| |
Site Navigation
Main
News
Forums
Games
Games Database
Top 100
Release List
Support Files
Features
Reviews
Previews
Interviews
Editorials
Diaries
Misc
Download
Gallery
Music
Screenshots
Videos
Miscellaneous
Staff Members
Privacy Statement
|
|
|
|
| Bush vs Kerry: who is your choice? |
| Bush (US-citizen) |
|
21% |
[ 10 ] |
| Kerry (US-citizen) |
|
19% |
[ 9 ] |
| Bush (non-US) |
|
10% |
[ 5 ] |
| Kerry (non-US) |
|
47% |
[ 22 ] |
|
| Total Votes : 46 |
Hexy
High Emperor
Joined: 28 Jun 2002
Posts: 621
|
quote:
Now let's look at the other side. After 9-11, they were DANCING IN THE STREETS in several Arab cities. Documented on video. No spin, no propaganda. DANCING IN THE STREETS! This is before troop #1 was in Afghanistan or Iraq. More recently, insurgents blew up a convoy on a bridge. Know what? They're fighting a war over there, so manure occurs to both sides. I don't like it, but I don't care for war either. Now, the people in that convoy died. Don't know whether the blast killed them, or the fact that they were left in burning vehicles did, but dead and charred is dead and charred. They pulled the dead bodies out, hung them from the bridge, and DANCED IN THE STREET. Anyone care to explain that away for me? Show me goodness in those incidents and I might even vote for Kerry. And don't tell me how that's just a few bad apples. If it's such a tiny minority, the supposed majority of good people would have done something about it. I certainly never saw a single person at those dance parties saying "This is wrong. Stop."
Hahahaha...
Do you honestly think history only goes as far back as 9/11? No, the American Empire has meddled in the middle east for decades, and left suffering in its tracks. Iran, Iraq, Saudi-Arabia are but a few countries in the middle east subjected to long-time US operations, which have only hurt the common man. And, more importantly, people have suffered from the American protege Israel. It was only a matter of time before someone would STRIKE BACK at the US.
Did any American soldier shout "stop!" as their machine gun fire tore through peaceful Iraqi protesters? Did any American soldiers shout "stop!" throughout all the bombings of ambulances, hospitals and Iraqi neighbourhoods in THIS war? How many of those FINE American soldiers cried out during the horrible tortures and killings throughout Iraqi prisons? How many times did you?
Then again, why should Americans care what happens way over THERE, as long as they can sit in their sofas, watch their TVs and believe they've shown those darn crazy ragheadz who's da boss?
quote:
To your first point, I think you've missed the real "correct" choice. The Arab world should have made an effort on behalf of their people to solve the terrorist problem long before the US stepped in. Terrorists aren't going to negotiate with Americans. Not now, not ever.
There WASN'T a terrorist problem before the US stepped in. Why would terrorists negotiate with terrorists? |
Thu Oct 21, 2004 5:30 pm |
|
|
Darrius Cole
Most Exalted Highlord
Joined: 04 May 2004
Posts: 406
|
A couple of points to make...
quote:
By dteowner
@Darrius- About a year ago, there was a political cartoon that summed up my so-called-fear. I linked it in the Iraq War thread IIRC, but that link is probably long dead by now. Anyway, the cartoon was a picture of Kerry sitting in the Oval Office. On his desk, doves are flying out of his outbox. In the windows behind him, you see a big mushroom cloud. An aide is leaning over and says, "Guess there were WMD's after all."
dteowner and (anyone else) surely you can see that that ad was just the type of manipulation that I described earlier. The purpose of that ad was to put an irrational fear in your heart when you visualize Kerry as President. The cartoon does not add any facts to the case. It only attempts to feed your fear and prevent you from being reasonable. People are creatures of emotion. The Bush supporters who put out that cartoon know that if they get everyone charged with fear at the thought of Kerry being elected, their fear will overwhelm their reason. Then, they will choose whatever other alternative they have, simply because it to does not make them afraid. Bush does not need a good case if everyone is afraid to choose the other guy.
Politicians have used fear as a means to gain power for millenia. Vladimir Putin is making a use of fear over in Russia now; attempting to role back their rights under the guise of "it is necessary to protect you from terrorism."
But, when you see reality; when you actually see Kerry standing there beside Bush, he takes that irrational fear away. He is obviously compentent. He can tell you why he thinks what he thinks. When you see Bush standing their beside Kerry, you become more concerned about him and his decisions. He is obviously less competent, and he can not tell you why he thinks what he thinks, because his justification depends on your being afraid of things that are not there.
quote:
By dteowner
Well, piln, you've hit on yet another touchstone... I don't care in the slightest about our international relations.
