Republican, Democrat, etc.

Error message

Deprecated function: implode(): Passing glue string after array is deprecated. Swap the parameters in drupal_get_feeds() (line 394 of /var/www/pied-piper.ermarian.net/includes/common.inc).

Pages

Author	Topic: Republican, Democrat, etc.
Commodore Mango Agent Member # 1169	written Saturday, November 15 2003 09:02 Profile #25 Exactly. It's not "pointless" to criticize Bush while he's in office. All leaders need to be criticized if they make bad decisions, and Bush is practically the embodiment of bad decisions. If nobody criticized him, he'd keep on making bad decisions without any regard for what the American people really think--oh, wait. Never mind. I identify most with the Green Party, and I'll register to vote with them as soon as I'm 18. Until then, I don't count. I do really like the look of Howard Dean, even though I don't really identify with the Democrats. Is he officially in the running? [ Saturday, November 15, 2003 09:03: Message edited by: Commodore Mango ] -------------------- "Man hands down misery to man. It deepens like a coastal shelf. Get out as early as you can, and don't have any kids yourself."--Philip Larkin, "This Be the Verse" Fear the wrath of the Grammar Wench, lest ye be cut down by the Glistening Scythe. Posts: 1150 \| Registered: Friday, May 17 2002 07:00
Djur Revolutions Babelicious Member # 3149	written Saturday, November 15 2003 09:23 Profile Homepage #26 Howard Dean is a liar and a fraud. He waffles like a busy Denny's on the Iraq war, and he's claimed responsibility for bills he simply signed. The Democrats' best choice is Dennis Kucinich, who's basically similar to Dean in policy, except that he doesn't waffle and is more honest. Also, he's cute. :-p quote: Originally written by X: Perhaps Aarrow Swift could cite a WORSE president since 1900, or any example of Bush Jnr behaving at all bravely or intelligently. Go on - surprise me. Ronald Reagan, the Great Eliminator. [ Saturday, November 15, 2003 09:25: Message edited by: Conspiracy Duck ] Posts: 999 \| Registered: Friday, June 27 2003 07:00
Djur Revolutions Babelicious Member # 3149	written Saturday, November 15 2003 09:24 Profile Homepage #27 EDIT: Forgot I already posted. [ Saturday, November 15, 2003 09:25: Message edited by: Conspiracy Duck ] Posts: 999 \| Registered: Friday, June 27 2003 07:00
Commodore Mango Agent Member # 1169	written Saturday, November 15 2003 11:28 Profile #28 quote: Originally written by Conspiracy Duck: Howard Dean is a liar and a fraud. Oh, because Bush totally isn't. Well, we've got a year yet before Election Day. We'll see how the candidates turn out. -------------------- "Man hands down misery to man. It deepens like a coastal shelf. Get out as early as you can, and don't have any kids yourself."--Philip Larkin, "This Be the Verse" Fear the wrath of the Grammar Wench, lest ye be cut down by the Glistening Scythe. Posts: 1150 \| Registered: Friday, May 17 2002 07:00
Sound Effect Shock Trooper Member # 1723	written Saturday, November 15 2003 13:27 Profile #29 I never said it was pointless to be critical of his decisions, just that it's pointless to make personal attacks on him. It does good to be critical of how our politicians do their jobs, but making attacks on his character is pretty stupid. Oh, and all the examples of worse presidents than Bush I could come up with off the top of my head have already been taken. While we're on the subject of lying presidents, what about the one that lied under oath to the grand jury? What was his name again...? Clinton? -------------------- "... and approximately one sea turtle." Posts: 277 \| Registered: Tuesday, August 13 2002 07:00
Thuryl ...b10010b... Member # 869	written Saturday, November 15 2003 16:11 Profile Homepage #30 quote: Originally written by Aarrow Swift: I never said it was pointless to be critical of his decisions, just that it's pointless to make personal attacks on him. It does good to be critical of how our politicians do their jobs, but making attacks on his character is pretty stupid. I disagree. The President of the United States is more of a spokesperson and a representative than a politician; it's the job of his cabinet to make all the important decisions. As such, his personal character is not just important, it's the only thing about him that's important. As for Clinton's indiscretions, I hope you've noticed by now that you won't find many fans of Clinton here either. -------------------- I believe there are 15 747 724 136 275 002 577 105 653 961 181 555 468 044 717 914 527 116 709 366 231 425 076 185 631 031 296 protons in the universe, and the same number of electrons. -- Sir Arthur Eddington Posts: 9973 \| Registered: Saturday, March 30 2002 08:00
