Either Way...

greenspun.com : LUSENET : Anarchy 2 : One Thread

Either way that this election turned out; either way that Ohio/Florida had went; this election would have had the same winner. The same loser.

Winner: Big Buisness and the KleptoCrats

Loser: America and The World

I havnt been here in a while but I am sure that most of you know where I stand on the idea of Government. I just want to know what y'all think that the positives and negitives of Bush being in office for 4 more years. And please neither Bush or Kerry are a god. Im sure you can give both Pros and Cons. :p

-- Dick Tator (inneedofliberty@yahoo.com), November 03, 2004

Answers

Positives of Bush doing another four:

Thousands more dead GIs and Iraqis. Yeah, fuck em oil! Oops, I mean...fuck em ALL!

Anti-environment America. Hey, I can't SEE the air! I must not need it to be clean! And any fool knows that oil is forever!

Nobody gets to retire until they're 104. Hey, I love my job that much! Now go work for your living like a good little lower middle class yutz.

Nobody with income under $200,000 a year gets MediCare. Hey, fuck THEM too! Society doesn't owe the elderly anything!

World hates us. Ah, fuck THEM too! Nobody likes a naysayer! Terrorist! Terrorist!

Racial profiling. Hey, they did a profile of potential terrorists, and 6 of the 19 hijackers of 9-11 fell into the criteria! Almost a third of the terrorists were Arabs, according to THIS failsafe plan! Wait a second...

The Patriot Act goes untouched, unrevised. Hey, if you're not a terrorist, you've got nothing to fear. Just play along as we hold you without trial, a lawyer, or your phone call, and then we'll let you go, crybaby.

No stem cell research. My values are your values, buster. Deal with it.

Astronomical deficit. Deficit, shmeficit. We'll be much better equipped to deal with the terrorists if we're $200 trillion in the hole.

No alternative energy. Alterna-who? Is that a ska band?

Negatives of Bush doing another four:

Aw heck...he's the Commander in Chief. Shucks, I can't think of anything bad to say about him.

-- Pasta (ilike@pasta.com), November 03, 2004.


Well I am sure glad Bush talked about the real issues like gay marriage, ammendment to ban flag burning and of course keeping under God in the pledge of allegience. These are very important issues. The dems think the high death toll in Iraq is an issue or a 200 bill surplus turning into a 420 billion deficit are issues.5 million middle class folks have lost their health insurance. boo hooo get with the real issues dems!

-- Tony Clifton (tclifton@loungesingerunion.com), November 04, 2004.

HELLO?

ANYONE HOME?

President Bush won his re-election, the Republicans incresed in the House, Senate, got rid of the leading Demokrat (Daschle), and all anti-gay marriage proposals passed, etc.

What America is saying is that Values DO matter, more than today's war, more than today's blips in the economy, more than an underfunded social security. Values matter.

With values, the old will be cared for, somehow. People get health care, somehow. As many people are working during this terrible time of woe as when Clinton declared a major victory in employment gain, don't let the left-wing press make their impressions yours. Things are much better than when Carter had 7-8% unemployment and itrest rates were like 18%!

You guys have it so good you think your toejam is a world crisis. Settle down, get a good education, and be positive with your life, you've only got one and it's passing you by while you stew in your juices and bite your livers.

Bazooka Joe

-- 2 (1@3.4), November 04, 2004.


I'm trying as hard as I can, and when I try to think what "moral values", if any, this President has, I keep drawing a blank. I suppose it's really moral to let 44 million people go without any healthcare. I suppose it's moral to let big corporations destroy the environment. I suppose it's moral to lie to start a war and get 1,200 American GI's killed. All those things are moral, but when a couple of homos want to get married, we've got to STOP THAT SHIT!

-- Anti-bush (Comrade_bleh@hotmail.com), November 04, 2004.

The founding fathers didn't have ANY government healthcare, and they were thankful.

New York used to be soot city, Cleveland's river caught on fire, air quality in L.A. in the 70's was much worse than now. it's much better now.

About 600,000 Americans died in the civil war, when the U.S. population was much smaller. this would be millions if it happened today.

