Paradox
©
Fisana

Jump to content


- - - - -

The asshole bush wants to replace ashcroft with


  • Please log in to reply
121 replies to this topic

#41 Guest_hippie3_*

Guest_hippie3_*
  • Guest

Posted 10 January 2005 - 08:45 AM

<blockquote><hr size=0><!-quote-!><font size=1>quote:</font>

I remember hearing a statistic about how 80 sumthin percent of voters in the district of Manhattan voted for Kerry.
That doesn't mean he was the right man for the job, any more than the claims of "biggest margin of victory in years" mean that Bush has a mandate from the American people.
<!-/quote-!><hr size=0></blockquote>

more denial.
bush got more votes
than any other presidential candidate in history
bar none.
if that's not a 'mandate'
then what is ??

it's percentages that are distorted to make things appear other than the reality,
the losers say
it's only 51%
as if the % mattered.
but even 1%
of ~300 million
is still a very large number.
even a half-a-percent margin
translates into a million+ votes.
it's easy to massage the data if one just uses statistics like percentages,
such as when a small town that normally has only 1 murder a year that one year gets two
can accurately say
that the murder rate rose by 100%
which sounds very significant and impressive
until you see the real numbers.
and the real numbers tell the
story about last election
quite clearly-
it wasn't even close
bush took a commanding lead early on
and never looked back.
the media pundits just refused to believe the evidence until it hit them full in the face
on the day after the election.
some, apparently,
still cannot accept the reality
and so persist in denying it.

(Message edited by admin on January 10, 2005)

#42 Guest_rodger_*

Guest_rodger_*
  • Guest

Posted 10 January 2005 - 11:04 AM

Bush may have received a record number of votes, but that's because the population is higher now. 51% of the votes cast is hardly a mandate, but let him go for it.

The point is, the election is over. Kerry conceded. It's time to hope the damage isn't permanent and look to the future.

It would be nice if we could all move on. I have made it no secret that I'm a registered Democrat.
There are stupid republicans who are uninformed, just as there are stupid democrats who only vote the party line because that's what they've been told to do. I hope for the next four years people will begin paying more attention to what's going on than they have in the past. If bush does a great job, people will vote for a republican next time. If he screws everything up, we'll get one of our own in next time.

That's how the system works. To our side, I say please quit whining, and to the other side, I say please quit gloating. This is serious. Let's treat it as such. Our future, and especially our children's future hangs in the balance.

#43 Guest_lazlow_*

Guest_lazlow_*
  • Guest

Posted 10 January 2005 - 12:20 PM

http://www.pipa.org/...10_21_04.html#1
I think this is relevant
Bush isn't out of touch with the people
the people are out of touch with the real world
Bush exploits this ignorance
IM not saying both sides don't, IM just saying Mr. Rove is better at it. Democracy like capitalism requires an informed public to work optimally. The wild card that stops this is advertising (political as well as commercial) that tricks the public. Instead of the best product/candidate wining the best stratigest/advertiser does.


#44 Guest_burnt_*

Guest_burnt_*
  • Guest

Posted 10 January 2005 - 12:31 PM

i think many people in america on both sides of the political spectrum want many of the same things for our country. security, a good economy, healthcare, and a more moral society. do both sides agree on that you tell me?? however what they dont agree on is first what these things mean and also how to accomplish these things.
for me being secure means having good relations with other nations and not constantly screwing them over for money or killing innocent people. but for others security may mean having a strong military and being on the offensive against our enemies.
for me a good economy is one that is sustainable, by sustainable i mean one that takes the environment into consideration since that is our source for all resources in our economy. for me a good economy wouldn't be one driven by material goods and constant resource consumption for max profit. but for many others a strong economy is one where people can spend tons of money on things and put that money into business who can then expand and sell more stuff and people will buy more and on it goes growing.

but this doesnt mean people cant meet on a common ground. our views on how things should be solved may differ but by discussing these issues openly and honestly and giving up their stubborn attitudes and keep an open mind we can make some progress. instead of running around this limbo of nonsense our society is lost in.

