Kerry has conceded [Text View] - VehiCROSS.info Forums

V-Twin hiCROSS

11/03/2004, 10:55 AM

All right, if no one else is going to defend our president, I will.
If you believe that George W. does not have our (the country's) best interest at heart, you need to take a step back and focus on what has happended in this country over the past few years.
First, the economy was in steady decline at the end of the last administration, not due to a President's actions, but due to over-savvy investors that seemed to be willing to pay way too much for anything that was related to "technology". This problem cannot be fixed over night, but the economy is definitely building back to its potential. As for jobs leaving the country, it is not W's fault that businesses take full advantage of the lower wages in other parts of the world. It only makes business sense.
Next, we were devastated by the actions of terrorists that would like to kill you, and every member of your family. W's actions after that brutal attack, were in pure rage and retaliation to the Middle-East governments lack of global defense. Basically, if those governments were not willing to crush the cells of terrorists (and in some cases were promoting them), then we (the United States) were determined to put our country's fears to rest.
Yes, the Bush family is rich, and yes there was certainly some part of W that wanted to "redeem" the Gulf War that his father pursued, but he also had almost every Americans support to go and kick some terrorist ***. The young soldiers that are there signed up to defend and fight for our nation. I am forever indebted to them for that. All reports that I have seen, show that the men and women fighting for our country overwhelmingly support George Bush.
I agree that there are some (which is too many) politicians that are only looking out for themselves. But, I truly believe that the majority are trying to do what is right for our country. Now, every person you talk to has a different idea of what is "right". So it only makes sense that it will take time and effort to come to any consensus. I believe that the "people" have spoken in this election, and we support W's convictions.
Hale to the Chief.

Sorry for the rant.....

Joe_Black

11/03/2004, 11:16 AM

Good post V-twin!

MrCrowley

11/03/2004, 11:46 AM

I was going to abstain from a comment, but dont want any delusions of grandeur for my nemesis.

No he doesnt have our interest at heart. He is involved in some glorious Crusade waged in his own religious zealout head about what is right and wrong. He is the biggest brainwashed wanna be yankee cowboy ive ever seen.

Yes, the economy was starting to decline. He has not done a single solitary thing to fix it. He wont now that he is reelected, either. If history record holds true. No, jobs wont be miraculously created, either. He is doing what he does best. Looking dumb and hangin out in Crawford, TX ( near Whacko, TX) like he did for weeks and weeks the first 3 1/2 years while Greenspan figures it out.

Jobs are going overseas why? Because big business money men like himself benefit from this. Its called the Bubba system. Why do you think Halliburton got a contract in Iraq? Hmmm.... I havent seen one Halliburton employee beheaded. Why? You dont let your logistics get compromised. Where did I learn that? Fort Bragg. If only our military leaders could learn this from their history ala Russian Winter to the Germans circa WW2 and several other times in history. The bubbas dont want to lose profits.

Yes, we were devastated in NY, but if I went to the ghetto tomorrow and started waving a gun around telling lowlifes to do what I want, and I want a cut of their business, how long would it take for me to get whacked at home asleep at night. Tip- dont go to war with people who dont care if they live or die, or if their loved ones live or die.

Yes the Bush family is rich thats why Yankee boys moved to TX in the first place. Thats what granpappy wanted for them. Through several corrupt attemps in companies handed down by "daddy" ala Harken Energy anyone? Sure costs the taxpayers. he finally did something at all in life after dodging the draft via a former Lt. Governor of TX " a family Bush friend asking me to let little georgie porgie in the air guard so he can fly like his pappy" Then deserting, then moving to Alabama and coking around on some politicians campaign. Then proceeded to be a drunkard for 40 years before being " saved" hallelujah! You want a man like this to send your loved ones to spill their guts in the desert? If its not good enough for him. Id like to see the Bush girls over there right now if thats the case. If you want to know more about some of these politicians in TX, just ask. I did work for them for a while, you know.

What state was Enron based out of?

Who was Governor and had political buddies all over Austin in the years up to their bankruptcy?

Who tried to hide it in the Blackout a few years back while state regulators did nothing? Who was regulating the regulators?

Hail to the Theif.

Someone please dont rant on Kerry. I only liked him a little more than Bush.

Dont keep blowing sunshine up my tailpipe about Bush- I just got started.

The people didn't speak. 50% said no....

The next Bush rant will warrant a bunch of poop on his entire cabinet with the exception of Colin Powell who I do respect somewhat.

Mr. I-MAN

11/03/2004, 12:47 PM

Awww Lets get a charity started to raise money for poor hillbilly Mr. Crowley so he can get on the road to recovery from a debilitating illness called "Income Envy"

Foot note

Big business sends business oversea's because they will to work
for a lower wage and still have pride in their work.

Adn most manufacture and Tech jobs are lost to increases in technology in which machine and computers are taking over those jobs not out sourceing. Finally maybe its time for people to strive harder to get a higher education and not settle for factory or union labor jobs.

I had nothing handed to me in life nor do I blame anyone for my short comings.

Buck up Stop whining!

I am finished

BaM*BaM

11/03/2004, 01:03 PM

No humor intended

http://www.users.qwest.net/~pempem/frodo_has_failed.jpg

FRODO has indeed failed.

I only hope that the floods of body bags that are about to descend upon the World, contain only the sons and daughters of these Republican Jesus Nazis, that brought this administration of the damned, to its Power in the first place.

I will save my compassion for it's victims.

MrCrowley

11/03/2004, 01:04 PM

Hey Hummer boy, whats wrong, your stablemate not able to take criticism?

If you cant come up with anything but personal attacks buddy, piss off. This is an enlightened area- all I see is your spark fizzling.

Go read a book- you might learn something.

MrCrowley

11/03/2004, 01:23 PM

Hot off the press as of 3:30 pm Nov. 3rd

Like all the rest of these good ol' boys, Mr Bush is a Fraud, Fraud, Fraud!!!!!!

Is this how you well to do boys who earn every penny make money? "Not I", said Curious George.

I sorry Mr. Yankeeman, deys is gonna go to da jail wif de other edumucated folk.

Business - AP

Five Execs Convicted in Enron Barge Case

16 minutes ago Business - AP

By KRISTEN HAYS, Associated Press Writer

HOUSTON - A jury convicted four former Merrill Lynch & Co. executives and a former midlevel Enron Corp. finance executive of conspiracy and fraud Wednesday for helping push through a sham deal to pad the energy company's earnings.

The deal involved a bogus sale of interest in power plants mounted on barges to the brokerage at the end of 1999 so the company could appear to have met earnings targets.

A sixth defendant, a former in-house Enron accountant, was acquitted. Sheila Kahanek testified she consistently opposed a verbal promise that the government contended made the deal a loan — that Enron would resell or buy back Merrill's interest within six months.

Those convicted of conspiracy and two counts of wire fraud were: Daniel Bayly, Merrill's former head of investment banking; James A. Brown, former head of Merrill's asset lease and finance group; William Fuhs, a vice president who reported to Brown; Robert S. Furst, a former manager of Merrill's relationship with Enron; and Dan O. Boyle, a former Enron finance executive.

The verdict came after 21 hours of deliberations that began at the close of six weeks of testimony.

The barge deal isn't among the numerous alleged financial machinations that pushed one-time Wall Street darling Enron into bankruptcy in December 2001, as a web of accounting maneuvers to prop up its books unraveled.

But the government contends the barge deal was an example of many illegal accounting schemes Enron used to pump up its appearance of financial success.

The barge case marked the first time Wall Street bankers were charged with active participation in a criminal Enron scheme.

Witnesses said the defendants — and others not charged — agreed to participate as a favor in hopes of gaining more business from Enron, then a lucrative client courted by banking titans.

Merrill avoided prosecution last year by acknowledging that some employees may have broken the law, cooperating with investigators and implementing reforms to prohibit dubious year-end deals. In March 2003, Merrill paid the SEC $80 million to settle civil allegations that involved the barge deal without admitting or denying wrongdoing.

V-Twin hiCROSS

11/03/2004, 01:25 PM

Mr. Crowley,
It sounds to me like you are a victim of your defense. All that you have is personal attacks on my President.

Since you're such a brain child, let's hear all about how you would "fix" this great country of ours.

Tell me how you are going to bring the people together.
Tell me how you are going to take care of the economy.
Tell me what you would have done about the terroist attack. Would you have sat down next to the P*ssy French wimps and waited for the United Nations.

Go on, tell us all of your grand ideas...................

Mr. I-MAN

11/03/2004, 01:28 PM

I was just trying help you out, sorry that you took offense.

I read a lot books in getting my MBA, real estate license, all my State insurance licenses, pilots license, yep also read some books in OCS and once again did I say what side I was for No. I think what I was trying to get across was save the Sob Story for Oprah.

Now if you want to talk about VX mods and cool things about the VX or about favorite off road spots I 'm all ears.

Hell if you need help finding better employment I'm also here.

I apologize that I have low threshold for whining and people playing blame game.

MrCrowley

11/03/2004, 01:46 PM

I might if I have time later tonight. One thing you said stands out. French wimps.

Did you know France lost 3.5 million young men in WW1 fighting for their freedom? Have we ever come close to losing that many? No. If we add up ALL our casualties ever, will we reach it then? No

Did you know that France has been our ally for over 200 years?

Did you know that right now as you bring your mental knife to the gunfight, France is in and around Japan having a joint naval- marine exercise along with the US, British, Aussies, and Japanese to practice naval operations including the scenario of intercepting WMD on a ship destined for a terrorist location?

I dont know about other "Americans" but dont want to lose an ally like that. Plus, they are the 3rd most powerful nation on earth as we speak.

When I hear the term freedom fries I remember a whole generation of people like me dying for their "freedom". Ill stop here.

Take your Freedom Fries and sell them to the Ayatollah that sent you. You are obviously trying to divide and conquer two great nations like Mr. Bush is in the process of doing.

Oh yeah, aculler toi. Now I hope your pea brain can look that up in a French -English dictionary, although it may not be in there- I dont know, as I didnt need one to say it.

MrCrowley

11/03/2004, 01:58 PM

You know you arent helping. You are being a smart-*****. You had to directly attack on a post that had none until you arrived in it. Heres a mod. Its a handy rag for wiping that- piss off.
Take your freedom fry buddy with you. Obviously my graduating from a military academy and working for 16 years cant compete with an almighty officuh. Maybe you too know that if your support troops are getting compromised in Iraq then something else isnt right. Did they teach you guys that in OCS, or just how to brownnose. Did you get tired of getting lost in the woods? I sure did. A 2nd louie everytime. Maybe if you tell me what logistics you handled as an officuh, Ill tell you what I did to serve my country and how I got screwed doing it. Now I dont want the same to happen to others when they return home. Now let your little minds rest. Maybe Ill play later. I am tired of kissing MBA a%% working on getting hired by NASA in December, and the space shuttle back in the air. Oh yeah it was delayed again until May for now. I think tonight I am going to bed reading some norse mythology for a change tonight. Not too bad for a grunt with a bad attitude, is it?

SPAZZ

11/03/2004, 02:05 PM

this country is in no better shape better shape and is actually in worse shape because of Bush. He has tried to seem as though he passes good ideas, but cuts all possibilities for those to be possible.
All poor people and minorities that voted for Bush just wasted a vote...all Bush cares about is his pocket and his Middle Eastern Butt Buddies.

Mr. I-MAN

11/03/2004, 02:07 PM

3.5 years active before OCS.

Come again?

MrCrowley

11/03/2004, 02:08 PM

Thanks Spazz. Why are you on the computer when you could be with the new wifey? :mbrasd:

V-Twin hiCROSS

11/03/2004, 02:10 PM

Spazz,
Please back up your comments.
How is the country in worse shape? If you're speaking of the economy, please read my first post.
The only poor folks or minorities that wasted a vote are those that were hoping for hand-outs.
Please clarify??? It sounds like un-warranted liberal jiberish.

MrCrowley

11/03/2004, 02:11 PM

What really scares me is now Bush is in office, we have a Republican House, and Republican Senate. Worried yet?

The chapter just opened for Bush to do whatever he wants....

t2p

11/03/2004, 02:13 PM

VTwin:
.
I also will defend the pres ......
.
Tax reform ...... 'No Child Left Behind' ........ creation of Homeland Security dept ..... prescription drug benefit for seniors ...... the 'topple' of the Taliban/Liberation of Afghanistan ....... 'topple' of Hussein/Liberation of Iraq .......
.
Sure .... there are issues with these accomplishments ...... and other problems ....... but I feel this pres is commited to increase and enhance our well being ......
.

MIDN USNA

11/03/2004, 02:19 PM

Kudos to John McCain....USNA'47 anchorman

SlowPro48

11/03/2004, 02:28 PM

Originally posted by MrCrowley
.....Yes, the economy was starting to decline. He has not done a single solitary thing to fix it.

What the hell are you talking about?!?! Of course he did something about it - he started a war didn't he? Any economist will tell you war really jump starts a sluggish economy. I can't beleive you're busting on the man's economic plan like that!

Yes the Bush family is rich thats why Yankee boys moved to TX in the first place. Thats what granpappy wanted for them. Through several corrupt attemps in companies handed down by "daddy" ala Harken Energy anyone? Sure costs the taxpayers.

Well - if you'll notice - there haven't been very many poor candidates for President or Vice President recently. I guess you're calling into question how he and his family came by the money but I don't see how it's any less noble than, for example, getting an allowance from your mega-rich wife or winning a 23 million dollar settlement against a doctor (who most likely didn't do anything wrong) by "channelling" voices of dead babies to the jury. Sure costs us when it's time to buy health insurance.

Then proceeded to be a drunkard for 40 years before being " saved" hallelujah!

Actually this is one of the few things I admire about the current prez. If you come from a family that has had to deal with/is having to deal with alcohol problems, even if you don't like his politics you can at least respect the man for taking control of his life and rising to the position he's in.

If you want to know more about some of these politicians in TX, just ask. I did work for them for a while, you know.

So give it up already you big tease!

;Dy;

t2p

11/03/2004, 02:30 PM

MrCrow .......
.
yes - that can be cause for concern ..........
.
but I'm hoping for the best.
.
'Things are not that great right now - in many areas. We just recently came out of a recession and this country was attacked (in a way it has never been attacked).
.
For the prev 20 years, (basically) no one did anything about terrorism. So, 'inaction' no longer appeared to be a viable option. The UN was basically useless. Bush did something.
.
Huge mistake - or the correct move ? I don't think anyone at this point can provide this assessment. We do know that 20 years of doing nothing was ineffective.
.
I don't fault the 'pre-emptive' strategy. I do fault the planning that was used ..... especially most recently in Iraq .... decisions made by Rumsfeld and Wolfowitz. Unfortunately, it appears Colin Powell was very underutilized.
.

SlowPro48

11/03/2004, 02:34 PM

Originally posted by BaM*BaM
No humor intended

http://www.users.qwest.net/~pempem/frodo_has_failed.jpg

FRODO has indeed failed.

Hey man - this pic might be a fake. If it were the real Ring wouldn't he be invisible? Or is Sauron visible even when he's wearing it?

t2p

11/03/2004, 02:35 PM

Oh no . we don't want any poor or even moderate Presidents .....
.
look how embarrassing it was when the Clintons took just about everything they could get their hands on when they vacated .......
.
speaking of the economy and wars .... despite all the programs ... moves ....... etc ....... by FDR, many feel it was the war that lifted the US economy .......... way back when ........

Jonnie

11/03/2004, 02:46 PM

Masssachusetts voted for Kerry to get him out of the state, only reason....

Jon

Dallas4u

11/03/2004, 02:53 PM

Anyone see this (posted on CNN a little while ago):

(CNN) -- The Arabic-language network Al-Jazeera released a full transcript Monday of the most recent videotape from Osama bin Laden in which the head of al Qaeda said his group's goal is to force America into bankruptcy.

Al-Jazeera aired portions of the videotape Friday but released the full transcript of the entire tape on its Web site Monday.
"We are continuing this policy in bleeding America to the point of bankruptcy. Allah willing, and nothing is too great for Allah," bin Laden said in the transcript.

He said the mujahedeen fighters did the same thing to the Soviet Union in Afghanistan in the 1980s, "using guerrilla warfare and the war of attrition to fight tyrannical superpowers."
"We, alongside the mujahedeen, bled Russia for 10 years until it went bankrupt and was forced to withdraw in defeat," bin Laden said.

He also said al Qaeda has found it "easy for us to provoke and bait this administration."

"All that we have to do is to send two mujahedeen to the furthest point east to raise a piece of cloth on which is written al Qaeda, in order to make generals race there to cause America to suffer human, economic and political losses without their achieving anything of note other than some benefits for their private corporations," bin Laden said.

Al-Jazeera executives said they decided to post the entire speech because rumors were circulating that the network omitted parts that "had direct threats toward specific states, which was totally untrue."

"We chose the most newsworthy parts of the address and aired them. The rest was used in lower thirds in graphics format," said one official.

U.S. intelligence officials Monday confirmed that the transcript made public Monday by Al-Jazeera was a complete one.
As part of the "bleed-until-bankruptcy plan," bin Laden cited a British estimate that it cost al Qaeda about $500,000 to carry out the attacks of September 11, 2001, an amount that he said paled in comparison with the costs incurred by the United States.
"Every dollar of al Qaeda defeated a million dollars, by the permission of Allah, besides the loss of a huge number of jobs," he said. "As for the economic deficit, it has reached record astronomical numbers estimated to total more than a trillion dollars.

The total U.S. national debt is more than $7 trillion. The U.S. federal deficit was $413 billion in 2004, according to the Treasury Department.

"It is true that this shows that al Qaeda has gained, but on the other hand it shows that the Bush administration has also gained, something that anyone who looks at the size of the contracts acquired by the shady Bush administration-linked mega-corporations, like Halliburton and its kind, will be convinced.
"And it all shows that the real loser is you," he said. "It is the American people and their economy."

As for President Bush's Iraq policy, Bin Laden said, "the darkness of black gold blurred his vision and insight, and he gave priority to private interests over the public interests of America.
"So the war went ahead, the death toll rose, the American economy bled, and Bush became embroiled in the swamps of Iraq that threaten his future," bin Laden said.

U.S. government officials said Friday that the tape appeared to be authentic and recently made. It was the first videotaped message from the al Qaeda leader in nearly three years.

yal^

11/03/2004, 02:56 PM

I think there is one thing you all keep forgetting in heat of recent political turmoils. It's the global picture of U.S.

There is a reason why this country is an envy object of almost everyone else in the world. There is a reason 9/11 happened. There is a reason why none of you actually saw tanks on the streets and your own millitary shooting workers on strike. There is a reason why this country has such strict immigration laws and still can't handle illigal immigration.

Two political parties. Just think about. Have you ever seen a country having fifty different parties, everyone of them pulling their way and every week trying to take down someone from political pedestal. I have. Talk about mess and division...

I've also lived in a country where election and free speech were forbidden. I admit, I didn't vote yesterday - I have no rights yet. But I am amazed more and more every day. Two towers got taken down - half of the country require psychiatric assistance.

Don't make a victim of your president. Who knows, if we had a democrat at the time, maybe he would've reacted the same exact way. This way or another our country would've taken this hit. Every so often something happens - Korea, Vietnam, Desert Storm. It was all peachy and now not everyone can afford to dine out every night. So f***ing what? Suck it up and let the man finish his job. If he had no support, the other guy would've gotten his 270. But he didn't. Let your president finish the job. This country will be what it is in four years, then for sure we'll know if change is needed. But right now follow the other guy's example - don't turn this into a farse. We already learned so much, and much is still to be fixed. It's turning around, but it needs damn time to settle. You don't have to love the guy, but there is no reason to wipe your a** with his name either.

Edit: don't get me wrong, just so it happened my post had fallen under Dalllas'. It wasn't intented that way, but... lets face it, the true enemy is not in our own garden.

Dallas4u

11/03/2004, 03:07 PM

I thought this was kinda funny... just to break the tension here

http://www.vehicross.info/gallery/data/500/35new_map.jpg

tomdietrying

11/03/2004, 03:08 PM

MrCrowley,
Sorry to say, but you speak the truth.

Sometimes the truth hurts.

For America's sake, I really pray Bush does MUCH better job the next time around.

Peace.
Tom

Raque Thomas

11/03/2004, 03:17 PM

Originally posted by MrCrowley

The people didn't speak. 50% said no....

Actually, Mr Bush was the first candidate to win in excess of 50% of the POPULAR vote since 1988 - so it seems to me we're always a country of varying opinions, and I for one think that is a good thing. Osama sounded quite a bit like a Democrat last week on his tape that was released (if it was really him - my money says he's dead), even using several things from recent Kerry speeches. There must be reason that a terroist who killed 3000 innocent Americans wants Bush out of office? Whatever that reason is - it's one more STRONG reason I want Bush in office!

The real point is - the election is over, Bush won. We need to support our President and our country now more than ever with what is going on. A guy gave me his opinion today that he thought W would go down in history as one of the great American Presidents. Now, I'm a Bush fan - but I thought that was pushing it a little, so I asked him why he thought that. He said - think about it, if under Bush we suceed in getting Democratic rule in the Middle East countries, that would be at least as great an accomplishment as getting Russia to abandon communism.......interesting....time will tell.

Dallas4u

11/03/2004, 03:23 PM

Originally posted by Raque Thomas
Osama sounded quite a bit like a Democrat last week on his tape that was released

Wow... that ain't very cool. I see what you're trying to say, but you didn't need to compare the two.