Jawaj Shock Trooper Member # 461	written Saturday, November 15 2003 17:10 Profile #31 Clinton and Bush disenchanted me with the American government. Both are horrible. I used to be republican because my parents are, but when I can vote I'll definitely be independent, although my views on issues lean slightly toward republican, I do not judge politicians by their party. You know, President Washington warned against political parties in his farewell speech. The fact is that many who are registered as Republicans or Democrats are blinded by party loyalty. I'd bet money that if Bush were a Democrat, most of the more critical congressmen/senators such as Tom Daschle would be right behind him, and Rush Limbaugh would be bashing the guy (Just for the record, I am against the Iraq war). A great book to read for anyone who likes politic(ian)s, hates politic(ian)s, or doesn't care about politic(ian)s - well, any American for that matter - is Dave Barry Hits Below the Beltway. It satirizes the government from a non-partisan point of view (he even rewrites the constitution), is absolutely hilarious, and even has a couple of good insights. [ Saturday, November 15, 2003 18:18: Message edited by: Jawaj ] -------------------- "If you held a weapon to Fwiffo's head, he would say anything you wanted him to. In fact, if you held a vegetable to Fwiffo's head, he'd say whatever you wanted him to." - Spathi high council, Star Control 2. Posts: 346 \| Registered: Sunday, December 30 2001 08:00
Custer Bob's Big Date Member # 3151	written Saturday, November 15 2003 18:56 Profile Homepage #32 I have reason to doubt that Dave Barry would write something non-partisan. I recall him being a passionate Libertarian. Particularly one of the "screw the poor" school -------------------- In a word, gay. --Bob the Impaler Posts: 2367 \| Registered: Friday, June 27 2003 07:00
Commodore Mango Agent Member # 1169	written Saturday, November 15 2003 20:09 Profile #33 Yeah, but it's still a funny-ass book. I find Al Franken's books and Ann Coulter's books equally hilarious. The sad thing is that Coulter isn't trying to be funny. -------------------- "Man hands down misery to man. It deepens like a coastal shelf. Get out as early as you can, and don't have any kids yourself."--Philip Larkin, "This Be the Verse" Fear the wrath of the Grammar Wench, lest ye be cut down by the Glistening Scythe. Posts: 1150 \| Registered: Friday, May 17 2002 07:00
Sound Effect Shock Trooper Member # 1723	written Saturday, November 15 2003 20:29 Profile #34 His character is important, but I still stand by my point that it's pointless to sit around and insult him personally when you don't know the guy. Those insults are either pretty unfounded, or founded on something pretty stupid. And I still think his policy decisions and stance on issues is more important than whether he likes it kinky with Barbara. (or whatever the case may be) EDIT: To elaborate on that a bit... He is a largely a spokesperson, (though lets not forget about the power to veto bills) but his stance on issues is more important than what kind of person he is. He represents the United States to the rest ot the world, and he represents the Federal Government to the population of the US. His character is less important than the policies he advocates. [ Saturday, November 15, 2003 20:39: Message edited by: Aarrow Swift ] -------------------- "... and approximately one sea turtle." Posts: 277 \| Registered: Tuesday, August 13 2002 07:00
The Immortal BANNED Member # 4	written Saturday, November 15 2003 22:23 Profile Homepage #35 I don't think you're exactly getting it. If I'm reading Thuryl correctly, then he's saying that Bush is a figurehead who isn't good at what he does. You're misreading the turing machine by thinking that he's stating how Bush is beyond that gate in the White House where the press are prohibited from passing. What Thuryl is saying; however, is that as a political office, the president's purpose is nothing more than that of a figurehead. If Bush is insuccessfuly being a figurehead, then he should by all means be lopped off. If the man makes a poor image of himself, then he really isn't worth having in office. (Apologies if this post is awkward or redundant- it's ~1:30 am, and I'm a far cry from being healthy.) -------------------- We're all amazed but not amused By all the things that you said you'd do. You're much concerned but not involved by Decisions that are made by you But we are sick and tired of hearing your song, Telling us how you are going to change right from wrong, 'Cause if you really want to hear our views, You haven't done nothin'. Posts: 6936 \| Registered: Tuesday, September 18 2001 07:00
Djur Revolutions Babelicious Member # 3149	written Saturday, November 15 2003 22:37 Profile Homepage #36 quote: Originally written by Saishuu Heiki Custer: I have reason to doubt that Dave Barry would write something non-partisan. I recall him being a passionate Libertarian. Particularly one of the "screw the poor" school Yeah, but he's softened over the years, and he's something of an equal-opportunity ass. He murdered Reagan when he was in office, but mostly for overspending :-p Posts: 999 \| Registered: Friday, June 27 2003 07:00
X Shaper Member # 496	written Sunday, November 16 2003 01:48 Profile #37 Good to see in this morning's 'Times' (whose editorial supports Bush) that over half the UK population think Bush is a "threat to world peace", and a third think him "stupid" and "incoherent". Less than 10% thought him intelligent or coherent. Reagan did better than this in the 1980s, despite being asleep half the time and gaga the rest. Not the sort of person I'd want representing MY country (though the smirking, amoral yuppy currently incumbent at #10 Downing Street is no great improvement, frankly). I remember when Clinton camer to Oxford to get his honorary degree--I guess he was too stoned or lazy to get a real one when he was a Rhodes scholar over here in the 1960s--I caused enough of a security fuss that he couldn't visit Blackwells bookshop, just over the road from the Sheldonian, where the 'degree' was being conferred. Most satisfying to think that as a result of the security fuss this time, Bush won't be able to go into the vast majority of London, his 'friendly' host city. BTW: I still haven't heard one brave or intelligent thing Bush has done. I'm priovisionally prepared to concede he might have been the worst US prez for 80 years, not 100, though the 'teapot dome' scandal wasn't that big a deal, was it? Posts: 2333 \| Registered: Monday, January 7 2002 08:00
