I would consider myself a neo-conservative, I do believe that the United States is the sole power left on Earth that can effectively spread freedom to the oppressed people of the world. America has always stood up for freedom, and liberty. Some may argue that the United States doesn't have a right to go around and impose its will on others, but I disagree. The United States is not a country, its a universality, it is only a country because other countries exist. American values are the most progressive in the world, and this is shown by the apparant growth of democracy in the Middle East. America has taken the responsibility of spreading liberalism, and tolerance to the rest of the world, and we believe so much in this that we are wiling to suffer for the betterment of mankind.

Okay. It’s not that I’m trying to slag you, but I’ve got a few clarifying questions:

1. In those time that the US fails to do what is right, are they judged more harshly because of their position you described? (ie, teachers and police held to a higher standard because of their position of authority) Is that fair?
2. How do you define neo-conservative?
3. Do all Americans suffer for the betterment of mankind?
4. Hypothetical question – if a newer, bigger, stronger, better nation were to arise and take the US’s role, how would you feel about that?

That’s all I’ve got for now . . . but damned if I don’t think of something good in an hour or so.

*couch pinochete* *cough bullshit* the only tyhing america stood up for is global domination and becoming rich. you give 2 shits about freedom, how about instead of spreading your shit you fix it in your own country first.

I support Bush because he seems to be the only individual willing to actually get out there and do something. Too many others today would do little more than curl up in a fetal ball and hide from the rest of the world.

What if your crusade bankrupts the country?
How many casualties would be too much in pursuit of this ideology?
Isn't it immoral to use military force against a country unless in defense?

The United States is most definitely a country, not a "universality", what an ethnocentric view. Other countries have more progressive values, treating health care as a right, for instance. In the US, it's everyone for themselves, especially under the Neo-cons.

I support Bush because he seems to be the only individual willing to actually get out there and do something. Too many others today would do little more than curl up in a fetal ball and hide from the rest of the world.
If it's the wrong thing, I'd prefer nothing.

In my eyes, it is the right thing. In my eyes, it is worth it. If you want me to go against my own beliefs I will have to expect you to be willing to go against yours.

OK, it's a deal, you can support attacking countries only in self defense, and I will encourage tax cuts for the rich.

Internationalist, are there prerequisites for democracy, or can you plop down anywhere and start one, regardless of conditions there?

*couch pinochete*

Ah yes.

Sept. 11, 1973, when the CIA overthrew Allende's democratically elected government in Chile and replaced him with the murderous despot Pinochet.

Yes, we must grieve for the people of Chile. They lived through 19 years of merciless dictatorship and brutal opression.

And it was backed by the most powerful country in the world.

Oh, my..........

"Tax cuts for the rich.....?" No poor man ever offered me a job. Rich men spend more money for more goods and that create more jobs. Rich men form companies that hire people.

"The United States is a country...!" But it's also an ideal. It says that you are what you make of yourself, and you have the freedom to do so.

It's better to have the opportunity to eat steak, than to be "granted" the "priviledge" of having a bowl of porridge. You can't argue with people who vote with their feet!

Internationalist,

America has taken the responsibility of spreading liberalism, and tolerance to the rest of the world, and we believe so much in this that we are wiling to suffer for the betterment of mankind.

How about those who are not sharing your beliefs? Should they suffer too for the betterment of mankind, against their own wishes?

No poor man ever offered me a job. Rich men spend more money for more goods and that create more jobs. Rich men form companies that hire people.

The 'poor' pay little to no taxes.
However, the middle class does pay taxes.
And they do spend money.
And they do provide employment.

"The United States is a country...!" But it's also an ideal. It says that you are what you make of yourself, and you have the freedom to do so.

It's not anything. It's many things. To many people.

"...Rich men spend more money for more goods and that create more jobs. Rich men form companies that hire people.
Or...they could just keep the extra. The trickle down theory is bogus. If instead, the government keeps the taxes, it could pay for the job training required so unemployed or underemployed people could find work, save social security, maybe provide a little homeland or airline security while they're at it. Companies understandably hire the least amount of workers they can get away with. And rich people rarely need to invest their own money to start a company, they just sell stock in it. Money means more to poor people than it does to rich people, they can do more with it, especially through small low interest loans to start community-based businesses that revitalize urban areas.

I would consider myself a neo-conservative, I do believe that the United States is the sole power left on Earth that can effectively spread freedom to the oppressed people of the world.
And who oppresses people in the first place? :rolleyes:

America has always stood up for freedom, and liberty. Some may argue that the United States doesn't have a right to go around and impose its will on others, but I disagree.
That's a big problem. You have your sovereignty within your own country. You don't have sovereignty outside. If you think you have, that causes many problems, which indeed is happening.

The United States is not a country, its a universality, it is only a country because other countries exist.
That makes me want to puke. I would kill myself if the world was indeed a reflection of US culture. Thank God for the europeans, the asians, the south americans....

American values are the most progressive in the world, and this is shown by the apparant growth of democracy in the Middle East.
Ha! Progressive!?!?!? Americans act like neanthertals! You just need to watch TV and see... :rolleyes:

America has taken the responsibility of spreading liberalism, and tolerance to the rest of the world,
Yes! Let's make homossexualism illegal! Hail to tolerance!! :rolleyes:

and we believe so much in this that we are wiling to suffer for the betterment of mankind.
Betterment!?!?!? Yeah, right....

Well, no one has said it yet that I've seen, so I'll say it:
I support President Bush because he's the duly elected President of the United States of America. The people of this great nation gathered together on election day and cast their ballots for the man they felt should lead this great nation. The election results are that "We, the people..." have decided that he is to lead the nation. In that regard, I bow to the wishes of the people and, in so doing, I support President Bush.

Baron Max

You know, you are under no obligation to support the president, just because he happened to get the vote rigged in his favor...

...what about in 2000? Was it so clear to you then that the American people wanted Bush?

God im tired of having the same arguments across multipul threads.

I would consider myself a neo-conservative, I do believe that the United States is the sole power left on Earth that can effectively spread freedom to the oppressed people of the world.


Shouldnt you start at home? Your locking people up in your country without trial or any sort of monitoring by people like the red cross or your own justice system. How do we know that the same thing wont start happerning to anyone who stands against the goverment including journlists and political rivals?


America has always stood up for freedom, and liberty. Some may argue that the United States doesn't have a right to go around and impose its will on others, but I disagree.

I would like to quote what you wrote in another thread

Why shouldn't the US try to depose the leadership in Syria, its a tyrannical regime, that imposes its will on the people of the country without their consent.

Now you just said you should have the right to impose your will on another country so why should syria? Or reversing that if You have the right to remove syrian ledership for imposing its will why shouldnt osama take the same aproch and shoot bush, blow up congress, kill everyone in the pentagon with vx gas ect? Seems to me by your reasoning that would be a VERY good idea


The United States is not a country, its a universality, it is only a country because other countries exist

What a load of crap. The US is a union of states, thats all. If you didnt hate the british so much you would have called yourself the comonwealth of america but thats all. Your just another country like any other and your cirtanly nothing special.

American values are the most progressive in the world

Firstly let me pick myself of the ground from laughing so hard.

American values are the LEAST progressive in the world. You still use the death penelty after most of eroup, australia, and i think britan and canada have abolised it as being barbaric.

You are still ARESTING people for homosexuality unlike most of the rest of the world

You put limits on the length of time people have to get a job without even concidering that it might be hard for some people where most progressive countrys give HELP to the unemployed. Here if your unemployed for over 3 months the goverment pays for you to get an intence one to one help to get a job but no matter how long your unemployed they will pay you and help you. We also give tax cuts to those who need them MOST, the poor and NOT the ritch. That just shows americas focus on helping the ritch and screwing the poor inside america and outside it

Most progressive goverments pay for the health care and education systems rather than saying "if you cant aford it to bad" like the US does

and this is shown by the apparant growth of democracy in the Middle East.

Did you ever stop to think that maybe they dont WANT democracy? Maybe they WANT a thocrasy or a dictatorship even? After all an autocratic style of goverment gets things done faster. Hell even BUSH said he wishes american was a dictatorship with him as the dictator!!!

America has taken the responsibility of spreading liberalism,

All your doing is serving your own interests, Just look at the oil deals your goverment has done before and as soon as they took control of iraq

and tolerance to the rest of the world

the rest of the world is more tolerant than you are. The rest of the world has laws saying that its ILLEGAL not to employ someone baised on there sex, race, religion or gender preference. Does america?

and we believe so much in this that we are wiling to suffer for the betterment of mankind


you mean the betterment of your companys and those who fund and bribe your leaders

NeoConservatives toppled a democracy in Haiti.

I love it when so many foreigners feign hate for the US, but come running, hat in hand, when times get tough. SciForums is like fly-paper for the disgruntled! :D

I agree Marv, I agree!

But ain't it fun to read all those silly-assed pipe-dreams sometimes? I mean, it's lots more fun the watching television, ain't it? And, hey, when one part of their pipe-dream goes to hell, they can just pipe-dream up another part to make it all work perfectly. What more could one want in life? ...LOL!

Baron Max

I love it when so many foreigners feign hate for the US, but come running, hat in hand, when times get tough. SciForums is like fly-paper for the disgruntled! :D

yea right, the only people that come running to you are those you have brainwashed. i certainly wouldnt come running to america to work 65 hours a week for less than minimum wage.

bush is a dictator: he rigged both elections so that he could not lose, how is that any worse than taknig over by force?
how is iraq spreadnig WMD rumours to maintain order withn its own country worse than bush actually having WMD and illegal weapons to outright oppress any nation that may want to cut ties with america.

Man, this thread straddles a whole lot of issues . . . and I just want my questions answered. And for people to back up fact with evidence; argument with reason.

People need somebody to blame in order to keep from going stark raving mad. They can't cope with the idea that crap happens to good people for no reason. It has to be because of the US, the Devil, Pazuzu the plague god, etc. They also can't accept that good things can have bad side effects.

