I herd there gonna start drafting - the draft

CalTech2010 · 2003-01-10 16:06:57

You call ridding the world of the lowest form of combat light on substance?

soph · 2003-01-10 16:08:50

Do I need to list all of his politically motivated moves?

CalTech2010 · 2003-01-10 16:09:28

Please do

soph · 2003-01-10 16:16:46

1. A $1.2 trillion tax cut that did little for the economy, but a lot for votes and the pockets of the rich.

2. Perpetuating the war mentality by finding new targets. Everyone knows the war increases a presidents ratings to the 80%-90% range, no matter how bad they are domestically. Why didnt Bush take out bin Laden in tora bora when he had the chance? Obviously it has nothing to do with comitting the money or manpower-$100 billion in iraq and many thousands of troops puts the lie to that. Finish our real war first.

3. Stock dividend cuts. Lining the pockets of the rich.

4. Having his brother "assist" him, to put it lightly, in the florida election. Catherine Harris had a very large conflict of interest, not in the least indicated by her numerous days off given by Jeb during the Florida election.

5. Standing on the WTC site, promising funds to New York City, which our senators had to fight very hard to make sure that we would eventually get. We still have only seen about $4 billion out of $20 billion, and even that amount had to be pried from the administrations hands.

6. Why was enron the only energy company at the government energy plan meetings? And why are the meetings shrouded in secret? If the public has the right to know anything, it's what goes on between the politicians and lobbyists.

I could really keep going, but I dont feel its necessary.

Cobra Commander · 2003-01-10 17:22:36

Okay. Let's just accept that every politician is a politically motivated pig involved in some manner of corruption. It's a requirement for getting enough support to get oneself elected.
I'm not a big fan of the Bush administartion, but a Gore administration would be no better. Yes, I know Josh will disagree with me here, but it doesn't change the facts.

Anyone interested in joining me in a coup somehwere in South America? We'll keep the political piggery to a minimum, at least until the foreign corporations come looking for a tax haven

Josh Cryer · 2003-01-10 19:05:11

Pfft, Reverse Psychology doesn't work with me, boy.

But you'd be surprised that I'd agree with a large bit of what you're saying. One thing I find funny, is that while we condemn countries for having a one party system (like Cuba), we fail to consider that we're only ?one party better,? and when you look at the parties beneath the surface, you find that they're not that different. All their motivations are political. Whatever keeps them in power. Very rarely does that result in real justice.

There are exceptions within each party, though. There are politicians who do what's right regardless of the political consequences. The sad part is that when they get out of politics do you finally realize what you've lost.

I'm actually interested in finding me an equatorial country in South America. Get me some anarchist friends, and build a space elevator!

Cobra Commander · 2003-01-10 19:36:35

I'm actually interested in finding me an equatorial country in South America. Get me some anarchist friends, and build a space elevator!

We'll split the equatorial band and build two! I'm gonna charge less to use my space elevator.

(Even if I have to seize resources from the neighbors to offset the cost)

CalTech2010 · 2003-01-28 13:34:03

1. A $1.2 trillion tax cut that did little for the economy, but a lot for votes and the pockets of the rich.

That's the beauty of democracy, my friend. Everyone's vote counts the same, and the other 99% of Americans that didn't get the big break could easily outvote that 1%.

2. Perpetuating the war mentality by finding new targets. Everyone knows the war increases a presidents ratings to the 80%-90% range, no matter how bad they are domestically. Why didnt Bush take out bin Laden in tora bora when he had the chance? Obviously it has nothing to do with comitting the money or manpower-$100 billion in iraq and many thousands of troops puts the lie to that. Finish our real war first.

Clinton had a chance to kill bin Laden back in '96, but I he sat there with his thumb up his rear-end. Plus, I think $100 billion spent on disarming Iraq is better than trying to rebuild Los Angeles or New York from the ground up.

3. Stock dividend cuts. Lining the pockets of the rich.

Great. Maybe now it will be easier for people to get into the stock market, and make it easier for people already there to turn a profit in a down economy.