Sound Effect Shock Trooper Member # 1723	written Sunday, November 16 2003 07:44 Profile #38 TM/Thuryl - Yeah, I think I understand what you're saying. It started to get away from my original point that making little unfounded insults against him does noone any good. And, the poor image of him that has been created isn't really all his fault. If he has no major bearing on decisions and his cabinet really does do everything, then they're the ones responsible for the war in Iraq, not Bush. They're ones responsible for the faultering (or growing) economy. It seems to me that most of why people say nasty things about him is because the economy isn't doing good or "no blood for oil" or something like that. His cabinet is responsible for these decisions, too. Thus, all these pithy insults against him shouldn't really be directed at him anyway. X - I suppose Vietnam was a cakewalk compared Iraq, right? 211,471 dead. I call that a pretty pointless war, with more than a few more dead than Iraq. When Bush has killed over 200,000 Americans, I might concede that he is a bad president. Until then, we've had worse. And Bush is not stupid. Despite what you may have heard, we don't elect completely unqualified idiots to the most powerful single position in our government. Not to say they don't make stupid decisions, but they're not stupid. Incoherent, perhaps. He's not the greatest public speaker in the world. EDIT: sspelin erorrz [ Sunday, November 16, 2003 07:46: Message edited by: Aarrow Swift ] -------------------- "... and approximately one sea turtle." Posts: 277 \| Registered: Tuesday, August 13 2002 07:00
Custer Bob's Big Date Member # 3151	written Sunday, November 16 2003 09:52 Profile Homepage #39 quote: Originally written by Aarrow Swift: TM/Thuryl - Yeah, I think I understand what you're saying. It started to get away from my original point that making little unfounded insults against him does noone any good. I agree, but for different reasons. I consider him genuinely evil... And, the poor image of him that has been created isn't really all his fault. If he has no major bearing on decisions and his cabinet really does do everything, then they're the ones responsible for the war in Iraq, not Bush. He was most certainly in favor of it, and has been its greatest spokesman so far, esp. abroad. They're ones responsible for the faultering (or growing) economy. It seems to me that most of why people say nasty things about him is because the economy isn't doing good or "no blood for oil" or something like that. His cabinet is responsible for these decisions, too. Thus, all these pithy insults against him shouldn't really be directed at him anyway. I have plenty of problems with Rumsfeld & co. I don't think anyone likes them, though, which is why Bush gets picked on. X - I suppose Vietnam was a cakewalk compared Iraq, right? 211,471 dead. I call that a pretty pointless war, with more than a few more dead than Iraq. When Bush has killed over 200,000 Americans, I might concede that he is a bad president. Are you implying Johnson was a bad president? He was merely acting on a commitment made by a previous one; his social programs did a LOT of good, even if Vietnam did happen. Also, your qualifiers for 'bad president' are far too low. I consider most Republicans since Harding to have been bad presidents. (Exceptions: Bush, who didn't behave too badly, and Ford, whose biggest act of mischief was pardoning Nixon.) If you care to demand an explanation, I'd be happy to break it down for you. Until then, we've had worse. You can't tell right now, can you? The future is murky now because next year is an election year. Watch for the saber to start rattling again in 2005; Iraq is small potatoes. Look at North Korea, Syria, Iran... And Bush is not stupid. Despite what you may have heard, we don't elect completely unqualified idiots to the most powerful single position in our government. Of course. We elect people on their acumen and political background. snort You ARE aware that the majority of Presidential elections since Bush/Dukakhis have been over-elaborate popularity contests, right? Not to say they don't make stupid decisions, but they're not stupid. Incoherent, perhaps. He's not the greatest public speaker in the world. The lady doth protest too much, methinks. -------------------- In a word, gay. --Bob the Impaler Posts: 2367 \| Registered: Friday, June 27 2003 07:00