BaM*BaM

11/03/2004, 03:24 PM

The next thing for real world war, will be this biblical, illiterate, paranoid named Ashcroft, to set up some sort of 'Jesus' first acceptance test ('true patriot clearance ID') throughout every meaningful American institution,... with the blessings of the new right wing religious fanatical judges in the Supreme and Federal courts.

The polarity of America's ecomomic and military might against the educated disgust and fear of the rest of whole world, will create tender box after tender box, of world nations forming new alliances against the rogue actions of the hated USA., and it's corporations, who use religion, military force, and corporate leverage to make the world in it's own corrupt sick image.

t2p

11/03/2004, 03:27 PM

too many fail to remember ........ the US was in a recession .... and then sufferred an enormous blow on 9-11 ........
.
how many Presidents have been faced with this type of crisis ?
.

SPAZZ

11/03/2004, 03:36 PM

Bush doesn't outright do evil things..he says he is for all that "no child left behind" bs...then he cuts funding from the schools for it.

He says he is for the Military benifits/pay increase, and VA benifits and care...but then cuts funding for it. So, even if you qualify for these "improvements" THEY ARE ANYTHING BUT A WAY FOR HIM TO BE A MONKEY IN THE LIMELIGHT and get your vote for him to make the country more indebt and ways for him to pass laws and bills that make his investments richer even though he HAS HIS SILVERSPOON SO FAR UP HIS ARSE ALREADY!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!:mad:

MrCrowley

11/03/2004, 03:43 PM

I had not seen the transcript of the Osama thing.

This really scares me as this is what ended the Cold War. The Soviet Union bankrolled themselves into bankruptcy trying to stand up to Ronnie Ray-guns strategy of outspending them until they imploded. Then civil turmoil ensued. Ronald Reagan where are you when we need you. This guy ended a 50 year standoff without a shot fired and came out victorious. Too bad his VP wasnt pro-choice. Wait- I take that back. Quayle keeps popping in my mind today. Ok- somebody else then.

Dallas4u

11/03/2004, 03:52 PM

More interesting info from Yahoo News

White House: Debt Ceiling Must Be Raised
By MARTIN CRUTSINGER, AP Economics Writer

WASHINGTON - The Bush administration announced Wednesday that it will run out of maneuvering room to manage the government's massive borrowing needs in two weeks, putting more pressure on Congress to raise the debt ceiling when it convenes for a special post-election session.

Treasury Department (news - web sites) officials announced that they will be able to conduct a scheduled series of debt auctions next week to raise $51 billion. However, an auction of four-week Treasury bills due to be completed on Nov. 18 will have to be postponed unless Congress acts before then to raise the debt ceiling.

"Due to debt limit constraints, we currently do not have the capacity to settle our four-week bill auction scheduled to settle on Nov. 18," Timothy Bitsberger, acting assistant Treasury secretary for financial markets, said in a statement.

Congress is scheduled to return for a lame-duck session beginning on Nov. 16 to deal with the debt ceiling, an omnibus spending plan for the rest of this budget year and other matters.
The Republican-controlled Congress put off dealing with the debt ceiling before adjourning in October, preferring not to force members to vote on the politically sensitive issue of adding to the national debt before the November elections.

The government hit the current debt ceiling of $7.384 trillion on Oct. 14, forcing Treasury to begin a series of bookkeeping maneuvers to keep financing the government's normal operations without breaching the debt ceiling. But Treasury Secretary John Snow has warned that those special measures would last only until mid-November.

The Treasury Department's actions have included reducing the amount of debt in government trust funds to free up room for further borrowing from the public. The nonpublic debt is then replaced in the trust funds once the debt ceiling is increased along with any lost interest payments.

Republicans have proposed that the debt ceiling be raised by $690 billion to $8.074 trillion, an amount that would get the government through next September, when the 2005 budget year ends.

The need to raise the debt ceiling reflects the record budget deficits of the past two years. The deficit for the 2004 budget year, which ended Sept. 30, was an all-time high of $413 billion, surpassing the old mark, in dollar terms, of $377 billion in 2003.
Democrats blame the surging deficits on Bush's tax cuts, while the administration contends the tax cuts provided critical economic stimulus to help lift the economy out of the 2001 recession.

The administration says the president has a plan to cut the deficit in half by 2009, but critics contend that the real problems will come in later years as retiring baby boomers put unprecedented strains on Social Security (news - web sites) and Medicare.

In its announcement Wednesday, Treasury said it will sell $51 billion in new securities next week including $22 billion in three-year notes on Monday, $15 billion in five-year notes on Tuesday and $14 billion in 10-year bonds on Wednesday.

Raque Thomas

11/03/2004, 03:56 PM

Originally posted by SPAZZ
Bush doesn't outright do evil things..he says he is for all that "no child left behind" bs...then he cuts funding from the schools for it.

He says he is for the Military benifits/pay increase, and VA benifits and care...but then cuts funding for it. So, even if you qualify for these "improvements" THEY ARE ANYTHING BUT A WAY FOR HIM TO BE A MONKEY IN THE LIMELIGHT and get your vote for him to make the country more indebt and ways for him to pass laws and bills that make his investments richer even though he HAS HIS SILVERSPOON SO FAR UP HIS ARSE ALREADY!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!:mad:

Actually, these are "facts" as presented by the Democratic National Party to divide and polarize the American public. Bush did not cut funding to schools or VA benefits, or for nearly anything else for that matter - he did however cut some of the proposed increase. These agencies are all getting more than in the past, just not as much as what they requested; and anyone who knows how government budgets work will tell you - ask for the moon, because it will be cut. Make sure you spend it all by the end of the year - any way you can - because if you have any left over at the end of the year, you get an automatic cut the next year.

I can't continue to listen (read) these rants without responding. It is necessary to think and investigate for yourself what the facts are - the politicians are going to put them in the best light (spin) to present their case. The Democratic Party is particularly bad about fabricating "facts" to polarize the public. I'm not sure why, but it seems that whenever I hear a Democrat talk about politics, it is full of accusations, slander, name calling, and outright anger. The Democrats that I have challenged face-to-face about the reasons that they believe in their party, cannot logically tell me and end up in the ranting and name calling anger state that we are seeing in this thread.

I don't get it, I have a lot of rational reasons for how I believe and how I vote. I try to be as informed as possible about my choices and what I am told. The "why I am" post that was quoted earlier was very to the point and logical about what that person believed and why without ranting - I'd like to hear that same thing from someone with the opposing views, just so I can try to understand where you are coming from. I'm not trying to inflame here - and SPAZZ, I'm not picking on your post, just replying to it. But I would actually like to hear from someone in a rational tone why they voted for Kerry.

MrCrowley

11/03/2004, 04:00 PM

Like Ive said since he was elected. Take my damn taxes you idiot- what the hell will a two hundred measly dollars a year do for me, when we can actually have a balanced budget and be in the positive in a few years. That is before you went and blew our lowest debt in decades. Maybe then we could just pay cash for social security.......... oh wait what am I saying............ not running into debt is unamerican these days...........lets keep financing it then you mook. I wish I could learn from a great master like that of how not to run your household. Just finance your life away- yeah right.

BaM*BaM

11/03/2004, 04:18 PM

again... thoughts on the TAX angle:

People are called 'RICH" because they already have more money than the can use in their normal everyday life. A TAX cut that is designed to ignite a sluggish economy with more consumer spending, is completely wasted on the RICH, which statistically use their TAX breaks for buying wasted second homes, and increasing existing real estate property values. This is the worst of all possibilities to inspire real economic growth. Give TAX breaks to the middle and lower income segments, and you will get a HUGE economic surge throughout all of the economy.

The second thing is that people forget to look at this present Federal deficit, as a Federally funded, economic incentive package. That is in fact, what it really is. And for all of the $7.5 trillion already spent (the greatest debt ever created ) by this current administration, our economy has failed miserably to respond. How does ANYONE pump in $7.5 trillion dollars EXTRA, and ABOVE the budget, into the US economy... and still get NO sustainable economic recovery? (the total US Federal Budget for 2004, was $2.2 Trillion dollars)

I am not sure how you spell "c-o-m-p-l-e-t-e f-a-i-l-u-r-e", but this defines it very well for me.

transio

11/03/2004, 04:30 PM

Originally posted by V-Twin hiCROSS
I believe that the "people" have spoken in this election, and we support W's convictions. Well, about half of us, anyway :)

dutchie

11/03/2004, 05:22 PM

Well first of all, congratulations to all those who voted Bush, it was a clean and honest victory.
My condolences to social and spiritual evolution...:(

Back to the middle ages with ridiculous anti-abortion laws and trampling on our fellow gay friends.... in the name of god....which god? Bush is as much of an insult to christian religion as the terrorist are to islam.

The USA has once again proven to the world why England had done great job in sending its religious nuts somewhere else....it's obvious why...you just can't kill that DNA line :eek:

Your friendly minister,

Dutchie

redline

11/03/2004, 05:33 PM

The Arab community in Dearborn,Mi "where I work" wanted Kerry, that should say something right there. I voted Bush.:D

BaM*BaM

11/03/2004, 06:07 PM

Redline, in real life don't you work for Vice Pres. Cheney, personally, and act as the Intelligence liason official for the Cheney Select Intelligence Bureau, on how to determine terrorist risk assessment potential for the USA?
You sure convince me!

redline

11/03/2004, 06:13 PM

BAMBAM>In real life you have your freedom/If you dont like it in the USA - move to Iraq.

BaM*BaM

11/03/2004, 06:24 PM

Redline, I am free today, because of the great American leaders of our past that could distinguish between a real American enemy, and a corporate business opportunity.

Today there are many, many Ten's of Thousands of real people, who lived full and meaningful lives, who are now dead because our incompetent leader couldn't tell the difference. And these dead, are but the tip of the iceberg of what is to come.

The rest of the World relies on each country's government to make this distinction correctly 100%, 7 days a week, all of the time. And any country who does create false reasons to create REAL war upon millions for selfish religious, business and expansionist reasons,... is a rogue, and illegal nation, who the world will eventually unite against.

The USA consumes over 2/3 s of ALL of the world's resources. Now that we have arrogantly laughed down upon the rest of the whole world, while we go after another full time, all night, gas station for our thirsty country,... We have LOST FOREVER, the great moral high ground, that my family, and probably ALL of your families, have paid for, time after time, again and again, generation after generation, to selflessly make the WHOLE the world a better place for everyone,... not just for a few fat-assed, paranoid, re-born, wealthy American consumers.

Heraclid

11/03/2004, 06:58 PM

:rollo:

I pity some of you. It must be truly terrible to have so much hate pent up inside and to have to carry that around with you every day, blaming everyone else for your problems and therefore drastically increasing the odds that they will never be fixed.

How silly a liberal looks to everyone else is directly proportional to how impressed he/she is with his/her self, and everything they say about their opposition is surely true about them.

BaM*BaM

11/03/2004, 07:08 PM

a few fat-assed, paranoid, re-born, wealthy American consumers. must have hit a nerve on somone! Eh, Bubba? Y'ALL?

WyrreJ

11/03/2004, 07:09 PM

Originally posted by redline
The Arab community in Dearborn,Mi "where I work" wanted Kerry, that should say something right there. I voted Bush.:D Yeah, when you have friends and relatives being killed and maimed by your own government, a government that occasionally seems to be casting a rabid eye in your own direction, then why wouldn't you be a strong supporter and rally behind the cause?

You let us know when you are ready to cast a vote for your cousins to get cholera and a few limbs blown off.

Originally posted by Heraclid
How silly a liberal looks to everyone else is directly proportional to how impressed he/she is with his/her self, and everything they say about their opposition is surely true about them.That statement is fortified with more than ten times your daily allowance of irony.

Raque Thomas

11/03/2004, 07:16 PM

Originally posted by dutchie

Back to the middle ages with ridiculous anti-abortion laws and trampling on our fellow gay friends.... in the name of god....which god? Bush is as much of an insult to christian religion as the terrorist are to islam.

The USA has once again proven to the world why England had done great job in sending its religious nuts somewhere else....it's obvious why...you just can't kill that DNA line :eek:

Your friendly minister,

Dutchie

I don't understand all the posts here talking about religious zealots. I'm a Republican, but I don't regularly attend church and don't preach on the street corner - I do believe in God, but I'm far from a zealot. I don't see Bush that way either - sure he goes to church every Sunday - but guess what this IS a free country, that's what we're all about, he is free to do as he wants in that regard, and I am free to do as I want.

Trampling on gays? I must have missed that also. I'm not gay, but I don't care if someone is gay - just don't force it on me. That is one of the fundamental differences in Republicans and Democrats - Republicans are conservative, but believe that you are free to believe as you wish. Democrats aren't happy unless you believe as they do, and they want their beliefs to be the only acceptable ones.

Heraclid

11/03/2004, 07:26 PM

That statement is fortified with more than ten times your daily allowance of irony.

See what I mean? Someone thinks they're being mighty clever.

must have hit a nerve on somone! Eh, Bubba? Y'ALL?

Yeah, I guess I did with "somone". Probably that "Jewdism" person. :-)

Raque Thomas, good points.

Look folks, whether you're conservative or liberal, we may as well find a good stiff breeze, face into it, and take a leak for all the good any of this is going to do. Wanna talk about VX's again?

WyrreJ

11/03/2004, 08:11 PM

Originally posted by Raque Thomas
I do believe in God, but I'm far from a zealot. I don't see Bush that way either - sure he goes to church every Sunday - but guess what this IS a free country, that's what we're all about, he is free to do as he wants in that regard, and I am free to do as I want. I don't see how that in any way contradicts an accusation of zealotry on Bush's part. I mean we are free to be zealots in this country too.

I disagree that Bush is free to do as he wants in that regard either. Free to go to church, yes, free to pray to his God for guidance, sure, free to justify his actions in the name of the USA on biblical scripture? Not at all. How far he has gone in that direction I can't say, but it would certainly be an inappropriate line to cross.

Trampling on gays? I must have missed that also. I'm not gay, but I don't care if someone is gay - just don't force it on me. That is one of the fundamental differences in Republicans and Democrats - Republicans are conservative, but believe that you are free to believe as you wish. Democrats aren't happy unless you believe as they do, and they want their beliefs to be the only acceptable ones.[/B]Either you have a different definition of "force it on" than I do or you haven't noticed what's been said in the whole gay marriage debate. No queers are going around gving republicans dry-humps and then proposing marriage, they just want to do their own thing, on their own, just like anyone else but that is certainly not what a majority of republican ticket voters were ready to accept in at least 11 states yesterday.

WyrreJ

11/03/2004, 08:46 PM

See what I mean? Someone thinks they're being mighty clever.

When you posted a, "I'm rubber and you're glue, whatever you say bounces off of me and sticks to you," message, someone had to try to make up for the lack of cleverness.

If you are young and not liberal you got no heart.
If you are old and not conservative you got no brains.

The quote is, "Any man who is under 30, and is not a liberal, has no heart; and any man who is over 30, and is not a conservative, has no brains." and is usually falsely attributed to Winston Churchill.

A good thing to remember about the quote is that neither of the modern republican nor democratic parties bears much, if any, resmblance to the conservative and liberal being referred to. Both parties are about serving their corporate masters and manipulating their constituents, in other words both parties are about fascism.

Lest you think I've gone overboard with that statement, listen to what Benito Mussolini, the father of fascism, had to say about the ideology and see just how closely it parallels modern American, "Fascism should more appropriately be called Corporatism because it is a merger of state and corporate power."

Heraclid

11/03/2004, 08:48 PM

Bush is no zealot, but he doesn't waver in his beliefs and will not apologize for them, as no one with confidence in their convictions would. Some people just hate that, but I respect that.

Now THIS is the behavior of a zealot...

http://www.local6.com/news/3887764/detail.html

Dallas4u

11/03/2004, 09:09 PM

The Constitution states, "separation between Religion and Government" (stated by James Madison). I believe in that myself.

SlowPro48

11/03/2004, 11:06 PM

Originally posted by Dallas4u
The Constitution states, "separation between Religion and Government" (stated by James Madison). I believe in that myself.

How interesting. Please tell me which article or amendment of the Constitution that statement came from. I'd like to read that myself!

Thanks

SGT.BATGUANO

11/03/2004, 11:43 PM

Hey,

Lighten up on dubya, he's learning from his mistakes. Look at the condition of Texas when he left the Gov's office..........

State practically bankrupt, one of the lowest educational levels in the country.........................

uh, never mind.:p

MachineVX

11/04/2004, 03:17 AM

I thought this was an interesting statement concerning the election --

"I'll tell you, being a 16 year-old gay kid in Michigan just got a hell of a lot worse. When I woke up this morning and saw the anti gay marriage proposal had passed, I was shocked. I realized the situation I'm faced with everyday in school - the American people have just shown my classmates that it's perfectly fine to discriminate. A direct quote from a 'friend' at school today: 'It's so cool that all these states just told all the faggots to eat **** and get the hell out...' Because of the above events, I am at a crossroads ... I'm the youngest card-carrying Republican in the county, and am constantly asked to get others involved for Bush/Cheney. Herein lies a problem, I can't bring myself to do that. Bush totally lost all my support (I know I can't vote - but I make a hell of a campaigner) when he supported the amendment to ban gay marriages, and I felt bad that in straying from Bush, I was abandoning Cheney, who I have an amazing amount of respect for. Many would say go Democrat... but I can't do that (that signals the absence of a spine up here), and in the next year, I'm considering dropping my membership to the party. Especially this year, despite how undercut and violated I feel as a gay person, I couldn't be happier that I am. I've got a stronger will because of it, and will lead my life just as strongly."

PBR

11/04/2004, 04:34 AM

Bam, Bam, you are a hypocrite, you own two gas guzzlers.

MrCrowley

11/04/2004, 06:28 AM

You know what drives me crazy is living here in Alabama with all the holy roller fruit loops who have this stupid ten commandments crap that they wanted to put in a courthouse. They were told no, the judge did it anyways, he got canned, and they are actually still trying to do it while the munument is crapping around the bible belt on tour on the back of a truck and they are trying to get his job back. Please fruit loops- dont take your kids to see this piece of crap- take them to a museum or play or library or state park or zoo or..........whatever. What do they not understand about separation of church and state. Its black and white to me. I even tried a microscope to look. I dont see any grey.... I also think that any mention of religion and faith amongst candidates should be off limits. I eat fruit loops for breakfast- they stay crunchy in milk!

SlowPro48

11/04/2004, 07:13 AM

Is it the Ten Commandments you have a problem with or is it the lack of separation between church and state? Or both?

jimbo

11/04/2004, 07:29 AM

Just my two cents, please don't take any of this the wrong way. :) I am an east coast progressive who is humbled (honestly) by the power of the red states.

It seems to me a battle is going on worldwide between two competing philosophies. At the root is the question as to whether the personal freedoms and secular beliefs that we have gained in the past hundred years are a good thing or the cause of unhappiness and moral decay.

I think the culture of the individual coming first and the absolute separation of religion and government (even given the problems it has created) is the best thing that has ever happened to the world. I don't want to see anything take it away.

I know most of you will probably disagree with me, but very dangerous men (in my opinion) are controlling our country right now. The connection between the philosophy of Leo Strauss and many of the men in the Bush administration is easily verifiable. I find Strauss's philosophy scary and fear a future decade of perpetual war. (Strauss felt this warfare and struggle would be good for the morals of the common man and keep the Philosopher Kings, i.e. neocons, in power)

Research it for yourself if you like.

Coincidentally this philosophy and its disdaine for modern secular freedom and liberalism (i.e. modern America and Europe) is very similar to the philosophy at the root of the Islamic Fundalmentalist movement.

Perhaps it is a common idea whose time has come. (the BBC just produced a documentary about these belief systems called "The Power of Nightmares")

Many in our government including John McCaine disagree with these men (the neocons). It seems quite likely that the president's father disagrees with some of the radicals his son has placed in powerful positions as well, though he will never make any public statements that might interfere with his son's presidency.

Please don't flame me, I'm only trying to shed a little light. ;dp;

If you have any interest in the philosophy that we have just given our leaders (mostly unknowingly) a mandate to pursue in force see these links:

http://www.nytimes.com/imagepages/2003/05/04/weekinreview/030504_STRAUSSIANS_GRAPHIC.html
http://www.larouchepub.com/other/2003/3011profile_strauss.html
http://www.acutor.be/silt/index.php?id=572
http://www.acutor.be/silt/index.php?id=575
http://home.earthlink.net/~karljahn/Strauss.htm

johnnyapollo

11/04/2004, 07:42 AM

Interesting.

-- John

BaM*BaM

11/04/2004, 07:54 AM

Well Said, Jimbo.

Raque Thomas

11/04/2004, 08:24 AM

Originally posted by jimbo
Just my two cents, please don't take any of this the wrong way. :) I am an east coast progressive who is humbled (honestly) by the power of the red states.

It seems to me a battle is going on worldwide between two competing philosophies. At the root is the question as to whether the personal freedoms and secular beliefs that we have gained in the past hundred years are a good thing or the cause of unhappiness and moral decay.

I think the culture of the individual coming first and the absolute separation of religion and government (even given the problems it has created) is the best thing that has ever happened to the world. I don't want to see anything take it away.

I know most of you will probably disagree with me, but very dangerous men (in my opinion) are controlling our country right now. The connection between the philosophy of Leo Strauss and many of the men in the Bush administration is easily verifiable. I find Strauss's philosophy scary and fear a future decade of perpetual war. (Strauss felt this warfare and struggle would be good for the morals of the common man and keep the Philosopher Kings, i.e. neocons, in power)

Research it for yourself if you like.

