Screaming Penguin

Great!!!

I have the idea that a better suited Democrat may be able to unseat the Republicans. Its bound to to happen. I voted for Bush, but as a whole, I feel the republican party in power slants a little to the right. I also hate the slant to the left. I think in the future, Democrats will finally "shut up and put up". What I mean by that is, they will finally practive what they preach tolerance and forgiveness and acceptance, yet they can't accept that 52% of Americans do not feel as they do. I always saw Democrats as being able to make peace and make friends, yet they can't do it this time. They were willing to not vote Kerry into office, but to "Hate" Kerry into office. We have enough hate. And I could not believe how much hatred was exhibited by the once "nice" Democrats. This situation really pisses me off just as religious fanatics do, when they claim to be tolerant and accepting, yet they do not consider me a true Christian because I am Catholic. I am also growing weary of Democrats trying to put on a "Moral" act after the wake of the election. Please, get real. Next they'll say they don't support gay marriages and abortion. It shows that in politics, as in entertainment, they will stop at nothing to get an audience. People wishing to leave the US: -------------------------------- I really hope people that are so distraught about George W. being in office really get out of the country as they say they will. I would love to help people fulfill their dream of getting out of the US and finding greener grass on the other side. I think Canada is a great choice for distraugh people to move to :) I actually like Canada a lot, but prefer the US, regardless of the president. If there was a fund for helping pissed off democrats(especially hollywood actors) get out of the US, I'd be the first one making a donation. Unfortunately I don't think Canada would fare very well with the insurgance of pissed off MTV'ers, starving artists, bummed out programmers, mediocre musicians... dont they have enough of that? hehe I'm sorry Kerry significantly lost the election. Better luck next time.

well well. I voted for Kerry but am a Libertarion more so than a Dem or Repub (I used to consider myself Repub when that *actually* meant less government and defending/understanding freedom, now it means ideologue/zealot/misunderstand freedom and exploit fear). (I voted for a few Libertarian candidates, Senatorial and so on, but did not like the Badnarkik pres choice.) That said the people here, or anywhere, that call Kerry "unfit to command" are full of shit and need to check the record. These are examples of people that BOUGHT THE REPUBLICAN BULLSHIT MACHINE 30 SECOND SOUNDBYTES and are frankly very stupid for having done so. There are a lot of reasons not to like Kerry and not to like any Democrat but believing misinformation like "his fellow soldiers considered him unfit to command" is not one of them. Kerry and his anti Vietnam war stance (one I think is very admirable, yes you can protest a war and its motives and not be protesting "against" the soldiers sent there who had no control over said motives) is an old debate now, and one thats pointless since the election is over, but the misinformation and bullshit continues. The real tradgedy is not 4 more years of Bush (although that is a horrible thing for the country) but the extent to which Americans are very stupid and dont check into issues and care about truth and reality, hell many of them cant even think critically or skeptically at all. The Republican party today, and the Bush band, are about false "morals" and religious ideology, its about theocracy, not freedom (such as protecting the "sanctity" of "marriage", something that the state should have nothing to do with either way, but certainly something that if the state does recognize they should not restrict to any particular group of people, thats not an understanding of freedom, its an encroachment of stupidity and religious zealotry - forcing religion into state run functions such as schools, again a PROFOUND misunderstanding of freedom - forcing people to not have medical procedures they want to have, abortion of a fetus with no brain waves does not constitute killing a human being, and our society is not against "killing" its against killing "humans" right, after all what did you have for lunch today? - I could go on and on but suffice to say freedom does not equal forcing your cultural/religious/ideologue views on other people through government, WHETHER OR NOT YOUR THINK YOUR VIEWS ARE CORRECT, its been tried throughout history, governments dictating social/cultural/religious policies in lets see IRAN and a thousand other countries, the difference is they dont call themselves FREE, they cop to the theocracy. Fine if the Repubotards change the constitution to make it a state that recognizes Abrahamic religions, but until then all this morals crap is specious bullshit.) The Republicans today take this very misguided stance that they have to enforce their social will with LAWS and then they call it LESS GOVERNMENT? Even Bushes stump speech had parts about government getting out of the way and then banning gay marriage, hello dumbasses thats NOT LESS GOVERNMENT ITS MORE (its just more of what YOU want, right?). And I would argue that while the Democrats have their own plans for imposing social will into government theirs are less dangerous. Theirs are to try to redistribute wealth to feed and clothe people (something the government really still sould not be doing, IMHO) but at least they are not trying to force some dumbass contemporary religious view down peoples throats (yes "contemporary", the Earth is billions of years old, humans are millions of years old, there have been shitloads of gods throughout history, yes I know they arent the true god, only *yours* is, but yours is a relatively modern and contemporary supersition, er, I mean religion).