Oracle Apprentice Member # 3643	written Sunday, November 16 2003 15:19 Profile #40 quote: Originally written by Saishuu Heiki Custer: [b]You can't tell right now, can you? The future is murky now because next year is an election year. Watch for the saber to start rattling again in 2005; Iraq is small potatoes. Look at North Korea, Syria, Iran... [/b] ...France, Canada, Brazil... Most of the attention if on Bush's Iraq policy and economic actions, but he's certainly butchered other issues as well. Let's not forget his No Child Left Behind Act, that certainly did a lot, especially considering he's in favor of vouchers, effectively leaving children behind. And his "Faith Based Initiatives"? Let's not forget how much previous "Faith Based Initiatives" have wound up. Look at Hawaii, or the Crusades. The country has regressed in so many ways, that the next administration will probably be plauged with remnants of this one. -------------------- Don't ask the Oracle unless you're willing to get the slurred drunken truth. Posts: 24 \| Registered: Monday, November 3 2003 08:00
Sound Effect Shock Trooper Member # 1723	written Sunday, November 16 2003 17:09 Profile #41 Alec/Custer, whichever you prefer to be called: 1. To each their own. 2. Granted 3. Granted 4. Not that Johnson was a bad president, but that Iraq hasn't been that bad of a war. 5. If we screw with North Korea, I'm gonna start living in a freakin hole in the ground. The others, maybe. But we're still a long ways from 200,00. 6. I have no idea what that means. BTW: That figure should have read 211,471 casualties, not deaths. My bad. [ Sunday, November 16, 2003 17:11: Message edited by: Aarrow Swift ] -------------------- "... and approximately one sea turtle." Posts: 277 \| Registered: Tuesday, August 13 2002 07:00
Stugri-La Guardian Member # 3521	written Sunday, November 16 2003 18:01 Profile #42 Alec had seven points, AS, not six. You missed the second to last point (if the last can be considered a point). -------------------- "Let a man find himself, in distinction from others, on top of two wheels with a chain- at least in a poor country like Russia- and his vanity begins to swell out like his tires. In America it takes an automobile to produce this effect."- Leon Trotsky Posts: 1798 \| Registered: Sunday, October 5 2003 07:00
Djur Revolutions Babelicious Member # 3149	written Sunday, November 16 2003 18:28 Profile Homepage #43 quote: Originally written by Aarrow Swift: BTW: That figure should have read 211,471 casualties, not deaths. My bad. Please don't forget foreign casualties. The "enemy" death toll of Bush's War has been about 20,000 so far, and rising. Iraqis and Afghanis are human beings too. Posts: 999 \| Registered: Friday, June 27 2003 07:00
Desert Pl@h Lifecrafter Member # 1768	written Sunday, November 16 2003 18:43 Profile #44 Why is it so easy to make someone look bad just by replying to each one of their arguments? It's very common (Alec) for one party (Alec) in a debate, to make the other seem so stupid, when in fact, the first party mentioned has few logical or rational arguments made (Alec). I see this all the time in debate. There's this girl in our league, who has these hypnotist powers. Not only is she beautiful, she gets up there and starts talking, and sounds sooo right. But when you think about what she just said, you realize that she sounds silly and wrong. -------------------- I want my Desert Plah back, (Drakey, check your PM's.) "Oh, North Wind, why frighten others? In Nature's family all are brothers. Puff and blow and wheeze and hiss; You can't frighten Shingebiss. Bring your frost and ice and snow; I'm still free to come and go. You can never frighten me, One who never fears is FREE!" -Shingebiss, the mighty duck Posts: 830 \| Registered: Tuesday, August 20 2002 07:00
Custer Bob's Big Date Member # 3151	written Sunday, November 16 2003 19:25 Profile Homepage #45 If you have a genuine issue with any one of my arguements, I would be glad to discuss it. Or if you just wanted to try and assassinate my character, that's fine too. ^_^ -------------------- In a word, gay. --Bob the Impaler Posts: 2367 \| Registered: Friday, June 27 2003 07:00
Custer Bob's Big Date Member # 3151	written Sunday, November 16 2003 19:45 Profile Homepage #46 Actually, on second thought, you know what? I made valid arguements in each of my responses. Choke on it. -------------------- In a word, gay. --Bob the Impaler Posts: 2367 \| Registered: Friday, June 27 2003 07:00
Djur Revolutions Babelicious Member # 3149	written Sunday, November 16 2003 20:06 Profile Homepage #47 Plah: Posts: 999 \| Registered: Friday, June 27 2003 07:00
The Immortal BANNED Member # 4	written Monday, November 17 2003 04:50 Profile Homepage #48 Try not to double-post, please. Other than that, Plah: -------------------- We're all amazed but not amused By all the things that you said you'd do. You're much concerned but not involved by Decisions that are made by you But we are sick and tired of hearing your song, Telling us how you are going to change right from wrong, 'Cause if you really want to hear our views, You haven't done nothin'. Posts: 6936 \| Registered: Tuesday, September 18 2001 07:00
Jame Warrior Member # 3694	written Monday, November 17 2003 05:23 Profile #49 New Member, votes for Democrat, only as a matter of convenience. If I could I'd form my own party and use it to conquer the world... -------------------- And that was exactly the point of itself. Takes advantage of the easily offended. Posts: 137 \| Registered: Monday, November 17 2003 08:00

Author	Topic: Republican, Democrat, etc.
