If Kerry wins the election, 2005 will be a banner year for the new aircraft carrier fleet. Cuz he said he's strong on defense, before he said he was against it.
Posted by KurtK (Member # 1779) on :
Posted by MMMM_ERT (Member # 1599) on :
Posted by Mike2001SS (Member # 2088) on :
HEE HEE
Posted by FireChicken (Member # 2067) on :
Oh, thats priceless!!!
Posted by JeffY (Member # 120) on :
At least he won't stage a fake event from the deck of it, have it turn around so he looks good and then proclaim from it that the war is over and watch a whole bunch of people get killed because somebody threatened his daddy-not a country.
[ 25. May 2004, 07:41 PM: Message edited by: JeffY ]
Posted by HOSS (Member # 1464) on :
quote:Originally posted by JeffY: At least he won't stage a fake event from the deck of it, have it turn around so he looks good and then proclaim from it that the war is over and watch a whole bunch of people get killed because somebody threatened his daddy-not a country.
That's because Kerry and his carrier fleet would have waved the white flag when the big bad bully says Boo!
Posted by el ess1 (Member # 1544) on :
quote:Originally posted by JeffY: At least he won't stage a fake event from the deck of it, have it turn around so he looks good and then proclaim from it that the war is over and watch a whole bunch of people get killed because somebody threatened his daddy-not a country.
That's because the deck's not big enough on his new carrier, nor can he fly a plane anyway. They might let him drive the boat though, as long as he doesn't change direction.
They both suck in their own way, but at least one has 'nads and doesn't waffle on important issues. Fortunately or unfortunately, we can only choose one of the two this November.
Even if you don't agree with policy, don't make our service people pay for it by voting against a spending measure to give them the supplies they need to fight. By doing so, you politicize the military, and that shows the true colors of your level of patriotism, IMO.
Posted by JeffY (Member # 120) on :
quote:Originally posted by el ess1:
quote:Originally posted by JeffY: At least he won't stage a fake event from the deck of it, have it turn around so he looks good and then proclaim from it that the war is over and watch a whole bunch of people get killed because somebody threatened his daddy-not a country.
That's because the deck's not big enough on his new carrier, nor can he fly a plane anyway. They might let him drive the boat though, as long as he doesn't change direction.
They both suck in their own way, but at least one has 'nads and doesn't waffle on important issues. Fortunately or unfortunately, we can only choose one of the two this November.
Even if you don't agree with policy, don't make our service people pay for it by voting against a spending measure to give them the supplies they need to fight. By doing so, you politicize the military, and that shows the true colors of your level of patriotism, IMO.
You're kidding right? Your equating patriotism with politicicizing the military???? The military is all about politics. And I don't agree with the policy one bit. I never believed we should have gone to Iraq, and I still don't. We gained nothing and have everything to lose. Its just another Viet Nam. And Kerry knows all about Viet Nam, while Georgie was....... , well, you tell me where he was.And I do believe in the military, so don't get me one that one. My son is a Marine; his friend was blown up in the Gaza strip on a peace mission - they just played it up on West Wing a week ago. I fly the flag in front of my house every day, I vote in every election, because I can. I know what the military has done for me and this nation. We're a proud people and we deserve to be-despite what the rest of the world thinks about us. Does the military need to be protected and given what they need-yup, 100%. We shouldn't have any one driving around in Iraq in unprotected Humvees but theyare. Because some politician didn't get the contract for his area. You'll never separate politics and the military.
Posted by Mitch02SS (Member # 1781) on :
Let's at least get the FACTS straight... The president did not proclaim the war over. He said it was the end of the major conflict and that we still had far to go. (read the speech) This war was not fought for "daddy". The previous administration had plans to go into Iraq, but they did not have the ba!!s to go through with it. It's interesting how the previous "waffler's" lack of military service was something that was unimportant when he ran against an injured WWII vet, now if you didn't serve in Vietnam, you're unfit. (gee, playing both sides of the fence - sounds like the democratic candidate) I know it's sad, but young men and women die in the military every day, whether in combat or training. They know the risks and still "volunteer" to protect this country. Thank God that they do. We lost more men in WWII in one battle than we've lost in total in this war. America needs to strenthen it's resolve and realize that we are in a WAR that was not started by us, but we must finish it.
Posted by killabee (Member # 860) on :
Bush said himself that action like he has taken in Iraq would not have been possible in the pre 9-11 world, and as we can see its debatable still now. Him saying but they tried to kill my daddy was childish. At least address him in a different manor so it doesn't look like a vendeta.
[ 26. May 2004, 12:57 PM: Message edited by: killabee ]
Posted by MMMM_ERT (Member # 1599) on :
God help the United States of America if Kerry gets in office.
Even many Democrats are thanking God that Al Gore was not President at the time of 9/11.
I'll vote for STRENGTH any day over flippy....
[ 26. May 2004, 01:32 PM: Message edited by: MMMM_ERT ]
Posted by twobratSS (Member # 2180) on :
Uh oh ...I can see where this is going ... Posted by MMMM_ERT (Member # 1599) on :
Standard issue footwear aboard the U.S.S. Kerry carrier will be flip-flops.
photo courtesy of my good friend Doug (Xero) (Monkeyboy). Posted by TimeLord (Member # 1389) on :
All very pathetic and sad !!!!!!
[ 26. May 2004, 02:50 PM: Message edited by: TimeLord ]
Posted by MMMM_ERT (Member # 1599) on :
Gore calls Bush the most "dishonest" president since Nixon. I see no mention of the 8 years under the "uni-banger" Clinton and his countless scandals....more Democratic selective amnesia.
Shut up Al Gore...noone is listening...go see "The day after tomorrow" a few more times and then drop by the "West Wing" set to hang with President Bartlett.
[ 26. May 2004, 06:08 PM: Message edited by: MMMM_ERT ]
Posted by TimeLord (Member # 1389) on :
Pssssttttt !!!!! ALL politicians are dishonest and amoral !!!!!
Posted by el ess1 (Member # 1544) on :
Good gravy, this is getting way overblown. Politics is in our fabric, and we either deal with it or we don't. All I was doing was poking a bit of fun at the candidate not of my choice. It is an opinionated outlook on Kerry's proposed policies, if he's even sure of them himself, but my opinion was not ad hominem, which the Bush-haters always seem to do (look it up if you don't know what that means). A few people get their panties in a wad over what I consider a humorous, and light-hearted ribbing. It was not meant to offend, but if your feathers get ruffled, it's something you need to handle. You can always start your own thread of Bush funnies. At least the opposers are passionate about something. Which is good. They at least stick to one side.
Either way this election goes, it appears just as last time, about 1/2 the people won't be happy. Worrying about this thread is like worrying about car build numbers. To those, I say "get a life." (Where have I heard this before?)
Posted by Fbodfather (Member # 1119) on :
OMG!!!!! Pete and I agree on Something!!!!!!
(Run, Forrest, Run!!!!)
(jk, MMM-ERT!!)
[ 26. May 2004, 03:43 PM: Message edited by: Fbodfather ]
Posted by MMMM_ERT (Member # 1599) on :
...and hey...I still love Camaros...
quote:Originally posted by Fbodfather: OMG!!!!! Pete and I agree on Something!!!!!!
(Run, Forrest, Run!!!!)
(jk, MMM-ERT!!)
Posted by MMMM_ERT (Member # 1599) on :
Agreeed!!!! But which is the lesser of two evils? Which lets me keep more of the money I work HARD for? Which is looking out to protect me and my family from those who wish to cut off our heads as was done with Nick Berg?
quote:Originally posted by TimeLord: Pssssttttt !!!!! ALL politicians are dishonest and amoral !!!!!
Posted by Hawkeye (Member # 88) on :
Iraq, Afghanistan, Gaza, Iran, U.S.S. Cole - terror is terror.
I don't know if you can fight terrorists with convential weapons or armies. I know that after 9-11 the country, for that matter the world was waiting for the U.S. response. And, after the first few days of bombing Bahgdad there was lots of euphoria. Now it's settled in and the U.S. is facing what Israel faces daily. At least, at the end of June Iraq will once again belong to Iraqies. Too bad young men and women had to die.
I just wonder if what they did over there has saved lives over here? One will never know.
D day is fast approaching. It was 60 years ago, on June 6, that the Canadians hit the beaches at Normandy and suffered many losses of young men driving back the German forces. They say it turned the tide of the war in Europe. I think we don't honor those men and women enough today.
Politics aside, it's individuals who are willing to sacrifice for freedom, always was, always will be. May God bless them and bring them all home safely.
Posted by TimeLord (Member # 1389) on :
They are both evil,,,vote for Nader and you wont have to worry about what to do with your money,GREENPEACE and Friends of the Earth will have it all !!!!!! Posted by 98-mongooSSe (Member # 794) on :
When democrats are in office, the economy is good & we're not at war. It seems to be just the opposite when the republicans are in. For God Sakes no one will ever agree with everything their canidate does or says, but you have to step back & look at the bigger picture. I'm not for budget cuts in the military one bit, but what is going to hurt our troops the most? Being at war with the best equipment possible or being on home soil & not having to police everyone elses affairs? Does anyone actually feel that what we've done so far will keep something like 911 from happening again? If anything I'd guess that we've got even more people that hate us now.
Politics suck anyway, we should stick to talking about cars!
Shay
Posted by SSHEETS (Member # 1989) on :
Red X due to work firewall!!! I'll check in when I get home.
Posted by MMMM_ERT (Member # 1599) on :
quote:Originally posted by 98-mongooSSe: When democrats are in office, the economy is good & we're not at war. It seems to be just the opposite when the republicans are in.
Does anyone actually feel that what we've done so far will keep something like 911 from happening again? If anything I'd guess that we've got even more people that hate us now.
1.) Economy was going in the toilet before Bush Jr. took the reins (and we are now just coming out of a bad economy under Bush.) Clinton took the reins just as Bush Sr/Reagans administrations labors came to bear fruit. Clinton rode the upswell and took credit for it.
2.) We tried peace....peace gave us 9/11.
Posted by 98-mongooSSe (Member # 794) on :
[/qb][/QUOTE]1.) Economy was going in the toilet before Bush Jr. took the reins (and we are now just coming out of a bad economy under Bush.) Clinton took the reins just as Bush Sr/Reagans administrations labors came to bear fruit. Clinton rode the upswell and took credit for it. [/QB][/QUOTE]
That's the typical republican responce I always hear. Do you have some kind of example for me as to why? No one else ever seems to be they swear that it's true! If that were the case then why didn't Bush Sr. reap the rewards of Reagans work? Are you going to tell me that it took them 12 years to get everything together & good 'ol Clinton just slowly tore it back down? I'm sorry, the trend speaks for itself & will come full circle once again.
Shay
[ 26. May 2004, 08:50 PM: Message edited by: 98-mongooSSe ]
Posted by biSScuit (Member # 2030) on :
I swear, some people need to learn what an inflection point in a graph means!
Say you graph the well being of the US economy over time, and shade different areas depending on whether or not a republican or democratic president is in office. You will see the majority of the time that a republican comes into office as the economy is heading downhill, but the republican leaves office with the economy heading back northwards. Well duh, the republican was in office while the economy was a its worst, but it has turned around and has nowhere to go but up. A democratic president usually comes to office with an economy that is heading upwards. But, when he leaves office, that economy is usually heading back downwards, meaning he was in office during the peak of the economy, but it is now failing again. Now I ask you, would you rather the economy make a turn for the best, or a turn for the worst?
Now to make things more confusing, all I just said means jack crap anyway, as the president has nothing at all to do with the well being of the economy. So, in more ways than one, the quote "When democrats are in office, the economy is good & we're not at war. It seems to be just the opposite when the republicans are in." is pretty dang ignorant.
Posted by MMMM_ERT (Member # 1599) on :
quote:Originally posted by biSScuit: as the president has nothing at all to do with the well being of the economy.
I did say "administrations" not the President alone. Dubya (and his crews) tax-cuts are partially responsible for turning the economy around though.
Posted by Tom (Member # 2281) on :
Excuse me! I am new in town! Is that the Canadian Navy? Posted by TimeLord (Member # 1389) on :
No !! We don't have any carriers that big anymore!!!!!! Posted by 98-mongooSSe (Member # 794) on :
quote:Originally posted by biSScuit: I swear, some people need to learn what an inflection point in a graph means!
Say you graph the well being of the US economy over time, and shade different areas depending on whether or not a republican or democratic president is in office. You will see the majority of the time that a republican comes into office as the economy is heading downhill, but the republican leaves office with the economy heading back northwards. Well duh, the republican was in office while the economy was a its worst, but it has turned around and has nowhere to go but up. A democratic president usually comes to office with an economy that is heading upwards. But, when he leaves office, that economy is usually heading back downwards, meaning he was in office during the peak of the economy, but it is now failing again. Now I ask you, would you rather the economy make a turn for the best, or a turn for the worst?
Now to make things more confusing, all I just said means jack crap anyway, as the president has nothing at all to do with the well being of the economy. So, in more ways than one, the quote "When democrats are in office, the economy is good & we're not at war. It seems to be just the opposite when the republicans are in." is pretty dang ignorant.
Does the inflection point graph also show you what particular events cause the changes? No. Why is it "ignorant" to point out the how things are going at a certain time? You do realize that IS what the graph is telling you right? You just choose to read it one way & I read it the other. But of course mine is the "ignorant" view huh? Can you give me any actual FACTS to back up your claim? How about the fact that Bush & Reagan together in 12 combined years couldn't make a difference until it was time for them to go? If what you're saying is true then Bush Sr. should have been the one enjoying a strong economic growth & gotten elected to a second term, but for some reason that just didn't seem to happen.
This is a waste of time.
Shay
[ 26. May 2004, 08:59 PM: Message edited by: 98-mongooSSe ]
Posted by Fbodfather (Member # 1119) on :
I'm not so sure you can generalize saying that when repubicans are in office we're at war...go look at the rest of the 20th century.
Posted by Fbodfather (Member # 1119) on :
I really hate war.....
---but one thing keeps going thru my mind....everyone tried to ignore Germany in the late 30s.....and Churchill and Roosevelt were criticized for their actions.....
6 million Jews died because of a madman.
No weapons of mass destruction? How did all those Kurds die, then?? ( I just don't think it was purple koolaid......)
Posted by biSScuit (Member # 2030) on :
quote:Originally posted by 98-mongooSSe:
quote:Originally posted by biSScuit: I swear, some people need to learn what an inflection point in a graph means!
Say you graph the well being of the US economy over time, and shade different areas depending on whether or not a republican or democratic president is in office. You will see the majority of the time that a republican comes into office as the economy is heading downhill, but the republican leaves office with the economy heading back northwards. Well duh, the republican was in office while the economy was a its worst, but it has turned around and has nowhere to go but up. A democratic president usually comes to office with an economy that is heading upwards. But, when he leaves office, that economy is usually heading back downwards, meaning he was in office during the peak of the economy, but it is now failing again. Now I ask you, would you rather the economy make a turn for the best, or a turn for the worst?
Now to make things more confusing, all I just said means jack crap anyway, as the president has nothing at all to do with the well being of the economy. So, in more ways than one, the quote "When democrats are in office, the economy is good & we're not at war. It seems to be just the opposite when the republicans are in." is pretty dang ignorant.
Does the inflection point graph also show you what particular events cause the changes? No. Why is it "ignorant" to point out the how things are going at a certain time? You do realize that IS what the graph is telling you right? You just choose to read it one way & I read it the other. But of course mine is the "ignorant" view huh? Can you give me any actual FACTS to back up your claim? How about the fact that Bush & Reagan together in 12 combined years couldn't make a difference until it was time for them to go? If what you're saying is true then Bush Sr. should have been the one enjoying a strong economic growth & gotten elected to a second term, but for some reason that just didn't seem to happen.
This is a waste of time.
Shay
Chill the freak out!! I am not calling you nor your interpretations ignorant. But, I've heard that same line (in different wording) several times, and I do think that it is ignorant to generalize things so far as to say that when Democrats are in office the economy is ALWAYS good and we are NEVER at war! Like I said, there are many more factors to the economy than just what party the president belongs to, and actually that really isn't even a factor!
