, I must get up from this chair".* Not the classic "I am A SUPER IMORTANT ADVERTISING EXECUTIVE (or whatever else you are that makes you so damn busy)" copout. please. I want to read something more entertaining.


Second best laugh I've had today! person3, you don't mince words, LOLOLOLOLOLOLOL.
:lol:


----------



## Dreamer (Aug 9, 2004)

Yup, Martin and I ARE getting married! We'll keep you posted on the date.
L,
D 8)


----------



## person3 (Aug 10, 2004)

Aw crap, that totally ruins my chances with Cancer boy.

Oh well. Dreamer, he's yours. I am too busy anyway, working 60 hours a week and all. I was going to say something about being so out of time that I would need to find a 5 minute man or something but then I realized how WRONG that would sound. :wink:


----------



## Martinelv (Aug 10, 2004)

> Aw crap, that totally ruins my chances with Cancer boy.


How could someone resist such sweet words? :shock:


----------



## dakotajo (Aug 10, 2004)

Person 3,

The reason Im no loner participating is this entire thread has turned to garbage and its simply boring. Your back to your same ol' circular ranting. Ive never understood how you could type so much and say so very little. Your posts are exhausting. I feel like I need to take drugs after I read one of your fucked up replies. Why dont you leave this thread and go do what you do best...complain about men and relationships. Im becoming nauseated so I have to go now.

Joe


----------



## dakotajo (Aug 10, 2004)

person3,

Oh, and a little friendly advice. If you ever want to feel better, You and your buddy dreamer need to get off the internet, get off the drugs, and get a fucking job.

Joe


----------



## Captain_K (Aug 22, 2004)

Are there any closing comments?

By the power vested in me as moderator I hereby lock this thread.

Nothing to see here folks, move along, move along.......

Sincerely,
Captain K


----------

