Okay, as you all know, we all have a pretty daunting task in a couple of weeks. We must choose a national leader from the following choices: A) The boring exaggerating stiff B) The complete idiot who is pretty full of $#!+ himself C) Token candidates that don't stand a shot in Hell (i.e. the racist and the environmentalist) D) None of the above (time to leave the country). Well, I'm choosing A, though I could defintely understand people who would select C or D. B, on the other hand . . . well, here's a link of quotes from B that would give Dan Quayle a run for his money: The complete bushisms The following is one of my favorites and pretty much sums up why I could never vote for Bush Lite. "I think if you know what you believe, it makes it a lot easier to answer questions. I can't answer your question."—In response to a question about whether he wished he could take back any of his answers in the first debate. Reynoldsburg, Ohio, Oct. 4, 2000 ------------------ [This message has been edited by Launch Pad (edited October 25, 2000).]
If bushel is elected I GUARANTEE WE WILL BE AT WAR IN 3 YEARS I cannot escape the fact that this man Is just not bright. He is as much a wimp who has never worked for anything in his life as Gore is. Bush has made everything he has because of his dad. Without Bush senior this man is nothing more than a bum on the street begging for change. I RESPECT BUSH SENIOR [Don't like him] Bushette I think not. Rocket River talk about the soldiers dying to puff up someone ------------------
That was hilarious River. Yeah, it would eliminate that redneck racist vote! ------------------ When you make an assumption, you make an ass out of yourself and umption. visit www.swirve.com
I've met some extremely intelligent Democrats--although the majority are complete morons. It never really made much sense to me. I mean--it makes sense to me why a moron would vote Democrat. Life is much easier when you have people legislating handouts, but I could never understand why there were extremely intelligent people who leaned to the left. I have no desire to be a Socialist. Republicans seem to be more middle-of-the-road in the brains department. Nevertheless, they DO attract the rednecks and the religious freaks. That's another thing that makes me laugh. If you studied the demographics of those having abortions, you'd think the Republicans would be neither pro-choice, nor pro-life. I'd think they'd be pro-ABORTION. I've watched this BBS and the political arguments going on lately, and I really haven't taken part. This is mainly because I loathe our "two party" political system. I think we have so many sheep in this country that buy into that system that I really think voting for a president is a complete joke. You people that think there is really some philosophical difference between Gore and Bush crack me up. Once a politician has reached the point of presidential candidate under one of our two "parties," he's relinquished whatever values he’s ever had. The philosophy--be it ass or elephant--is the same: greed and power. Those who judge someone’s intelligence by his performances in front of a camera further amuse me. Why don't we elect Tom Hanks? Anyway, thanks for the laughs--keep 'em coming. ------------------ stop posting my damn signature
I actually like GWB better than his daddy. GWB is clearly not as smart or persistent, but apprears to be a whole lot more in touch with people. So I won't knock GWB for his language problems and being a lightweight that much--even though my favoriate is the can't claim the high horse on the low road quote regarding John McCain. Too me focusing on Bush's bumbles or Gore's embellishements detracts from the real issues. What concerns me about GWB is the circles he runs with, because you know when it comes down to it they will be running the circus if he wins. And the likes of Cheney, C. Rice and old 80's repo guard running things again (especially appointing justices) is scary. [This message has been edited by Desert Scar (edited October 25, 2000).]
Certainly is! Who in their right mind wants to take a few steps backward? They were out of touch then, and they are even more out of touch now! ------------------ I am the b*stard son of LHutz. Huh? Right!
I've met some extremely intelligent people--although the majority are complete morons. What's your point? As for the socialism cop-out, what about improving education, medical care, and other programs and making them more accessible to those that can't afford it is socialism? Nobody is advocating a complete redistribution of wealth; they just believe that in a society nobody should be left out in the cold. You really should learn the difference between socialism and living in a society. Republicans are just as stupid as Democrats and probably a little more myopic when it comes to social issues. To reiterate some of your own points, have you heard of the NRA? The religious right? Prayer in school? George Dubya? There are large amount of morons (and hypocrites as you illustrate in your "pro-abortion" criticism) in both parties. I agree that a 2 party system sucks, but disagree that voting for president is a complete joke (unless of course, you're a Bush supporter, then by all means, don't vote ). We live in a republic and electing the leaders of that republic is about your only influence on how the government is run. The only "sheep" are the ones that blindly follow a govenrnment, but refuse to pick their leaders. You really think that there isn't a difference between the two parties? Let me sum it up for you: Republicans: A surplus! Great! Huge tax cut! Democrats: A surplus! Great! Improved social programs! Hey, thank you for the debate ------------------ [This message has been edited by Launch Pad (edited October 25, 2000).]
