BWX

Who gives a rat's behind what they were protesting?

Look at the signs and read. You sound like you are trying to say that they have a good reason for that garbage.





You are the one who says "Crazy Islams", not me. I showed some pictures, you can make up your own mind about what your eyes see.



At least I know how your brain works now. Your crass comment has nothing to do with radical Islamic terrorists wanting to "kill all Infidels"..




THATS what you were talking about? THAT? You've said nothing about what we do to "piss them off" as you say. It's almost comical seeing someone try to explain away terrorism.


What topic is that? Olbermann bashing Bush and making excuses for terrorists?

Maddogg6

Huh? I care. I guess protests to you is just some crap 'hippy' idea. pff.

AND, its NOT like we havent made many violent threats too - the threat of war = the threat death.
Our military (tanks and guns and missles) presance in some areas are seen as a 'persistant threat of death' as well.
(more at SFOSOK response)
This is what you typed.(not exactly - 'come to your own conclusions' now is it?)
This is a pretty clear insinuation (I used that word before too) to me that you think they are crazy.

I chose something I was sure you would have found offensive so you could get a feel for how upsetting a single cartoon can be to you - but looked at as a joke by others. You simply refuse to understand my points.

Remove the 'bush bash goggles' for a moment.
You have indicated before, you thought the media are liars and cant be trusted to report 'the whole truth' - but yet you proliferate the same notions I hear/see from these people you called liars before. When its ONLY going to lead to more and more hate and violence.

No it was about 'chalk one up for the terrorists' (as in - terrorists are fighting to remove our freedoms - and they won another 'battle') - the clip contained a message you seem to have missed. WE HAVE LOST YET ANOTHER FREEDOM in the name of the 'war on terror'
(Ill add: and anyone supporting the pres policy is helping the terrorists get what they want.) But you were too focused on it being 'bush bashing' to get it.

I mispoke on that and Garbrial_entrail already pointed that out earlier. (beside was not really my main point anyway)
So, Yes I did explain it 4 times now.

More than it my right its our pres oath.
But THATS what this thread IS ABOUT. Habeous corpus, our basic right and how we are loosing this right. (not to mention the pres' unilateral and illegal policy changes with out the 'checks and balance' that prevents individual total gov't control)

And yes, our founding fathers warned NOT to allow a reduction of our freedoms to happen under ANY circumstances (except via amendments) - I happen to understand why - because its the ONLY thing that guarentees 'the people' protection from our own 'super power' gov't and prevent 'catastrophic' abuse on their part.

I already expalined this too - and no. Im not muslUm. nor am I muslIm - I simply dont care to be an accurate typist in a forum where spelling is obviously not much of a concern as long your point still gets accross.

ANY group working in unison, commiting crimes on US soil IS ORGINIZED CRIME the # of victoms isnt really a factor as much as our freedom is. THE FOUNDING IDEALS OF OUR NATION.

I want justice too, but not at the cost of freedom which also means a victory for these extremists who want exactly that. So now my motivation to keep freedom alive is 2 fold.
We ALSO have a duty to respect others too if we want to keep our rights and our safety.
Like, I KNOW I should not walk thru a predominatly black neighborhood and yell 'niggers are all murderers' - and then complain when they kill my family becuase of this. This is effectivly what is still happening as I see it. ('muslIms are terrorists' - sentiment)

How many times did you find someone who was insulted by a simple joke - and sure - its your right to say it - but if you want to have some civility with that person - you know you need to refrain from blatently disrespecting them. You find middle ground - aka comprimise.

THATS the 'responsibility' that comes with freedom we dont seem to exercise. Instead we laugh our asses off at all the jokes at their expense (if were not laughing with them - were laughing AT them - right?) - proliferate prejudice (muslIms want infidels dead and are plotting to kill us) - and invade their land under false pretenses (Iraq -wmd?).

Or - if we dont take that 'civil' course (and stop doing the above things first) - we might as well just nuke the middle east ('sorry bout all fallout allies') and round up all muslIm's world wide and go nazi on their asses. And hope we get em all before any/too much retaliation occurs. But I suspect that would be the end of it all - 1B+ people is LOT to have to hunt down. when we cant get a grip of things in Iraq.

