well here is an election response from someone who did vote for bush.
I'm sorry that your candidate didn't get elected. Perhaps it was because of his past history. You know, his burning of his purple hearts after he got home from vietnam, the fact that his fellow soldiers considered him unfit to command. The fact that now when it's convenient for him he is showing off medals that he supposedly burned so many years ago at the anti-war rallies that he took part in after coming home from the vietnam war.
My only suggestion is that if you really want to see a democrat in the white house to make sure that Kerry isn't the candidate seeking the office during the next presidential election.
and for the record, I don't like a lot of what Bush has done in office, but I felt he was the better candidate to vote for.
Again sorry that Kerry wasn't fit to president. Hopefully the next candidate will be.
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.
I voted for Kerry and I did not want to "hate" Kerry into office. I actually liked the guy, and thought he had some great qualities for a president. Don't be so small minded. You should not let other peoples "opinions" get to you. These sites are all in fun.
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).
I agree with the gentleperson who posted the comment about people not wanting to "hate" kerry into office.
A lot of the people who voted for Kerry, let their personal hatred towards George W. Bush be their guide as to who they voted for. This was referred to as the "Anybody but Bush" movement by a lot of the people I know in the area where I live.
Unfortunately this is the wrong reason to vote for anyone.
I'm guessing from your post atrox that you were a member of the "anybody but bush" group that voted for Kerry.
I don't like Bush, but I feel that he is the better choice for president from the choices that we had to vote for this time around.
I'm not overly religious, so I won't even respond to your hate inspired rhetoric but I'll leave you with this thought.
"Hatred does not cease by hatred, but only by love; this is the eternal rule. " - Buddha
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)
Glad to piss you off, anytime. I am not a Democrat, because they are stupid, just like Republicans ;).
Also you might want to try to *read* the posts you allude to and respond to "I voted for Kerry but am a Libertarion[sic] more so than a Dem or Repub".
As to hating Bush and or "hating" him into office. Thats just NOT true for my part. I sure do dislike Bush for a variety of Bush EARNED reasons (not just some personal bias) but I did not vote for Kerry just because of my dislike for Bush. I made no attempt to "hate" Kerry into office and would not do so. I vote where I think my vote is deserved, for a better, smarter candidate (in the Bush vs Kerry contest this just happened to BY FAR be Kerry). I would not burn a vote, even in an area where said vote would not matter, as I stated I voted for a few Libertarians. Did they have a shot in hell, no, but they were the best candidates. (And yes people that voted for one candidate, Bush, are stupid, did not mean to "insinuate" that, sorry, meant to STATE IT ;).)
As to myself and my "hate inspired rhetoric" over religion.
PAY ATTENTION:
1. My "hate inspired rhetoric" is an stance AGAINST church mixed in with state, and was a RESPONSE to some bullshit about morals in a few other posts, *not* against religion in general (well with the exception of the one tongue in cheek crack about "superstition" ;). Those that want prayer in schools, under god in the pledge and a *ban* on gay marriage and so on are NOT MORAL and DONT UNDERSTAND FREEDOM. There are many reasons for the separation of Church from State (besides it being written down in the Constitution which itself is not a reason). The mixture of the two erodes BOTH. (Many people fail to realize this, it degrades RELIGION also to force it into the state, and religion being a replacement for logic and reason by definition, its "faith", is not at all good for the state either, even if as you assure us *your* religion is the correct one .) This "rhetoric" is an indictment of the Bush administration and its attempts to force relgion on people, something that Americans should have figured out by now is not a good thing (why did the first non native Americans come here again?).
And that last poster there, man you are hook line and sinker responding to the old unite over an imagined enemy trick. Missiles headed our way . . . . , thats the point, WHAT FUCKING MISSILES? The fear the Republicans are selling is bullshit. " The Enemies see us as undivided." . . . Keep watching Fox news, it shows. . I wont bother to deteriorate into a "war on terror" rant here, again, but come on man get a clue. This is central to why Kerry was a better man for the job, Kerry might actually fight REAL ENEMIES, not some contrived (and I would say imagined but thats not true, as the Bush administration knew it was bullshit to begine with) bullshit in Iraq. Missiles, undivided enemies, want to see more of that then keep voting for people that attack soverign nations unprovoked using "evidence" that would get kicked out a third grade science class AGAINST the direction of the rest of the world and the UN (and then use the UN as an excuse to make the attack).