Coincidentally this philosophy and its disdaine for modern secular freedom and liberalism (i.e. modern America and Europe) is very similar to the philosophy at the root of the Islamic Fundalmentalist movement.

Perhaps it is a common idea whose time has come. (the BBC just produced a documentary about these belief systems called "The Power of Nightmares")

Many in our government including John McCaine disagree with these men (the neocons). It seems quite likely that the president's father disagrees with some of the radicals his son has placed in powerful positions as well, though he will never make any public statements that might interfere with his son's presidency.

Please don't flame me, I'm only trying to shed a little light. ;dp;

If you have any interest in the philosophy that we have just given our leaders (mostly unknowingly) a mandate to pursue in force see these links:

http://www.nytimes.com/imagepages/2003/05/04/weekinreview/030504_STRAUSSIANS_GRAPHIC.html
http://www.larouchepub.com/other/2003/3011profile_strauss.html
http://www.acutor.be/silt/index.php?id=572
http://www.acutor.be/silt/index.php?id=575
http://home.earthlink.net/~karljahn/Strauss.htm

All very interesting articles, written by liberal journalists and shaped to prove whatever point they are trying to prove. As far as the "made up or imagined" threat of terrorists mentioned - WTF is that all about?? Did anyone forget about 9-11, did someone forget about the threats continuing to made on the American public by these people, do they not watch their own liberal newscasts showing the suicide bombers??? I don't get it!!

I guess a lot of people think if we leave them (the terrorists) alone, they won't bother us - we weren't bothering anyone on 9-11 that I recall. These people are called terrorists because terror is what they use to further their cause - they will not go away if we quit going after them; in fact, just the opposite will happen. We are the object of their disdain - like it or not. They do not like what we represent, what we have accomplished, or the wealth that we have. The only way to win a battle is to fight. There is a battle right now for our way of life - we must fight to preserve it, or cower in a corner and watch it slip away.

One of the articles mentioned in the above post talked about us going on a empire building crusade in the Middle East - that is not the purpose of our mission there - the only way to stabilize that region of the country is to remove the totalitarian leaders who harbor, train, and fund our enemies, while oppressing and further enflaming their people. That area of the world has been rife with warfare and battles since as far back as history goes. I don't believe in getting involved in a coutry's internal affairs as long as they don't have a direct affect on us. But damn it 9-11 changed that little comfortable feeling that what goes on accross the ocean doesn't have any effect on me. Never in the history has peace been negotiated without first there being a resounding victory. Some people get confused on this issue, and think that we can negotiate a truce - look at history, that has NEVER happenned without there first being either a victory by one side, or a long battle that finally wore down the opponent to the point of surrender. We were attacked unprovoked, we had to go to Afganistan to get them. We had to take out their friend and ally Saddam, I think we'll have to take out Iran as well. The only way we can have peace and stability here is to have peace and stability there - the world is an increasingly small place.

Then there's the misleading, lying Republican politicians - did we forget about - I did not have sexual relations with tht woman - Monica Lewinski?? Of course the religion thing comes up again as well - I gues we forget also about William Jefferson Clinton going to church and mentioning his belief in God on numerous occassions - of course a lot of those times were after he was caught lying, and maybe he was trying to redeem himself??

BaM*BaM

11/04/2004, 08:47 AM

Where do these dumb hillbilly, Carl Rowe attack dogs come from, who can do nothing but comment about how much their own butts stink.

Try coming up with something like how your own more evangelical moments from a vision of your god really will save the world!

Or how there really was great intelligence in spending $7.5 dollars above the federal budget, and still have a dead economy... Or that the WMD's really Are there in Iraq , but until we all take vows in christianity, god will not let us see them!

This attack dog mentaltity, that has no meaning. Is this all that these republican fools can create. Republicans, please stop being idiot response attack dog . Try using big words and explain how all of the lost USA allies are going to return to the USA's side, because jesus told them to.

Dallas4u

11/04/2004, 08:55 AM

Originally posted by SlowPro48
How interesting. Please tell me which article or amendment of the Constitution that statement came from. I'd like to read that myself!

Thanks

You're correct... this was actually taken from a letter in the 1800's from Madison. It is primarily what is used to interpret the "wall of separation" between church and state in the Constitution and Bill of Rights. Here is more info for anyone interested in reading up on it:

http://members.tripod.com/~candst/tnppage/tnpidx.htm

http://members.tripod.com/~candst/tnppage/view1.htm

http://members.tripod.com/~candst/tnppage/view2.htm

http://members.tripod.com/~candst/tnppage/basicidx.htm

http://members.tripod.com/~candst/tnppage/argidx.htm

http://members.tripod.com/~candst/tnppage/arg1.htm

http://members.tripod.com/~candst/tnppage/arg2.htm

http://members.tripod.com/~candst/tnppage/danbury.htm

http://members.tripod.com/~candst/tnppage/levi.htm

http://www.fac.org/rel_liberty/establishment/index.aspx

http://members.tripod.com/~candst/madnational.htm

http://members.tripod.com/~candst/detach.htm

J La

11/04/2004, 09:09 AM

Originally posted by Raque Thomas
Then there's the misleading, lying Republican politicians - did we forget about -

Is this a Freudian slip?? ;)

Raque Thomas

11/04/2004, 09:10 AM

Originally posted by BaM*BaM
Where do these dumb hillbilly, Carl Rowe attack dogs come from, who can do nothing but comment about how much their own buttes stink.

Contrary to popular belief, hillbilly's come from Idaho, not Kentucky, and I normally don't talk about it when my butt stinks - I do something about it - we have finally graduated to toilet paper from the Sears catalog, and have actually installed indoor plumbing.

Try coming up with something like how your own more evangelical moments from a vision of your god really will save the world!

If you read one of my earlier posts you would have noticed that I don't consider myself religious, and I don't attend church regularly. I don't expect God to save me - that's something you have to do for yourself. The Government's job isn't to take care of you and make sure that you have everything your heart desires.

Or how there really was great intelligence in spending $7.5 dollars above the federal budget, and still have a dead economy... Or that the WMD's really Are there in Iraq , but until we all take vows in christianity, god will not let us see them!

Can't comment on the deficit other than to say that yes, war is expensive. As to the comment of the "dead economy" I'd have to challenge you on that one, as the econonomy is definately improving - maybe you ahve a Democrat govenor in Idaho? WMD's, I'm really tired of that argument. We had intellegence that indicated the weapons, or the capability to produce them was there, everyone agreed to go in - now that they have not materialized, Democrats want to say they had no part in the decision to go in. I don't care if we never find them, I don't care if they were never there - we still did the right thing by going in and taking out a self confirmed enemy of our county who ruled with tyranny and harboured our enemies. Of course at the end we've got to throw in the God thing again. Where does this come from? All Republicans are not holy rollers, just like all Democrats are not dumbasses.

This attack dog mentaltity, that has no meaning. Is this all that these republican fools can create. Republicans, please stop being idiot response attack dog . Try using big words and explain how all of the lost USA allies are going to return to the USA's side, because jesus told them to.

This is a very ironic statement - look back at the posts i nthis thread - which side has the attack dog mentality, with words that have no meaning? Until this post, I was attempting to present my case in a rational manner, and not attack anyone who does not believe as I do. When you are looking back at those posts, look at the theme of who thinks everyone should believe as they do, or they are dumbasses. I am free to believe as I do, and you are free to believe as you do. I am free to try to convince you to see it my way, and you are free to try to convince me of your viewpoint - that's what this country is all about. The attack mentality and name calling is not a neccessary or welcome part of that process - and I invite you to examine the origins of that mentality (Politics - Democrats). I for one, am finished with this thread, and wish you well.

BaM*BaM

11/04/2004, 09:27 AM

http://www.users.qwest.net/~pempem/crowe.gif

jimbo

11/04/2004, 09:48 AM

Raque Thomas - I respect your opinion and you are most certainly right about all of the articles having bias. This does not mean that they are false or do not contain serious seeds for thought.

You will certainly laugh your #ss off at me (go ahead, laughter is good), but the media is not "liberal".

We see almost nothing in this country, even on PBS, that the big corporations who own (or fund in the case of PBS) our media outlets feel it is appropriate to show us. Large corporations are inherently conservative.

One really must sample the media from around the world to get a broad view of what really is going on. I'm sure you would think this reporting is REALLY liberal but you would see video of the results of American foreign policy that really can open your eyes.

The people in the towers were murdered innocents. They must be avenged.

Past American foreign policy itself is far from innocent. It wasn't about nothing. They didn't attack Sweden or Switzerland. The murderers had (mis-guided) reasons.

Thanks for taking the time to check out my posts.

jimbo

11/04/2004, 10:01 AM

It is naive to think our current adventures in the middle east are not about having a permanant and dominating presence there for years to come.

The myth about bringing freedom and stability to everyone is not neccesarily true (and not particularly important to our foreign policy) It's like the WMD thing, it will fade away eventually.

The real reasons:

We now have four big bases in Iraq and at least two in Afganistan that we didn't have before.

Mark my words those bases, and the threat of power they extend, will still be there 10 years from now.

That's the modern version of empire.

As Seinfeld said: Not that there's anything wrong with that.

P.S.

I am free to believe as I do, and you are free to believe as you do. I am free to try to convince you to see it my way, and you are free to try to convince me of your viewpoint - that's what this country is all about. The attack mentality and name calling is not a neccessary or welcome part of that process
I totally agree with what this poster said. If we are going to discuss things political we should try to leave the emotion out of it.

t2p

11/04/2004, 10:18 AM

so .....
.
Would you rather 'Hussein and company' be in charge of a Middle East 'Empire' ......... ???
.
That is what we were basically looking at.
.
Now that is something to look forward to .........

sure, the world would be much better off with a madman in total control of the entire Middle East ......
.
regardless, I appreciate your opinions and views because they force me to look outside of my (traditional) myopic view ........
.
heck, there are still many people out there that continue to think that we made a mistake by dropping the bombs on Japan .....

BaM*BaM

11/04/2004, 10:25 AM

That was not even a possiblility
The UN sanctions were working 100%. Maybe your scenario is the one preached to you at your sunday school,... but here in the real light of day, such crap is laughed at.

t2p

11/04/2004, 10:36 AM

.
so the move to take over Kuwait was make-believe ......... ? What was the Gulf war about then ........... ?
.
and the mass grave sites in Iraq .... were really flower beds .... ?
.
UN Sanctions were working 100% ? I don't think so. Iraq was not in compliance and would not permit full inspections. Even the trade sanctions were bypassed.
.
Just who was going to stop Hussein and Sons ?

jimbo

11/04/2004, 10:38 AM

Hi t2p, glad to see ya here.

Would you rather 'Hussein and company' be in charge of a Middle East 'Empire' ......... ???
Yeah it would be called the United States of Torture.
Seriously the problem was Saddams Sons. They were certain to take over, and one was a total psycho.

There must be other strategies that could have worked besides the whole goblin circus we have going on over there now. I think we have ulterior motives.

heck, there are still many people out there that continue to think that we made a mistake by dropping the bombs on Japan .
It looks like there was at least a chance that it might not have been neccesary. But hindsight is always ... well you know.

Apparently the Japanese may have thought that "absolute surrender" meant there was a good chance we would execute their emperor (unacceptable to them), which we had no intentions of doing. Some say enough wasn't done to clarify this point.

Perhaps this was on purpose. Perhaps a little justified "revenge" was also on people's minds.

In any case I respect Harry Truman and certainly wouldn't have wanted to be the one who had to make that decision.;Do;

jimbo

11/04/2004, 10:54 AM

Theoretical Question: Why didn't we just remove Saddam and Sons, check for wmd, kill the small group of terrorists who were operating on the northeast Iranian border, then get out and leave the bathists in charge?

I know, I know they would still be our enemies and all ... but I think the question exposes the untruths of the official reasons for the war.

The way we did it now means we will always have bases there. Even if there ends up being a civil war, our troups will retreat behind the concertina wire and wait it out.

We have a permanent presence in the heart of our enemy.

Another point: I think GW just likes being a wartime president just a little too much. I've seen him refer to himself that way and he's smiling as he's saying it. I can't imagine any other recent president showing so much obvious enjoyment in having that sad and sobering role.

Back during the invasion of Iraq I remember a reporter asking him about suicide attacks on our troops and he just smiled and said "bring it on!".

I was embarrased for our country and felt sorry for the soldiers stuck over there with the prez saying bring on the attacks. Some must have been very concerned at that. It seemed irresponsible.

BaM*BaM

11/04/2004, 11:01 AM

Yes, Hussein did kill thousands of Iraqis in an effort to stabilize his country. When Donald Rumsfield was the the US's special envoy to Iraq (providing Iraq with more and more arms and money) Hussien even gassed a few Kurds, all under the watchful eye of the USA. who were hiring Hussien (and his sons) to continue his war against Iran, where well over two and one half million islamic fundamentalists were killed, using USA arms and aid.

Yes, Al-Queda hates Hussien as much as they hate the USA

And USA has now killed MANY TENs OF THOUSANDS of Iraqis!!!!!!! Along with the deaths and crippling of tens of thousands of GREAT US Servicemen and women!!/ But of course we use the words 'saving the Iraqis' in front of the number dead, so its ok then?

t2p

11/04/2004, 11:40 AM

BAM .... I can't argue with you there ......
.
I was in favor of the 'oust' of Hussein ..... but certainly did not want this 'mess' ........
.
jimbo ....... I would have preferred that ........
.
at a minimum, I would have preferred a different strategy .... different plan ......... than the ones (presumably) directed by Rumsfeld ....... Wolfowitz ......... ???

MrCrowley

11/04/2004, 12:14 PM

Im glad someone brought up the invasion of Kuwait. Did you know Kuwait has so much money, they pay a minimum of $800.00 a year in taxes TO THE CITIZENS? Yes, the reverse of our system. This is based on the value 12 years ago. Did you also know that the invasion was the biggest bank job the world has ever seen? If you remember, they invaded, occupied kuwait city, then the republican guards beat it back to iraq? What we fought was peasants stuck in trenches near the border after the banks were looted in kuwait and brought back to master. What I want to know is why we didnt get reimbursement for the billions spent in oil revenues or oil itself. I know you and I are still paying for that damn war.

tiggergreen

11/04/2004, 12:33 PM

How low the U.S. has sunk... Many of you do not fully understand the truth about what is really happening here on our soil.

1. Separation of Church and State:

The founding fathers did not want a scenario such as was happening with the Church of England. ONE CHURCH was running things in the country. So they made it so that that wouldn't happen in this country. How is banning a monument of 10 commandments against the notion of separating church and state? It doesn't - plain and simple. The founding fathers believed in God and put it on all the currency ("In God We Trust") and knew that we would be in trouble if we ever fell away en masse. Why can't we pray in schools? Almost every religion has some type of prayer - I wouldn't mind bowing my head and listening to a budhist pray - as long as we all believe in a higher power, then we will be better citizens.

2. Freedom of speech:

This was intended to allow the common citizen to say anything he or she wished about the government without fear of reprisal. In Nazi Germany, if you spoke openly against the Nazi party, you were thrown in jail, etc. This freedom does NOT apply to pornography. Pornography is tearing this country apart and I have personally witnessed a lot of tragedies from this horrible infestation in our society.

3. Communism

How many of you are aware that we have instituted communist practices in our government? We have a central bank that is not part of the government (Federal Reserve) and we have a graduated income tax. I have taken the liberty of pasting in the content from the Communist Manifesto (http://www.anu.edu.au/polsci/marx/classics/manifesto.html):

"Nevertheless, in most advanced countries, the following will be pretty generally applicable.

1. Abolition of property in land and application of all rents of land to public purposes.

2. A heavy progressive or graduated income tax.

3. Abolition of all rights of inheritance.

4. Confiscation of the property of all emigrants and rebels.

5. Centralization of credit in the banks of the state, by means of a national bank with state capital and an exclusive monopoly.

6. Centralization of the means of communication and transport in the hands of the state.

7. Extension of factories and instruments of production owned by the state; the bringing into cultivation of waste lands, and the improvement of the soil generally in accordance with a common plan.

8. Equal obligation of all to work. Establishment of industrial armies, especially for agriculture.

9. Combination of agriculture with manufacturing industries; gradual abolition of all the distinction between town and country by a more equable distribution of the populace over the country.

10. Free education for all children in public schools. Abolition of children's factory labor in its present form. Combination of education with industrial production, etc." - Karl Marx

I do not like what George Bush has done over in Iraq. However, Kerry was infinitely more evil than Bush. Why didn't we all cast our vote for one of the independents on the ballot? There were a lot of good men running for president - but they didn't have the monetary reserves to compete with the Democratic and Republican parties.

Open your eyes, everyone - there are a lot of things happening in this country and we are slowly losing our freedoms (Patriot Act, anyone?).

They are trying to take our weapons these days. My father always told me, "Outlaw guns and only outlaws will own guns." This freedom is very dear and we should fight any law that attempts to control guns.

And finally, I have to comment on the gay issues... First of all, I condemn hatred of any kind towards any person or persons. However, I think that Homosexuality is wrong and I support laws that protect the sanctity of marriage as being between a man and a woman. However, I am friendly towards all no matter their sexual orientation. I just find it ironic that the homosexual community wants a ceremony of God to be applied to their union when the Bible clearly states that it is an abomination. If they do not believe in God, then why do they want to use one of its sacraments??? Also, I was involved personally with a gay community in Portland, Oregon (one of the reasons I left). They ganged up on my nephew and convinced him that he was gay and sexually assaulted him several times. Before this time he was a little feminine (but so was I when I was his age) and liked to dress nicely. That does not make one gay... What they did was wrong. If someone chooses to be gay of their own free will and volition - then fine - but why do you have to attack someone in a group? They even told him that they were "recruiters!!!"

Abortion - hmm - killing a baby is ok because??? Pro-choice? Couching murder in friendly terms does not change the nature of the crime. How would you have liked it if someone had terminated your life before you were born? What about the baby's choice? Did you ask the baby before killing it? If you do not want to have a baby, practice abstinence. I have personally known women who were convinced to perform abortions and they went slightly cuckoo afterwards...

SUV gas guzzling etc. I am all for alternate fuel. However, I purchased the VX because of its style and looks and there was nothing like it on the market. I hate that it is a gas guzzler - but I love driving it... I hope that someday I will be able to put a different engine in the vehicle that will be more "Earth friendly." I for one am glad that oil prices are rising - that means that more and more car companies will be forced to come out with better cars... Buying oil = supporting terrorism - it is true - but until we can stop our dependence on oil (a long shot), we will be funding them for the foreseeable future.

[ steps off soap box ]

Brent
Former Republican

I_Wanna_Retire

11/04/2004, 12:34 PM

This rather LONGGGG thread proves that we are truely a divided nation. There are many important decisions to be made, deficit, social security, all of us damn baby boomers, etc, needing a strong intelligent president, and sorry, I just don't see Bush as the guy.

jimbo

11/04/2004, 01:02 PM

I agree with the above. I just saw on Yahoo that Gw is claiming he got political capital in this election "And he's a gonna spend it".

Read: Nothing has changed, he's gonna keep on screwing up our country.

Even though he won by a very narrow margin he thinks he's a big winner and half the country oughta just bend over and take it.

Is anyone here aware there is already a book being sold in our national parks bookstores explaining how the Grand Canyon was created by Noah's Flood.

I can't wait to see what 's next.;Dp;

MrCrowley

11/04/2004, 01:16 PM

I saw that!!!!!!! What a bunch of crock. They are saying that all the scientific data gathered over the past 200 years is false. The fruit loops are saying that 1 short flood dug that huge hole in the ground. If you ever get a chance to see a topographic map of the river, you can actually see that it has indeed eroded over thousands of years to the depth it is today. And I aint dat edumucated. The sad thing is that they are selling in the federal gift shops at the park. That is another violation of the church state separation as it is viewed as basically having government approval.

The next bull**** Im expecting is that Jesus farted while resting on a long journey, and miraculously a cave was formed......

If religious people dont believe in evolution, how the hell can they explain a platypus. Id like to see a jehovah's witness scratch his head trying to make up some bull****, but you know all you will hear is "because the lord made it that way" What a bunch of crock.

Maybe we should change the laws so that a foreigner can be elected as President. My nomination will be f&^%ing Ozzy. I could just see him getting pissed and cussing, throwing **** and beating the hell out of ol' George and taking over the White House. Only because it would piss the fruit loops off! Sharon would lead the nation better than that rat bastard Curious George.

jimbo

11/04/2004, 01:23 PM

how the hell can they explain a platypus
Everyone knows platypuses are created by homosexual relations.

Geeeez

MrCrowley

11/04/2004, 01:33 PM

LOLOLOLOLOLOL!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!;Db; ;Db; ;Do; ;Dp; ;Dr; ;Dy;

tiggergreen

11/04/2004, 02:35 PM

I think that God is a 3D animator - if you have ever played around with a modelling program, you can totally come up with some bizarre characters... Thus the platypus...

I do not believe in Evolution - it is the single most annoying piece of garbage I have ever had the misfortune of studying. I do believe that the Earth was millions of years in the making - but I believe that the formation of the Earth was directed by divine intervention. The dinosaurs roamed free for millions of years and then were removed to be placed on the next planet project...