So I feel we're forced into some diplomatic solution (300M v 1B ??). And it starts by one side putting their weapons, greed and threats away long enough to understand the other side - we as americans should be the first to do so and not expect the others (we as a 'super power' can afford to be the 'bigger man' here IMO) to be the first to do so.
Im not proposing 'kissing up' to them - but I see the blatent disrespect to their beleives by too many people with a tone I can see how they view as 'threatening'.

Heres another source for *potential* complaint they could have...
We became dependant on oil imports - and we can predict what happens to oil prices when these 'conflicts' occur AND they have become increasingly hostile towrds us - coincidence? - I dunno - but shouldnt there be SOME sort of legitimate investigation BEFORE we agree to call in our military and go to war with potentially 1B people and be stripped of our rights?

Well - define extremist... to me it someone who commits misdemeanor or non-capitol crimes in the name of their cause.

Like Green peace - I would call 'an extremist' group. But are they 'terrorists'?? (?? Im not gonna debate that here - but my point is..) now they are with our definition of the term 'terrorist' and these new policies - (side note: and who was a major target of green peace? - oil co's - another coincidnece??) - is where the differentiations will come into play later. Some of their activities I seen as 'protest' (boats blocking oil tankers, LA arco building sign) *could* now be considered 'terrorist activity'. Im not sure I like the idea of that either.

You see - it takes 'sensationalism' to get the media's/masses attention now a days - so how does one get their attention and NOT be called a terrorist?
With these new policies and the definition of 'terrorist' I dont see how its possible anymore unless you already have a massive ammount of people behind your cause. Because a large # can be seen as 'sensational' - but how do you get to that point first? (aka 'chicken and the egg' conundrum)

Thus, How do we know - those protestors wern't using 'sensational' verbage on their signs to gain media attention?? - there was no violence right? They were using traditional 'protesting' avenues - and thats a positive indicator that theres SOME level of civility among at least some of the people that are close(er) to these extremists we are trying to protect our selves from. Instead of denouncing their protest - we should ask - ok - so why DID 911 happen??

Their 'warning' is DAMN clear to me - 'stop mocking their god/religious beliefs' and that they are deadly serious about it. 'Learn from 9/11' - 'Europes 911 is on the way' - granted, all this over a cartoon seems rediculous to us - but its obviously NOT to them. We should respect that if we dont want it to become 'deadly'. Or, do you want it to get 'deadly'?
Just like we have the FCC limiting whats brodcast on TV. Which I dont completely agree with it - but its better than loosing a huge chunk of freedom like our writ of habeous corpus.

PS I am NOT justifying 'terrorists' I am simply trying to get everyone to realize we should attempt to understand the 'terrorist' before we agree to rash changes in policy and attempt to fight a war against a faceless/nationless enemy. When 99% of our preception of the situation is 'media induced'. And most here seem to realize how crooked the media is.

SFOSOK

Would you rather America "warn" (not threaten) before hand or have them just go into the country and kill their top officials effectively overthrowing it?

There are a place for peacful protests but there should be no place for for people who want to openly threaten another group of people. Threatening like that is not considered a peaceful protest because it is a psycological attack (fear/terrorism) in the targeted group of people.

__________________
*Warning* - Explicit Content Preceeding



METAL!!

BlueMak

No, still zero.

__________________

The people who are regarded as moral luminaries are those who forego ordinary pleasures themselves and find compensation in interfering with the pleasures of others(Bertrand Russell)"You go into Afghanistan, you got guys who slap women around for five years because they didn't wear a veil,You know, guys like that ain't got no manhood left anyway. So it's a hell of a lot of fun to shoot them." - Lt. Gen. James N. Mattis
This is slavery, not to speak one's thought. [Euripides-The Phoenician Women (c.411-409 B.C.)] http://www.macedonia.info/FALLACIESANDFACTS.htm Sic semper tyrannis.

BWX

Maddogg.. do you agree with the terrorists? it sounds like you do.

TheBlackCat

It also means he is allowed to disagree with such people, and try to show them why.

Maybe because two wrongs don't make a right?