#45 Guest_hippie3_*

Guest_hippie3_*
  • Guest

Posted 10 January 2005 - 01:02 PM

<blockquote><hr size=0><!-quote-!><font size=1>quote:</font>

Bush may have received a record number of votes, but that's because the population is higher now.<!-/quote-!><hr size=0></blockquote>
population is larger, true
but folks are not required to vote.
it takes effort.
more people put forth the effort to vote
than ever before.
there were enough people
back in 1980 or 1990
for someone to have gotten as many votes as bush did, if the voters had been motivated.
but they weren't.
what got bush elected was not mere population growth but instead it was unprecidented voter turn-out, something heretofore thought to be a friend of democrats but no more eh ?

#46 Guest_i_am_me_*

Guest_i_am_me_*
  • Guest

Posted 11 January 2005 - 12:09 AM

Kerry got the second most amount of votes ever.

Heh does that mean people like him more than all other past presidents?

The electoral college is what made Bush win the popular vote. I know lots and lots of people who did or didn't vote because they knew which way their state would swing. In the super-blue states people didn't need to get out in force because they were already locked up. In the super-red states people just stayed at home and hung their heads low.

Granted, its not the best way to get things done but I don't think you can clearly judge that the majority wants Bush in office based soley on the election. The electoral college plays a major role in that.

I'm not denying that Bush won the election and is our president for the next 4 years, I'm just saying that things aren't so black and white when it comes to comparing the majority of people with the actual turnout of voters.

#47 Guest_hippie3_*

Guest_hippie3_*
  • Guest

Posted 11 January 2005 - 06:58 AM

<blockquote><hr size=0><!-quote-!><font size=1>quote:</font>

I know lots and lots of people who did or didn't vote because they knew which way their state would swing. In the super-blue states people didn't need to get out in force because they were already locked up. In the super-red states people just stayed at home and hung their heads low. <!-/quote-!><hr size=0></blockquote>

IF that were true
voter turn-out wouldn't have set new records.
looks like damn few folks stayed at home anywhere.
besides
bush beat kerry by 3 million popular votes
which is quite significant
when one considers that
most of the country's population
lives in BLUE states.
quibble all you want
about the semantics
of majority and mandate
but the reality on the ground
says that bush surprised everyone
including most of y'all
by beating expectations, false news stories,
foreign interference and millions of dollars
of negative advertizing to
win a decisive re-election victory.
he has the only majority/mandate
that matters now.


(Message edited by admin on January 12, 2005)

#48 Guest_rodger_*

Guest_rodger_*
  • Guest

Posted 11 January 2005 - 09:00 AM

I was really hoping all this bullshit would end once Nov 2 was past. I didn't vote for bush but he won. That's it. Period.

The thread was to point to what is happening NOW, not last year. All the scandals of bush's first term are still working their way through the system and will eventually come to completion.

Bush's famous 'torture is ok' lawyer is who he wants to replace ashcroft with. I'm sure they had to search far and wide to find someone even more scary than ashcroft, but alas, they're professionals.

#49 Guest_hippie3_*

Guest_hippie3_*
  • Guest

Posted 11 January 2005 - 10:09 AM

you are still
twisting the facts
by applying a false label
to wit-
"famous 'torture is ok' lawyer
he denies that allegation
and so far as can be documented
no one has ever actually said
officially
that 'torture is ok'.
instead they redefined torture more specifically,
in a technical legal sense
as opposed to mere popular concepts & definitions.
what you might call torture
depends greatly on your own political perspective.
so plz be more specific-
what specific torture has gonzales approved ?

#50 Guest_vrooota!_*

Guest_vrooota!_*
  • Guest

Posted 11 January 2005 - 01:08 PM

Posted Image

#51 Guest_burnt_*

Guest_burnt_*
  • Guest

Posted 11 January 2005 - 02:50 PM

so how do we keep the administration in check? what happen to checks n balances or power to the people...

#52 Guest_rodger_*

Guest_rodger_*
  • Guest

Posted 11 January 2005 - 06:28 PM

There are no more checks and balances. They own the white house and both houses of congress. Unless we can keep a couple of supreme court justices on life support for the next four years, they're going to own three out of three.

