Topic awaiting preservation: Bush in 30 seconds (Page 2 of 2)

Bush in 30 words:

quote:

---

It is clear our nation is reliant upon big foreign oil. More and more of our imports come from overseas.

---

George W Bush - Beaverton, Oregon, Sept 25, 2000

quote:

---

I know the human being and the fish can coexist peacefully.

---

George W Bush - Saginaw, Michigan, Sept 29, 2000

You have to respect this guy's insight... dontcha!

>edit - added url

[This message has been edited by Dufty (edited 01-09-2004).]

According to the IMF it looks like the massive US debt is shaping up to destroying the global economy:
www.guardian.co.uk/usa/story/0,12271,1118425,00.html

___________________
Emps

The Emperor dot org

quote:

---

Bugs: I think your bloody nuts!! You put your US economy over our god/nature given envioroment?.. and war as a solution to anything.. What would your god say about that I wonder? I have never met a Christian like you befor.

---

But you still love me just the same, right?

I am actually pleased when you say you've never met a Xian like me before because it means I've caused you to rethink what it means to be one. I find that there are multitudes of assumptions made about Xianity and so many of them are misconceptions. But then there are others that are firmly based in the actions and views of those who call themselves Xian and this attaches baggage to the name that does not belong. All I can do about that is point this out to people in hopes they can make the proper distinctions.

I believe the environment is very important. It's just that I don't believe it is as bad as you say. I am far more concerned about human evil in this world than I am about the internal combustion engine. I believe the former is a greater threat to humankind.

I did not say that war is the solution to anything. I have simply said that it is the solution to some things, which it absolutely is. If you have even the slightest grasp of human history, you will know this to be true. I never said it was pleasant and I never said that alternatives should not be sought, it is just necessary sometimes.

quote:

---

I am curious to know how you feel about the trillions of dollars of debt being built up and the poor state of the dollar?

---

Very upset!!! That is why I put that little jab in my earlier words about spending too much on education. This president is spending too much money!!! I do not have a problem spending lots of money on the war because that fulfills one of the basic functions of government, which is to protect its citizenry, but the increased spending on education, prescription drugs, and any other number of social programs is troublesome.

There is very little difference in this country between the Republicans and Democrats when it comes to spending I'm sorry to say. But even with this spending the burgeoning economy will be able to mitigate the debt, I believe. It worked that way in the 80s and I see no reason why it can't happen in the next few years.

Now I'm going to catch up with the rest of the thread and see if there's more to respond to.

. . : slicePuzzle

[This message has been edited by Bugimus (edited 01-09-2004).]

Bloody Nuts Bugs:

[quote]This president is spending too much money!!! I do not have a problem spending lots of money on the war because that fulfills one of the basic functions of government, which is to protect its citizenry, but the increased spending on education, prescription drugs, and any other number of social programs is troublesome.[quote]

LOL - I'd always rather more was spent on education and health and less on uneccesary wars

Also as excited as I am about the boost to the space programme I do worry if we really should be spending that right now

quote:

---

There is very little difference in this country between the Republicans and Democrats when it comes to spending I'm sorry to say.

---

I thought that C*****n fella left office with the budget in the black

___________________
Emps

The Emperor dot org

He did... thanks to the Republican win of Congress in '94 and the tech bubble

. . : slicePuzzle

I have to argue one of your points too Bugs:

quote:

---

/war/ is the solution to some things

---

I'd argue that it is merely a sulution.

As history has also shown us, it is written by the victors and no matter how unbiassed the intent, history will always carry a degree of propaganda along for the ride.

[edit - spelling]

[This message has been edited by Dufty (edited 01-09-2004).]

Dufty, I am seriously saying that sometimes it is *the* solution. I am not talking about a world in which none of us live but the real world. I can only agree with your point if we stipulate that every single human on the planet lives by values that would avoid the need for war. But then again, we are talking about the way things are as opposed to how we would wish them to be.

So please tell me how you would have stopped Hitler without the use of violence. Could it have been done?