"America will press on, regardless of the torrent words you and others spew out."
Brilliant, just brilliant.
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.
The little ";)" behind "And yes people that voted for one candidate, Bush, are stupid, did not mean to "insinuate" that, sorry, meant to STATE IT ;).)" means that was meant as a joke.
My original post said people were stupid for NOT paying attention and being aware of complicated issues and facts, not for who they voted for either way.
I said many Americans are stupid for basing who they vote for on solicitations of patriotism, 30 second commercials and in general bullshit (and I was RESPONDING to just such bullshit when I jumped in, not unsolicited rant mode, but that has been known to happen ;)). Know the issues and be aware of whats going on and vote for whomever you want
What I said:
"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."
What I also said:
" . . . people that BOUGHT THE REPUBLICAN BULLSHIT MACHINE 30 SECOND SOUNDBYTES and frankly very stupid for having done so".
What you (and others) apparently read:
"People that vote for Bush are stupid". While that MAY BE ;), its not what I said. I think people that buy the fear and the war on terror and the general rovian wolves in the woods crap are stupid. There are real reasons to like Bush and thats just fine (lowering taxes, great thing, and I posted an article here at the time praising Bush, . . . but the spending, I digress), but this election wasnt about real reasons, it was about waving flags and "God Bless".
This is just ANOTHER example of people, this time YOU mutt, not paying attention and misunderstanding things.
And I agree and have stated several times that I realize I am in the minority in liking Kerry over Bush. My opinion was that Kerry was a much better choice (not perfect, but better) and that America is far worse off for having re-elected Bush (for various reasons having already been elaborated upon).
At least pay attention when you when you say "fuck you" to someone, you zealot ass ideologue *stupid* moron, 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.
Um, I think that you know, oh twisted-panty wearing one, that the "fuck you" was intended in the same way as your original statement. Didn't think that the winky-winky was necessary to convey my (admittedly dry) humor.
Regardless, I think, based on your political rants alone, that it is safe to say that your definition of stupid *appears* (so as not be accused of putting words in your mouth) to be "one who disagrees with me." My point was this seems very similar to the Repubs definition of "enemy."
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.
I kind of feel that the country is right for a legitimate 3rd party. Granted the deck is stacked in favor of the existing 2 parties but still. There has to be somewhere to go. What I want it:
1. Fiscal responsibility. Spend what you take in with taxes, nothing more. Oh, and you can't use Social Security money - separate that into it's own area where it is only used for what it was taken for.
2. Less Federal government. Leave social, religious type things to the states where people have more influence over their reps to get what they want.
3. Less taxes, as long as number 1 is met.
4. Find meaningful ways to increase the size of the middle class. On some levels I think the greatest threat to our country is the declining middle class.
5. Don't let the rich fuck over the poor.
6. Protect the enviornment smartly.
7. Oh, and don't go attacking other nations just cuz we want to. ;)
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.
I agree with Schmooze on the "just cause we want to" part and I would be willing to bet that you do to, another miscommunication thing here, maybe.
I *think* what he means is not just "cause". Have a reason. Have a *real* reason. I dont think anyone would or ever has argued that "we" should not be allowed to defend our nation and make such a decision.
Now I could be wrong but I think you mean to imply that some people would not allow "we" to defend "us" and would defer to some international organization. Thats utter nonsense and no one ever SAID that (despite it being spouted around all the time by the Repubs in the election and being another little misleading fear mongering tactic, "be afraid, they will defer to the UN to DEFEND OUR NATION!!!").
If someone ever does actually attack the US then we certainly should respond and "we" can make that decision. We did and there were NO COMPLAINTS when it comes to Afghanistan and the Taliban. There is a credible link between the "attack" and the source and no one batted an eyelash at the response.
Now on to other matters WITHOUT any evidence to support the "attack" or the "threat" much less the "imminent threat" and we should not "go attacking other nations just cuz we want to". We should especially not do it just cause we want to and then CITE THE UN AS THE REASON FOR DOING IT when the UN was against it.
