Issues with your account? Bug us in the Discord!
***Warning*** Biased political rant ahead!
Freejack
Jake the Not-so-Wise
in Zocalo v2.0
Ok, watched the debate last night, thought both candidates did a pretty good job, but something signifigant is bugging me, and both people are guilty of this, its that lack of explaintion to their plans.
Ok now for the biased part…Kerry is the worst about this. A number of times last night Kerry would say “I have a plan to do X”, but would give little advisement as to how he would follow through with his plan. For example, Kerry says on a regular basis to improve the situation in Iraq, he would train Iraqi troops faster and bring more allies to our cause. Ok, those are good ideas, but they’re pretty basic thing that most anyone would be for. What I want to know is how. How does Kerry plan to train more troops faster? How does Kerry plan to reduce the deficit by half in 4 years (Bush has made this claim also)? How is Kerry going increase the standing troop count by 50K? How does Kerry plan to enact health care reforms. All he says is that he is going to do it, that’s it, no substance, layout to back it up. It’s really beginning annoy and anger me. Really scares me that no one wants to ask him how, that people are making decisions based upon his “I wills” not “my plan is”.
Jake
Ok now for the biased part…Kerry is the worst about this. A number of times last night Kerry would say “I have a plan to do X”, but would give little advisement as to how he would follow through with his plan. For example, Kerry says on a regular basis to improve the situation in Iraq, he would train Iraqi troops faster and bring more allies to our cause. Ok, those are good ideas, but they’re pretty basic thing that most anyone would be for. What I want to know is how. How does Kerry plan to train more troops faster? How does Kerry plan to reduce the deficit by half in 4 years (Bush has made this claim also)? How is Kerry going increase the standing troop count by 50K? How does Kerry plan to enact health care reforms. All he says is that he is going to do it, that’s it, no substance, layout to back it up. It’s really beginning annoy and anger me. Really scares me that no one wants to ask him how, that people are making decisions based upon his “I wills” not “my plan is”.
Jake
Comments
at least Bush gave some details to his other plans.
Kerry's way of managing the deficit will be to bankrupt half of America and throw us into a depression I think.
And then there was Kerry's promise not to give away ANY of our rights.
ummm...is he not planning on signing in several tretise that will superceed the Constituion, which WILL mean a loss of rights and freedoms?
[B]same thing here. Bush side stepped the deficit thing 3 times, so did Kerry...
at least Bush gave some details to his other plans.
Kerry's way of managing the deficit will be to bankrupt half of America and throw us into a depression I think.
[/quote][/b]
Don't spout shit like an idiot. That's just flame-bait and republican talking points there. Try to think for yourself for once. Kerry said he will close out tax loopholes for corporations who offshore jobs or move their headquarters out of the US to dodge taxes. He will roll back the tax cuts for those who make more than $200,000/year as well. Try listening to something besides what Fox News, Rush Limbaugh, and Bill O'Reilly say, hmm?
[quote][b]
And then there was Kerry's promise not to give away ANY of our rights.
ummm...is he not planning on signing in several tretise that will superceed the Constituion, which WILL mean a loss of rights and freedoms? [/B][/QUOTE]
Pure and utter bullshit. Yet an even more egregious example of using those talking points. Try giving out some examples of what you say here? I know of no treaties he wants to join that could in any way "superceed(sic) the Constituion(sic)" as you claim. No, you're supporting the guy who wants to let Ashcroft into our lives to monitor what books we check out of the fucking library! How DARE you claim to be concerned with our freedoms and support this administration? What incredible hypocrisy!
[B]same thing here. Bush side stepped the deficit thing 3 times, so did Kerry...
at least Bush gave some details to his other plans.
Kerry's way of managing the deficit will be to bankrupt half of America and throw us into a depression I think.
And then there was Kerry's promise not to give away ANY of our rights.
ummm...is he not planning on signing in several tretise that will superceed the Constituion, which WILL mean a loss of rights and freedoms? [/B][/QUOTE] One word Patriot Act...If anything Kerry promised to INCREASE freedoms by removing this amendment from the constitution. Be aware that is one of the sole reasons I am voting for the guy & not thing superficial like heh TAX CUTS.
