Presidential Elections - ...and other political discussion.

Palomar · 2004-11-03 14:33:48

In my darker moments I see gays being "used" like the Jews in the 1930s as scapegoats
Pat Robertson said "on the record" that 9/11 happened because America tolerates deviant sexual practices and perverts. His supporters voted 95% for Bush (anecdotally speaking).

*I don't doubt they're scapegoated, but I wouldn't go so far as to compare them to German Jews of the 1930s (yet, anyway...hopefully never).

I'm for gay rights. (Pat Robertson...well, "consider the source." No surprise there).

Unfortunately, I think the Gay Community *may* have created a backlash against itself with all the illegal San Francisco marriages we saw this past Spring. IIRC, the mayor of SF doesn't have the legal authority to sanction gay marriages. Bill O'Reilly repeatedly addressed the issue of persons within the judicial system trying to create laws at their own behest, contrary to the wishes of the voters.

--Cindy

BWhite · 2004-11-03 14:35:16

In my darker moments I see gays being "used" like the Jews in the 1930s as scapegoats
Pat Robertson said "on the record" that 9/11 happened because America tolerates deviant sexual practices and perverts. His supporters voted 95% for Bush (anecdotally speaking).
*I don't doubt they're scapegoated, but I wouldn't go so far as to compare them to German Jews of the 1930s (yet, anyway...hopefully never).
I'm for gay rights. (Pat Robertson...well, "consider the source." No surprise there).
Unfortunately, I think the Gay Community *may* have created a backlash against itself with all the illegal San Francisco marriages we saw this past Spring. IIRC, the mayor of SF doesn't have the legal authority to sanction gay marriages. Bill O'Reilly repeatedly addressed the issue of persons within the judicial system trying to create laws at their own behest, contrary to the wishes of the voters.
--Cindy

Yup. Its a shame those folks don't obey the DNCC.

Euler · 2004-11-03 14:40:44

*A moment of internet uncertainty...are you being serious or facetious?

Well, somewhat serious. The South used to elect a lot of democrats despite being extreamly conservative. That has changed, and now the South is solidly Republican. The Dems just can't win now that they only have the advantage in the North East and the West Coast.

Cobra Commander · 2004-11-03 14:42:16

P.S.: Cobra Commander, you seem to indicate the Dems are losing because they're seeking to please everyone?

That's half of it. The other is that when they actually stand on what they really believe they're at odds with a majority of the people. They're burning at both ends and getting greatly diminishing returns for the trouble.

Bill O'Reilly repeatedly addressed the issue of persons within the judicial system trying to create laws at their own behest, contrary to the wishes of the voters.

Another example, because the Left's views are not shared by the majority they have an extraordinarily hard time getting them eneacted into law. Rather than convince people, they all too often seek to bypass them entirely and appoint judges who will legislate from the bench. The recourse to judicial activism in turn spawns "legislation through litigation". Can't ban smoking? sue the tobacco comapnies. Can't get a majority in Congress to ban guns? Sue the manufacturers out of business. Voters don't like being told their voice matters, then watch the very people who claim to champion them bypass their voice whenever it suits them.

Palomar · 2004-11-03 14:42:28

In my darker moments I see gays being "used" like the Jews in the 1930s as scapegoats
Pat Robertson said "on the record" that 9/11 happened because America tolerates deviant sexual practices and perverts. His supporters voted 95% for Bush (anecdotally speaking).
*I don't doubt they're scapegoated, but I wouldn't go so far as to compare them to German Jews of the 1930s (yet, anyway...hopefully never).
I'm for gay rights. (Pat Robertson...well, "consider the source." No surprise there).
Unfortunately, I think the Gay Community *may* have created a backlash against itself with all the illegal San Francisco marriages we saw this past Spring. IIRC, the mayor of SF doesn't have the legal authority to sanction gay marriages. Bill O'Reilly repeatedly addressed the issue of persons within the judicial system trying to create laws at their own behest, contrary to the wishes of the voters.
--Cindy
Yup. Its a shame those folks don't obey the DNCC.

*Well...? Don't you think it's possible a portion of the recent election results are the result of a backlash against the SF marriages this past Spring?

That wouldn't effect my vote in any way, but I think it likely did effect a lot of peoples' votes. :-\

--Cindy

DonPanic · 2004-11-03 14:48:15

LO

What is queer (sic!) is that the USA and the EU may end up fighting more about the rights to be afforded gays than anything else. After all didn't a prominent EU minister just resign over an anti-gay position?

Hey, let's be serious, mayor of Paris is gay, he is appreciated over parties, he manages Paris well enough to have very weak opposition.
And we're not ready to let bigotry threaten the rights conceded to women to abort and to gays to have a "Civil Union Act" that give them some of the rigths of an average family.
Many straight couples choose the "Civil Union Act" (called PACS) instead of contracting a marriage.