And yes it makes sense to have and use an organization such as the UN when it comes to international matters and percieved threats that require preemptive strikes. Different thing altogether than a country that actually was attaked making a response.
Again I think we are likely *somewhere near* the same page on this, its just that we oft seem to miscommunicate on this crappy little 50 pixel wide textarea ;).
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.
"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."
Atrox, how come you get angry if we take you literally, yet you do the same???
I was just saying in a colorful way, no one in the world gives a damn about what party you support. If the opportunity was given to kill one of us, they are not going to care about much other than we are american. Talk your BS while walking through any nation, they just think your're a stupid American, so face the facts dude.
First off there was no anger about my statement, I find all this stupidity very depressing but its not making me angry per se. Second you both need to look up the definition of "literal". You SAID "Missiles" and "killing" and shit. *Literally*. Sure you seem to have backed off of that in the next post "why do you take me literally, whaaaa ;(" But thats not what was actually said. I never actually said republicans were stupid (except for the joke). So not sure what we are comparing here or what the "burrnnnnnn" is but you guys go on believing your own bullshit, it works for morons that voted for Bush ;).
Comments
RE: Election responses from the 49% of America that didnt go W
Great!!!
RE: Election responses from the 49% of America that didnt go W
well here is an election response from someone who did vote for bush.
I'm sorry that your candidate didn't get elected. Perhaps it was because of his past history. You know, his burning of his purple hearts after he got home from vietnam, the fact that his fellow soldiers considered him unfit to command. The fact that now when it's convenient for him he is showing off medals that he supposedly burned so many years ago at the anti-war rallies that he took part in after coming home from the vietnam war.
My only suggestion is that if you really want to see a democrat in the white house to make sure that Kerry isn't the candidate seeking the office during the next presidential election.
and for the record, I don't like a lot of what Bush has done in office, but I felt he was the better candidate to vote for.
Again sorry that Kerry wasn't fit to president. Hopefully the next candidate will be.
RE: Election responses from the 49% of America that didnt go W
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.
RE: Election responses from the 49% of America that didnt go W
I voted for Kerry and I did not want to "hate" Kerry into office. I actually liked the guy, and thought he had some great qualities for a president. Don't be so small minded. You should not let other peoples "opinions" get to you. These sites are all in fun.
RE: Election responses from the 49% of America that didnt go W
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).
RE: Election responses Posted By: atrox
I agree with the gentleperson who posted the comment about people not wanting to "hate" kerry into office.
A lot of the people who voted for Kerry, let their personal hatred towards George W. Bush be their guide as to who they voted for. This was referred to as the "Anybody but Bush" movement by a lot of the people I know in the area where I live.
Unfortunately this is the wrong reason to vote for anyone.
I'm guessing from your post atrox that you were a member of the "anybody but bush" group that voted for Kerry.
I don't like Bush, but I feel that he is the better choice for president from the choices that we had to vote for this time around.
I'm not overly religious, so I won't even respond to your hate inspired rhetoric but I'll leave you with this thought.
"Hatred does not cease by hatred, but only by love; this is the eternal rule. " - Buddha
RE: Election responses from the 49% of America that didnt go W
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)
RE: Election responses from the 49% of America that didnt go W
Glad to piss you off, anytime. I am not a Democrat, because they are stupid, just like Republicans ;).
Also you might want to try to *read* the posts you allude to and respond to "I voted for Kerry but am a Libertarion[sic] more so than a Dem or Repub".
As to hating Bush and or "hating" him into office. Thats just NOT true for my part. I sure do dislike Bush for a variety of Bush EARNED reasons (not just some personal bias) but I did not vote for Kerry just because of my dislike for Bush. I made no attempt to "hate" Kerry into office and would not do so. I vote where I think my vote is deserved, for a better, smarter candidate (in the Bush vs Kerry contest this just happened to BY FAR be Kerry). I would not burn a vote, even in an area where said vote would not matter, as I stated I voted for a few Libertarians. Did they have a shot in hell, no, but they were the best candidates. (And yes people that voted for one candidate, Bush, are stupid, did not mean to "insinuate" that, sorry, meant to STATE IT ;).)