I won't comment on that yet because I don't think you said what you meant to say. Obviously you care about international relations. Terrorism and the Iraq war are international relations. What point did you intend to get across?
_________________
Always with you what can not be done. Hear you nothing that I say? - Master Yoda
Only the powerful are free. - Darrius Cole |
|
Thu Oct 21, 2004 5:51 pm |
|
|
Moriendor
Black Ring Leader
Joined: 19 Jul 2001
Posts: 1306
Location: Germany |
quote:
Originally posted by dteowner
Well, piln, you've hit on yet another touchstone... I don't care in the slightest about our international relations
You obviously do or we wouldn't have this debate at all  .
quote:
Turkey (as an example) wouldn't let us use their airspace until we gave them millions in bogus aid programs. A supposed ally, and they made no bones about taking advantage of a chance to squeeze some cash out of us.
Yes, a NATO ally. Was there a NATO or UN mandate to attack Iraq? Did those organizations approve the war? Right. It was Turkey's own sovereign right to either say 'yes' or 'no'.
quote:
The French would be speaking German right now without our assistance, and look how they treat us.
Maybe, maybe not... no one knows what course history would have taken. It's more likely that they would be speaking Russian today though.
quote:
Without our resolve, there's a chance there wouldn't have been a West Germany. Without us supplying a competitor that kept the Soviet Union constantly racing until she dropped, there might still be a Berlin Wall.
Wrong. The Soviet Union collapsed because of its inefficient economy and because it (and the Warsaw Pact countries) is too large a territory to be controlled from one central government. They eventually had a choice between opening up or civil war. They opted for opening up.
Besides, the process of opening up was very different in all Warsaw Pact countries. As far as East Germany is concerned, it was indeed a people's movement that led them to freedom. They rushed the Czech and Hungarian borders to break free. The East German government had no choice but to let people go in the end.
quote:
To say nothing of the money we dumped into former East Germany to facilitate the unification. Look at the support we're getting from Germany.
Right. The US "dumped" that money into East Germany because of their incredible generosity. Wake up, please. West German and foreign companies alike made major profits from investing into East Germany because the West German government not only granted freedom of tax for a certain period but also granted major subventions.
Return on investment (and trust me that investment was not a huge factor in most cases because of the subventions of the West German government) was guaranteed.
It's what's troubling our country to this day. We made an incredible deficit and debts but East Germany has unfortunately not developed as fast as was originally expected. |
|
Thu Oct 21, 2004 8:05 pm |
|
|
dteowner
Shoegazer
Joined: 21 Mar 2002
Posts: 7570
Location: Third Hero of Erathia |
quote:
Originally posted by Hexy
quote:
Now let's look at the other side. After 9-11, they were DANCING IN THE STREETS in several Arab cities. Documented on video. No spin, no propaganda. DANCING IN THE STREETS! This is before troop #1 was in Afghanistan or Iraq. More recently, insurgents blew up a convoy on a bridge. Know what? They're fighting a war over there, so manure occurs to both sides. I don't like it, but I don't care for war either. Now, the people in that convoy died. Don't know whether the blast killed them, or the fact that they were left in burning vehicles did, but dead and charred is dead and charred. They pulled the dead bodies out, hung them from the bridge, and DANCED IN THE STREET. Anyone care to explain that away for me? Show me goodness in those incidents and I might even vote for Kerry. And don't tell me how that's just a few bad apples. If it's such a tiny minority, the supposed majority of good people would have done something about it. I certainly never saw a single person at those dance parties saying "This is wrong. Stop."
Hahahaha...
If you actually think that's a funny joke, there's nothing more to say here.
_________________
=Proud Member of the Non-Flamers Guild=
=Benevolent Dictator, X2/X3 and Morrowind/Oblivion Forums=
Sorry. No pearls of wisdom in this oyster.
RIP Red Wings How 'Bout Dem Cowboys! |
|
Thu Oct 21, 2004 10:58 pm |
|
|
Darrius Cole
Most Exalted Highlord
Joined: 04 May 2004
Posts: 406
|
Dteowner, I don't think that Hexy was trying to make light of 9/11 or the fact that Arabs were dancing in the street at the site of American deaths on 9/11 or later in the case of the contractors your were talking about. I think he was trying to ridicule you for limiting your field of view to 9/11 and what happened after it. However, he used laughter at the wrong time, neither 9/11, the contractors deaths, the dancing in the streets, or the way you view it is funny.
I want to impress two points upon you. You ruled out the idea that the dancers were in a minority, reasoning that the majority did nothing to stop it so they must have approved. I want to put a counter point to that argument. Remember, most Arab people don't live like you and I. Most have never had democracy in their history. Minorities, especially violent ones, act unchecked by majorities all the time. Add that to the facts that many Arabs associate Americans with Jews, and often kill their own for collaborating with either, and you get a case where no one is going to risk their neck to say, "stop insulting Americans."