I don't give a R.A. about what Kerry / Edwards say they "will do (if elected)" about the Patriot Act or anything else. They're already in the government, why don't they just get rid of it now? You know, starting in the Senate... which they are already in... right now. The same goes for health care, tort reform or anything else. The same goes for Bush / Cheney. Do something [i]now[/i] instead of promising to do it later. (Unless it's a lie, in which case there is no intention to do it later...)
"It's an election year, nothing will happen." Do it anyway. Make a stink. Force the issue. (I won't even start on "what was wrong with the last 3 to 5 years?")
They are both lying. Lying politicians with corrupt lawyer training manipulating "facts", opinion, vague statements, and sound bites. Arguing about who lied better is pointless.
Promises = lies.
History = facts.
(added later...)
...and it's no different than it has been for thousands of years. Politicians lie. Power corrupts.
And it states the following
"This Constitution, and the laws of the United States which shall be made in pursuance thereof; and all treaties made, or which shall be made, under the authority of the United States, shall be the supreme law of the land; and the judges in every state shall be bound thereby, anything in the Constitution or laws of any State to the contrary notwithstanding."
This is why I think most of the treaties are bad.
And the patriot act is just a collection of legislation, it just modifies U.S code, so congress can tweak it if they want.
AND DONT GET ME STARTED ON KYOTO! Ive read it and it is EVIL.
[B]
They are both lying. Lying politicians with corrupt lawyer training manipulating "facts", opinion, vague statements, and sound bites. Arguing about who lied better is pointless.
Promises = lies.
History = facts. [/B][/QUOTE]
Hey now its MY job to play Old Benjamin from animal farm! :D
[B]Benjamin was the horse right? [/B][/QUOTE]
No he was the cynical donkey who knows that Napolen and company were full of shite and nobodies life would be improved.
Don't spout shit like an idiot. That's just flame-bait and republican talking points there. Try to think for yourself for once. Kerry said he will close out tax loopholes for corporations who offshore jobs or move their headquarters out of the US to dodge taxes. He will roll back the tax cuts for those who make more than $200,000/year as well. Try listening to something besides what Fox News, Rush Limbaugh, and Bill O'Reilly say, hmm?
[b]Sorry, but an unfair tax cut like that isn't going to work. Thats an uneven tax burden on the rich. You know, the ones that are making jobs for middle and lower class people, the ones giving them a home. And They WILL share that tax burden to the middle and lower classes. Cutting out tax lookholes will NOT raise enough money to pay for all the thigns Kerry has promised. I'm not saying Bush's plan is anywhere near perfect, but it's much more realistic then Kerry's so called plan. And I haven't watched Rush Limbaugh in years and years and years. [/b]
Pure and utter bullshit. Yet an even more egregious example of using those talking points. Try giving out some examples of what you say here? I know of no treaties he wants to join that could in any way "superceed(sic) the Constituion(sic)" as you claim. No, you're supporting the guy who wants to let Ashcroft into our lives to monitor what books we check out of the fucking library! How DARE you claim to be concerned with our freedoms and support this administration? What incredible hypocrisy!
[b]Look up what a treaties do in our government. They ALL superceed our constitution. Look at Kyoto which Kerry said he will sign. And the Child treaty the UN wants us to sign on to. Look good at first glance, but read into them a little further, NASTY NASTY NASTY!!! And how DARE I support Bush? Because I am 100% certain Kerry wil be a UN lapdog. Which is a VERY bad thing for our nation. [/b]
[/QUOTE]
And how about actually saying something worth while about Kerry's "plan". You know, that means you have to think far enough into it to relize it doesn't work. But then again, your a democrat, and theres a good statement about that.
"I think, therefor I am republican."
And yes, that last sentance IS flamebait. I look at it as a responce to your post, which was most definately flamebait itself. ;)
Treaties do not supercede our constitution. I have no idea how you can think that they could possibly do so. None at all.
Where does it say in our constitution that we have to pump out as much pollution as we want?
Where is my right to drive the biggest and most useless gas-guzzling Hummers protected? Is that next to the part about stockpiling miniguns and cop-killer bullets?
And in the name of protecting our freedom, they want to put limits on peoples' rights into the Constitution itself now. Last time they did that was Prohibition and look how well [i]that[/i] worked....
Shrub's plan is to drive us further into debt while he takes more vacations and his corporate owners get rich and Cheney runs the country.