It really looks like someone struck a nerve with Atrox. "The real tradgedy is not 4 more years of Bush (although that is a horrible thing for the country) but the extent to which Americans are very stupid and dont check into issues and care about truth and reality, hell many of them cant even think critically or skeptically at all." Sorry atrox, I usually respect your opinion, but not this one. Please do not insinuate that just because one votes one way they are any more intelligent than others. That guy was right, the people were trying to "hate" a president into office. and the Democrats, like myself. Now need to show the compassion and understanding that we have as good Americans and accept and respect our President. We need to come together as one, just as our enemies see us as one. You are really crossing the line and pissing me off. Please tell me you are NOT a Democrat. We don't need people like you in our party. You do not represent the majority of us. Please keep this in mind, when enemy missles are headed our way, there is no radar which decides to kill a republican over a democrat, or a black man over a white man. The Enemies see us as undivided. We can learn a lot from our enemies. I am not a fan of Bush. I am a fan of America. America will press on, regardless of the torrent words you and others spew out. Thank you. Proud member of the Democratic party. (I do not HATE Republicans, nor their ideas.... just don't understand or agree with all of them)

atrox, I know you like a good pop, but come on..... Freedom means choice to make your own decisions... Not agreeing with you does not make people stupid. You sound just like your definition of a Republican. I ended up not being able to bring myself to vote for Kerry. I'm no fan of Bush, but I'll be honest, with Bush, I know where I stand. I don't agree with a lot of what he believes in, but at least I know what it is..... Kerry's entire platform was "I'm not Bush" and that just wasn't good enough for me. I don't agree with the war in Iraq, I don't agree with Bush's stance on state/religion. There are others as well, but Kerry offered me no real alternatives. I tend to agree with the people that say things like we, as a country, can outlast four more years of Bush. Both internally and externally. Based on what little I could actually glean from Kerry, I just didn't have the same faith in that simple fact. I personally agree with a lot of the post-election pundit-ing in that the Dems need to find a focus and find someone to embody that and it can't simply be, "We're not Bush." As it is, the Repub's have a common, focused front and, whether you like it or not, that front appeals to most Americans. anyway, just my $.02 Oh and fuck you for calling me stupid, you pinko-commie-pussy, et al.

While I would never call everyone that voted for Bush stupid I do tend to agree with all the points Atrox makes. For me it seems like the voting public could not think more than one move ahead. So they ended up buying the simple minded Bush retoric. I get so frustrated when I hear interview where people state "I oppose the war in Iraq, but it's better to take the fight to them like the President said". It shows a profound lack of reasoning and independent thought. I also don't understand what the problem is with voting against someone. I firmly believe that history will show W as the worst president in the last 100+ years and why is that wrong for me to have voted for the next guy on the basis of 'he has to be able to do a better job than this one'? And while I'm on a rant...get over this lets all come together now that the election is over crap. It's my country to and it seems to me if I'm watching the people in power destroy liberty and freedom and many of the things I've always loved about my country I should have the right to complain about it.

schmooze: I don't think that voting someone out is a bad thing at all.... I was planning on doing it, to be honest. However, when I started doing a little research, I just couldn't see where Kerry was going to make it any better. As I said, "I'm not Bush" wasn't good enough for me, and it appears not good enough for the majority of the people out there. I'm no exit-pollster, but I'd be willing to bet that a decent percentage, (more than the 2% required,) of the Bush voters felt something like I do. At least that's the impression that I get from talking to people. Not to repeat myself too much, but if the Dem's had put together a better platform and provided me some real reasons and solutions, I'da voted dubya out myself. In the end, I just didn't see it.

Note: I see the winky face Having said that, I disagree that we shouldn't be able to attack other nations just cuz we want to. As a sover^H^Hei^H^Hgn^H^H^H^H^H^H independent nation, I think that it is very important for us to be allowed to attack other nations "just cuz we want to." The "we" is the important bit... Not cause one man (small group) wants to get back at the guy that made his daddy look bad. Lets not gloss over the fact that, just because this particular action is pretty much unjustified, it is not the only action that the U.S. has, is or will be involved in.

Man, talking to you is hard some days..... Yes, I know what he meant. Yes, you know what I meant, (I hope.) Yes, I know what you mean. I was just making a very small point. Even if "we" (and I mean we as a people) decide to do something that is "unjustified" by everyone else in the whole damned world. That's ok, cause "we" (again, majority or whatever vote it takes) said it was. There is a presumption that "we" would have reasons.

I'm a little concerned that everyone seems to be agreeing... I completely agree that our country should do whatever it takes to defend us - if that means attacking a country then so be it. I also think (thought) we have a fairly good mechanism to prevent a few people from misusing this power. Congress serves the function as a watchdog over the executive side and the populace of the nation can correct beyond that at the voting booths if they decide the legislative body failed to act. It's my feeling that history will reflect that this administration actively deceived congress and the public. Although deceived isn't quite the right word because evidence brought out to justify the action was discredited very quickly. It is obvious that the administration took advantage of the 9/11 aftermath to railroad things through - this Iraq thing could never have happened without an event like 9/11. That there was no one of power willing to stand up and say stop (it seems like) except for an ex govenor of Vermont shows that the system failed us. The reason people like me (or maybe just me) talk about UN involvment is that it provides an impartial (ok - we all know its not really impartial - but major countries with just as much to lose with the terror thing as us) body to say - 'Yes, you have a legitimate point, this is a real problem' I think your average American sitting at home watching TV does not have a feel for the fact that there are lots of nations out there questioning our motives. The CIA was very busy during the cold war and lots of 'evil dictatorships' stayed in power and received their weapons from the good Ole US of A. So there is a lot of pent up cynicsm when it comes to viewing our actions. And don't misunderstand me, I'm not all CIA is evil US is bad, it is very possible that what we did can easily go into the end justifies the means arguement. My point is just that we have to be aware of the worlds perception of us. When we take an action like we did in Iraq we have to take into account that the rest of the world might not see our actions as altruistic as we see ourselves.

To quote Kelso from "That '70s Show".... Buuuuurrrrnnnnnnn...... He's got a point there atrox.

dude, the point isn't the bit in quotes, it's the bit about being taken literally vs. taking others literally. At least that's what the burn was for.

you win. I quit. next topic, please.