4. Having his brother "assist" him, to put it lightly, in the florida election. Catherine Harris had a very large conflict of interest, not in the least indicated by her numerous days off given by Jeb during the Florida election.

If the voters would have had enough intelligence to punch a hole **correctly** in a thin paper card, we wouldn't have had the whole fiasco in the first place!

5. Standing on the WTC site, promising funds to New York City, which our senators had to fight very hard to make sure that we would eventually get. We still have only seen about $4 billion out of $20 billion, and even that amount had to be pried from the administrations hands.

I don't recall the Concert For New York paying out very much, either.

6. Why was enron the only energy company at the government energy plan meetings? And why are the meetings shrouded in secret? If the public has the right to know anything, it's what goes on between the politicians and lobbyists.

Being the 9th largest employer in the nation, and being an energy company, will probably land you some leeway when it comes to energy planning meetings.

I could really keep going, but I dont feel its necessary.

You know what? I just realized it. I think we've had this conversation before. I kept thinking these points sounded errily familiar. I can't remember the last time I came to New Mars... maybe we lost some posts. Or maybe it's deja vu. I could almost swear that the last time you said that, I said please do...

soph · 2003-01-28 13:56:56

Um first of all, our president is responsible for matters of economic importance, not the concert for new york.

second, our energy policy should be ruled on by more than one company. looks like bias to me.

third, going to war over a few empty shells vs. rebuilding the economic capital of the world--lets see. i would rebuild NYC.

fourth, lets look at the stock market for what it is. its gambling. there is no security-just look at enron or the internet.

and i thought we had already established that due to the electoral system, and the jact that gore won the popular vote, obviously, not everybodys vote is equal.

CalTech2010 · 2003-01-28 14:04:54

Um first of all, our president is responsible for matters of economic importance, not the concert for new york.

I was trying to show that everyone has had trouble securing and delivering funding. No organization (or the federal government) has done a spectacular job on this issue.

second, our energy policy should be ruled on by more than one company. looks like bias to me.

Once again, Enron was a huge company. That comes with some pretty substantial benefits.

third, going to war over a few empty shells vs. rebuilding the economic capital of the world--lets see. i would rebuild NYC.

We need to make the investment now to protect our country in the future before this problem spawns out of control. And we are rebuilding New York... there'll be a couple of nice, new buildings in that foundation by the end of the decade.

fourth, lets look at the stock market for what it is. its gambling. there is no security-just look at enron or the internet.

I never said the stock market was secure. I was saying that the dividend tax repeal will make it easier for people to get into the market or turn a higher profit if they're already investing.

and i thought we had already established that due to the electoral system, and the jact that gore won the popular vote, obviously, not everybodys vote is equal.

Sure, my vote counts more because I live in a small state, but my parents' income doesn't mean jack #### on their ballot.

soph · 2003-01-28 17:27:30

actually, it does. the wealthiest 1% is where the special interest money comes from. and with something like a tax cut, you can pass it off as helping everybody, so you gain votes, while really only helping your campaign donors.

speaking of special interests. dont you find it odd that the only energy lobby represented happens to be the company that used fraudulent accounting, and dick cheney happened to be on the board of directors, and dick cheney happened to sell his stock before they were caught? Now, why cant we see the transcripts of the meetings? What does he have to hide?

CalTech2010 · 2003-01-28 21:21:32

actually, it does. the wealthiest 1% is where the special interest money comes from. and with something like a tax cut, you can pass it off as helping everybody, so you gain votes, while really only helping your campaign donors.
speaking of special interests. dont you find it odd that the only energy lobby represented happens to be the company that used fraudulent accounting, and dick cheney happened to be on the board of directors, and dick cheney happened to sell his stock before they were caught? Now, why cant we see the transcripts of the meetings? What does he have to hide?