Trickle-down economics don't work. People who are rich tend to gain more and more under that theory while the rest of us get the wonderful priveledge of working for Wal-Mart for slave wages.
See, the people in the middle and lower classes buy things. When we buy things, it boosts the economy. When the wealthy people have money, they save it. This does nto do nearly as much to boost the economy.
Shrub has put us into a position of huge deficits, something he promised in the 2000 campaign he would not do for any reason. This will have to be paid for by somebody, and who better than the ones who benefitted from it in the first place?
You were right with us complaining about how Sierra was screwing things up when they canceled ITF. Now you want corporations like that running the country and deciding how we get to live our lives? Wake up and realize that huge megacorporations just might not be the best people to safeguard our lives.
Joe gets up at 6 a.m. and fills his coffeepot with water to prepare his morning coffee. The water is clean and good because some tree-hugging liberal fought for minimum water-quality standards. With his first swallow of coffee, he takes his daily medication. His medications are safe to take because some stupid commie liberal fought to insure their safety and that they work as advertised.
All but $10 of his medications are paid for by his employer's medical plan because some liberal union workers fought their employers for paid medical insurance -- now Joe gets it too. He prepares his morning breakfast, bacon and eggs. Joe's bacon is safe to eat because some girly-man liberal fought for laws to regulate the meat packing industry.
In the morning shower, Joe reaches for his shampoo. His bottle is properly labeled with each ingredient and its amount in the total contents because some crybaby liberal fought for his right to know what he was putting on his body and how much it contained. Joe dresses, walks outside and takes a deep breath. The air he breathes is clean because some environmentalist wacko liberal fought for laws to stop industries from polluting our air. He walks to the subway station for his government-subsidized ride to work. It saves him considerable money in parking and transportation fees because some fancy-pants liberal fought for affordable public transportation, which gives everyone the opportunity to be a contributor.
Joe begins his work day. He has a good job with excellent pay, medical benefits, retirement, paid holidays and vacation because some lazy liberal union members fought and died for these working standards. Joe's employer pays to these standards because Joe's employer doesn't want his employees to call the union. If Joe is hurt on the job or becomes unemployed, he'll get a worker compensation or unemployment check because some stupid liberal didn't think he should lose his home because of a temporary misfortune.
It's noontime and Joe needs to make a bank deposit so he can pay some bills. Joe's deposit is federally insured by the FSLIC because some godless liberal wanted to protect Joe's money from unscrupulous bankers who ruined the banking system before the Great Depression.
Joe has to pay his Fannie Mae-underwritten mortgage and his below-market federal student loan because some elitist liberal decided that Joe and the government would be better off if he was educated and earned more money over his lifetime.
Joe is home from work. He plans to visit his father this evening at his farm home in the country. He gets in his car for the drive. His car is among the safest in the world because some America-hating liberal fought for car safety standards. He arrives at his boyhood home. His was the third generation to live in the house financed by Farmers' Home Administration because bankers didn't want to make rural loans. The house didn't have electricity until some big-government liberal stuck his nose where it didn't belong and demanded rural electrification.
He is happy to see his father, who is now retired. His father lives on Social Security and a union pension because some wine-drinking, cheese-eating liberal made sure he could take care of himself so Joe wouldn't have to.
Joe gets back in his car for the ride home, and turns on a radio talk show. The radio host keeps saying that liberals are bad and conservatives are good. He doesn't mention that the beloved Republicans have fought against every protection and benefit Joe enjoys throughout his day.
Joe agrees: "We don't need those big-government liberals ruining our lives! After all, I'm a self-made man who believes everyone should take care of themselves, just like I have."
[QUOTE][i]Originally posted by Freejack [/i]
[B]Ok, watched the debate last night, thought both candidates did a pretty good job, but something signifigant is bugging me, and both people are guilty of this, its that lack of explaintion to their plans.
Ok now for the biased part…Kerry is the worst about this. A number of times last night Kerry would say “I have a plan to do X”, but would give little advisement as to how he would follow through with his plan. For example, Kerry says on a regular basis to improve the situation in Iraq, he would train Iraqi troops faster and bring more allies to our cause. Ok, those are good ideas, but they’re pretty basic thing that most anyone would be for. What I want to know is how. How does Kerry plan to train more troops faster? How does Kerry plan to reduce the deficit by half in 4 years (Bush has made this claim also)? How is Kerry going increase the standing troop count by 50K? How does Kerry plan to enact health care reforms. All he says is that he is going to do it, that’s it, no substance, layout to back it up. It’s really beginning annoy and anger me. Really scares me that no one wants to ask him how, that people are making decisions based upon his “I wills” not “my plan is”.