The other point I want to impress is that even though we all have different cultures, most Arab people will be like you and me. That is, they are to busy caring about their own business to be concerned about Americans or anyone else. They are only concerned to the degree that we affect their lives. You have a few extremists acting outside of the majority performing 99% of the terrorist activity.
What needs to be answered, what is this idea that leads terrorists to be so adamant against US and its policies. That is the real cause of the problem. In fact that is what you asked not too long ago. Whatever it is, it can not be reconciled with war (although action must be taken to foil plans to kill in the meantime). What appears to be hatred is most often fear and misunderstanding.
@Hexy, be a little more sensitive with the laughter next time. Remember, people are motivated by emotions. We have to be careful not to stir up the wrong ones.
_________________
Always with you what can not be done. Hear you nothing that I say? - Master Yoda
Only the powerful are free. - Darrius Cole |
|
Fri Oct 22, 2004 1:03 am |
|
|
dteowner
Shoegazer
Joined: 21 Mar 2002
Posts: 7570
Location: Third Hero of Erathia |
Well Darrius, the current debate has only secondary relation to the thread's topic, and I'm not at all happy with the turn it's taken, misunderstanding or not. In fact, this post is strictly because I owe you the decency of a response. You've run a fair debate, even if you've failed to see the light. 
quote:
Originally posted by Darrius Cole
What needs to be answered, what is this idea that leads terrorists to be so adamant against US and its policies. That is the real cause of the problem. In fact that is what you asked not too long ago. Whatever it is, it can not be reconciled with war (although action must be taken to foil plans to kill in the meantime). What appears to be hatred is most often fear and misunderstanding.
This really seems to be a question of human nature. Now, being all-knowing as I am, I have all the answers to that question, but it would take a long time to spell it out. It's a very interesting discussion (although opinion far outweighs fact on that one), but would be completely off-topic in this thread. To very quickly summarize the most relevant aspect-- The easiest way to control/lead a group of people is to construct an "us versus them" mentality. We are good; they are evil. We want to be happy; they are keeping us from it. Leaders get power, wealth, willing women (or men, whatever works)... As soon as there's no "them", there's no struggle. As soon as there's no struggle, there's no need for the leader anymore. The leader has nothing to gain from the struggle ending (unless a new one is waiting in the wings).
_________________
=Proud Member of the Non-Flamers Guild=
=Benevolent Dictator, X2/X3 and Morrowind/Oblivion Forums=
Sorry. No pearls of wisdom in this oyster.
RIP Red Wings How 'Bout Dem Cowboys! |
|
Fri Oct 22, 2004 1:38 am |
|
|
maic_ro
Keeper of the Gates
Joined: 28 May 2004
Posts: 113
Location: Always at work |
This really seems to be a question of human nature. Now, being all-knowing as I am, I have all the answers to that question, but it would take a long time to spell it out. It's a very interesting discussion (although opinion far outweighs fact on that one), but would be completely off-topic in this thread. To very quickly summarize the most relevant aspect-- The easiest way to control/lead a group of people is to construct an "us versus them" mentality. We are good; they are evil. We want to be happy; they are keeping us from it. Leaders get power, wealth, willing women (or men, whatever works)... As soon as there's no "them", there's no struggle. As soon as there's no struggle, there's no need for the leader anymore. The leader has nothing to gain from the struggle ending (unless a new one is waiting in the wings).[quote]
It seems to me that you have a clear concept of mass control techniques and still vote for Bush; using this kind of approch beeing one of the most frequent acusations made to him. I don't understand (or maby i was not paying attention to yours opinion trough the forum and i misjudge you)[/quote]
_________________
The ability to quote is a serviceable substitute for wit.
-- Somerset Maugham |
|
Fri Oct 22, 2004 3:46 pm |
|
|
EverythingXen
Arch-villain
Joined: 01 Feb 2002
Posts: 4342
|
I'm anti-Bush (was when he was running against Gore... mostly anti-Republican because historically they're worse for Canada/US relations... and Bush has done nothing to change this history) but I want to see him win.
Why?
Quite simple, really. I want to see him finish what he took upon himself to start.
I was happy Saddam was captured: I would have preferred the murderous dog be killed but I have no doubt he will be in due time.
Happy as I was I knew that the US, powerful as it is, could no more defeat Iraq than it could Canada. Crush it's miltary, certainly... break its infastructure... scatter its despot leadership to the winds ... absolutely. Win? No chance. None. Every day that goes by some poor american soldier WILL die... not for their country but for the freedom of a country that hates him.
Every time a soldier dies the terrorists get more confident and the popular opinion waivers. That's the true goal of the terrorists: One that was captured freely admitted that they're preying on the fact that 'westerners have no stomach for casualties'.
