Which is the better candidate?

Discussion in 'Politics, Religion, Social Issues' started by SlyHunter, Apr 18, 2004.

  1. SlyHunter macrumors newbie

    SlyHunter

    Joined:
    Apr 13, 2004
    Location:
    Florida
    #1
    Discussing in a thread with a narrow topic such as is Bush's administration the worst ever is pointless unless you compare it to what choice do we have. First off I don't think Bush did everything right. I think he waited too long by 12 months trying to appease the UN before going into Iraq. I think he spent too much effort trying to appease the Democrats, probably to get their votes, doing things like working with Kennedy to write I think it was the education bill. I think he spent too much time trying to out liberal the liberals in an effort to steal democrat votes from them. And that by doing so he may have lost just as many Republican votes. And yes there have been better speakers.

    I don't understand who would want the job, too many people going thru your past judging it for perfection, like anyone has ever led a perfect life. Like for example his abscence from the NG. No there is no evidence that says he was AWOL but there is evidence that he was Abscent With Leave as were allot of people even tho there was a war going on at the time it was a war that was winding down.

    But you have to look at the alternatives and Kerry isn't it.

    http://www.flipflopper.com/Flipflops.asp

    Yes this site is biased but then there wouldn't have been such a nice organized listing of factual information to make it convenient to copy into a thread like this and it doesn't invalidate the validity of what was written. The quotes I pasted are sample they are neither the best nor the worst samples I could find and I did skip around a little bit. There are many as good or better examples at that above link.

    My point is this it seems to me that Democrats will reinvent themselves in order to get elected. They are career politicians and nothing really matters to them except winning the whitehouse simply for the sole purpose to keep power in the hands of the Democrats. They stand for nothing without first taking a poll or a measurement so as to insure they get the maximum number of votes.

    The Republicans tend to stand for what they believe in even if it costs them votes. At least with them you see what you get even if you don't like what it is that you see there is very little deception. Yes from time to time individuals try to mimic the democrats and they do it badly and usually getted busted for doing it on every media channel in the universe, when if a Democrat did the same thing the media ignores it. Example lotts comment vs that senators comment about Byrd. Both mispoke, one was member of the KKK the other was a seperationists. But who got ran out of office for speaking and who got defending by the mass media as an honest mistake? It just aint fair.

    Now the libertarians they are really truly honest with their positions. Too bad they don't have more of a following. Problem is like the republicans if they gained too much power in the white house they would take things too far. We really would have people starving in the streets, or in forced work camps. Makes it hard for someone like me to be loyal to any one party.

    But you got to look at the times we are in now and the real choices we have now and right now, right this minute in time (8 months long +- a month) our best choice is Bush.
     
  2. skunk macrumors G4

    skunk

    Joined:
    Jun 29, 2002
    Location:
    Republic of Ukistan
    #2
    If his efforts to get the UN on board had not been based on disinformation, he might have got a resolution. If there was a case to be made.

    With Bush, we KNOW we're going to be screwed. With Kerry, we only suspect it.
     
  3. numediaman macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Jan 5, 2004
    Location:
    Chicago (by way of SF)
    #3
    SlyHunter, why don't you ever quote news sources? This site is a political site -- it would be like someone else linking from the DNC.

    But, if you want someone to discuss those accusations:

    1) Kerry on Iraq: yes, Kerry voted for the original authorization. I don't like his excuse on this either. But it should be pointed out that a vast majority of Americans, back in 2002-2003, supported the President on this. The don't see why you hold it against Kerry for supporting the President -- I would think you would be happy about this. But now that it has been shown that the President lied about Iraq, Kerry has changed his mind. I would think that would be called "using your brains".

    2) Marriage penalty: talk about a garbage claim. Kerry has, in fact, voted against tax bills that would have eliminated the "marriage penalty" -- he has also voted four times for bills that would have eliminated the "marriage penalty". Is this flip-flopping? If you think so you need a serious civics lesson. The fact is that the both the Republicans and Democrats introduce legislation that do popular things like eliminate a tax rule, but also do things that many Congressmen can not tolerate. So voting down a bill that contains dozens of provisions, then saying that Kerry voted it down because of one item is disingenuous.