#53 Lefty

Lefty

    Arrogant Asshole

  • Expired Member
  • 2,333 posts

Posted 11 January 2005 - 08:41 PM

I thought torture was okay as long as we didn't do it on U.S. soil or paid someone else to do it? The C.I.A. or similar authority approved "aggressive" interrogation, didn't they? Been all over the media & several civil rights groups are screaming.

#54 Guest_hippie3_*

Guest_hippie3_*
  • Guest

Posted 12 January 2005 - 12:07 PM

define torture


#55 Guest_hippie3_*

Guest_hippie3_*
  • Guest

Posted 12 January 2005 - 12:16 PM

<blockquote><hr size=0><!-quote-!><font size=1>quote:</font>

how do we keep the administration in check?<!-/quote-!><hr size=0></blockquote>
the entire house will
have to stand for elections
in just two years,
as will a third of the senate.
there are currently many many democrats
serving as federal judges at various levels
including the supreme court.
and then there's the constitution itself.
plenty of checks and balances
and no one to blame
but the voters themselves
who sent dems like daschle back home.
this is another
telling point, imo.
it's not just bush
that the country likes,
it's the republicans across the board
in almost every state
winning.
explain that away
as a fluke
if you can.

#56 Guest_i_am_me_*

Guest_i_am_me_*
  • Guest

Posted 12 January 2005 - 12:18 PM

Its no fluke. This country is moving more and more towards the religious right for several reasons everyday.



#57 Guest_burnt_*

Guest_burnt_*
  • Guest

Posted 12 January 2005 - 04:24 PM

im not saying anythings a fluke. the people vote they decide. im just worried that as more and more republicans take over more and more seats in government and courts that even more rights are going to be lost and theres going to be no way to stop it if its all on group of people running everything. i mean honestly how is our nation ever going to mature if people who think that gay marraige is satans way of ruining the human race, or that evolution didnt happen, or that if you dont do exactly whats in the bible your going to hell. sorry im not tyring to stereotype republicans or anything but this right ring religious movenment is disturbing. thats not what america is about its about freedom. yes people should have the freedom to practice their religion christian jew rasta whatever. but the bush adminitration has used religion as a tool to control peoples minds and freedoms and to me and my man jesus its discusting.

#58 Lefty

Lefty

    Arrogant Asshole

  • Expired Member
  • 2,333 posts

Posted 12 January 2005 - 04:46 PM

Torture, as I was referring to here, may be viewed at:rotten.com/library/crime/prison/abu-ghraib

(Message edited by Lefty on January 12, 2005)

#59 Guest_lazlow_*

Guest_lazlow_*
  • Guest

Posted 12 January 2005 - 04:49 PM

The public is simply misinformed as that P.I.P.A report partly shows. EVERY time i speak to Bush suporters they are not very informed and flat out wrong when it comes the facts on many of the issues they are familiar with.

#60 Guest_hippie3_*

Guest_hippie3_*
  • Guest

Posted 12 January 2005 - 05:45 PM

<blockquote><hr size=0><!-quote-!><font size=1>quote:</font>

honestly how is our nation ever going to mature if people who think that gay marraige is satans way of ruining the human race, or that evolution didnt happen<!-/quote-!><hr size=0></blockquote>
the world has managed to muddle along ok
without gay marriage
or knowledge of evolution.
i suspect things will go on
much as they always have.
it just seems more dramatic
when you're in the midst of the moment
as time passes
you'll see more and more
that this too
is just another
swing of the pendulum.
cycles are the nature of this universe,
we are currently in a cycle
that will bring great violence and disorder
but out of the pain and the blood
will come a better world.
just keep the faith.
evolution takes time,
and time is plentiful
even if patience is not.
work on fixing your own
little piece of the world,
that is every bit as important,
chaos theory teaches us
that little things matter a great deal.
plant a tree, hug a child.
the world will be a better place
because of you.

(Message edited by admin on January 12, 2005)




Like Mycotopia? Become a member today!