President Bush, sr, did not press on to Bagdahd and finish it back in the first war because he didn't think there was any exit strategy. That's the reason in his memoirs anyways. President Bush, jr, obviously does see an exit plan that his father did not and I'm waiting for this master plan to be unveiled.
So I say give him four more years... if he sorts it out he'll be a hero and I'll be happy that he managed to defeat an ideal (he would be the first conquerer in the history of man to defeat an ideal). If he doesn't the faith in Republicans will be so shattered that the Democrats will win by a landslide.
Kerry in 2008. That's what I'm hoping for now.
_________________
Estuans interius, Ira vehementi
"The old world dies and with it the old ways. We will rebuild it as it should be, MUST be... Immortal!"
=Member of the Nonflamers Guild=
=Worshipper of the Written Word= |
|
Fri Oct 22, 2004 6:45 pm |
|
|
Darrius Cole
Most Exalted Highlord
Joined: 04 May 2004
Posts: 406
|
Well, Dteowner, I apologize for my failure to get you to see the light. It is especially disappointing since I agree with what you said in your last post. I will comment on that, and try to pull the thread back toward the topic. You said...
quote:
...The easiest way to control/lead a group of people is to construct an "us versus them" mentality. We are good; they are evil. We want to be happy; they are keeping us from it. Leaders get power, wealth, willing women (or men, whatever works)... As soon as there's no "them", there's no struggle....
That is an example of "preaching fear". You get your people to say, "we are peaceful and good; we just want to be happy, but I am afraid that those evil people want to make war and kill us and ruin our happiness." When the truth is most people on the "other side" are thinking the exact same thing about you. The leaders don't care what the truth is as long as they stay in power. That is what Bush is doing. That is what the leaders behind the terrorism are doing, although they may actually be genuinely afraid that America will change their way of life.
I stress the need for diplomacy not because I want the nation to negotiate with terrorists, once they go that far they have decided to kill themselves and you too, no matter who "you" are. But, because it is essential to communicate with the larger populations that spawn these terrorists and get them to understand that the United States is not a nation that they must fear, and thus curb the source of terrorism. Declaring wars over false pretenses does not remove anyone's fears, it adds to them. Hence, my criticism of Bush's false justification for the war. It is truly spending American lives to make the problem worse.
Kerry has more experience (yep that's MORE experience) in foreign affairs, is a more effective communicator, is not the person who told the lies in the first place, and operates more from a spirit of, 'we are all in this together.' Furthermore he is more likely to focus on new terrorist threats that may occur. George Bush most likely has already chosen his next target.
_________________
Always with you what can not be done. Hear you nothing that I say? - Master Yoda
Only the powerful are free. - Darrius Cole |
|
Fri Oct 22, 2004 9:03 pm |
|
|
|comy|
Eager Tradesman
Joined: 17 Jun 2003
Posts: 42
Location: Slovenia |
quote:
Originally posted by dteowner
Well, piln, you've hit on yet another touchstone... I don't care in the slightest about our international relations.
The French would be speaking German right now without our assistance, and look how they treat us.Without our resolve, there's a chance there wouldn't have been a West Germany. Without us supplying a competitor that kept the Soviet Union constantly racing until she dropped, there might still be a Berlin Wall. To say nothing of the money we dumped into former East Germany to facilitate the unification. Look at the support we're getting from Germany.
--- This is a little thingy that caught my eye. I think that some of you Americans think that if you didn't come to "rescue" the Europe in the WW2, there wouldn't be anything left. Being the ultimate force and if you hadn't come to our aid we would all have been doomed. OMG !!! I simply don't have a comment on somethink like that. Like the world is spinning because of you... please ( I meen no disrespect although my words may sound harsh, but somethink like this really makes me say things...)
- About you not caring about internation relations : Act like a world cop and not care about anybody else. N1 ! Ask yourself : why did the world start to dislike America ? The answer my friend is blownig in the wind, the answer is blowing in the wind... 
- I recommend you watch Fahrenheit 9/11 and learn a few things about you Dubya. Do you know that the Bush family and Osama familiy were very close ? They even gave one of the osamas middlename "bush". Did you know that on the day of the attach ( 9/11 ) the airtraffic was blocked but hey ! whats that ? Several outgoing flights ? Who was on them ? Entire Osama family and relatives. 
Oh I don't want to start this talk, I get so carried away.
I'd vote for Kerry. Simple as that. Can't be worse as it is now ( speaking as non-American I don't know whats going on in America but concidering what's going on in the world Dubya musn't be allowed to continue doing the same thing for another four years. He is a criminal for god sake ( lanuched an attach against a country without the approaval of the UN. What would happen if others would start doing the same thing !!!!!! )
This is my opinion, I hope I didn't insult anyone too much but the truth is the truth.