Are you just going to make hit-and-run attacks on Bush's advisors, or talk about the entire issue and focus on the President? I don't know if you've noticed, but the Vice President's only job is to be a yes-man puppet, preside over the Senate (but only at formal meetings), and wait for somebody to gun down the President. He's not exactly a big player in Washington aside from being a way to reconfirm the President's statements.

soph · 2003-01-28 21:27:10

hahah, you obviously dont know how our government works.

CalTech2010 · 2003-01-28 21:32:24

When was the last time you saw the vice-president give a public speech? Or attend a highly-publicized conference of foreign leaders? Or propose education reform? No. If the President was a finely smoked salmon, the vice-president would be a can of tuna. He's an imitation President because the big man can't be everywhere at once. He's the one that attends the boring meetings and reports back.

Plus, almost every political leader has had some sort of business ties that followed them to office. Recall Whitewater?

soph · 2003-01-28 21:35:46

I've heard that the president is sometimes a mouth for the VP. ive heard that especially so in the early part of bush's presidency.
in fact, ive heard it said that they are actually protecting cheney.

whitewater was a sham. when the republicans couldnt find anything wrong with it, they discovered monica lewinsky. there was nothing to find with whitewater, just a politcal ploy gone sour for the republicans. enron, however, is a completely different story.

CalTech2010 · 2003-01-28 21:41:06

Whitewater wasn't a sham. It involved the same crooked money politics as Enron, and there was a 5 year (plus 1 election) lapse between Whitewater and Monica Lewinsky. Going after Cheney for being a part of Enron is just as bad as going after that "horney banker".

And all of that talk of the President being Cheney's puppet is BS. They're both well educated politicians that have spent a long time in government and private business. They're both from Midwestern towns, and went to the big law schools (hell, Cheney even flunked out of his). Cheney is Bush's puppet, not vice versa.

Josh Cryer · 2003-01-28 22:43:08

I think he was saying that the Clinton's ?involvement? in Whitewater was a sham. Of course, it was. They just made a business deal that went bad. There was no evidence to link them to anything illegal.

If anything should be illegal, it should be the fact that the US defended Saddam when he gassed his own people (by reporting that it didn't happen, and he was gassing Iranians), just long enough to insure that Iraq paid for the WMDs we were selling them.

soph · 2003-01-29 05:37:12

Bush is a recipient of affirmative action-due to the "legacy" elemnt-a very real physical element in college admissions.

if he wasnt a Bush, he wouldnt have gone to a big school. fact.

whitewater was a joke, and the country knew it. the next election, clinton was given a democratic congress because of it. enron is a real illegal business deal, involving real illicit accounting.

i didnt know oral sex was illegal. but i did know what linda tripp did was illegal, and the republicans found a way, so they could smear clinton.

Josh Cryer · 2003-01-29 06:06:17

Purjury is illegal, it's hardly cause for impeachment, though.

soph · 2003-01-29 09:17:14

exactly. in criminal law, perjury is used to hold criminals for bigger crimes, more than it is actually prosecuted in and of itself. But the whole issue surrounding the perjury was a joke. Why do we even come to the point of spending millions of taxpayer dollars to investigate personal infidelities? JFK was an adulterer, and we didnt spend a penny on him.

No, the whole trial was a political ploy gone awry for the republicans. GWB is an alcoholic and a former cocaine user. This is more serious than adultery in my opinion. He has done far worse than clinton.

CalTech2010 · 2003-01-29 12:04:53

No, the whole trial was a political ploy gone awry for the republicans. GWB is an alcoholic and a former cocaine user. This is more serious than adultery in my opinion. He has done far worse than clinton.

You decry illegal doings by Bush, but you throw all of Clinton's wrongdoings out, too. If you're going to forget that Clinton did something illegal in office (literally in office) then how can you go after Bush's wrongdoings?

How about instead of focusing on a politician's past, we look at his policies and actions in office.

soph · 2003-01-29 12:12:48

What's illegal about adultery? the fact that it was even investigated is ludicrous. there was nothing illegal about whitewater, which is why the republicans had to turn to monica to salvage their investigation and political face.

