I don't know too much about politics, but it seems to me (well, people tell me) that Republicans only want to hoard their own money and act "patriotic." If somebody would please validate or bash this impression of mine, I'd be most grateful.

P.S. I'm trying to develop an unbiased perspective here. Feel free to attack democrats while you're at it.

*sigh*

http://www.bloomington.in.us/~bbbs/images/worms.jpg

:m: Peace.

Oh... it all becomes clear now...

While that statement wasn't the most tactful I've seen, it is not entirely untrue. I'm a professed Democrat, but I'll see if I can't come up with a somewhat objective explanation.

Let's start with "hoarding." The general thought behind this view is that "It's my money. I earned it. I should spend it as I see fit." By extension, Republicans favor lower taxes (less out of their paycheck) and lower spending on social programs (less things to spend taxes on).

On to the patriotism topic, which is a little less straightforward. Republicans are generally in favor of spending on defense. Furthermore, the miltary is a facet of, and therefore represents, the US - much in the way the Olympic team does. Thus, an inferred connection begins. Support of Defense spending=support of troops=support of the US=patriotism.

This, of course, is not a foolproof series of connections. That, and the word patriotism itself is hard for the layman to define. Add to this that the common opinion is that the Republicans are generally more reliable on matters of national security, being advocates of defense spending. What you find is a useful PR tool. It doesn't take much to capitalize on an image which the public can easily make on its own.

I haven't yet posted much on this thread. But I just got angry and posted elsewhere with a rant. I'd like to reproduce it here. My rant was in response to a post that defended Bush, defended the banner on the aircraft carrier, and thought that Hollywood was much more of a threat than the goodness represented by Enron, Halliburton, and Exxon Mobile. My rant:


Yes, the tools of 20th century world affairs and politics have certainly worked well, haven't they? Downtown Manhatten in ruins, the Middle East as messed up, if not more, than ever, more people in hunger and poverty than ever world wide, the gap between rich and poor growing rapidly in this country, and your point is what, exactly?

Spare me your niave opinions about the democrats and hollywood that Fox News prepared for you. What exactly is the big EVIL that Hollywood has in store for you? Is it along the same lines as Enron under the leadership of Kenny-Boy Lay, convincing legislators to "de-regulate" power so that billions (THAT's BILLIONS) can be transferred from the pockets of people like you into their coffers? Could Hollywood offer something so insidious as to have a corporate executive promote and push a war in the middle east, while maintaining that it's just coinicidence that his former company, (from which he has received over a million dollars in deferred compensation since becoming vice-president)has received 2,700 of the 3000 reconstruction contracts in IRaq? Is Hollywood out there, in the evil guise of people like Barbra Striesand, ready to read your emails and check on your bank account activity, and monitor which web pages you visit?

So now let's talk about this terror network you so scared of. There is no domestic terror risk to you mathematically. Exactly how many Americans died in the 9/11 attacks? While the deaths of nearly 3000 innocents is nothing to disregard, people are dying in far greater numbers in car accidents every month, as Pablo points out to me in gun control debates.

So who did attack us anyway? Well, it appears that a Saudi Billionare did. Given that, what reasonable steps should be taken to minimize the reocurrence of such events? Because isn't that the point of the so-called "war on terrorism", really? To make Americans safer, and less likely to be victims of another such attack? It would seem that gathering every bit of information we can about this billionaire and any other connections he has in this country. And yet the war on terrorism president allowed a private Saudi jet to fly around the U.S. in the days after September 11th and pick up members of the bin Laden family and then fly them out of the country without a proper investigation by the FBI. Why was that anyway? What would you have thought of that had President Clinton allowed such a thing?

I have had posts on this board, that brought up the issue of Bush family ties to the Bin Laden family, and other Saudi billionaires, scoffed at, as though these questions shouldn't be asked. They are just "Bush Bashing", as though this administration should be give a free pass on such things, while Clinton's sex life was much more relevant to the national debate. Why? Does some Bush-coddler here want to explain why we should'nt even ask these questions? Funny how the 9.11 commission now has to actually subpoena documents from the White House regarding September 11. Should we not wonder why that is? Because you kinda like him? He's your guy? Tell me something, Debra. Which business associate of George Bush's convinces you that he's such a great guy, so worthy of your respect and undying protectiveness? The Bin Ladens, or Ken Lay? Yes, that questions Bush's character. I will do it openly; I think he's a dishonorable man, a liar, and a destroyer of American democracy. And his past, his business assocations and policies are relevant matters for examination on the issue of his character and actions. What seems to bug you and others here is that it is actually possible to document Bush's malfeasance, and the best you can come up with in defense, given the lack of defenses, is to simply label critics Bush-basher. Funny how much time is spent here defending such obviously stupid, self-interest based actions by this administration. They've even got people posting simpering articles for them about such absurdities as "Halliburtons Mission".