Ahhhhh! The American dream. Come to America, work hard, get ahead, even get rich, so everybody can hate you..........:D

Well, no one has said it yet that I've seen, so I'll say it:
I support President Bush because he's the duly elected President of the United States of America. The people of this great nation gathered together on election day and cast their ballots for the man they felt should lead this great nation. The election results are that "We, the people..." have decided that he is to lead the nation. In that regard, I bow to the wishes of the people and, in so doing, I support President Bush.

Baron Max
This is a horrible reason to support the President. Hear me out here, I respect your opinion, but I think you're underestimating the merits of your own ideals.

A slim minority supported John Kerry over Bush. Does that mean they should abandon all of their ideals and cave to Bush because the slim majority elected him? Of course not. That's not how democracy works. And even though the US is not a democracy, that's not how a Federalist Republic works either. Constructive discourse is what makes our country great, and why our country will remain great so long as it does not abandon these binding tenets.

Don't get me wrong, I abhorred John Kerry as well. I voted for Badnarik.

But don't feel that just because everybody else thinks one way, you have to too. That's the tyranny of the majority that De Tocqueville warned us about some years ago, and the tragic flaw of pure democracy.

Edit: I support Bush because I support the office of the President. I hope that Bush does the best that he can to give this nation the solid leadership it needs, to carry out the duties of his office as delineated in the Constitution, and to fuck it up as little as possible in his second term. But I did not vote for him, nor did I prefer him over all the others. So I guess you could say I support him as a President, but not for a majority of his ideals.

This is a horrible reason to support the President. Hear me out here, I respect your opinion, but I think you're underestimating the merits of your own ideals.

A slim minority supported John Kerry over Bush. Does that mean they should abandon all of their ideals and cave to Bush because the slim majority elected him? Of course not. That's not how democracy works. And even though the US is not a democracy, that's not how a Federalist Republic works either. Constructive discourse is what makes our country great, and why our country will remain great so long as it does not abandon these binding tenets.

Wow, just when I was about to write this thread off as nothing but the intellectual equivalent of a girly slap fight you come out and really surprise me, Stokes. Generally when I see your name at the top of a post I get ready to disagree with something, but you've hit it right on here. Right on.

Patriotism doesn't mean blind faith and support for every single thing that your President (or country) does and makes itself stand for. Sometimes patriotism is about loving your country enough to raise a bit of hell when you can see it veering off course.

I support George W. Bush only in the Dr. Strangelove Nuclear Holocaust sort of way-for the same reason I support our current efforts in Iraq (not the initial invasion). Any more pleasant alternative is out of our hands at this point, and really the most viable alternative is simply total commitment to see it through to the end, and hope to God that we aren't led off another cliff. I didn't vote for Bush, and I'd probably spit on him as soon as shake his hand, but for the time being, I hope to hell that he has a nice quiet second term, for the good of us all.

Doesn't look like that nice quiet second term is to be. If even one of Bush's dream reforms passed, like for Social Security, we and future generations would be in for a much diminished lifestyle. Bush seems intent on channelling as much public money as possible to his buddies, solidifying a right-wing Supreme Court, and converting the media to a Republican propaganda machine, the sum of which will cement our nascent dictatorship. Bush needs to be harried at every step, just like the Republicans did to Clinton.

Asguard:

Just look at the oil deals your goverment has done before and as soon as they took control of iraq

While it wouldn't surprise me that America is making huge profits from oil in Iraq, do you have any actual documentation to show that their profits from oil sales have increased after the Iraqi War?

actually,nah.

While it wouldn't surprise me that America is making huge profits from oil in Iraq, do you have any actual documentation to show that their profits from oil sales have increased after the Iraqi War?

Just try looking for the public accounting of the oil with Google. Except for one little blip about some no-name CPA firm, it's all undisclosed. Which means it's a foregone conclusion that the oil is being stolen. (There once was a huge Native American trust fund, with secret accounting. It was almost all stolen.) No doubt it's the reason for Bush's executive order 13303, giving blanket immunity to any oil-stealing friends of Bush, should they ever be exposed. All you really need to know is this: Republicans do not spend $500 billion that they could spend on pork projects in their home states, on other countries for nothing. The US obviously cares not for democracy at home much less anywhere else.

The 'poor' pay little to no taxes.
However, the middle class does pay taxes.
And they do spend money.
And they do provide employment.



It's not anything. It's many things. To many people.

What dus that mean, make some sense, if your willing to contribute, at least contribute something worth while, mr high and mighty 'invert_nexus', christ your SAD, always having to be best, always having to correct everyone,you get on my tits.

I am a so called 'foriegner' , im from the uk, and christ almighty we DO NOT come running hat in hand, you and your stupid 'bush', he called US to help, trust me, we didnt come running.

Constructive discourse is what makes our country great, and why our country will remain great so long as it does not abandon these binding tenets.

Ahh, yes ...and the operative word there is "constructive". And when was the last time you saw any of that from those who oppose the current President or the administration? I've seen almost nothing but blind accusations and condemnation from most everyone!

We, the People, elect representatives and senators and the President to run this country. And yet we seem unwilling to allow them to run the country once they're elected. If we're not going to let them run the nation, why elect them in the first place? What do the elections mean?

And the other thing that irks me is that in every election, city council all the way up to President, the voting public who voted for the opposition are always unwilling to support the electorate .....yet, if they're man had won, they'd be all upset if the opposition didn't support THEIR elected leaders!

We, the People, is a strong, powerful force, but at some point we vote and that vote should mean something ....and should mean something to the "losers", too. But it doesn't!!!

So I guess you could say I support him as a President, but not for a majority of his ideals.

Hmm, and you call that support?? How so? ...just by using the word "president" in front of his name? Personally, I think support means something a bit more solid. If your man had won the election, would you want all of the people to have supported him in the same way as you or others support President Bush?

Baron Max

Sometimes patriotism is about loving your country enough to raise a bit of hell when you can see it veering off course.

Well, in principle, I have to agree with that. But the part that bothers me is that most of those who "raise a bit of hell" are not educated and/or knowledgeable enough to do so. And in a sense, that's precisely why we elect representatives and senators in congress ...they're supposed to be knowledgeable and educated enough to run the nation.

Every person who complains about what we do or where we're going should have to present credentials to support his own ideals. And I don't think young high school or college kids have enough knowledge or education or experience to know. Oh, yeah, they think they know! When I was young, I also thought I knew everything ...but now that I'm grown and experienced, I know that I don't know!

Baron Max

The United States is not a country, its a universality, it is only a country because other countries exist.

What do you mean by “universality”?

American values are the most progressive in the world, and this is shown by the apparant growth of democracy in the Middle East.

American values have nothing to do with the growth of democracy in the Middle East. American military and economic strength however do. How proud have you to be to suggest that these people would gladly exchange their values, which they had cultivated for centuries, for Western values?

America has taken the responsibility of spreading liberalism, and tolerance to the rest of the world, and we believe so much in this that we are wiling to suffer for the betterment of mankind.

This is certainly one way of putting it. Another way is that a small but influential segment of the American population has found war a good investment for their business. An increase in the amount of consumers entails an increase in the demand of a particular commodity. What is a more confident investment than in the most powerful military force on Earth, as you say?

Also, who are the ‘we’ who are allegedly willing to suffer for the “betterment of mankind”?

All in all, America is a nice country. But if it decides to invade my home and impose on me her values, I would go to war. It doesn’t matter how you justify American aggression. It still remains aggression, and preaching about the betterment of the entire planet is reminiscent of Hitler preaching to his own people that the war was for the betterment of the superior Aryan race.

Has it not occurred to you that that might be the case because you are more indoctrinated in the culture?

although i am aare of the dumbing down of education, i know that many young people are more in tune with the REAL real world than the suits are. AND they have a RIGHT to be

the fallacy that the facade of the 'political' world creates is that 'only TJHEy know' politics. well that aint so. anyone who cares about this world, and wants a better deal for people being shit on, and explotied and murdered etc is being political. and they have as much right to voice political opinion as the corrupt politicians with their hands on the power
The trouble Is is many become like you seem to confess to be........compliant with the state of things. apathetic

There is just so much to reply to I simply don't the time so I'll do my best.

What if your crusade bankrupts the country?

Not doing it would morally bankrupt America, I believe that although the American economy would suffer for our ideals, I believe that liberalizing the world will indeed work in America's long term interest, and we will be richer for it. Its not a crusade either, its a war against tyranny, and against oppression. Has the US in the past supported tyranny? Yes, am I as an American proud of that? No, but sometimes it had to be done to protect the people from themselves.

How many casualties would be too much in pursuit of this ideology?

It doesn't depend on America how many ppl are to die, it all depends on how much the tyrannists stand to oppose the inevitable fate of history? See as a neo-conservative, I don't support war if the people of the country can do themselves, frankly that is the success of the agenda if America doesn't have to use its military power, but if we have to believe me we will.

Isn't it immoral to use military force against a country unless in defense?

Is it not immoral to let millions suffer, and die under a tyrannical dictatorship? Should it not be in America's ideological interests to promote our way of life for what it truly is...man's way of life?

The United States is most definitely a country, not a "universality", what an ethnocentric view.

Firstly I don't deny its ethnocentric, but just because that's true doesn't make it wrong. Do you deny that liberalism is the best system of belief for mankind? If so, your in the same boat buddy. America is an ideal, much like the French Revolution was, or the Russian revolution attempted to be. America is an idea, and its exists only in America when it should exist worldwide as a lighthouse of peace, and hope.

Other countries have more progressive values, treating health care as a right, for instance.

Of course I don't believe that is progressive, I think that's regressive because it reinforces subordination of the rich to the poor, and it interrupts the market, as a liberal I believe in the freedom of the market. So it all depends on what you consider "progressive".

In the US, it's everyone for themselves, especially under the Neo-cons.

That's the way it should be, and I have no problem with that.

And who oppresses people in the first place? :rolleyes:

What oppresses people is ignorance above all else, religion oppresses ppl as well, and so does governments which reinforce the class structure in these societies. No dictatorship would last very long if there wasn't a real base of support, what happens in these countries has much to do with European imperialism and its aftermath, that something that America has a duty to repair.