Oh please! You have never heard of the inquisition? We don't know how many people were killed because their religious beliefs differed from those in power, or were simply accused of differing, since the Christians at the time didn't think it was worth keeping track of such people. But I have heard estimates in the 10 million range. And they weren't just killed or denied rights, they were tortured until they confessed. And it wasn't fully abandoned until the mid-1800's. Christianity was also spread through force in many parts of Europe. Last time I checked it was Christian fundamentalists, not Islamic ones, who were blowing up abortion clinics. Claiming that this is somehow unique to Islam is absurd, Christianity is fully of such practices. They are not as common anymore (although they are by no means completely gone). But then again Christianity is in a far stronger position in the world politically than Islam is.

I never heard anyone here say that. Besides, Christians do this all the time too. I remember several occasions where the Catholic Church calls for boycotts of movies they think are offensive to Catholicism. There is a movement among some fundamentalist Christians to ban Harry Potter books. Last year a man who was going to teach a University course critical of fundamentalist beliefs like anti-evolution was beaten up on the side of the road by Christians offended by him. To claim that trying to silence ideas that a religious group finds offensive is somehow unique to Islam is just wrong.

I am no great lover of Islam, nor am I a great hater of Christianity. I just expect that all groups should be held to equal standards. Terrorists are terrorists no matter what religion they belong to. Violent fundamentalists are violent fundamentalists no matter what religion they belong to. I do no condone violence by any religion. I will readily admit that Islamic terrorists are the main religious terrorists affecting the western interests right now. But I cannot blame Islam in general when I look in the mirror and see all the horrible things my own religion has done and continues to do.

__________________
[color=#000000]There is always an easy solution to every human problem—neat, plausible and wrong.[/color]
-H. L. Mencken

TheBlackCat

So you are saying all Muslims should lose their freedoms because of the actions of a few? The US has had terrorist attacks by numerous other groups, including Christian ones, but I do not see that sort of thing being demanded for all Christians.

I never said you were, I was making a comparison between Christians in Greece and Muslims in Greece. You stated quite explicitly you are not a Christian, and it seems from your tone you are also not Greek.

In Muslim countries with any sort of freedom, of course. That is the whole point. Greece is supposed to be free. It is not supposed to be the same as oppressive regimes. People are supposed to be able to practice their religion as they please there. Same in the US. So yes, I am expecting a free country to behave differently than a totalitarian fundamentalist theocracy. I would find it very disheartening to find out that Greece treated minority religions the same way Iran, for instance, did. Is that so strange? To expect free countries to be better than non-free ones?

I was not talking about the literal Ghettos that existed in Nazi Germany. I am talking about poor areas in any country in any point in history that new immigrant groups always end up in. That is how immigration works. No immigrant group every instantly integrates into the country they arrive in. It always takes several generations at least. Sometimes it never happens fully. There are still Chinatowns in many major cities in the US, even though Chinese have been immigrating to the US for a century and a half or more. There are also still many areas that have excessive number of descendants of immigrants from Italy, Ireland, Germany, or some other country or area and still follow many customs from that country. Historically these areas tended to be poor, dangerous, and full of crime when the immigrant populations first arrived. That changed over time, but it still took several generations. I expect nothing different from Muslim immigrants, nor do I see anything different. Same rules apply to them as to everyone else.

__________________
[color=#000000]There is always an easy solution to every human problem—neat, plausible and wrong.[/color]
-H. L. Mencken

BlueMak

TheBlackCat

1)the inquisition did take place and you are right about it. The difference is that neither christ or the bible command followers to the things I said, so don't say "oh please!". When one commands you to do something certain way, and the other has people acting on that way because they want to, is a BIG difference.


2)The difference between the church of today and islamists is that when a book is seen as an insult, the most that happens is some books get burned, in islam people are killed. I think it is not the same.


3)What other terrorist attacks in the US by other groups are you talking about? Apart from 1 or 2 cases where individuals wackos attacked (1996 the last time?), what terrorist attacks took place in the USA and by what groups? How do all muslims in the USA lose their freedoms by having them (in percentage) more searched in airports?


4) I am greek. I don't know what makes you assume I am not and I would love to know. A comparison between christians in Greece and muslims in Greece? No, muslims in Greece do have full rights and mosques where they live (western thrace and some islands). Mentioning the mosque in Athens as an example of muslim immigrants, not greek muslims. Huge difference. Do you know how many christians live in Saudi Arabia? What would you think would the reaction of the saudis be if they asked for churches there?