. . : slicePuzzle

Bigamus, Metahuman, Ramasax, DL-44

Public confession:
I am wrong about you guys.. I have nothing against anyone.. I love everyone.. I am sorry for being an asshole sometimes.. and mistakenly targetting you guys..and for my often rash impulsive outburts when it's nothing to do with you at all. I am sorry. I am utterly powerless to change anything and it drives me insane. I need to rethink a few things..I don't hate Americans.. I had a ball in your country and met many beautiful people there. I am extremely disturbed and sad about the situation in the world..and the direction the big players are taking us.. it really gets to me and I can do nothing about it apart from just sit and watch and be sad and helpless.

I'm very sorry. Forgive me please.. that's not who I am.



[This message has been edited by Xpirex (edited 01-10-2004).]

Actually Bugs there's a significant difference with how Democrats and Republicans spend. The Democrats understand that taxes are neccessary evils to pay for their spending. ( not to mention ideologically at least the Republicans should be spending less than the Dems)



.:[ Never resist a perfect moment ]:.

quote:

---

So please tell me how you would have stopped Hitler without the use of violence.

---

By recognising the threat before it became a threat:

1933 Hitler is invited to become chancellor, in an attempt to control him and his 'National Socialist Party' - !
1935 Hitler declares Germany will no longer honour the Versailles peace treaty - !
1936 German troops march on the previousy demilitarized Rheinland - !
1938 Austria, Sudeten and Chechoslovakia are occupied - !
1939 German-Russian Non-Agression Pact signed - Poland invaded - TOO LATE!

Were it not for the endless beurocracy and cowardice of 'modern politics' (which a: enabled him to become chancellor and b: enabled him to amass an army of sheep, desparate to be led out of a depression), the war could have been averted peacefully before it even began.

As it is, the world reacted too late and millions of people needlessly died.

I'd argue that the same could be said of Iraq: If Saddam hadn't been groomed and deployed in the first place...

>edit: That said, maybe I am also guilty of being an idealist.
(according to those IQ testing type bods, my intellectual type is 'Visionary Philosopher').

[This message has been edited by Dufty (edited 01-10-2004).]

Xpirex, no worries! It's good to have you here in the mix. We take on some very upsetting topics and some of us just deal with them differently. I've lost my cool more than once around here... I just usually refrain from hitting that reply button until I've had a chance to consider my words after counting to 10

Bit, you're right that the Reps should be spending less, it really bothers me they're not. But the reason I say there is little difference is based on how much Bush *is* spending on stuff we don't have the money for... that's in line idealogically with the Dems and not the Reps. I want there to be a bigger difference between the two!

The way I see it is that the Dems traditionally raise taxes and have lots of government spending whereas the Reps prefer to lower taxes and let the increased revenue from that pay for the necessary programs. Both ways work in theory. I sometimes wonder though whether anyone, even the best economist, really understands how the economy works. I see it as an extremely inexact science.

Dufty, idealism is fine as long as you don't get us all killed putting it into practice But seriously, I agree with your timeline but let's assume the threat was fully recognized in 1933, or even sooner. How could you have avoided the probelms without violence? It would have required taking action against a sovereign nation's internal affairs. How do you get another country to do that without violence or at least some threat of violence in some other form of coercion.

Take Iraq as an example. Everyone here agrees that Hussein was a complete despot and not worthy of his role over the last 30 some years. But who put him in power? HE DID. Take a look at the history of his rise to power sometime and you will see no outside powers installed him. Outside powers most certainly interacted with him at varying degrees but without invading and forcing another outcome, his rise was inevitable. (DL-44, I am fully aware that the further history of cutting up the region after WWI and all played into this. I'm really not trying to erase that )

. . : slicePuzzle

Xpirex, what Bugimus said man. No hard feelings, after all, words are just words.

Dufty: I don't know if they "needlessly" died... However, considering that Bush, Jr. is essentially following in Hitler's footsteps by systematically eradicating "terrorists" (hint: you're not a terrorist if you are in your own country fighting invaders), limiting American Liberty through the passage of the Patriot acts (Patriot II was passed on the sly when Saddam was captured thus the largest manipulation of official investigative powers becomes a mere footnote in history), and slowly eliminating separation of Church (any religion not just Christianity) and State... I don't think it's possible for governments to learn from mistakes of the magnitude of Hitler's Holocaust.