That's a big problem. You have your sovereignty within your own country. You don't have sovereignty outside. If you think you have, that causes many problems, which indeed is happening.

Its only happening because the people of the world aren't used to seeing liberalism fight for freedom for all, sure it was ok when we fought in Europe to save liberalism from socialism, and pseudo-socialism. The EU isn't wiling or able to defend liberalism, and as a result it is allowing the fundamentalists in the world take over. The idea that one can live in a bubble while not taking care of the air isn't very logical. America is doing the dirty work, and although we may get the flak America knows that what is doing is indeed for the betterment of mankind.

That makes me want to puke. I would kill myself if the world was indeed a reflection of US culture. Thank God for the europeans, the asians, the south americans....

Well I will provide the gun because what do you think the internet is? What do you think modern media is? What world are you living in? You are benefitting from what America pioneered which is entrepreneurship, freedom, and innovation.

Ha! Progressive!?!?!? Americans act like neanthertals! You just need to watch TV and see... :rolleyes:

If we are what you suggested we are, then what are the Taliban? Pieces of shit? I do watch TV (which was popularized by America), and I can tell you that we are far above most nations in terms of civility. For instance what you see on TV shows how liberal America is, being wiling, able, and ready to adapt to social changes.

Yes! Let's make homossexualism illegal! Hail to tolerance!! :rolleyes:

What you are confusing is neo-conservatives with religious conservatives, most neo-conservatives are quite "liberal" on social issues, as a arch liberal I believe in the freedom to do whatever you want, and the government shouldn't have a right to restrict that. I support gay marriage because it doesn't effect me negatively in anyway, I am an atheist so...your belief that neo-cons are all religious freaks is quite off the mark.

Betterment!?!?!? Yeah, right....

Well you seem to be better off then you would have been before 1776.

I love it when so many foreigners feign hate for the US, but come running, hat in hand, when times get tough. SciForums is like fly-paper for the disgruntled! :D


I lived there for many years and ran away because it was such great bullshit, I pitty anyone who rushes to them ost nazi country of this generation.

Neither is america the place to get rich everyone lives in debt , milked by the loan companies. and this isnt coming from an imigrant working as a taxi driver its from someone who lived on 90 000 a year.

Not only that but the medical system is total shit , 2000 for cleaning your teath at the local dentists... the american FREEDOMS I didnt enjoy can blow me fools.

God im tired of having the same arguments across multipul threads.

Talking to mirrors can get boring I agree...

Shouldnt you start at home? Your locking people up in your country without trial or any sort of monitoring by people like the red cross or your own justice system. How do we know that the same thing wont start happerning to anyone who stands against the goverment including journlists and political rivals?

The whole of the Western world is largely doing the same thing, this isn't a America only clause, we are defending our freedom from tyrannical, oppresive, and illogical Islamists movements which try to impose a religion that is like most religions illogical, hate filled, and intolerant. Liberalism is in a state of flux, it is fighting not only for its existance but for the spreading of that existence, liberalism like markets to grow to work. And unlike Islam for instance libearlism doesn't distinguish ppl, and suppresses for their beliefs, or acts. Islam is where Christanity was in the year 1426, Islam will slowly die as well. I don't think that your hyperbole towards the end will happen because most of us want to show the world what we can do as a free society, and they should try to adopt us as their ideological breathern for mankind's sake.

Now you just said you should have the right to impose your will on another country so why should syria?

Syria has, its not like it hasn't. Syria can do what it wants I don't care because I know that history is against Syria in the end, and against tyranny. I don't deny that other nations have rights as well, I am a Kantian though and the categorical imperative here is "its ok to invade other nations to free them from their oppressors" firstly not only are we doing a utility, we are also treating humans as ends not means, Syria doesnt' do that.

Or reversing that if You have the right to remove syrian ledership for imposing its will why shouldnt osama take the same aproch and shoot bush, blow up congress, kill everyone in the pentagon with vx gas ect? Seems to me by your reasoning that would be a VERY good idea

Osama can do that, I don't him the right, but he won't be able to win bc not many ppl want him, or this ideals to represent them. Its like the USSR, sure you make look all powerful but fate is not on ur side, bc like Sovietism, Islam is repressive, anti-humanistic, and will cause ppl to eventually revolt. If Osama does go into power, he will delegitimize Islam as a ideology and I hope he gets what he wants, because in the end it will only be better for us.

What a load of crap. The US is a union of states, thats all. If you didnt hate the british so much you would have called yourself the comonwealth of america but thats all. Your just another country like any other and your cirtanly nothing special.

We are something special we are a nation that is the world within a bordered zone, our ideas, our way of life, etc. Are being adopted worldwide as standard, from China to India, to Brazil. American ways of life with only some variation is the standard, now really only the Islamic world stands in our way, and unlike Islam liberalism is permeable, we can spread because ppl don't have to believe in anything.

American values are the LEAST progressive in the world.

Less then the Taliban? Are we speaking in a tone of hubris to try to make a point?

You still use the death penelty after most of eroup, australia, and i think britan and canada have abolised it as being barbaric.

I don't agree with the deathe penelty personally, but if the people of the US will it to be enforced, then it shall that is democracy.

You are still ARESTING people for homosexuality unlike most of the rest of the world

Actually no, the anti-sodomy laws were torn down years ago...nice try though.

You put limits on the length of time people have to get a job without even concidering that it might be hard for some people where most progressive countrys give HELP to the unemployed.

Its up to the market, if you aren't getting a job maybe your the problem. Go to school, get the education you need, or get skills then you should be able to get a job.

We also give tax cuts to those who need them MOST, the poor and NOT the ritch. That just shows americas focus on helping the ritch and screwing the poor inside america and outside it

Actually I argue that cutting rich ppl's taxes increases investments which brings up the entire economy, helping the poor will only really help the poor.

Most progressive goverments pay for the health care and education systems rather than saying "if you cant aford it to bad" like the US does

Again it depends on whether or not you believe the market is progressive I believe it is, so I disagree.

Did you ever stop to think that maybe they dont WANT democracy? Maybe they WANT a thocrasy or a dictatorship even?

Stockholm syndrome does that, if those ppl really want what you propose they want, then surely a election should be able to decide that. Why not give ppl the elections to decide for themselves?

All your doing is serving your own interests, Just look at the oil deals your goverment has done before and as soon as they took control of iraq

I don't deny that...real politik get used to it.

the rest of the world is more tolerant than you are. The rest of the world has laws saying that its ILLEGAL not to employ someone baised on there sex, race, religion or gender preference. Does america?

Once you stop saying things which are OBVIOUSLY incorrect I will respond.

you mean the betterment of your companys and those who fund and bribe your leaders

The betterment of corporations means more investment, and a higher standard of living for millions.

Has the US in the past supported tyranny? Yes, am I as an American proud of that? No, but sometimes it had to be done to protect the people from themselves.

Then why do you propose the US should take up arms to rid the world of non-democratic governments while they can have their purpose? Take e.g. the Russian Federation. Directly after the disintegration of the USSR, free elections led to an utter disaster, with Yeltsin either ruining or selling the country's resources. Putin, who takes democratic principles less seriously, got the country a bit more in shape. Singapore offers a similar story.

Imho, democracy only works properly in a reasonably stable country. In times of chaos, there is no telling what people would vote for. They can end up with someone worse than they were freed from.

The betterment of corporations means more investment, and a higher standard of living for millions.

That can certainly be the case. On the other hand, unbridled capitalism can also lead to very unhealthy social tensions. Almost a century ago communism thrived upon discontent factory workers who felt exploited by companies. The trick is to find a good balance between laws which encourage economic freedom and laws which protect the individual employee. A very hard trick indeed.

This tendency of moderation is what i lack in your vision. You claim the American way of life, with its relatively unrestrained capitalism, is the only way forward. While i can agree to the point that a country with a well functioning democracy and a free market economy can be a very good place to live in, i do believe that it is not a solution you can just easily implement all over the globe without huge consequences.

the rest of the world is more tolerant than you are. The rest of the world has laws saying that its ILLEGAL not to employ someone baised on there sex, race, religion or gender preference. Does america?

"Once you stop saying things which are OBVIOUSLY incorrect I will respond. "

its not incorect, Countrys like Australia, brittan, canada, NZ all have laws that say its illegal to discriminate PERIOD. You dont, you have to call yourself "equal opotunity employers" or you can stop ANYONE from working there. thats wrong and i think we should invade you and libarate your people from this mindless abuse

You put limits on the length of time people have to get a job without even concidering that it might be hard for some people where most progressive countrys give HELP to the unemployed.

Its up to the market, if you aren't getting a job maybe your the problem. Go to school, get the education you need, or get skills then you should be able to get a job.

how do you go to school if you cant aford to?


Most progressive goverments pay for the health care and education systems rather than saying "if you cant aford it to bad" like the US does

Again it depends on whether or not you believe the market is progressive I believe it is, so I disagree.

i belive that the jobs requiring the most intelligence should go to the MOST INTEILLIGENT and not to the ritch because they are the only ones who can aford say medical school
I belive in health care for all no matter WHAT their finantual statice.

What oppresses people is ignorance above all else,
Ignorance which your government is very willing to endorse. You know... democracy without wisdom is an instrument of slavery and fascism.And that is exactly what happens. Your government is a fascist government disguised under the vail of "democracy" and "freedom" ...

religion oppresses ppl as well, and so does governments which reinforce the class structure in these societies.
i.e. US. Altough it is not the religion, but the way it is used.....

No dictatorship would last very long if there wasn't a real base of support,
Yes. Sadam, for instance was supported by the US for many years.... :rolleyes:

Also most, if not all dictatorship governments were created by the US.

what happens in these countries has much to do with European imperialism
European!?!?!? :eek:
Which "european imperialism", the same one that gets crammed in our heads everyday through our TVs!?!? :rolleyes:

and its aftermath, that something that America has a duty to repair.
It is america's imperialism that created fascism all over the world.