5)Of course Greece is a more free, it is not near perfect of course, in fact there is one and only one religion that is not allowed to have their own buildings, it is not islam or any other major (population wise). What I was talking about was specificaly about muslims though. Because the other religion is a far different situation than what we are discussing here.

6) Two things about your last point about ghettos. Apart from muslim immigrants, no other group (that I know of) tries to actualy turn (in the long term) the rest of the country to their religion. The rest might try to remain their original religion, but not try to expand it, not to mention forbid any chance of leaving (from muslim to anything else), without the risk of getting killed. Now, in the USA things are not like this (and I am really happy about it), but in the rest of the world is. Why is it different? Apart from of course the USA being perhaps the best country in the world, my guess is that since there is no large scale settlement of muslims in a single city/area, but instead of spreading out accross the nation, helps. Also, since it is not as easy to immigrate to the USA (unless you are in Mexico I guess) it is far harder for most of the, not pure at heart, meaning those that not truly want to become americans, and just escaping or whatever, it also helps.

I know my last paragraph is even worse than usual, but I am tired.

__________________

The people who are regarded as moral luminaries are those who forego ordinary pleasures themselves and find compensation in interfering with the pleasures of others(Bertrand Russell)"You go into Afghanistan, you got guys who slap women around for five years because they didn't wear a veil,You know, guys like that ain't got no manhood left anyway. So it's a hell of a lot of fun to shoot them." - Lt. Gen. James N. Mattis
This is slavery, not to speak one's thought. [Euripides-The Phoenician Women (c.411-409 B.C.)] http://www.macedonia.info/FALLACIESANDFACTS.htm Sic semper tyrannis.

TheBlackCat

The old testament, which is in the Bible, commands people to do things very much like that. So yes, the Bible does command that. You can reject half the Bible if you want, but it doesn't change the fact that those sorts of things are in there.

No, people are stilled killed by Christians even today.

And how many islamic terrorist attacks were there in the US in the last 20 years? 2, that is how many.

You seemed to be referring to Greece in the third person, so I assumed you were not Greek. My apologies.

Exactly. Greece is not a totalitarian fundamentalist theocracy like some Muslim countries. Nor do I think they should behave as such.


I see no difference. They want religious freedom and a place to practice their religion. Any immigrant group in a free country would expect that.

It appears at least 1 million. And Saudi Arabia is exactly the sort of totalitarian fundamentalist theocracy I was referring to before. Their treatment of other religious beliefs is abominable. That very well me why people emigrated from there to Greece in the first place. They wanted more freedom to practice their religion as they pleased. I do not think Greece should then turn around and behave like Saudi Arabia. Because Saudi Arabia did something bad to foreigners there does not make it okay for us to do the same thing to Saudi Arabians living in our countries. We are supposed to be better than them. That is the point I am trying to make.

That was my point too. Greece values religious freedom, so it should allow religions to be free (and it does). Thus there should be no problem with members of a religion building a place of worship, or wearing religiously appropriate clothing (which all religious people do, Muslim or otherwise). These seem to be the sorts of things that someone would logically expect a free society to allow. I fail to see the issue with this.

Are you saying this is the case with all Muslims in Greece, or that there is a subset that is resistant to immigration. I would be very surprised if all Muslims were like this. If it is just a subset, then yes that does happen with other immigrant groups. For the Puritans, for instance, it was not a risk of getting killed, it was a certainty.

I do not have an answer to this question. I am not familiar enough with the demographic differences regarding this issue to speculate. The only other obvious difference is that Greek is much, much closer to predominately Muslim countries than the US is.

__________________
[color=#000000]There is always an easy solution to every human problem—neat, plausible and wrong.[/color]
-H. L. Mencken

OmegaRED

I agree, and I'm not gonna jump in with the 5 pages of discussion but Americans are so blind and think they are fighting the terrorists when all they are doing is destroying their own freedoms.

Obermann's speach is going to go down as one of the classic moments in broadcast history.

__________________

SFOSOK

God I hope not, but you are probably right which is the sad thing.