As for the USA versus the EU, the French have more MIRV tipped H-bombs and "boomer" submarines than many people realize and the Galileo project is not a "civilian" project no matter what the EU-nics proclaim.

Only 2 nuclear subs with 16 mirvs in operation when 2 others are in revision period, and crews at home.
Galileo isn't military, its just strategic, nuance
It would be a kind of a sin to let an US bigot have any temptation to blind our cruise missile under development if not in agreement for an action. So, let's not commit a sin. Amen
Destroying a satellite is a casus belli, allies don't commit casus belli at each other, do they ?

clark · 2004-11-03 14:52:12

Firing a satellite is a casus belli, allies don't commit casus belli at each other, do they ?

Depends Ally, are you with us, or against us?

Cobra Commander · 2004-11-03 14:55:43

So, let's not commit a sin. Amen
Firing a satellite is a casus belli, allies don't commit casus belli at each other, do they ?

The traditional American thing to do would be to look at the improvements over our GPS system in Galileo, improve on them, then sell them the new technology.

The modern American thing of course is to bitch and moan about it, let the Japanese improve on it, buy the license from them and have it made in China.

clark · 2004-11-03 14:59:26

Well, lucky for us we have Bush for 4 more years to keep those manufacturing jobs in the States, I mean, look at the job creation and retention under his stweardship for the last four years..er, never mind.

Cobra Commander · 2004-11-03 15:03:27

I mean, look at the job creation and retention under his stweardship for the last four years..er, never mind.

Yep, everyone knows a President has direct control over economic forces and can create a thriving economy with millions of high-paying jobs through executive order.

BWhite · 2004-11-03 15:07:35

LO
What is queer (sic!) is that the USA and the EU may end up fighting more about the rights to be afforded gays than anything else. After all didn't a prominent EU minister just resign over an anti-gay position?
Hey, let's be serious, mayor of Paris is gay, he is appreciated over parties, he manages Paris well enough to have very weak opposition.
And we're not ready to let bigotry threaten the rights conceded to women to abort and to gays to have a "Civil Union Act" that give them some of the rigths of an average family.
Many straight couples choose the "Civil Union Act" (called PACS) instead of contracting a marriage.

How dare you threaten the foundations of Western Civilization and all good and righteous moral upbinging!

Ah, you have nukes?

Okay, nevermind.

clark · 2004-11-03 15:10:37

You're right, of course Cobra. Bush's leadership hasn't affected the economy what-so-ever. He has no influence over it at all. His policy decisions have neither improved, or caused a decline, in the American economy.

Afterall, he is a WAR president. And a WAR president only makes decisions about WAR, and anti gay-marriage ammendments, and faith based intitives, and intelligence reforms, and appoints judges who determine if women will have less rights than their mothers. That whole global free trade stuff, means nothing to our economy. Bush has no effect on that at all.

DonPanic · 2004-11-03 15:11:34

LO

The traditional American thing to do would be to look at the improvements over our GPS system in Galileo, improve on them, then sell them the new technology.

The traditionnal froggy say that big american limousines do not fit his cities and that US GPS doesn't allow a french drunkard to put the key in the keyhole with enough precision when going back home
And that's a major reason indeed.

DonPanic · 2004-11-03 15:31:55

LO

Firing a satellite is a casus belli, allies don't commit casus belli at each other, do they ?
Depends Ally, are you with us, or against us?

"A quelle heure ?" Must consult my timetable

The evidence that our MIRVs are not calculated to theaten USA is that their range is over 6000 miles, far beyond USA...
in fact, if you know the froggies, it's like when they inflate their throat, that's just to impress the females of the kind

Yang Liwei Rocket · 2004-11-03 17:17:51

Next one...2008
Be ready for Cheney ( Mr Apartheid ) as president
and the little hispanic dictator George Prescott Bush as VP
The Bush dynasty will continue....

Cobra Commander · 2004-11-04 06:35:44

Next one...2008
Be ready for Cheney ( Mr Apartheid ) as president

Cheney's not going to run, it just isn't going to happen. If he becomes President it will be before '08.

DonPanic · 2004-11-04 12:29:20

LO

Cheney's not going to run, it just isn't going to happen. If he becomes President it will be before '08.

How that ? do you mean that some weaponmaniac* can shoot at Bush ?
*having easily bought an assault gun thanks to NRA
Or that a terrorist gang could crash a jetplane over White House, showing that war on terror didn't reach any valuable target ?

Cobra Commander · 2004-11-04 12:40:53

That's the hostile, caustic and sarcastic DonPanic we're used to. Back to normal.