    3) Who is Wallace Carter? and why should I care?

    4) No Child left Behind: I will admit that voting for this was a bad move. It should have been clear from the beginning that Bush was pulling a fast one -- more mandates that have been unfunded -- more interference in local school decisions -- why did the Republicans think this was a good thing? Why are the Republicans voting for more and bigger government? Like Iraq, I wish Kerry had been on the right side of this issue from the beginning -- but at least is where I would want him now.

    You have pointed out several cases where Bush did really horrible things to this country, and you blame Kerry for backing up the President. Kerry now admits that Bush was wrong in these cases -- why don't you blame Bush for these mistakes?

    Which is the better candidate? The one that most closely reflects your views. I have no doubts that Bush more closely reflects your views.

    Rather using character assassination, why not discuss this using the issues?

    Where are you on the war? On taxes? On public education? On a woman's right to choose? There are real issues involved in this election -- is "flipflopping" a real issue, or bogus? All it gets us into is an argument about who is the bigger liar, Bush or Kerry?
     
  4. SlyHunter thread starter macrumors newbie

    SlyHunter

    Joined:
    Apr 13, 2004
    Location:
    Florida
    #4
    In my post I wasn't judging the merits or the reasoning in what Kerry voted for or against. What I post and why is that he can't seem to stay on one side of an issue. He has to be on both sides of every issue so nomatter what you say he can claim different. He's both for the war and against the war depending on when you are talking to him about it.

    No news site would have correlated that data so nicely so that it shows his votes for and against side by side. Also its not that easy finding a truly neutral web site. I do check out a variety of sites from a variety of countries, england, canada, Israel, even the French Praesse (mispelled that one too) I copy news items that reflects what I want to say.

    I believe ABC, CBS, NBC, CNN, MSNBC, NPR, and such to be left wing liberal so you won't find allot of links to those sites from me.

    Ok FYI the web sites I visit from time to time for political news and stuff.
    http://www.rr.com/flash/index.cfm
    http://www.thesmokinggun.com/archive/babsmoney1.html
    http://www.science.co.il/Arab-Israeli-conflict.asp
    http://www.dawn.com/2004/04/17/index.htm
    http://middleeastinfo.org/article3827.html
    http://www.science.co.il/
    http://www.jewishworldreview.com/
    http://apnews.myway.com/article/20040228/D810BV100.html
    http://www.mfa.gov.il/mfa/home.asp Site seems to be down right now.
    http://www.packing.org/
    http://studentsforacademicfreedom.org/
    http://news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=sto.../who_health_latam_cars_040407201350&printer=1
    http://www.cpac.org/
    http://www.liberty-tree.org/ltn/dayofdeceit.html
    http://www.local6.com/news/2968435/detail.html
    http://www.vietnamveteransagainstjohnkerry.com/
    The frequent ones I visit
    http://boortz.com/
    http://drudgereport.com/
    http://fraudfactor.com/
    http://www.frontpagemag.com/
    http://www.insightmag.com/
    http://www.intellectualconservative.com/
    http://www.canada.com/national/nationalpost/index.html
    http://www.canada.com/national/nationalpost/index.html

    I'm only one person so I don't have a whole lot of time to add more to that.
     
  5. SlyHunter thread starter macrumors newbie

    SlyHunter

    Joined:
    Apr 13, 2004
    Location:
    Florida
    #5
    I wanted Saddam removed. My sister wanted him assassinated thinking it to be the easier solution, and I would have been for that but not a good policy the war was the better solution. But it is not wise to give your enemy 12 months notice that you are going to attack him.