Jake [/B][/QUOTE]
A two minute speech is not the forum in which to lay out details of plans. You want more information on specifics, go to the candidates' respective websites.
Don't depend on these little snippets we hear on the news to make your choice. Investigate yourself and see what each person offers.
BTW, this is the response I intended to post first, but A2597's political idiocy preempted my thought process there.
(edited for a typo)
Now, just because someone else's opinion is different than yours does not give you the right to think it has less merit. If you want to debate, do it PROFESSIONALLY.
/end Moderator
:D
You may think that, but others may not. There's no need to say such things of members here.
[B]A DAY IN THE LIFE OF JOE REPUBLICAN
...edited out the dribble...
[/B][/QUOTE]
And you call [i][b]me[/b][/i] biased eh?
BTW, what does that offer this thread, constructivly I mean. ;)
[B]Nah, I'm saying he's thinking LIKE an idiot. I try to avoid being actually insulting on these discussions. A fine distinction, but it's there. I will insult his political views, his arguments, etc, but I draw the line at insulting the person. [/B][/QUOTE]
I find it interesting how you accuse me of just repeating what the repub leaders say, and not thinking for myself, whenever you are doing exatly that which you accuse me of. :D
man politics is fun. :eek:
[B]And you call [i][b]me[/b][/i] biased eh?
BTW, what does that offer this thread, constructivly I mean. ;) [/B][/QUOTE]
Same thing this does:
[quote]
And how about actually saying something worth while about Kerry's "plan". You know, that means you have to think far enough into it to relize it doesn't work. But then again, your a democrat, and theres a good statement about that.
"I think, therefor I am republican."
And yes, that last sentance IS flamebait. I look at it as a responce to your post, which was most definately flamebait itself.
[/quote]
Now go on, I want to see you disagree with anything in that post. Go read Upton Sinclair's "The Jungle." That's where we'd still be if it wasn't for us whiny liberals. We'd still have segregated schools and water fountains, interracial marriage would be illegal, and women could be nannies or teachers.
So you want to attack my beliefs and progressive stance? I can defend it quite well. REAL conservatism is supposed to be pro-market, not pro-business. Think on that a while, and then look at the people you want to elect.
[B]I find it interesting how you accuse me of just repeating what the repub leaders say, and not thinking for myself, whenever you are doing exatly that which you accuse me of. :D
man politics is fun. :eek: [/B][/QUOTE]
Ow. You just punched a straw man. I hope you didn't hurt it too badly.
I come by my beliefs through research and careful consideration. I do not agree with many of the perceived democrat positions, but some things are more important than others. Having children get a good education is one of those things. Not starting wars on evidence that would not merit a search warrant here is another one. Having control of my life instead of being controlled by Wal-Mart, Halliburton, and GE is yet another.
And if your arguments were not perfect echoes of the talking points distributed by the RNC, I'd not accuse you of it.
Wipe out the entire government as it stands. it's HUGE. Unfortunatally, both current partys want BIGGER government, so I'm left chooseing which one will make it bigger, slower. Currently I think that Bush will do less damage then Kerry.
I want a Pre-WW1 America. Yes, an ISOLATIONISTIC America. Not a hide our heads in the sand America, but one that has a "You don't mess with us, we don't mess with you" mentality.
I think the US should pull out of the UN, and go back to a much more conservative way of life.
Is any of this going to happen? Of course not. But thats how I feel. IMHO The world would be alot better of if the UN stuck to it's original goal rather then trying to run the world.
I agree that we should have gone into Iraq. I think we should have done that many many years ago.
You want more of my own personal opinion?
I think Kerry is unfit for command. Nothing in his record makes him worthy of even being a candidate IMHO.
And if I could choose any one person to be President?
Nope. not Bush. Definately not Kerry.
Guess who?
Tony Blair.
Oh yes, no worries about offending me. I have a thick skin. People can get me mad, surprisingly easily as of late, but not much affects me personally. :D
[B]You want my honest to God opinion?