Show me a half-man, half monkey in the world today and I might just give evolution a second chance... I do believe in micro-evolution - I just don't see how two apes can spawn something human... Most "creationists" don't realize that the book of Genesis actually speaks of two separate processes - the spiritual creation (planning in a sense - seven thousand years) and the physical creation (seven time periods - millions of years).

And yes, Adam and Eve had belly buttons... If you do a little studing, you will even find out that Darwin made a lot of the garbage up and recanted on his death bed - even he was surprised at how willing the scientific community was to take in this misinformation - but man has always wanted to do away with God so that he could assuage his guilty conscience.

Brent

SlowPro48

11/04/2004, 02:49 PM

snippage of Original post by jimbo
It seems to me a battle is going on worldwide between two competing philosophies. At the root is the question as to whether the personal freedoms and secular beliefs that we have gained in the past hundred years are a good thing or the cause of unhappiness and moral decay.

I think the culture of the individual coming first and the absolute separation of religion and government (even given the problems it has created) is the best thing that has ever happened to the world. I don't want to see anything take it away.

HaHa!!! Well I've seen it all now. A link to Lyndon LaRouche's website on the VX board. What's next - John Birch Society? ;)

Jimbo, you seem sincere. Maybe you're a true seeker of knowledge. I am too. I love to read and ponder and listen and ponder and talk and ponder and... well you get the point. Drives my girlfriend crazy...

Here's my take: The root grows much deeper than you think....

You're right - there is in fact a battle going on between two "philosophies" - but the battle is not "worldwide" - it goes beyond that. The "world" (i.e., universe) is like a giant train rolling down the tracks. We as passengers can get out of our seats and move around a little but we're all headed to the same place at the same rate. The battle is not limited to the three dimensions in which we're free to move or even to the one dimension in which we don't have freedom of movement (since we're all hurtling through it in the same direction at the speed of light). No, the battle is being waged outside the train.*

While on this train ride, you have time to ponder, to make decisions, to meet and talk to people about what's going on outside the train, etc - but your journey will soon come to an end, and you will then be expected to leave the train and go on to your final destination.

Unfortunately, many red herrings have been dragged through the woods to keep you - you personally - from thinking about the true nature of this battle. This very website may be one of those red herrings. Politics and conspiracy theories are certainly among those red herrings. Politics leads just about ALL of us dogs off the path at one time or another but it's stench is not the strongest. Secular Humanism is one of the biggest, fattest, stinkiest red herrings of them all and it has become so thoroughly entwined with left-wing politics that one can't tell them apart anymore. I do know one thing though - individual freedom is not part of the Secular Humanist/leftist agenda. The socialists of this world want you to conform to their humanist "world community" value system. Don't do it! If you have to chase a red herring, make sure it's not one that leads you so far off the path that, when you realize you're headed in the wrong direction, you can't get back!

*Note about the train: If you don't believe there's anything outside the train (beyond the light cone) that affects our reality - and you just can't bring yourself to read anything that hints at th existance of a creator - and from what I can tell, that is the case - then bone up on John Stewart Bell's work.

Dallas4u

11/04/2004, 02:51 PM

Of course, someone who believes so intensely in religion won't believe in evolution. Formation of the Earth was directed by devine intervention? Wow... I knew there were people that still believed this, but I guess I just haven't seen it in writing yet. Dinosaurs were removed from the planet and placed on another for the next project? Some of the oldest bones discovered, linking to the cro-magnon "man", estimated to be between 34k and 36k years old, those people were just picked up and put on another planet, in another universe, created by God (of course) to be used as another experiment, correct?

Well, too bad he forgot some of those bones along the way. I know, you don't believe in Science, but much of the "theory" of evolution can be proven with hard facts... you know, besides just a book.

Originally posted by tiggergreen
If you do a little studing, you will even find out that Darwin made a lot of the garbage up and recanted on his death bed - even he was surprised at how willing the scientific community was to take in this misinformation

Almost 100% without a doubt untrue (posted even from the site Christian-Truth.org mind you):

http://christian-truth.org/creation/myths3.html#_Toc526329947

BaM*BaM

11/04/2004, 03:02 PM

This is the belief system that was just voted in,... and the Federal and Supreme Court Judges are coming very soon to make it so

TOPEKA, Kan. (Reuters) - The Kansas Board of Education rejected evolution as a scientific principle Wednesday, dealing a victory to religious conservatives who are increasingly challenging science education in U.S. schools.

The 10-member board, ignoring pleas by educators and established scientists, voted six to four to embrace new standards for science curricula that eliminate evolution as an underlying principle of biology and other sciences.

"Evolution has been removed," board member Janet Waugh, who opposed the new standard, said in a packed conference room near the state capitol. "Instead of Kansas' curriculum having more and more credibility, it will have less and less."

The board voted on a modified version of curriculum guidelines for grades kindergarten through high school that eliminates evolution as a way to describe the emergence of new species -- for instance the evolution of primates into homo sapiens -- while leaving intact references to "microevolution," or changes that occur within a single species.

The theory of evolution was developed by 19th-century British scientist Charles Darwin. His discoveries were famously argued in the 1925 "Scopes Monkey Trial," in which the state of Tennessee put teacher John Thomas Scopes on trial for knowingly infringing a law banning the teaching of evolution.

Defended by prominent trial attorney Clarence Darrow, Scopes was convicted and fined the minimum $100 but the verdict was reversed on a technicality by the state Supreme Court.

Prior to Wednesday's vote, the presidents of Kansas' six public universities wrote a letter saying the new standards "will set Kansas back a century and give hard-to-find science teachers no choice but to pursue other career fields or assignments outside of Kansas.

"The argument that teaching evolution will destroy a student's faith in God is no more true today than it was during the Scopes trial in 1925," the letter said.

Banning evolution from the classroom gave conservative forces a victory after previous attempts to eliminate evolution in states including Alabama, Arizona, Georgia and Nebraska.
This article is two years old,... but of course that means nothing, when evolution doesnt exist!!

And people wonder why Europeans call the war with the Al-Queda, as the U.S.Christian Taliban vs. the Islam Taliban?

Notice to BOTH of you,... I AM YOUR SWORN ENEMY!!!!

StormTROOPER

11/04/2004, 03:10 PM

This thread has now EVOLVED to evolution, which is more interesting. :p Isn't it interesting that there are 3 types of great apes just as there are 3 races of humans, maybe the creator was practicing with apes first, maybe he should have QUIT while he was AHEAD. ;)

SlowPro48

11/04/2004, 03:28 PM

Originally posted by Dallas4u
Of course, someone who believes so intensely in religion won't believe in evolution..... <snip snip>... Well, too bad he forgot some of those bones along the way. I know, you don't believe in Science, but much of the "theory" of evolution can be proven with hard facts... you know, besides just a book.

I'm too ignorant to know for myself - *for sure* - how living beings - or anything else for that matter - came into existance but your blanket statement is untrue. I know plenty of very smart people who are intensly religious and believe that living beings are/were CREATED via an EVOLUTIONARY process.

When it comes to the evolution debate, a major sticking point is that people tend to forget the role of science is to determine the How and When of the process but it can never answer the question Why. We humans always have to ask that question though don't we? For thousands of years the Jewish people have answered the questions Why and Who through Genesis1 and Genesis2.

Do you think it's fair to try to verify Genesis with carbon dating or any other scientific technique - and declare it nonsense because it doesn't square with the fossil record - the When and How - when it's real purpose was to answer the questions Why and Who?

Conversly do you think it's fair to say the science of evolution is invalid because it CAN'T answer the question of Why there is life on earth?

SlowPro48

11/04/2004, 03:34 PM

Originally posted by StormTROOPER
This thread has now EVOLVED to evolution, which is more interesting. :p ..........

Yeah we're hitting all the hotbuttons aren't we? Pretty soon we'll be talking about synthetic oil. Oh wait! The intake thread has already evolved into an oil-fest!!!

:D

BaM*BaM

11/04/2004, 03:35 PM

When I was a very young teen, I spent 100's of hours reading and studying about how Germany had ever come to commit the atrocities of the Holocaust. (yes, I know that the true Bush Leaguer Believer, does NOT believe that the Holocaust ever really happened).

Germany at that time, was the most well educated country on the face of the Earth. .. More literate, and college educated than even England, USA, and France.

Yet, when the Zealous True Believers took over the legislature and the courts of Germany,, all of mankind's thousands of years of science, and rational thought went down the toilet

And the World was wrought with the Deaths of the many many untold millions...

Maverick

11/04/2004, 03:39 PM

okay, im probably gonna tick someone off here, so skip this if your the sensitive type..

the only reason ANYONE recants anything on their death bed is because their dying, even most athiests dont want to take a chance that their wrong when they might have shot at eternal bliss, rather then facing the fact that they just might only end up as fertiilizer...... I respect religious beliefs, but the idea of "poof, instant world" sounds about as nuts to me as evolution probably does to those who are religiously inclined..

But this is about politics anyhow right? interesting stuff here....ill add my 2 cents, and keep it short...

we just reelected the government that gave us the worst employment record, highest debt, worst environmental record, lousiest world relations in the history of our country, among other things..and holy cow, HALIBURTON... ugh..were going to find out some very disturbing things unless they get away with the coverup..
For the first time in the history of the US A we elected a leader based upon fear rather than strength,....Im not a huge kerry fan BTW, i disagreed with allot of what he proposed, but holy cow, .We allowed a failure to perpetuate, ARE WE NUTS???
i hope im wrong..but the truths a real b#$tch sometimes.. im going to invest in some gold and silver..just in case our economy collapses ..

Heraclid

11/04/2004, 04:01 PM

I don't see why religion and evolution have to be so mutually exclusive. Evolution is really just survival of the fittest, and the fittest naturally are more successful at passing along their genes. Part of our problem as human beings is that we have come to a point where we have been able to largely circumvent that system. There are a whole lot of people out there today who just couldn't make it on their own. Given a very extended time frame to work within, I think evolution is perfectly reasonable to a degree, and I think it does nothing to disprove that there is a God.

I've seen some interesting discussion here on the Constitution so I'll toss in a a few thoughts...

The Constitution does not guarantee anyone the right to vote. States appoint electors to the electoral college and the electoral college selects a president. It just so happens that the states all chose to allow a popular vote to determine how their electoral votes will be awarded. However, the electors in any given state are under no constitutional obligation to throw their votes to whomever wins the popular vote. It would be totally constitutional for the state of Florida to hand-pick only Florida VX owners to be its electors, for instance, and those VX owners would have every right to throw their votes to Tone Monday even if the CEO of Jeep won the popular vote in Florida by a wide margin.

The word democracy is never once mentioned in the Constitution. This nation was not founded as a democracy, and our founding fathers, in their great wisdom, actually sought to avoid it. Democracy is three wolves and a lamb deciding what's for dinner.

I would go so far as to say that there should be more restrictions on who can vote. Nowadays any ignorant fool who doesn't follow politics until the presidential debates can go to the polls without a clue and help determine the fate of a nation when they spend most of their time not giving it a second thought.

Here's something to read and think about. Alexander Tyler wrote the following about the fall of the Athenian republic:

"A democracy cannot exist as a permanent form of government. It can only exist until the voters discover that they can vote themselves money from the public treasure. From that moment on, the majority always votes for the candidates promising the most money from the public treasury, with the result that a democracy always collapses over loose fiscal policy followed by a dictatorship. The average age of the world's great civilizations has been two hundred years. These nations have progressed through the following sequence: from bondage to spiritual faith, from spiritual faith to great courage, from courage to liberty, from liberty to abundance, from abundance to selfishness, from selfishness to complacency, from complacency to apathy, from apathy to dependency, from dependency back to bondage."

How true it is.

BaM*BaM

11/04/2004, 04:05 PM

panoramic pageant of poop

PBR

11/04/2004, 04:12 PM

After reading this thread, it looks like its a prerequisite to be a nut case before you buy a VX, I have not read such paranoid political drivel ever before.

jimbo

11/04/2004, 04:12 PM

I'm not touching the evolution argument.

To the person back several posts who had me chasing stinky turds and fish on a train: I just knew putting a link to Larouche's site was going to come back to haunt me. ;)

Religion and politics on the vehicross board. Who'd have ever thunk it.

I just know God created my VX. ;Db;

P.S. - I don't know what that thing is beside BamBam's posts but it keeps hypnotizing me. Cut it out man! (LOL)

Dallas4u

11/04/2004, 04:19 PM

Originally posted by SlowPro48
I'm too ignorant to know for myself - *for sure* - how living beings - or anything else for that matter - came into existance

I, too, feel the same way. My post was to show just how ignorant people can be. Single track minds, not open to any other way of thinking... again, it's incredible that people still think this way.

I have a hard time figuring out how someone believe so overwhemingly in the Bible and it's teachings yet believe in evolution, or that living beings were created through an evolutionary process. As Brent stated below, Adam and Eve with belly buttons? I know... that's a far one.

I admit I am agnostic. I'm open to hear anything, but lean one way. I believe there was a Jesus Christ, and I believe he has had followers up till this day. I'm not trying to say I know enough about ANYTHING to factualize any theories out there... I tend to believe scientific fact. You're right, Science cannot prove "Why", but nothing can from what I can see. In my eyes, Science is trying with it's How and When everyday.

I respect religion. If that's what some people need then I'm all for it. I don't want religion to rule my life, though.

Originally posted by PBR
...it looks like its a prerequisite to be a nut case before you buy a VX

Ehh... you DO own a VX, correct? :D

SlowPro48

11/04/2004, 04:25 PM

Originally posted by Maverick
"poof, instant world" sounds about as nuts to me as evolution probably does to those who are religiously inclined..

What is your alternative to "poof, instant world"? Can you give us a beginning of the universe scenario that doesn't sound nuts? It doesn't matter if you leave God in or out of the picture, it always sounds nuts because reality IS nuts.

If you went to the circus and saw a man pouring wine from a bottle that never ran out wouldn't you wonder where all that wine was coming from? You see the equation e=mc squared all over the place but have you ever really thought about it's implications? Where did all the e come from? And since c is a constant, e and m are interchangable. Is that not nuts?

Do you believe the moon is there when you're not looking at it? Because science says it's not. Poof, instant moon. People need to at least try to wrap their minds around some basics such as Bohr's Copenhagen Interpretation instead of just scratching the surface before they give up and say "it's hard - just too hard to think about these things - i'll just make up my own reality instead - and it's going to be composed only of what my senses can detect."

Originally posted by Maverick
For the first time in the history of the US A we elected a leader based upon fear rather than strength,....

It would have been the same had Kerry won - he was just using a different set of fears to motivate his base.

;eeko;

SlowPro48

11/04/2004, 04:35 PM

Originally posted by jimbo
I'm not touching the evolution argument.

Dude, we're stepping it up another notch - forget about evolution - we're talking about reality itself now. Has this thread got legs or WHAT!!!!????

To the person back several posts who had me chasing stinky turds and fish on a train: I just knew putting a link to Larouche's site was going to come back to haunt me. ;)

uhh.. that would be me but i guess i wasn't very clear if you thought i was talking about turds. i assume you know what a red herring is. do you not know how the term originated?

P.S. - I don't know what that thing is beside BamBam's posts but it keeps hypnotizing me. Cut it out man! (LOL)

He's trying to brainwash you. It transmits text from LaRouche's website straight to your retina!!!

jimbo

11/04/2004, 04:36 PM

There are good scientific ideas that address the "whys" (the selfish gene theory for example) but folks that ask "why" aren't neccessarily looking for scientific answers.

These answers make them feel the "specialness" of being human isn't being respected.

In this case the answers aren't answers for them.

jimbo

11/04/2004, 04:42 PM

Slowpro - LOL - funny.

Wasn't the red herring from a mystery story, sherlock holmes or something, and it sort of morphed into a metaphor for something that leads you off the trail?

I get it man - LOL (stinky turds - you slay me);Dp;

I agree with a lot of what you said.

tiggergreen

11/04/2004, 04:49 PM

I don't believe in Science??? I am totally a believer in science and I believe God works through science and that he understands science perfectly.

What I am saying, is that if you pursue a false path in science, you will end up with false results. If we want to improve our technology in any area of science, we have to follow the truth. Macro Evolution is a lie. Adam and Eve were literally offspring of God (which is why they had belly buttons). That is also why they were immortal and why there had to be a tree with forbidden fruit. If God really didn't want them to eat the fruit, he wouldn't have placed the tree there in the first place.

And yes, I believe in Eternity - which is something that very few can really comprehend. There are planets being formed and organized right now in varying stages of progress that will eventually house more children of God. We are here for a purpose - to gain a body and learn how to become more like God. This is a test for all of us to see what we will do with our lives. It is all very logical.

If you truly want to have a debate on macro evolution - I am ready for any of your arguments. It is just very sad to me that this "THEORY" is thrown around as if it is fact. God does not need to work through macro evolution. Macro evolution is embraced by people who want to disprove the existence of God. If you do believe in God and the Bible, then you shouldn't believe in macro evolution.

And of course dinosaur bones were left behind after millions of years of existence - why wouldn't there be? I'm just saying that they were placed here for a purpose in order to prepare this planet for our eventual arrival.

The truth will set you free...

Brent

SlowPro48

11/04/2004, 04:53 PM

Originally posted by jimbo
There are good scientific ideas that address the "whys" (the selfish gene theory for example) ....

selfish gene theory = still an answer to How

science will never be able to answer Why because that is not it's job

SlowPro48

11/04/2004, 05:07 PM

Originally posted by jimbo
Slowpro - LOL - funny.

Wasn't the red herring from a mystery story, sherlock holmes or something, and it sort of morphed into a metaphor for something that leads you off the trail?

Actually i think there are several theories but they all center around dragging a herring around to throw dogs off the trail of something they are following. Some say the technique was used to train fox hounds to follow the fox scent better and not get distracted. Others say it was used by fugitives from justice running from bloodhounds. Either way the herring (which is red when cured) was used to lead dogs astray.
There you have it.

jimbo

11/04/2004, 05:29 PM

selfish gene theory = still an answer to How
It's a why to me.

Why does a rock drop when I let go of it? Gravity is enough of a reason.

Why life? DNA has a strong tendency to replicate.

redline

11/04/2004, 05:53 PM

Dinosaurs existed for millions of years had plenty of time for new species to change/adapt/evolve plenty of evidence in fossil records. Man has only been on this planet for a few thousand,Yes that includes early man>our descendents. Belly buttons on Adam and Eve, that's funny.:laughp:

Maverick

11/04/2004, 06:35 PM

holy crap, i have to explain the origins of the universe now?? no one told me there was going to be a test!!!
id be happy if i could figure out how Albert came up with e=mc2 , smart man he was..im not even going to attempt to define the origins of everything, sadly, it is beyond my meager capabilities..But i think theres a better explaination than "Poof!! " well figure it out eventually..

Reality is not the problem, its perception..our perception is based upon our upbringing, opinion, fears, and experiences, and teachings...weve been tought to trust our leaders, some hold this so dearly that they refuse question them...i dont.. i asked questions..i didnt like the answers i found when my questions turned to Bush.. In every lie, there is some small bit of truth, i added those bits together and man, are we in trouble...but thats just my perception, others feel differently, and i hope theyre right...

jimbo

11/04/2004, 07:41 PM

Yes Maverick ... we most certainly are in trouble.

Capri

11/04/2004, 07:54 PM

I like religions, except when people try to convert me when I didn't ask in the first place.

Anyways, whoever thought of VX's design and followed through gets my faith.

SPAZZ

11/05/2004, 05:04 AM

I'll say this about all you Bush lovers ...Sticking feathers up your butt does not make you a chicken.

Bush will screw up this country worse now than ever before...and take even more vacation days ever in history beating the record held by...HIMSELF

tomdietrying

11/05/2004, 06:14 AM

Spazz, I thought you and I would never see eye to eye. I agree with with you on this 100%.
Peace.
Tom

t2p

11/05/2004, 06:35 AM

.
........ and I can remember when one of the biggest debates concerned who gets the credit for the design of the VX .........
.

t2p

11/05/2004, 06:45 AM

SPAZZ ...... Maverick ....... Tomdie .......... and others ......
.
Bush did not 'ruin' this country ..... not yet at least. Bush inherited a recession ..... and the country was attacked.
.
I'm certainly not happy with the way many things are going - but your credibility is severly diminished when you place the blame for the many woes entirely on the shoulders of Bush ........
.
This is one reason I sometimes would have liked to see Al Gore as president .... how he would have handled a recession .... and an attack on our country. Or anyone else for that matter.
.
I know nothing about Bush's record as governor of Texas - but why is it that that state still supports him ?
.

Maugan_VX

11/05/2004, 06:47 AM

On all the forums I visit, I've never come across more irrational, bitter people than you.

Makes me wonder why I even bothered to piss you people off in the first place. Seems to me like you manage that fine and dandy on your own :P

(ok, with a little help from Bush)

Fact of the matter is that all this discussion is moot. The votes have been counted and this is what you've got to work with for the next 4 years.

(oh and 51% constitutes a majority. Not even your boy Clinton got that much)

kpaske

11/05/2004, 07:34 AM

I have been following this thread since the beginning and have opted not to comment. With a few exceptions, most of what is being spewed here is unintelligent rubbish.

This forum is an excellent place for us to come together and discuss a vehicle we all own and enjoy, but we should really avoid the political discussions.

Dallas4u

11/05/2004, 08:10 AM

Originally posted by Maugan_VX
On all the forums I visit, I've never come across more irrational, bitter people than you.

Makes me wonder why I even bothered to piss you people off in the first place. Seems to me like you manage that fine and dandy on your own :P

(ok, with a little help from Bush)

Fact of the matter is that all this discussion is moot. The votes have been counted and this is what you've got to work with for the next 4 years.