George Bush is not raping this country, Democracy is raping this country.
This country was founded as a Republic, look back to its creation. It is not once mentioned (until Woodrow Wilson said it) that this country is a democracy. It is instead reffered to as a republic. The freedoms we have were never ment to be a right but a privalage.


Every single one of you keep dodging and not responding to a certain statement I keep making because I think you know its right just none of you want to take the responsibility to fix it. Just f*ckin complain.

It is our faults our country is falling. The blame lies with all of us (in America of course). Our government is serverly flawed and is raping this country because YOU let it. We all let it. I get tired of this bitching and moaning, what do you hope to accomplish by complaining about what is goin on? Why don't you f*cking get out there and do something, plan something. If you have such a f*cking problem overthrow the God Damned Government! I have a problem with democracy and I inted to do something about it, but I am not goin to complain in the meantime about how bad things are. If people don't realize democracy is the fall of this country they will never know. Stating that someone will never know still doesn't accomplish anything.

Freedom isn't free and I intend to pay my way while the rest of you loath in it. But one day in the future, when our country has fallen (not because of a president but because of you) we will know we were mistaken, but it will be too late. I'll take back this country as a republic in the future, and you may call me naive and an idiot. But hey, at least I'm doin something about it instead of sitting on my hands and pouting about it.

__________________
*Warning* - Explicit Content Preceeding



METAL!!

BlueMak

It has been a while since I read the old testament, and apart from the jewish conquest of the lands after their exodus from Egypt, I admit I can't remember where it said to spread the religion to non believers, and that those who do not want to change should be killed or at best if they belong to a certain other religion of the time, be allowed to live as 2nd class citizens.


Doh! (or is it Duh?) Of course christians kill others. But it is not the teachings of christ saying that they should do so.


yes, but they were such and the death toll was large. Meaning, they were terrorist groups and they killed a lot.


I am trying to do so to remain objective. Now I know someone might laugh with this, but trust me I do not have anything else in my mind than to be objective, even when I do not sound to some people as such. There is no reason to apologize! BTW, what (if any specific) did you think my nationality is?


My objection is not that people followers of a religion want to build a temple, but that they scream and riot (not in Greece) for it, while when they were back in their countries I doubt they did anything to support (for example) churches in Saudi Arabia. I do not believe it is because they didn't like the government there, but because they preferred it that way. Where in the west it is the opposite. You can easily find non muslims openly supporting the muslims/arabs etc. It isn't just because the western countries are more free, but also because the westerners truly believe more in the freedom than muslims do.

I disagree with one part of the above. I seriously doubt that the muslims that left, in this case, Saudi Arabia, left because of the lack of religious freedom of other people in the country.

As I mentioned before, the situation in Greece is such, apart for one religious group. Thus it is not perfect. My objection is not with muslims right to pray or to have a place to do so. But with all the rest, including what I mentioned above in this post. They know very well how to demand, but they are not as good as giving away the same things they demand.

In Greece things are very different in a lot of ways. I would say there are two unique (in each own way) situations regarding the matter, one is USA the other is Greece.
In Greece muslim immigrants know that they cannot do the things they do in say France or Sweden. You see Greece was occupied by muslims for almost 450 years, and just in the last 200 years they (remember) have fought muslims from a variety of countries, in Greece. Egyptians and Turks mostly, but also Albanians. In the long run the muslims (who were also non greeks, so don't forget that) were kicked out of the country. Today there is a strange mix. On the one hand most of the greeks are friendly and supportive to arabs and muslims in general, but also not tolerable towards any ideas or notions that muslims (immigrants) would act violently as they do in other countries. Simply put, they would be at least kicked out without second thoughts. Where in France and Sweden they are so PC and so worried about "rights" that they are actualy losing control of their own country. It is ridiculous.

__________________

The people who are regarded as moral luminaries are those who forego ordinary pleasures themselves and find compensation in interfering with the pleasures of others(Bertrand Russell)"You go into Afghanistan, you got guys who slap women around for five years because they didn't wear a veil,You know, guys like that ain't got no manhood left anyway. So it's a hell of a lot of fun to shoot them." - Lt. Gen. James N. Mattis
This is slavery, not to speak one's thought. [Euripides-The Phoenician Women (c.411-409 B.C.)] http://www.macedonia.info/FALLACIESANDFACTS.htm Sic semper tyrannis.