Wipe out the entire government as it stands. it's HUGE. Unfortunatally, both current partys want BIGGER government, so I'm left chooseing which one will make it bigger, slower. Currently I think that Bush will do less damage then Kerry.
I want a Pre-WW1 America. Yes, an ISOLATIONISTIC America. Not a hide our heads in the sand America, but one that has a "You don't mess with us, we don't mess with you" mentality.
I think the US should pull out of the UN, and go back to a much more conservative way of life.
Is any of this going to happen? Of course not. But thats how I feel. IMHO The world would be alot better of if the UN stuck to it's original goal rather then trying to run the world.
I agree that we should have gone into Iraq. I think we should have done that many many years ago.
You want more of my own personal opinion?
I think Kerry is unfit for command. Nothing in his record makes him worthy of even being a candidate IMHO.
And if I could choose any one person to be President?
Nope. not Bush. Definately not Kerry.
Guess who?
Tony Blair.
Oh yes, no worries about offending me. I have a thick skin. People can get me mad, surprisingly easily as of late, but not much affects me personally. :D [/B][/QUOTE] So you want Isolationism yet you want war in Iraq. Contradicting yourself there...
[B]You want my honest to God opinion?
Wipe out the entire government as it stands. it's HUGE. Unfortunatally, both current partys want BIGGER government, so I'm left chooseing which one will make it bigger, slower. Currently I think that Bush will do less damage then Kerry.
[/b][/quote]
Suuure he will.... They guy who made government bigger than anyone before him will make it grow more slowly?
[quote][b]
I want a Pre-WW1 America. Yes, an ISOLATIONISTIC America. Not a hide our heads in the sand America, but one that has a "You don't mess with us, we don't mess with you" mentality.
I think the US should pull out of the UN, and go back to a much more conservative way of life.
[/quote][/b]
Good idea! Then we can stop importing all the oil we need to fuel those SUVs, stop working with other countries to try to stop nuclear proliferation, stop trying to assist in resolving international disputes. The rest of the world can go nuke itself into oblivion while we hide in our protective blanket of selfish ignorance. Too bad radiation and climate changes don't respect national borders, hmm?
[quote][b]
Is any of this going to happen? Of course not.
[/quote][/b]
Thank any gods that may be there!
[quote][b]
But thats how I feel. IMHO The world would be alot better of if the UN stuck to it's original goal rather then trying to run the world.
[/quote][/b]
Oooh! Another talking point! Yes, the UN is trying to take over the world! Maybe they're linked to the Jewish Conspriracy, the Illuminati, and the Skull and Bones Society? The UN is trying to resolve international conflicts, not take over the world.
[quote][b]
I agree that we should have gone into Iraq. I think we should have done that many many years ago.
[/quote][/b]
Very isolationist of you.
[quote][b]
You want more of my own personal opinion?
I think Kerry is unfit for command. Nothing in his record makes him worthy of even being a candidate IMHO.
[/quote][/b]
Nah, 20 years as a Senator doesn't give anyone experience at all. And you prefer the guy who had his family pull strings to get him out of Vietnam to the guy who actually served? All the guys who were under Kerry's command on that boat endorse him. I trust the opinions of the guys who were led by him on the subject of his leadership skills over the disproven lies of RNC-sponsored talking heads.
[quote][b]
And if I could choose any one person to be President?
Nope. not Bush. Definately not Kerry.
Guess who?
Tony Blair.
[/quote][/b]
Interesting. Most people in the UK I communicate with call him a wanker and can't wait for the next election so they can boot him out.
He does speak better than Shrub, but then again, so does my four year old.
Interesting. Most people in the UK I communicate with call him a wanker and can't wait for the next election so they can boot him out.
[/QUOTE]
Thats not completely true.
While the public may be against him, there's no chance he's goign to be "booted" out at the next election. The electoral system here is very different to the us, we vote for a party rather than a person, and the leader of that party becomes the PM. Now it's basically a two party system (before anyone posts about the Lib Dems, no, they don't have a chance of gaining enough seats to even form the opposition) so we've got the choice between the Conservative Party, or Tony Blair's Labour Party.