(oh and 51% constitutes a majority. Not even your boy Clinton got that much)

First of all, there is no reason to lump all 200 - 300 members of this forum into a mass of 'bitter' people. I know, you are a perfect SOB, so quit f&*king posting here then. I don't mind seeing some nice, thought out posts from you, but most of the f*#king time you are just an a$$hole. I don't know why you think acting this way makes you seem 'cooler' or more 'intelligible' than everyone else here, but may I say that you are sooo wrong.

The discussion isn't moot because I believe everyone here knows (yes, you're under estimated us again) that we can't change what happened by posting our opinions. Some people get more emotional than others, but this time it seems we've kept from calling people names... big improvement.

I don't know if you just don't get out much or what, but 'bitter people' are f*@king everywhere... get use to it. If this is the most bitter you've seen, you need to crawl out from under the rock.

Seriously... you think you rule the board by coming here and saying things to upset people? Is that your way to beat your chest and prove your manhood? Grow up a little. People have opinions. People feel strongly about how their country is run. Many people love this country... so either participate and quit acting like a 9 year old bully or don't.

Maverick

11/05/2004, 09:08 AM

Originally posted by t2p
SPAZZ ...... Maverick ....... Tomdie .......... and others ......
.
Bush did not 'ruin' this country ..... not yet at least. Bush inherited a recession ..... and the country was attacked.
.
I'm certainly not happy with the way many things are going - but your credibility is severly diminished when you place the blame for the many woes entirely on the shoulders of Bush ........
.
This is one reason I sometimes would have liked to see Al Gore as president .... how he would have handled a recession .... and an attack on our country. Or anyone else for that matter.
.
I know nothing about Bush's record as governor of Texas - but why is it that that state still supports him ?
.

I dont think anyone claimed Bush did all this single handedly, thats far more credit than he deserves imho...However his actions, lack of action in some cases, and dismissive attitude certainly contributed to our current state of affairs..his record speaks for itself.. In the end, our current president is accountable . what he tells us does not jive with his past record, and i have a problem with that.. I sincerely hope he can fix the problems, but i get the distinct impression he doesnt even acknowledge there are problems..so im not convinced the next four years will be any different than the past four..and that is very troubling to me...

SlowPro48

11/05/2004, 12:16 PM

Originally posted by Maverick
But i think theres a better explaination than "Poof!! " well figure it out eventually..]

Well I personally believe it was a Big Bang - but I don't have a problem with Poofs... Do you prefer a Big Bang or a Big Poof? You sound kinda like you might prefer Poofs (not that there's anything wrong with that) :p

..i didnt like the answers i found when my questions turned to Bush.. In every lie, there is some small bit of truth, i added those bits together and man, are we in trouble...but thats just my perception, others feel differently, and i hope theyre right...

Everything will be OK. Just think - in 4 more years you can vote for Hillary. I actually don't think we're in any more trouble than if Kerry had been elected. That man was swimming in an ocean of lies too. I wish he had won so you Dems could find out how deep that ocean was and then maybe we'd get some Libertarian votes in 2008. Apparently being a fibber is a pre-requisite to being a front-runner in the presidential campaign. Name one straight-talking major party candidate who's gotten past the primaries in the last 20 years. The only honest man that has gotten anywhere close to the presidency was Perot and he was an Independant and way too flaky to win. He told it like it was though didn't he? I wish he had won. Damn that would have been an entertaining four years.

Actually I shouldn't be so pessimisstic - now that I think about it, a truly honest man HAS won and served as president during my lifetime and of course I'm talking about Jimmy Carter.

SlowPro48

11/05/2004, 12:20 PM

Originally posted by jimbo
It's a why to me.

Why does a rock drop when I let go of it? Gravity is enough of a reason.

Why life? DNA has a strong tendency to replicate.

OK - so you took a couple HOW questions and stuck a "Why" in front of them. That still doesn't make them WHY questions but if you want to think it does then go right ahead. I like your answers though. Definitely more succinct than anything I could come up with. Man, I envy people who can look at the back of a DVD and admire the pretty colors instead of thinking about diffraction gratings...

BTW, Mr Smartypants - do you think the big turtle at the South Pole will ever get tired? You know the one I'm talking about right? He carries the Earth around on his back and that's how we orbit the Sun.

;Dy; ;Dy; ;Dy;

jimbo

11/05/2004, 12:26 PM

Bring back Jimmy!!!!!! Pleeeze!

Anyways it's not about the lies, it's not about the policies, it's not even about the war. It's about basic beliefs and everytime Bush talks to the press(and snickers sarcastically) I get a little more scared.

He's NOTHING AT ALL like me and that scares the sh#t out of me.

Can anyone say Ozzie and Harriet time all over again? Welcome back to Pleasantville. Liberals, commies, long-haired freaks and homos not welcome. ;Db;

jimbo

11/05/2004, 12:38 PM

Hi slowpro -

OK - so you took a couple HOW questions and stuck a "Why" in front of them. That still doesn't make them WHY questions but if you want to think it does then go right ahead. I like your answers though. Definitely more succinct than anything I could come up with.
They are whys. A how would be more in depth , such as How does gravity work on the rock. That would take a much longer answer. Why is easier.

The rock drops because gravity acts on it. There doesn't need to be any deeper answer than that. Human concerns and philosophies have zero to do with it. Ditto for the reason life exists.

If you need more reason (and by the way I do to) for your own personal sanity then that's great. That's what religion, phlosophy, the arts, sex, love and ice cream are for. ;Do;

Let's not argue too much, I think we basically agree. After all we both have VXs.

P.S. Isn't it weird where this thread has gone? I bet Anita thinks we are loons.

I'll say this about all you Bush lovers ...Sticking feathers up your butt does not make you a chicken.
No but in some circles it probably means you are having a good time on a Friday night.

t2p

11/05/2004, 01:02 PM

Jimmy Carter was a respectable man .......
.
a man of honor .......... a great person .....
.
but NOT a great president unfortunately.
.
In a way ........ he inherited a mess ....... but he was unable and/or willing to make the changes to lead this nation out of the cellar .........
.

SlowPro48

11/05/2004, 01:03 PM

Originally posted by Dallas4u
I, too, feel the same way. My post was to show just how ignorant people can be. Single track minds, not open to any other way of thinking... again, it's incredible that people still think this way.

Yeah - I find closed-minded people very frustrating too... guess we all do. I work with a bunch of them - and the funny thing is they always refer to themselves as "open-minded" or, more recently, "progressive" which I think must be a new code word for something. One of them has a bumper sticker that says "If only closed minds came with closed mouths" How much more closed-minded can you get? Somehow she thinks not listening to people she might not agree with makes her open-minded. Hello, McFly! - could you be any more closed-minded and hypocritical?

Originally posted by Dallas4u
I have a hard time figuring out how someone believe so overwhemingly in the Bible and it's teachings yet believe in evolution, or that living beings were created through an evolutionary process. As Brent stated below, Adam and Eve with belly buttons? I know... that's a far one.

I'm definitely no Bible expert but that seems like an easy one to explain. The Bible vs evolution/science issue, I mean - not the belly button thing. I have no explanation for that! Guess it's a reference to A & E not coming from a womb or something.

The way I see it, the Bible is not a scientific book but rather a theological one. It offers personal explanations for our concerns rather than scientific ones. Scientific explanations do not prove or disprove personal ones. Even Stephen Hawking - one of the smartest humans alive right now - has admitted that "science may solve the problem of how the universe began, but it cannot answer the question: why does the universe bother to exist?"

Originally posted by Dallas4u
I admit I am agnostic. I'm open to hear anything, but lean one way. I believe there was a Jesus Christ, and I believe he has had followers up till this day. I'm not trying to say I know enough about ANYTHING to factualize any theories out there... I tend to believe scientific fact. You're right, Science cannot prove "Why", but nothing can from what I can see. In my eyes, Science is trying with it's How and When everyday.

Well you and I are almost in the same boat then. I'm definitely not an atheist - the universe couldn't exist without being created by something outside the system - but until recently have never really thought of the creator as a Being (i.e., God) - in my mind it was just some nebulous (but really smart!) Force that Poofed everything into existance and then sat back to watch the show. For years I relied on nothing but empirical facts. If I couldn't see it, feel it, hear it, smell it or taste it - well then it didn't exist. If it was something far away or really small I might have to use some assistance - a light microscope or an electron microscope or maybe I'd monkey around with the electrons' spin-spin coupling using an NMR. One way or another, the phenomena had to be observed or measured to be real. Then BOOM! One night something happened that was beyond the realm of possibility. I now know there is more to this world than meets the eye because I've seen the unseen world intrude upon these four dimensions we call home. There was another witness too so don't go thinking it was a halucination. I had to adjust my view of the universe and turned to quantum reality for answers because I knew there was wiggle room there. In Bell's Theorem I found a basis for my own personal myth as to HOW weird things can happen without breaking the known physical laws of the universe - but not WHY.

One thing you need to keep in mind in your search for the truth (and I just assume everyone is searching for the truth but if you're just lounging in the Lazy-Boy of life, eating potato chips and watching Gilligan's Island that's OK too) is that the role of science is to DISCOVER said truth. Science does not DEFINE the truth. The truth is what it is whether we like it or not. Due to advances in knowledge and technology, the scientific facts and the theories used to explain them change over time, but the underlying, unchanging Truth is and has been there all along just waiting for scientists to discover it. Our experiments get better and reveal a clearer picture of the truth, though bringing new facts to light all the time. For example, during the 19th century, respectable scientists believed the universe was made of a substance they called aether, and believed that matter was composed of vortices in this aether - like little tiny smoke rings. It was in all the textbooks. Taught in school. There were even patents granted for machines that would have extracted energy from the earth's passage through the aether. Does anybody believe in the aether now?

At the end of the 19th century physicists pretty much had it all figured out. They were confident they had a comprehensive picture of the way the world worked. They just had one teeny tiny little detail left to work out. One little loose end that wasn't really hurting any thing... but it bugged them just the same... They had finally figured out an experiment to test the speed of light - and it seemed to be absolute. Then in 1905 Einstein not only blew those old aether smoke rings away but he shook the very foundations of physics with his theory of special relativity, which changed everything just to take care of that little speed of light problem. And a whole new round of experiments were started and more facts were added to the cookbook of knowledge. The the process started all over when relativity experiments failed at the sub-atomic level and quantum mechanics came along. New experiments, new facts, and another shiny new theory. Wonder what the next one will be? A universe made of string cheese anyone...? Point is - science is shifting sand. Truth is not.

You mentioned Jesus.... I don't remember talking about him in any previous messages - I'm pretty sure I didn't anyway because that kind of talk makes me uncomfortable - but what the hell let's get a little more mileage out of this thread. So you think he actually existed, eh? If so do you think he was crazy or a liar - or downright evil? If he did actually exist it was over 2000 years ago. Have you ever wondered why the whole world is still talking about him? And why talking about him elicits such strong reactions from people? I've wondered and I'm going to find out. He is the subject of my next truth seeking project. I've hit the wall with quantum electrodynamics. Time for something where I don't have to draw a hundred little squiggly lines and arrows on graph paper. All I have to do is read. Hell, maybe they even have it on DVD now and I can enjoy some popcorn and learn all about Jesus at the same time.

I read a quote by C.S. Lewis that goes like this:

"Christianity is a statement which, if false, is of no importance, and, if true, of infinite importance. The one thing it cannot be is moderately important."

Considering JC's outrageous claims, the logic of that statement is flawless.

Originally posted by Dallas4u
I respect religion. If that's what some people need then I'm all for it. I don't want religion to rule my life, though.

At least you're open-minded about it. Tell me, what's ruling your life right now? Is it doing a good job? Maybe it's something I can afford. Roadracing is too expensive...

:)

t2p

11/05/2004, 01:08 PM

.
yeah ......... vote for Hillary Clinton .........
.
the possibility of that is *truely* frightening ......
.
they (dems) better find a better candidate .........
.

Dallas4u

11/05/2004, 01:22 PM

Wow... good reading here. I should seriously set aside more time to read and reflect on these things.

I guess I should say, I believe more in the possibility in that there was a person named Jesus Christ as it is possible there was a person who lived at the time he is said to have, that was named Jesus Christ, that was a carpenter. What happened after this, I don't know. I tend to believe that many stories were made because many people think they need to believe that there is something more out there than what they see and know. These stories evolved and were followed as a reason for being.

As for something else being out there... as in other life forms in what we call the universe... I think it is pretty selfish to think we would be the only living beings in this mass of solar systems.

jimbo

11/05/2004, 01:24 PM

BTW, Mr Smartypants - do you think the big turtle at the South Pole will ever get tired? You know the one I'm talking about right? He carries the Earth around on his back and that's how we orbit the Sun.
Silly rabbit, everyone knows the earth is carried on the back of a fat moustached guy with a New York accent named Sol.

-----------------------------------------------

You guys better watch talking about Jesus, Mel Gibson might be watching.

You don't want to mess with Mel do ya? Remember lethal weapon?

Dallas4u

11/05/2004, 01:29 PM

Originally posted by t2p
.
yeah ......... vote for Hillary Clinton .........
.
the possibility of that is *truely* frightening ......
.
they (dems) better find a better candidate .........
.

I don't want to sound like a sexist or racist, and believe me, I am not... but I just don't think the country is ready for a woman (Clinton) or somone of a different race (Barack Obama... who I believe is part Kenyan decent). I'm not saying I personally would care... I just vote for who I like... I just don't think the majority of Americans would.

Sorry, I know that sounds harsh, but I believe it's the truth.

SlowPro48

11/05/2004, 01:35 PM

Originally posted by jimbo
P.S. Isn't it weird where this thread has gone?

Nah - pretty cool really. We've hit on just about everything - almost like a real conversation... at a party.... after he tequila has been broken out...

Hey is everybody through with this baby? Anybody want to air out another subject? We're almost at 10 pages. I was thinking if everybody's finished beating this horse we should lock it otherwise we're going to get sucked back into it when somebody comes along months from now and sees something they take offense to - and believe me - we've got something for everybody in this jewel.

Another thing I was thinking is that we should end on a good note - something we can all agree on.

How about if we get Denee to put up another pic as the last post in this thread, then lock it down and throw away the key?

;Dy; ;Dy; ;Dy; ;Dy; ;Dy; ;Dy; ;Dy; ;Dy;

jimbo

11/05/2004, 01:36 PM

Hillary's a woman ?!!!!!!

How could I have missed that.

Seriously, there's no way we're gonna run her. On the democrat blogs we're already talking about needing a southern semi-religious type, like John Edwards.

Either that or a hip-hop artist. ;Db;

jimbo

11/05/2004, 01:39 PM

Another thing I was thinking is that we should end on a good note - something we can all agree on.
How 'bout:

We all have Vxs!!!!

We rock!!!!!!

SlowPro48

11/05/2004, 01:41 PM

Originally posted by Dallas4u
I don't want to sound like a sexist or racist, and believe me, I am not... but I just don't think the country is ready for a woman (Clinton) or somone of a different race (Barack Obama... who I believe is part Kenyan decent). I'm not saying I personally would care... I just vote for who I like... I just don't think the majority of Americans would.

Sorry, I know that sounds harsh, but I believe it's the truth.

I'd vote for President Condoleezza Rice in a second. If Bushie had ditched Cheney in favor of her he would have gotten my vote this time. I would have felt bad voting for him but it would have set her up for 2008.

t2p

11/05/2004, 01:45 PM

.
I felt Colin Powell would have made a great pres .....
.
and I feel he would enjoyed universal support

Dallas4u

11/05/2004, 01:45 PM

Well, depending on their platform, what about a McCain/Rice ticket??

StormTROOPER

11/05/2004, 01:45 PM

Looks like this thread could use a laugh, check out this lesbian democrat who voted for Bush, (check out her football & kiss test) SHE GETS IT www.tammybruce.com

jimbo

11/05/2004, 01:45 PM

How 'bout Colin Powell, Condees too much like Bush.

No wait!!!! ......

John Stewart, he'd probably win!

SlowPro48

11/05/2004, 01:50 PM

Originally posted by jimbo
Hillary's a woman ?!!!!!!

How could I have missed that.

Seriously, there's no way we're gonna run her. On the democrat blogs we're already talking about needing a southern semi-religious type, like John Edwards.

Either that or a hip-hop artist. ;Db;

OMG - tell me you guys aren't running that smarmy bastard again. I've seen him in person when the cameras aren't rolling and he's a slimeball. He can't even win his home state. We call him Clinton Lite. I would rather see President Snoop Dogg. With Dr. Dre as V.P. With a platform of...

CHRONIC FOR ALL!!!

SlowPro48

11/05/2004, 01:52 PM

Originally posted by Dallas4u
Well, depending on their platform, what about a McCain/Rice ticket??

Sounds good to me. I prefer Rice/McCain though...

;)

valenki

11/05/2004, 01:54 PM

It was very educational to read this thread. I have my own view on things just like all of us, so it is not in my heart to try to move my opinion on other people. I believe time will show everyone wether they were right or wrong. However, there is a couple things I would like to say to my fellow VX'ers and others:

1) All you young people 18-28 who didnt vote, I wish you to have a good time in the desert sands when you get drafted in about 6-9 months.

2) All of you hard working Americans who have been working so song and hard, putting money away into social security and trusted uncle sam to help you out when you can no longer work, kiss your hard earned money goodbye, W spent it on Cheneys new bio heart.
Oh yeah, now you will have to work extra 5 years to retire. Tough luck!

3)At least when the stock market crashes in 6 months and the US economy goes under, I will no longer have to pay mortgage, or will I?
:confused: ::warn:

Ok, then, comments are welcome, back to digging my bomb shelter.

jimbo

11/05/2004, 01:56 PM

He can't even win his home state
You have a point there. Maybe it will be Hillary.

SlowPro48

11/05/2004, 01:57 PM

Valenki - you'll have to step it up a notch if you want to get a rise out of the veterans of this thread. We're jaded from the bunker busters and you toss that marshmallow into the room??? Get outta here...

;)

SlowPro48

11/05/2004, 02:00 PM

Originally posted by jimbo
You have a point there. Maybe it will be Hillary.

What if he and Bill swap wives - they're probably into that - and we have a John Edwards/Hillary Edwards husband wife Dream Team.

jimbo

11/05/2004, 02:02 PM

All you young people 18-28 who didnt vote, I wish you to have a good time in the desert sands when you get drafted in about 6-9 months.
Whew! I'm glad I won't be 18 for five years.

t2p

11/05/2004, 02:03 PM

valenki .........
.
c'mon .......... how about some optimism ....... look forward .......... don't look back ..........
.
we just went through a recession .........
.
an attack (on our home soil) ........
.
the market dropped ..........
.
.
we are now out of recession - the economy is growing
.
the market is up
.
we have liberated Afghan - defeated the Taliban ......
.
'purged' 75% of Al Queda .....
.
and are in the process of liberating Iraq ..... and bringing and end to the Hussein regime ......
.
this sounds like some sort of a staged political ad ........

jimbo

11/05/2004, 02:06 PM

What if he and Bill swap wives - they're probably into that - and we have a John Edwards/Hillary Edwards husband wife Dream Team.
Yeah, two southern democrat lawyers sharing power. Maybe they could invest together in a land deal that goes belly-up, then John can get a hummer in the oval office .....

No wait ... we already did that!!!!

jimbo

11/05/2004, 02:11 PM

c'mon .......... how about some optimism ....... look forward .......... don't look back .......... we are now out of recession - the economy is growing
.
the market is up
.
we have liberated Afghan - defeated the Taliban ......
.
'purged' 75% of Al Queda .....
.
and are in the process of liberating Iraq ..... and bringing and end to the Hussein regime ......
.
I'm George W. Bush and I approved this message (LOL)

t2p

11/05/2004, 02:14 PM

Hillary Clinton is bad news. Lots of baggage - and it's not pretty.
.
Edwards is a lightweight - barely one term and little else.
.
Obama (or whatever his name is) is in the same class as Edwards. Very little experience.
.
Why does no one mention Joe Biden ........ ???
.
Maybe they need to look for a Governor. Clinton had a solid rep as a Governor. Yes - he had baggage - but he had good experience and was a skilled politician.

SlowPro48

11/05/2004, 02:20 PM

Originally posted by jimbo
then John can get a hummer in the oval office .....

Do you think it would fit through the door...? Oh... Uhhh... nevermind....

t2p

11/05/2004, 02:20 PM

jimbo ........ I think I picked that up during one of the debates ....
.
I also picked up on some of the Kerry statements ......
.
had to look up a few names ..... and .. son-of-a-gun ... it appears he was on to something. Sheshinki ..... yeah .... that's the guy .... Rums and Wolf dismissed this guy ....... ditto with White (former head of the Army I believe) ....... they dismissed their estimates on the number of troops it would require to secure Iraq ..........
.

jimbo

11/05/2004, 02:21 PM

Ok, then, comments are welcome, back to digging my bomb shelter.
"How deep does that have to be anyways?" ... I say while getting my shovel out of the garage.

Chin up my friend. Things will work out somehow. At least Bush has to deal with his own messes now.

SlowPro48

11/05/2004, 02:21 PM

Originally posted by t2p
Edwards is a lightweight - barely one term and little else.

He's a good lookin' guy though isn't he? Got a real pretty mouth....

jimbo

11/05/2004, 02:23 PM

T2P

jimbo ........ I think I picked that up during one of the debates ....