Commodore Mango Agent Member # 1169	written Saturday, November 15 2003 09:02 Profile #25 Exactly. It's not "pointless" to criticize Bush while he's in office. All leaders need to be criticized if they make bad decisions, and Bush is practically the embodiment of bad decisions. If nobody criticized him, he'd keep on making bad decisions without any regard for what the American people really think--oh, wait. Never mind. I identify most with the Green Party, and I'll register to vote with them as soon as I'm 18. Until then, I don't count. I do really like the look of Howard Dean, even though I don't really identify with the Democrats. Is he officially in the running? [ Saturday, November 15, 2003 09:03: Message edited by: Commodore Mango ] -------------------- "Man hands down misery to man. It deepens like a coastal shelf. Get out as early as you can, and don't have any kids yourself."--Philip Larkin, "This Be the Verse" Fear the wrath of the Grammar Wench, lest ye be cut down by the Glistening Scythe. Posts: 1150 \| Registered: Friday, May 17 2002 07:00
Djur Revolutions Babelicious Member # 3149	written Saturday, November 15 2003 09:23 Profile Homepage #26 Howard Dean is a liar and a fraud. He waffles like a busy Denny's on the Iraq war, and he's claimed responsibility for bills he simply signed. The Democrats' best choice is Dennis Kucinich, who's basically similar to Dean in policy, except that he doesn't waffle and is more honest. Also, he's cute. :-p quote: Originally written by X: Perhaps Aarrow Swift could cite a WORSE president since 1900, or any example of Bush Jnr behaving at all bravely or intelligently. Go on - surprise me. Ronald Reagan, the Great Eliminator. [ Saturday, November 15, 2003 09:25: Message edited by: Conspiracy Duck ] Posts: 999 \| Registered: Friday, June 27 2003 07:00
Djur Revolutions Babelicious Member # 3149	written Saturday, November 15 2003 09:24 Profile Homepage #27 EDIT: Forgot I already posted. [ Saturday, November 15, 2003 09:25: Message edited by: Conspiracy Duck ] Posts: 999 \| Registered: Friday, June 27 2003 07:00
Commodore Mango Agent Member # 1169	written Saturday, November 15 2003 11:28 Profile #28 quote: Originally written by Conspiracy Duck: Howard Dean is a liar and a fraud. Oh, because Bush totally isn't. Well, we've got a year yet before Election Day. We'll see how the candidates turn out. -------------------- "Man hands down misery to man. It deepens like a coastal shelf. Get out as early as you can, and don't have any kids yourself."--Philip Larkin, "This Be the Verse" Fear the wrath of the Grammar Wench, lest ye be cut down by the Glistening Scythe. Posts: 1150 \| Registered: Friday, May 17 2002 07:00
Sound Effect Shock Trooper Member # 1723	written Saturday, November 15 2003 13:27 Profile #29 I never said it was pointless to be critical of his decisions, just that it's pointless to make personal attacks on him. It does good to be critical of how our politicians do their jobs, but making attacks on his character is pretty stupid. Oh, and all the examples of worse presidents than Bush I could come up with off the top of my head have already been taken. While we're on the subject of lying presidents, what about the one that lied under oath to the grand jury? What was his name again...? Clinton? -------------------- "... and approximately one sea turtle." Posts: 277 \| Registered: Tuesday, August 13 2002 07:00
Thuryl ...b10010b... Member # 869	written Saturday, November 15 2003 16:11 Profile Homepage #30 quote: Originally written by Aarrow Swift: I never said it was pointless to be critical of his decisions, just that it's pointless to make personal attacks on him. It does good to be critical of how our politicians do their jobs, but making attacks on his character is pretty stupid. I disagree. The President of the United States is more of a spokesperson and a representative than a politician; it's the job of his cabinet to make all the important decisions. As such, his personal character is not just important, it's the only thing about him that's important. As for Clinton's indiscretions, I hope you've noticed by now that you won't find many fans of Clinton here either. -------------------- I believe there are 15 747 724 136 275 002 577 105 653 961 181 555 468 044 717 914 527 116 709 366 231 425 076 185 631 031 296 protons in the universe, and the same number of electrons. -- Sir Arthur Eddington Posts: 9973 \| Registered: Saturday, March 30 2002 08:00
Jawaj Shock Trooper Member # 461	written Saturday, November 15 2003 17:10 Profile #31 Clinton and Bush disenchanted me with the American government. Both are horrible. I used to be republican because my parents are, but when I can vote I'll definitely be independent, although my views on issues lean slightly toward republican, I do not judge politicians by their party. You know, President Washington warned against political parties in his farewell speech. The fact is that many who are registered as Republicans or Democrats are blinded by party loyalty. I'd bet money that if Bush were a Democrat, most of the more critical congressmen/senators such as Tom Daschle would be right behind him, and Rush Limbaugh would be bashing the guy (Just for the record, I am against the Iraq war). A great book to read for anyone who likes politic(ian)s, hates politic(ian)s, or doesn't care about politic(ian)s - well, any American for that matter - is Dave Barry Hits Below the Beltway. It satirizes the government from a non-partisan point of view (he even rewrites the constitution), is absolutely hilarious, and even has a couple of good insights. [ Saturday, November 15, 2003 18:18: Message edited by: Jawaj ] -------------------- "If you held a weapon to Fwiffo's head, he would say anything you wanted him to. In fact, if you held a vegetable to Fwiffo's head, he'd say whatever you wanted him to." - Spathi high council, Star Control 2. Posts: 346 \| Registered: Sunday, December 30 2001 08:00