How that ? do you mean that some weaponmaniac* can shoot at Bush ?

I was referring to a fairly obscure piece of American political lore, Tecumseh's Curse, which refers to the pattern of American Presidents elected in years ending with zero to die in office from whatever cause, from William Henry Harrison until Reagan, who survived an assassination attempt.

Reagan probably broke the curse, but if not... President Cheney.

Sure it's totally unscientific, but that Halloween mask thing has never been wrong either.

DonPanic · 2004-11-04 14:36:27

LO
Thanks for these explanations.

That's the hostile, caustic and sarcastic DonPanic we're used to. Back to normal.

Ho, don't exagerate my "hostility", all Americans don't listen to Bluegrass...
My way to try to dry Dems'eyes.
a people who invented Jazz, R 'n R, and gave birth to ZZTOP can't be that bad, after all.

Rxke · 2004-11-04 15:38:29

You're saying Reagan actually survived that assasination attempt?
Now I'm confused, I always thought the prez was replaced by a bad Hollywood actor...

:;):

DonPanic · 2004-11-04 16:23:13

LO
The three hurricanes that recently swept coasts of America may had an influence on Bush reelection, after each storm, was an opportunity for the president and brother pay a to visit to the victims and show they were taking care.
Florida was among the most striked, gaining Florida would have open White House doors to Kerry.
no ?
that's a question.
another question, do hurricanes vote reps ? ???
I'm anxious, earth warming means more an more hurricanes

About security, I'm amazed when I see on TV so many of these little piggie things, made with wood and plaster pannels, assembled on cleats, you call a house, crushed by Big Wolf's blow.
In Europe, we almost all live in concrete houses, and few of them would be flat crushed by 160 mph winds.
I'm impressed to know that millions of people evacuate the hurricane route.
When we had "La Grande Tempête" with 160 mph winds, tens of houses were destroyed, not thousands, though plenty were severely dammaged, mainly by fall of trees.
May be that's America : "vous faites les choses en grand"
In France, before building a house, plans must be sent to the mayor and accepted. If plans are signed by an architect, authorization is easy to get, if signed by a private citizen, the mayor should consult an architect before signing his authorization. An architect signed house has his guaranty for ten years.

Other point, the american average middle class wooden houses that I see on TV, no shutters, no trebble points locks, no walls around the house, give me a feeling of insecurity, the feeling than any vilain could break in by any window or by a shoulder hit or a kick at the door.
Then, buying a gun is less expansive than securing such houses.
Here we would rather put metallic shutters and alarms, may be some remindings of the times of the "chateau forts".

Last about security: remember the Air France jet the algerian terrorists had taken under control until french police assaulted the plane. The terrorists wanted to crash it over Paris, maybe on the Eiffel tower or the Elysée presidential palace.
Why US intelligence and security services didn't take good notice of that kind of threat ? This could happen only to froggies ?

Mad Grad Student · 2004-11-04 18:39:24

Is this the right place to put this? I hope it is. Anyways, I'll keep my ranting on the election down to one post, as follows:

Though many of my peers also happen to be Kerry supporters (19 out of 24 people in my history class voted Kerry in a mock-election), the vast majority of those around me are steadfast Bush advocates. This helped lessen the sense of defeat after the election for me, and actually the main emotion I had was mild disappointment with a sense of interest at what will be done with the Bush space policy. I wish that feeling weren't so short-lived.

Earlier today it re-occured to me why I hated Bush so much in the begining, his stem cell research views. With Bush in office for another four years hard-core stem cell research will be delayed that much longer, or could die off completely in this country. That will be an enormous hit to the medicine and science in general. Additionally, we'll have to put up with more of his environmental policies like the "clean air act" (that allows coal-burning utilities to do so more expensively) and the "healthy forests act" (naturally, which allows logging in national forests). George Bush will be an enormous threat to science and the environment in this country.

I doubt that there was any president in the previous century that inspired so much hatred in the eyes of foreign leaders. I'm not saying that the United States should only do whatever makes them popular internationally, but I am saying that the US isn't the only country in the world, getting along with others is extremely important. Does it seem wise to alienate most of our allies just for the sake of moving in our own arbitrarily uncompromising direction? According to the Bush-Cheney campaign it is.

Regardless of however much evidence you think we had before Iraqi Freedom that indicated that Saddam Hussein had weapons of mass destruction and supported terrorists, we also had evidence that Saudi Arabia, Syria, Iran, and North Korea did one or the both as well. The difference? Bush chose the one country that didn't pose any sort of threat to the US to invade. What does that say about his reliability and responsibility as leader of this country.