    Taxes, this I flip flop around a bit myself. I do believe in the graduated tax system. I do think that rich people should pay more percentage of their income than poor people. The difference is they don't have to worry about survival like the poor people do. However I also don't believe in abusing these same rich folks. Don't tax them too much or they will simply move to another country who taxes them less. The question is how much is too much.
    I don't like the idea of having tax money taken from those who earn it an given to those who havn't. Don't tell me about 5.7% unemployment. I could have a job tomorrow if I needed it. For example with a valid drivers liscence I can walk into a place a mile away and be working 10 bucks an hour driving a dump truck. Special liscence for that cost 10 bucks and the test consist of about 5 pages in the back of the regular standard drivers handbook. Or I could go to work for McDonalds for 7 bucks an hour. There are allot of people hiring around here. There is no excuss to take money from those who work and give it to those who don't work with so many people around hiring.

    I hate wellfare mothers who already live on the government and then have more kids. Then they look at you wierd if you have a problem with it. I am from a poor neighborhood and I've seen first hand these women think they have the right to take other peoples tax money to spend for their crap. For example if they quit smoking that is the grocery bill right there. These are selfish ungrateful individuals and while I don't like the idea of starving kids in the streets I hate the idea of these leaches who think the world owes them a living.

    I think the National government has the right to regulate education. If I were in charge I would change the system 12 tests for 12 levels of education. Self paced you can not be promoted to lvl 2 until you pass lvl 1. You are stuck in lvl 1 until you pass. Each level brings rewards, like lvl 9 you get to drive a car during the day time at lvl 10 you get to drive at night (parents permission of course) At level 12 I don't care if you are 10 years old you are now legally an adult. I don't care if you 50 years old if you havn't passed all 12 levels then you are not legally an adult. Part of a conviction in a criminal case could include a penalty of dropping them to lvl 9 or even lvl 10 upon exiting prison. In their case they would have to have an alternative method to earn their way to lvl 12.

    [edit]---- I however believe that it is the State governments job to finance education and National government so lower taxes to reflect the fact they are not paying for education. I see nothing wrong with IBM, or Apple creating their own upper education system as a means of insuring qualified applications. But I'm against the potential of turning that into a slave system. I think vouchers are a poor idea to fix a problem. The reason they probably will work is a part of them the Republicans have never stated out loud. You don't get a voucher equal to how much the school was getting paid to teach your child. So by pulling that child out with the voucher and sending it to private school you helped the school have more money left per student when divided up their total budget on the students that remain. And that is how they become a better school.

    I also think teachers should be judged on their students passing each level. Yes sometimes they get bad students and shouldn't be fired or demoted because of one single class. But they should be fired or demoted if it becomes a habit. They should be promoted if they typically have higher than average passing students in their class. And no they should not be trusted to give out the FCAT or in my example the lvl 1-12 tests.
    [end edit]
    How about a mans right to choose. In a fantasy world I think it would be great walk down to the bus stop see a hot girl sitting on the bench while waiting on the bus pull her skirt up do her then hop onto the bus without fear of consequences. Aids, pregnancy, palimony, etc. Too bad we live in reality.

    I don't think a woman has the right to committ abortion without giving the father a say in it whatsoever. However I do realize that in such a case it could be impossible to break a tie and I don't have an answer for that. I think that decided the point of a human life vs a biological life is not in my abilities to deduce. Keeping it simple abortion fine, partial birth abortion equals to murder. There is no excuss to give partial birth and then kill the baby, you may as well pull it the rest of the way out and try to keep it alive and allow someone to adopt it. It does not save a womans life to do partial birth since you have to put her thru the hard part before you kill it.

    Not so simple. Saying that we cannot kill anything that can become human is short sighted and narrow minded. Is human really all that special. Should there be a law saying that we cannot kill anything that has the potential of intelligence which is more open minded way of saying the same thing. And then define intelligence? Porpoises, monkeys, unborn feteses? I'm not qualified to say. For now I'll stick with the simple paragraph above.
     