[This message has been edited by metahuman (edited 01-11-2004).]

quote:

---

I just usually refrain from hitting that reply button until I've had a chance to consider my words after counting to 10

---

I use win98se, ie6, old bios, and the wonderfully inadequate 'Lucent v90+dsl WildWire Modem' connected to an old noisy telephone line. This combination keeps my posting in check most times. Should I get caught up in a 10 paragraph rant. My connection actually proofreads for ideological snafus and by the time I click reply my connection has already dropped.



______________
Is This Thing On?

Bleah...

metahuman When was Patriot 2 passed? What's your source?

apparently, it's not being called patriot act 2:

quote:

---

Wired News

The so-called Patriot Act II was discovered by the Center for Public Integrity last year, which exposed the draft legislation and initiated a public outcry that forced the government to back down on its plans.

But critics say the government didn't abandon its goals after the uproar; it simply extracted the most controversial provisions from Patriot Act II and slipped them surreptitiously into other bills, such as the Intelligence Authorization Act, to avoid raising alarm.

---

you can also wade through the House and the Senate sites for more info.
also, here's the link for The Center for Public Integrity.

[This message has been edited by Lacuna (edited 01-12-2004).]

quote:

---

So please tell me how you would have stopped Hitler without the use of violence.

---

This is easy. Never create a situation that allows a man like Hitler to come into power. It's widely accepted and understood that the harsh conditions imposed on Germany following WWI led to Hitler gaining power. Had the United States and its allies shown more understanding after WWI Hitler would have been stopped before he began, and without killing a single person.

Jestah

Ramasax wrote:

I don't agree with granting immunity to illegal aliens who steal our fucking jobs and should't be here in the first place. Break the law, get citizenship. Here is what needs done, stop giving lazy human trash welfare, and fill those immigrant jobs with Americans. Make them work, give them no other choice. If they refuse, kick em out or let them resort to crime and lock their asses up where they belong in the first place. Stop giving people rewards for being lazy mother fuckers.

I know this reply is way past the post, but I want to touch on it a bit more because of the Bush immigration reform. And also because I work with many immigrants who have permission to work in the US. And also know persons who work here illegally.

Here in Texas since we are right next to the Mexican border we have loads of immigrants who we hire because they are cheap labor. My company plant workforce is composed of predominatly hispanics going all the way to the tip of fartherest South American borders. If you want to put blame on who is taking your American jobs, blame it on the American companies and corporations who only look at profits. Not the welfare of the American citizen. It always about money. Also look at the large American corporations who have moved to Mexico because there labor is cheap. You cannot blame the Mexican citizen who wants a better life and future to look towards the USA where its a land of opportuntity for all like the immigrants who came before them from Europe. From what I have seen the concept the VIPS have is that these immigrants should be thankful they have a job and we can boot them out and someone else can always take their place for less money. And they don't complains as much as the American worker does too. They are intimidated. The amount of money they pay these workers is not enough to support a family unless they work overtime. Anglos do not want these jobs because the pay is too low. So these Hispanics are working the jobs that anglo Americans don't want. They are not stealing American jobs. We here should be grateful they want to do those jobs. Like freeway construction jobs, clean up, janitors, building construction jobs, restuarant help, food service, hotel maids & banquet help, landscaping. Mexican immigrants built my gunite pool and were supervised by Anglos. I bet the wage they paid them was very low. Most are excellent good hard workers who have the same ideals the born American has. Many begged the streets as youngsters and worked as young as seven years old and have had a very hard life compared to the born spoon fed anglo American. So, I think we should have a little more compassion for the immigrants. Unstead of blaming them, blame the American companies that seek to hire them only. The new home building industry is upset because they hire sub-conctractors, who hire illegal aliens to work on homes and after Bush reform they will loose money, whereas they should be prosecuted for hiring illegal workers. Plus many immigrants are abused and mistreated because of the threat of calling immigration if they complain. So they are also exploited by many US companies.

[This message has been edited by jade (edited 01-13-2004).]

[This message has been edited by jade (edited 01-13-2004).]