EDIT : oh, I don't really hate America, but I can't say i'm really fond of it. If you elect a capable presidend who won't make such decisions as the present one in a few years you might not be so disliked as now ( the total bottom imho )
_________________
now as the lights go down
deeper now it seems than long before
there are no noises here
just a silence gone bad
something I will never hide
this urging need to
invite the darkside in
into my haven |
|
Sun Oct 24, 2004 2:02 pm |
|
|
Lord_Brownie
High Emperor
Joined: 16 Feb 2003
Posts: 575
Location: Unfashionable arm of the spiral galaxy |
Vaticide and Darrius Cole have already spoken very well for my views. There are a few things that I feel are worth adding.
First, prisoner abuse by the US was reported by our soldiers and reacted to by our military. It took too long for something to happen in my view, but it DID happen. Our government, our public said openly it was wrong, and we did something about it. Justice through trail is slow and sometimes not as filling as sometimes me may wish, but wanting to get 'filled' through justice only creates injustice.
Second, the flip-flop accusation against Kerry is unfounded. Bush should have taken the mandate that Congress gave him to put together the world against Saddam before invading. If this guy is such a ruthless tyrant, it cant be that hard to win over just a few more people. Other issuses Kerry has been called a flipflop on are national security. As non-baised research groups have pointed which national news media has completly ignored is that military bills Kerry voted against he did so along with Rebs. who wanted to down size the military, and the national security. US policy, since our nation was founded is to have a big military during times of war, and small military when war was over, both sizes (reb/dem) were following an American tradtion. One bill repeated meantioned that he voted against, he did so because the then current sec. of defense (Dick Chaney) recommended he vote against it (check out factcheck.org on this one). I cant justify everything everyone does, not even for myself- they are poltictains after all, I just feel that this charge is a backstab and it is false. Kerry tired faithfully to work with Chaney and his reward is false accusations.
Third, the Bush adminastration has shown that they dont beleive in America. It is just a tool they use to give thier rich friends huge amounts from the public coffers and its legal system is a tool to get what they want. The Patroit Act is a slander against American freedom, repeatedly parts of it have been found to be unconstutional, and tacted into the bill (which our Congressmen and women didnt even get to see before voting) were laws which shifted the legal rights and powers for a number of industries, including the music industry, which have never fully come to the public light. Our news media is not liberal at all they
dont look were their light is needed most!
In one of the three debates this year Bush said we shouldnt bother taxing the rich because they just get lawyers and dont pay anything. Why tax anyone then? Oh, tax those who have no recourse, those who cant fight back legaly. Words of a tyrant. If he has so little faith in the government to believe it incapable of mandating itself to its own citizens he shouldnt be apart of it..unless he realy is interesting in only using the government as a means to subjuged others to his group of wealthly friends.
Incase this was enough for convence me one more thing came up today in "The New York Times." Why would you rewrite, secrectly military law (which was last majorly updated in the 50s) without talking to folks like Gen. Powell (ret) or your own national secrecty adviser?
In WWII Germany sent a U-boat which landed men in the US. They were civilian clothed spies sent to harm Americans. They didnt, there commander, as soon as they landed turned them all in because he disapproved of what they were supposed to do. My government, secrectly tried and excuted them without any public knowledge of what was happening. Something needed to happen to these people, but the US went too far in killing them after they turned themselves in. I think this story bothers me when I put it together with the New York Times artical. I dont want to admit that St. Augustine may have been right: "Government is a symptom of man's sin, not a solution to it"(City of God).
Now is the time in AOT were the thread gets de-railed. For weeks now I have been following the often heated exchange of posts on this forum. I would like to give my thanks for those who have tried to express a view, who have fought through the pain of trying to communcate to others, which is painful to try. It is not often I get a chance to learn so much from others about these subjects because most dont want to talk about them. And to those who post and tell us to shut-up, thank you, too! Long winded posters like me need to be told to shut-up, or we'll type forever!!!!!!!
I must conclude by apologizing to everyone, esp. Dtwowner who faithly reads and responses to posts here. Being pressed for time, I didnt get a good chance to edit this post. Let the confusiong begin! If anyone can get this far into one of my posts 
LB |
|
Sun Oct 24, 2004 5:00 pm |
|
|
Darrius Cole
Most Exalted Highlord
Joined: 04 May 2004
Posts: 406
|
quote:
By dteowner
The French would be speaking German right now without our assistance, and look how they treat us.
I want to make another point. Let's just assume that that is true. I would imagine that French people would argue against that. I won't argue that point at all, for or against, but I will assume that it is true to make my point.
Without France the US would still be a British colony.