I'd agree that Dubya is probably more in touch with the people than daddy, but that's hardly a crowning achievement. George, Sr. sucked when it cam to domestic policy. Bushes lack of political experience does bother me. It also bothers me that Bush attacks Gore as an exaggerater, but is pretty much full of crap (exaggerating, lying, or just plain got the facts wrong) on a number of issues himself. I think you hit the nail on the head though concerning my biggest fear. I think the presidents most enduring power is the appointment of Supreme Court justices and a I really tremble to think about whom the boys that are pulling Dubya's strings would have him appoint. ------------------
Traj, Good point. There are a lot of very smart, and very stupid people in both parties -- along with a a lot of average people who just identify themselves more with one set of ideals than the other. Just because one doesn't share the same idea as someone else, doesn't mean that they are stupid. Personally, I think it's great when people care enough to get involved in politics to identify themselves with a party, or even as an independent. It's those that don't give a flip about what happens that are stupid. If anyone has any doubts as to whether they can make a difference, just look at Jeff and the Save Our Rockets campaign. Ordinary people can make a difference, but only if they try. On part 2, good point as well. What was the Clinton/Gore platform; the things they promised to fix? Health Care reform, Medicare Reform, Social Security reform. What have they done to fix these problems in the last eight years? ------------------ Stay Cool...
I guess I think that anyone who still buys into the rhetoric that Democrats are for handouts to the poor are morons. Or how about people who care more about a baby when it's inside a mother's womb than when it's outside a mother's womb? Pretty moronic if you ask me. Or how about people who get worked up over money they want to save when there's no way in the world they could even come close to spending all the money they have right now in their life time? Pretty moronic if you ask me. Or how about people who love the right to carry firearms, the second amendment is so great, but are so quick to blame Hollywood, the first amendment sucks for our "decay" in moral values? Pretty moronic if you ask me. Or how about people who would love to say a little prayer to Jesus before a football game, but probably wouldn't allow any other religions' be represented? Pretty moronic if you ask me. Or how about people who believe that homosexuality is a sin, yet have probably lied, been divorced, lusted after someone, touched the skin of a dead pig, or, given statistics, have committed adultary? Pretty moronic if you ask me. Like many have already stated, there are just as many morons on both sides. Throwing out stereotypical rhetoric (like I just did) and calling the majority of the other side morons is very counter-productive. I call myself a Democrat because that is the party that my beliefs most closely resemble those of that particular party. Do I wish we had more choices? Hell yes. Do I like Gore? Not particularly. Do I wish their was less corruptness on BOTH sides? Hell yes. I want there to be more choice, but I am going to vote for my party this time (with the exception of Hutchinson). ------------------ When you make an assumption, you make an ass out of yourself and umption. visit www.swirve.com [This message has been edited by Rocketman95 (edited October 25, 2000).]
I don't see what is wrong with some of these "Bushisms". More of our imports are coming from overseas seems like a resonable statement to me. ------------------ Don't come in Bullard's house!
On part 2, good point as well. What was the Clinton/Gore platform; the things they promised to fix? Health Care reform, Medicare Reform, Social Security reform. What have they done to fix these problems in the last eight years? On part 2, good point as well. What was the Clinton/Gore platform; the things they promised to fix? Health Care reform, Medicare Reform, Social Security reform. What have they done to fix these problems in the last eight years? You are kidding, right? The Clinton/Gore platform primarily included dealing with Crime, Welfare, the Economy, and Balancing the Budget. In case you haven't noticed, those issues all have not only been tackled, but we are in better shape than anytime in the last 30 years in all of them. What have Clinton/Gore accomplished? Exactly what the people voted as America's top priorities 8 years ago. (Give credit whereever you see fit, but the bottom line is that the issues that were at the top of the list 8 years ago are no longer issues because incredible and unbelievable progress has been made) Medicare & SS have been issues for 20 years, but no political party is going to solve them -- that needs to be done outside of politics. The fact that relatively minor issues like Prescription Drug Coverage are such a big deal instead of Crime, Defense, and Welfare tells you how successful the last 8 years have been. ------------------ Is it any coincidence that the Cato is the only Rocket with a temperature scale named after him? I didnt think so!!!!