  6. skunk macrumors G4

    skunk

    Joined:
    Jun 29, 2002
    Location:
    Republic of Ukistan
    #6
    Meaning that they don't always follow the Administration's line? And I don't see any UK sites on your list. Many of the sites you do list are out-and-out propaganda. This is not news. Your own opinions might be more engaging. Or not. But as long as you keep throwing this biased rant into the argument, we'll never know.
     
  7. SlyHunter thread starter macrumors newbie

    SlyHunter

    Joined:
    Apr 13, 2004
    Location:
    Florida
    #7
    Also I think Syria should be next. I think our army should be increased in size and technology. And I think Iran should worry about being in line after Syria but I believe military effort won't be required in Iran just that its good they worry that it might.

    I think N. Korea is tricky because they already have nukes and that if we attacked they could nuke S. Korea. Therefore kids gloves required. I hope our so called allies don't look at this and decide to arm other middle eastern countries with nukes as a means to get the US to not contemplate military options with those countries.
     
  8. skunk macrumors G4

    skunk

    Joined:
    Jun 29, 2002
    Location:
    Republic of Ukistan
    #8
    I want Bush and Blair removed. OK to assassinate them too? Or should I just declare war? Both countries have WMD. The UN should be a pushover.
    Why would that be great? That's what Bush thought about Iraq. Too bad we live in reality indeed.

    Come back when you have a meaningful suggestion, then.

    Which "simple paragraph"? Considering that you seem quite happy with 10,000 Iraqi dead and God knows how many Afghanis, your pro-life tendency sits rather uncomfortably with your warmongering.
     
  9. skunk macrumors G4

    skunk

    Joined:
    Jun 29, 2002
    Location:
    Republic of Ukistan
    #9
    And after Syria and Iran? Who next? Venezuela, because you rightwing buddies tell you Chavez is a dangerous pinko? Saudi Arabia? Egypt? Yemen? Ethiopia? Sudan? France? Who is going to finance your deficit to enable this?
    Oh my God, they're BOUND to do that! Why did you let the cat out of the bag? Anyway, your mate Musharraf has seen to that already.
     
  10. numediaman macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Jan 5, 2004
    Location:
    Chicago (by way of SF)
    #10
    For the record:

    ABC: owned by Disney
    CBS: owned by Viacom
    NBC: owned by General Electric
    CNN: owned by Time Warner
    MSNBC: owned by Microsoft & General Electric
    NPR: private non-profit media company

    SlyHunter: "Also I think Syria should be next." -- then volunteer.
     
  11. SlyHunter thread starter macrumors newbie

    SlyHunter

    Joined:
    Apr 13, 2004
    Location:
    Florida
    #11
    Skunk Numedia asked for my point of view I gave it. Your responses seem to be directly aimed at trying to tick me off. I don't work that way.
     
  12. skunk macrumors G4

    skunk

    Joined:
    Jun 29, 2002
    Location:
    Republic of Ukistan
    #12
    Perhaps you should take your sister along too. Sounds like she'd be up for it. ;)
     
  13. skunk macrumors G4

    skunk

    Joined:
    Jun 29, 2002
    Location:
    Republic of Ukistan
    #13
    If you can't argue your opinions, why post them? How am I ticking you off?
     
  14. SlyHunter thread starter macrumors newbie

    SlyHunter

    Joined:
    Apr 13, 2004
    Location:
    Florida
    #14
    If everyone who thinks we should go to war volunteer'd and were excepted there would be none left to vote for President except thru absentee ballot which Gore tried to stop during the last election. Not a realistic answer. Besides not only did I spend my time in service I'm also not fit and too old to do them a whole lot of good.
     
  15. skunk macrumors G4

    skunk

    Joined:
    Jun 29, 2002
    Location:
    Republic of Ukistan
    #15
    There's always logistics. :p
    Or you could write those pamphlets they drop on people they're about to bomb to win their hearts and minds...
     
  16. numediaman macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Jan 5, 2004
    Location:
    Chicago (by way of SF)
    #16
    I wasn't being flip. You not only support this war, but are advocating more war.