Try harder Anti, nothing the President has done is that bad. Why not try expanding your horizons and list 4 GOOD things your President has done, or tried to do? You might be suprised.

Bazooka Joe

-- 2 (1@3.4), November 04, 2004.



I really dont get all this gripping about Healthcare. Clinton had 8 years and did nothing. Besides that I have Federally Provided Healthcare. 100% paid for. God Bless America. But you know what? It really, really sucks. When my sister inlaw was 7 she was told by these people that she had asthma. In reality it was Epilepsy. Good jod, Doc! I guess you get what you pay for. More than healthcare costs people should be worried about RxDrug costs. Canada gets their meds from the same places America does. Whats the difference?

-- Dick Tator (inneedofliberty@yahoo.com), November 05, 2004.

"The founding fathers didn't have ANY government healthcare, and they were thankful."

The founding fathers didn't have toilet paper either. What's your point?

"New York used to be soot city, Cleveland's river caught on fire, air quality in L.A. in the 70's was much worse than now. it's much better now."

Exactly. That is a testament to the fact that real progress is possible. We've probably made more environmental progress in the last thirty years than any other country. In the last four years, George Bush has tried his damndest to roll back all that progress. Robert Kennedy Jr. wrote a great book about Bush's shitty environmental policy called "Crimes Against Nature" that was released this summer. It's a great book, I highly reccomend reading it.

"About 600,000 Americans died in the civil war, when the U.S. population was much smaller. this would be millions if it happened today."

What is your point? That 1,200 is ok because it's not as many as the death toll of the civil war? Does that make it ok? Try telling that to their families and see if they get any comfort from it.

"Try harder Anti, nothing the President has done is that bad. Why not try expanding your horizons and list 4 GOOD things your President has done, or tried to do? You might be suprised."

Well, I do like the fact that he is anti-abortion, but as I've explained earlier, he's going about it all wrong. He needs to work on overturning Roe v. Wade and returning the issue of abortion to the states.

I like the fact that he went into Afghanistan, but I don't like the way he carried it out. What the fuck are you going to accomplish with 11,000 troops? There are more cops patrolling the streets of Manhattan than that. It was just enough to caputre Kabul and Kandahar, make a big show out of the wonderful new freedom we are imposing on them, and keep that new UNOCAL pipeline safe. Afghanistan is still the armpit of the world and we haven't changed a goddamn thing.

I kind of liked the things he said during the 2000 election about giving us less federal government and more personal freedom. It was a great little spiel. Too bad it was complete horse shit. Had he actualy followed through on that, instead of giving us MORE federal government, MORE federal spending, and LESS personal freedom, I might be inclined to support him. But we all know how that turned out.

That's all I've got. If I think of anything else, I'll let you know. Now it's your turn. Name me four good things KERRY has done or tried to do (or good things about his platform).

-- Anti-bush (Comrade_bleh@hotmail.com), November 07, 2004.


Anti,

"The founding fathers didn't have ANY government healthcare, and they were thankful."

The founding fathers didn't have toilet paper either. What's your point?

Morality doesn't change at the drop of a hat. It was immoral to kill indiscriminately thousands of years ago, it's immoral now. You are saying it's IMMORAL not to have people having healthcare, and that isn't true. People still get treated in emergency rooms, etc., when they need it, but there is no Consitutional "right" to healthcare. If the founders wanted it, they would have SAID it. How does an Anarchist look to the government to solve their health needs anyhow? Isn't that a bit, well, non-anarchist?

In the last four years, George Bush has tried his damndest to roll back all that progress.

Some progress was made that was REAL, and some things that were done are just crap. The crap needs to be repealed. You can't please everyone all the time, and just because some people don't like what the President is doing, that doesn't make it objectively wrong. Obvioiusly HE thought what was going on was wrong, or he wouldn't have changed it, right? Why not say that what was going on was wrong and Bush fixed it? That would make you happier.

What is your point? That 1,200 is ok because it's not as many as the death toll of the civil war? Does that make it ok? Try telling that to their families and see if they get any comfort from it.