Huh? I think I missed something?

jimbo

11/05/2004, 02:24 PM

He's a good lookin' guy though isn't he? Got a real pretty mouth....
You're cracking me up - very funny!

jimbo

11/05/2004, 02:26 PM

Does Anita really have to read through all this garbage?

Hi Anita!

SlowPro48

11/05/2004, 02:40 PM

Garbage? Man this is classic stuff. Three and a half years from now when the economy's humming along, there's a hydrogen pump at every gas station and Bush is spending all his vacation time in France where they love Americans (because things worked out so well with the Middle East peace accord of 2006) you'll look back on this thread and think "What was I so worried about? It all worked out in the end! I think I'll vote for Condi and Hillary!"

OK guys I gotta go. My girlfriend just called and said there's a spider as big as a tennis ball in her basement. If I don't get over there quick and rescue it, it's a goner. It's been fun chatting with you. Have a good weekend!

:)

valenki

11/05/2004, 04:21 PM

Special thanks to slowpro48, Jumbo, and especially t2p.

The only one thing that I would like to say is that:

1. we didnt really liberate Afganistan, we have somewhat liberated Kabul, the capital by giving them as much alcohol and money as they need. Every day in Afganistan in villages and smaller cities us military dump trucks are giving away money and boose to all who wish for it to keep the peace.

2. The Taliban are still feeling well, they make about 80% of the Worlds heroin supply with their friends Mujahadeen.

3. Us pilots try not to fly over Afghanistan unless they really have to because there are thousands of US made stinger missiles throughout Afghanistan.

4. The weapons for money exchange program has been somewhat successfull, a couple weeks ago some Afghani dude brought in a dump truck of Soviet and US made RPG's.

5. When Soviets occupied Afghanistan, they built schools, markets, hospitals dambs, communicatoins and other things. Their forces were spread throughout Afghanistan, US forces are mostly in Kabul. In the 80's the Soviet Union engaged the crasiest fanatical Islamists. Those Islamists were poorly trained and funded until the US came in and helped them out with weapons, training and money. The Taliban and Usama gang were trained by the CIA, this shouldnt be surprising to anyone. However those crasies dont know how to do anything except pray, grow heroin, point and shoot. THey dont know how and dont want to do anything else. It was going to be only so long until they turned on the US because they need someone to struggle with.

US Populatoin ~300Mil

Muslim Population in Middle East: ~ 800Mil

When Joseph Stalin had to decide after WWII wether he would attack China beacuse of the Manchurian problem or try to join it under the communist cause peacefully he asked math professors to do some research for him. They counted that if they used every single machine gun in the Red Army and started shooting at a line of Chinese people, the line would reproduce and there would be no ending to it.

Now About Iraq.

Not much to say here, except for a couple things.

1) I have a lot of respect for elder Bush. When he had the world behind him in 91 and not even the Soviets would say anything, the coalition troops were already in the steps to Iraq he decided to invade BECAUSE THERE WAS NO EXIT PLAN!

2)Russia has Chechnya , we have Iraq. Similar and different at the same time. Both places Superpowers are fighting Islamists. They have been fighting for 10 years to keep their country in one piece. What are we fighting for? Black gold?

MOST IMPORTANTLY: Iraq didnt have WMD's but other countries do or about to have them and they hate US: Iran, North Korea and other axes of evil. Let me remind you that they ahve not signed the Nuclear non-preliferation treaty meaning they can sell nuclear bombs to anyone: Usama, Zarqawi or Homer Sompson for that matter. One of those explodes over Washington DC, LA, NY, Boston, we'r done.

If we win in Iraq are we going to Syria, N.Korea, Iran next?

Which I doubt Doctors without borders have pulled out of Iraq saying quote: "becoming too unstable" Our coalition is getting smaller and smaller.

Now, hang on there almost the end. We have 2/3 of our military in Iraq. It has gotten so bad that we are pulling troops from Germany and N.Korea and National Gard is getting more and more involved. Peoples pay is getting cut back and tours of duty are being extended. Less and less people wanna be in the military since it's not worth having your brains shot off over 50 Grand for college. .

So, with our military so stretched out, what happens if we get attacked by an unforseen enemy?

:homer: have you got any different globus?:?:

SPAZZ

11/05/2004, 04:24 PM

we have only have 2 inches of top soil left...........
the corn flakes are falling off the pop tarts too....

Bush fockers......he is in bed and has been with everyone responsible for the bad ****e going on in this country...it will get far worse now with him on his Nazi stand with the power of Hitler...just wait.

and while your in your misery...he will continue to be on his vacation..but as he says "You would be amazed at what you can get done with a telephone and a fax machine"

if you voted for Bush..that's ok, because I vanceled your vote out;Dp; I want nothing to do with Bush, except end his reign.

which only close to being outdone by his father.

WyrreJ

11/05/2004, 06:51 PM

I know I'm late getting back to the party, but back when y'all were talking religion there was an undercurrent to the discussion that it was the atheists/agnostics/etc vs the christains.

As if there were really only two choices - God or No God.

It reminded me of a somewhat famous philosophical argument known as "Pascal's Wager" named for Blaise Pascal, the mathematician. In very simple terms, Pascal's Wager goes thus, "If there is a God, you gain everything by believing in Him. If there is no God, you lose nothing by believing in him."

The big problem with all such arguments, including the quote from CS Lewis and particularly any attempt to define absolute right and wrong by Christian dogma is that there is a third choice, or rather an almost infinite number of other choices - Islam, Hinduism, Bhuddism, even Chinese folk religion to name a few of the ones with larger numbers of adherents. Even within the umbrella of Christianity there is signficant divergence of opinion about the details - for example, Mormons differ significantly from Catholics.

So, I thought it might interesting to get a global perspective on the demographics of religion:

http://www.religioustolerance.org/worldrel.gif (http://www.religioustolerance.org/worldrel.htm)

More info, including the projection that by 2025 the proportion of Christians will have decreased to about 25% with Islam making up for the majority of that loss, is available by clicking on the image

Random CS Lewis factoid: Most people don't know this, but Treebeard the Ent in Tolkein's Lord of the Rings was intended to be a cariacature of CS Lewis.

And finally, whatever faith you believe in (or not believe in for the aetheist types), it's called "faith" for a reason. Faith is something you believe in but can not prove. Consquently, any arguments or justifications based on faith can not prove anything either. Such arguments can convince or sway people, but ultimately it all boils down to believing in the unprovable.

kpaske

11/05/2004, 06:59 PM

Wow, just when the conversation started to get intelligent again (about three pages back), we've digressed into pointless chatter again (except for maybe Wyrrej's post). Someone mentioned something about it being hypocritical for someone to say closed-minded people should have closed mouths. I think the point is that it's not interesting or a valuable use of your time to listen to close minded people because they will rarely have any truth or valuable insight to share with you. If they are too close minded to consider your opinion, then how could they possibly be enlightened about anything?

I also feel compelled to clear up a few things:

Originally posted by valenki
1. we didnt really liberate Afganistan, we have somewhat liberated Kabul, the capital by giving them as much alcohol and money as they need. Every day in Afganistan in villages and smaller cities us military dump trucks are giving away money and boose to all who wish for it to keep the peace.

Dude, what are you talking about? Most Muslims don't drink alcohol, and 99% of the military is forbidden from drinking while deployed. The people in the villages are more likely to chew Nestar or smoke opium. The only people I ever saw drinking were a handful of civilian employees in a single small restaurant opened in Kabul. I've never seen any money "given away".

5. When Soviets occupied Afghanistan, they built schools, markets, hospitals dambs, communicatoins and other things. Their forces were spread throughout Afghanistan, US forces are mostly in Kabul.

The last half of that statement is simply not true. There is no military base inside Kabul.

MOST IMPORTANTLY: Iraq didnt have WMD's but other countries do or about to have them and they hate US: Iran, North Korea and other axes of evil. Let me remind you that they ahve not signed the Nuclear non-preliferation treaty meaning they can sell nuclear bombs to anyone: Usama, Zarqawi or Homer Sompson for that matter. One of those explodes over Washington DC, LA, NY, Boston, we'r done.

WMD's include chemical and biological weapons which Iraq did have. It was not unreasonable to think that Iraq might also possess (or be attempting to aquire) nuclear capabilities. However, it's unlikely that one would explode over a U.S. city because they don't possess the long range delivery systems necessary for that. Nuclear weapons in the middle east would be a much greater threat to other countries in the middle east, or in Western countries in the form of "dirty bombs".

Green Dragon

11/05/2004, 07:42 PM

VICTORY- VICTORY- VICTORY

In the words of my grandchildren

SWEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEET- AWESOMMMME

This in no way should interrupt your right to WHINE- WHIMPER- or
FLEE TO CANADA.

Bob F

BaM*BaM

11/05/2004, 08:18 PM

interminable onslaught of offal

valenki

11/05/2004, 08:42 PM

When I made my first post I made it clear that I didnt wish to empose my opinion on enyone and didnt expect my opinion to be craped on either.

Let me clear something up also. Not all Afghans are rightious Muslims. Some of them started drinking After other cultures brought alchoholism to them; British occupiers then Russian, Americam ext. Also, I had heard this fact personally from someone who was there soon after the US invasion and saw this. If you do your research you will find out that in Iran this is a big problem but drinking is underground.

Also, A nuke can be transported on a passanger or commercial airplane and triggered in the sky over a city where it will do most damage or in a container on a ship, if it would be triggered in the water it will affect a mutch larger area.

Now about Nukes and WMD in Iraq. They did use biologicall artillery shells against their own people and might have had more but turns out they didn't. NEXT AND MOST IMPORTANT Sadam never had nukes, he wanted to make them in the 80's but in 86 Israelis destroyed his nuclear plant and refinery before he had a chance to make nukes.

YOU DO NOT NEED A NUKE TO MAKE A DIRTY BOMB. This is a fact. You can go to your local hospital and find radioactive materials and plenty of them stuff them in a shoe bomb with a grenade and you have a radioactive bomb. The worst about dirty bombs as they are known is that they will poison the environment around them for a long time.

5 regimes MUCH more dangerous than Sadam's:
North Korea
Iran
Syria
Turkmenistan
Belarus

Why? All of them have WMD's in one form or another widely available on the black market. N.Korea even has a missile capable to reach the US West Coast. Yet the US Government chose Iraq.

I am not for or against Bush or Kerry, I am speaking facts as I see them, you might see them differently.

So please don't piss on my opinion I have my own reasons to make conclusions. I appreciate people who will read this.

SGT.BATGUANO

11/06/2004, 01:07 AM

Three reasons why Texas supported Bush:

Oil production (don't bite the hand.......), guns (you can have my gun when..............damn yankees :) ). A growing contingent of immigrants from south of the border who threw their support his way.
-------

Yes, Iraq did have wmd's. Guess how we know this. ;) As was mentioned earlier our past international meddling has and will probably continue to come back and bite us in the arse.

-------

Condi Rice? Loved her method of avoiding answering questions while being deposed by the congressional committee. Kinda reminded me of the good ol' contra days.

--------
Hey, all the pols at the top of the food chain are long ago bought and paid for. In our recent senate race it was mentioned that it cost a cool $10 mil just to get name recognition for Alan Keyes.

Where's an honest, average American gonna come up with a disposable down stroke like that?

All we can do is hope our elected officials don't screw up too badly, and if they do, get rid of them.

I'll have to side with the U.K.'s "Daily Mirror" on this one.

Download the front page here:

http://images.icnetwork.co.uk/docs/Mirror/0007ACB8-ADCE-118B-9E4F80C328EC0000.pdf

Have a nice day, my friends :) !

johnnyapollo

11/06/2004, 05:51 AM

I've been staying pretty much out of this conversation, but that that pie chart is rediculous.

Taking into consideration that China and India contain 2/5ths of the world's population, how could that chart be right?

-- John

dutchie

11/06/2004, 06:04 AM

Mmm lots of great posts, from republicans, democrats and everybody else, lots of surprising posts, and some less nice ones!
But I think, that for such a "sensitive" topic, this forum members did quiet well..thumbs up for that!

I was a bit disappointed by some sentences though, words which I think don't belong in this era, and definetely not in a forum which is dedicated to such a progressive vehicle.... :(

I think that Homosexuality is wrong and I support laws that protect the sanctity of marriage as being between a man and a woman.

Homosexuality is....wrong???

I just find it ironic that the homosexual community wants a ceremony of God to be applied to their union when the Bible clearly states that it is an abomination. If they do not believe in God, then why do they want to use one of its sacraments???

The gay community never asked for church weddings..just normal weddings. Marriage is not a sacred institute, it's man made.
It's a symbol of two people who love each other , and want to spend the rest of their lives together.
Marriage has advantages, provided by the state and society, tax, loans etc.
Denying gay people the right to marry, is denying their existence.
They were born gay, like some people are born caucasian, others dark...nothing they you or anybody else can do about.
Not less than 50 years ago, it was found unacceptable for an coloured person to marry a white person..now in 2004 it's normal.....it's called evolution of humanity and acceptence!

Also, I was involved personally with a gay community in Portland, Oregon (one of the reasons I left). They ganged up on my nephew and convinced him that he was gay and sexually assaulted him several times. Before this time he was a little feminine (but so was I when I was his age) and liked to dress nicely. That does not make one gay... What they did was wrong. If someone chooses to be gay of their own free will and volition - then fine - but why do you have to attack someone in a group? They even told him that they were "recruiters!!!"

In the same matter of thinking then...if some group of man ganged up on your niece, you'd blame all male hetero sexuals?

"God created all men equal...but some more than others"

Abortion - hmm - killing a baby is ok because??? Pro-choice? Couching murder in friendly terms does not change the nature of the crime. How would you have liked it if someone had terminated your life before you were born? What about the baby's choice? Did you ask the baby before killing it? If you do not want to have a baby, practice abstinence. I have personally known women who were convinced to perform abortions and they went slightly cuckoo afterwards...

Nothing is black and white like that:
What right has a person, to tell a twelve year old girl not to abort her baby?
What right has a person, to tell a raped woman that she has to keep that baby?
What right has a person, to tell a..... shall I continue?

Yeah the Bush administration and many of its followers follow the bible, unfortunately they love to skip parts, especially the new testament, for their own convenience and political agenda.
Everytime that man, takes the word god in his mouth. the insult spreads...

Your gay, hetero, transexual, transvestite, euthanasia, save well thought out abortians loving minister,

Dutchie

jimbo

11/06/2004, 08:38 AM

Several good well thought out points Dutchie.

I agree, it really irks me that some religious types (some) seem to want to claim marriage the institution as part of their judeo-christian religion exclusively. This goes to the heart of many of their other arguments as well. They are so deep in a forest of dogma and unflinching faith that some (some again) of them can't separate ideas and customs from their belief systems. They won't even often admit that their religion IS a belief system.

And just because people are in the majority (if they are) doesn't mean they should be able to interfere with another group's pursuit of happiness (if it is not hurting anyone) simply because they feel it is "wrong".

The courts (I beleive)should protect the rights of the minority in these instances, striking down laws the majority passes that discriminate against minority lifestyles that are not hurting anything, except perhaps some folks idea about what american culture should be.

If so called activist courts hadn't stood up boldly for minority rights in the 50s and early 60s the whole civil rights movement would have never gotten rolling. We would probably still have governments in the south passing laws discriminating against blacks.

You would think everyone would want our homosexual citizens to be faithful, monogomous, responsible homeowners and raise families. Encouraging marriage would surely encourage healthy settled families.

In my mind this would only benefit communities. I have two sets of gay neighbors and they are probably the best, most decent citizens on my block. ;Dp;

kpaske

11/06/2004, 08:41 AM

Valenki -

The first part of my post wasn't directed against you at all. My apologies if it appeared that way. I'm certainly not arguing with your opinion, just disputing a few of your facts.

Originally posted by valenki
Let me clear something up also. Not all Afghans are rightious Muslims. Some of them started drinking After other cultures brought alchoholism to them; British occupiers then Russian, Americam ext. Also, I had heard this fact personally from someone who was there soon after the US invasion and saw this. If you do your research you will find out that in Iran this is a big problem but drinking is underground.

True, not all Afghans are righteous Muslims. However under the Taliban regime, many were forced to follow the teachings whether they agreed with them or not. There may be a growing community of underground drinkers with their newfound freedom, but the military certainly isn't bringing in "dump trucks full of money and booze".

Also, A nuke can be transported on a passanger or commercial airplane and triggered in the sky over a city where it will do most damage or in a container on a ship, if it would be triggered in the water it will affect a mutch larger area.

Good point...

5 regimes MUCH more dangerous than Sadam's:
North Korea
Iran
Syria
Turkmenistan
Belarus

Why? All of them have WMD's in one form or another widely available on the black market. N.Korea even has a missile capable to reach the US West Coast. Yet the US Government chose Iraq.

Are you suggesting that these countries should be next on the hit list? Bush certainly has his eyes on the first two. However, I don't think the only factor being considered is whether they have access to black market WMD. I believe more important is how likely they are to use them in the near future. Sadaam had already shown his willingness to use WMD, as well as invade neighboring countries. This is what pushed him to the top of the list, as well as him thumbing his nose at the international community by denying access to the U.N. Inspectors.

Again, I'm not into pissing on people's opinions. I would just prefer to have an intelligent discussion and it's almost laughable how much worthless chatter keeps getting inserted into what could be a good topic of discussion.

tiggergreen

11/06/2004, 08:46 AM

Marriage is not man-made - it is founded in religion. In the distant past, marriages did not provide tax breaks. There were morals back then and if two people were together and had a child, that child was termed a bastard. If you do not believe in God and therefore do not believe in chastity, adultery or fornication, there is no need for marriage. Please do some research and you will find that the original ceremony was a covenant between two people and God. Man has taken this ceremony and secularized it.

I did not condemn all homosexuals when I talked about the recruiters in Portland. I have a very good friend that is gay and he never attempts to recruit others. I know there are good and bad in all groups of people. I also have another gay friend who is a performer on Broadway and he is also very kind and never forces himself on another.

Abortion makes people see things crazy, somehow...

**************************
What right has a person, to tell a twelve year old girl not to abort her baby?
**************************

The same right that person has to tell a twelve year old girl not to murder her brother.

**************************
What right has a person, to tell a raped woman that she has to keep that baby?
**************************

I never talked about this scenario. Obviously this is a rare case and one which would perhaps warrant an exception as it was not her choice to get pregnant. However, I would strongly urge anyone in this situation to have the baby and put it up for adoption.

Please, let's all be reasonable and think about others before doing anything or saying anything we may regret later.

Brent

jimbo

11/06/2004, 09:23 AM

Please, let's all be reasonable and think about others before doing anything or saying anything we may regret later.

I apologize if it was I who offended you. If I did not respect your opinions I would not bother even visiting here, reading them, and disagreeing.

And I do disagree with the marriage and God thing. While it is true that in certain religions there have been marriage ceremonies for thousands of years, the concept of marriage has assuredly existed since man was a hunter gatherer (and I also anticipate and respect that you may reject this as well). There was probably no concept of "God" with a big "G" in those days. Yet people teamed up in couples as husband and wife.

Judeo christianity cannot lay exclusive claim to the concept of marriage. Only to the concept of marriage inside the limited and fairly recent bounds of judeo-christianity.

And in my mind the whole point is moot because to say that something has always been some way, therefore it should always stay that way, doesn't make any sense. Many folks make this argument about the founding fathers. They would probably have had very different ideas about things (such as gun control) if they lived in our age assault weapons and drive-bys.

We just have to use our own minds and do the best we can in our own ages. It will soon (already is actually) be possible for a lesbian couple to parent children without a man. This is certain to become fairly common. Homosexual men will use a surrogate mother to parent children that are truely theirs. (half of each of them). Heterosexuals also will soon probably have some of their children through genetic enginneering, not natural sex (yikes!).

Shouldn't our culture and laws evolve to take advantage of these new developments?

We should press boldly forward, not hesitate to change, and not be afraid as our culture and biology changes and grows.

Dallas4u

11/06/2004, 09:36 AM

Originally posted by tiggergreen
There were morals back then and if two people were together and had a child, that child was termed a bastard. If you do not believe in God and therefore do not believe in chastity, adultery or fornication, there is no need for marriage.

I think it's funny ("close minded") that many who believe in God think that those who don't have no morals.

Originally posted by tiggergreen
I did not condemn all homosexuals when I talked about the recruiters in Portland. I have a very good friend that is gay and he never attempts to recruit others.

This is hilarious. Homosexuals recruiting the heteros! Wow, keep ME away! I know, it has to be tough to keep yourself from going Gay! Is it a Portland thing or a liberal (progressive) thing? It's neither. I have no doubt you either did see someone trying to recruit a heterosexual to be a homosexual, or at least think you did... no matter what happened that night I DO live in Portland (came from Texas mind you) and live around at least 3 homosexual couples... within a few houses of each. We have gotten to know a couple of ladies very well. They are the nicest people we know here. I have actually left my wife around them for an extended period of time and, you know what... she's still straight AND she wasn't abused! Imagine that! Not only are there homosexuals that do mean things but straight people do to!

It's just so amazing to me that this country is so split on homosexual marriage rights.

kpaske

11/06/2004, 09:36 AM

A few more comments on some of the other topics:

The Pie Chart: Yeah, you've got to wonder how accurate something like that could ever be. Like one person mentioned, China accounts for a big chunk of the world's population, but as a nation their official religion is Atheist (as is the case with all Communist governments). At one point China had the world's largest Buddhist population, some estimates putting it at around 300 million. That would at least double the percentage of Buddhists in the world (which in some cases shouldn't even be considered a religion, but that's a whole 'nother topic).