Its only happening because the people of the world aren't used to seeing liberalism fight for freedom for all, sure it was ok when we fought in Europe to save liberalism from socialism, and pseudo-socialism. The EU isn't wiling or able to defend liberalism, and as a result it is allowing the fundamentalists in the world take over.
At least they are not endorsing them in the same way america is doing....

The idea that one can live in a bubble while not taking care of the air isn't very logical.
Yes. WHich country is the worst polutting in the planet? Wasn't it the same country that didn't sign the Kyoto protocol?

America is doing the dirty work,
Yes, you are planning to expand your coal plants while the rest of the world is trying to cut on emissions.

and although we may get the flak America knows that what is doing is indeed for the betterment of mankind.
Ha! Yes! Let's put fascists governments all over the world and melt all glaciers for the betterment of mankind!!!!!

Well I will provide the gun because what do you think the internet is? What do you think modern media is? What world are you living in? You are benefitting from what America pioneered which is entrepreneurship, freedom, and innovation.
*pukes*

I prefer to drive the Japanese small energy-efficient cars.

If we are what you suggested we are, then what are the Taliban?
Rebels against you. Not that I agree with their methods, but hey... they stand up against you, don't they?

Pieces of shit? I do watch TV (which was popularized by America),
Yes, the curse of the world.

and I can tell you that we are far above most nations in terms of civility.
Ha! The nation with the greatest population of prisoners!?!?!?

For instance what you see on TV shows how liberal America is, being wiling, able, and ready to adapt to social changes.
WTF!?!? Every single social change that went through there was thought with a lot of blood being shed!! Ever read american history? And I'm talking about real books, not the ones supplied by your fascist government.

What you are confusing is neo-conservatives with religious conservatives, most neo-conservatives are quite "liberal" on social issues, as a arch liberal I believe in the freedom to do whatever you want, and the government shouldn't have a right to restrict that.
Tell that to your government, not to me.

I support gay marriage because it doesn't effect me negatively in anyway, I am an atheist so...your belief that neo-cons are all religious freaks is quite off the mark.
I'm not talking about neo-cons at all, I'm talking about your government.

Well you seem to be better off then you would have been before 1776.
Not at all. I would prefer my clean air and my stars back.

Not at all. I would prefer my clean air and my stars back.

:( I feel sorry for those who live in the city, and this simple request is denied.


Once you stop saying things which are OBVIOUSLY incorrect I will respond

Translation: I can't think of any specific rebuttals against Asguard's arguments, hence I'll make a generalized attack and pretend I've won.

Quite simply, Asguard hit the nail on the head. Your country is barbaric and backwards compared to some countries (eg. Netherlands). The Netherlands allow gay marriage, euthanasia, no death penalty, equal opportunity, good healthcare, no monopoly of Christian religious dogma etc. In fact, I seriously plan to move from Australia to the Netherlands when I have finished my education (mainly due to the euthanasia laws. I can't stand the idea of dying in excruciating pain)

how do you go to school if you cant aford to?

You don't if you can't get a scholarship or a "freebie" of some kind. Hey, how 'bout a loan from the "Asguard Unlimited Free Scholarship Fund"? I hear he wants to help everyone go to college for free!

If you can't get that, you get a job slinging hamburgers, or cleaning bus terminal toilets or such. We need workers for those jobs, too, ya' know. Or are you going to give everyone a free medical education and THEN make them clean the toilets???

i belive that the jobs requiring the most intelligence should go to the MOST INTEILLIGENT...

And why should anyone care what you believe? Are your beliefs somehow better than everyone else's beliefs?

Who decides who's the most intelligent?

I belive in health care for all no matter WHAT their finantual statice.

See note above. PLUS ...who pays for this healthcare for all? ...especially when in your world, everyone is happily going to college for free!

Baron Max

PS - is good spelling part of your free educational benefits??

Your country is barbaric and backwards compared to some countries ...

Yeah, and we like it that way! Please refrain from trying to change us into something like the Neanderthal-lands, okay?

Baron Max

You don't if you can't get a scholarship or a "freebie" of some kind

America can afford to spend billions on a war, but not on providing education for their best and brightest. And you wonder why America is gradually declining.


Who decides who's the most intelligent?

If someone performs well during previous education, it is only fair that they be given first pick as to what further education they receive.

PS - is good spelling part of your free educational benefits??

It's official, you're an arrogant asshole.


Yeah, and we like it that way!

Like being oppressed and sodomized by your government, eh?

America can afford to spend billions on a war, but not on providing education for their best and brightest.

Well, that's what it means when the nation is NOT a socialist nation. We can pay for a war if we want to instead of paying for education. And we don't want to be a socialist naton, we like free enterprise. If you like socialism, fine ...just don't try to sell it to us or make it out to be anything more than a free ride for those who don't want to work.

And you wonder why America is gradually declining.

I don't wonder any such thing.

If someone performs well during previous education, it is only fair that they be given first pick as to what further education they receive.

Who pays for it? Or would you force the people of the nation to pay for it without their approval and consent?

Are you going to take that money from a hardworking, legalized immigrant who has saved his hard-earned money to send his kid to college, even tho' the kid didn't do quite so well on the tests?? (I think Enstien did poorly in early school and did very poor on tests ...what then?)

Are you going to take that money from the hardworking rich man who worked all of his life to afford to send his kid to college, but now finds that his kid didn't do so well on some test or other? But the kid might be lazy as a youngster, but end up being the world's leading scientist ...what then?

It's official, you're an arrogant asshole.

Good argument ....I'm sure you win lots of arguments that way. ...cause people give up talking to you, huh? ...LOL!

Baron Max

“PS - is good spelling part of your free educational benefits??”
It's official, you're an arrogant asshole.
Hmmm... no.
Asguards spelling is a bit much.
The odd typo and maybe putting one L where there should be two is ok, even a "there" instead of a "their" would be acceptable if it wasn't repeated, but "finantual"? "brittan"? "opotunity"? "inteillegent" ?
That's crossing the line in my humble opinion.
When you're reading those kinds of spelling mistakes you naturally use a retard voice in your head without even thinking, which then in turn makes it impossible to respect the author.
Asguard should try to get his message across abstractly by playing the role of a comical character with down's syndrome.
"I cant ged sattesfaxshun... with the guvenment, my mova is a bigfoot but she cant aford a harecut" and so on. This would make the audience think "haha ...hey, wait a second, why shouldn't she be able to get a haircut?".

John Smith,

What dus that mean, make some sense, if your willing to contribute, at least contribute something worth while, mr high and mighty 'invert_nexus', christ your SAD, always having to be best, always having to correct everyone,you get on my tits.

What does 'dus' mean?
Ha!
Sorry. Couldn't resist.
Your pm was similarly full of odd spellings and such.
I thought you were asking me to cyber you for a minute. Talking about 'cum' and all.

Anyway. My point is simple. I don't have a clue what your problem with it is.

Marv made some point about the fact that the poor don't give employment and such. That rich people spend more and do more for their country.

Well. My point was that comparing the rich to the poor is stupid as the poor don't pay taxes. Or not many. It's the middle class that should be given tax cuts if anyone should. The middle class do provide employment. They spend money. They could actually benefit from a tax cut, giving them the opportunity to provide more employment.

Or was it the second part that you find objection to?
Another simple statement. Marv said that the US was an ideal. And I said that the US is no one thing. It is many things. To many people. To some it is the land of the free. To some it is the great satan. And it is everything in between as well. It's not an ideal. It's a country.

Too bad Goofy edited your posts before I got a chance to see them in full.
What exactly is your problem with me if I might ask? You seem to have a chip on your shoulder. Your pm was about Yellowstone and I expected to find you posting in there and maybe finding what was up your ass, but no Yellowstone post.

This was your first post. So. What about me arouses your ire, Herr 'Smith'?
My name? Don't like 'invert_nexus'? Sound too elitist or something?

Don't like 'invert_nexus'? Sound too elitist or something?
Yer it dus axshully.
But den I fink dirt is also a elitist.

I support George Bush because he has a kind face and a nice smile.

Also, when he speaks of evil and what it is doing to people around the world, I am angered that people can be stupid enough to deny that evil exists and that God is the only way to combat it.

By God, I mean the one and only true Lord, our Jesus Christ of Nazareth.

It’s easy to denounce and to criticize the forces of good, because goodness allows for such criticism. What is difficult is to stand behind the powers of light and to oppose Satan and his minions.

George W. Bush is the best thing that ever happened to the world.
Underneath his banner of righteousness and common decency, humanity shall be saved from the forces that wish to lead mankind into the darkness.

Democracy has been man’s greatest invention and this only through the divine intervention of a compassionate and loving God that implanted the ideal of freedom and human rights within mans mind.

The American people have decided.
They belong to one of the most well-informed, educated and free nations in the history of the world.
They have access to the internet, they watch CNN, ABC, NBC and even CBS – to name but a few - and there are numerous newspapers reporting the news to them with no bias or ulterior motivations.
They are kind, God fearing people with a sense of honour and dignity, which they show in how they choose to free oppressed people from their miserable lives through either assimilation or death.

The striking thing about Americans, something I have first hand knowledge of, is their respect and class.
I cannot believe anyone would hate them or oppose them.

When American companies go into a country and offer jobs to the population, some collateral damage is inevitable.
Where do these peasants go when their nations are stricken by poverty and their resources are raped?
America! Of course!
Duh.

They hate America but they run to it when they are desperate and hungry.
Didn’t Negroes run to their master’s house when they were hungry?
If they hated their master for beating them so much why did they run for food to him?

I mean, come on!
Common sense, people.

We all know, in our heart of hearts, that Americans are benevolent, kind people.
So they have the highest crime rates in the western world, so what?
Should the entirety be judged by the actions of a few?
Do they not then electrocute these animals?

And how free they are.
We all envy them. And jealousy is the root of all evil.

How free they are to choose between the Democrats and the …Republicans.
How free to choose between Coke and Pepsi.
How free to speak their minds, so well-informed and wise that they are.

