Paradox
©
Fisana

Jump to content


Photo
- - - - -

election discussion [merged]


  • Please log in to reply
131 replies to this topic

#121 chill

chill

    celtic tiger

  • Expired Member
  • 1,092 posts

Posted 12 November 2006 - 01:49 PM

hell, who pissed in your coffee? ;)

You're agruing against education and access to information?

From your post you're apparently also against providing them with food and medicine.

I don't think we're going to find common ground here.

Just started another version of my open air grow and I gotta go clean up.

Have a good long weekend, hip.

ttyl

#122 marsofold

marsofold

    Mycotopiate

  • Expired Member
  • 348 posts

Posted 12 November 2006 - 02:40 PM

While Hillary might turn out to be the dreaded super-feminist the Republicans fear, I think she's matured a bit over the years and realizes that she has to reach out to the center to get anything done at all. Something that Howard Dean hasn't figured out yet (I'm beginning to think Howard Dean is a republican agent). And her intellect is beyond dispute. Before politics, she was rated as one of the top 100 lawyers in the country. I'd take a chance and vote for her. Obama, however, hasn't even been a US senator for a whole year. That alone is enough to disqualify him on grounds of inexperience. Giving possible access to the nuclear button to such untested personality isn't wise. And while the South might vote for Colin Powell, Obama just ain't gonna get the white vote in Alabama. If the democrats want to go beyond posturing and actually capture the white house in 2008, they need to make the hard choices and pick a combo that also attracts people who call themselves republican. Or lose it yet again.

#123 Hippie3

Hippie3

    DUNG DEALER

  • Founders
  • 40,642 posts

Posted 12 November 2006 - 04:11 PM

hell, who pissed in your coffee? ;)

You're agruing against education and access to information?

From your post you're apparently also against providing them with food and medicine.

I don't think we're going to find common ground here.

Just started another version of my open air grow and I gotta go clean up.

Have a good long weekend, hip.

ttyl


pretty lame come-back,
you side-step every point
and instead mumble something
about piss in my coffee ?
what the hell ?

#124 Horus XCIII

Horus XCIII

    Mycophage

  • Expired Member
  • 162 posts

Posted 13 November 2006 - 10:16 PM

hell, who pissed in your coffee? ;)

You're agruing against education and access to information?

From your post you're apparently also against providing them with food and medicine.

I don't think we're going to find common ground here.

Just started another version of my open air grow and I gotta go clean up.

Have a good long weekend, hip.

ttyl


What you're suggesting sounds more like a lot of propaganda, like hip said. "Free Access to Information" ("information" by-and-large provided by us) won't do anything, because they have to be willing to access such information.

People who have been brain-washed in such ways their whole lives (and yes I'm generalizing, I know there are people who haven't been so utterly manipulated but many of them are . . . fundamentalism kills brain cells!) aren't suddenly going to say "Hmmm, maybe women deserve equal rights! They aren't really any different from us! And maybe we should be allowed to say what we want! The government shouldn't control our brains!" just because they have a DSL connection :)

#125 Hippie3

Hippie3

    DUNG DEALER

  • Founders
  • 40,642 posts

Posted 14 November 2006 - 08:37 AM

agreed, it is naive in the extreme to believe that mere access to information,
even if coupled with yet more food and medicine-
items we've already been sending for the last 50 years or so-,
would somehow free the minds of the jihadists
into seeing things our way.
wishful thinking is what it is, not a real solution at all.

#126 llamabox

llamabox

    Researcher

  • OG VIP
  • 1,406 posts

Awards Bar:

Posted 14 November 2006 - 09:52 AM

You know how we work commercialize first. Then they will WANT to be just like us.

#127 Hippie3

Hippie3

    DUNG DEALER

  • Founders
  • 40,642 posts

Posted 14 November 2006 - 09:57 AM

bingo.
while having some military overtones
this is primarily a war between cultures, civilizations, societies.
both sides are intent on the destruction of the other
as this planet is no longer big enough for both.
they will either win,
and usher in a second medieval Dark Age that covers the entire globe,
or we will be selling Coca-cola and Nikes
to the talibans' descendants.

#128 beebopboy

beebopboy

    Mycotopiate

  • Expired Member
  • 257 posts

Posted 17 November 2006 - 01:04 AM

Im glad the dems came out on top!

Even if they cant get most of their agenda through, neither can the republicans on social conversative issues like gay marriage and prolife jive. I dono but i just feel like those issues are a bit too personal and the government should be left out, not to mention separation church and state.

That aside, I think the war needs a new prespective on it.

Republicans have just seemed so stubborn on their stance of "staying the course".

I think the dems being in power will allow more debate on how to approach the war and hopefully a bipartisan agreement on how to proceed.

I heard Glenn Beck today saying that since the dems have no plan that makes their party weak. pssh. Its been like 8 days. Talk can be good, especially after 3 years.

#129 Hippie3

Hippie3

    DUNG DEALER

  • Founders
  • 40,642 posts

Posted 17 November 2006 - 07:59 AM

one would hope that the dems had already given some thought
over the last 3 years
as to what their 'plan' would be if they were in charge.
unfortunately they apparently did not,
getting no further than the rather vague idea
that the war isn't going well, let's get the hell out of there.
:lol:
and even the generals tell them that's a
recipe for disaster.

murtha's defeat , despite pelosi's backing/endorsement,
pretty clearly shows that even within their party
there is still indecision and division about how to
proceed.
in the end no much will change
as a gridlocked congress can not
effectively restrain
a commander-in-chief in wartime.

#130 Horus XCIII

Horus XCIII

    Mycophage

  • Expired Member
  • 162 posts

Posted 18 November 2006 - 09:17 AM

Abandoning Iraq out of the blue would be deadly for our international relationships. It shows that we cannot get a job done. I know that's rather conservative rhetoric, but I still think it's true. Leaving Iraq, especially in its current state, is suicide, and weakens us politically.

#131 Hippie3

Hippie3

    DUNG DEALER

  • Founders
  • 40,642 posts

Posted 18 November 2006 - 09:24 AM

it would also be immoral,
knowingly & deliberately abandoning people that trusted us
to be slaughtered.

if you think it's bad there now,
it would quickly turn much worse if our restraining influence was
withdrawn precipitously.

i personally find it offensive that so-called 'liberals' have turned
callous indifference to the fate of myriads of iraqis
into a virtue.

i guess it's supposed to be ok
as long as it is just
strange-talking brown-skinned foreign people
dying...

#132 Horus XCIII

Horus XCIII

    Mycophage

  • Expired Member
  • 162 posts

Posted 18 November 2006 - 01:34 PM

it would also be immoral,
knowingly & deliberately abandoning people that trusted us
to be slaughtered.

if you think it's bad there now,
it would quickly turn much worse if our restraining influence was
withdrawn precipitously.

i personally find it offensive that so-called 'liberals' have turned
callous indifference to the fate of myriads of iraqis
into a virtue.

i guess it's supposed to be ok
as long as it is just
strange-talking brown-skinned foreign people
dying...


Indeed; great post hippie3. Muchos kudos :thumbup:




Like Mycotopia? Become a member today!