1200 people in a country of 300 million is .00004% Not many people when you consider the AIDS toll, and our traffic fatalities every year far outstrip that. What do you want? Over 3000 people died in 9/11, people die in bathtubs, people just DIE. For a war 1200 isn't that many when you consider how many people die in most wars, and if it cuts down the losses from terrorists, it may be that overall it's saving American lives, which is a GOOD thing. You might not believe that these lives lost have overall saved lives, but you don't KNOW that's not the case. If you want to say Bush was "wrong", you can, but remember it's just your opinion. If what you are interested in is saving American lives, you should be criticizing the President for the immorality of the automobile, it kills ten times all our Iraq losses every year, and hasn't been banned yet.

I like the fact that he went into Afghanistan, but I don't like the way he carried it out. What the fuck are you going to accomplish with 11,000 troops? There are more cops patrolling the streets of Manhattan than that. It was just enough to caputre Kabul and Kandahar, make a big show out of the wonderful new freedom we are imposing on them, and keep that new UNOCAL pipeline safe. Afghanistan is still the armpit of the world and we haven't changed a goddamn thing.

It's changed a lot. They've voted on a leader. When the Russians occcupied it, LOTS of people died. The Taliban were hanging people during soccer games from the goal posts, and lots of people died. It really is better there now, and without a great loss of life. What do you want? How much better can it get? If you use lots of troops, it's an invasion, and the locals get stirred up and start trouble. Little troops, you aren't doing enough. Step back and look at the country though, I'd rather live there now than 10 or 20 years ago, and that means we've done something.

I kind of liked the things he said during the 2000 election about giving us less federal government and more personal freedom. It was a great little spiel. Too bad it was complete horse shit.

I don't think he meant that to be that way, but again how could he have known about 9/11? Our agencies weren't doing jack together. They need to start. On the .gov size, the Repubs just fell down on the job, but that is Congress' fault, not Bush's.

Name me four good things KERRY has done or tried to do (or good things about his platform).

1. He went to Vietnam, if only briefly, and put in for every medal and then left, but he did go. Of course when he got back he called u.s. soldiers war criminals, so that wasn't good, but his going was.

2. He says he personally is against abortion. This is good, although he says he can't choose that for others, which makes no sense. It's like he is saying he knows that killing your granny for her inheritance is wrong and he wouldn't do it, but if YOU want to, go ahead. No leadership there, but his own belief is good, just his acting on it is weak.

3. He thinks gay marriage is wrong. Well, he wouldn't act on it, but believes it's wrong. Definitions need to mean something. Have civil unions if you want, but keep the language in one piece.

4. He thought something must be done in Iraq. He never said what, exactly, but that's typical for a senator on the run, don't say anything, and nothing can be used against you. I'm sure he had ideas, but just was afraid to come out with them. The whole Middle East is a problem, always has been, perhaps always will be. At least he recognizes that and would probably have done something.

That's about as good as I can come up with. The rest of his stuff is really regressive. Tax the rich? "Egalitarianism" made EVERYONE poor in Russia, and Europe has gone the same way. Don't want that here. Social security? His plan is do nothing. Bush wants to do something, etc.

Bazooka Joe

-- 2 (1@3.4), November 08, 2004.


"People still get treated in emergency rooms, etc., when they need it, but there is no Consitutional "right" to healthcare."

Exactly my point. Under the current system, people who can't afford healthcare simply go to the emergency room. This not only costs the city money but it also clogs up the ER. Ever had to wait for a long time to get seen in the emergency room? That's why. I'm not proposing universal healthcare like they have in the UK or the Netherlands. That simply won't work in the US, at least not on a nation-wide basis. There's too many people. If states or counties want to try it, they can, but we can't have federaly funded universal healthcare. No, what I am proposing is universal health insurance. Make sure every American is covered. Keep doctors in the private sector, but help pay for medical fees when people need it.

"How does an Anarchist look to the government to solve their health needs anyhow? Isn't that a bit, well, non-anarchist?"

I'm not an anarchist.

"Some progress was made that was REAL, and some things that were done are just crap. The crap needs to be repealed. You can't please everyone all the time, and just because some people don't like what the President is doing, that doesn't make it objectively wrong. Obvioiusly HE thought what was going on was wrong, or he wouldn't have changed it, right? Why not say that what was going on was wrong and Bush fixed it? That would make you happier."