So stop this Bush bashing.
He is a smart and capable man.
How else would he have his father make him into a president?
So he doesn’t read books or speak English well; how many of you do?
His intelligence is revealed in how he’s accepted Lord Jesus into his heart and how he is guided by God.

Who pays for it?

Who pays for the war in Iraq? Oh, wait...
http://costofwar.com/


Or would you force the people of the nation to pay for it without their approval and consent?

Thank God the American people aren't forced to pay for a pointless war in Iraq. Oh, wait....
http://costofwar.com/

Look at how much tax money is being spent on a war. How many kids could you send to college with that amount???


Are you going to take that money from a hardworking, legalized immigrant who has saved his hard-earned money to send his kid to college, even tho' the kid didn't do quite so well on the tests?? (I think Enstien did poorly in early school and did very poor on tests ...what then?)

I'm talking about spending taxes on IMPORTANT things, such as health and education, not pissing it away on wars.


Good argument ....I'm sure you win lots of arguments that way. ...cause people give up talking to you, huh? ...LOL!

I'm sure a lot of people love talking to you. You can't refute their arguments, so you belittle them because of their spelling. Intellectual snobbery at its worst.

Dr. Lou


Hmmm... no.
Asguards spelling is a bit much.

He spells the words the way they are pronounced. I always find his posts easy to understand.

When you're reading those kinds of spelling mistakes you naturally use a retard voice in your head without even thinking, which then in turn makes it impossible to respect the author.

That's idiotic. So what you are saying is that if someone is illiterate, they are stupid, and their opinions are worth jack shit?
What about someone who is dyslexic? What about immigrants who have trouble with the English language?
Calling someone uneducated because of poor spelling is like calling you a troll because you have opinions which don't agree with mainstream.

I'd rather blunt and honest, than flowery and full of bullshit.

On another note, I actually enjoy reading your posts, Dr. Lou, since you are quite often blunt and honest.

Calling someone uneducated because of poor spelling is like calling you a troll because you have opinions which don't agree with mainstream.
I never said uneducated, I'm uneducated, I said retarded.
And I meant they seem retarded in this medium. Perhaps they aren't actually retarded, all the more reason to avoid attempting to communicate with the written word. Why come off as a retard when you aren't?
It would serve asguard well to spend his time vocalising his opinions to people in person. They might take him seriously.

Thank God the American people aren't forced to pay for a pointless war in Iraq.

The war was approved by the congress ...by the representatives of the people of the United States of America, people that the voters elected to that office. As such, tax dollars were allocated accordingly and approved by the congress. No American was forced to pay for the war ...we voted for our representatives, who voted to go to war. That's how a representative government works.

How many kids could you send to college with that amount???

Don't matter. We obviously would rather go to war than give free handouts to some kid who probably wouldn't appreciate it anyway! Besides, we need to get rid of some of the hordes of humans on the Earth ...a good place to start is the Middle East! :)

I'm talking about spending taxes on IMPORTANT things, such as health and education, not pissing it away on wars.

But why don't the parents use their own money for those things? Why should I pay for some dumb-ass kid to go to college or have his fuckin' tonsils removed? Ain't that what parents are supposed to do? They ain't my damn kids, why should I have to pay for 'em?

And we're not pissing away the money on wars ...wars are fun, they help fuel the economy and they help get rid of some of the humanity that's choking the world today. Hell, we should have more wars, for god's sake. Hopefully the Chinese and the Taiwanese will get into it soon and we can have another fun, enjoyable, profitable war.

..., so you belittle them because of their spelling.

I don't believe I "belittled" him, I merely pointed out that his spelling is atrocious and he should do something about it ....like spend his money going to school instead on paying for a computer and Internet access. Or should American taxpayers pay for that, too?

Baron Max

The only time in the near future you be seeing me trust George W Bush if we send a US backed country weapons inspectors onto American soil.

Lets see the furios outrage from the multi-corporations covering up just how much technology they have and how many weapons (including nukes) are in stock pile.

I think it the US government the world should be worried about, something is always telling me America is one step ahead of the world for the wrong reasons.

God bless the Earth.

It would serve asguard well to spend his time vocalising his opinions to people in person. They might take him seriously

I guess some people might jump to conclusion regarding Asguard's spelling, but since I can understand what he is saying, I don't really care.


The war was approved by the congress ...by the representatives of the people of the United States of America, people that the voters elected to that office.

A large number of people did NOT vote for these representatives. Yet their money is pissed away on a war.

Why should we have to listen to a bunch of idiots, whose only skill is being able to con a block of voters into voting for them? These same idiots told us WoMD were in Iraq, but they weren't. These same idiots claimed that Saddam had ties to Al-Qaeda, and he didn't. These same idiots claimed that Iraq was a threat, when it wasn't.

The only things these idiots had going for them was their ability to manipulate and push buttons, and money.


As such, tax dollars were allocated accordingly and approved by the congress. No American was forced to pay for the war ...we voted for our representatives,

Actually, a large amount of Americans were FORCED to pay for war, since a large section were against it. And a large section did not vote Bushy in.


We obviously would rather go to war than give free handouts to some kid who probably wouldn't appreciate it anyway!

Insulting, since I have received several scholarship and definitely appreciate them.

You'd rather people get shot than help a kid get through college. Jeez, America sure knows where its priorities lie!


Besides, we need to get rid of some of the hordes of humans on the Earth ...a good place to start is the Middle East!

Actually, it's America which is pumping tonnes of shit into the atmosphere, so perhaps America is 'a good place to start'. You are all a bunch of trouble makers anyway.


But why don't the parents use their own money for those things? Why should I pay for some dumb-ass kid to go to college or have his fuckin' tonsils removed? Ain't that what parents are supposed to do? They ain't my damn kids, why should I have to pay for 'em?

Iraq is of no concern to the average American, why the hell should they have to pay for a conflict there?

Also, medical and health are public services. You are paying for your own right to be educated, and receive health care.


And we're not pissing away the money on wars ...wars are fun,

Hell yeah. Why don't you go over to Iraq and 'have fun' then, Soldier of Fortune?


they help fuel the economy

The down side is that you must pay for every bomb dropped, and every bullet fired. An expensive way to fuel the economy.

Hopefully the Chinese and the Taiwanese will get into it soon and we can have another fun, enjoyable, profitable war.

I hope that the American Admin. is insane enough to side alongside the Taiwanese.

George W. Bush is the best thing that ever happened to the world.

I'm sure that a christian like you could think of a few better things. Nit picked, I'm outta here.

Ahh, yes ...and the operative word there is "constructive". And when was the last time you saw any of that from those who oppose the current President or the administration? I've seen almost nothing but blind accusations and condemnation from most everyone!
Actually I see this all the time. Just look around you on this forum. Granted, there's a lot of stupid shit coming from all angles of the political spectra, but don't let that squelch out the thoughtful well-reasoned arguments.

I hear excellent arguments from people who aren't keen on Bush all the time, and many from those who are. Remember not to confuse a cogent argument with the truth.
We, the People, elect representatives and senators and the President to run this country. And yet we seem unwilling to allow them to run the country once they're elected. If we're not going to let them run the nation, why elect them in the first place? What do the elections mean?
When an official is elected their election does not give them a magical exemption from criticism just because they won the vote; it increases their vulnerability to it and necessarily so as they are now bound to deliver on campaign promises. It is our duty as participants in this Republic-that-has-many-democratic-mechanisms-therefore-is-called-democracy-by-convention to demand elected officials act as we want them to, and also within the constraints of the Constitution.

When this doesn't happen, you're damn right we can criticize them. They need to be reminded of this continuously. The government needs to be kept humble before the people, and the moment our leadership gets this idea that "we're the government and we do what we like" means it's time to smack them bitches back in their place, yo.

Max's arguments are so full of misrepresentations, fallacies, and downright idiocy, I'm not going to spend much time here.

I'm just going to point out that Max knows very little about the American political system. He can't see any farther than the past 20 years of politics. He has no idea that our system was purposefully created to be full of checks and balances, to allow the people to control who is in office.

We elect representatives because they will do a better job, the Framers believed, in deciding issues than uninformed voters.
Representatives have term limits so they answer to the voters and are ultimately responisble for the will of the people.

Checks and balances, dipshit. The American people want limited forms of socialism. So you have to deal with it.

i was just passing by on this thread, but this sort of got to me

George W. Bush is the best thing that ever happened to the world.
Underneath his banner of righteousness and common decency, humanity shall be saved from the forces that wish to lead mankind into the darkness.
by what bombing people correct me if im wrong but didn't jesus preach peace

They have access to the internet, they watch CNN, ABC, NBC and even CBS – to name but a few - and there are numerous newspapers reporting the news to them with no bias or ulterior motivations.
They are kind, God fearing people with a sense of honour and dignity, which they show in how they choose to free oppressed people from their miserable lives through either assimilation or death.
Accually if you accually read CNN, ABC, NBC, and "even" CBS. Their quite bias. Not so sure on there religous inklings

When American companies go into a country and offer jobs to the population, some collateral damage is inevitable.
Where do these peasants go when their nations are stricken by poverty and their resources are raped?
America! Of course!
Duh.
Are you saying that because we go into a nation and make them work for our companies for near to nothing, then leave because the pay is cheaper in another country, so there econemy dies, it's all good and cherry because... they come to america where there is an already shortage of jobs

They hate America but they run to it when they are desperate and hungry.
Didn’t Negroes run to their master’s house when they were hungry?
If they hated their master for beating them so much why did they run for food to him?
Maybe because if they were caught running they were killed. Also maybe because they couldn't get any other job, because of racism. so how else could they feed themselves.

We all know, in our heart of hearts, that Americans are benevolent, kind people.
not anymore then any other race of humans in this world that we are speaking of

So they have the highest crime rates in the western world, so what?
Should the entirety be judged by the actions of a few?
Do they not then electrocute these animals?
o.0 0.o o.0 0.o again i though that jesus preached about peace.