Posted by MMMM_ERT (Member # 1599) on :
quote:Originally posted by Fbodfather: I really hate war.....
---but one thing keeps going thru my mind....everyone tried to ignore Germany in the late 30s.....and Churchill and Roosevelt were criticized for their actions.....
6 million Jews died because of a madman.
No weapons of mass destruction? How did all those Kurds die, then?? ( I just don't think it was purple koolaid......)
Posted by TimeLord (Member # 1389) on :
[ 26. May 2004, 11:25 PM: Message edited by: TimeLord ]
Posted by MMMM_ERT (Member # 1599) on :
Posted by SSHEETS (Member # 1989) on :
quote:Originally posted by 98-mongooSSe:
quote:Originally posted by biSScuit: I swear, some people need to learn what an inflection point in a graph means!
Say you graph the well being of the US economy over time, and shade different areas depending on whether or not a republican or democratic president is in office. You will see the majority of the time that a republican comes into office as the economy is heading downhill, but the republican leaves office with the economy heading back northwards. Well duh, the republican was in office while the economy was a its worst, but it has turned around and has nowhere to go but up. A democratic president usually comes to office with an economy that is heading upwards. But, when he leaves office, that economy is usually heading back downwards, meaning he was in office during the peak of the economy, but it is now failing again. Now I ask you, would you rather the economy make a turn for the best, or a turn for the worst?
Now to make things more confusing, all I just said means jack crap anyway, as the president has nothing at all to do with the well being of the economy. So, in more ways than one, the quote "When democrats are in office, the economy is good & we're not at war. It seems to be just the opposite when the republicans are in." is pretty dang ignorant.
Does the inflection point graph also show you what particular events cause the changes? No. Why is it "ignorant" to point out the how things are going at a certain time? You do realize that IS what the graph is telling you right? You just choose to read it one way & I read it the other. But of course mine is the "ignorant" view huh? Can you give me any actual FACTS to back up your claim? How about the fact that Bush & Reagan together in 12 combined years couldn't make a difference until it was time for them to go? If what you're saying is true then Bush Sr. should have been the one enjoying a strong economic growth & gotten elected to a second term, but for some reason that just didn't seem to happen.
This is a waste of time.
Shay
I guess that depends on the what the definition of "IS" is?
[ 27. May 2004, 01:04 AM: Message edited by: SSHEETS ]
Posted by HOSS (Member # 1464) on :
Here's a straight forward question for everyone planning on voting for John Kerry in this election...
Why will you vote for John Kerry?
Posted by Hawkeye (Member # 88) on :
Non participating observer. It might not be as much for Kerry, as it is against Bush.
Posted by BigBlueSS (Member # 2173) on :
War is hell. I'd surrender to her.
Posted by Z28-SORR (Member # 1565) on :
quote:Originally posted by Fbodfather: I'm not so sure you can generalize saying that when repubicans are in office we're at war...go look at the rest of the 20th century.
Yes, I've always found it interesting that the Dems. never talk about which party was in power during the 10 years of Viet Nam.
Posted by KurtK (Member # 1779) on :
quote:Originally posted by 98-mongooSSe: When democrats are in office, the economy is good & we're not at war. It seems to be just the opposite when the republicans are in.
Hmmm...remember Jimmy Carter..'Stagflation'...the hostages in Iran and our response???
[ 27. May 2004, 11:53 AM: Message edited by: KurtK ]
Posted by MMMM_ERT (Member # 1599) on :
Never forget.....
Posted by Z28-SORR (Member # 1565) on :
I got another one. Ever notice that most of the liberals on this site are waxers while most of the conservatives are into engine mods. Do you think it's because that for the Dems. it's all about flash and looks and for the Repubs. it's all about power?
Sitting peacably on the the fence, just to the right center.
[ 27. May 2004, 12:04 PM: Message edited by: Z28-SORR ]
Posted by SSHEETS (Member # 1989) on :
quote:Originally posted by Z28-SORR: I got another one. Ever notice that most of the liberals on this site are waxers while most of the conservatives are into engine mods. Do you think it's because that for the Dems. it's all about flash and looks and for the Repubs. it's all about power?
Sitting peacably on the the fence, just to the right center.
That is soo funny Citing that JeffY is one of the left slanted members I would say your observation is incorrect, but still funny.
...and remember; confuscouis say,"He who sit on fence get splinter up butt."
My opinion on Bush is that while he certainly isn't the most impressive speaker and I feel like slapping my TV eveytime he says, "uhhhm...err..." I still feel better about him than any of the alternatives. He, like his father is willing to risk his popularity by doing what he feels is the right thing to do. He has formulated that direction based on sound moral ground. The times we are in now could be the beginning of the end, or the end of the terrorists beginning.
My 2 cents.
[ 27. May 2004, 12:37 PM: Message edited by: SSHEETS ]
Posted by 98-mongooSSe (Member # 794) on :
quote:Originally posted by Z28-SORR: I got another one. Ever notice that most of the liberals on this site are waxers while most of the conservatives are into engine mods. Do you think it's because that for the Dems. it's all about flash and looks and for the Repubs. it's all about power?
Sitting peacably on the the fence, just to the right center.
Wow, you just earned all my respect right there! I've now changed my mind!
Shay
Posted by Jim Mac (Member # 113) on :
quote:Originally posted by Fbodfather: I really hate war.....
---but one thing keeps going thru my mind....everyone tried to ignore Germany in the late 30s.....and Churchill and Roosevelt were criticized for their actions.....
6 million Jews died because of a madman.
No weapons of mass destruction? How did all those Kurds die, then?? ( I just don't think it was purple koolaid......)
Damnit Scott, will you stop trying to confuse this debate with facts and logic?
quote:Originally posted by MMMM_ERT:
Mert wins! Jeri Ryan can assimilate me anytime she wants!!!
Posted by cytruffle (Member # 1733) on :
quote:Originally posted by Fbodfather: purple koolaid......
HEYYYYYY!!! Watch how you sling that rhetoric around, bud!!!!
---Grape Kool Aid, Local 221
Posted by Joey Red (Member # 550) on :
I love reading this crap! It's soooo easy to criticize. If you think you can do a better job go right ahead and run for office and do it better.
Posted by SSHEETS (Member # 1989) on :
quote:Originally posted by Joey Red: I love reading this crap! It's soooo easy to criticize. If you think you can do a better job go right ahead and run for office and do it better.
At the risk of waking to an equine cranium...
Joey, while running for office may be possible, your statement is the ultimate in over simplification.
Most of us are lucky to manage success as parents, workers and members of society. Running for office is more like a dream of NFL stardom or perhaps a winning lottery ticket.
What we can do however, is VOTE, and that's why conversations like this do have merit. I am fairly conservitive, but I try to have an open mind. I remember some years ago JeffY responded with ...err, uh different viewpoint than mine. I have met others that I respect with such an opposing viewpoint and the respect I have for them makes me listen. I haven't been convinced to change my vote yet, but I do listen.
Discussion is always good, many a discussion has avoided unnecessary acts of violence.
Freedom of speech is one of our most important rights...without it, all others will be stifled.
EDIT ADD:
Of course many a discussion has led to acts of violence and divorce too :
[ 27. May 2004, 03:15 PM: Message edited by: SSHEETS ]
Posted by chrisL (Member # 97) on :
You know, there was a time on this board I was asked to delete a thread discussing Elian Gonzales because it was too political of a subject for a car forum.
Maybe the moderators here arent such power abusing post Nazis afterall.
[ 27. May 2004, 03:38 PM: Message edited by: chrisL ]
Posted by cytruffle (Member # 1733) on :
quote:Originally posted by SSHEETS: At the risk of waking to an equine cranium...
...nope....a Mustang grille...
Posted by MMMM_ERT (Member # 1599) on :
quote:Originally posted by SSHEETS: Of course many a discussion has led to acts of violence and divorce too :
This wouldn't have anything to do with showing up to SLP CAD in Vegas the day after it was over would it?
Posted by SSHEETS (Member # 1989) on :
quote:Originally posted by chrisL: You know, there was a time on this board I was asked to delete a thread discussing Elian Gonzales because it was too political of a subject for a car forum.
Maybe the moderators here arent such power abusing post Nazis afterall.
Yavold meinhiem Posted by SSHEETS (Member # 1989) on :
quote:Originally posted by MMMM_ERT:
quote:Originally posted by SSHEETS: Of course many a discussion has led to acts of violence and divorce too :
This wouldn't have anything to do with showing up to SLP CAD in Vegas the day after it was over would it?
Youjust won't let things go will you pete!!!!!
(that was a long drive home )
Posted by MMMM_ERT (Member # 1599) on :
quote:Originally posted by SSHEETS: Youjust won't let things go will you pete!!!!!
(that was a long drive home ) [/QB]
Sorry buddy....it is a funny story...and what kind of friend would I be if I let you forget it. Posted by Mark IXZD 150 (Member # 235) on :
<<<<< Posted by FireChicken (Member # 2067) on :
quote:Originally posted by Z28-SORR: I got another one. Ever notice that most of the liberals on this site are waxers while most of the conservatives are into engine mods. Do you think it's because that for the Dems. it's all about flash and looks and for the Repubs. it's all about power?
Sitting peacably on the the fence, just to the right center.
Bwahahahahahahaha!!!! Thats great!!!
I am reminded of what Tom Clancy said the first time I saw him on the O'Reilly Factor:
"The difference between liberals and conservatives is that when a bridge collapses, the liberals want to build a pretty monument to the people who died. Conservatives want to find out what went wrong and fix the problem."
Personally, I think that at this point in history, its the conservatives who are the fighters, and the liberals who are the cowards.
Earlier, in the last century, it was the other way around. Conservatives supported isolationism, and keeping out of world affairs, which at the time was the status quo. Liberals on the other hand were the ones with odd views (i.e. the lend-lease act helping britain with its war against Germany). Fortunately, when Pearl Harbor happened, everyone banded together and we all kicked butt.
Or, as a friend of mine explained it one day, "You dont like alternative music because its different, huh? You know what the alternative music in the 1960's and 1970's was, dont you? Your probably familiar with it, we call it country music right now."
it all boils down to perspective.
Posted by Camaro_Woody (Member # 1619) on :
It is not a war. There is a recession about every 4 years. People are idiots when it comes to the economy, and could care less about it just aslong as they get the 3% at the end of the year.
Posted by el ess1 (Member # 1544) on :
quote:Originally posted by SSHEETS:
quote:Originally posted by Joey Red: I love reading this crap! It's soooo easy to criticize. If you think you can do a better job go right ahead and run for office and do it better.
At the risk of waking to an equine cranium...
Joey, while running for office may be possible, your statement is the ultimate in over simplification.
Most of us are lucky to manage success as parents, workers and members of society. Running for office is more like a dream of NFL stardom or perhaps a winning lottery ticket.
Um, I'm going to go ahead and sort of have to disagree with you there on that one. ANY citizen of the United States who meets the qualifications for the office of the President of the United States has the right to run for that office if they choose to do so. In fact, now there's legislation allowing you to receive campaign funds while paying your own salary from those funds! It was done with the idea (read illusion ) that the "average Joe" could compete for the office. Will Joe Blow off the street win? Probably not, but to discount the fact that running for a public office is a pipe-dream is a bit limiting in scope, if you ask me. If qualified in all respects, put your name in the hat and campaign your butt off. Just hope you can pick up some financial backing along the way and then you can call me from the White House in January.
As George Carlin points out, I find it ironic that all the people who claim to know how to run the country the best aren't in office.
It is so sad that it costs so much to vie for a job that obviously has been tainted with corporate funds. I'm very surprised we don't see sponsor advertising on the side of Air Force one or company billboards on the White House lawn.
But I agree, your vote counts. Even if you think it's a sham, your vote is your voice and it is your right to do so, but moreover, it should be your duty as a citizen. I've had the folks I've voted for lose, and some have won (I'm batting .667 in presidential elections so far), but either way, I put my say in. Rhetorically speaking, if your guy/gal loses, you can always complain, but if you choose not to vote, just shut the hell up and live with who the rest of us voting public chooses.
I doubt if anyone is going to change any minds here, but at least people are discussing stuff that matters to them. Wish more people would. I had never intended all this partisan sort of talk when I started this thread, but it's good to hear other people's views. It helps to either strengthen or weaken our own views.
I like the question that was raised: Why would you vote for Bush/Kerry? Why do you "hate" Kerry/Bush?
A guy at work says his sister deeply despises Bush, so he asked what she didn't like about him. She said he didn't like how he smiles. She never gave a specific policy reason, just that his smile creeped her out. Wow, if that's how we're choosing our candidates, no wonder we deserve whoever we get! OW!
Posted by SSHEETS (Member # 1989) on :
quote:Originally posted by el ess1:
quote:Originally posted by SSHEETS:
quote:Originally posted by Joey Red: I love reading this crap! It's soooo easy to criticize. If you think you can do a better job go right ahead and run for office and do it better.
At the risk of waking to an equine cranium...
Joey, while running for office may be possible, your statement is the ultimate in over simplification.
Most of us are lucky to manage success as parents, workers and members of society. Running for office is more like a dream of NFL stardom or perhaps a winning lottery ticket.
Um, I'm going to go ahead and sort of have to disagree with you there on that one. ANY citizen of the United States who meets the qualifications for the office of the President of the United States has the right to run for that office if they choose to do so. In fact, now there's legislation allowing you to receive campaign funds while paying your own salary from those funds! It was done with the idea (read illusion ) that the "average Joe" could compete for the office. Will Joe Blow off the street win? Probably not, but to discount the fact that running for a public office is a pipe-dream is a bit limiting in scope, if you ask me. If qualified in all respects, put your name in the hat and campaign your butt off. Just hope you can pick up some financial backing along the way and then you can call me from the White House in January.
As George Carlin points out, I find it ironic that all the people who claim to know how to run the country the best aren't in office.
It is so sad that it costs so much to vie for a job that obviously has been tainted with corporate funds. I'm very surprised we don't see sponsor advertising on the side of Air Force one or company billboards on the White House lawn.
But I agree, your vote counts. Even if you think it's a sham, your vote is your voice and it is your right to do so, but moreover, it should be your duty as a citizen. I've had the folks I've voted for lose, and some have won (I'm batting .667 in presidential elections so far), but either way, I put my say in. Rhetorically speaking, if your guy/gal loses, you can always complain, but if you choose not to vote, just shut the hell up and live with who the rest of us voting public chooses.
I doubt if anyone is going to change any minds here, but at least people are discussing stuff that matters to them. Wish more people would. I had never intended all this partisan sort of talk when I started this thread, but it's good to hear other people's views. It helps to either strengthen or weaken our own views.
I like the question that was raised: Why would you vote for Bush/Kerry? Why do you "hate" Kerry/Bush?
A guy at work says his sister deeply despises Bush, so he asked what she didn't like about him. She said he didn't like how he smiles. She never gave a specific policy reason, just that his smile creeped her out. Wow, if that's how we're choosing our candidates, no wonder we deserve whoever we get! OW!
First, you pretty much proved my point with words like illusion and to get Joe Bloe in ofice.
Second, the sponsership on Air Force one is there...it's just not painted on the outside
Lastly, I absolutely agree, DON'T VOTE, DON'T COMPLAIN Posted by el ess1 (Member # 1544) on :
quote:Originally posted by SSHEETS: First, you pretty much proved my point with words like illusion and to get Joe Bloe in ofice.
I don't think you're keeping an open mind here and using all available critical thinking skills. I didn't "prove" your point. You just assumed I did. Realistically speaking, I agree the chances are very slim that Joe Blow would be elected, but the chance is not zero as you wished to infer, as long as he's in the race. If he suddenly came into a bazillion dollars, he may could afford to make a serious run for it, who knows? Every successful campaign starts with that person putting their name in the ring.
The same can be said for the Montreal Expos' chances of winning the pennant this year. Probably won't happen, but they're in the running for now. If they didn't think they had any sort of shot at it, they wouldn't put a team on the field. It's all in your perspective. John Kerry was expected to lose bigtime to Howard Dean in the primaries. Guess what happened? If he tossed in the towel early, he may have never known he would have come out on top.