Rauthrin: This isn't the story I read somewhere, but it's similar.
With a whisper, not a bang

ACLU Fact Sheet on PATRIOT Act II

TalkLeft: September 10, 2003 / Bush to Announce 'Patriot Act II' Today

Well, if things get bad enough, perhaps we can have the American Revolution II, too, to overthrow our "evil" regime. By the way, I'm not a liberal, and I only recently found TalkLeft while searching for the source you requested. Unfortunately, the article that I did read has been removed from CNN.

Of course, if you want to find out how fuct our rights are getting... Elaine Cassel of Cassel's Civil Liberties Watch is pretty good with coverage: http://babelogue.citypages.com:8080/ecassel/

quote:

---

...removed from CNN...

---

Figures...

Damn you people and your leftist links!

quote:

---

http://www.aclu.org/SafeandFree/SafeandFree.cfm?ID=12234&c=206
Unprecedented power of the government to revoke American citizenship even of native-born Americans and detain them indefinitely

---

Do we have a resident right wing conservative who can confirm this?

______________
Is This Thing On?

Bleah...

I'm pretty close to that But I can neither confirm nor deny this information

My gut feeling on these is that Patriot I was justified but going much further should be opposed. There is a real danger of stepping on too many of our fundamental rights as citizens because of this war. Because it will be a very long war, the danger is even more real because the "frog in the kettle" effect is more likely to take effect.

Jestah, agreed. But your scenario is very far-fetched because governments rarely if ever have that much forsight. And even if the forsight is there, the public will is certainly not. So I want to know if it is possible *after* 1933. I also want to point out that the *primary* focus for his rise to power has to be put on the German people themselves. I totally agree that keeping Germany destitute after WWI was a mistake, one corrected after WWII mind you, but Hitler could never have assumed so much power if the citizenry hadn't played along in a big way.

. . : slicePuzzle

I think these "Patriot" laws need to be reigned in...

If not, I dont think I can conscientiously vote for those who think these are acceptable laws. As of right now, I myself have nothing to fear from these laws. However, I still dont think that much power should be given to any government. Even if Martial Law has been declared, these laws are inappropriate for a "free" democratic society.

The idea that a citizen can be stripped of their constitutional rights is apalling.




______________
Is This Thing On?

Bleah...

I've made the point previously that during every war we've had, certain rights have been curtailed. These rights have always been reinstated after the threat has been eliminated. The US has a decent track record in this regard. But that does not mean it is automatic!!! We have to be very vigilant to make sure we don't go too far and that these measures don't become permanent.

In theory, I agree with most of the Patriot Acts I/II. However, the main problem rests in the implementation of these acts. They will be misused and evidence of such misusage is already evidence. Pay attention to the news and you'll see. If a governmental agency decides to call you a terrorist, they will, and you will be charged as such.

It is a fool who thinks 9/11 can still be used to justify the misusage of these acts, the hassle of using the airports, and the toppling of Saddam Hussein's regime among many other things. The year is now 2004 not 2001.

A good time for words to be repeated

quote:

---

"Anyone who would trade their freedom for safety
deserves neither freedom or safety."

-Ben Franklin

---

______________
Is This Thing On?

Bleah...

metahuman, I don't think you should dismiss what happened on 9/11 so lightly. If we don't do anything to remove the threat that brought about 9/11, it will happen again. There is a balance that must be found between a free society and fighting against elements that want to remove that freedom. At this particular time in history we are faced with a foreign and very idealogically driven effort intent on destabilizing the society that provides the freedoms we all hold so dear. *Something* has to be done to stop that effort.

. . : slicePuzzle

quote:

---

...the society that provides the freedoms we all hold so dear.

---

At least the ones that we have remaining...

Someone's been brainwashed... and it's not me. *looks at Bugimus*

Bugs, the threat of foreign terrorists has always been there. It's nothing new. It's just that the majority of the American public were completely oblivious to it all. Am I dismissing 9/11? NO! I am simply saying that 9/11 should no longer be used as an excuse for the Bush Administration to fuck up our country.

By the way, it's one thing to actually fight the "war" on anti-American terrorism. It's another to simply state your support.

I'm not sure what brainwashing has to do with this.

I agree the threat has been there for some time and I think the American public was intentionally oblivious because as long as it happened "over there" it wasn't important. I think that was pretty sad actually. The magnitude of the 9/11 attacks were predicted for decades and we just didn't want to do anything about it.