I'm sorry, are you talking to me or pole? If you are talking to me, I'm not sure if this was in reference to my statement that Republicans are just as stupid as Democrats, or to my tongue-in-cheek re-working of pole's statement, when I said, "I've met some extremely intelligent people--although the majority are complete morons." If you're talking about the former, then I'll stick to my guns and say yes, there is an equal distribution of morons in the Democratric and Republican party. If you're talking about the latter, then that was just a joke (sorry for the lack of smilies). If, on the other hand, you're defending Dubya . . . well, what can I say? He is an idiot Okay, as you should already know, the President's primary law-making power is his ability to veto. Say what you will about Clinton, he has vetoed many bills that would undermine social programs. Furthermore, there is no guarantee that any President will "get these things done", but that still doesn't mean that you should vote for the other guy who believes these things that you believe in aren't even worth doing. ------------------
Bingo. Give the lady a blue ribbon, because she hit the nail on the head. What the Clinton haters fail to realize is that, even after the Monica Lewinsky scandal, if Clinton were able to run for a 3rd term, he would beat the stuffings out of Dubya, even with Little Bill hanging out of the front of his trousers at the Democratic Convention!!! ------------------ I am the b*stard son of LHutz. Huh? Right!
The origional goals of the Clinton/Gore administration, as outlined in Clinton's first state of the Union address in 1993, were: An Economic Plan (including Job Creation, Spending Cuts, and Deficit Reduction), NAFTA, Health Care Reform, Medicare, Social Security, Education, Welfare Reform, Campaingn Finance Reform, Crime, and Reduce Defense Spending. http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/politics/special/states/states.htm His goal was to cut the deficit to a "responsible level" -- not to balance the budget. That was pushed on him by congress, meeting with a lot of resistance, and didn't become part of his platform until his 1996 campaign. In some areas, he's done pretty well. The economy is in good shape, unemployment is low, NAFTA is in place and working, and they've made some good progress on welfare reform. The budget is balanced, and crime is on the decline. One could argue that the thriving economy, which the president has had little impact on, has contributed to low unemployment, less welfare problems, lower crime, and the balanced budget, but they were goals of the administration, and Clinton did have an impact. The administration also acomplished its goal of reducing defense spending, too well, to the point where our military is in trouble. Ironically, both Bush and Gore think this is a problem, and both advocate increasing defense spending. But the Clinton/Gore administration hasn't been able to accomplish its other goals, and after 8 years they are now on the table again. Clinton's biggest promise in his 1992 campaign was to reform the health care system, something he was never able to do, despite a crusade by his wife and numerous studies and commissions. They vowed to fix Medicare, including offering Medicare replacement plans -- an idea that has failed miserably. In the 1996 campaign, Clinton and Gore promised to reform education, and started the "National Crusade for Education." In 1998, Clinton specifically promised to "Save Social Security" and vowed to present a plan in "one year" to fix social security so that it would "remain strong" in the 21st century. In 1997, he vowed to increase spending to modernize our military. In 1992 and 1997, he vowed to put in place campaign finance reform. So how can Gore now say he is prepared to tackle the unfinished goals like Health Care Reform, Medicare, Social Security, Campaign Finance Reform, and Education -- without answering the question of what he has done to help fix these problems over the past eight years. ------------------ Stay Cool... [This message has been edited by dc sports (edited October 26, 2000).]
Someone put it like this. Democrats are a Negligent Parent Republicans are an Abusive Parent Take your Choice. I honestly do not fall into either one because one somethings I agree with each. If I could take the good from both and infuse them into a party I'd be happy. BUt for now I look for the one with the least sh*t that will destroy my life. Right now that seems to be democrats Rocket River ------------------