So this war on terror. A Saudi Billionaire destroys downtown Manhatten, we ignore his ties to the current American administration because. . . . because. . . . does someone have a good answer for that? Well, we know that in addition to being rich, this guy doesn't like the presence of American forces and influence in his home culture. He also clearly understands how to maximize his own power by influencing large masses of uneducated, deeply religious Islamics who are also resentful of the rich dynasties that horde the wealth of their lands, while they live in poverty. Just thinking about it suggests some pragmatic approaches to reducing the conditions that breed terrorists.

But no, you're telling me to "wake up" and support what, the answer that the geniuses in the White House came up with? To cynically use the nations fear of terrorists to bring their plans for an oil war back to life; finally a good excuse they can propose to all the little, stupid people out there who support them, and for whom they care not. The answer to the complex, yet understandable question to terrorism lies in. . . . . . attacking Iraq? Well, of course not. I've yet to see one viable defense of this war, really. But by saying "mushroom cloud" and "do you want another 9/11", and talking about Saddam and 9/11 often enough, these liars convinced you, and many others, that sending thousands of American troops INTO ISLAMIC SOIL was the answer. To occupy an Arab country. Oh yes, that will calm them down. No matter though, since the worlds second largest oil fields are there. So our sons and daughters can be sacrified for this "war on terrorism". And our national economic treasure; I see that Bush is still fighting to make that $87 billion a grant, not a loan. Thanks, George! When will the Medicaid that pays for my son's kidney dialysis dry up? When will the education funds that will eventually turn him into a tax payer dry up?

I have no doubt you're a nice person, and well intentioned. But there are so many on this board who defend this administration for no articulable reasons whatsover. You seem to just like him. I regard that has irresponsible and not the result of careful thought. And if we actually regard ourselves as viable participants in Republican Democracy, then we owe ourselves and our republic careful thought about these issues.

Every nation will have it's haves and have-nots. Each will have those who rule, and those who will not. Regardless of governmental form, really, in the end, a tiny minority will rule. The temptations of arrogance, of power, of self-delusion are too great for us to simply assume they are acting in our best interest. The ruling elite will work to support the power structures and institutions that placed them in power. They, and those institutions have every reason to increase their power and their hold over economies. It is illogical to think otherwise, and unsupportable. We can see the institutions that supported these people and brought them to power. We can see that their actions are consistent with support of those institutions. This isn't rocket science. All things, and all administrations are NOT equal, and these people are in fact dangerous, whether anyone wants to put a Bush Cheney flag in their yard or not.

Yes, there is a lot of waking up to do, all right.

[QUOTE]Originally posted by Ives

Yes, the tools of 20th century world affairs and politics have certainly worked well, haven't they? Downtown Manhatten in ruins,

Well, I don't know about Manhatten, but I know that Manhattan is alive and well with capitalism.


the Middle East as messed up, if not more, than ever,

Well, what do you expect when you concentrate a bunch of zealous jihad-ers in one place? :rolleyes:


more people in hunger and poverty than ever world wide,

The only person who can stop that is the people who are actually hungry and poor and immoral.

the gap between rich and poor growing rapidly in this country, and your point is what, exactly?

There will always be rich people and poor people, of course. But that too is controlled by the poor and immoral.

Spare me your niave opinions about the democrats and hollywood that Fox News prepared for you.

Well, my opinions may be naive but they're not niave.


What exactly is the big EVIL that Hollywood has in store for you?

Nothing. The purpose of hollywood is entertainment.

Is it along the same lines as Enron under the leadership of Kenny-Boy Lay, convincing legislators to "de-regulate" power so that billions (THAT's BILLIONS) can be transferred from the pockets of people like you into their coffers?

Hey, if it works, you have to give Kenneth Lay some credit for pulling it off.



Could Hollywood offer something so insidious as to have a corporate executive promote and push a war in the middle east, while maintaining that it's just coinicidence that his former company, (from which he has received over a million dollars in deferred compensation since becoming vice-president)has received 2,700 of the 3000 reconstruction contracts in IRaq? Is Hollywood out there, in the evil guise of people like Barbra Striesand, ready to read your emails and check on your bank account activity, and monitor which web pages you visit?