As to myself and my "hate inspired rhetoric" over religion.
PAY ATTENTION:
1. My "hate inspired rhetoric" is an stance AGAINST church mixed in with state, and was a RESPONSE to some bullshit about morals in a few other posts, *not* against religion in general (well with the exception of the one tongue in cheek crack about "superstition" ;). Those that want prayer in schools, under god in the pledge and a *ban* on gay marriage and so on are NOT MORAL and DONT UNDERSTAND FREEDOM. There are many reasons for the separation of Church from State (besides it being written down in the Constitution which itself is not a reason). The mixture of the two erodes BOTH. (Many people fail to realize this, it degrades RELIGION also to force it into the state, and religion being a replacement for logic and reason by definition, its "faith", is not at all good for the state either, even if as you assure us *your* religion is the correct one .) This "rhetoric" is an indictment of the Bush administration and its attempts to force relgion on people, something that Americans should have figured out by now is not a good thing (why did the first non native Americans come here again?).
And that last poster there, man you are hook line and sinker responding to the old unite over an imagined enemy trick. Missiles headed our way . . . . , thats the point, WHAT FUCKING MISSILES? The fear the Republicans are selling is bullshit. " The Enemies see us as undivided." . . . Keep watching Fox news, it shows. . I wont bother to deteriorate into a "war on terror" rant here, again, but come on man get a clue. This is central to why Kerry was a better man for the job, Kerry might actually fight REAL ENEMIES, not some contrived (and I would say imagined but thats not true, as the Bush administration knew it was bullshit to begine with) bullshit in Iraq. Missiles, undivided enemies, want to see more of that then keep voting for people that attack soverign nations unprovoked using "evidence" that would get kicked out a third grade science class AGAINST the direction of the rest of the world and the UN (and then use the UN as an excuse to make the attack).
"America will press on, regardless of the torrent words you and others spew out."
Brilliant, just brilliant.
RE: Election responses from the 49% of America that didnt go W
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.
RE: Election responses from the 49% of America that didnt go W
The little ";)" behind "And yes people that voted for one candidate, Bush, are stupid, did not mean to "insinuate" that, sorry, meant to STATE IT ;).)" means that was meant as a joke.
My original post said people were stupid for NOT paying attention and being aware of complicated issues and facts, not for who they voted for either way.
I said many Americans are stupid for basing who they vote for on solicitations of patriotism, 30 second commercials and in general bullshit (and I was RESPONDING to just such bullshit when I jumped in, not unsolicited rant mode, but that has been known to happen ;)). Know the issues and be aware of whats going on and vote for whomever you want
What I said:
"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."
What I also said:
" . . . people that BOUGHT THE REPUBLICAN BULLSHIT MACHINE 30 SECOND SOUNDBYTES and frankly very stupid for having done so".
What you (and others) apparently read:
"People that vote for Bush are stupid". While that MAY BE ;), its not what I said. I think people that buy the fear and the war on terror and the general rovian wolves in the woods crap are stupid. There are real reasons to like Bush and thats just fine (lowering taxes, great thing, and I posted an article here at the time praising Bush, . . . but the spending, I digress), but this election wasnt about real reasons, it was about waving flags and "God Bless".
This is just ANOTHER example of people, this time YOU mutt, not paying attention and misunderstanding things.
And I agree and have stated several times that I realize I am in the minority in liking Kerry over Bush. My opinion was that Kerry was a much better choice (not perfect, but better) and that America is far worse off for having re-elected Bush (for various reasons having already been elaborated upon).
At least pay attention when you when you say "fuck you" to someone, you zealot ass ideologue *stupid* moron, et al.
RE: Election responses from the 49% of America that didnt go W
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.
RE: Election responses from the 49% of America that didnt go W
Um, I think that you know, oh twisted-panty wearing one, that the "fuck you" was intended in the same way as your original statement. Didn't think that the winky-winky was necessary to convey my (admittedly dry) humor.