While I don't agree with Tony Blair on many things, and I'd be the first to call him a wanker aswell, I would rather cut of my penis than vote for the Conservative party, and their leader now happens to be one of the most unpopular ministers from one of the most unpopular tory governments (Thatcher/Major), they've flatlined in the polls since they're landslide defeat in 97 and show no sign of recovery. So baring some sort of miracle (like an endorsment from God, Allah and Moses) Labour will win again next year, and Tony Blair will remain Prime Minister.
I do find it interesting that A# would want the leader of a left-wing Labour Party to be President though. :)
Suuure he will.... They guy who made government bigger than anyone before him will make it grow more slowly?
[b]Most slowly then Kerry. sure...
[/b]
Good idea! Then we can stop importing all the oil we need to fuel those SUVs, stop working with other countries to try to stop nuclear proliferation, stop trying to assist in resolving international disputes. The rest of the world can go nuke itself into oblivion while we hide in our protective blanket of selfish ignorance. Too bad radiation and climate changes don't respect national borders, hmm?
[b]We have ALOT of oil in the US, and it would force us towards hybrids. no problem there. And Nuclear plants...which are cleaner then coal.
[/b]
Oooh! Another talking point! Yes, the UN is trying to take over the world! Maybe they're linked to the Jewish Conspriracy, the Illuminati, and the Skull and Bones Society? The UN is trying to resolve international conflicts, not take over the world.
[b]No secret I hate the UN and most of what they do. Although the Illiminati/Secret societies don't fit in anywhere...thats kinda well...I'll call it a red herring.
[/b]
Very isolationist of you.
[b]We started it back then, we didn't finish it. Thats why.
[/b]
Nah, 20 years as a Senator doesn't give anyone experience at all. And you prefer the guy who had his family pull strings to get him out of Vietnam to the guy who actually served? All the guys who were under Kerry's command on that boat endorse him. I trust the opinions of the guys who were led by him on the subject of his leadership skills over the disproven lies of RNC-sponsored talking heads.
[b]Correction. 20 years doing nothing as a senator
[/b]
Interesting. Most people in the UK I communicate with call him a wanker and can't wait for the next election so they can boot him out.
[b]Yea, thats because he went to war in Iraq. How unpopular of him. They absolutly LOVED him before that. So, go fig. [/b]
He does speak better than Shrub, but then again, so does my four year old.
[b]No offence ment here mate, but can your daughter honestly pronouce Silvio Berlusconi or Aleksander Kwasniewski properly? can she properly use the word Pharmaceuticals in a sentance?
I'm not saying your daughter isn't smart, but rather that you made a gross exaggeration of Bush's near non-existant verbal skills. Whats odd is, he was better spoken the Kerry in the last debate. Texan accent not withstanding. [/B][/QUOTE]
Correction. 20 years doing nothing as a senator
[/quote][/b]
Oh look! A talking point! Let Rush, O'Reilly, Fox News, and Sean Hannity repeat something often enough, it must be true. Let's see here:
Worked with McCain to get more of our POWs from Vietnam home, worked with the Republicans for the balanced budget laws, 19 years of service on the Senate Foreign Relations Committee - including a term as chairman of the Subcommittee on Terrorism, Narcotics and International Operations, in addition to working for childrens' health care and other items.... Yeah, sat on his ass and did nothing hmm? And Cheney did not meet John Edwards until Wednesday's debate either?
[quote][b]
No offence ment here mate, but can your daughter honestly pronouce Silvio Berlusconi or Aleksander Kwasniewski properly? can she properly use the word Pharmaceuticals in a sentance?
I'm not saying your daughter isn't smart, but rather that you made a gross exaggeration of Bush's near non-existant verbal skills. Whats odd is, he was better spoken the Kerry in the last debate. Texan accent not withstanding.
[/quote][/b]
Sure, if, like Shrub, she has a lot of training to say those names. Do you not remember how badly he used to mangle names when he first assumed office? They've spent a lot of time teaching him proper pronunciation since then.
And interrupting the moderator twice, jumping up and down, and having a fit makes him better spoken? Expectations for Shrub are so low it's considered a victory if he doesn't piss himself on stage!
[B]Just for refrence has a Senator ever become president? [/B][/QUOTE]
Several times, I think. John F. Kennedy to name one.
[B]Just for refrence has a Senator ever become president? [/B][/QUOTE]
It used to be one of the the most common paths to the Presidency. In fact most of the exception had Senator become Vice-President first.