Well, those contracts you spoke of--we cannot complain, if we were in the position to choose who gets them, I'm sure at least I would give it to the most loyal company to me.

So now let's talk about this terror network you so scared of. There is no domestic terror risk to you mathematically. Exactly how many Americans died in the 9/11 attacks? While the deaths of nearly 3000 innocents is nothing to disregard, people are dying in far greater numbers in car accidents every month, as Pablo points out to me in gun control debates.

How often do terrorists hijack cars to cause accidents?


So who did attack us anyway? Well, it appears that a Saudi Billionare did. Given that, what reasonable steps should be taken to minimize the reocurrence of such events? Because isn't that the point of the so-called "war on terrorism", really? To make Americans safer, and less likely to be victims of another such attack? It would seem that gathering every bit of information we can about this billionaire and any other connections he has in this country. And yet the war on terrorism president allowed a private Saudi jet to fly around the U.S. in the days after September 11th and pick up members of the bin Laden family and then fly them out of the country without a proper investigation by the FBI. Why was that anyway? What would you have thought of that had President Clinton allowed such a thing?

That's irrelevant; we were attacked by terrorists and 3000+ lost their lives.

I have had posts on this board, that brought up the issue of Bush family ties to the Bin Laden family, and other Saudi billionaires, scoffed at, as though these questions shouldn't be asked. They are just "Bush Bashing", as though this administration should be give a free pass on such things, while Clinton's sex life was much more relevant to the national debate. Why? Does some Bush-coddler here want to explain why we should'nt even ask these questions? Funny how the 9.11 commission now has to actually subpoena documents from the White House regarding September 11. Should we not wonder why that is? Because you kinda like him? He's your guy? Tell me something, Debra. Which business associate of George Bush's convinces you that he's such a great guy, so worthy of your respect and undying protectiveness?

Well man, just don't Bush bash then. The Clinton administration broke 20+ major laws anyway, with nothing to do with Monica.

The Bin Ladens, or Ken Lay?

That's just sleazy.

Yes, that questions Bush's character. I will do it openly; I think he's a dishonorable man, a liar, and a destroyer of American democracy.

As a bleeding heart liberal, you are entitled to that opinion.



And his past, his business assocations and policies are relevant matters for examination on the issue of his character and actions.

..

What seems to bug you and others here is that it is actually possible to document Bush's malfeasance, and the best you can come up with in defense, given the lack of defenses, is to simply label critics Bush-basher. Funny how much time is spent here defending such

...

obviously stupid, self-interest based actions

Why do you breathe? Why do you eat food? Why do have a job? (assuming, of course, that if you hold your anti-capitalist sentiments so deeply, you would be against joining the working world)

by this administration. They've even got people posting simpering articles for them about such absurdities as "Halliburtons Mission".

...

So this war on terror. A Saudi Billionaire destroys downtown Manhatten, we ignore his ties to the current American administration because. . . . because. . . . does someone have a good answer for that? Well, we know that in addition to being rich, this guy doesn't like the presence of American forces and influence in his home culture. He also clearly understands how to maximize his own power by influencing large masses of uneducated, deeply religious Islamics who are also resentful of the rich dynasties that horde the wealth of their lands, while they live in poverty. Just thinking about it suggests some pragmatic approaches to reducing the conditions that breed terrorists.

..Reducing the conditions that breed terrorists is the point of the war on terrorism.

But no, you're telling me to "wake up" and support what, the answer that the geniuses in the White House came up with? To cynically use the nations fear of terrorists to bring their plans for an oil war back to life;

The war is not about oil, fool. The war was about bringing democracy to an oppressed people. Isnt that what you stand for as a liberal?

finally a good excuse they can propose to all the little, stupid people out there who support them, and for whom they care not.

Obviously the don't care, and they really shouldn't care.

The answer to the complex, yet understandable question to terrorism lies in. . . . . . attacking Iraq? Well, of course not. I've yet to see one viable defense of this war, really. But by saying "mushroom cloud" and "do you want another 9/11", and talking about Saddam and 9/11 often enough, these liars convinced you, and many others, that sending thousands of American troops INTO ISLAMIC SOIL was the answer. To occupy an Arab country. Oh yes, that will calm them down.

We need not fear the terrorists, that is how the operate.



No matter though, since the worlds second largest oil fields are there.

:rolleyes:


So our sons and daughters can be sacrified for this "war on terrorism". And our national economic treasure; I see that Bush is still fighting to make that $87 billion a grant, not a loan. Thanks, George! When will the Medicaid that pays for my son's kidney dialysis dry up? When will the education funds that will eventually turn him into a tax payer dry up?