I think it's silly to say that 9/11 is being used as an excuse to f*ck up the country. First of all, it's not being f*cked up. We, as a people, are dealing with the situation and it's evolving all the time. We were hit very hard and, yes, it woke people up and now they want things done to "protect" them. I want things done that will eliminate terrorism on a global level. I do not see myself as someone concerned only with my own personal safety wanting to live a fat unengaged indifferent American consumerist life. I see this as a defining period of history, such that will effect foreign affairs and cultural directions for generations to come.

I have stated several times before in threads concerning this issue that it is easy to criticize current policy. It is. And it is important that current policies are criticized and scrutinized, I acknowledge that completely. What I do object to, however, is people simply using 9/11 as an excuse, to borrow your analogy, to piss on an administration they never liked in the first place. Are you one of those people? Or do you have a better plan for how to deal with the terror threat? I'm certainly open to hearing and considering its merits.

On a final note, I honestly don't understand what you mean by

quote:

---

By the way, it's one thing to actually fight the "war" on anti-American terrorism. It's another to simply state your support.

---

. . : slicePuzzle

quote:

---

Jestah, agreed. But your scenario is very far-fetched because governments rarely if ever have that much forsight. And even if the forsight is there, the public will is certainly not. So I want to know if it is possible *after* 1933. I also want to point out that the *primary* focus for his rise to power has to be put on the German people themselves. I totally agree that keeping Germany destitute after WWI was a mistake, one corrected after WWII mind you, but Hitler could never have assumed so much power if the citizenry hadn't played along in a big way.

---

When countries have fallen into the levels of poverty and chaos Germany fell into following WWI, radical governments usually emerged. Surely those involved in punishing Germany studied history. It certainly was avoidable the problem was, much like today, most leaders thought with their dicks and not their brains.

Jestah

Like Maggie Thatcher and Golda Meir? LOL!!!

. . : slicePuzzle

quote:

---

I think it's silly to say that 9/11 is being used as an excuse to f*ck up the country.

---

It's silly to say what you just said.

quote:

---

First of all, it's not being f*cked up.

---

False. If you would pay attention to history since the Civil War as well as current events, you wouldn't need someone to explain why you are wrong.

quote:

---

What I do object to, however, is people simply using 9/11 as an excuse, to borrow your analogy, to piss on an administration they never liked in the first place. Are you one of those people? Or do you have a better plan for how to deal with the terror threat? I'm certainly open to hearing and considering its merits.

---

I supported the Bush Administration for the first 2 years of its establishment, supported the invasion of Afghanistan, supported the 2nd Gulf War, and the sham called the "War on Terrorism." It was only after the major news coverage of the 2nd Gulf War that I ceased my mental support of the Bush Administration. So no, I liked this administration initially, however, after realizing my error I did more research, consulted more political scientists, and others, and then changed my position. This administration sucks and you're getting fucked whether you want to realize it or not.

As for having a plan, well, whether I do or do not is irrelevant. The same is true for you and most likely the rest of the Asylumites here.

By the way, to "support the troops" is a practically meaningless phrase unless you're in D.C. trying to get Congress to force the troops back home. Obviously, you can't "agree with the troops" as "I support the initiative, etc." typically means. So what you're really saying is "I sure wish the troops would make it home safely." Of course, with the recent scientific study on prayer, prayer is ineffective. Wishful thinking is not going to help our soldiers--soldiers who are very likely to die tomorrow. After all, an American soldier dies everyday in Iraq.

I see, you mean armchair generals as opposed to actual soldiers getting shot at. Yes, I agree on that. We've already agreed that all our discussions here have no direct bearing on the course of world events.

But not having an alternate plan is problematic. It is because if the Dems in this country could get their sh*t in one sock and have a plan, then they would have a chance of actually winning the next election. If the only plan is actually a non-plan based in saying the current plan is no plan, that is not going to win over very many hearts and minds.

I have never stated that I agree with everything this administration is doing. What I have said is that I agree with the basic direction they are taking us. Regarding Iraq, I have wanted us to do something about that before I knew Bush was even going to be a candidate.