What? What progress has Bush made on the environment? He withdrew from the Kyoto Protocol, his "Clear Skies Initiative" just give corporations more leeway to pollute our air, he has raised the "acceptable" levels of murcury and arsenic in our water supply, and his cabinet is filled with the people least likely to uphold the law. The Secretary of the Interior used to work for a think tank that promotes commercial development of public land. The Secretary of Agriculture is a former lumber industry lobbyist. The Deputy Secretary of the Interior is a former oil and coal lobbyist. The Director of the EPA is a former biotech lobbyist. The solicitor for the interior department is a former beef industry lobbyist. The Undersecretary of the Interior is a former coal mining executive. Bush appointed another mining executive to the Mine Safety and Health Commission. All of these people are regulating the same companies they used to work for and, in some cases, still own stock in! That doesn't sound like progress to me.

"1200 people in a country of 300 million is .00004% Not many people when you consider the AIDS toll, and our traffic fatalities every year far outstrip that. What do you want? Over 3000 people died in 9/11, people die in bathtubs, people just DIE. For a war 1200 isn't that many when you consider how many people die in most wars, and if it cuts down the losses from terrorists, it may be that overall it's saving American lives, which is a GOOD thing."

Bullshit. IRAQ WAS NOT A THREAT. Saddam has no weapons. He was not behind 9/11. It was not worth American lives to remove him from power. What we did in Iraq didn't save any American lives. What a crock. We didn't shut down any "terrorist plots" in Iraq. All we did was further piss the Muslim world off and create yet another breeding ground for al Quaeda, who ironicaly were kept OUT of the country by Saddam. But it's always cool unless it's your kid going off to fight, right Joe?

"It's changed a lot. They've voted on a leader. When the Russians occcupied it, LOTS of people died. The Taliban were hanging people during soccer games from the goal posts, and lots of people died. It really is better there now, and without a great loss of life. What do you want? How much better can it get? If you use lots of troops, it's an invasion, and the locals get stirred up and start trouble. Little troops, you aren't doing enough. Step back and look at the country though, I'd rather live there now than 10 or 20 years ago, and that means we've done something."

That "leader" they voted on is just another thug. He just happens to be a thug who used to work for UNOCAL. Imagine that. His government controls Kabul, Kandahar, and a handful of other big cities. The rest of the country is run by the same warlords who ran it four years ago. Women are still beaten for leaving the house without a burqua. Men are still shot for shaving their beards. Islamic militias still roam most of the countryside killing indiscriminantly, raping women, shooting people they suspect of cooperating with the Americans.

"I don't think he meant that to be that way, but again how could he have known about 9/11? Our agencies weren't doing jack together. They need to start. On the .gov size, the Repubs just fell down on the job, but that is Congress' fault, not Bush's."

Please. Project for a New American Century had all this shit on the shelf for years. 9/11 was the best thing that ever happened to the neocons. The Republicans are supposed to be the party of limited government and they made it bigger. The Republicans are supposed to be the party of fiscal responsibility and they spent more. The Republicans are supposed to be the party of personal freedom and they gave us the PATRIOT Act. And their logic is completely flawed. Let's see, the thing that allowed 9/11 to happen was bureaucratic ineptitude (and a certain leader of the free world spending four months on vacation, but that's for another debate), so let's make a bigger and more complex bureacracy! Yeah, that'll stop the terrorists. Our agencies still aren't doing jack together, and Homeland Security has proven itself to be little more than an important-sounding money pit.

"Tax the rich? "Egalitarianism" made EVERYONE poor in Russia, and Europe has gone the same way."

Yeah, that's why the standard of living has DECLINED in Russia, East Germany, and the other former Soviet Bloc countries since the wall came down...

-- Anti-bush (Comrade_bleh@hotmail.com), November 09, 2004.


Will get back to this, but my goof-off time just evaporated.

BJ

-- 2 (1@3.4), November 09, 2004.



Moderation questions? read the FAQ