:rolleyes:

I have no doubt you're a nice person, and well intentioned. But there are so many on this board who defend this administration for no articulable reasons whatsover. You seem to just like him. I regard that has irresponsible and not the result of careful thought. And if we actually regard ourselves as viable participants in Republican Democracy, then we owe ourselves and our republic careful thought about these issues.

I like George Bush because he favors big bussiness and the workers.

Every nation will have it's haves and have-nots.

Which do you consider yourself?

Each will have those who rule, and those who will not.

Which do you consider yourself?

Regardless of governmental form, really, in the end, a tiny minority will rule.

Exactly.

The temptations of arrogance, of power, of self-delusion are too great for us to simply assume they are acting in our best interest.

Oh, but they are acting in our best interest.

The ruling elite will work to support the power structures and institutions that placed them in power.

As would you, if you ever have power!

They, and those institutions have every reason to increase their power and their hold over economies. It is illogical to think otherwise, and unsupportable. We can see the institutions that supported these people and brought them to power. We can see that their actions are consistent with support of those institutions. This isn't rocket science. All things, and all administrations are NOT equal, and these people are in fact dangerous, whether anyone wants to put a Bush Cheney flag in their yard or not.

Dangerous, maybe only to your personal interest. Beneficialy, maybe only to my personal interest.

Yes, there is a lot of waking up to do, all right.

May I borrow your NyQuil perscription?

Well. Well. another one of your occasional and unsupported posts reg. You really must try to stop posting inanities and try some reasoned argument. I would have thought a businessman like yourself would wish to be respected.
Never mind. I guess it's time for another simple knockdown job.

Lets begin shall we?
Well, I don't know about Manhatten, but I know that Manhattan is alive and well with capitalism.
Is this supposed to mean something? Havana is not generally considered to be a hotbed of capitalism but it appeared 'alive and well' the last time I was there. Perhaps you should pay a visit. Cuba's tourist trade is booming these days. Oh pardon me I forgot that US citizens are denied such freedom of movement. You will just have to trust me when I tell you that 'capitalism' is not a prerequisite for urban vibrancy.

TOUR PACKAGES FOR SCUBA DIVING BICYCLING, HUNTING, FISHING, HIKING OR OTHER TOURIST TRAVEL IN CUBA ARE ILLEGAL (US treasury document) (http://www.treas.gov/offices/eotffc/ofac/sanctions/cubatrav.pdf)
Well, what do you expect when you concentrate a bunch of zealous jihad-ers in one place?
You make the middle East sound like Salt Lake City.
I guess you can find religous nutters the world over.

Mormon Fundamentalism and Violence: A Historical Analysis (http://www.exmormon.org/violence.htm)

Wow look! American Jihad-ers!

Since 1973 a passionate and sometimes deadly war has raged between those who believe the procedure involves nothing more than the removal of unwanted tissue from the womb of a woman rightfully in control of her own body and those who believe it is the coldblooded murder of a defenseless child. (http://www.cnetwork.co.uk/shea11.htm)

What makes their Jihad-ers worse than yours? I guess you need to find another reason why the middle east is 'messed up'.
The only person who can stop that is the people who are actually hungry and poor and immoral.....
There will always be rich people and poor people, of course. But that too is controlled by the poor and immoral.
Makes you wonder why people bother with leaders don't it?
How the business anyway Reg? You added that second page of HTML to WAM (http://wam.vze.com ) yet? I'm sure thats all you need to do to make that first million. Get out there and earn boy! You don't wanna be a nobody all your life, do you?
Well, my opinions may be naive
No they're obtuse. (http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=obtuse)
Nothing. The purpose of hollywood is entertainment.
We agree! Roll out the barrell ect ect. Just a pity Hollywood spews out mostly generic second rate shite these days.
Hey, if it works, you have to give Kenneth Lay some credit for pulling it off.
I presume you didn't work for Enron then? Of course not! Your a businessman!
Kenneth Lay sounds like 'Tim McVay' another motivated American misery monger!
There's lots of them out there. Good luck to them all eh?
Well, those contracts you spoke of--we cannot complain, if we were in the position to choose who gets them, I'm sure at least I would give it to the most loyal company to me.
Just out of interest what company is most loyal to you?
You seem to confuse symbiosis. (http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=symbiosis) with loyalty. Just an observation.