So stop this Bush bashing.
He is a smart and capable man.
How else would he have his father make him into a president?
So he doesn’t read books or speak English well; how many of you do?
His intelligence is revealed in how he’s accepted Lord Jesus into his heart and how he is guided by God.
Again i though jesus preached about peace!!?!?!??!?!?!?!?

Why are people getting down on the Neanderthals? They were an intelligent, cultured people. Their brains were bigger than ours. They were capable of speach and song as well as crafted flutes and participated in cerimonial burial. Neanderthals were just more of a specialized race that couldn't adapt to changes in climate or reproduce as quickly as modern humans. Once the ice age was gone they didn't last very long but I seriously doubt they were stupid. Forget the cartoons people. Freddy is a neat little character but Neanderthals probably weren't so dense.

i was just passing by on this thread, but this sort of got to me

Gemini, I think the post that 'got to you', and that you rebutted, was actually a sarcastic parody of a Bush supporter.

I support George Bush because he has a kind face and a nice smile ....
.................................................. ..
....................................
So stop this Bush bashing.
He is a smart and capable man.
How else would he have his father make him into a president?
So he doesn't read books or speak English well; how many of you do?
His intelligence is revealed in how he's accepted Lord Jesus into his heart and how he is guided by God.


(...full version here (http://www.sciforums.com/showthread.php?p=783714#post783714))

A glorious tribute Wanderer: Much enjoyed. :D

(P.S. Unrelated: who should I appeal to in order to attempt to have my username changed. Can anyone help?)

Teehee;
who should I appeal to in order to attempt to have my username changed. Can anyone help?
You just confirmed gendanken's suspicions as far as I'm concerned.
Unless it's a characteristically gay trait to constantly need a user name change.

Yamayama
A glorious tribute Wanderer: Much enjoyed. Thanks.

rGEMINI
Wake up little boy.
Stop bashing the USA and believing in Satan.

God said peace but also crush the infidels when they oppose the word of God and the forces of good and decency.

Crimson_Scribe
I'm sure that a christian like you could think of a few better things. Nit picked, I'm outta here.Jesus Christ our Lord and saviour will have the last word here.

America is the land of the chosen. Deal with it blasphemer.
Repent before you damn yourself.

Gambit Star
The only time in the near future you be seeing me trust George W Bush if we send a US backed country weapons inspectors onto American soil.Your insinuation that the UN should monitor US elections and question the kind of democracy is being implanted in Iraq, somewhere over in Africa, is pathetic and wrong.

Sure American soldiers prey daily to our Lord to give them strength to shoot through the head these Muslim fanatics and sure our President believes in God and then sends men to kill other men for oil, but that doesn’t mean that they aren’t good Christians.

But you’ll see, these Iraqi dudes will be storming through our borders soon, trying to get a job and feed their families, when we’ve so rightly offered them freedom, McDonald’s super-sized meals, MTV, and Christianity.

What will you American haters say when Iraq is ravaged and its economy destroyed and these same guys that oppose us and hate us come knocking at our door for the American dream?
You see they hate us one day and love us the next.
Let’s be honest, everyone wants to bean American and be a part of this wonderful culture.

Them Pakis complain but then they buy Michael Jackson albums.

Baron Max
The war was approved by the congress ...by the representatives of the people of the United States of America, people that the voters elected to that office. As such, tax dollars were allocated accordingly and approved by the congress. No American was forced to pay for the war ...we voted for our representatives, who voted to go to war. That's how a representative government works.Amen to that brother.
I’m with you.

We can admit that these representatives were elected because they had the “anonymous’ backing to advertise themselves and to spin and to create a persona that was attractive to the well-educated and perspicuous American people.

But these American bashers are children.
They don’t know about real life like us, they haven’t been to the trenches and earned an honest buck, like us.
They have these notions about rebelliousness and scepticism.

If you’re unhappy with the system, man, get yourself a sponsor, fall inline behind a general popular trend, sell yourself, be cute and tall with a full head of hair, keep to the talking points, hire people to write speeches for you and advisors that spin what mistakes you make into advantages, bribe the right officials and become a senator or - why not? – the president.

Don't matter. We obviously would rather go to war than give free handouts to some kid who probably wouldn't appreciate it anyway! Besides, we need to get rid of some of the hordes of humans on the Earth ...a good place to start is the Middle East!Nicely said.
Kill ‘em all or assimilate them.

That’s what the US stands for.

But why don't the parents use their own money for those things? Why should I pay for some dumb-ass kid to go to college or have his fuckin' tonsils removed? Ain't that what parents are supposed to do? They ain't my damn kids, why should I have to pay for 'em?Right on brother.

Why should we, hard working red blooded Americans, pay for some idiot’s mistake?

I wouldn’t expect anyone to bail me out if I invested in the wrong place and lost everything due to the glorious free market system. It’s a crap game man, some win some lose. Us winners should stick together.

If some retard can’t raise enough money to feed himself and his family, then why did he have one? Why should I pick up the tab and make some unappreciative punk a scientist that might cure my eventual lung cancer or prostate problem?

Why should I pay for the fire trucks that put out the fire burning their house down, for that matter?
I want MY money to go towards my needs.

And if these bastards eventually get desperate and hungry enough to come and rob me, I want the right to shoot them in the head with my M16, from the comforts of my own trailer.

That’s what America is about. That’s what society is like.

And we're not pissing away the money on wars ...wars are fun, they help fuel the economy and they help get rid of some of the humanity that's choking the world today. Hell, we should have more wars, for god's sake. Hopefully the Chinese and the Taiwanese will get into it soon and we can have another fun, enjoyable, profitable war.What do we care what happens to Africa anyways?

I don't believe I "belittled" him, I merely pointed out that his spelling is atrocious and he should do something about it ....like spend his money going to school instead on paying for a computer and Internet access. Or should American taxpayers pay for that, too? Don’t these people use spell-checker that makes them appear more educated than they are?
Jeez.

Actually I see this all the time. Just look around you on this forum. Granted, there's a lot of stupid shit coming from all angles of the political spectra, but don't let that squelch out the thoughtful well-reasoned arguments.

So what ye're saying is that I should wade through tons of shit just to find a single pearl of wisdom? And you'd suggest that our congressmen do that, too? Do you have the slightest idea of the amount of shit that is slung in one lousy day?? ...LOL!

>"When an official is elected their election does not give them a magical exemption from criticism just because they won the vote;..."<

Agreed ...to a point. But just who should they listen to? And how do you suggest that they wade through all the shit just to find the pearl of wisdom?

>"It is our duty as participants .... to demand elected officials act as we want them to, ...."<

But who?! Should an official from MY district do whatever someone in some other district "demands"? Should New York congressmen listen to the demands of California voters? "We, the people,..." takes on a very limited role once those votes have been cast and counted ...as it should be. Can you imagine trying to get "We, the people,..." to agree on any-damned-thing?

I did like your post - but it was written from a purely scholarly approach. I.e., when you say "we" or "you", it takes on an umlimited field of view. But it's not like that ...the "we" and "you" are meant to be the public, the voters. But what you've failed to consider is that "we" just might want that particular congressman and "you" have little rights to criticize him! "We" can criticize him because "we" elected him .....but "you" didn't!! See how academia fails to disclose that important fact?

Again, just to set the record straight for those who didn't fully read: Should California voters criticize congressman from New York? And if they do, should those congressman listen and obey?

Perhaps that's why people like to name President Bush and heap all of the critcize on him, yet our government is much, much more than one single man, than one single President. But people fail, fail miserably, when they just criticize without understanding our system.

Baron Max

Baron Max
I’m liking you more and more Baron Max. But not in a gay way.

So what ye're saying is that I should wade through tons of shit just to find a single pearl of wisdom? And you'd suggest that our congressmen do that, too? Do you have the slightest idea of the amount of shit that is slung in one lousy day?? ...LOL!Amen.
It’s hard just keeping your nose above the surface of all the shit.
Especially around this place.

Agreed ...to a point. But just who should they listen to? And how do you suggest that they wade through all the shit just to find the pearl of wisdom?I say lobbying groups is the answer.
You got good old greenbacks, earned through the exploitation of infidels, who you’ve driven out of their country, then you sell what wisdom you got.
Highest bidder wins.

George Bush managed to wade through all the shit and float to the surface in the highest office possible.
So his daddy pulled a few strings, so what?
That’s America.

You know people, you’re our guy.
You don’t, go to hell.

But who?! Should an official from MY district do whatever someone in some other district "demands"? Should New York congressmen listen to the demands of California voters? "We, the people,..." takes on a very limited role once those votes have been cast and counted ...as it should be. Can you imagine trying to get "We, the people,..." to agree on any-damned-thing?Exactly.
And if Texans want to invade Canada, why should faggot Californians veto the decision?

I would go further and make it even more local. If my neighbour’s house is being robbed, let him shoot the motherfucker or die trying to.
What the hell do I have to do with it?
Of course if my trailer is broken into I would expect him to come-a-running.

It’s only fair.

I still can’t justify spending money in Iraq though.
I mean shouldn’t they also bear the burden of their own affairs?
No…no….that’s silly.

Californians should mind their own business but we Americans can intervene in anyones affairs.
Why?
Might makes right, baby!

I did like your post - but it was written from a purely scholarly approach. I.e., when you say "we" or "you", it takes on an umlimited field of view. But it's not like that ...the "we" and "you" are meant to be the public, the voters. But what you've failed to consider is that "we" just might want that particular congressman and "you" have little rights to criticize him! "We" can criticize him because "we" elected him .....but "you" didn't!! See how academia fails to disclose that important fact? You so clearly comprehend the intricate issues involved in language.

I usually use ‘I’ when I speak. Or ya’ll. Or me, me me.

But that’s just me….I…me.

Academia is a crock-o-shit!!

I always trusted the words of down home bumpkins and red neck hoosers.
My local pastor is more in touch with reality than some Yankee, hoity-toity philosopher professor or some pompous college dude with too much time on his hands and, probably, faggot tendencies.

What would some academic, sitting amongst his many books, which he’s wasted away his life reading, know about real life?
Has he hoed his own garden?
Has he torn his hands on metal and sweated under the sun?
That’s where real wisdom lies.