The only point I was trying to "prove" is that regardless of what your chances really are, you can't hit a home run if you don't get in the batter's box and swing the bat. Did anyone ever think that Bill Clinton would grow up to be a two-term president when he was in 2nd grade? The difference between him being just another Joe Blow and President was, as we all know...Hillary.
Nothing personal here, I enjoy these discussions, actually.
Posted by cytruffle (Member # 1733) on :
"The difference between him being just another Joe Blow and President was, as we all know...Hillary."
......or maybe Monica.....
Posted by SSHEETS (Member # 1989) on :
quote:Originally posted by el ess1:
quote:Originally posted by SSHEETS: First, you pretty much proved my point with words like illusion and to get Joe Bloe in ofice.
I don't think you're keeping an open mind here and using all available critical thinking skills. I didn't "prove" your point. You just assumed I did. Realistically speaking, I agree the chances are very slim that Joe Blow would be elected, but the chance is not zero as you wished to infer, as long as he's in the race. If he suddenly came into a bazillion dollars, he may could afford to make a serious run for it, who knows? Every successful campaign starts with that person putting their name in the ring.
The same can be said for the Montreal Expos' chances of winning the pennant this year. Probably won't happen, but they're in the running for now. If they didn't think they had any sort of shot at it, they wouldn't put a team on the field. It's all in your perspective. John Kerry was expected to lose bigtime to Howard Dean in the primaries. Guess what happened? If he tossed in the towel early, he may have never known he would have come out on top.
The only point I was trying to "prove" is that regardless of what your chances really are, you can't hit a home run if you don't get in the batter's box and swing the bat. Did anyone ever think that Bill Clinton would grow up to be a two-term president when he was in 2nd grade? The difference between him being just another Joe Blow and President was, as we all know...Hillary.
Nothing personal here, I enjoy these discussions, actually.
...and just when I was about to give up buying lottery tickets
I too enjoy the battle if witts...albeit sometimes I come ill prepared to wage war
This is one of the best things you wrote.
"I didn't "prove" your point. You just assumed I did."
So very true how inturpretation is so subjective. I love the Saying perception is reality.
[ 27. May 2004, 09:41 PM: Message edited by: SSHEETS ]
Posted by MCKNBRD (Member # 2238) on :
quote:Originally posted by HOSS: Here's a straight forward question for everyone planning on voting for John Kerry in this election...
Why will you vote for John Kerry?
I REALLY think its interesting that NO one...not ONE individual has come forward with an answer...
Byrdman
Posted by Harry (Member # 1834) on :
quote:Originally posted by TimeLord: No !! We don't have any carriers that big anymore!!!!!!
I don't think we have any carriers at all!
Posted by SSHEETS (Member # 1989) on :
quote:Originally posted by MCKNBRD:
quote:Originally posted by HOSS: Here's a straight forward question for everyone planning on voting for John Kerry in this election...
Why will you vote for John Kerry?
I REALLY think its interesting that NO one...not ONE individual has come forward with an answer...
Byrdman
Maybe nobody's voting for flip flop Posted by TimeLord (Member # 1389) on :
quote:Originally posted by Harry:
quote:Originally posted by TimeLord: No !! We don't have any carriers that big anymore!!!!!!
I don't think we have any carriers at all!
Actually the last Carrier we had was the Bonaventure I think,it was a used Royal Navy boat that we refurbished for 6 or 7 Million $$ in 1965 then scrapped in 69 or 70 if I remember correctly!!!!
Posted by cytruffle (Member # 1733) on :
quote:Originally posted by MCKNBRD:
quote:Originally posted by HOSS: Here's a straight forward question for everyone planning on voting for John Kerry in this election...
Why will you vote for John Kerry?
I REALLY think its interesting that NO one...not ONE individual has come forward with an answer...
Byrdman
OOOOOOKAY.....here I go.....first of all, I'm a Democrat, and second, to vote against Bush..... Posted by JohnS (Member # 1073) on :
quote:Originally posted by TimeLord: Actually the last Carrier we had was the Bonaventure I think,it was a used Royal Navy boat that we refurbished for 6 or 7 Million $$ in 1965 then scrapped in 69 or 70 if I remember correctly!!!!
You are correct, sir!
The Bonny's last operational flight was on 28 October 1969. She was decommissioned at Halifax on 3 July 1970 and sold for scrap and broken up by the end of 1971.
Posted by MCKNBRD (Member # 2238) on :
quote:Originally posted by cytruffle:
quote:Originally posted by MCKNBRD:
quote:Originally posted by HOSS: Here's a straight forward question for everyone planning on voting for John Kerry in this election...
Why will you vote for John Kerry?
I REALLY think its interesting that NO one...not ONE individual has come forward with an answer...
Byrdman
OOOOOOKAY.....here I go.....first of all, I'm a Democrat, and second, to vote against Bush.....
Well, thats one...and pretty much what I was expecting...I assume this means you always tow the party line?
Byrdman
Posted by MMMM_ERT (Member # 1599) on :
I DID SO INVENT THE INTERNET.......
Posted by SSHEETS (Member # 1989) on :
quote:Originally posted by MMMM_ERT: I DID SO INVENT THE INTERNET.......
I did!, I did!, I did!!!! Posted by Z28-SORR (Member # 1565) on :
Well you know what "they" say, If you want an argument, bring up sex, politics, or religion. As discussions go on this board, this one has been pretty civil.
And Millie, I'm shocked, and you a Texan!!
Posted by cytruffle (Member # 1733) on :
quote:Originally posted by MCKNBRD: Well, thats one...and pretty much what I was expecting...I assume this means you always tow the party line?
Byrdman
Yessir, I do.....I come from a long line of "yellow dog" Democrats....
quote:Originally posted by Z28-SORR: And Millie, I'm shocked, and you a Texan!!
Bush ain't no Texan like.....*in hushed tones*.....LYNDON BAINES JOHNSON was a Texan..... Posted by MCKNBRD (Member # 2238) on :
quote:Originally posted by cytruffle:
quote:Originally posted by MCKNBRD: Well, thats one...and pretty much what I was expecting...I assume this means you always tow the party line?
Byrdman
Yessir, I do.....I come from a long line of "yellow dog" Democrats....
quote:Originally posted by Z28-SORR: And Millie, I'm shocked, and you a Texan!!
Bush ain't no Texan like.....*in hushed tones*.....LYNDON BAINES JOHNSON was a Texan.....
And we all know HIS legacy...Viet Nam...
Byrdman
Posted by cytruffle (Member # 1733) on :
quote:Originally posted by MCKNBRD: And we all know HIS legacy...Viet Nam...
Byrdman
....so that means we have both a Democrat AND a Republican who have dragged us into pointless wars......
*putsonflamesuit*
Posted by HOSS (Member # 1464) on :
quote:Originally posted by MCKNBRD:
quote:Originally posted by cytruffle:
quote:Originally posted by MCKNBRD:
quote:Originally posted by HOSS: Here's a straight forward question for everyone planning on voting for John Kerry in this election...
Why will you vote for John Kerry?
I REALLY think its interesting that NO one...not ONE individual has come forward with an answer...
Byrdman
OOOOOOKAY.....here I go.....first of all, I'm a Democrat, and second, to vote against Bush.....
Well, thats one...and pretty much what I was expecting...I assume this means you always tow the party line?
Byrdman
Any more takers on this straight forward question?
Posted by SSHEETS (Member # 1989) on :
quote:Originally posted by cytruffle:
quote:Originally posted by MCKNBRD: And we all know HIS legacy...Viet Nam...
Byrdman
....so that means we have both a Democrat AND a Republican who have dragged us into pointless wars......
*putsonflamesuit*
It is some 10 years and 100,000's of lives premature to compare Iraq to Vietnam. Whether are not it is/was pointless will not be known for some time. The empirical data can be argued both ways.
Whether or not there was enough evidence to remove him proactively is an arguement for the ages. Pre 9-11, I'd say no, post 9-11 and in light of the 12 years of UN resolution violation...I personally say yes. And if the answer to act is yes, so too must be the commitment to finish the job at hand.
I say the removal of a ruthless tyrant that mamed, raped and murdered his own citizens let alone his eneimies and such a ruler that eagerly sought to leverage his freindships with our enemies was just. It is safe to presume that another version of 9-11 with his signature somehow in the mix was a matter of when, not if.
The future of the world as we know it depends on the outcome of this action. We must stay morally sound and ethically comitted to lead the world in the war on terror.
(sometimes my fingers type without me )
Posted by MMMM_ERT (Member # 1599) on :
quote:Originally posted by HOSS: Any more takers on this straight forward question?
I know where you would get some "interesting" answers to that question.....
The site is good for a laugh anyway... Posted by ss_rs_z (Member # 1888) on :
Here is a taker right here. I am not afraid to put in my two cents and say I will vote for Kerry especialy when you have a President who accepts sending jobs overseas and say it is good for ours. This goes to show that he doesn't care for the working man nor the poor. He is only for the Rich and well off.
1. Bush has put us into a deficit we will never come out of now. 2. We are spending a billion dollars a day in Iraq and Afghanistan. What have we accomplished. Absolutely nothing. Bin Laden and his croonies are still free and his counter part Al Musquwi or whatever his freakin name is is beheading an American plus we are making deals to let Al-Sadr basically go free while we pull back. What good is that???????? Another murderer still able to walk the streets. 3. Millions of good paying jobs going overseas to India, China, Pakistan, and whereever else while corporate executives get away with those people with poor working conditions, very low pay, no benefits, on and on and on, while they rake in the money and laugh. 4. I still say Bush and his croonies new an attack on the WTC was imminent and could possibly been avoided. 5. He is Anti-Union. 6. He blasted Clinton for not stepping up against OPEC when prices were skyrocketing back in 2000 and he is doing the samething. Sounds to me like Bush is talking out of both sides of his mouth. 7. Record deficits. 8. His taxcuts did not restart the economy. All it did was put money back into wealthy people hands so the burden becomes heavier on the working man and women.
The list is endless. Bush hasnt done a darn thing for this country except help his Rich Friends. He couidn't even run his own Oil Company which ended up keeling over but not before he cashed in hs stocks and got a healthy does of money.
What gets me is he lost running for Congress. How in the Hell did he get to be President while losing the popular vote by 500,000 votes? The electoral collage which actually gets the person elected got it for him and only after they tried to recount Florida which in turn was a disgrace with punch cards thown out that were clearly punched for Al Gore. Go Figure............Oh I forgot His Brother is Governor of that state isn't it...............sure sounds funny to me.
Now I expect to get raked over the coals here but all the Republicans in here but I put in my two cents. This cat isn't Republican nor Democrat, but I know another 4 years or Bush will really mess this country up and send Anti-American fervor over the brink. People used to look up to us and this is why they came here, now we are the laughing stock even to our own allies.
[ 28. May 2004, 05:36 PM: Message edited by: ss_rs_z ]
Posted by SSHEETS (Member # 1989) on :
quote:Originally posted by ss_rs_z: Here is a taker right here. I am not afraid to put in my two cents and say I will vote for Kerry especialy when you have a President who accepts sending jobs overseas and say it is good for ours. This goes to show that he doesn't care for the working man nor the poor. He is only for the Rich and well off.
1. Bush has put us into a deficit we will never come out of now. 2. We are spending a billion dollars a day in Iraq and Afghanistan. What have we accomplished. Absolutely nothing. Bin Laden and his croonies are still free and his counter part Al Musquwi or whatever his freakin name is is beheading an American plus we are making deals to let Al-Sadr basically go free while we pull back. What good is that???????? Another murderer still able to walk the streets. 3. Millions of good paying jobs going overseas to India, China, Pakistan, and whereever else while corporate executives get away with those people with poor working conditions, very low pay, no benefits, on and on and on, while they rake in the money and laugh. 4. I still say Bush and his croonies new an attack on the WTC was imminent and could possibly been avoided. 5. He is Anti-Union. 6. He blasted Clinton for not stepping up against OPEC when prices were skyrocketing back in 2000 and he is doing the samething. Sounds to me like Bush is talking out of both sides of his mouth. 7. Record deficits. 8. His taxcuts did not restart the economy. All it did was put money back into wealthy people hands so the burden becomes heavier on the working man and women.
The list is endless. Bush hasnt done a darn thing for this country except help his Rich Friends. He couidn't even run his own Oil Company which ended up keeling over but not before he cashed in hs stocks and got a healthy does of money.
What gets me is he lost running for Congress. How in the Hell did he get to be President while losing the popular vote by 500,000 votes? The electoral collage which actually gets the person elected got it for him and only after they tried to recount Florida which in turn was a disgrace with punch cards thown out that were clearly punched for Al Gore. Go Figure............Oh I forgot His Brother is Governor of that state isn't it...............sure sounds funny to me.
Now I expect to get raked over the coals here but all the Republicans in here but I put in my two cents. This cat isn't Republican nor Democrat, but I know another 4 years or Bush will really mess this country up and send Anti-American fervor over the brink. People used to look up to us and this is why they came here, now we are the laughing stock even to our own allies.
Or you could look at it that way Posted by MMMM_ERT (Member # 1599) on :
quote:Originally posted by ss_rs_z: 8. His taxcuts did not restart the economy. All it did was put money back into wealthy people hands so the burden becomes heavier on the working man and women.
I disagree that only the wealthy made out on the tax cuts...but thats beside the point.
I don't know about you...but I never worked for a poor man. Posted by ss_rs_z (Member # 1888) on :
quote:Originally posted by MMMM_ERT:
quote:Originally posted by ss_rs_z: 8. His taxcuts did not restart the economy. All it did was put money back into wealthy people hands so the burden becomes heavier on the working man and women.
I disagree that only the wealthy made out on the tax cuts...but thats beside the point.
I don't know about you...but I never worked for a poor man.
LOL.........I agree I have never worked for a poor man either, but I have worked for one that did go out of business.
[ 28. May 2004, 05:51 PM: Message edited by: ss_rs_z ]
Posted by MCKNBRD (Member # 2238) on :
quote:Originally posted by ss_rs_z: 1. Bush has put us into a deficit we will never come out of now.
Puh-LEASE don't tell me you think he was the only deficit spending President? Every administration clear back to about the Korean conflict has either contributed to, or not helped any, the deficit...and don't blow sunshine up my a$$ about Slick Willie...he just stopped the RATE of GROWTH of the deficit...basically, for about 6 or 7 years, he just paid the interest...not helping much at all for such a "hero"...
quote: 2. We are spending a billion dollars a day in Iraq and Afghanistan. What have we accomplished. Absolutely nothing. Bin Laden and his croonies are still free and his counter part Al Musquwi or whatever his freakin name is is beheading an American plus we are making deals to let Al-Sadr basically go free while we pull back. What good is that???????? Another murderer still able to walk the streets.
I disagree, wholeheartedly. We have ousted the Taliban from Afghanistan, essentially removing their 'free for all' base of operations. They are running, and while they still may be able to launch an attack against us, we are no longer the soft target we were pre-9-11. I saw the Nick Berg video...its horrid. And its a CRIME. Just like ignoring millions of dead under Saddam. And now that we've found nerve agent, I guess the President was still lying, eh?
quote:3. Millions of good paying jobs going overseas to India, China, Pakistan, and whereever else while corporate executives get away with those people with poor working conditions, very low pay, no benefits, on and on and on, while they rake in the money and laugh.
I don't like this, either. But look at it from a guy's perspective that has to answer to stockholders...he's gotta cut costs, or the investors pull out. The only way to cut costs is to reduce headcount, as our processes are about as good as they can get. We are overpaid and coddled here in the US, and they aren't in Asia. I'm not agreeing with the exportation of jobs, but as long as we are a 'me' society and have to make sure our stocks go up and up and up, its going to be ugly.
quote:4. I still say Bush and his croonies new an attack on the WTC was imminent and could possibly been avoided.
Bull$hit. I firmly believe that they knew something was imminent, but you can't say that they knew that 9-11 was the day and these 4 flights were going to target these 4 buildings...you've GOT to be kidding me. I know that there will be a murder tonight...but I can't stop it.
quote:5. He is Anti-Union.