    If there is one single improvement I would like to see in our government, it would be the requirement that Congress declare war in order to send troops into any situation where the troops would take offensive action. The exception would be self-defence, of course, or situations where the troops are working with a direct U.N. mandate (Korea or the first Gulf War, for instance).
     
  17. skunk macrumors G4

    skunk

    Joined:
    Jun 29, 2002
    Location:
    Republic of Ukistan
    #17
    Sounds good to me.
     
  18. Thanatoast macrumors 6502a

    Thanatoast

    Joined:
    Dec 3, 2002
    Location:
    Denver
    #18
    I am happy to take every one of those quotes at face value. Why? Because in the end, on many of those issues Kerry came around to my point of view. I want a President that represents what I believe. Bush does not. Kerry did not, now he does :) Think of it as the ultimate cynicism.

    And don't think the Republicans are any less poll driven than the Democrats. Besides, one could argue that if politicians are following the polls, they are simply more closely representing the values of their constituents. One could argue that, anyway. It comes down to the style of representation that you want. Do you wnat your rep to vote what you'd vote, or do you want your rep to vote what's best for you?
     
  19. SlyHunter thread starter macrumors newbie

    SlyHunter

    Joined:
    Apr 13, 2004
    Location:
    Florida
    #19
    Problem with polls is their flaky one day their one way the next another its hard to lead when your following the polls. Example on 9/12/01 If we took a poll or a vote I bet the people would have demanded that we nuked the Middle East.

    added --- this link http://www.pollingreport.com/iraq.htm
    shows alot of polling data good and bad towards all sides. I put this up to show people are all over the place but mainly people think we did a good thing but don't like the fact we lost American lives to do it.
     
  20. Neserk macrumors 6502a

    Neserk

    Joined:
    Jan 1, 2004
    #20

    I love having discussions with intelligent people!

    I would rather vote for someone who is able to admit he was wrong (Kerry) and try to right it, than someone who is complete denial (Bush) and continues to maintain their ignorance!
     
  21. Dale Sorel macrumors 6502a

    Dale Sorel

    Joined:
    Jan 12, 2003
    #21
    No kidding... oh wait a minute, he's a freakin' human bean :rolleyes:
     
  22. skunk macrumors G4

    skunk

    Joined:
    Jun 29, 2002
    Location:
    Republic of Ukistan
    #22
    Afghanistan is not in the middle east, so that wouldn't have helped much. Polls are OK if everyone is well-informed. Not so good when they are disinformed. Would you have voted to nuke the middle east?
     
  23. skunk macrumors G4

    skunk

    Joined:
    Jun 29, 2002
    Location:
    Republic of Ukistan
    #23
    Is that your defence of illegal warmongering, mass killing and the rest?
     
  24. SlyHunter thread starter macrumors newbie

    SlyHunter

    Joined:
    Apr 13, 2004
    Location:
    Florida
    #24
    I was worried we might strike too soon. I had a suspicion at the time that maybe others may have done the deed and tried to pass it off as Al-Qaeda to get us into the action. This was due to web site information I was reading at the time. I mean I couldn't believe that someone was so stupid to think we wouldn't retaliated after doing something like that and I would not have been surprised to find out back then if Israel did it to get us to do more than just talk. Think about it, that was the worst mistake they ever made without which the Taliban would still be running Afghanistan. Makes no sense to me.

    It would make more sense to me if Mossad (Israel) came over to the US disguised as Pallestinians and blew up a train station or something. But those would have to be really loyal patriots.

    added ---> After they compounded their error by actually admitting it, then it was time to go into Afghanistan for sure.
     
  25. pseudobrit macrumors 68040

    pseudobrit

    Joined:
    Jul 23, 2002
    Location:
    Jobs' Spare Liver Jar
    #25
    Kidney, lima, string, pinto or soy?

    I've yet to try these human beans.
     

Share This Page