Again, just to set the record straight for those who didn't fully read: Should California voters criticize congressman from New York? And if they do, should those congressman listen and obey?Should American’s criticize Saddam Hussein?….I mean… strike that.
You’re either with us or against us.
USA…Take it or get the hell out.
God bless America.

I think a city-state is more appropriate.
Why should some dude from Hoozerville have a say in what happens in Bumpkin city?

If I want to shoot coons and marry my cousin what’s his problem?

Perhaps that's why people like to name President Bush and heap all of the critcize on him, yet our government is much, much more than one single man, than one single President. But people fail, fail miserably, when they just criticize without understanding our system. It sure is Baron Max and only guys like us fully get all the issues involved.
Men who’ve put flesh to metal and lubricated the gears of society with their blood.

Government isn’t only the President. God, he isn’t even in control but just a figurehead and a lightning rod the real powers hide behind.

But explain that to some faggot in Manhattan.

Baron Max,

Albeit off-topic:
Yeah, and we like it that way! Please refrain from trying to change us into something like the Neanderthal-lands, okay?

That's an interesting way of referring to a coalition partner.

Baron Max, ...Albeit off-topic: That's an interesting way of referring to a coalition partner.

Why, thank you ...glad you found it interesting.

Baron Max

Heh, gotta love Wanderer's posts. (assuming they *are* sarcastic :bugeye: )

- N

Neildo
Heh, gotta love Wanderer's posts. (assuming they *are* sarcastic ) Wanderer, blunderer.

What’s with his English anyways? Does he even speak American?

The subject here is why I support George W.

It seems to me that the only people making any sense around here are Baron Max and Bob.
The rest of you are silly.

Thing is we went into Iraq to find weapons of mass.. no we went there to save the ….no we went there to bring Democracy and happiness and economic equality to that country.
The kind we have here in the US.

I wouldn’t be surprised if in a few years there’s a Shiite and a Sunni party monopolizing public discourse and special interests get backdoor preferential treatment from the government, just like in our wonderful system.
Then we can teach them about dummying down their population with religion and TV and spin, teach them that reading and a rudimentary knowledge of their language is nerdy, make them placid with large quantities of alcohol and food, maintain the fear of God in them, and then they’ll be just like us.

That’s Democracy!!! American style, baby!!!

Are you doing drugs? Do you need to be?

You do understand that America has been getting ever more secular, open about sexuality, educated, culturally tollerant, and politically outspoken since WWII. Back the most weren't college educated, probably barely knew what happened in their city much less their country, had a very strict dress code, and were racist and homophobic as hell. God help you if you were openly Communist in the early Cold War era.

You must be living on a different planet or something.

You must be living on a different planet or something.

Well, I think it's called "Fantasy Land" or something ...perhaps "pipedreams"?

But remember, lots of young people have those fantasies and they're quite prevalent until reality begins to force it's way into their lives. You know, work, family obligations, paying for their own food and entertainment, loss of freedom due to family concerns, .....you know, reality? :)

Baron Max

Then why do you propose the US should take up arms to rid the world of non-democratic governments while they can have their purpose? Take e.g. the Russian Federation.

Are you seriously suggesting the US invade a country the size of Russia, with over 140 million people, and thousands on nuclear warheads? We aren't stupid, and liberalism although is restricted, has in a overall sense won in Russia, Russians are better off now, freer, and are able to decide for themselves in elections who is their leaders. There are troublesome problems in relation to media control, and manipulation, but overall things are better now then ever before.

Imho, democracy only works properly in a reasonably stable country. In times of chaos, there is no telling what people would vote for. They can end up with someone worse than they were freed from.

That's their decision, that's their imperative, that's what liberalism is the ability to choose. I wouldn't object to a government which was democratically and freely elected by the popular will of the society even if that government was illiberal, because i know at the end of the day liberalism will triumph over all obstacles, it is the human way of life. Democratically elected despots are like inflation, they happen when ppl expect to much but it will eventually be tammed and will result in a more enlightened society.

That can certainly be the case. On the other hand, unbridled capitalism can also lead to very unhealthy social tensions. Almost a century ago communism thrived upon discontent factory workers who felt exploited by companies. The trick is to find a good balance between laws which encourage economic freedom and laws which protect the individual employee. A very hard trick indeed.

Unbridled capitalism has never existed, and I suspect it may never. But the if you look at the nations which became communist, they did not have a capitalist mode of production, and did not have a majority of the population being proletarians, most of them were feudalistic states, and so Marx's theory could not be applicable here because capitalists in those societies did not want the revolution to happen. I think the best example is England, it caused horrendous social inequality, but eventually living standards increased for all and for 30 years under Pax Britainnia Globalization had created a world of richess, not seen until our recent times.

i do believe that it is not a solution you can just easily implement all over the globe without huge consequences.

Those consequences can be moderated by a increase in individual freedom, and the growth of social mobility, you see you can be dirt poor but if you know the system can make you rich you will not revolt against it. So I agree that capitalism does cause there to be a large inequality of wealth, but it can also cause there to be a huge amount of social mobility.

its not incorect, Countrys like Australia, brittan, canada, NZ all have laws that say its illegal to discriminate PERIOD.

Let's review what you said

the rest of the world is more tolerant than you are.

You did not indicate which nations, and I did not say America was the MOST liberal society, I said it was up there. Although you say that Canada for instance is a more liberal society, I say maybe in the sense of civil rights, but I propose that America is freer in economic rights, the ability to set a business with relative ease, and with low taxes, liberalism=liberty, and Canada's socio-economic system doesn't provide that.

how do you go to school if you cant aford to?

As another member said, scholarships our schools should waste their time and money on students who are the best of the best and if you are dirt poor but can prove you deserve the right to get into school due to your exceptional marks, you will get in. And since the amount of people in university will decrease, the supply of students will go down and so logically wages for grads. will go up and that smart child will no longer be poor he will be able to bring himself up, and pay off his debts.

Ignorance which your government is very willing to endorse. You know... democracy without wisdom is an instrument of slavery and fascism.And that is exactly what happens. Your government is a fascist government disguised under the vail of "democracy" and "freedom" ...

Of course that's nonsense, if America was a fascist state then why aren't people being killed based on their sex, race, or status by government endorsement? The American people are one of the most educated on Earth, and although I agree that we neo-conservatives are co-opting religious conservatives to achieve our goals, I at least totally abhor them. Once the supremacy of the, also I don't like the word neo-conservative that better describes the modern democratic party, I am a neo-liberal in everysense.

Yes. Sadam, for instance was supported by the US for many years.... :rolleyes:
Also most, if not all dictatorship governments were created by the US.

Yes Saddam was supported by the US, and we "neocons" did not support that, we found it abhorrant of US principles, but again that was the Cold War, and real politik was in play America had little in the way of choice, if it wasn't the US it would have been the USSR and we would have lost control of 112 billion barrels, and the western economy would have been at the whim of the Soviet Union...you wanted that?

Which "european imperialism", the same one that gets crammed in our heads everyday through our TVs!?!? :rolleyes:

If you had a modicum of historical knowledge you'd know that eversince 1919 under Wilson America has been a crusade to destroy the vestiges of European imperialism, America didn't create Iraq, the British did.

It is america's imperialism that created fascism all over the world.

One day u'll know what fascism means...

At least they are not endorsing them in the same way america is doing....

Not only are they not endorsing it, they are ignoring it. Thus liberalism would die, liberalism is the ONLY ideology that is permeable to all the world's people's, Islam isn't, atheism isn't, communism isn't only liberalism is and as a result it has to spread to the people of the world.

Yes. WHich country is the worst polutting in the planet? Wasn't it the same country that didn't sign the Kyoto protocol?

So I take it you agree with me, since you went off on a irrelevant tangent.

*pukes*

I prefer to drive the Japanese small energy-efficient cars.

Those Japanese companies wouldn't be around if it weren't for American aid, and demand. So again you owe us for what you consider non-American.

Rebels against you. Not that I agree with their methods, but hey... they stand up against you, don't they?

So you'd want 20 million Afghani's to live under their rule instead of a least a liberal one?

Yes, the curse of the world.

Then I am sure you don't have TV?

Ha! The nation with the greatest population of prisoners!?!?!?

Firstly per capita I doubt that, secondly those crimes are actual crimes that correspond to the harm principle not political prisoners, and America has one of the best judicial systems in the world.

WTF!?!? Every single social change that went through there was thought with a lot of blood being shed!! Ever read american history? And I'm talking about real books, not the ones supplied by your fascist government.

But it hasn't denegrated into civil war (save the civil war), and liberalism HAS ALWAYS won out in the end, that is something that not all nations can say.

I'm not talking about neo-cons at all, I'm talking about your government.

My gov't is a bureaucracy it doesn;t make decision it only implaments them, learn basic political science.

Not at all. I would prefer my clean air and my stars back.

Ok then I suggest you move to the Amazon, with the tribes, and stop using the computer, the shower, clothes, and electricity, we'll see how much you want that life...you sir are a hypocrite.

Yes Saddam was supported by the US, and we "neocons" did not support that, we found it abhorrant of US principles...

So...Donald Rumsfeld isn't a Neo-con?

Are you seriously suggesting the US invade a country the size of Russia, with over 140 million people, and thousands on nuclear warheads?

That's not what I meant. Russia was intended as a specific case where restricted liberties, introduced by Putin, were part of a package to lead Russia to a more stable and prosperous state. My excuses for the confusion.

i know at the end of the day liberalism will triumph over all obstacles, it is the human way of life. Democratically elected despots are like inflation, they happen when ppl expect to much but it will eventually be tammed and will result in a more enlightened society.

Thus, the inevitable outcome for every country is liberalism? All we have to do is wait long enough for it to happen? Yet, you also propose to put your country in the line of danger to speed up that process (assuming for the sake of argument that you are going to succeed). Why busy yourself with something that is going to sort itself out anyway?

Unbridled capitalism has never existed, and I suspect it may never.

I underline your suspicions with my hope.