And pro-business. Unions have no place in modern business. Companies that are saddled with BS union contracts are unable to change as needed to meet the demands of the modern marketplace. Look at the trucking industry...of the top 100 25 years ago (pre de-regulation), only about 7 are still around...and only 3 of them are unionized. ALL of them were union in 1980. Economics speaks for itself.
quote:6. He blasted Clinton for not stepping up against OPEC when prices were skyrocketing back in 2000 and he is doing the samething. Sounds to me like Bush is talking out of both sides of his mouth.
Again, not sure that I can defend his actions...just like you can't accuse him, because neither of us know all the facts. One fact I DO know...the tree-huggers have kept us from opening one single new refinery in the past 15 years...so even if crude were to drop to record lows, the prices wouldn't move very fast, as our demand is still high and we don't have the throughput to meet it. Once again, Economics 101.
quote:7. Record deficits.
IIRC, its less with relation to the GDP than during Viet Nam...
quote:8. His taxcuts did not restart the economy. All it did was put money back into wealthy people hands so the burden becomes heavier on the working man and women.
Face it, bums don't run the country's businesses. Nor do they pay any taxes. The burden of the taxes are paid by the top 10% of the earners in the country...they should get the majority of the cuts. You pay the most, you should get the most back.
Byrdman
Posted by el ess1 (Member # 1544) on :
Sorry ss_rs_z, but I see opportunity in your post, so I couldn't help but challenge some of the statements. Nothing personal, and I'm not going to defend Bush, but I'm going to expose the fallacies in your logic but I'm not doing it just to piss anyone off.
quote:Originally posted by ss_rs_z: I will vote for Kerry especialy when you have a President who accepts sending jobs overseas and say it is good for ours. This goes to show that he doesn't care for the working man nor the poor.
I'm thinking it's like NAFTA?...something like this is what you're talking about? Lessee, who started that? Corporations were encouraged to do this in the 90s because of it and never stopped. So which one do you mean, Clinton or Bush?
quote:1. Bush has put us into a deficit we will never come out of now.
Slippery slope fallacy at best. The sky is falling...no logical basis for that conclusion. We came out of a major depression in the '30s...it was a lot worse than this. Deficits and surpluses are the roller coaster of the economic engine. In fact, the 4th quarter quarterly earnings statements in 2000 (before W took office) showed the economic downturn already in progress. So many people seem to forget this proven fact of our economic history. Bush "Sr." had 4th quarter quarterly earnings statements at the end of 1992 showing an upward trend, but it was too late for him by then. Look it up, I'm not blowing smoke here.
quote:2. We are spending a billion dollars a day in Iraq and Afghanistan. What have we accomplished. Absolutely nothing.
Ok, this one comes under the hasty generalization fallacy. If it's nothing, then you haven't been keeping up with current events or I've been researching the wrong war. I would agree if you claimed it didn't seem like much was being accomplished, but there's probably more going on than meets the eye. I do agree that there should be some heads rolling because of policy snafus, but we've yet to see that.
quote:3. Millions of good paying jobs going overseas to India, China, Pakistan, and whereever else while corporate executives get away with those people with poor working conditions, very low pay, no benefits, on and on and on, while they rake in the money and laugh.
That's kinda how it's always been regardless of where the work was done. As we were forced into a global economy, it started before GW, and will continue even after GW. Not sure if you make a good argument from that perspective, but I'll give you the benefit of the doubt.
quote:4. I still say Bush and his croonies new an attack on the WTC was imminent and could possibly been avoided.
An assumption. I'd be more inclined to not discount this if some sort of proof were given. Just because no one cannot disprove this claim, however, doesn't make it true, no matter how much some people would love this to be the case.
quote:5. He is Anti-Union.
Interesting. I never heard him say that. But if it were, indeed, true, the assumption is then, that you're pro-union. That would be opposite of Bush's supposed values, so that has validity. I'm having trouble finding anything that he's done as president that was anti-union, however.
quote:6. He blasted Clinton for not stepping up against OPEC when prices were skyrocketing back in 2000 and he is doing the samething. Sounds to me like Bush is talking out of both sides of his mouth.
I never heard this one either, but assuming it is true, I guess Kerry supporters are used to the double-speak. I guess they can recognize it when they see it, at least.
quote:7. Record deficits.
Repeat. See #1. Every deficit ever recorded has been claimed as a new record. The next one will be too. Mark this on the calendar.
quote:8. His taxcuts did not restart the economy. All it did was put money back into wealthy people hands so the burden becomes heavier on the working man and women.
I must be rich. I saw an immediate increase in my paycheck with about a 2% drop in my taxes, and my tax return check was bigger than it has ever been in recent years. Can't speak for all the rich people, but I'm gonna have to go ahead and disagree with you on this based on my personal financial standpoint.
quote:What gets me is he lost running for Congress. How in the Hell did he get to be President while losing the popular vote by 500,000 votes?
You act like this is something new. Probably the same way Nixon(R) beat Kennedy(D) in the 1960 election in the popular vote, yet lost the presidential election by electorial votes. Only the last time the Supreme Court technically decided the winner.
quote:Now I expect to get raked over the coals here but all the Republicans in here but I put in my two cents. This cat isn't Republican nor Democrat, but I know another 4 years or Bush will really mess this country up and send Anti-American fervor over the brink.
I'm not going to rake YOU over the coals, just your logic. There's a lot of logical holes in your water bucket. "Another 4 years" statement is another of the slippery slope fallacies. You cannot possibly know this in advance. But, if you really do, what's the pick 4 numbers in tonight's lotto? I do applaud you in the fact you stood up and answered the question posed though. Not too many people can come up with more than one or two reasons why they'd vote for one candidate over another.
Hope you didn't feel like I was stepping on your toes, because I wasn't. I was just using your post to show how easy it is for judgements to be clouded by outside biases and fallacies. I can't persuade anyone to vote for any candidate, because it's your vote, your choice. That's why we are fortunate to have elections to debate. If this were Cuba, this thread would be very very short.
Posted by SSHEETS (Member # 1989) on :
Lifted from Bob aka BadWS6:
G. W. Bush and John Kerry somehow ended up at the same barbershop. As they sat there, each being worked on by a different barber, not a word was spoken. The barbers were even afraid to start a conversation, for fear it would turn to politics. As the barbers finished their shaves, the one who had Kerry in his chair reached for the aftershave. Kerry was quick to stop him saying, "No thanks, my wife Theresa will smell that and think I've been in a whorehouse,"
The second barber turned to Bush and said, "How about you?"
Bush replied, "Go ahead, my wife doesn’t know what the inside of a whorehouse smells like." Posted by Hookerf14 (Member # 1602) on :
If Kerry wins the election, 2005 will be a banner year for the new aircraft carrier fleet.
[/QB][/QUOTE]
Hmmm, And I thought it was hard to land the damn thing on a Nimitz Class boat.
OK 3 wire
Posted by ss_rs_z (Member # 1888) on :
Yep just as I suspected. Raked over the coals especially with Pro Business and Anti-Union observers Above.
All I can say is this, Businesses that say they are hard strung because of Union Contracts is Total BS. Anyone that has a sense of logic knows that everyone should be allowed a piece of the pie. Corporate Execs that make 10's of millions of dollars including stock options and bonuses and don't want to share with the working class that make up this nation and buys the goods and services so that this country can run won't have them if people can't pay for them. Sounds to me like everyone wants to go back pre 1900's where there were only two classes, RICH AND POOR. Well guess what we are heading in that direction and the RICH will be the ones crying when there isn't anyone employed to buy their goods. Well then LOOK at whats ahead for this COUNTRY. We will became a third world nation!!!!!! No EMPLOYMENT, which therefore will mean NOTHING BOUGHT. Oh I forget all my logic is Bull$it and Fallacies.
Wrong, everything written in my previous thread is complete and truthful. And from what I have seen you think I voted for slick Willie. WRONG !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
As a matter of fact I voted for Perot. To tell you the truth none of the candidates in 88 or 92, 96, or 2000 as far as I am concerned could have led this nation. As far as Nafta Goes..........TOTAL FAILURE !!!!!!!!
Everything you have written is complete blubberish and total Republican BS. I use to be a Republican back in 1980 but when I seen Reagan ( a former SAG president ) fire PATCO wrkers for what they believed in just proves that Anti-Union rhectoric and brainwashing was starting. Oh I also forgot to memtion that Unions also gave people the rights to decent wages, vacations, benefits, rules and rights, job safety, for ALL.
Well I guess Mr. Business Man that you don't want anyone of your workers to have these perks and that you only the the rights to them. Well then I say more power to you. Oh I forget just think of this as more fallacies from a true worker. One that has always workered overtime so that goods and services could be provided for all including yourself.
Oh I also forgot to mention that Mr. Bush wants to stop OVERTIME PAY for millions of Americans as well. Gosh you may see this as more fallcies, but its been put through already.
Oh and your comment as possibly seeing me as flip flopping also........WRONG..........Kerry has the right just like everyone to change their minds on things. Bush's education bill isn't working either, and now he wants to push through and energy bill. And hins Medicare Reform?????? More for the Rich and nothing for the rest that need it. ANd he wants to reform Social Security??????? OMG....... The elderly will really get messed up with this. Just goes to show he and other Rich Folk want it all for themselves.
I can go on and on and on...............but you will percieve them as fallcies also. So if they are you shouldn't have to worry about making comments and everyone will believe you and Mr. Bush.
Oh By the way sure we pushed the Taliban out. Okay then why are we still over there? Okay We beat Hussein............gosh now they have Al-Sadr, Al Zar Qauwi or what ever his blasted name is. We haven't beaten terrorism yet and guess what more than likely won't.
And as for 9/11...........typical response from a Republican.
So you see I knew it would come to this when a challenge was put forth. I stepped up and said what I had to say and true to form here comes all the nonsense that blasted me. Well the proof is in the pudding or should I say in my words listed above. People can believe them if they want. Its their choice. But when the Rich start attacking people about if they want to be Union and have decent wages and benefits then I stand up and fight for what I believe in. The rights of workers.
P.S. I also want to put forth that I too come from Management which means I have worked both sides of the fence. I know what goes on in the Corporate Boardroom as well as being a worker. So you can't pull nothing over my eyes.
[ 29. May 2004, 08:25 AM: Message edited by: ss_rs_z ]
Posted by HOSS (Member # 1464) on :
quote:Originally posted by ss_rs_z: Yep just as I suspected. Raked over the coals especially with Pro Business and Anti-Union observers Above.
All I can say is this, Businesses that say they are hard strung because of Union Contracts is Total BS. Anyone that has a sense of logic knows that everyone should be allowed a piece of the pie. Corporate Execs that make 10's of millions of dollars including stock options and bonuses and don't want to share with the working class that make up this nation and buys the goods and services so that this country can run won't have them if people can't pay for them. Sounds to me like everyone wants to go back pre 1900's where there were only two classes, RICH AND POOR. Well guess what we are heading in that direction and the RICH will be the ones crying when there isn't anyone employed to buy their goods. Well then LOOK at whats ahead for this COUNTRY. We will became a third world nation!!!!!! No EMPLOYMENT, which therefore will mean NOTHING BOUGHT. Oh I forget all my logic is Bull$it and Fallacies.
Wrong, everything written in my previous thread is complete and truthful. And from what I have seen you think I voted for slick Willie. WRONG !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
As a matter of fact I voted for Perot. To tell you the truth none of the candidates in 88 or 92, 96, or 2000 as far as I am concerned could have led this nation. As far as Nafta Goes..........TOTAL FAILURE !!!!!!!!
Everything you have written is complete blubberish and total Republican BS. I use to be a Republican back in 1980 but when I seen Reagan ( a former SAG president ) fire PATCO wrkers for what they believed in just proves that Anti-Union rhectoric and brainwashing was starting. Oh I also forgot to memtion that Unions also gave people the rights to decent wages, vacations, benefits, rules and rights, job safety, for ALL.
Well I guess Mr. Business Man that you don't want anyone of your workers to have these perks and that you only the the rights to them. Well then I say more power to you. Oh I forget just think of this as more fallacies from a true worker. One that has always workered overtime so that goods and services could be provided for all including yourself.
Oh I also forgot to mention that Mr. Bush wants to stop OVERTIME PAY for millions of Americans as well. Gosh you may see this as more fallcies, but its been put through already.
Oh and your comment as possibly seeing me as flip flopping also........WRONG..........Kerry has the right just like everyone to change their minds on things. Bush's education bill isn't working either, and now he wants to push through and energy bill. And hins Medicare Reform?????? More for the Rich and nothing for the rest that need it. ANd he wants to reform Social Security??????? OMG....... The elderly will really get messed up with this. Just goes to show he and other Rich Folk want it all for themselves.
I can go on and on and on...............but you will percieve them as fallcies also. So if they are you shouldn't have to worry about making comments and everyone will believe you and Mr. Bush.
Oh By the way sure we pushed the Taliban out. Okay then why are we still over there? Okay We beat Hussein............gosh now they have Al-Sadr, Al Zar Qauwi or what ever his blasted name is. We haven't beaten terrorism yet and guess what more than likely won't.
And as for 9/11...........typical response from a Republican.
So you see I knew it would come to this when a challenge was put forth. I stepped up and said what I had to say and true to form here comes all the nonsense that blasted me. Well the proof is in the pudding or should I say in my words listed above. People can believe them if they want. Its their choice. But when the Rich start attacking people about if they want to be Union and have decent wages and benefits then I stand up and fight for what I believe in. The rights of workers.
P.S. I also want to put forth that I too come from Management which means I have worked both sides of the fence. I know what goes on in the Corporate Boardroom as well as being a worker. So you can't pull nothing over my eyes.
I think I may have an idea as to why you will not vote for Bush.
Now can you apply that same kind of passion into why you will vote for Kerry?
Posted by el ess1 (Member # 1544) on :
quote:Originally posted by ss_rs_z: Oh I forget all my logic is [deleted] Fallacies.
Not all of it, just quite a bit of it. But it's not BS, that's just your perception that it is. You went into rant mode before you really thought some of these things out. I don't mind having a well-thought out discussion with differing points of view, as long as it stays a discussion and doensn't turn into a shouting match. As you can see, I never raked you over the coals, just your logic. I have nothing personal against you or anyone else. If I did, you'd find a personal message off the board stating so. I thought we were all having a fairly civil discussion where everyone could participate and encouraged to participate. The only reason this thread hasn't got locked, IMO, is that we haven't been making this a venue of personal attack. We can agree to disagree, but I, at least, did not make it personal.
Although I lean to the right, I'm an independent thinker and don't toe the party line without question. I decide for myself. Every administration has had their flaws and their gems. In fact, if Lieberman were running, I'd have a dilemma on who to vote for. Kerry's too far to the left for me.
quote: Everything you have written is complete blubberish and total Republican BS.
Who are you talking to? Again, you claim others speak complete blubberish while proclaiming you only speak the truth. Truths are backed up with fact, otherwise they are not truths. We can discuss things like this to derive the truth. Where's your backup? Surely being in management you would remember that basic premise of root cause analysis and sound decision-making.
I'm curious as to how many overtime hours you logged last year. It was a little lean for me last year, I only had 563 overtime hours. And it's even lower this year, I've only got 216 so far this year. From one working man to another, I understand some of your frustrations with corporate America. You can't have it both ways, either corporations make money or we will probably all starve. But regardless of what you think, I wasn't attacking you. It's not what we're here for. I don't believe I share MCKNBRD's same method of trying to get a point across in this thread (there's quite a few fallacies in his logic too), so please don't group my rebuttal as raking you over the coals personally.
Since you mentioned that you'd get raked "over the coals" as you put it, then you probably knew what you were posting was "baiting" IMO. And then you got satisfaction when a rebuttal occurred so you could say "I told you so" and try to garner empathy as the "victim". I don't see it that way. You said what you perceived to be the truth, and that is a good thing. Then I questioned it, but got no factual backup to your claims. Just more rhetoric. So until you provide some substance to prove your points, my reasoning stands that you still have some logical holes in your bucket of "truths". Put some facts in there to plug the holes and you can make a valid argument as far as I'm concerned.