Homosexuality: I think one of the major topics of disagreement is whether it is a choice or if people are born homosexual. I personally believe that it's a choice, but whatever two consenting adults want to do in the privacy of their own home is none of my business as long as it's not hurting anyone else. I don't see any reason why they shouldn't be allowed to have a legal marriage if they so choose, however, there are some issues that come along with that which a lot of people aren't comfortable with. I don't see why they shouldn't get some of the benefits of marriage (i.e., tax breaks, health insurance, etc), but I don't support the idea of homosexual couples adopting children. I just don't see how a child could grow up with two moms or two dads in a homosexual union and not be a little bit screwed up. Throughout my life I've met and known a sufficient number of gays to form the idea that although many of them lead pretty decent, well-adjusted lives, most of them (at least the folks I've known) have some very deep emotional problems. This may of course be due to a lifetime of hurt inflicted by closed minded family, friends, and society, but it's true none the less. If someone chooses this path for themselves in their search for happiness, so be it. But I would rather not subject a child to the same issues if it wasn't his/her choice.

As for marriage not being man made, well, that's an opinion. It's my opinion that religion is man-made, therefore marriage is man-made. And regardless, there are plenty of non-religious people out there who choose to unite with another person for personal and legal reasons. In today's society there IS a need for marriage and to non-religious folks, it has nothing to do with your God.

jimbo

11/06/2004, 09:43 AM

I have actually left my wife around them for an extended period of time ...
Dude! You didn't!!!!?

Oh man you are so scr@wed. Tickle-fights in their underwear surely ensued. (my heterosexual male biased view of the lesbian community) LOL

tiggergreen

11/06/2004, 11:42 AM

There are groups out there and they target children. This has now happened to a friend and nephew in different parts of the country. A lot of people do not understand that homosexuality is a plague - while the gay community would like us all to believe that they are almost identical to heterosexuals when it comes to being a family unit, there are a lot of them that do not commit to one partner.

In the not too distant past, there were bath houses frequented by gay men and there were a lot of "anonymous" sexual unions taking place. In fact, this is why AIDS spread so quickly among the homosexuals... One man could have sex with twenty different partners in one day... And lets be frank about what they are doing to one another - sodomy... That is just plain disgusting. And yes, my nephew is now off the deep end - I have seen a great change in his life even if he is blind to it. I don't care about adults hanging around homosexuals - I am concerned about children doing the same.

I also believe Homosexuality is a choice - in fact, I compare it to alcoholism - except it is worse because a lot of homosexuals refuse to believe they have a problem and try to tell the world that they don't. What frightens me is that it is working... They need to realize that it is a problem and seek help. I am here for anyone seeking to remove themselves from this type of situation. I love all my fellow man and want everyone to be happy. I just know that wickedness never was happiness...

And here is the truth about marriage. I know it is true - I have asked God and he has told me that it is true - you can do the same. If you do not believe in God, then I don't understand why - because this Earth is a huge testimony of His existence. The first marriage was performed by God uniting Adam and Eve - it was an Eternal marriage - one that was not broken by the bonds of death. Later, this ceremony became secularized and the term "Until death do you part" became a part of the ritual marking that the marriage was not really recognized by God.

And I am tired of the whole "open mind, closed mind" argument. This is used by everyone when they do not have any other way of winning an argument. I have enjoyed reading everyone's opinion here (except when name-calling enters the fray) and I will continue to enjoy debating and talking with anyone about these deeply significant topics. I love hearing another's take on these matters and hope that everyone will continue to do so without making it a personal attack.

Brent

SPAZZ

11/06/2004, 12:23 PM

all I heard is ....Bla, bla, bla, Bush is a dirty POS!!!!!!!!!!

WyrreJ

11/06/2004, 01:59 PM

On gay adoption and other "non-traditional forms of child acquisition:"

1) Gay people do not have a monopoly on deep-seated emotional problems.

2) If a couple, or really any grouping of one or more people, feel so strongly about having a child that they are willing to go through the elaborate, expensive and emotionally wrenching process of adoption, that is a pretty good indication that the child will be well cared for and deeply loved. Which has got to be 100x better than growing up an orphan, or in an unloving and abusive household.

On the "choice to be gay:"

Tiggergreen, do you believe God gave free will to man alone, or do animals have free will too? If only man has free will, then how do you explain homosexual behaviour among animals?

On marriage coming from God:

How do you explain all the people who have been marrying for tens of thousands of years and who have never even heard of the Judeo-Chirstian God? I'm pretty sure that they wuld strongly disagree that their marriage has anything to do with your God.

jimbo

11/06/2004, 02:11 PM

Now that we've got most of this stuff worked out do ya think we could all just redo the election and get rid of the bushmeister?;Db;

Dallas4u

11/06/2004, 04:55 PM

I am just going to agree to disagree here with you, Brent. Nothing against you as I respect people and their opinions. That being said, I believe you and I are on totally different sides of this argument, so it would be worthless for me to post any more on this topic.

Oh, and I love you... in a non man-on-man, peanut-butter and feathers type of way. :p

By the way. Something has come over me. There is a '94 Jeep Wrangler a few blocks down the road (on our dog walking route) for $6500 OBO. I've been thinking of putting a piece of paper on this window saying if he'll except $5k to email me and let me know. Am I crazy? Jeeps are so easy to work on, and parts are so readily available... I'd probably need the availability for buying a Jeep and all. I dunno... I have to admit that I like them for what they are.

Maverick

11/06/2004, 05:28 PM

i shouldve waited till sunday to check this thread...wow..

:angel: ;puke2; :snooz:

J La

11/06/2004, 06:59 PM

Originally posted by tiggergreen
The founding fathers believed in God and put it on all the currency ("In God We Trust")

Originally posted by tiggergreen
...Please do some research...

Some research you may have neglected to do:

http://home.flash.net/~lbartley/au/issues/godtrust.htm

Seidmanrob

11/06/2004, 07:13 PM

All this time I thought that this was a list about the Vehicross. I got many great tips and information about this special vehicle. This list has reached an all time low. Keep the politics out of the list and let's get on with enjoying our little trucks. Oh, I understand France has room for those of you who can't stand it here. Maybe there will now be more room for us Vx'ers to drive.

rant mode off!

Heraclid

11/06/2004, 07:21 PM

First I will digress - this is already old on this thread, but for some reason stuck with me out of the blue. The statement that the Taliban are still doing alright in Afghanistan and are producing 80% of the world's opium is false. Afghanistan produced a great percentage of the world's opium before the Taliban came to power, and the Taliban actually put it to a rather abrupt stop. So if Afghanistan is supplying a lot of opium again, it is actually proof positive that the Taliban is a thing of the past.

I am not homosexual so I do not know if homosexuality is a choice, but I tend to think that it is not simply by trying to relate it to myself in some way. How I do that is to ask myself if I ever made a choice to be a heterosexual. Well, no I didn't. It was automatic and natural for me and there was never any question that I was interested in women and not men. I would tend to think it must be the same for homosexuals. While things seem to be changing some, it is still not easy to be a homosexual, and it seems to me that not a whole lot of people would make a decision to be homosexual and face those hardships unless it was a natural part of their being and something they had little control over. If it were a choice, it would be much easier to choose differently.

Given what I've said, I am not totally sure how to reconcile homosexuality with the religious teachings I have been getting through the course of my life. It seems to me that what I think of homosexuality is really irrelevant. I think all I really need to know is that my religion teaches compassion and forgiveness, not hate and intolerance. So regardless of my feelings toward the practice of homosexuality or whether or not my faith says it is wrong, I do know without a shadow of a doubt that at least my own religious faith still does teach that one should try to look beyond it.

SGT.BATGUANO

11/06/2004, 08:47 PM

Rob,

check which forum this is . Non-vx related chit-chat. Just some lively discussion, no death threats ..............yet ;) :argue: :thumbup: :thumbdn: :?: ;wtf; ;eeky; :wtfo: :waab: ;ooo; :rollb: :laughg: :naughty: ;puke: :homer:

tiggergreen

11/06/2004, 09:51 PM

Adam, I love you too - thanks for that great post... I think you should get the jeep...

J La - interesting read - I learned quite a bit from reading this that I had not known before. However, in the declaration of Independence (http://www.law.indiana.edu/uslawdocs/declaration.html):

"When in the Course of human events, it becomes necessary for one people to dissolve the political bands which have connected them with another, and to assume among the powers of the earth, the separate and equal station to which the Laws of Nature and of Nature's God entitle them, a decent respect to the opinions of mankind requires that they should declare the causes which impel them to separation."

"We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness." July 4, 1776 (emphasis added)

And let us pull from the writings of the founding fathers...

George Washington: "The power and goodness of the Almighty were strongly manifested in the events of our late glorious revolution; and his kind interposition in our behalf has been no less visible in the establishment of our present equal government. In war he directed the sword; and in peace he has ruled in our councils. My agency in both has been guided by the best intentions, and a sense of the duty which I owe my country. " (Letter from George Washington (http://www.uwm.edu/People/corre/children/washington.html))

Here is an interesting read about the role of God in the founding of this great nation:

God and Washington (http://www.newsmax.com/archives/articles/2003/7/7/175656.shtml)

Here is a link to the constitution (a must read for anyone):

http://www.house.gov/Constitution/Constitution.html

I could go on - but I suggest you do a search on the Internet for both sides of the issues and I think you will find that the answer is that the founding fathers wanted a separation of any single church and the state - basically they didn't want a repeat of the Church of England fiasco... However, they knew our nation would fall apart without religion. There are some incredible stories about the founding of the United States of America.

I took a class in college and that is why I know so much about this subject - however, sometimes my mind loses track of facts, and that is why I love the Internet - it is all at your disposal - for and against - all written very well for anyone to make an educated conclusion of the matter.

Brent
;Dp;

webdog

11/06/2004, 11:48 PM

Can an atheist get insurance
against acts of God?:eek:

WyrreJ

11/07/2004, 06:35 AM

"Laws of Nature" and "Nature's God" are terms that are primarily associated with deism.

Washington was well known as a deist, as were most of the founding fathers. You will find that there are no records of George Washington ever referring to Jesus - not a single mention of Christ in all of Washington's writings.

That is important in the context of the modern conservative christian idealogy which is firmly based in revelation. Deism completely rejects the idea of revelation.

Beyond the abstract characteristics of generic monotheism, the God of the deists shares very little in common with the God of christianity. For the most part, deists are just one step away from being agnostics.

Given that background, it is interesting that the article you linked to quotes Washington's farewell address in which he said:

"And let us with caution indulge the supposition, that morality can be maintained without religion. Whatever may be conceded to the influence of refined education on minds of peculiar structure -- reason and experience both forbid us to expect that National morality can prevail in exclusion of religious principle."

Note that part about "influence of refined education on minds of peculiar structure" -- basically he just said that enlightened people don't need religion to have morals, but for the average bloke its simpler if somebody else sets out the rules of morality and they just follow along.

I'm pretty sure that the author of the article didn't really pick up on that, despite it being in character for Washington - for example, he attended church about as rarely as he possibly could given his position in society.

Maverick

11/07/2004, 08:25 AM

Originally posted by webdog
Can an atheist get insurance
against acts of God?:eek:
yes, but they charge you a double deductible... :D

it would make an interesting argument though.. if the insurance company denied a claim due to an "act of god", and your athiest, couldnt one fight their decision based upon that? i dont think theres a clause in insurance policies requiring you acknowldege the existance of God when you sign up, therefore theyd have to pay out wouldnt they??
oh the fun one could have with that one.. ;eekr; ;Dy;

i respect religious beliefs, but i just dont think one has to subscribe to a popular organized religion in order to be spiritual.... Religion teaches good moral values, but i agree that religion is not a requirement to attain morality...Thats a great Quote by Washington (above) , thanks for posting it!!

MachineVX

11/07/2004, 12:14 PM

As for this discussion about God and the founding fathers, many of them were not Christians. They were Deists.

http://www.postfun.com/pfp/worbois.html

jimbo

11/07/2004, 03:43 PM

"And let us with caution indulge the supposition, that morality can be maintained without religion. Whatever may be conceded to the influence of refined education on minds of peculiar structure -- reason and experience both forbid us to expect that National morality can prevail in exclusion of religious principle."
This is very interesting. My in-laws, born again Christians, are forever paraphrasing this quote saying that "George Washington (or the founding fathers) intended this nation to be a christian and thought that if religion and state were separated the state would fail."

Now that you pointed this out and I carefully read it I can see what he really means and it's not quite how it is often paraphrased at all.

Perhaps if George Washington were with us today he would take a firm stance against the meddling of religion that is going on in America's politics today.

Very interesting.

BaM*BaM

11/07/2004, 05:26 PM

What city would Jesus bomb next?

And please, no crap about, " this question can't be applied to the USA,... and to your sophisticated 'christian' 'ideas' of Jesus.

Or that Jesus represents only a 'spiritual' model,... but not really a model for YOUR OWN political actions.

And that USA casualties are more spiritually significant than the Iraqis that we are killing.

tiggergreen

11/07/2004, 08:20 PM

Did someone try to read between the lines of what I've been saying? I know well and good that George Washington was a Deist... I never tried to state that. However, the quote was not understood:

*************************
"And let us with caution indulge the supposition, that morality can be maintained without religion. Whatever may be conceded to the influence of refined education on minds of peculiar structure -- reason and experience both forbid us to expect that National morality can prevail in exclusion of religious principle."

Note that part about "influence of refined education on minds of peculiar structure" -- basically he just said that enlightened people don't need religion to have morals, but for the average bloke its simpler if somebody else sets out the rules of morality and they just follow along.
*************************

Let me put this quote in layman's terms:

"And let us be careful saying that morality can be maintained without religion. No matter how high an education a person has gained -- reason and experience have taught us that National morality cannot exist without religious principle."

His quote says that we cannot have morality without religion - which is what I was saying in the first place. This nation was founded by people who believed in GOD - I didn't say which one and I didn't say that it mattered. What I am saying is that I do believe that we all need to believe in a higher power whether Muslim, Catholic, Mormon, Protestant, Hindu, Buddhist or whatever - because that is the driving force that helps us to be a better person, better families, better nation.

Jesus would not bomb anyone - I'm sorry - if you read the New Testament - he taught us to love our enemies. Last time I checked around - it isn't showing love when you drop a huge bomb on someone's neighborhood. In fact, I would go so far as to say that we should only defend our country if someone was to attack us. Some would say that we were attacked on 9/11 - however, the group that attacked us was not a nation - but a group of outlaws attempting to overthrow our "infidel" nation. I don't know what would have been the best route - but if I had been in charge - I would have just boosted our nation's defenses including an overhaul of the airport security system and a tighter scrutiny of persons wishing to obtain a pilot's license...

I don't have all the answers, however, and I would hate to be in the position to have to make such crucial decisions. I do believe that the only way to win peace in this world, is through the power of love... If you live by the sword, you will die by the sword. We have so far to go before we are even ready to show love for our enemies abroad. We have so much hate domestically and we really need to address that. Fathers pass their hate on to their progeny and it is a hard cycle to defeat...

Did I mention that I love my VX?

Cheers...

Brent
;Dp; ;Dr; ;Db;

Heraclid

11/07/2004, 10:02 PM

I respect his conviction and I agree with tiggergreen's interpretation of the Washington quotation, but where we do differ is that I'm more of an Old Testament kinda guy. :-) Evil has to be confronted and defeated, and the nations harboring it must understand that there are consequences. We must mean what we say and do it.

I got into a bit of an argument with my brother over the separation of church and state recently. He has become quite the liberal and apparently has a real problem with President Bush's being openly religious, so he is for separation of church and state. I told him that while that all sounds fine and dandy, in reality there comes a point where the two are inextricably linked and things get tricky. Such as when you have a presidential candidate who claims to be a devout Catholic but also supports abortion. If you are a Catholic and you oppose abortion, how do you overlook that and vote for that candidate anyway? There will always be times in the debate over church and state in which one simply cannot ignore the other.

My brother is actually fairly religious. It is interesting that now many on the left are so even more outspoken against the religious community since this last election. Perhaps it will open his eyes. I have hope even in the midst of doubt.

WyrreJ

11/07/2004, 10:51 PM

Brent, your interpretation of the Washington quotation completely ignores the key phrase that I commented on. If Washington really believed what you say he believed, then what do you think he meant when he said, "Whatever may be conceded to the influence of refined education on minds of peculiar structure..." ?

Furthermore, look at the first sentence of the paragraph from which that quotation is taken, Washington begins it with, "Of all the dispositions and habits which lead to political prosperity, religion and morality are indispensable supports."

If he believe that morality uniquely and solely derives from religion, as you appear to be claiming why does he break morality out and give it equal standing? If morality flows only from religion and is not in any way self-evident, why did he not just say so, or at least write as if he believed it?

Also, I really would appreciate you addressing my question about animals, homosexual behaviour and free will.

Heraclid - I really don't see how a candidate's claim to being a devout follower of a particular religion and then holding forth in words or actions in contradiction to that religion's tenents is an issue of seperation between church and state. Seems to me it is simply a matter of person saying one thing and doing another.

The hypocrisy of claiming to be a devout catholic and then supporting the murder of babies is just as hypocritical as claiming to be a devout born-again christain and then bombing cities which are populated with innocent civilians. Hypocrisy is not some trait unique to claims of religious belief, it is simply a characteristic that some people have, regardless of their religion or lack there of.

SlowPro48

11/07/2004, 11:07 PM

Originally posted by kpaske
....Someone mentioned something about it being hypocritical for someone to say closed-minded people should have closed mouths. I think the point is that it's not interesting or a valuable use of your time to listen to close minded people because they will rarely have any truth or valuable insight to share with you.

Just wondering - how do you make the determination that a person is closed-minded and not worthy of conversing with you if you don't listen to them. Can you tell just by the bumper stickers on their car? Or the political signs in their yard maybe...?

Originally posted by kpaske
If they are too close minded to consider your opinion, then how could they possibly be enlightened about anything?

Yeah - what could they possibly know? It's a total waste of time for an open-minded person such as yourself to talk to closed-minded individuals.

I guess I'm just really stupid because I learn something from practically everybody I talk to. Even the ones who are not receptive to my views. :confused:

Anyway.. Thanks for the comments!!! I think you did a fantastic job of illustrating my point.
;Dy;

SlowPro48

11/07/2004, 11:24 PM

Dang I figured this thread would die over the weekend but you guys are still going at it! What's the record for the longest thread on this site?

Originally posted by WyrreJ
Washington was well known as a deist, as were most of the founding fathers. You will find that there are no records of George Washington ever referring to Jesus - not a single mention of Christ in all of Washington's writings.

In his speech on May 12, 1779, he claimed that what children needed to learn "above all" was the "religion of Jesus Christ"; on May 2, 1778, he charged his soldiers at Valley Forge that "To the distinguished character of patriot, it should be our highest glory to add the more distinguished character of Christian"

Originally posted by WyrreJ
Beyond the abstract characteristics of generic monotheism, the God of the deists shares very little in common with the God of christianity. For the most part, deists are just one step away from being agnostics.

Now you've got me confused. The God of Christianity is the God of the Jewish people right? - the God of Abraham and Isaac and Jacob? So which God did George Washington and the other Deists believe in if not that one? Thor the God of Thunder? (Don't laugh - I just buy his riding gear but there are still plenty of people who worship Thor)

kpaske

11/08/2004, 05:36 AM

Originally posted by SlowPro48
Just wondering - how do you make the determination that a person is closed-minded and not worthy of conversing with you if you don't listen to them. Can you tell just by the bumper stickers on their car? Or the political signs in their yard maybe...?

See? You just aren't listening. If you read my response it didn't say that I don't listen, just that I realize it's often a waste of my time.

Yeah - what could they possibly know? It's a total waste of time for an open-minded person such as yourself to talk to closed-minded individuals.

I guess I'm just really stupid because I learn something from practically everybody I talk to. Even the ones who are not receptive to my views.

I've wasted countless hours talking to closed-minded people who never seriously considered anything I had to say. It comes to a point where what little you may learn isn't worth the effort.

tiggergreen

11/08/2004, 07:23 AM

Animals and homosexuality - I don't care. I would never compare ourselves to animals. Animals have no morals and do not belong in a comparison to human behavior. In fact, I would say that some people go so far down the tube as to become animal-like and that is not a good thing.

"Whatever may be conceded to the influence of refined education on minds of peculiar structure" - this is saying to me that no matter how educated someone gets and says that he is so much more enlightened - this does not mean that morality will prevail. In fact, there are some very evil people who are very well educated. Education in and of itself is not an indicator of morality. George Washington knew this. Please tell me how morality can exist without religion? If you do not believe in a higher power, why be moral? Where is the reward for being moral? I would say that if I did not believe in God, then I would be a far different person - if someone got in my way, I would remove them - if lying would get me closer to the top of the pack, then I would do so. My religion helps me to be a better citizen.

Look at France and the French revolution for what happens when a mass of people lose sight of God...

Brent
;Db;

dutchie

11/08/2004, 07:45 AM

Such as when you have a presidential candidate who claims to be a devout Catholic but also supports abortion. If you are a Catholic and you oppose abortion, how do you overlook that and vote for that candidate anyway?