Custer Bob's Big Date Member # 3151	written Saturday, November 15 2003 18:56 Profile Homepage #32 I have reason to doubt that Dave Barry would write something non-partisan. I recall him being a passionate Libertarian. Particularly one of the "screw the poor" school -------------------- In a word, gay. --Bob the Impaler Posts: 2367 \| Registered: Friday, June 27 2003 07:00
Commodore Mango Agent Member # 1169	written Saturday, November 15 2003 20:09 Profile #33 Yeah, but it's still a funny-ass book. I find Al Franken's books and Ann Coulter's books equally hilarious. The sad thing is that Coulter isn't trying to be funny. -------------------- "Man hands down misery to man. It deepens like a coastal shelf. Get out as early as you can, and don't have any kids yourself."--Philip Larkin, "This Be the Verse" Fear the wrath of the Grammar Wench, lest ye be cut down by the Glistening Scythe. Posts: 1150 \| Registered: Friday, May 17 2002 07:00
Sound Effect Shock Trooper Member # 1723	written Saturday, November 15 2003 20:29 Profile #34 His character is important, but I still stand by my point that it's pointless to sit around and insult him personally when you don't know the guy. Those insults are either pretty unfounded, or founded on something pretty stupid. And I still think his policy decisions and stance on issues is more important than whether he likes it kinky with Barbara. (or whatever the case may be) EDIT: To elaborate on that a bit... He is a largely a spokesperson, (though lets not forget about the power to veto bills) but his stance on issues is more important than what kind of person he is. He represents the United States to the rest ot the world, and he represents the Federal Government to the population of the US. His character is less important than the policies he advocates. [ Saturday, November 15, 2003 20:39: Message edited by: Aarrow Swift ] -------------------- "... and approximately one sea turtle." Posts: 277 \| Registered: Tuesday, August 13 2002 07:00
The Immortal BANNED Member # 4	written Saturday, November 15 2003 22:23 Profile Homepage #35 I don't think you're exactly getting it. If I'm reading Thuryl correctly, then he's saying that Bush is a figurehead who isn't good at what he does. You're misreading the turing machine by thinking that he's stating how Bush is beyond that gate in the White House where the press are prohibited from passing. What Thuryl is saying; however, is that as a political office, the president's purpose is nothing more than that of a figurehead. If Bush is insuccessfuly being a figurehead, then he should by all means be lopped off. If the man makes a poor image of himself, then he really isn't worth having in office. (Apologies if this post is awkward or redundant- it's ~1:30 am, and I'm a far cry from being healthy.) -------------------- We're all amazed but not amused By all the things that you said you'd do. You're much concerned but not involved by Decisions that are made by you But we are sick and tired of hearing your song, Telling us how you are going to change right from wrong, 'Cause if you really want to hear our views, You haven't done nothin'. Posts: 6936 \| Registered: Tuesday, September 18 2001 07:00
Djur Revolutions Babelicious Member # 3149	written Saturday, November 15 2003 22:37 Profile Homepage #36 quote: Originally written by Saishuu Heiki Custer: I have reason to doubt that Dave Barry would write something non-partisan. I recall him being a passionate Libertarian. Particularly one of the "screw the poor" school Yeah, but he's softened over the years, and he's something of an equal-opportunity ass. He murdered Reagan when he was in office, but mostly for overspending :-p Posts: 999 \| Registered: Friday, June 27 2003 07:00
X Shaper Member # 496	written Sunday, November 16 2003 01:48 Profile #37 Good to see in this morning's 'Times' (whose editorial supports Bush) that over half the UK population think Bush is a "threat to world peace", and a third think him "stupid" and "incoherent". Less than 10% thought him intelligent or coherent. Reagan did better than this in the 1980s, despite being asleep half the time and gaga the rest. Not the sort of person I'd want representing MY country (though the smirking, amoral yuppy currently incumbent at #10 Downing Street is no great improvement, frankly). I remember when Clinton camer to Oxford to get his honorary degree--I guess he was too stoned or lazy to get a real one when he was a Rhodes scholar over here in the 1960s--I caused enough of a security fuss that he couldn't visit Blackwells bookshop, just over the road from the Sheldonian, where the 'degree' was being conferred. Most satisfying to think that as a result of the security fuss this time, Bush won't be able to go into the vast majority of London, his 'friendly' host city. BTW: I still haven't heard one brave or intelligent thing Bush has done. I'm priovisionally prepared to concede he might have been the worst US prez for 80 years, not 100, though the 'teapot dome' scandal wasn't that big a deal, was it? Posts: 2333 \| Registered: Monday, January 7 2002 08:00