My advice is(take it or leave it), try not to take things so personally. I'd like to think we were having a healthy discussion with differing points of view. And regardless whether we agree or not, getting to the unbiased facts allow everyone to make up their own minds. Just because you or I say something doesn't necessarily make it true.
And appearing from your rant, no one can pull anything over your eyes because from where I'm standing based on your recent posts, it looks that's already been done to some degree.
Posted by ss_rs_z (Member # 1888) on :
El Ess 1 I was not ranting at you, only at items that I find disagreeable with amongst all posts. People are stating I haven't shown facts which and I believe I have. If I mention where I got this information from then this will start another disaggreeable situation. But I will say its from a very reliable and repected source.
If you feel I am ranting then its because I do have my opinions just like everyone else in here and when something is stated then everyone should be prepared for the feedback good or bad just as I am. America is built on the first amendment which includes Freedom of Speech. As they say, if you can't stand the heat get out of the kitchen, and you know I am still here.
Everyone has given food for thought and my posts are food for thought. I am middle of the road I do not agree with all aspects of the right or left. Both parties have good aspects and its good to listen and to have an open mind as I have.
As for me voting for Kerry, I just feel that he should be given the chance just like Bush has been given and I feel he has some good points but there are a few that I don't agree with. I am waiting to see who his running mate is going to be. But to tell you the truth I wanted Gephardt to get in but as you see from the outcome it didn't work out to be that way. But if he does happen to be Kerry's running mate I will give it alot of thought.
Now you should know where I stand and how I feel. It is not my nature to ruffle feathers but as Popeye stated and I quote: "I Y'am what I Yam."
[ 29. May 2004, 11:25 AM: Message edited by: ss_rs_z ]
Posted by SSHEETS (Member # 1989) on :
quote:Originally posted by el ess1:
quote:Originally posted by ss_rs_z: Oh I forget all my logic is [deleted] Fallacies.
Not all of it, just quite a bit of it. But it's not BS, that's just your perception that it is. You went into rant mode before you really thought some of these things out. I don't mind having a well-thought out discussion with differing points of view, as long as it stays a discussion and doensn't turn into a shouting match. As you can see, I never raked you over the coals, just your logic. I have nothing personal against you or anyone else. If I did, you'd find a personal message off the board stating so. I thought we were all having a fairly civil discussion where everyone could participate and encouraged to participate. The only reason this thread hasn't got locked, IMO, is that we haven't been making this a venue of personal attack. We can agree to disagree, but I, at least, did not make it personal.
Although I lean to the right, I'm an independent thinker and don't toe the party line without question. I decide for myself. Every administration has had their flaws and their gems. In fact, if Lieberman were running, I'd have a dilemma on who to vote for. Kerry's too far to the left for me.
quote: Everything you have written is complete blubberish and total Republican BS.
Who are you talking to? Again, you claim others speak complete blubberish while proclaiming you only speak the truth. Truths are backed up with fact, otherwise they are not truths. We can discuss things like this to derive the truth. Where's your backup? Surely being in management you would remember that basic premise of root cause analysis and sound decision-making.
I'm curious as to how many overtime hours you logged last year. It was a little lean for me last year, I only had 563 overtime hours. And it's even lower this year, I've only got 216 so far this year. From one working man to another, I understand some of your frustrations with corporate America. You can't have it both ways, either corporations make money or we will probably all starve. But regardless of what you think, I wasn't attacking you. It's not what we're here for. I don't believe I share MCKNBRD's same method of trying to get a point across in this thread (there's quite a few fallacies in his logic too), so please don't group my rebuttal as raking you over the coals personally.
Since you mentioned that you'd get raked "over the coals" as you put it, then you probably knew what you were posting was "baiting" IMO. And then you got satisfaction when a rebuttal occurred so you could say "I told you so" and try to garner empathy as the "victim". I don't see it that way. You said what you perceived to be the truth, and that is a good thing. Then I questioned it, but got no factual backup to your claims. Just more rhetoric. So until you provide some substance to prove your points, my reasoning stands that you still have some logical holes in your bucket of "truths". Put some facts in there to plug the holes and you can make a valid argument as far as I'm concerned.
My advice is(take it or leave it), try not to take things so personally. I'd like to think we were having a healthy discussion with differing points of view. And regardless whether we agree or not, getting to the unbiased facts allow everyone to make up their own minds. Just because you or I say something doesn't necessarily make it true.
And appearing from your rant, no one can pull anything over your eyes because from where I'm standing based on your recent posts, it looks that's already been done to some degree.
Bravo el...Bravo. You have a keen eye for the facts. I enjoy your responses very much and whole heartedly agree with you. It seems that some would suggest the government should be anti-business and pro-worker...in that scenario...who are they going to work for?
[ 29. May 2004, 03:40 PM: Message edited by: SSHEETS ]
Posted by el ess1 (Member # 1544) on :
quote:Originally posted by SSHEETS: [QUOTE] It seems that some would suggest the government should be anti-business and pro-worker...in that scenario...who are they going to work for?
I think government should be more middle of the road on this issue. They should be supportive of both. I know it's not that way, but it should be, IMO. My own take is that many people in this country are sheep wanting to be led. The extremely poor turnout of the actual voting public helps suggest this is the case. I am of the strong ideological belief that the government is supposed to represent the people, not themselves. How many people have actually ever contacted their representatives or their senators (state or federal)? The reason we elect these guys is to represent our positions and the candidate's own views must closely match our own, if not exactly, or he/she doesn't get the vote. The guy/gal who wins the election a lot of times seem to forget that they're there for US, not themselves. They are not royalty, they are public servants. I've written my own reps and senators and voiced my opinions either in support or opposition based on their own positions on issues.
I simply believe if more people took a look at what our own representatives in government are doing for us, they may just start looking at voting the way the majority of their constituents would favor. But if you don't let them know, then they go with their own convictions.
Sure, most politicians may be crooked, but that's OUR fault for letting them get away with it.
This discussion has been a lot of fun for me because you can get a whole lot of different viewpoints on which to learn. We're teaching each other here as well. Like family.
Now make sure you're registered and get out and VOTE for the person you feel will do the best job for you, regardless of your political affiliation, if any! But somehow I think our friends not living in the U.S. won't be voting for either Bush or Kerry anyway... Posted by SSHEETS (Member # 1989) on :
Synbiotic is the word I left out above. Employer/employee relationships need to benefit both parties. To put excessive burden on either will harm both.
[ 29. May 2004, 03:41 PM: Message edited by: SSHEETS ]
Posted by xero (Member # 2001) on :
ok .. I think I have read this whole thing.. and has anyone actually said why they would vote FOR Flip Flops and not why they wouldn't vote for Bush? I think the only comment I have seen close to it is "As for me voting for Kerry, I just feel that he should be given the chance just like Bush has been given and I feel he has some good points but there are a few that I don't agree with." but that is kinda just saying ahh lets vote Kerry just to see what happens.. more input!! .. this discussion is very good soo far, lots of good points..
and fyi we have these discussions on our board all the time and they are mistaken for angry bantering.. just so ya know its all in the sport of debate Posted by SSHEETS (Member # 1989) on :
quote:Originally posted by xero: and fyi we have these discussions on our board all the time and they are mistaken for angry bantering.. just so ya know its all in the sport of debate
Now that's debatable
[ 29. May 2004, 03:41 PM: Message edited by: SSHEETS ]
Posted by Mike2001SS (Member # 2088) on :
Well I guess I will answer the post as started. My father who has passed away now was a Dem. I have always been Rep.and we had alot of debate on that. I have been voting every time for 40 some years and always vote a straight Rep. ticket no matter what. Could make a list longer than this thread on the harm the libs have caused in this country. Some good they did but alot more harm than good. Bush all the way unless he changes party. As for Kerry I for one think the Dems needed a much better choice than what they have, he lucked out and beat better people on the dem side in the primaries
Posted by el ess1 (Member # 1544) on :
Ok, who's going to push this to over 100 posts?
Oops...that would be me. hee hee... we're a bunch of post hoars... Posted by Harry P (Member # 533) on :
Two things that have not been mentioned yet that I think should be said:
First, for those that feel the war in Iraq has not done anything for America or the world, let me remind you that Mommar Kadaffi saw America invade Iraq. And after more than 25 years of sanctions and the support of global terrorism, he rolled over like a dog fresh out of obedience school. Not one American life lost, and the media doesn't say boo about a major victory against the war on terrorism. Sad. We as Americans should all be proud, but because of the political rhetoric spread by liberal mainstream media, we are divided. After 1945, it's no wonder we can never all agree to win another war. We're doomed by the media.
Second, Kerry is very much an enemy of the Second Amendment. I cannot support anyone who wishes to impose more laws against the law abiding because of emotional anti-gun groups (including the mainstream media) spewing their rhetoric.
I consider myself middle of the road, and like many middle-of-the-roaders, I do not like Bush and Ashcroft all that much. Just when the Democrats had a shoo-in for a President, they are likely to nominate the biggest boob in the party, and everyone... even all Democrats... know it. That's why we only hear why we need to elect Kerry, because he is allegedly better than Bush, NOT because Kerry will make a good president. The Democrats screwed this up for themselves... compared Kerry, Bush has my vote. He, far and away, is the lesser of two evils with regard to our Constitution and this country.
Posted by MMMM_ERT (Member # 1599) on :
quote:Originally posted by el ess1: Ok, who's going to push this to over 100 posts?
Oops...that would be me. hee hee... we're a bunch of post hoars...
We can't be post whores....all these posts actully have content!
BTW- I like the point above about Libya...I never even considered that. Posted by Cavy Dan (Member # 1352) on :
wow...this thread is exactly why i hate politics and dont get involved, and dont care...i'll carry on with my life nevertheless.... Posted by SSHEETS (Member # 1989) on :
The Libya thing baffles me...I wish we knew what went down behind the scenes, you know there is more to it than one day he wakes up, turns on CNN and says Wholly COW, I better straighten up and fly right!!
Bad news sells so good news never makes the headlines. That is why so many have a negative opinion about the US and our war on terror. Posted by Mitch02SS (Member # 1781) on :
As someone who works with (not for) different unions, I can say for a fact that the union "attitude" is dragging the American workforce down. Unions reduce hard-working Americans to mind-numb robots with low quotas, poor work ethics and "blame someone else" attitudes. Unions harbor the "we are owed something" mantra that has infested America.
You are not "owed" anything, especially a job. A company's #1 job is to make money for it's owners or investors. Simple as that. If you want more, then you should mortgage everything you own and start your own business. It's funny how we decry the people who take risks, build a company, hire employees, create a tax base and provide a service. All while some union worker is crying because he only gets $35/hour to shove some small part into a larger part. (and you wonder why jobs are going to Mexico)
I work with unions that won't allow you to lift a screwdriver to turn 4 screws that would take 30 seconds. Instead you must wait for 30 minutes for a union electrician to find his screwdriver, get a cup of coffee and finally make it over to you and unscrew some screws for you.
I have a relatives that is a union steward at her shop. As part of her contract she gets 8 hours a week for "union time". There's 8 hours a week that the company has to pay her for work that she is not doing. How many people in America right now are getting paid for 8 hours of "union time"? Who pays for that lost production? The consumers do. So while you are out on that picket line demanding this and that, YOU ARE forcing your company to look overseas.
I know I'm painting with a broad brush, but my dealings with unions have been mostly unpleasant. Unions are going the way of the horse and buggy and I wish that the workers would see this and start telling these union bosses (who are no different that corporate execs) that enough is enough.
Posted by el ess1 (Member # 1544) on :
quote:Originally posted by Cavy Dan: wow...this thread is exactly why i hate politics and dont get involved, and dont care...i'll carry on with my life nevertheless....
Funny how the ones who don't care seem to be the ones crying when they have to write out their tax checks or complain about the stupid laws that get passed. You should care and get involved. That was precisely my point about sheep wanting to be led. Nothing personal, Cavy Dan, but if you don't speak up, you'll be hypocritical to complain later.
Posted by SSHEETS (Member # 1989) on :
Mitch, you are dead on...that being said, I used to be completely anti union, but I now wor for one of the 3 largest companies in the world. I can see how union representation was needed to keep the balance. That representaion has become so perverse though it is destroying our economy.
My brother works for the city of San Francisco. Remember last year when the long shoremen went on strike? Some of these people were making over $100,000/year for clerical work!!! They were striking for more money and less automation so as not to increase prodcutivity and therefore decrease their hours!!!!
Like I said before, "Symbiotic" Posted by el ess1 (Member # 1544) on :
quote:Originally posted by Mitch02SS: You are not "owed" anything, especially a job. A company's #1 job is to make money for it's owners or investors. Simple as that.
I agree no one is "owed" anything like a job, but I'm going to disagree with you about a company's #1 job. Making money for owners/investors is a priority, but it isn't the #1 priority. Money is the resultant of doing Job #1 well, and that is to attract, obtain, and retain a customer base. That is a company's #1 job. If it's not, they're doing it wrong. Everything else, good or bad, comes with how well you perform that first piece. Without the customer, even large companies will be in the tank in a short time. And they won't be able to make money for anyone.
I would agree one of the reasons someone opens their own business is to make money, but that's also why people go to work for those companies and join Unions, etc.
Unions were a good idea for their time, to correct the total BS and mistreatment that companies used to hand its employees. Enough was enough, so some rules needed to be established. Nowdays, companies thrive without unions because they treat their employees well. Those who don't treat their employees well usually have poor output/performance and a high turnover rate. This should tell them something, but many are too stupid to care or even notice. It is my belief that Unions were meant to ensure that everyone played well with each other, but I think now, for the most part, Unions have outlived their usefulness.
There are many reasons for companies to benefit from treating employees well without having to have a union to enforce fair play, but one is that the more technical jobs need the company to invest a lot in training individuals, and for the employee to have all this knowledge and then want to go somewhere else to work is not a financially sound risk that companies are willing to take very often. The good ones always seem to leave.
Posted by SSHEETS (Member # 1989) on :
quote:Originally posted by el ess1:
quote:Originally posted by Mitch02SS: You are not "owed" anything, especially a job. A company's #1 job is to make money for it's owners or investors. Simple as that.
I agree no one is "owed" anything like a job, but I'm going to disagree with you about a company's #1 job. Making money for owners/investors is a priority, but it isn't the #1 priority. Money is the resultant of doing Job #1 well, and that is to attract, obtain, and retain a customer base. That is a company's #1 job. If it's not, they're doing it wrong. Everything else, good or bad, comes with how well you perform that first piece. Without the customer, even large companies will be in the tank in a short time. And they won't be able to make money for anyone.
I would agree one of the reasons someone opens their own business is to make money, but that's also why people go to work for those companies and join Unions, etc.
Unions were a good idea for their time, to correct the total BS and mistreatment that companies used to hand its employees. Enough was enough, so some rules needed to be established. Nowdays, companies thrive without unions because they treat their employees well. Those who don't treat their employees well usually have poor output/performance and a high turnover rate. This should tell them something, but many are too stupid to care or even notice. It is my belief that Unions were meant to ensure that everyone played well with each other, but I think now, for the most part, Unions have outlived their usefulness.
There are many reasons for companies to benefit from treating employees well without having to have a union to enforce fair play, but one is that the more technical jobs need the company to invest a lot in training individuals, and for the employee to have all this knowledge and then want to go somewhere else to work is not a financially sound risk that companies are willing to take very often. The good ones always seem to leave.
I finally disagree el...kinda. Your first paragraph and disagreement with Mitch is a semantical arguement. I think you assume Mitch meant short term profit at all cost. To make money and contiune in that success requires a satisfied customer base. Qaulity, value and the like all play into this equation. I think you are both saying the same thing.
The rest of your comment I agree with. Posted by Cavy Dan (Member # 1352) on :
quote:Originally posted by el ess1:
quote:Originally posted by Cavy Dan: wow...this thread is exactly why i hate politics and dont get involved, and dont care...i'll carry on with my life nevertheless....
Funny how the ones who don't care seem to be the ones crying when they have to write out their tax checks or complain about the stupid laws that get passed. You should care and get involved. That was precisely my point about sheep wanting to be led. Nothing personal, Cavy Dan, but if you don't speak up, you'll be hypocritical to complain later.