SFOSOK

Also, did anyone notice the steady social and moral decline since under God and anything relating to the bible has been taken out of school.

__________________
*Warning* - Explicit Content Preceeding



METAL!!

Maddogg6

I could ask - are in favor for the removal of our rights? - because you sound like it. anyway.. here it is again.
Ill add - and consider for one moment - the possibility that our media and gov't are manipulating us all.

I DO think a warning (= threat IMO) is most fair. We dont have to rely on deception or 'sneak' attacks to win a legitimate war against a recognized nation. We are/should be bigger than that (maturity as well as might).
And becuase terrorists are NOT representitives of any nation - we should pressure the the countries that harbor them politically/economically first - then show em were serious with military threats then operations - then all out war (if necessary) for non-compliance. Thats whats we seem to have all (as a bi-partizen nation) agreed upon as a course of action to deal with 'un-cooperative' nations in the past. But thats not what happened. And Im convinced its going to turn into a 'cause' and motivation for tomarrows extremists.

I do agree - the language they used WAS wrong.... but....
(my point about 'sensationalism' to get media attention.?? as I mentioned before) And Also...

Think about how we would like it to see foriegn (not necessarily 'allied') battleships circling the pacific when your at the beach? Or walking the streets with assault rifles, anti-tank, anti a/c missles etc.. . How 'safe' would you feel? Is it possible that could feel like a threat? - one youd be willing to kill for or at the very least threaten violence over? - OR maybe our anger would come out as 'over reaction' to a 'joke'. a 'last straw' if you will.
So, I see how some these things we have done, could be interpreted as 'threatening' to them as well. (And IMO - worse than a sign that says 'kill infidels')

Like I said I dont know for sure... but something - no, alot of things, just arent adding up to me - except the removal of our fundamental rights.
But I do know - IF were found to have been at fault - it WILL require some major ass kissing to repair releationships.

The whole point of this thread (1st post clip indicated) is how its now legal for them to be held indefinitly with NO writ of habeous corpus... NOT just 'extra searching at the airport. (anyone with a oneway ticket, or paid in cash - gets that extra treatment - cuz racial profiling is (rightfully) illegal)

Maddogg6

1# - Im not avoiding your comments
2# - debate is part of the system we have now and is NOT doing 'nothing' nor is it simple bitching. Its how you get others to see your point of view in a non violent way.

SFOSOK

But thats the point, this thread is only angering both sides while accomplishing nothing. No one will leave this thread any more thinking your way than they came here (except pissed off). Words are worthless without action thats why I dislike online debates, its not the same as talking to a person in front of you.

__________________
*Warning* - Explicit Content Preceeding



METAL!!

BlueMak

I am not angry.

__________________

The people who are regarded as moral luminaries are those who forego ordinary pleasures themselves and find compensation in interfering with the pleasures of others(Bertrand Russell)"You go into Afghanistan, you got guys who slap women around for five years because they didn't wear a veil,You know, guys like that ain't got no manhood left anyway. So it's a hell of a lot of fun to shoot them." - Lt. Gen. James N. Mattis
This is slavery, not to speak one's thought. [Euripides-The Phoenician Women (c.411-409 B.C.)] http://www.macedonia.info/FALLACIESANDFACTS.htm Sic semper tyrannis.

Maddogg6

lol - so it can result in a brawl and the toughest one wins the debate?? I dont see a difference otherwise.

Seriously...
A debate is meant to be at the very least a means to glean into the other sides point of view. It forces a concensus of ideals and indicates WHAT issues are important to whom and opportunity to discover why.

So I dont see it as a waste at all.

Maddogg6

and Im not mad/angry either - not even close.

Oh and aditionally - I think arguments can be good at times
It tends to bring up issues someone may be reluctant to voice otherwise.

SFOSOK

I don't believe people can be open minded in debates unless they talk about it face to face.

Fom what I have seen here, that is true.

__________________
*Warning* - Explicit Content Preceeding



METAL!!

The New Guy

and by open minded you mean "open to changing their mind to believe your mindless drivel", right?