The point I am trying to make is that everyone needs help sometimes. Just like the US is the most powerful now, there will come a day when someone else will be the most powerful. Everyone needs allies. You can't treat people anyway you want to treat them. Not you, Not I, Not Sadaam, Not Bush, Not Isreal, Not Palestine, Not Russia, Not China, Not Islamic fundamentalists, Not Islamic dictators, nor any other person or country can get away with this indefinitely. You may get away with it today but eventually the shoe will be on the other foot, and they will remember how you treated them when they needed you.
_________________
Always with you what can not be done. Hear you nothing that I say? - Master Yoda
Only the powerful are free. - Darrius Cole |
|
Sun Oct 24, 2004 7:18 pm |
|
|
dteowner
Shoegazer
Joined: 21 Mar 2002
Posts: 7570
Location: Third Hero of Erathia |
I just know I'm going to regret jumping back in the pool, but oh well...
@L_B: Thank you for the kind words.
@|comy|: Even Michael Moore has admitted that Fahrenheit 9-11 is a political diatribe disguised as a documentary. That film presents many, many ideas as facts that are distorted, out-of-context, or bald-faced lies. Moore admitted it when pressed on the issue during interviews (the one about flying Osama's family out has been completely discredited). If you're using that movie as the foundation of any opinion, I would be very careful.
@Darrius:
re-human nature-- I think you're stopping short. That "rule" applies to all leaders. That includes Kerry. Kerry doesn't feel good about focussing the struggle on terrorism/Iraq, so he's trying to focus it (in traditional Democrat form) on US rich versus US poor. Still a struggle, still an "us vs them" scenerio, complete with the requisite scare tactics (millions without health care, flu vaccine, social security running dry, rich getting unfair breaks, yadda-yadda-yadda). Although I'm probably closer to the poor side of that dispute, I'm certainly not pleased with a struggle that pits American against American.
As for the cartoon (going back a few posts here), Gary Varvel (the cartoonist) would be classified, based on the complete scope of his work, as a moderate with equal dismay for both sides of the political spectrum. Not everything is part of the vast Right Wing conspiracy.  The point I take from the cartoon is not the one you got, though. I don't view it as commentary on Kerry so much as a clear vision of the cost of being wrong. I fully expect the terrorists to continue to attack us (see human nature again) regardless of who's in charge here. Given that, I feel more confident that terrorism will get the appropriate attention if we are on the attack than if we sit back and hope for the best. The nutjobs are out there, and I don't think anybody's stupid enough to deny it. One nutjob can kill an entire city now. Being in "attack mode" will certainly generate more nutjobs, but I feel we'll be more prepared to deal with them. I feel safer knowing there's 10 nutjobs in front of me and I'm concentrating on them than having 1 nutjob behind me because I'm distracted at the negotiating table (keep in mind that Saddam, Osama, and clerics like al-Sadr have repeatedly demonstrated that anything that gets done at the negotiating table is often forgotten before they've even left the room) or concentrating on stirring up class warfare. I don't see where that can be dismissed as "blind fear" or "Republican spin". We've already had a taste of what happens when we look the other way. Clinton did, and for that matter so did Dubya until 9-11. Look what that got us. Just because you're paranoid doesn't mean they aren't out to get you.
_________________
=Proud Member of the Non-Flamers Guild=
=Benevolent Dictator, X2/X3 and Morrowind/Oblivion Forums=
Sorry. No pearls of wisdom in this oyster.
RIP Red Wings How 'Bout Dem Cowboys! |
|
Sun Oct 24, 2004 8:27 pm |
|
|
xSamhainx
Paws of Doom
Joined: 11 Sep 2002
Posts: 2192
Location: San Diego |
Ok, its Sunday night and I just feel like just pounding out like 10 thousand words. Ive got that sunday evening dread that everyone has, from as far back as grade school, knowing the weekend is pretty much over. I'm going to vent here, this is therapeutic for me.
The way Im feeling about the election is similar to the extreme mental burn one gets from an annoying repetitious tune or jingle in the mind, endlessly turning end over end in ones head, inducing a sick, dull headache.
You know, I truly cannot wait until this election is over.