I dont care...taxes are a fact of life...you deal with it, whether you owe or not. DOH!! why am i getting into this!?!?! AHHHH!!!! Posted by SSHEETS (Member # 1989) on :
quote:Originally posted by Cavy Dan:
quote:Originally posted by el ess1:
quote:Originally posted by Cavy Dan: wow...this thread is exactly why i hate politics and dont get involved, and dont care...i'll carry on with my life nevertheless....
Funny how the ones who don't care seem to be the ones crying when they have to write out their tax checks or complain about the stupid laws that get passed. You should care and get involved. That was precisely my point about sheep wanting to be led. Nothing personal, Cavy Dan, but if you don't speak up, you'll be hypocritical to complain later.
I dont care...taxes are a fact of life...you deal with it, whether you owe or not. DOH!! why am i getting into this!?!?! AHHHH!!!!
Ok manly Danly... Does the term "we the people", or "by the people for the people" mean anything to you? Posted by Cavy Dan (Member # 1352) on :
Posted by MMMM_ERT (Member # 1599) on :
I think it takes a little "aging" to become more involved in politics. Usually when you start paying a chitload in income, property taxes is when it hits home.
Dan will get there... Posted by el ess1 (Member # 1544) on :
quote:Originally posted by Cavy Dan: I dont care...taxes are a fact of life...you deal with it, whether you owe or not. DOH!! why am i getting into this!?!?! AHHHH!!!!
You're getting into this because you WANT to. Taxes are only a fact of life because our government said so and passed laws to that effect. I'm not sure where we'd be today without mandated taxes, but if enough people voiced an opposition to it, there would be a huge turnover in Congress and we'd vote the folks in who more closely share our views, and thus repeal the income tax. Bad idea financially, but that's the cool part about elected public servants. If we're going to have to live with the laws these pinheads make, at least elect the folks who have similar goals and values. That just makes the new "dumb" laws easier to swallow.
And you say you don't care... If you didn't care at least a little teeny bit, you'd have not even responded. That shows you care a little, at least.
So, now to more important things, Dan...did you get your garage floor paint yet? Posted by Xsta Z 28 (Member # 740) on :
My answer is short.
I VOTE FOR BUSH.
Is he the best for the job? No, but I am confident he will do a better job than Kerry.
You all have very good points, but they all feel pointed in one way or another, bottom line, politics suck and all politicians are criminals, but you pick the lesser offender . .
Posted by SSHEETS (Member # 1989) on :
About two years ago I read John Adams by David McCollughm (sp?)
Awesome book and a wonderful plot, and subplot and another suplot.
Long story short, Politics hasn't changed much since the Day George Washington ran for the first presidency.
The book has wonderful stories detailing the creation of our nation, the love between a husband and wife and the contancorous relatioships between our founding fathers. I highly recommend it to anyone with the slightest interest in US history.
It also tells the story of virtue...one thing that has changed in the last 200 plus years Posted by CAMSS (Member # 1388) on :
quote:Originally posted by HOSS: Here's a straight forward question for everyone planning on voting for John Kerry in this election...
Why will you vote for John Kerry?
I will vote for John Kerry.
Why?
1. He is NOT George Dubya Bush.
2. Kerry is a decorated combat veteran (3 Purple Hearts, 1 Bronze Star, and 1 Silver Star) and has first-hand experience of what our troops are going through right now. Even thought he grew up in a privileged environment, Kerry chose to serve his country and fight along side his fellow man. He will NOT place our troops, our sons, daughters, fathers and mothers in harm’s way unless it is ABSOLUTELY NECESSARY for the security of the United States. ….Unlike Dubya, who hid behind his daddy’s skirts and used his family’s name and power to receive a much safer placement in the National Guard. Sadly, he did not fulfill his duties and cannot provide any form of evidence that he completed his obligation – in fact, he was missing for at least 18 months from his duties. Can you say AWOL? Nowadays, Dubya likes to dress up and pretend that he’s a TopGun pilot in million-dollar photo-ops (at taxpayer expense, I might add) and send real soldiers to war. Mission accomplished? Riiiiight. Sure it is. Anyone care to guess how many more years our troops will have to stay in Iraq?
3. Dubya misled the American people to justify an unjustified war. Where are the WMDs? Where is the imminent threat? Dubya, Cheney and company went out of their way and scared the HELL out of America to justify this war and it was absolutely not necessary. Sure, Saddam was an evil sonofabitch (and I’m glad he’s gone) but that was NOT the reason used to gain the support of the American people. Dubya has opened a huge can of worms that will haunt this country for years to come. And this is from the man who campaigned on the premise that he did not believe in “nation building”.
4. Osama Bin Laden. Remember him? Oh yeah, that’s right. He’s the rotten, filthy, murderous, piece of crap that was the mastermind of 9/11.
Not the Iraqis. Not Saddam. Osama Bin Laden.
Oh, silly me. I keep forgetting that Dubya and the rest of the GOP want everyone to think that the war in Iraq and the War on Terror are one and the same. Sorry, but it’s hard for me to forget that not a single Iraqi was involved in the attack of 9/11. (It never fails to astound me how incredibly f***ing stupid the average American is that they continue to believe that Iraq had something to do with 9/11). Gee, I wonder if we wouldn't have already found Osama Bin Butthead if the resources (in both $$$ and manpower) hadn't been diverted to Iraq???? Never fear, I'm sure that OBB will miraculously be killed or captured just before the election so that Dubya can wrap his campaign in the flag, declare victory and ride into the sunset (or land on another carrier).
5. Kerry believes that it is better to create good jobs that stay in America. Dubya’s guy said it is good for America that jobs are being outsourced to other countries. At least 2.1 million jobs have been lost since President George W. Bush took office—the worst overall job growth rate under any president in 58 years.
6. What ever happened to fiscal responsibility? As of today, our national debt is $7,208, 319,637, 963.41. That works out to a little over $24,501.31 for every man, woman and child in the USA. It’s growing by over $1.73 billion per day. Instead of asking America to share the burden in setting our fiscal house in order, Dubya rewards the rich with huge tax cuts, leaving the middle and lower-classes to fend for themselves. The GOP’s economic motto: Leave No Millionaire Behind.
7. My own special pet peeve: Dubya is an embarrassment to America when he speaks. I swear, the man is incapable of stringing together a coherent sentence. Every time he opens his mouth, I want to puke. (It should be noted that when Kerry speaks, I merely fall asleep).
8. Are you enjoying our high gasoline prices? What do you expect when two oilmen are running the country? Their answer? Drill more. Kerry’s answer? Save more. Gee, its too bad that all those big SUVs (mine included) aren’t subject to the same standards that gave me a 400+ hp f-body that gets 28+ MPG on the highway.
9. Lastly, Kerry is a strong supporter of the Second Amendment. He believes that law-abiding American adults have the right to own guns. He, like most reasonable people, supports closing the gun show loophole, which is allowing criminals to get access to guns at gun shows without background checks, and will strive to fix the background check system, which is in a serious state of disrepair. As a gun-owner and enthusiast, this gun-totin' liberal has no fear that a Kerry administration will threaten my right to keep and bare arms.
My $.02.
[ 01. June 2004, 07:15 PM: Message edited by: CAMSS ]
Posted by Steven2000SS (Member # 780) on :
quote:Originally posted by JeffY: At least he won't stage a fake event from the deck of it, have it turn around so he looks good and then proclaim from it that the war is over and watch a whole bunch of people get killed because somebody threatened his daddy-not a country.
You cant be that dense? GWB stated that MAJOR COMBAT OPERATIONS were over.. If you would have bother to stop hating for a moment and listen you would have heard him said there was still a long tough road ahead..
When Clinton sent troops to die in Somalia I guess that was ok? or in Kosovo? (funny, no UN backing on that one)..
The stated US policy since 91 (even under Clinton) was regime change in Iraq.. given the new world after 9/11 GWB has begun to clean house. He had legal justification to go into IRAQ (failer by Iraq to live up to surrender agreement AND violation of 17 resolutions).. plus the ENTIRE world believed/s he had WMD..
I never realized you were so bitter JeffY Posted by HOSS (Member # 1464) on :
This topic has certainly generated some very spirited debate. Now for another twist...
Any Nader fans out there? If so, please speak up.
Given Nader's record within the automotive industry, I would anticipate very few positive responses.
Posted by Steven2000SS (Member # 780) on :
quote:Originally posted by CAMSS:
quote:Originally posted by HOSS: [b] Here's a straight forward question for everyone planning on voting for John Kerry in this election...
Why will you vote for John Kerry?
I will vote for John Kerry.
Why?
1. He is NOT George Dubya Bush. thats an intelligent reason
2. Kerry is a decorated combat veteran (3 Purple Hearts, 1 Bronze Star, and 1 Silver Star) and has first-hand experience of what our troops are going through right now. Even thought he grew up in a privileged environment, Kerry chose to serve his country and fight along side his fellow man. He will NOT place our troops, our sons, daughters, fathers and mothers in harm’s way unless it is ABSOLUTELY NECESSARY for the security of the United States. ….Unlike Dubya, who hid behind his daddy’s skirts and used his family’s name and power to receive a much safer placement in the National Guard. Sadly, he did not fulfill his duties and cannot provide any form of evidence that he completed his obligation – in fact, he was missing for at least 18 months from his duties. Can you say AWOL? Nowadays, Dubya likes to dress up and pretend that he’s a TopGun pilot in million-dollar photo-ops (at taxpayer expense, I might add) and send real soldiers to war. Mission accomplished? Riiiiight. Sure it is. Anyone care to guess how many more years our troops will have to stay in Iraq?
Not even his commander in Nam thinks he is qualified.. he was there for 4 months and weasled away 3 PH's as fast as he could.. know how long he was out for his THREE wounds? two days!! lol.. then he came back and slammed his fellow soliders by saying they were murderers and commited atrocities..
3. Dubya misled the American people to justify an unjustified war. Where are the WMDs? Where is the imminent threat? Dubya, Cheney and company went out of their way and scared the HELL out of America to justify this war and it was absolutely not necessary. Sure, Saddam was an evil sonofabitch (and I’m glad he’s gone) but that was NOT the reason used to gain the support of the American people. Dubya has opened a huge can of worms that will haunt this country for years to come. And this is from the man who campaigned on the premise that he did not believe in “nation building”.
misled nothing.. he thought (as did the world) that Iraq had WMD and was a threat.. so did everyone else in congress (including Kerry) who voted for the war
4. Osama Bin Laden. Remember him? Oh yeah, that’s right. He’s the rotten, filthy, murderous, piece of crap that was the mastermind of 9/11.....
come on now.. bush NEVER said Iraq had anything to do with 9/11.. if so then show me.. im waiting... still waiting...
In case you missed the news.. we are still in Afganistan looking for Osama.. i guess you feel we cant do two things at once? good thing you were not in charge for WWII
5. Kerry believes that it is better to create good jobs that stay in America. Dubya’s guy said it is good for America that jobs are being outsourced to other countries. At least 2.1 million jobs have been lost since President George W. Bush took office—the worst overall job growth rate under any president in 58 years.
There is no way to stop outsourcing of jobs overseas.. its the same deal as when mfg jobs left a while back. in a free market economy the public demands the lowest priced goods well to compete companies cut costs. One way is by sending jobs overseas.. Here is a question: How many OVERSEAS companies employee american citizens here???? maybe the people in those countries should be crying about the "outsourcing" to america..
You mention jobs loss but thats a weak and misleading way to do it.. how many were created? deduct that from the 2.1 mil and you have the REAL number.. factor in there the chaos of 9/11 and the resession and it wont seem nearly as bad.. oh, the recession started BEFORE GWB took office
How many of the Heinz companies are located in the US? How many overseas?
6. What ever happened to fiscal responsibility? As of today, our national debt is $7,208, 319,637, 963.41. That works out to a little over $24,501.31 for every man, woman and child in the USA. It’s growing by over $1.73 billion per day. Instead of asking America to share the burden in setting our fiscal house in order, Dubya rewards the rich with huge tax cuts, leaving the middle and lower-classes to fend for themselves. The GOP’s economic motto: Leave No Millionaire Behind.
got me there.. GWB does spend too much but rich people deserve high tax break since they pay most of the taxes.. something like the top 50% of the US pays 97% of the taxes..
Oh, Kerrys wife paid and effective tax rate of only 11% last year.. how do you spell hypocryte?
7. My own special pet peeve: Dubya is an embarrassment to America when he speaks. I swear, the man is incapable of stringing together a coherent sentence. Every time he opens his mouth, I want to puke. (It should be noted that when Kerry speaks, I merely fall asleep).
GWB sure is no Clinton.. but i would rather have a poor speaker that means what he says than an eloquent liar
8. Are you enjoying our high gasoline prices? What do you expect when two oilmen are running the country? Their answer? Drill more. Kerry’s answer? Save more. Gee, its too bad that all those big SUVs (mine included) aren’t subject to the same standards that gave me a 400+ hp f-body that gets 28+ MPG on the highway.
if GWB controls the oil (thats a joke that only shows a lack of knowledge of the oil market) then why isnt gas $.80 a gallon, thus ensuring GWB a second term???
Im sure Kerry is saving a lot more gas in his SUV's(well not HIS but his FAMILIES), private yaght, private jet and multiple mansions.. How is Kerry going to save more? make SUV's illegal? open the strategic reserve? (a stupid move that will lower gas prices .05 cents a gallon (maybe) and leave us weakened from a national security standpoint. And whats wrong with drilling more? Dont harp and not drilling then whine about gas prices.. at least be consitent
9. Lastly, Kerry is a strong supporter of the Second Amendment. He believes that law-abiding American adults have the right to own guns. He, like most reasonable people, supports closing the gun show loophole, which is allowing criminals to get access to guns at gun shows without background checks, and will strive to fix the background check system, which is in a serious state of disrepair. As a gun-owner and enthusiast, this gun-totin' liberal has no fear that a Kerry administration will threaten my right to keep and bare arms.
and i feel the same that GWB will not infringe on my "rights to bear arms".. wonder who the NRA supports?
Just my .08 cents.. when you adjust for inflation its only .02 [/qb]
[ 01. June 2004, 10:01 PM: Message edited by: Steven2000SS ]
Posted by el ess1 (Member # 1544) on :
quote:Originally posted by CAMSS:
quote:Originally posted by HOSS: Here's a straight forward question for everyone planning on voting for John Kerry in this election...
Why will you vote for John Kerry?
I will vote for John Kerry.
Why?
1. He is NOT George Dubya Bush.
Again, I preface this with my rebuttal is nothing personal. I'm looking at the post quality itself and offering my viewpoint on the issues. Everyone always has a right to disagree with me.
That was fair on a scale of poor to excellent. There was like only two or three references to why one would think Kerry was more qualified to be president. The majority of it was the same ol' Democratic stale song of attacking Mr. Bush personally instead of the issues (see reference 1. above). I thought Ted Kennedy logged on for a second there. And as far as disagreeing with policy, I'm accomodating to other people's opinions and can accept it if someone says that they think U.S. shouldn't have gone to war, they think that we went to war for the wrong reasons, etc., since that is disagreeing with a policy, but when people say that Bush misled America, those same people cannot come up with one shred of evidence to prove that as fact, ergo, it's not a valid argument. They attack the person instead of the issues, and that is usually due to having little to no valid arguments about the issues to begin with and more to do with just trying to get to people emotionally riled. Well, I for one do get a bit emotional. The emotion is sadness. To see people reduce themselves to attacking a fellow American on a personal level, we might as well help the terrorists. I won't be voting for Kerry, but it's not because he's a bad man or stupid or anything like that. He's quite bright and seems like a genuinely likeable person. But I don't see eye to eye with his outlook for America, and wouldn't feel comfortable with him at the helm. Heck, I agreed more with Clinton's policies than I do with Kerry's proposed ones. Thusly, I won't be voting for him. Very simple. I don't agree with most of his proposed policies. I don't agree with all of Bush's either, but I think his vision is better for America than Kerry's. That's my opinion. Notice I didn't attack Kerry personally.