But the if you look at the nations which became communist, they did not have a capitalist mode of production, and did not have a majority of the population being proletarians, most of them were feudalistic states

While Communist governments may not have been formed in the traditionally capitalist countries, the sympathy for Communist movements was nevertheless strong in them. The "Council Communism" e.g. originated partly in the Netherlands, a country with a strong history of free enterprise.

so Marx's theory could not be applicable here because capitalists in those societies did not want the revolution to happen.

I'm not sure why communism did not take off to power in e.g. Western Europe. At that time, the early half of the previous century, so many factors played a role in shaping Europe's history that, for me, it makes it near impossible to point out a single cause.

I think the best example is England, it caused horrendous social inequality, but eventually living standards increased for all and for 30 years under Pax Britainnia Globalization had created a world of richess, not seen until our recent times.

Which 30 years are you referring to, if i may ask?

Those consequences can be moderated by a increase in individual freedom, and the growth of social mobility, you see you can be dirt poor but if you know the system can make you rich you will not revolt against it.

You are ignoring the cultural backgrounds of other nations. Our countries have a long tradition in cultivating individuality and empowering yourself to climb the social ladder. We have been born and bred with that notion. Now, imagine a country with a culture alien to that concept. It can take decades before a new generation rises up and takes the bait of such an interesting promise, assuming that the chaos that follows any large transition did not throw the country back to a more fundamentalistic or militant government.

So I agree that capitalism does cause there to be a large inequality of wealth, but it can also cause there to be a huge amount of social mobility.

This social mobility would be there if anyone has a more or less equal change to climb the social ladder. I dispute that capitalism, by default, provides that option. Capitalism focusses on the accumulation of, well, capital. That in itself can result to a scenario where those that have accumulated it will do all to protect and enlarge their capital, perhaps even at an unjust expensive of others. To prevent this from happening, governments are e.g. breaking up companies which have grown so powerfull that an honest competition in their market is deemed impossible.

It is the combination of a relatively free market and a government that can excert control over that market when necessary. Quite a few countries, including the U.S. and Western European states, have evolved to that construction. It seems to me a mode of governing that has to be learned over time rather than to be forcefully implemented upon short notice.

Are you doing drugs? Do you need to be?

You do understand that America has been getting ever more secular,
http://www.religioustolerance.org/chr_poll4.htm

Adults who believe that God performs miracles: 84%
The Bible is totally accurate (2001): 41%

Bush sounds very secular to me... :rolleyes:

open about sexuality,
http://www.commondreams.org/news2004/0829-09.htm

Homossexuality is outlawed in many states... :rolleyes:

educated,
You speak only one language, maaaaybe some spanish, but many countries in europe, for example, teach more than 4 languages.

Plus, you either know nothing about the world or have a very distroted image.
Plus the cost of education there is extremely high and exclusive.

Not to mention brainwashing, obviously.... :rolleyes:

culturally tollerant,
A lot of the bloodshed that happened in the US happened because of cultural difference.
http://www.counterpunch.org/hanania05102004.html
http://www.peoplesvideo.org/images/resolutionmaj.pdf
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/asia-pacific/4313909.stm

and politically outspoken since WWII.
To bad your policies are terrible...

You must be living on a different planet or something.
Looks like it is you that lives in your little fantasy land...

Of course that's nonsense, if America was a fascist state then why aren't people being killed based on their sex, race, or status by government endorsement?
First of all, that is not the definition of fascism:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fascism#Definition
"The word fascism has come to mean any system of government resembling Mussolini's, that

exalts nation and sometimes race above the individual,
uses violence and modern techniques of propaganda and censorship to forcibly suppress political opposition,
engages in severe economic and social regimentation.
engages in corporatism,[1] (http://www.britannica.com/eb/article?tocId=219369)
implements or is a totalitarian regime. "


Sounds a lot like america.... :rolleyes:

Also, remember homossexuals and general racism. US is one of the most racist countries in the world. It is practically your own definition.
http://www.counterpunch.org/hanania05102004.html

The American people are one of the most educated on Earth, and although I agree that we neo-conservatives are co-opting religious conservatives to achieve our goals, I at least totally abhor them. Once the supremacy of the, also I don't like the word neo-conservative that better describes the modern democratic party, I am a neo-liberal in everysense.
I don't care waht your are nearly as much as what the majority is. And, no, you are far from educated.

Yes Saddam was supported by the US, and we "neocons" did not support that, we found it abhorrant of US principles, but again that was the Cold War, and real politik was in play America had little in the way of choice, if it wasn't the US it would have been the USSR and we would have lost control of 112 billion barrels, and the western economy would have been at the whim of the Soviet Union...you wanted that?
Denial of the antecedent (http://www.infidels.org/news/atheism/logic.html#antecedent)

If you had a modicum of historical knowledge you'd know that eversince 1919 under Wilson America has been a crusade to destroy the vestiges of European imperialism, America didn't create Iraq, the British did.
Oh yes! What a great historical knowledge!!! :rolleyes:
Wow.... the brainwashing is REALLY effective....

One day u'll know what fascism means...
We already know. We see it downstairs everyday....

Not only are they not endorsing it, they are ignoring it. Thus liberalism would die, liberalism is the ONLY ideology that is permeable to all the world's people's, Islam isn't, atheism isn't, communism isn't only liberalism is and as a result it has to spread to the people of the world.
Your liberalism have nothing of liberal. That is the old Orwell's prophecy: "Freedom is slavery"...

So I take it you agree with me, since you went off on a irrelevant tangent.
Irrelevant!?!? WTF!?!?!?
What are you trying to do now? Denying that the US didn't sign the agreement!?!?

Those Japanese companies wouldn't be around if it weren't for American aid, and demand. So again you owe us for what you consider non-American.
Again, denial of the antecedent.

So you'd want 20 million Afghani's to live under their rule instead of a least a liberal one?
I see no "liberty".

Then I am sure you don't have TV?
Actually, the only thing I watch on TV is the Simpsons, cause it exposes a lot of the lies. And it is also as sarcastic as I am... :D

Firstly per capita I doubt that, secondly those crimes are actual crimes that correspond to the harm principle not political prisoners, and America has one of the best judicial systems in the world.
Ha! You make me laugh. Should I really waste my time answering that?

But it hasn't denegrated into civil war (save the civil war), and liberalism HAS ALWAYS won out in the end, that is something that not all nations can say.
There is no liberalism in the US. It is just a huge joke. As I said, you live in a fascist system that is constantly desguised as a democracy. Hell, don't you see at all? Bush won twice and people didn't want him. People didn't want to go to war either. And Bush is always uing fear to control americans. Like... are you so brainwashed you cannot see what is going on!?

My gov't is a bureaucracy it doesn;t make decision it only implaments them, learn basic political science.
This is stupid. The very definition of political science states that it is the management of scarce resources. Politicians make decisions all the time. Didn't G dorky Bush decided to go to war? Who is making the decisions, than? Santa Claus? The easter bunny!?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Politics
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Political_science

Ok then I suggest you move to the Amazon, with the tribes, and stop using the computer, the shower, clothes, and electricity, we'll see how much you want that life...you sir are a hypocrite.
Not at all. I would love it. But unfortunately, I want to preserve that so that my children can have air to breath someday. SO I have to go through the system and change it, so that people stop destroying what I want to preserve. So I need to stay and work. Otherwise, you know where to stick your techonolgy....

I want to preserve that so that my children can have air to breath someday. SO I have to go through the system and change it, so that people stop destroying what I want to preserve.

And what if those people don't want to stop "destroying" what you want to preserve? What are you going to do then?

Baron Max

Ok - well, blatantly ripping off a Ted Rall column (which I have looked up and found to be true) - for all you pro-Bushists out there that believe that business is the savior of everything in the world, why are they not paying the same taxes the rest of us pay? Whenever any good (eg, stapler, software, etc.) passes between two people, one of them is required to pay sales tax. However, stocks are exempt from this sales tax. If only the New York Stock Exchange was required to pay equivalent sales tax on their purchases (totaling trillions upon trillions of dollars per year), that would surpass the entire budget of both the federal and state governments combined. I really do not understand why these particular goods (stocks) are exempt from tax while everything else (that we in the working class world) is subject to. And do Bushists really expect this to change under the current presidency?

truthseeker, i love you :p

I would have to say most replies in this thread were either by "superior" feeling americans, or logical arguments.

someone said "Yeah, you all bash america but when it gets tough you come running"

Believe me, the only reason they come running is because the problem was caused by America's choice to 'liberate' the world, because america's system is soooo much better than foriegn systems :D.

In reply to the first post, america is not superior to any other country, as many others have PROVEN. A country who thinks it is their 'responsibility' to 'free' a country from a dictatorship so they can impose freedom on them is inferior to all countries that don't. Have you noticed how many TV shows use the sterotype of bullies being strong but stupid? Yes, that is based upon America. How do many people not see the hypocracy in 'invading' a country because they think they have WMD, when america HAS them.

If you think Iraq's liberation was just, then why is it not just for America to send special ops into Iran, when North Korea has told the world that they have WMD and say they hate america.

Yes, i am from australia, but unlike a lot of 'patriotic' (ignorant) american's, i know the leadership of my country is terrible. Australia IS a united state of america. Sure our leader makes good economic decisions, but he is the same as the sterotypical "bully's friend". If anyone needs to be liberated, it is america and australia. I can't stand my country, i don't understand the idiocracy and the lack of priority of my countries citizens.

Sure our leader makes good economic decisions, but he is the same as the sterotypical "bully's friend". If anyone needs to be liberated, it is america and australia. I can't stand my country, i don't understand the idiocracy and the lack of priority of my countries citizens.

HEAR HEAR!

I'm not happy with Howard either, but who do we have who is better than him? Labour is no better, and any other party is too weak to take up the mantle of government.

true true mountain hare, we need a new person/group to take a leading posistion, and one that isnt scared to refuse the will of the bully.

I honestly wish prince charles was the undisputed king of the commonwealth. And I was the duke of south east queensland.

I wish lenin was