I really, really, really hope I'm wrong on all accounts. In all sincerity I hope that Bush is nowhere near as bad a leader as I think he is, but from the look of it that doesn't seem likely to me. Hopefully we can get through the next four years reasonibly unscathed and then carry on in a (hopefully) positive direction

DonPanic · 2004-11-05 04:13:06

LO

I doubt that there was any president in the previous century that inspired so much hatred in the eyes of foreign leaders. I'm not saying that the United States should only do whatever makes them popular internationally, but I am saying that the US isn't the only country in the world, getting along with others is extremely important.

Some of the leaders which support Bush politics do it against the will of their public opinion as for GB, Italy, Japan and even Poland.
That's the way they conceive "democracy"...
Some american fellows get out of churches where they are supposed to prey for a forgiving God and for a Jesus Christ who did forbid to Simon-Petrus to take his sword out againsts its ennemies,
that's their way to believe they are Christians...

Cobra Commander · 2004-11-05 14:16:04

Earlier today it re-occured to me why I hated Bush so much in the begining, his stem cell research views.

I just have to jump in with a few comments. Were it my call, we'd do extensive stem cell research. Secretly if need be. But there are legitimate concerns on the part of those opposing it, not least of which is the idea of creating human embryos with the express purpose of harvesting them. That's a big step.

That said, Bush is opposed to such harvesting, but is also the only US President to authorize funding for stem cell research. It can only be conducted on existing samples, but it is getting funding.

Further, we don't know that stem cells will help anything. Perhaps they hold the key to regenerating the spinal cord and correcting all manner of horrible diseases and injuries, or perhaps they're just exotic meat. We don't know. Some try to convey an image of the vile, heartless Bush Administration forcing people to live in wheelchairs or die as their nervous system erodes while a cure sits under lock and key, but it simply isn't true. We have a potential, something that after years of hard work may or may not pay off.

That said, I'm sure a compromise can be reached, there are afterall plenty of harvestable embryos that will be destroyed regardless.

Sit a little funny in the gut, did it? That's where the opposition to this research is coming from.

The next four years will be eventful on many fronts, regardless.

Gennaro · 2004-11-08 06:30:52

That whole global free trade stuff, means nothing to our economy. Bush has no effect on that at all.

...said Clark in a shower of sarcasm.

Cobra Commander, I have one question for you that I've intended to put for a long time. As a Fascist, doesn't this bother you at all?

Isn't the social dimension and that you put the state above market forces the very defining point of Fascism?
How could you then support the globalist policies of the Neocon Bushites?

New Mars Forums

Announcement

#326 2004-11-03 14:33:48

Re: Presidential Elections - ...and other political discussion.

#327 2004-11-03 14:35:16

Re: Presidential Elections - ...and other political discussion.

#328 2004-11-03 14:40:44

Re: Presidential Elections - ...and other political discussion.

#329 2004-11-03 14:42:16

Re: Presidential Elections - ...and other political discussion.

#330 2004-11-03 14:42:28

Re: Presidential Elections - ...and other political discussion.

#331 2004-11-03 14:48:15

Re: Presidential Elections - ...and other political discussion.

#332 2004-11-03 14:52:12

Re: Presidential Elections - ...and other political discussion.

#333 2004-11-03 14:55:43

Re: Presidential Elections - ...and other political discussion.

#334 2004-11-03 14:59:26

Re: Presidential Elections - ...and other political discussion.

#335 2004-11-03 15:03:27

Re: Presidential Elections - ...and other political discussion.

#336 2004-11-03 15:07:35

Re: Presidential Elections - ...and other political discussion.

#337 2004-11-03 15:10:37

Re: Presidential Elections - ...and other political discussion.

#338 2004-11-03 15:11:34

Re: Presidential Elections - ...and other political discussion.

#339 2004-11-03 15:31:55

Re: Presidential Elections - ...and other political discussion.

#340 2004-11-03 17:17:51

Re: Presidential Elections - ...and other political discussion.

#341 2004-11-04 06:35:44

Re: Presidential Elections - ...and other political discussion.

#342 2004-11-04 12:29:20

Re: Presidential Elections - ...and other political discussion.

#343 2004-11-04 12:40:53

Re: Presidential Elections - ...and other political discussion.

#344 2004-11-04 14:36:27

Re: Presidential Elections - ...and other political discussion.

#345 2004-11-04 15:38:29

Re: Presidential Elections - ...and other political discussion.

#346 2004-11-04 16:23:13

Re: Presidential Elections - ...and other political discussion.

#347 2004-11-04 18:39:24

Re: Presidential Elections - ...and other political discussion.

#348 2004-11-05 04:13:06

Re: Presidential Elections - ...and other political discussion.

#349 2004-11-05 14:16:04

Re: Presidential Elections - ...and other political discussion.

#350 2004-11-08 06:30:52

Re: Presidential Elections - ...and other political discussion.

Board footer