If you don't agree with policy, Ok, that's your opinion. But to declare as unproven facts that Bush misled America, or imply he's stupid because he doesn't know 10 dollar words, etc., is akin to saying that you're a freakin' idiot if you own an F-body. Everyone knows that the real performance is Ford Cobra.
Here's probably a better argument for voting for Kerry...I actually was shocked not to hear some of these views. These are hypothetical examples for the sake of example, not my actual opinion.
Kerry served in VietNam. He's not unfamiliar with military operations. He gives every impression of being a decent military leader. Kerry has a plan to lower costs for Medicare and I happen to agree. Kerry wants to help the working man. Kerry wants to repeal the Bush tax cuts and get America out of debt. Kerry has a plan to get our troops out of Iraq.
... as you can see, these would be MUCH more believable reasons to vote for Kerry than turning into a personal attack on Bush.
Perhaps the Kerry supporters would have more luck if they approached people as if they're sitting on the fence and need to be persuaded why Kerry is the better choice. Then maybe we can learn why Dems think he should be president rather than why Bush shouldn't be.
Posted by MMMM_ERT (Member # 1599) on :
Thank you Steven....
This is not an attack on CAMSS...but everything he stated sounded like the the propaganda coming directly from CNN.
Posted by Steven2000SS (Member # 780) on :
CNN.. you mean the Communist News Network
I have nothing against dems.. but can you really tell me Kerry is the BEST they have to offer? He is trying to pretend he is a moderate when the facts show he is the most liberal Senator we have. I can think of many democrats that I would not be fearful to have in office.. Kerry is NOT one of them..
And i think GWB is FAR from perfect.. he spends too much on social crap.. Even though he went into Iraq with good intentions I dont think they thought the exit strategy through enough. He plays too nice with Mexico and a few other things.
BUT he has moral clarity.. he DOES not do what thinks the popular opinion says he should do.. while Kerry is reading the polls and trying to decide what if any position he should have on a subjet GWB is MAKING DECISIONS.. right or wrong he does what he belives needs to be done.
I laugh at the "vote for kerry because he is NOT bush" crowd.. It shows that they really dont belive Kerry is good, they just support him because he isnt Bush..
Kerry did serve us in Vietnam and i applaud him for that but he wears its like a beacon that says "I did the NAM so anything else I do is off limits to talk about!!".. the fact is that he was ashamed of his brief service in Vietnam until it became "popular" to have served there.. why do you think so many vets oppose him?
All in all these threads are pointless.. those that are so blinded by hate for GWB will see nothing else.. all will continue to be his fault and they will never admit that he has done anything right..
Just ask yourself on election day.. if Osama could vote who would he choose to have in office.. Kerry or Bush..
Posted by SSHEETS (Member # 1989) on :
Steven...most awesome job. Again, nothing against members on the other side of this arguement, I just happen to agree with Steven and el. The two of them have done an excellent job of detailing the facts and truths.
And just because it's worth repeating...
Clumbsy speaker with moral clarity over elequent liar any day. Posted by Harry P (Member # 533) on :
CAMSS: No personal flame intended, but regarding Kerry's stance on the Second Amendment, he and the media have duped you. He say's he is for law abiding gun ownership, but his voting record speaks for itself, voting alongside the worst enemies of the Second Amendment, including Diane Fienstien, Chucky Schumer, Franky Lautenburg, Barby Boxer, and Ted "leave the scene and let her drown" Kennedy. Kerry's voting record may be summarized in one word... Appalling.
And the gun show loophole is a mainstream media fallacy. According to the Dept. of Justice, less than 1% of guns used in crimes are purchased at gun shows. Guns used for terrorism don't even make it into the stats with regard to gun shows. Only those guns privately bought and sold at gun shows, i.e. no gun dealer sales, are NOT required to be background checked (which make up for a relatively low number of sales each year). The same applies for anyone privately selling a gun to someone else at any time. To effectively ban private sales at gun shows means we need to ban private sales everywhere. Shall we take away this freedom of the law abiding, as if criminals will stop the present illegal transfer of firearms because one more idiotic law is passed? Smell the toast... it's burning. Oh wait, no, that's the Constitution burning.
Posted by MMMM_ERT (Member # 1599) on :
From my cold dead hands....
Posted by SSHEETS (Member # 1989) on :
Kerry: I beleive in the right for law abiding citizens to own guns...we just need to change the laws. Posted by SSHEETS (Member # 1989) on :
Kerry: I don't own guns...those are my family's guns. Posted by MMMM_ERT (Member # 1599) on :
Look at that will ya...another shameful gratuitous photo op for Dubya....
Its just awful that the Military has a President they respect again isn't it....
Posted by Steven2000SS (Member # 780) on :
quote:Originally posted by ss_rs_z: Wrong, everything written in my previous thread is complete and truthful. ...
Everything you have written is complete blubberish and total Republican BS.
There you have the democratic thought process.. EVERYTHING they say is the truth.. EVERYTHING we say is a lie.. how can you reason with someone that hold this view????
Posted by Hawk196 (Member # 2175) on :
quote:Originally posted by Steven2000SS:
quote:Originally posted by ss_rs_z: Wrong, everything written in my previous thread is complete and truthful. ...
Everything you have written is complete blubberish and total Republican BS.
There you have the democratic thought process.. EVERYTHING they say is the truth.. EVERYTHING we say is a lie.. how can you reason with someone that hold this view????
You don't.........just hope and pray we out vote them
Tom
Posted by Jim Mac (Member # 113) on :
quote:Originally posted by MMMM_ERT: Look at that will ya...another shameful gratuitous photo op for Dubya....
Its just awful that the Military has a President they respect again isn't it....
Oooooo....now we're fighting dirty!
Posted by Mike2001SS (Member # 2088) on :
quote:Originally posted by Hawk196:
quote:Originally posted by Steven2000SS:
quote:Originally posted by ss_rs_z: Wrong, everything written in my previous thread is complete and truthful. ...
Everything you have written is complete blubberish and total Republican BS.
There you have the democratic thought process.. EVERYTHING they say is the truth.. EVERYTHING we say is a lie.. how can you reason with someone that hold this view????
You don't.........just hope and pray we out vote them
Tom
You don't reason with them I learned that with my father, funny thing he worked all his life and died poor and I had to pay for his funeral. As for out voting them I did one thing I gave my kids a good education and between me and Cindy we have 9 kids all married but 2 and us and all of them will vote for Bush along with many of my cousins so we will out vote a few around here.
Most people can't see the forest for the trees is why I never reason with them. As for my dad I loved him just thought he was nuts. At least those on the other side vote and thats the main thing which gives them the right to post what they think as I do because I always vote Posted by SSHEETS (Member # 1989) on :
Last year's local elections I took my 8 year old daughter withme to vote. I tried to explain to her how the process works and the importance of voting. Posted by MMMM_ERT (Member # 1599) on :
quote:Originally posted by Mike2001SS: As for my dad I loved him just thought he was nuts.
Same with my Grandfather...STAUNCH Dem...he and I spoke politics one day (which was the last time we did that). He hated the Republican party and stated "What has the Republican Party ever done for me". I was appalled at that statement, I wanted to say...what have you done for YOURSELF, but refrained out of respect. He died poor too, living off of Social Security.
Gotta love that hand out, what are you gonna do for me attitude. Meanwhile the ones in power want you to live in squalor while they get rich off your taxes. Hypocrytes...
Posted by ss_rs_z (Member # 1888) on :
quote:Originally posted by Steven2000SS:
quote:Originally posted by ss_rs_z: Wrong, everything written in my previous thread is complete and truthful. ...
Everything you have written is complete blubberish and total Republican BS.
There you have the democratic thought process.. EVERYTHING they say is the truth.. EVERYTHING we say is a lie.. how can you reason with someone that hold this view????
Lets see what happens come Election Day. You say you can't reason with me but truthfully you can. As I stated before I am NOT Republican nor Democrat. Everyone has the right to their opinions and I respect everyones around here.
So when Election Day comes and I will be in line as I have since 1980 we will see the outcome. I am just glad that I DO vote so I can say what I believe. As far as I am concerned neither one is a viable candidate but to each his/her own.
[ 06. June 2004, 07:34 AM: Message edited by: ss_rs_z ]
Posted by Mike2001SS (Member # 2088) on :
I want to say this about this subject. We are all friends here and have different views on lots of things but we agree on more than we disagree. Look over seas at how all the different parties in the Arab world hate the other side completely. I hope we never get to the point we hate the other person because he is the other party and I am seeing to much of that these days aready. What ever you feel in your heart is right and vote that way I congrat you for doing every Americans duty.
Posted by Mark IXZD 150 (Member # 235) on :
I can wrap this whole conversation up right here, right now with this...
Has anyone seen Kerry's ugly hag of a wife? I'll take sweet Laura over that troll any day.
Posted by ss_rs_z (Member # 1888) on :
quote:Originally posted by Mike2001SS: I want to say this about this subject. We are all friends here and have different views on lots of things but we agree on more than we disagree. Look over seas at how all the different parties in the Arab world hate the other side completely. I hope we never get to the point we hate the other person because he is the other party and I am seeing to much of that these days aready. What ever you feel in your heart is right and vote that way I congrat you for doing every Americans duty.
I totally agree Mike. Excellent words of wisdom. Posted by ss_rs_z (Member # 1888) on :
quote:Originally posted by Mark IXZD 150: I can wrap this whole conversation up right here, right now with this...
Has anyone seen Kerry's ugly hag of a wife? I'll take sweet Laura over that troll any day.
Thats cold but funny............LOL. Posted by MMMM_ERT (Member # 1599) on :
quote:Originally posted by Mark IXZD 150: I can wrap this whole conversation up right here, right now with this...
Has anyone seen Kerry's ugly hag of a wife? I'll take sweet Laura over that troll any day.
Woooooof.....
I bet if Kerry gets elected...you'll see pretty interns around.....a la Clinton. Posted by Steven2000SS (Member # 780) on :
Im sure she is beautiful to Kerry.. after all it's not like he married her for her money Posted by KurtK (Member # 1779) on :
quote:Originally posted by Steven2000SS: .. how do you spell hypocryte?
Hypocrite...sorry, couldn't pass it up Posted by KurtK (Member # 1779) on :
quote:Originally posted by Mark IXZD 150: I can wrap this whole conversation up right here, right now with this...
Has anyone seen Kerry's ugly hag of a wife? I'll take sweet Laura over that troll any day.
Yeah- however $ 500M does change your perception of beauty!
What do you think the public's reaction will be if all of the groups she helps subsidize is blared all over the tube?)
Rhetorical question: If Laura Bush was this wealthy (and foreign-born) and contributed to similar right-wing groups- what would the Dem mouthpieces be screaming?
Posted by Mike2001SS (Member # 2088) on :
You know what just hit me as being funny, after reading all this us adults can be as cruel as school kids were when I went to school back in the stone age. Posted by el ess1 (Member # 1544) on :
quote:Originally posted by Mike2001SS: You know what just hit me as being funny, after reading all this us adults can be as cruel as school kids were when I went to school back in the stone age.
And whoo sez U don't 'member nuttin' when you wer a kid?
Posted by MMMM_ERT (Member # 1599) on :
Comments from men who served with Kerry in VietNam *******************************************
Regardless of your political views---this is worth reading !
Subject: NAVY SWIFT BOAT QUOTES
.
"We resent very deeply the false war crimes charges he made coming back from Vietnam in 1971 and repeated in the book "Tour of Duty." We think those cast an aspersion on all those living and dead, from our unit and other units in Vietnam. We think that he knew he was lying when he made the charges, and we think that they're unsupportable. We intend to bring the truth about that to the American people.
We believe, based on our experience with him, that he is totally unfit to be the Commander-in-Chief."
-- John O'Neill, spokesman, Swift Boat Veterans for Truth
.
"I do not believe John Kerry is fit to be Commander-in-Chief of the armed forces of the United States. This is not a political issue. It is a matter of his judgment, truthfulness, reliability, loyalty and trust -- all absolute tenets of command. His biography, 'Tour of Duty,' by Douglas Brinkley, is replete with gross exaggerations, distortions of fact, contradictions and slanderous lies. His contempt for the military and authority is evident by even a most casual review of this biography. He arrived in-country with a strong anti-Vietnam War bias and a self-serving determination to build a foundation for his political future. He was aggressive, but vain and prone to impulsive judgment, often with disregard for specific tactical assignments. He was a 'loose cannon.' In an abbreviated tour of four months and 12 days, and with his specious medals secure, Lt.(jg) Kerry bugged out and began his infamous betrayal of all United States forces in the Vietnam War. That included our soldiers, our marines, our sailors, our coast guardsmen, our airmen, and our POWs. His leadership within the so-called Vietnam Veterans Against the War and testimony before Congress in 1971 charging us with unspeakable atrocities remain an undocumented but nevertheless meticulous stain on the men and women who honorably stayed the course. Senator Kerry is not fit for command."
-- Rear Admiral Roy Hoffman, USN (retired), chairman, Swift Boat Veterans for Truth
.
"During Lt.(jg) Kerry's tour, he was under my command for two or three specific operations, before his rapid exit. Trust, loyalty and judgment are the key, operative words. His turncoat performance in 1971 in his grubby shirt and his medal-tossing escapade, coupled with his slanderous lines in the recent book portraying us that served, including all POWs and MIAs, as murderous war criminals, I believe, will have a lasting effect on all military veterans and their families.
Kerry would be described as devious, self-absorbing, manipulative, disdain for authority, disruptive, but the most common phrase that you'd hear is 'requires constant supervision.'"
-- Captain Charles Plumly, USN (retired)
.
"Thirty-five years ago, many of us fell silent when we came back to the stain of sewage that Mr. Kerry had thrown on us, and all of our colleagues who served over there. I don't intend to be silent today or ever again. Our young men and women who are serving deserve no less."
-- Andrew Horne
.
"In my specific, personal experience in both coastal and river patrols over a 12-month period, I never once saw or heard anything remotely resembling the atrocities described by Senator Kerry. If I had, it would have been my obligation to report them in writing to a higher authority, and I would certainly have done that. If Senator Kerry actually witnessed or participated in these atrocities or, as he described them, 'war crimes,' he was obligated to report them. That he did not until later when it suited his political purposes strikes me as opportunism of the worst kind. That he would malign my service and that of his fellow sailors with no regard for the truth makes him totally unqualified to serve as Commander-in-Chief."
-- Jeffrey Wainscott
.
"I signed that letter because I, too felt a deep sense of betrayal that someone who took the same oath of loyalty as I did as an officer in the United States Navy would abandon his group here (points to group photo) to join this group here (points to VVAW protest photo), and come home and attempt to rally the American public against the effort that this group was so valiantly pursuing.
It is a fact that in the entire Vietnam War we did not lose one major battle. We lost the war at home... and at home, John Kerry was the Field General."
-- Robert Elder
.
"My daughters and my wife have read portions of the book 'Tour of Duty.' They wanted to know if I took part in the atrocities described. I do not believe the things that are described happened.
Let me give you an example. In Brinkley's book, on pages 170 to 171, about something called the 'Bo De massacre' on November 24th of 1968... In Kerry's description of the engagement, first he claimed there were 17 servicemen that were wounded. Three of us were wounded. I was the first..."
-- Joseph Ponder
.
"While in Cam Rahn Bay, he trained on several 24-hour indoctrination missions, and one special skimmer operation with my most senior and trusted Lieutenant. The briefing from some members of that crew the morning after revealed that they had not received any enemy fire, and yet Lt.(jg) Kerry informed me of a wound -- he showed me a scratch on his arm and a piece of shrapnel in his hand that appeared to be from one of our own M-79s. It was later reported to me that Lt.(jg) Kerry had fired an M-79, and it had exploded off the adjacent shoreline. I do not recall being advised of any medical treatment, and probably said something like 'Forget it.' He later received a Purple Heart for that scratch, and I have no information as to how or whom.