My god people...anyone who can relate the loss of habeus corpus to the war in Iraq, please, relate your head out of your ass and then look at it again.

Bush is the embodiment of what is wrong with this country:

-There are no real requirements to become powerful, aside from being wealthy
-There are no requirements to becoming rich, especially if it runs in the family
-Money is the golden calf of our backwards society
-Our education system is so bad that the majority doesn't understand what's going on, and thus we get stuck with emperor george
-"Shoot first, ask questions later"
-"Civilian or enemy? Kill em all, let god sort em out"



You people scare me...you truly do. How in the HELL can you say the journalists are the terrorists when we have this f*cker for a president?



And before you even say it SFOSOK...I didn't vote for Bush. I'd sooner not vote then vote for that fascist git.

And also, I too wonder what the difference in arguing online and in person are aside from the ability to intimidate them better.

And lastly, it seems only those who have their fascist fanboy hats on are getting mad...the rest of us are just getting depressed and wanting to move...


...and I'm sure you'll tell me not to let the door hit me on my way out, but I can assure you that I'm staying, because I'm hopeful that come 2008, things will improve.



And remember: "while I don't agree with what you say, I will defend to the death your right to say it".....NOT "[sic] defend to the death your right to be wrong"...big difference.

Maddogg6

I dont understand that.... I see...
face to face debates too frequently ends up:

1) never letting the other side complete a point
2) end up in violence
3) go off topic quicker and further *eh hem*

Maddogg6

Because they arent reporting how much of a tyrant bush is.
IMO thats JUST as bad if not worse.
We (as a nation) are somewhat aware of the corruption in DC - but few suspect the media is (helping) 'spin' us into WWIII - for the few advertising $$$ they get for their ratings.

And SFOSOK isnt a bush fanboy (i though so at first too)

Pompey

I hate to get off topic but SFOSOK, did you ever consider that democracy is not the problem? That maybe its the American version thats the problem?

Just felt I had to say it.

And if you detest online debates so much...why are you here?

__________________
One's inability to find an answer to a question does not imply that the question has no answer.

SFOSOK

Well I should say personally and how it goes for me. I never take online debates seriously and usually just oppose who ever starts the thread in an attempt to make myself better at arguing and debating.

I haven't been doin that well in portraying my thoughts accurately though, I need to read and begin writing again (sigh).

__________________
*Warning* - Explicit Content Preceeding



METAL!!

SFOSOK

For Some

For Everyone Else

And something else...

__________________
*Warning* - Explicit Content Preceeding



METAL!!

Yousaif

They won't improve unless the entire 2 party system is gone. Without some new voices with some different ways of approaching things it will be the same damn thing all over again.

If you think that by electing democrats instead of republicans in office things will get better than I'm afraid that you are mistaken. We are on a downward spiral on both sides of the aisle.

Both sides raise taxes for their pet projects, though the pet projects may differ in concept, they don't differ in how little actual impact they make on our society.

As the Joker said in "Batman," : "This town needs an enema." Well what this country needs is an enema. People that run for office aren't doing it for any grand noble cause. They run because they seek power, and those are exactly the people that we shouldn't be electing.

__________________
-----------------------------
Yousaif


Isaiah 1:23

pr0digal jenius

<-- voted for Badnarik

Maddogg6

I dont beleive that to be true necessarily..

I beleive we are in this pickle becuase for years the people have been lax in watch dogging the gov't - things like NOT following up on how your reps vote (or if they even did or not, and why)

With out people paying closer attention - just makes their 'job' screwing us easier.
The tides of freedom turned when WE became fearfull of the gov't - when it *should* have always been the opposite.

Look at all those congressmen and senators that have been in office for multiple terms - in that time - they learn how to 'work the system'
If ALL reps only got 1 term (by our votes) they would 1) have less time to learn the 'system' - and 2) it also sends a message that 'we ARE paying attention' - the low voter turn outs of past was the message to them that we dont follow politics very closely as a nation.

I dont know a better system could replace ours - I just think we need some overhauling - an 'enema' if you will in DC. That means people and policy (primarily foriegn) - if any government is for the people - the people have to run it, not politicians. Democracy seems to be the closest thing available that comes close to that - but 200 years of policy changes have taken us in the directions (i beleive) we all detest now.