And I would say that the deportation of people who renewed their visas, for no reason, is illegal. as well as the powers he granted himself in the patriot act. dont get me started on ashcroft.

blatant disregard for the UN borders on illegal. he has set forth plans to use nukes, in certain situations, preemptively, this is illegal as per many treaties.

these are all things bush has done in office. i really hope you dont blindly follow bush the way your words imply.

CalTech2010 · 2003-01-29 12:15:40

Adultery is not illegal... lying about it in front of 250 million people is illegal.

And we've already talked about visas. Thousands of immigrants every year manage to get their visas renewed on time, and we should make to exception based on race or ethnicity.

And if you don't want to spend $200 billion every time we have a skirmish with a rogue nation, we'd better get ready to use tactical nukes in certain situations.

soph · 2003-01-29 14:26:23

like i said, the party line is getting old.

they renewed their visas on time. the government was at fault. your argument is disgusting, and i hope one day you know how it feels to be screwed over the way these immigrants were.

and like i said, adultery should have never been an issue. i dont know why the american people were forced to pay for an adultery investigation. perjury is not an impeachable crime-it certainly doesnt harm the state, and it is not a capital crime.

CalTech2010 · 2003-02-05 21:06:21

THEY DIDN'T RENEW THEIR VISAS ON TIME!!! THE WHOLE ISSUE WAS THAT THEY CALLED THE PEOPLE INTO THE INS OFFICE BECAUSE THEIR CARDS WERE EXPIRED AND HADN'T BEEN RENEWED YET!!! Why can hundreds of thousands of people pass through the US every year and manage to get their paperwork in on time?! :angry:

New Mars Forums

Announcement

#76 2003-01-10 16:06:57

Re: I herd there gonna start drafting - the draft

#77 2003-01-10 16:08:50

Re: I herd there gonna start drafting - the draft

#78 2003-01-10 16:09:28

Re: I herd there gonna start drafting - the draft

#79 2003-01-10 16:16:46

Re: I herd there gonna start drafting - the draft

#80 2003-01-10 17:22:36

Re: I herd there gonna start drafting - the draft

#81 2003-01-10 19:05:11

Re: I herd there gonna start drafting - the draft

#82 2003-01-10 19:36:35

Re: I herd there gonna start drafting - the draft

#83 2003-01-28 13:34:03

Re: I herd there gonna start drafting - the draft

#84 2003-01-28 13:56:56

Re: I herd there gonna start drafting - the draft

#85 2003-01-28 14:04:54

Re: I herd there gonna start drafting - the draft

#86 2003-01-28 17:27:30

Re: I herd there gonna start drafting - the draft

#87 2003-01-28 21:21:32

Re: I herd there gonna start drafting - the draft

#88 2003-01-28 21:27:10

Re: I herd there gonna start drafting - the draft

#89 2003-01-28 21:32:24

Re: I herd there gonna start drafting - the draft

#90 2003-01-28 21:35:46

Re: I herd there gonna start drafting - the draft

#91 2003-01-28 21:41:06

Re: I herd there gonna start drafting - the draft

#92 2003-01-28 22:43:08

Re: I herd there gonna start drafting - the draft

#93 2003-01-29 05:37:12

Re: I herd there gonna start drafting - the draft

#94 2003-01-29 06:06:17

Re: I herd there gonna start drafting - the draft

#95 2003-01-29 09:17:14

Re: I herd there gonna start drafting - the draft

#96 2003-01-29 12:04:53

Re: I herd there gonna start drafting - the draft

#97 2003-01-29 12:12:48

Re: I herd there gonna start drafting - the draft

#98 2003-01-29 12:15:40

Re: I herd there gonna start drafting - the draft

#99 2003-01-29 14:26:23

Re: I herd there gonna start drafting - the draft

#100 2003-02-05 21:06:21

Re: I herd there gonna start drafting - the draft

Board footer