Lt.(jg) Kerry was allowed to return to the good old USA after 4 months and a few days in-country, and then he proceeded to betray his former shipmates, calling them criminals who were committing atrocities. Today we are here to tell you that just the opposite is true. Our rules of engagement were quite strict, and the officers and men of Swift often did not even return fire when they were under fire if there was a possibility that innocent people -- fishermen, in a lot of cases -- might be hurt or injured. The rules and the good intentions of the men increased the possibility that we might take friendly casualties."
-- Commander Grant Hibbard, USN (retired)
.
"Lt. Kerry returned home from the war to make some outrageous statements and allegations... of numerous criminal acts in violation of the law of war were cited by Kerry, disparaging those who had fought with honor in that conflict. Had war crimes been committed by US forces in Vietnam? Yes, but such acts were few and far between. Yet Lt. Kerry have numerous speeches and testimony before Congress inappropriately leading his audiences to believe that what was only an anomaly in the conduct of America's fighting men was an epidemic. Furthermore, he suggested that they were being encouraged to violated the law of war by those within the chain of command.
Very specific orders, on file at the Vietnam archives at Texas Tech University, were issued by my father [Admiral Elmo Zumwalt] and others in his chain of command instructing subordinates to act responsibly in preserving the life and property of Vietnamese civilians."
-- Lt. Col. James Zumwalt, USMC (retired)
.
"We look at Vietnam... after all these years it is still languishing in isolated poverty and helplessness and tyranny. This is John Kerry's legacy. I deeply resent John Kerry's using his Swift boat experience, and his betrayal of those who fought there as a stepping-stone to his political ambitions."
-- Barnard Wolff
.
"In a whole year that I spent patrolling, I didn't see anything like a war crime, an atrocity, anything like that. Time and again I saw American fighting men put themselves in graver danger trying to avoid... collateral damage.
When John Kerry returned to the country, he was sworn in front of Congress. And then he told my family -- my parents, my sister, my brother, my neighbors -- he told everyone I knew and everyone I'd ever know that I and my comrades had committed unspeakable atrocities."
-- David Wallace
.
"I served with these guys. I went on missions with them, and these men served honorably. Up and down the chain of command there was no acquiescence to atrocities. It was not condoned, it did not happen, and it was not reported to me verbally or in writing by any of these men including Lt.(jg) Kerry.
In 1971, '72, for almost 18 months, he stood before the television audiences and claimed that the 500,000 men and women in Vietnam, and in combat, were all villains -- there were no heroes. In 2004, one hero from the Vietnam War has appeared, running for President of the United States and Commander-in-Chief. It just galls one to think about it."
-- Captain George Elliott, USN (retired)
.
"During the Vietnam War I was Task Force Commander at An Thoi, and my tour of duty was 13 months, from the end of Tet to the beginning of the Vietnamization of the Navy units.
Now when I went there right after Tet, I was restricted in my movements. I couldn't go much of anyplace because the Vietcong controlled most of the area. When I left, I could go anywhere I wanted, just about. Commerce was booming, the buses were running, trucks were going, the waterways were filled with sampans with goods going to market, but yet in Kerry's biography he says that our operations were a complete failure. He also mentions a formal conference with me, to try to get more air cover and so on. That conference never happened..."
-- Captain Adrian Lonsdale, USCG (retired)
.
"I was in An Thoi from June of '68 to June of '69, covering the whole period that John Kerry was there. I operated in every river, in every canal, and every off-shore patrol area in the 4th Corps area, from Cambodia all the way around to the Bo De River. I never saw, even heard of all of these so-called atrocities and things that we were supposed to have done.
This is not true. We're not standing for it. We want to set the record straight."
-- William Shumadine
.
"In 1971, when John Kerry spoke out to America, labeling all Vietnam veterans as thugs and murderers, I was shocked and almost brought to my knees, because even though I had served at the same time and same unit, I had never witnessed or participated in any of the events that the Senator had accused us of. I strongly believe that the statements made by the Senator were not only false and inaccurate, but extremely harmful to the United States' efforts in Southeast Asia and the rest of the world. Tragically, some veterans, scorned by the antiwar movement and their allies, retreated to a life of despair and suicide. Two of my crewmates were among them. For that there is no forgiveness. "
-- Richard O'Meara
.
"My name is Steve Gardner. I served in 1966 and 1967 on my first tour of duty in Vietnam on Swift boats, and I did my second tour in '68 and '69, involved with John Kerry in the last 2 1/2 months of my tour. The John Kerry that I know is not the John Kerry that everybody else is portraying. I served alongside him and behind him, five feet away from him in a gun tub, and watched as he made indecisive moves with our boat, put our boats in jeopardy, put our crews in jeopardy... if a man like that can't handle that 6-man crew boat, how can you expect him to be our Commander-in-Chief?"
-- Steven Gardner
.
"I served in Vietnam as a boat officer from June of 1968 to July of 1969. My service was three months in Coastal Division 13 out of Cat Lo, and nine months with Coastal Division 11 based in An Thoi. John Kerry was in An Thoi the same time I was. I'm here today to express the anger I have harbored for over 33 years, about being accused with my fellow shipmates of war atrocities.
All I can say is when I leave here today, I'm going down to the Wall to tell my two crew members it's not true, and that they and the other 49 Swiftees who are on the Wall were then and are still now the best."
-- Robert Brant
.
"I never saw, heard of, or participated in any Swift boat crews killing cattle, poisoning crops, or raping and killing civilians as charged by John Kerry, both in his book and in public statements. Since we both operated at the same time, in the same general area, and on the same missions under the same commanders, it is hard to believe his claims of atrocities and poor planning of Sea Lord missions.
I signed this letter because I feel that he used Swift boat sailors to proclaim his antiwar statements after the war, and now he uses the same Swift boat sailors to support his claims of being a war hero. He cannot have it both ways, and we are here to ask for full disclosure of the proof of his claims."
-- James Steffes
. Can you read this and tell any of these 18 men they are wrong about Kerry. Kerry shouldn't even be a Senator ~~ he should be court-martialled.
Posted by Mike2001SS (Member # 2088) on :
Not telling me nothing I did not know about him. Alot if people may noy like alot of things about Bush but one thing is for sure Kerry is not the man to replace him. Sad part is the Dems don't have anyone right now worthy of running against Bush. On the Dem Side I would have taken John Edwards over the rest anyday
Posted by el ess1 (Member # 1544) on :
quote:Originally posted by Mike2001SS: Not telling me nothing I did not know about him. Alot if people may noy like alot of things about Bush but one thing is for sure Kerry is not the man to replace him. Sad part is the Dems don't have anyone right now worthy of running against Bush. On the Dem Side I would have taken John Edwards over the rest anyday
Yeah, John Edwards may lack in experience vs. Kerry, but everything I've heard from him is straightforward, no BS. I don't necessarily agree with all he says, but at least I feel like he's not pulling wool. He's an atypical democrat in that while he is for socialism type programs, he is strong in his convictions and unwavering. Gotta respect a guy like that. He's also got the charisma that Kerry lacks. Only hope for him though is to be picked to be a running mate and then someone have an "accident".
Posted by Fbodfather (Member # 1119) on :
wow...points all over the place.....
Here's what REALLY bugs me:
We were attacked on 9/11........we've tried the UN resolution routine...that didn't work. (in fact, it would be laughable if it weren't so sad) We tried diplomacy.....that didn't work.
As to weapons of mass destruction...I ask the question once again (from page one...) HOW did all those Kurds die? We've already established (thank you Millie!) that it wasn't purple koolaid. So I don't buy the argument about 'we shouldn't be there 'cause we haven't found WMD.
Look....there's a lot of people in this world that want us dead. Simple as that. And they aren't afraid to go to any length to see that this happens. I can't see that sitting back and doing nothing is the right thing to do. I still go back to 1939 and Churchill and Roosevelt....go read the newspapers and transcripts...almost scary how much it sounds like the past 5 years.
I have a good friend that I've talked with for hours and hours (days and days) trying to understand (for lack of a better term) the left and her position that we shouldn't have gone into Iraq. Still haven't figured it out.....BUT......she was adamant that we should not go into Iraq.....so....I asked her this question: OK...you have two daughters....you go out in the yard one day and one of them has a gun...and is waving it around....and you tell her to put it down...and she points it at her younger sister....and pulls the trigger....thank God it wasn't loaded.
Now....are you gonna use diplomacy? Or are you gonna ground the hell outta her until she turns 35??? I guaran-damn-tee you that you aren't gonna use diplomacy.
Now...some of you may think..well, Scott...what a stupid analogy....but I ask you to think about it for a minute.
As to Mr. Kerry......judging by his record, I think he probably uses a Ouija Board to make decisions......
OK...I'll shut up now......
That said....convince me otherwise. I like to think I have an open mind.
Posted by ss_rs_z (Member # 1888) on :
First off I was behind Gephardt from the get go. I figured he would be the one that could do a good job in leading this country and was stunned that he was outvoted from the very beginning. As for Kerry I think he would do something about Healthcare, do what he could to stem the tide of jobs going overseas, and I think he really believes in this country. This is all I am going to say on this subject.
Scott your analogy is not stupid. We all have our beliefs and from what I have read I truly respect yours and everyone elses feelings. To me though I think Bush had been hiding something about an imminent attack before 9/11 and from what I have been hearing on the News and reading about it Tenet told him "several" times that an attack was coming but alas nothing was done to possibly or even remotely prevent it. Ever since 1993 when the first attack on the WTC happened I always wondered if it could happen again. Doesn't anyone think that extra measures should have been taken at that site and everywhere else just in case? I am not trying to convince anyone that one person is better than the other or put down his or her feelings about whom they are backing in this election year. As far as I am concerned I don't trust Politicians period. And as for the WMD's weren't those suppose to have been eliminated after the first Gulf War when inspectors were pursuing to find them and and destroy them before they were kicked out of the Country?
This is all I will say on this matter as well. We all stand behind how we feel and that is all that matters. This is a right we were given by our Forefathers and I am grateful to them for this.
GOD BLESS AMERICA.
[ 08. June 2004, 04:08 AM: Message edited by: ss_rs_z ]
Posted by Steven2000SS (Member # 780) on :
quote:Originally posted by ss_rs_z: ...As for Kerry I think he would do something about Healthcare, do what he could to stem the tide of jobs going overseas, and I think he really believes in this country. This is all I am going to say on this subject.
So Kerry could bankrupt our country with National Heathcare and destroy the economy by stopping the natural progression of jobs going overseas (why does nobody talk about all the jobs that come HERE FROM overseas??)
I could tell how much he belives in America and its people by that glowing book he wrote and by the testimony he gave about the monsters in Vietnam and how commiting atrocities was a common and encouraged practice..
Posted by SSHEETS (Member # 1989) on :
quote:Originally posted by Steven2000SS:
quote:Originally posted by ss_rs_z: ...As for Kerry I think he would do something about Healthcare, do what he could to stem the tide of jobs going overseas, and I think he really believes in this country. This is all I am going to say on this subject.
So Kerry could bankrupt our country with National Heathcare and destroy the economy by stopping the natural progression of jobs going overseas (why does nobody talk about all the jobs that come HERE FROM overseas??)
I could tell how much he belives in America and its people by that glowing book he wrote and by the testimony he gave about the monsters in Vietnam and how commiting atrocities was a common and encouraged practice..
I was talking with my neighbor yesterday and he mentioned a discussion with a friend of his. They were talking about overseas jobs. His friend was a major executive for some corporation...I can't remember which one!! The take away is this: Many of the outsourced jobs are low level jobs, the money it brings to workers in other countries allows them to buy more product from the world economy. Much of the product sold on the world market ends up providing profit and gains to the US economy.
It's not so simple to say stop outsourcing. Doing so is a limitaion on capitalism and will reap more harm to our economy than good. What we need to keep diong is what we do best, new teechnology through space exploration or military invention etc...remember, our good friend the Internet (when Al Gore was inthe Pentagon ) was originally a military means of communication.
Posted by ss_rs_z (Member # 1888) on :
quote:Originally posted by Steven2000SS:
quote:Originally posted by ss_rs_z: ...As for Kerry I think he would do something about Healthcare, do what he could to stem the tide of jobs going overseas, and I think he really believes in this country. This is all I am going to say on this subject.
So Kerry could bankrupt our country with National Heathcare and destroy the economy by stopping the natural progression of jobs going overseas (why does nobody talk about all the jobs that come HERE FROM overseas??)
I could tell how much he belives in America and its people by that glowing book he wrote and by the testimony he gave about the monsters in Vietnam and how commiting atrocities was a common and encouraged practice..
The Country is bankrupt. The National debt is rising every single day. Now I never liked Clinton and don't even give him any credit whatsoever the way the economy was booming in the mid to late 90's but at least we had a surplus over over 200,000,000 billion I believe if my mind serves me correctly when he left office.
As for the war atrocities, I have never heard of any he may have been involved in. Of course there were some done just as there are some that have been committed in Iraq but I have never heard of any he may have been in.
As for jobs coming over here, I have never heard of any of those either. Nothing printed or said about that I know of or any of my friends knowing of either.
[ 08. June 2004, 06:30 PM: Message edited by: ss_rs_z ]
Posted by ss_rs_z (Member # 1888) on :
It's not so simple to say stop outsourcing. Doing so is a limitaion on capitalism and will reap more harm to our economy than good. What we need to keep diong is what we do best, new teechnology through space exploration or military invention etc...remember, our good friend the Internet (when Al Gore was inthe Pentagon ) was originally a military means of communication.
I thought Al Gore said he invented the Internet.............LOL.
As for outsourcing I don't think you will ever stop that.........all I am saying is Companies like Levi's closing up in Texas and moving to China, Tyco closing up and moving to China, Textile Mills closing and moving to China. These are good paying jobs going overseas with more to follow. We have a Refrigeration company here in Michigan which is closing up and moving 2200 jobs to Mexico within two years amnong another 45,000 Michigan jobs that will possibly be leaving the state over the next 10. These are the jobs I am speaking about. The Middle Class is shrinking more and more all the time. This is where the problems lie at the moment and something needs to be done.
Posted by Steven2000SS (Member # 780) on :
Well Clinton didnt have the effects of a recession combined with the economic impact of 9/11 either.. We also have a war were fighting..
Ive heard MANY economists talk about the National Debt as irrelevent.. If we don't make the payments will the white house be reposessed? We have always been a nation of spenders and thats one reason why our economy continues to outpace the ones in other countries..
Also when adjusted for inflation our dept as a factor of GDP is not THAT bad.. just like gas is cheaper now than in 1991 when adjusted for inflation..
Its a lot like the movies.. Titanic beat Star Wars in ticket sales but did more people SEE Titanic? It cost like $4 to see Star Wars and $8 to see Titanic.. If they adjusted for inflation the Star Wars would still be #1
Many overseas companies employee hundreds of thousands of employees here in the US.. Like it or not we are moving away from being a simple mfg economy and we are more of an information and services economy.. its our own fault since we would rather save $1 on a pair of socks from China than ones made here. WE, through our desire for cheap goods, force the jobs to be outsourced.. We need to deal with it and learn new skill sets much like what happened when we moved for an agricultural based economy to an industrial one.
There is no way Kerry can fix this to any meaningful extent.. to say he can is untrue..
Posted by ss_rs_z (Member # 1888) on :
I see where you are coming from now and yes you are right that there are many companies from overseas that employ people. Some of them are decent paying and some aren't. But we still need the manufacturing area as well as information and services for employment.
As for the National Debt I have heard otherwise which can lead to another recession along with interest rate hikes and it looks as though the rate hikes are inevitable now. But we shall see.
The Middle Class is shinking like never before and most of the burden of taxes lies with them. If the jobs aren't there then programs of any nature can't be paid for. This is why taxation has to be evenly squared out for everyone.
As for Star Wars vs Titanic........I'll take Star Wars anytime. As for Kerry fixing the problems well lets wait and see how the election comes out and go from there.
![[Razz]](tongue.gif)
![[Roll Eyes]](rolleyes.gif)
![[Eek!]](eek.gif)
![[Smile]](smile.gif)
![[Frown]](frown.gif)
...I can see where this is going ![[Big Grin]](biggrin.gif)
![[Wink]](wink.gif)
![[Confused]](confused.gif)
![[Cool]](cool.gif)