I think one of the differences between our opinions on this is that you don't like the fact that governments use half truths, propoganda, shady tactics, basically which all fall under the heading of "politics" to achieve things. It's not pretty, in fact, it stinks to high heaven but it's the best we've got. I've come to terms with that reality. I also recognize it is a "cultural tool". This is how we've decided to do things in the western world and until we have a major cultural transformation (read not gonna happen real soon) this is how it's going to be done.

. . : slicePuzzle

Right... do you realize the U.S. has invaded more countries than all of the countries in the world combined? We're the aggressors. We're invaders. We're not peacekeepers.

That's the problem with humanitarianism. There is no good reason to do things for humanitarian reasons when it does not benefit our group--the United States of America. Humanitarianism as a foreign policy does not work. The humanitarians would have us invade and takeover the world to "make things right" according to their standards of morality.

The best quote to come out of Iraq was from an Iraqi man: "Under Saddam, I had food, but no freedom of speech. Under Bush, I have freedom of speech, but no food... I like food."

quote:

---

Right... do you realize the U.S. has invaded more countries than all of the countries in the world combined

---

Care to share where you pulled that statistic from? Or are we just talking the last 2 years of history?

We are part of the world community and we must make judgement calls as to when to intervene in the affairs of others. I am not comfortable generalizing to the degree you just did. I think we should evaluate each case on its own merits.

Balkans: We acted unilaterally without UN approval to prevent a Muslim population from being "ethnically cleansed" by a Xian population.

Iraq: We acted unilaterally without UN approval to prevent a secular dictator from destabilizing a region that is key to the world's primary energy source and in turn establish a dominoe in hopes of toppling it later to gain an upper hand in the GWOT (I really love that acronym!!!)

Somalia, Vietnam, Korea, Grenada, etc. we could go on and on. Which could be cool but I'm getting tired.

That quote from the Iraqi man is pretty sad. I want him to have food, of course, but Iraq is infinitely better off now than it was under Hussein. They now have hope for a real future. The polls taken there so far show that they are for the most part grateful for this new day and they are beginning to realize that it was a lie to say that we were there to take over. And now that they are coming to that realization they want us to stay until they can adequately quell the remnants of the former regime and protect their borders from the probable influx of foreign fighters.

[edit] typos

. . : slicePuzzle

[This message has been edited by Bugimus (edited 01-18-2004).]

quote:

---

Iraq is infinitely better off now than it was under Hussein.

---

True, but can the same be said for America? The Patriot Act took a lot away, Patriot Act II has gone underground so to speak... Now, instead of being able to see the ass fucking in one tidy document, we have to scan 100 + bills just to spot the pieces of this dildo.

When all is said and done, the authorities will have an arsenal of laws to subjugate, corral, and silence law abiding citizens... well, they will be citizens until Ashcroft, or whoever else happens to be in charge, decides otherwise. This is what the Framers of the Constitution were trying to avoid.

It is going to take many years, millions of dollars, and many innocent incarcerated citizens, to ferret out all the damage done to our constitution and restore American Freedoms.

This means I will personally have to move my loyalties more towards the left in order to vote the appropriate people into office. I dont imagine any republicans will stand up and oppose Bushes "Patriot Laws". It's a bunch of Orwellian doublespeak. I'm actually pissed. I respected the republican business model... But now... Screw it. It isnt worth all the tea in China if I cant speak my mind without fear of the Sparklett's guy reporting me to the local "Homeland Security Office"(AKA: Rape Freedom Office).

... hmpf, there's more..., but, I'd rather tweak my registry than think about it right now.



______________
Is This Thing On?

Bleah...

I'm getting the sense you're a bit upset Let's say you did move to the left in protest, would you vote for one of the current Democrat candidates? I've been following their progress lately and I must say, I'm glad I'm not a Dem this election year. The prospects are so grim it would almost drive one to despair. It's not quite as bad as 1996 for the Reps with Dole, but dang close.

. . : slicePuzzle

I cant see myself voting for any of them... But I may take another look at the Libertarian Party. http://www.lp.org/

And this guy says he will actively work to REPEAL the "Patriot Act". http://www.lp.org/lpnews/0402/aaronrusso_prez.html




______________
Is This Thing On?

Bleah...