Sound Effect Shock Trooper Member # 1723	written Sunday, November 16 2003 07:44 Profile #38 TM/Thuryl - Yeah, I think I understand what you're saying. It started to get away from my original point that making little unfounded insults against him does noone any good. And, the poor image of him that has been created isn't really all his fault. If he has no major bearing on decisions and his cabinet really does do everything, then they're the ones responsible for the war in Iraq, not Bush. They're ones responsible for the faultering (or growing) economy. It seems to me that most of why people say nasty things about him is because the economy isn't doing good or "no blood for oil" or something like that. His cabinet is responsible for these decisions, too. Thus, all these pithy insults against him shouldn't really be directed at him anyway. X - I suppose Vietnam was a cakewalk compared Iraq, right? 211,471 dead. I call that a pretty pointless war, with more than a few more dead than Iraq. When Bush has killed over 200,000 Americans, I might concede that he is a bad president. Until then, we've had worse. And Bush is not stupid. Despite what you may have heard, we don't elect completely unqualified idiots to the most powerful single position in our government. Not to say they don't make stupid decisions, but they're not stupid. Incoherent, perhaps. He's not the greatest public speaker in the world. EDIT: sspelin erorrz [ Sunday, November 16, 2003 07:46: Message edited by: Aarrow Swift ] -------------------- "... and approximately one sea turtle." Posts: 277 \| Registered: Tuesday, August 13 2002 07:00
Custer Bob's Big Date Member # 3151	written Sunday, November 16 2003 09:52 Profile Homepage #39 quote: Originally written by Aarrow Swift: TM/Thuryl - Yeah, I think I understand what you're saying. It started to get away from my original point that making little unfounded insults against him does noone any good. I agree, but for different reasons. I consider him genuinely evil... And, the poor image of him that has been created isn't really all his fault. If he has no major bearing on decisions and his cabinet really does do everything, then they're the ones responsible for the war in Iraq, not Bush. He was most certainly in favor of it, and has been its greatest spokesman so far, esp. abroad. They're ones responsible for the faultering (or growing) economy. It seems to me that most of why people say nasty things about him is because the economy isn't doing good or "no blood for oil" or something like that. His cabinet is responsible for these decisions, too. Thus, all these pithy insults against him shouldn't really be directed at him anyway. I have plenty of problems with Rumsfeld & co. I don't think anyone likes them, though, which is why Bush gets picked on. X - I suppose Vietnam was a cakewalk compared Iraq, right? 211,471 dead. I call that a pretty pointless war, with more than a few more dead than Iraq. When Bush has killed over 200,000 Americans, I might concede that he is a bad president. Are you implying Johnson was a bad president? He was merely acting on a commitment made by a previous one; his social programs did a LOT of good, even if Vietnam did happen. Also, your qualifiers for 'bad president' are far too low. I consider most Republicans since Harding to have been bad presidents. (Exceptions: Bush, who didn't behave too badly, and Ford, whose biggest act of mischief was pardoning Nixon.) If you care to demand an explanation, I'd be happy to break it down for you. Until then, we've had worse. You can't tell right now, can you? The future is murky now because next year is an election year. Watch for the saber to start rattling again in 2005; Iraq is small potatoes. Look at North Korea, Syria, Iran... And Bush is not stupid. Despite what you may have heard, we don't elect completely unqualified idiots to the most powerful single position in our government. Of course. We elect people on their acumen and political background. snort You ARE aware that the majority of Presidential elections since Bush/Dukakhis have been over-elaborate popularity contests, right? Not to say they don't make stupid decisions, but they're not stupid. Incoherent, perhaps. He's not the greatest public speaker in the world. The lady doth protest too much, methinks. -------------------- In a word, gay. --Bob the Impaler Posts: 2367 \| Registered: Friday, June 27 2003 07:00