You know, we all only have so much emotion or interest in any given thing, no matter the importance. I remember a couple years or so ago when a young girl named Danielle Van Dam was kidnapped, raped, and murdered by some sicko here in San Diego. It was a very sickening and horrible crime, and we all were just beside ourselves about it. Mama Sam was in tears over it, we all were to one degree or another affected by it. To the media jackals of course, this little girl's horrific murder was the best thing that ever happened. All happy about a new tearjerker story, they went to work slamming us all very hard 24/7 with anything and everything about this little girl, her family, the killer, and the subsequent trial. Her image was increasingly on every newspaper, local magazine, and television. Her slut mother that was having a sex party when Danielle was kidnapped, was followed around and quoted like some world leader speaking. The media hung on every single word uttered by this woman. Suddenly whatever you were listening to or watching would cut out, and theyd break in with !!!URGENT NEWS!!! "THE MOTHER HAS SPOKEN AGAIN... and weve got it here for you LIVE because we care sooo much". All over tv the dramatic slow-motion playbacks of birthdays and other assorted home videos to soft piano music that the media is so good at, as voice-overs of her mother spoke in cracking voice about what a little angel she was. For days, weeks, months, they kept at it, still going strong, just saturating us day in and day out with up-to-the-minute reports about anything to do with her or her family. Then the trial began.
During the day if Im not too busy at work, I like to listen to Phil Hendrie or Rush, or Paul Harvey, you know whoever's on at the moment. All that was out the window, because all programming was pre-empted once the trial began, and they re-ran the trial almost around the clock in case you missed it. There would be days that there was no trial, and even then they would actually be reporting from the empty courtroom! Reporting about what might happen in the trial, what did happen in the trial, what didnt happen in the trial. Interviews with relatives, friends, aquaintences,the ice cream man, the dogcatcher, the cops on the case, other people whose kid was killed, and on and on and on. It just never ended. Radio stations used her in promos, "Speak to us Danielle, we hear you... AM 600 KOGO".
Her first and last name ran together and became one 4 syllable word to me, "Danyelvandam". Turn on the radio and its "Blah blAh Danyelvandam blAh BlaH Danyelvandam blah blAh Danyelvandam blAaah blAh Danyelvandam blAh Danyelvandam blAh.....
It was the saturation of course, but also I was really angry at how they were exploiting this little girl's death. Like I said, it seemed like it was the best thing that ever happened to them. Like these ghouls were wishing more little girls would meet the same fate, just so they could be the first to get the big scoop, the first interview, the first grisly picture of her naked and broken body thrown in some drainage ditch like a piece of roadkill.
Finally, I just totally snapped. Driving home from work I flipped on my radio for a sec and there was her mother, issuing another decree from on high. I punched the dashboard and screamed at the radio I DONT CARE, I JUST DONT F#2%CKIN CARE ANYMORE! SHUT UP ABOUT IT! SET HIM FREE! APPOINT THE KILLER HEAD OF THE LOCAL GIRL SCOUT TROOP I DONT CARE JUST SHUT UP ABOUT IT DAMMIT! I meant it too, I just didnt care anymore. My emotional resevoir was completely tapped out on that subject. In fact, I was actually becoming hostile at the very mention of anything to do with the case. I wasnt alone either, there was actually a petition drive outside some local supermarkets to take the 24/7 re-running of the trial off the air. The local community here was just gagging on it, people like to hear other news and their shows. I went online and viciously attacked the radio station on it's forums, and was suprised to see how many others were doing it too. I look back now and snicker about it, but it sure wasnt funny at the time. Of course ultimately I truly do care about Danielle, and yes I want her killer to be crucified and left for the buzzards to finish, but dammit, you know the media has a way of really skewing things. If not by the outright reported facts, then by ramming it down your throat until you just dont care anymore.
I am now fast approaching that mental flashpoint, reminicent of the danvelvandam psychosis, when it comes to the election. Im getting moments of teeth grating when the news comes on and it's Kerry in his monotone, spitting out another talking point. Or Bush, for that matter. Im tired of looking at them, hearing them, hearing about them, Im just freakin burned out on the whole thing. Stop already. I just want this crap to be over so we can go back to some semblance of normalcy. Im tired of having my friends and relatives fighting over this crap. I want the Dems to go back to least acting like they are on America's side, it's dangerous having a desperate party that will say and do anything to get it's power back. These people are practically frothing at the mouth, Im afraid to put a Bush/Cheney sticker on my truck because I dont want to wake up to slashed tires. On the other side of the coin, we have the Republicans who are going all mushy, saying and doing things not in their or our best interest to keep the power they have. One side grows more frantic and shrill, while the other grows too complacent and overconfident, letting it's guard down. We simply cannot go on much longer with this insanity, the American people wont tolerate it much longer. This may only the beginning tho, I fear. The only way this will be over on election night is if one side wins in a landslide. 2000 set a new legal precedent unfortunately, that we will regret every election.
