Future of Politics

[mindido]

Supa,

"I think his point was that they're all corrupt, Dems and Reps."

I agree that they are mostly all corrupt (I'm sure there are a couple that aren't) but still, does that make it right? And aren't we all fools for supporting such a corrupt system?

"But the Dems seem to forget that when there's a Republican in office."

And Reps. aren't exactly the same?

 

[Supafly]

Supa,

"I think his point was that they're all corrupt, Dems and Reps."

I agree that they are mostly all corrupt (I'm sure there are a couple that aren't) but still, does that make it right? And aren't we all fools for supporting such a corrupt system?

"But the Dems seem to forget that when there's a Republican in office."

And Reps. aren't exactly the same?

Yes we are and of coarse they are. I was seriously disgusted by the Clinton BJ deal. Not because of the fact that some intern blew him. But because of the fact it was made out to be such a big deal.

But the dems have been reaching lately. Every time I log on someone's posted something to the effect "Damn, Bush and the Christian Right eat all the macoroni and cheese in my moms house." It's just childesh.

If you wanna blame the system then blame the system. But nothing gets done without both parties. And I'll let you liberals in on something. Your one of those parties.

 

[Iceberg]

Yeah and ABC did and interview with Bin Laden, yet Bill Clinton was unable to locate him. Then when he got lucky, he failed to pull the trigger.

Well, there was little evidence of bin Laden's involvement in previous terror attacks than there was about the 9-11 attacks.

After such a horrific attack (9-11), you'd think the government would do anything in its power to track down and arrest/kill the guy. However, after three months, Bush said basically that he wasn't worried about bin Laden and thought he was no longer a threat.

AFTER 9-11, BUSH SAID THIS!!! This is a failure of leadership and a failure to protect the nation's citizenship to the n'th degree! No other President has been so negligent!

Clinton can be excused for not tracking down bin Laden because of congressional Republicans' obstructionist tactics. These Republicans thought Clinton's hunt of bin Laden was a diversion from the Lewinsky affair and not an effort to protect Americans.

Now which party and which President is soft on terrorism? Certainly not the Democrats nor Clinton!

 

[Texan]

How many attacks on Americans were made during Clintons administration? Yup thats right 5.

What did clinton do, he had Morris take polls. Then he fired a couple of missles.

 

[mindido]

Supa,

"Not because of the fact that some intern blew him. But because of the fact it was made out to be such a big deal."

I would agree with you on this 100%. The Reps. spent, what? Over $50 million to get him on a BJ? He shouldn't have lied about it, but you can't tell me that 9 out of 10 men, in basically the same position, wouldn't do the same darn thing.

"But the dems have been reaching lately. Every time I log on someone's posted something to the effect "Damn, Bush and the Christian Right eat all the macoroni and cheese in my moms house." It's just childesh."

The Reps as well, there is no longer a difference.

"Your one of those parties."

Supa, I'm an Independent and have been for years. The last election was the first in I don't know how long that I've voted for anyone from the major parties. And the only reason I did it this last time was because of what gw did to John McCain. The first that I remember was John Anderson, way back when. So no, I'm not one of those parties.

 

[mindido]

Tex,

So if we know where Bin Laden is now, why aren't we going after him?

 

[Texan]

We are going after him. From what I have been told from some of my friends involved in the search, is that we are about one day behind him.

 

[mindido]

Well, I guess time will tell. I wonder if Pres. Musharraf has been informed as he seemed to wonder what Goss was talking about. I seem to remember a couple of days ago Musharraf asking for the data.

 

[Iceberg]

God help us all! Sandra Day O'Connor has resigned. Now Bush can make a SCOTUS nomination. Good Lord, now the US is really doomed.

 

[cableguy]

yep, President Bush will appoint a replacement to a nominee of President Reagan... people, please stop panicing over this... it is simply a one for one trade... same if rhenquist retires... its the 5 that voted against private property rights that should be of a concern to us... actually, those upholding mccain/feingold as well... oconnor was one of those... perhaps her successor will be better able to read and comprehend the Constitution...

 

[Iceberg]

perhaps her successor will be better able to read and comprehend the Constitution...

I hope so, so they can call the Patriot Act unconstitutional and strike it down. Also, I hope the nominee will uphold Roe v. Wade, which is an entirely necessary part of the legal system.

I also hope so because the ruling on Gore v. Bush was unconstitutional because recounts are required if the vote differential is less than a specific percentage apart. O'Connor chose to vote in favour of Bush, which was absolutely unjust and unfair.