How often do terrorists hijack cars to cause accidents?
You think they pay for those cars they crash into US embassies the world over?
I think Ives was suggesting that Driver/Passenger airbags will save more lives than the patriot act. You know I think he may be right. Better tire pressure monitoring would help here but don't hold ya breath.

The car industry successfully lobbied against the best form of automatic protection, sensors built into each wheel that transmits air pressure readings to the dashboard or rear-view mirror. Instead, under pressure from the Bush administration, highway safety regulators are giving car manufacturers the option of installing a less expensive monitor that indirectly infers problems with a tire. (http://www.bartecautoid.com/newsletter.html)

Gee I bet those car manufactures are 'loyal' to da man!

Well man, just don't Bush bash then. The Clinton administration broke 20+ major laws anyway, with nothing to do with Monica.
Looks like you have nobody honest left to vote for:(
Not that voting makes any difference these days.
You should move to a democratic country. Democracy is cool!

That's just sleazy.
Thats America!
As a bleeding heart liberal, you are entitled to that opinion.
As a cold hearted bastard so am I.
Reducing the conditions that breed terrorists is the point of the war on terrorism.
What? Are we back to Tim Mcvay and the Anthrax mailer?
Quick now give me locations of ten 'Terrorist' attacks on the US mainland. Can't do it can you? So what hell are you on about then? If you thinking about attacks on Americans overseas then bring the buggers home! 'The War on Terrorism' LOL If you can halt the NY subway by sticking your hand down a toilet (http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/americas/3232473.stm) then it's a wonder the terrorist haven't shut you down years ago!
As would you, if you ever have power!
Don't prejudge by your own poor standards. There are still some nice people left you know. I used to be nice once but I wised up. I bet you happy for me.:)
May I borrow your NyQuil perscription?
No.

Look I'm done!
I left out a lot of the nonsense you posted. If you'd like me to correct that omission I'd be glad to do so.
Just be careful what you ask for.
TTFN
Dee Cee

DeeCee, just out of personal interest, are you an American citizen?


unreg

I suppose that depends on whether you consider the UK the 51st state or not.
Maybe objectivity improves with distance.:D
Dee Cee

Well, I guess you can be critical of a country you don't even live in :rolleyes:




unreg

I suppose that depends on whether you consider the UK the 51st state or not.

Our interest waned after you lost your empire.;)

Well, I guess you can be critical of a country you don't even live in
Of course you can Reg. Otherwise you'd have to live in the middle east before you could spout shite like
Well, what do you expect when you concentrate a bunch of zealous jihad-ers in one place
Hey wasn't that one of yours?
Dee Cee:p

Our interest waned after you lost your empire
Well I was sitting in McDonalds the other day watching a group of gang bangers hassling an old bag lady in the carpark. When it suddenly came to me that perhaps recent reported increase's crack cocaine seizures were no doubt due to the insidous influence of Canadian culture throughout this fair land.

Idle thoughts I know. Please excuse me now as I have to go catch Will and Grace on cable. ;)
Dee cee

Originally posted by Tano
I don't know too much about politics, but it seems to me (well, people tell me) that Republicans only want to hoard their own money and act "patriotic." If somebody would please validate or bash this impression of mine, I'd be most grateful.

You are right on the "money." Congrats on wondering about this at age 15. They don't just want to hoard their own, they want a lot more of it at the expense of others and even future generations (by showering themselves with borrowed money). I'm talking about the big shots; the rest are just ignorant flag-wavers. Keep your eyes open and you'll soon see between the lines of all their B.S.

When it suddenly came to me that perhaps recent reported increase's crack cocaine seizures were no doubt due to the insidous influence of Canadian culture throughout this fair land.

I know exactly what you mean. Those damned Canadians are ruining this country as well with their mindless culture. ;)

Please excuse me now as I have to go catch Will and Grace on cable.

See, further proof of what those Canucks are doing to your culture. Eric McCormack (Will) is Canadian. Watching mindless Canadian sitcom crap is part of your problem. :D

Canada is Americans true WMD!!! MUHAHAHAHAHA...MUHAHAHAHAHA ....MUHAHAHAHAHA :m: :m: :m:

Originally posted by zanket
You are right on the "money." Congrats on wondering about this at age 15. They don't just want to hoard their own, they want a lot more of it at the expense of others and even future generations (by showering themselves with borrowed money). I'm talking about the big shots; the rest are just ignorant flag-wavers. Keep your eyes open and you'll soon see between the lines of all their B.S.

Dear Zanket:


Kill or be killed.


:p unreg