Regardless, I think, based on your political rants alone, that it is safe to say that your definition of stupid *appears* (so as not be accused of putting words in your mouth) to be "one who disagrees with me." My point was this seems very similar to the Repubs definition of "enemy."
RE: Election responses from the 49% of America that didnt go W
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.
RE: Election responses from the 49% of America that didnt go W
I kind of feel that the country is right for a legitimate 3rd party. Granted the deck is stacked in favor of the existing 2 parties but still. There has to be somewhere to go. What I want it:
1. Fiscal responsibility. Spend what you take in with taxes, nothing more. Oh, and you can't use Social Security money - separate that into it's own area where it is only used for what it was taken for.
2. Less Federal government. Leave social, religious type things to the states where people have more influence over their reps to get what they want.
3. Less taxes, as long as number 1 is met.
4. Find meaningful ways to increase the size of the middle class. On some levels I think the greatest threat to our country is the declining middle class.
5. Don't let the rich fuck over the poor.
6. Protect the enviornment smartly.
7. Oh, and don't go attacking other nations just cuz we want to. ;)
RE: Election responses from the 49% of America that didnt go W
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.
RE: Election responses from the 49% of America that didnt go W
I agree with Schmooze on the "just cause we want to" part and I would be willing to bet that you do to, another miscommunication thing here, maybe.
I *think* what he means is not just "cause". Have a reason. Have a *real* reason. I dont think anyone would or ever has argued that "we" should not be allowed to defend our nation and make such a decision.
Now I could be wrong but I think you mean to imply that some people would not allow "we" to defend "us" and would defer to some international organization. Thats utter nonsense and no one ever SAID that (despite it being spouted around all the time by the Repubs in the election and being another little misleading fear mongering tactic, "be afraid, they will defer to the UN to DEFEND OUR NATION!!!").
If someone ever does actually attack the US then we certainly should respond and "we" can make that decision. We did and there were NO COMPLAINTS when it comes to Afghanistan and the Taliban. There is a credible link between the "attack" and the source and no one batted an eyelash at the response.
Now on to other matters WITHOUT any evidence to support the "attack" or the "threat" much less the "imminent threat" and we should not "go attacking other nations just cuz we want to". We should especially not do it just cause we want to and then CITE THE UN AS THE REASON FOR DOING IT when the UN was against it.
And yes it makes sense to have and use an organization such as the UN when it comes to international matters and percieved threats that require preemptive strikes. Different thing altogether than a country that actually was attaked making a response.
Again I think we are likely *somewhere near* the same page on this, its just that we oft seem to miscommunicate on this crappy little 50 pixel wide textarea ;).
RE: Election responses from the 49% of America that didnt go W
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.
RE: Election responses from the 49% of America that didnt go W
not necessarily a good one, given the current administration, but that's why I excluded the one person/small group the first time.
RE: Election responses from the 49% of America that didnt go W
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.
RE: Election responses from the 49% of America that didnt go W
"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."
Atrox, how come you get angry if we take you literally, yet you do the same???
I was just saying in a colorful way, no one in the world gives a damn about what party you support. If the opportunity was given to kill one of us, they are not going to care about much other than we are american. Talk your BS while walking through any nation, they just think your're a stupid American, so face the facts dude.
RE: Election responses from the 49% of America that didnt go W
To quote Kelso from "That '70s Show"....
Buuuuurrrrnnnnnnn......
He's got a point there atrox.
RE: Election responses from the 49% of America that didnt go W
Yeah, ummm, thats a great "point". You just go right on buying the fear crap, it suits you.
RE: Election responses from the 49% of America that didnt go W
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.
RE: Election responses from the 49% of America that didnt go W
First off there was no anger about my statement, I find all this stupidity very depressing but its not making me angry per se. Second you both need to look up the definition of "literal". You SAID "Missiles" and "killing" and shit. *Literally*. Sure you seem to have backed off of that in the next post "why do you take me literally, whaaaa ;(" But thats not what was actually said. I never actually said republicans were stupid (except for the joke). So not sure what we are comparing here or what the "burrnnnnnn" is but you guys go on believing your own bullshit, it works for morons that voted for Bush ;).
RE: Election responses from the 49% of America that didnt go W
you win. I quit. next topic, please.