Truth of the matter is this, it doesnt really matter either way. This election is alotta symbolism not reality because of the current total Republican dominated political structure, and some truths that are evident Bush or no Bush. This notion that a Kerry win will bring Germany and France into Iraq is totally false, they've said flat out they have no intention of doing so. This idea that suddenly all the socialists and communists around the world will suddenly love us is as much nonsense, these people hated us before Bush was president and theyll hate us long after Bush is long gone because of who we are. Because of what we are. We're American's dammit, Yankees, Gringos, Infidels, Capitalist Pigs, and we were all those things long before Bush came to office and we'll still be when he is gone. Democrat or Republican We'll still support Israel, and we'll still tell Kyoto to take a long walk off a short dock. We arent going to suddenly wed gays, both parties are against it as are the majority of Americans when put to vote. We arent going to shut down the border with Mexico no matter who wins, and there will be no national health care Kerry or no Kerry. We arent turning around and leaving Iraq, I dont care who wins, it isnt going to happen. We will still refuse to harvest our own natural resources, and insist we stay dependant on foreign powers for our energy needs. Republicans still own both houses of Congress, Governorships of most major states are Republican, and actually the state senates are being taken right out from under Dems all over the place. A Democrat president isnt going to suddenly magically change all that. The Left wants it's symbolic victory tho, they have been doing nothing but losing for a decade, and I think they feel they have to win this to show they are still a viable national party. In any case, Bush can lose and it really wont be anything major, and if he wins well there really wont be much of a change either. Im just sick of it all..
_________________
“Then away out in the woods I heard that kind of a sound that a ghost makes when it wants to tell about something that's on its mind and can't make itself understood, and so can't rest easy in its grave, and has to go about that way every night grieving.”-Mark Twain |
|
Mon Oct 25, 2004 5:33 am |
|
|
Lintra
Elf Friend
Joined: 23 Apr 2002
Posts: 9448
Location: Bermuda, the triangle place with SANDY BEACHES |
quote:
Originally posted by Amelia
Choosing between Bush and Kerry is like choosing between a life preserver filled with iron and a life preserver filled with bricks.
Thanks for that Amelia. I agree.
Okay, dragging this thread back to domestic issues ... here's my personal biggest beef:
I've yet to hear either candidate explain how they will take care of the HUGE chunk of change that OASDI (Social Security) is going to be removing from general revenues in the near future. This is no longer a "Lets deal with it when it happens" issue ... 2004 is the first year that the outflow is greater than the income from OASDI. Think military spending is out of hand? HA!! You ain't seen nothin yet. The current unfunded liability is in the trillions ... yet Bush "has a plan" and Kerry "Won't change a thing".
Bush wants some privatization ... bully for him. This was a good plan ... 10 years ago when the plan was running a surplus. Not only does any solution have to fund for the current generation of workers, but it must also pay for the retired and soon to be retired.
Kerry's plan is ... hmmm ... what is his plan? Any one know? Last I could tell it was just "don't worry you'll get what's yours" ... just not possible with out a HUGE increase in taxation. But he's not gonna raise taxes either. So where's the money to come from? Eh?
Ane what's worse is the growth in current federal deficit ... how much of that is due to the reduced inflow of OASDI funds? My guess (and it *is* a guess), a lot.
The honest bottom line truth is that benes have gotta be cut, but no politician can say so and get elected. Okay, I guess that benes don't *have* to be cut, but if they aren't then:
A. Other spending has to go way down (yeah right) or
B. Taxes go way up or
C. Debt goes way, way up.
My guess is that DC will go for C at first then slowly phase in A and B. "Big Brother is happy to announce that chocolate rations have been increased from one ounce a day to three and a half an ounces a week".
Edited:
As a goof I thought I'd get the 'offical' postions on SS, so I just checked the Bush and Kerry websites for "plans for Social Security". I can sum up the results of using the search function as follows:
Bush site: He's good for social security, his opponent voted to raise taxes for SS 8 times (or was it 10?), and Kerry is resoting to scare tatics and playing dirty with SS scares.
Kerry site: He has a plan Yep. Still not sure what it is though, but then I stopped looking after I stumbled across this little beauty ... on the official Kerry site ... I swear:
quote:
Social Security Faces Challenges - But They Are Manageable. Under current law, Social Security is projected to be solvent through 2042. Current law revenues would be sufficient to pay 73 percent of scheduled benefits after trust fund exhaustion in 2042.
THERE IS NO TRUST FUND you ...you .... maroon you! It is a promissary note from one branch of the govt to another ... an IOU for cripes sake. And when that IOU comes due, where does the money come from? The same place it went to ... General Revenues!!!! And there I was thinking that Bush was supposed to be the idiot.
So if this one issue were to decide the election, it would have to go to Bush since at least he didn't refer to a phantasm accounting creation.
If you don't believe me about the quote, here's the link. The quote is about 1/2 way down the page.
_________________
=Member of The Nonflamers' Guild=
=Just plain clueless= |
|
Mon Oct 25, 2004 7:05 pm |
|
|
|
Goto page Previous 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9 Next
All times are GMT. The time now is Thu Apr 11, 2019 1:33 pm
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