True religious devotion is devoting religion to life, not life to religion..
A true minister, will advise and lead its herd, but will never judge them, the final judgement is up to god.
So who are all these people who judge people in the name of god? People who go against everything Jesus tried to teach us....
Followers of the old Herbrew scripts, should convert to that other religion, which applies a tooth for a tooth...judaism.

Christians are to recognize the Old Testament as the inspired word of God and use it for learning, for admonition, and for comfort, but they must not, however, use it for their law (study Romans 15:4, I Cor. 10:11). The law we are to follow today consists of Jesus' commandments, the Apostles' directions, and the examples of the early Christians as they lived under the direct tutorship of the inspired apostles.

Your Dutch minister:)

jimbo

11/08/2004, 08:14 AM

Animals have no morals and do not belong in a comparison to human behavior
Please tell me how morality can exist without religion? If you do not believe in a higher power, why be moral?
This sort of thinking goes to the heart of this thread and why the current american administration is narrow-minded and dangerous.

Humans are not "better", just different. America is not better either. We see being these things as being better because it is hard to get outside of our own belief systems and value judgements. Even if you feel you can argue that the above suppositions are absolutely true (I realize that humans and americans are different in significant ways) it is no way to think. We do not have to attach value judgements to our own differentness.

This is the beginning of intolerance.

When you start believing that humans are so special, americans are so great, my religion is the one "true" religion, then you set up a dangerous situation that often leads to violence and oppresion of other nations, religions, and the earth's ecosystem itself.

You become so sure you are right that you justify your aggresive actions by your own narrow-minded belief system.

Is this how we justify the torture going on at Guantanomo? Is this a good way for the leader of the free world to behave?

Back to the topic at hand, animals and morals :

Many animals exhibit altruistic behavior. One example is whale pods who will often surround a sick member who is in shallow water (beached) and in danger of drowning by flipping over and submerging the blowhole.

Whales will often stay with the sick individual until that individual recovers or dies, even if they end up getting stranded and dying themselves. I don't think this behavior can be justified by saying that the animals are simply reacting out of instinctual needs to protect the gene pool (like a mother bear protecting her own cubs). Something deeper is going on here.

Altruism -The quality of unselfish concern for the welfare of others. Often used as a synonym for morals.

So whales might have morals. In fact the whole animal kingdom is full of examples that we might call "moral" behavior.

Do animals have religion? I think not. But they might have morals.

The same instinctual moral behaviors apply to humans. After the toddler stage human animals exhibit moral behavior on their own, regardless of their culture and upbringing (religion or not). As a matter of fact humans (barring psychological problems like sociopaths) have to learn immoral behavior, in other words rationalize harming others. People who do wrong often know it is wrong instinctually, but rationalize it to themselves. Example: It is ok to steal from my boss because he didn't give me the raise I deserved. Studies seem to show that moral behavior is instinctual in humans and can be totally unreliant on religious beliefs.

Actually, some sociologists who study religion believe the opposite is true.

Religious beliefs seem true to people because they reenforce instinctual moral systems that exist within the brain already. This is why some belief systems just "seem" right. The more the religion conforms to these instinctual systems, the more it will seem true, and the more popular and widespread the memes of that religious system are likely to be.

Maverick

11/08/2004, 09:18 AM

In my junior year of High school ( a long , long time ago, public school system) i had a great literary arts teacher..he was a protestant minister (or the equivelant of a preist for that religion, excuse my ignorance of the title, and my memory lapse) ...extremely intelligent, and a great teacher...he, ofcourse was a very religious man, however he never attempted to force his views on his students. instead, he varied his lesson plans, including great works from many different faiths. I once asked him if it was frustrating for him to teach so many different view points (including athiest perceptions) considering his position in his church..he responded to me with something to effect of "I am an educator, and a student of the worlds great works, of which many are religiously based texts. God gave us the gift of choice, and no choice can be made in honest with out exposure to different viewpoints.the moral fiber, or lack of it, in the texts are far more important than the beliefs behind them. It is up you to make your decisions on faith, its up to me to make sure you have the tools to make your decision, and have a wide exposure to the history of right and wrong. I enjoy that challenge very much, even it it means you might choose to believe there is no god at all. "

those words have stuck with me my entire life. I signed up for all the elective classes i could with him after that, because i knew id learn something and enjoy them, not be subjugated by his religious ferver. to this day i feel very fortunate to have had him for a teacher. He taught that accepting religion wasnt necessary to be "moral" but it was a great tool to teach morality with.
the point? many seem to feel that the subject of religion in the US is a tangible, win or loose situation, i submit that it is not, it has never been, and will never be so, it has been and always will be a gray area, and should be addressed with tolarance, respect and equality..might i also remind those people that this country was formed by people fleeing religious persecution and intolarance. Our base structure was formed to prevent such a thing from happening here, yet today, we face intolarance as never before.. my teacher wasnt teaching religion, he was teaching history, diversity, morals, choice and even consequence...that message will be lost forever if we let the far right, or far left for that matter, elliminate opposing view points, and we will cease to be the country our founders envisioned..and our greatest strength will be lost....if it already hasnt...

Dallas4u

11/08/2004, 09:25 AM

VERY nicely put, Maverick. (For some reason, when I say your screen name, I feel like I'm Goose in Top Gun).

SlowPro48

11/08/2004, 09:30 AM

Originally posted by kpaske
See? You just aren't listening. If you read my response it didn't say that I don't listen, just that I realize it's often a waste of my time.

Sorry - guess I'm not much for parsing casual conversation and was paying more attention to what I perceived to be the spirit of your message than the semantics. ;Db;

Originally posted by kpaske
I've wasted countless hours talking to closed-minded people who never seriously considered anything I had to say. It comes to a point where what little you may learn isn't worth the effort.

I know what you mean. I spend a lot of time listening to my neighbor ramble on. Most people walk the other way when they see him coming because they think he's crazy. He's a WW2 vet, a Marine infantryman. On this very day 61 years ago he was fighting for his life, and our freedom on Bougainville Island in the South Pacific. I guess it's stressful having 75mm of exploding ordnance lobbed at you all day and he came back from that place a little wacky.

Actually in his case I think what bothered him more than people trying to kill him was the people he saw die as he looked through his sights and pulled the trigger. He said he stopped counting at 100. That was the first, and worst day of the invasion. He's not a "natural-born killer" or an "army of one" or any of that crap. Far from it. He's a very humble, passive, softspoken man - not someone you would think has ever killed another human. He wonders how he made it out of that place alive. He says God has blessed him his entire life.

He gets on my nerves sometimes with all his God talk and the tracts he leaves on my windshield and telling me I shouldn't be shacking up (as he calls it) but you know what? Every once in a while that man says something I need to hear.

But yeah - I know what you mean about wasting time. I always make sure I've got a paintbrush or wrench or something in my hand when I seem him walking my way. That way I can at least do something constructive while I wait for that gold nugget to drop out of his mouth...

SlowPro48

11/08/2004, 10:01 AM

Originally posted by jimbo
This sort of thinking goes to the heart of this thread and why the current american administration is narrow-minded and dangerous.

A Kerry administration would have been as narrow-minded and dangerous. The Democratic [Socialist] Party is no better than the GOP - they just want to ignore different parts of the Constitution, trample different individual rights and freedoms and would have us worship the earth and "humanity".

Originally posted by jimbo
People who do wrong often know it is wrong instinctually, but rationalize it to themselves.

Where do you think this instinctual morality come from?

jimbo

11/08/2004, 01:48 PM

Where do you think this instinctual morality come from?
Same place as the platypus of course.

----------------------------------------------
P.S. - I believe in God, just not religious dogma. Brent is arguing that without religion (read christianity) there could be no morals (I think, sorry if I'm mistaken Brent).

Also he insinuated that without the "fear of God"(answering to a higher power) no one would have any reason to be moral. I am simply arguing that morality (and evil as well) may be natural, occur in most higher animals, and that with humans religions can use this fact to construct their own "truths" that make sense to their followers.

Slowpro - I don't believe John Kerry would have been nearly as dangerous as George Bush (I know I can't convince you though). He seems a rational, moderate man, and not one to stubornly pursue policies based on faith, us vs them mentality, and prejudice.

StormTROOPER

11/08/2004, 02:44 PM

If John Kerry HAD HIS WAY Saddam would OWN Kuwait and maybe Saudi Arabia, then we would all be driving Chevy Metros or motorcycles instead of VXes.:p Forget WMDs the main reason to remove that bafoon was LEVERAGE. How can the U.S. be taken SERIOUSLY in it's war on terrorism when one of the MAIN SUPPORTERS of terrorism NEVER ADMITTED DEFEAT and continued to thumb his nose at the U.S. & U.N. The reason the left hates Bush so much is that he's changing the world for the better and they love him cause it gives them a purpose and the chance to relive the 70s, I'm sure Michael Moore is already planning Farenheit part 2. ;)

BaM*BaM

11/08/2004, 02:50 PM

above comment......

comedy's malformed twin

kpaske

11/08/2004, 07:23 PM

Maverick - Nice post. I believe it is only from a thorough examination of as many viewpoints as possible that we can truly make an educated judgement. It was actually my early religious education (6 years of CCD and 3 years of Catholic high school) that eventually led me away from the Catholic tradition I was first raised in. It amazed me that when I questioned teachings of the bible I was given answers like "God works in mysterious ways" and "you must first have faith in the Lord". These aren't acceptable answers for the scientifically educated mind when there are clearly contradictions between the bible and science.

I consider religion to be merely a teaching tool for the masses. I believe the bible, as well as many religious texts throughout history, has many valuable lessons, which are open to interpretation. You don't need to believe every word, literally, in order to gain from the wisdom of many generations.

Please tell me how morality can exist without religion? If you do not believe in a higher power, why be moral?

I'll tell you how. Buddhism. As I eluded to in an earlier post, Buddhism isn't really a religion, but rather a philosophy. Buddha is paid respect as a human being who gained enlightenment beyond any other human, but should not be considered a "God". He taught human beings about morality, without even a mention of a "higher power" or a "creator". Buddhists follow a similar set of principles, or "precepts" that exist in every religion, such as the Christian's "10 Commandments".

Why be moral? Because it benefits mankind. Duh. It's one of the factors that has allowed human beings as a species to thrive far beyond other animals. That and opposable thumbs, of course. ;)

And yes, I went there. We truly are just another animal. Biologically, we just happen to be the most well adapted, mentally and physically. Our brains are the most developed, and our bodies have a couple of simple advantages. But I don't see why (outside of the fact that the "bible says so") such a strong distinction must be made between us and the other creatures on this planet.

And lets not forget, the bible was written by humans, and translated through several languages over the course of over 2000 years. It is a mistake not to recognize that it has been reinterpretted over and over again, and likely bears little resemblance to the original text.

There was an old joke that goes something like this. A priest goes to work at the Vatican after many years of faithful service. One day he begins studying some of the old original texts from which the bible was written. One day he's heard sobbing from the Vatican library so another priest goes to ask him what's wrong. He looks up from his tears and proclaims, "it says CELEBRATE, not CELEBATE"!!

Instinctive morality? Perhaps to some extent our basic instincts govern our morality. We have many of the same instincts as animals (to eat, to reproduce, to fight, to communicate), but much of our behavior is learned. We have learned to repress some of our instincts because of things we've been taught. Animals too, particularly other higher, communal species, exercise restraint due to learned behavior. Does a dog not have some thoughts about consequences when he wants to jump up on the table and eat the piece of steak, but opts not to because he knows his owner will become very upset with him? His instinct makes him drool and stare at the delicious meal, but if he's been trained well enough, he won't jump for it, even in the absense of authority. So my question is, are we truly moral, or have we just been taught to avoid undesirable consequences? Certainly the fear of ETERNAL LIFE IN HELL wouldn't affect our behavior, would it?

By the way SlowPro - sometimes those old "crazy" guys really have some interesting stories to tell. He sounds like a guy we could learn a thing or two from.

Kerry vs. Bush - wow, back to the original topic again? ;eekb; I think whoever gets into office is potentially dangerous, just in different ways. Bush certainly hasn't chosen the safest, easiest path for our nation. But the safe, easy answer isn't always the right one. Sometimes you need to be proactive when you are the leader of the most powerful nation in the free world. Kerry may have chosen to get us out of Iraq as quickly as possible, but I believe that given the state of the world right now, that would be a very, very bad move. The most dangerous thing about Kerry though, is nobody knows what the heck he would have done. He's way too inconsistant, and I think the nation recognized this when the majority voted for Bush. At least with Bush, we know what to expect, and we know he won't ever back to down from terrorists.

Ok, I've said way more than my two cents. Time to go do something productive. ;Db;

Ldub

11/08/2004, 07:41 PM

:D

Is the horse dead yet? I'll try & rember to ck. back in another 14-15 pages.

Ldub

Moncha

11/08/2004, 07:46 PM

Will this do?

Ldub

11/08/2004, 07:49 PM

:thanx:

THATT'L DO! Ldub

jimbo

11/09/2004, 05:01 AM

I concede.

Four more years, yeeeeeeyyyy!!!!!!
(I can't wait to see what's next)

SlowPro48

11/09/2004, 10:31 AM

Originally posted by jimbo

Slowpro - I don't believe John Kerry would have been nearly as dangerous as George Bush (I know I can't convince you though). He seems a rational, moderate man, and not one to stubornly pursue policies based on faith, us vs them mentality, and prejudice.

It doesn't really matter - I didn’t vote for either one of those buffoons! No, I shouldn’t say that. Here’s the deal: personality-wise, I like your man Kerry as much as I like Bush. I get the feeling it would be easier to talk to Bush than Kerry. Bush seems like he would at least try to have a conversation with a peon like me - even if he didn't need my vote, whereas Kerry appears to be the stuck-up type who would look down his nose and not even speak to a peon like me if he didn’t need my vote. But the bottom line is they’re both rich, Ivy League frat boys, so it’s not like either one of them could really relate to me or my little insignificant life. So - from a personality standpoint it’s really a wash.

From a political standpoint, however, there is a slight difference. It's not so much a difference in the men as it is the effect political parties have. I don’t exactly like what either major party is doing. But one has more of a negative effect on my life than the other. The current administration is running roughshod all over my 4th amendment rights with all this homeland security crap. That bothers me when I think about it but, in all honesty, it doesn’t have much effect on my day-to-day existence. The Democratic party, however, is constantly getting in the way of one of my unalienable Rights - the pursuit of Happiness. Democratic lawmakers are relentless in their efforts to kill my joy.

I’m sure Kerry IS a rational, moderate man - but in the last couple election cycles, the party he’s associated with only gets my vote at lower levels of government. Democrats have simply been doing far too much damage to my hobbies to get my vote at the national level.

Having said that though, I do realize there should be more to the decision than my pursuit of Happiness. So - on to the bigger picture! I do vote for Dems at the local and state level. They actually brought my “batting average” up this time. All the Dems I voted for won as opposed to only two Republicans and ZERO Libertarians. :mad: So you see I do spread my vote around and you actually CAN convince me to vote for your party’s man (or woman) in the next national election. All you have to do is show me that the Democratic Party isn’t moving the country toward socialism. Just pick any plank on their platform - the economy, health care, education, the environment, military operations - pick anything and show me where they favor a solution that doesn’t conflict with the basic tenets this great country was founded upon and our Constitution - the tenth amendment in particular - as opposed to favoring a bureaucratic, centralized/socialist-government type solution.

Have at it. I think we can get 20 pages out of this thread...:)

SlowPro48

11/09/2004, 10:41 AM

Originally posted by jimbo
I concede.

Hell, I tried to throw in the towel way back at page 10 but I guess you guys didn't like my plan. Now I'm feeling like your man Kerry. "Because I have a PLAN"

it was a damn fine plan too.... :cryb:

tomdietrying

11/09/2004, 12:54 PM

Plan? Plan? What plan? Bush don't need no stinkin plan.
Peace.
Tom

jimbo

11/09/2004, 01:14 PM

Well ... ok if you guys want to talk a little more ...

( I know - shut up already! But I'm bored.)

After reading the last couple posts I was thinking about why I actually liked Kerry and although it is throughly academic at this point to discuss these things, it seems that being throughly academic is what this thread has become all about.

I don't think Kerry was a flipflopper (and don't think changing your position is always bad anyways). The Bush administration is forever saying one thing then another, sometimes even on the same day. I watch John Stewart everynight and he spent a couple years teasing the Bushies by showing one piece of video, then another where they were saying two opposite things. We're safer - we're not safer, Catching Osama is not really important - catching Osama is very important, We're positive Iraq has nuclear weapons - we never said Iraq had nucear weapons etc.

I went through most of Kerry's voting record before deciding to vote for him and it seemed fairly consistent. For example he always votes for gun control, he always votes pro-choice, he usually leans towards environmentalists, leans away from war.

It looked like he was inconsistent on Iraq, but if you analyze it I don't think he was. He was remarkably consistent in his opposition to military intervention even back to the first Gulf War, being one of the few who voted against it. When he voted for it this time he felt it was an authorization only to be used if all else failed. When it became clear how gungho the Bush administration was he voted against funding further aggression.

I think it is clear he never was for the war in Iraq and realized that he had to deal with the reality that Bush had already commited us to it. I think he did a pretty good job on that.

Here's a few things I wanted from a president, hoping John Kerry would at least partially do, and feel George Bush will never do:

1. My Dad, who is now deceased, spent the last five years of his life very sick and suffering with piss-poor health care. He would probably be alive today if he had better care, and he worked hard his whole life. He got a raw deal.

All americans should have the best health care in the world. Not just some americans.

No one seems to question WHY health care is expensive. I think the biggest reason is greed.

I think america's health care should be treated like the highway system, the space program, the military. Instead of a profit center and cash cow for wealthy investors it should be an important part of our nation's infrastructure. Middle-men are profiting from other people's pain and sucking up profits big-time. I'm not talking about doctors, nurses, researchers, inventors - all of whom deserve to get rich when they contribute.

I'm talking about insurance companies, lawyers, investors, salesman, lobbyists, and high payed executives.

I think that just because an industry started exclusively in the private sector is no reason it has to stay there forever.

The airlines are another example of an important infrastructure that we trust too much to the private sector.

Education is one area that started in the public sector that we might want to try privatizing.

Back to my wishlist.

2. We are doing things in the war on terror that I feel are unneccesary and despicable. Some of this stuff we have allowed our government to do in the name of fighting terror is going to come back to bite us later.

Torturing prisoners either physically or mentally is one of these things. "Unlawful enemy combatant" is a nonsense phrase that is not recognized by the rest of the world (or us before now).

The bush administration made it up to justify their not treating "the detainees" as either prisoners of war, or regular criminals; so that they would be in a no-man's land outside of all international law or internal oversight.

They want to hold people indefinitely without anyone even knowing where they are and they want to do whatever they like to these people. Some of these men we are holding (or have held) were scooped up in raids of general buildings and certain areas.

Some are (or were before they were eventually released) only guilty of being in the wrong place at the wrong time and many were held and tortured for months or years wth no access to courts or international oversight.

It's just wrong and I would want the President to put an end to it. There needs to be checks and balances here.

3. I think abortion rights are intertwined with woman's rights and to outlaw them would be a major setback to equality between the sexes.

I would want a President who supports Roe vs Wade.

A woman can never be equal if she can be forced to give birth to a child she considers a mistake, even at the expense of her own career, education or health.

I believe the groups who oppose abortion (and all of us in general) should lobby to reduce the number of abortions by promoting abstinence (yeah right), better birth control and adoption, but it should never be made illegal again.

4. I want a president who respects the press as our fourth branch of government and welcomes their critisism.

He should hold frequent press conferences (Bush holds almost none) and not try to intimidate the press by shutting of access to those who write articles critical of his administration. He should not limit questions to only one, or talk down to them in an arrogant manner like I saw him do last week.

I also want a president who welcomes dissent from the people and does not try to control demonstrations critical of his policies.

Bush is the first president to misuse the secret service to remove people with anti bush signs (and only those people) from motorcade routes and public speeches he makes. The whole country should be a "free-speech zone" not just a fenced off area far from his public appearances.

These appearances are one of the few occasions where a citizen who is angry at the president might have the opportunity to protest in a manner the president, and the press, can see.

This is important and I feel it is un-american for an american president to try to hide or squelch this dissent.

He should expect and welcome it, and respect the citizens point of view and his or her right to hold that protest sign in a president's face.

5. I want a president who does not lie to the people about who big tax cuts benefit the most. I don't believe voodoo economics works by trickling down from the top.

Also: The so called "death tax" actually affects so few people, a small group of multimillionares, but bush gives speeches where he insinuates that it is an evil thing that must be abolished for the good of everybody. The vast majority of estates pay no federal estate tax.

Regarding estate taxes: They are a good thing for society. Most people don't realize that if the wealth is not "leveled" to any extent after each generation it's like creating a never ending game of monopoly where the wealth gets pooled into a small number of families, basically like the european landowners of past centuries. This reduces opportunity for everyone else.

The middle class is going to pay for all these wealthy tax cuts with lower social services and higher deficits.

I want a president who taxes the wealthy more, and the middle class less and stimulates the economy through targeted government spending programs.

6. I think we all deserve a president who is eloquent, and a superb public speaker. This is a big part of his job. We should have a president who speaks in full sentences (not fragments) and has no trouble putting together complete thoughts at the spur of the moment.

It is embarrasing to me that our current president need a little notebook to flip through whenever he speaks, and still manages to say the wrong thing almost as many times as not.

Well, that's enough for now. I'm just a peon, as a poster before me already said, and I felt that John Kerry would have done (or at least tried to do) these important things for our country.