Oracle Apprentice Member # 3643	written Sunday, November 16 2003 15:19 Profile #40 quote: Originally written by Saishuu Heiki Custer: [b]You can't tell right now, can you? The future is murky now because next year is an election year. Watch for the saber to start rattling again in 2005; Iraq is small potatoes. Look at North Korea, Syria, Iran... [/b] ...France, Canada, Brazil... Most of the attention if on Bush's Iraq policy and economic actions, but he's certainly butchered other issues as well. Let's not forget his No Child Left Behind Act, that certainly did a lot, especially considering he's in favor of vouchers, effectively leaving children behind. And his "Faith Based Initiatives"? Let's not forget how much previous "Faith Based Initiatives" have wound up. Look at Hawaii, or the Crusades. The country has regressed in so many ways, that the next administration will probably be plauged with remnants of this one. -------------------- Don't ask the Oracle unless you're willing to get the slurred drunken truth. Posts: 24 \| Registered: Monday, November 3 2003 08:00
Sound Effect Shock Trooper Member # 1723	written Sunday, November 16 2003 17:09 Profile #41 Alec/Custer, whichever you prefer to be called: 1. To each their own. 2. Granted 3. Granted 4. Not that Johnson was a bad president, but that Iraq hasn't been that bad of a war. 5. If we screw with North Korea, I'm gonna start living in a freakin hole in the ground. The others, maybe. But we're still a long ways from 200,00. 6. I have no idea what that means. BTW: That figure should have read 211,471 casualties, not deaths. My bad. [ Sunday, November 16, 2003 17:11: Message edited by: Aarrow Swift ] -------------------- "... and approximately one sea turtle." Posts: 277 \| Registered: Tuesday, August 13 2002 07:00
Stugri-La Guardian Member # 3521	written Sunday, November 16 2003 18:01 Profile #42 Alec had seven points, AS, not six. You missed the second to last point (if the last can be considered a point). -------------------- "Let a man find himself, in distinction from others, on top of two wheels with a chain- at least in a poor country like Russia- and his vanity begins to swell out like his tires. In America it takes an automobile to produce this effect."- Leon Trotsky Posts: 1798 \| Registered: Sunday, October 5 2003 07:00
Djur Revolutions Babelicious Member # 3149	written Sunday, November 16 2003 18:28 Profile Homepage #43 quote: Originally written by Aarrow Swift: BTW: That figure should have read 211,471 casualties, not deaths. My bad. Please don't forget foreign casualties. The "enemy" death toll of Bush's War has been about 20,000 so far, and rising. Iraqis and Afghanis are human beings too. Posts: 999 \| Registered: Friday, June 27 2003 07:00
Desert Pl@h Lifecrafter Member # 1768	written Sunday, November 16 2003 18:43 Profile #44 Why is it so easy to make someone look bad just by replying to each one of their arguments? It's very common (Alec) for one party (Alec) in a debate, to make the other seem so stupid, when in fact, the first party mentioned has few logical or rational arguments made (Alec). I see this all the time in debate. There's this girl in our league, who has these hypnotist powers. Not only is she beautiful, she gets up there and starts talking, and sounds sooo right. But when you think about what she just said, you realize that she sounds silly and wrong. -------------------- I want my Desert Plah back, (Drakey, check your PM's.) "Oh, North Wind, why frighten others? In Nature's family all are brothers. Puff and blow and wheeze and hiss; You can't frighten Shingebiss. Bring your frost and ice and snow; I'm still free to come and go. You can never frighten me, One who never fears is FREE!" -Shingebiss, the mighty duck Posts: 830 \| Registered: Tuesday, August 20 2002 07:00
Custer Bob's Big Date Member # 3151	written Sunday, November 16 2003 19:25 Profile Homepage #45 If you have a genuine issue with any one of my arguements, I would be glad to discuss it. Or if you just wanted to try and assassinate my character, that's fine too. ^_^ -------------------- In a word, gay. --Bob the Impaler Posts: 2367 \| Registered: Friday, June 27 2003 07:00
Custer Bob's Big Date Member # 3151	written Sunday, November 16 2003 19:45 Profile Homepage #46 Actually, on second thought, you know what? I made valid arguements in each of my responses. Choke on it. -------------------- In a word, gay. --Bob the Impaler Posts: 2367 \| Registered: Friday, June 27 2003 07:00
Djur Revolutions Babelicious Member # 3149	written Sunday, November 16 2003 20:06 Profile Homepage #47 Plah: Posts: 999 \| Registered: Friday, June 27 2003 07:00
The Immortal BANNED Member # 4	written Monday, November 17 2003 04:50 Profile Homepage #48 Try not to double-post, please. Other than that, Plah: -------------------- We're all amazed but not amused By all the things that you said you'd do. You're much concerned but not involved by Decisions that are made by you But we are sick and tired of hearing your song, Telling us how you are going to change right from wrong, 'Cause if you really want to hear our views, You haven't done nothin'. Posts: 6936 \| Registered: Tuesday, September 18 2001 07:00
Jame Warrior Member # 3694	written Monday, November 17 2003 05:23 Profile #49 New Member, votes for Democrat, only as a matter of convenience. If I could I'd form my own party and use it to conquer the world... -------------------- And that was exactly the point of itself. Takes advantage of the easily offended. Posts: 137 \| Registered: Monday, November 17 2003 08:00