The nominee also better uphold the constitution and allow those who were disqualified to vote in 2000 "because their names were similar to those who were on an invalid list." This was most foul.

 

[Texan]

I hope so, so they can call the Patriot Act unconstitutional and strike it down. Also, I hope the nominee will uphold Roe v. Wade, which is an entirely necessary part of the legal system.

I also hope so because the ruling on Gore v. Bush was unconstitutional because recounts are required if the vote differential is less than a specific percentage apart. O'Connor chose to vote in favour of Bush, which was absolutely unjust and unfair.

The nominee also better uphold the constitution and allow those who were disqualified to vote in 2000 "because their names were similar to those who were on an invalid list." This was most foul.

Your facts are wrong, the only fact is your dislike for America.

 

[Supafly]

God help us all! Sandra Day O'Connor has resigned. Now Bush can make a SCOTUS nomination. Good Lord, now the US is really doomed.

Just a reminder.............................you live in Canada.

 

[Iceberg]

Your facts are wrong, the only fact is your dislike for America.

Wrong. I do not dislike America. I do dislike the current American government. I quite liked the Clinton Administration, though.

I generally like the Democrats and some moderate Republicans (like John McCain). I like a lot of American citizens and think they are kind and gentle people. I dislike the extremists in the US (the Christian Right and the Neo-Conservatives).

Just a reminder.............................you live in Canada.

Yes, but a lot of things that the US government (including the courts) decides to do affects the world, especially Canada, since we are next-door-neighbours. Cases in point, the cattle ban that is causing farmers in Canada to lose much-needed income, the illegal softwood lumber tariffs which hurt Canadian industry, and failing to act on climate change (which will put the entire world in peril).

 

[Duke E. Pyle]

Just a reminder.............................you live in Canada.

bahahahahahaaaa!!!

On another note....do you believe this muthafucker fell off his bike once again!!!!!!! You know this guy is starting to piss me off. If it happens once more then i will personally start a petition against it. This bike shit has got to stop. http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20050706/ap_on_re_eu/g_8_bush_bike_accident

 

[moxdevil]

What do you expect, they shouldn't let special needs people operate transport other than wheel-chairs, for their own and others safety.

 

[Ankit Pande]

Politics

Yesterday i was reading foreign views about USA and while reading i came across a weird but good question ...

"Since America is the most powerful nation in the world, and the president holding the most powerful office in the world makes decisions with its people and congress decisions that affect the world; shouldn't the world be allowed to vote in the US elections?"

expect your replies to be .. :bah:

 

[cableguy]

ankit, you want a vote, become a citizen... we became great on our own, perhaps those other nations might want to try some of what has worked here... if they exclude the crap bogging us down now, which runs counter to the charter of this nation, those nations might actually do better and become powerful themselves... until then, i wish they would stop whining...

iceberg, the patriot act, though flawed, is mostly legit... the parts that arent need to go, and go fast... roe v wade should have never happened... nowhere in the Constitution is any right to privacy, and at most, this should be a states issue, NOT a federal one...

President Bush won florida no matter how, or who, counted the ballots... all of the news networks DEMANDED access to the ballots so they could see for themselves... funny, there wasnt any follow up to that story, BECAUSE THE CORRECT CALL WAS MADE... there simply was no way to count them and end up with gore as a winner... also, you have grossly misstated the case itself, which the florida court actually acted ILLEGALLY...

disenfranchisement is a popular word for libs... oddly, for as much as it is alleged to have happened, there has yet to be a single name attached to the charge... i call bullshit on that one altogether... oh, and why, pray tell, did your friends on the left insist that military absentee ballots NOT be counted AT ALL?? there is an interesting question that the mainstream media also conveniently didnt ask...

 

[Iceberg]

Two sites for the same item in the "Fire Rove" campaign:

http://dccc.org/rove_small.wmv

http://www.democraticaction.org/firerove/?source=d3cfull

 

[cableguy]

fun thing, this... once again, it is the seriousness of the charge that is given the emphasis, not the facts... it seems that this story is rather boring, and that mr rove broke no laws... one wonders why, after the mysterious source gave the times reporter a a waiver for disclosure, the reporter is still in jail... is there another source??? who is the second source, and why is the nytimes protecting said source??

rove is still clean, and as such, there is no reason whatsoever for any disciplinary action, much less dismissal... i guess effectiveness is a crime when the individual is a conservative... senators kerry and kennedy are guilty of naming names of ACTIVE covert ops in public committee hearings... where, i ask, is the outrage from the left over this illegal disclosure, when there is such a shitstorm over one that broke no laws, and risked no repercussions??