TranceAddict Forums (www.tranceaddict.com/forums)
- Political Discussion / Debate
-- Nader: At least he's honest

Nader: At least he's honest

"We'll truly see how bad things can get, and elect a progressive candidate the next time."


What a deluded fool. By that logic, Nader should just endorse W - a man who believes that it's his job to bring on the rapture through war.


I take back anything positive I've said about Nader in the past.

He wants all hell to break loose first, so that maybe he'll win someday. He doesn't care about all the people who are suffering.

Are you suffering?

No, but I care about other people.

Is that a radical concept to you?

Think about if this girl could have purchased emergency contraception over the counter for example:

http://www.tranceaddict.com/forums/...threadid=180648

Her life is probably ruined now, and no I don't blame Bush for her not having access to that pill at the present time - it was too late for her.

But there will be MANY more people like her...

quote:

Originally posted by DaveSZ No, but I care about other people. Is that a radical concept to you? Think about if this girl could have purchased emergency contraception over the counter for example: http://www.tranceaddict.com/forums/...threadid=180648 Her life is probably ruined now, and no I don't blame Bush for her not having access to that pill at the present time - it was too late for her. But there will be MANY more people like her...

Although you could easily rebut by saying it takes two to tango. If she was raped that was another story, but two consenting adults having sex has consequences, and those should be taken into consideration. As you know I am for Plan B, but I'm also for personal responsibility. Yes I believe it should be legal, but just because it isn't doesn't push accidental preganancies into the fault of the government.

I may have felt some sympathy for her if it was her first child, but hell, she already had an abortion. This would be her second abortion at 15!

Re: Nader: At least he's honest

quote:

Originally posted by DaveSZ "We'll truly see how bad things can get, and elect a progressive candidate the next time." What a deluded fool. By that logic, Nader should just endorse W - a man who believes that it's his job to bring on the rapture through war. I take back anything positive I've said about Nader in the past. He wants all hell to break loose first, so that maybe he'll win someday. He doesn't care about all the people who are suffering.

Do you have a source for that quote? From my experiences with creationists, I've seen how easy it is to find an out of context quote that really doesn't reflect what the person was saying at all. I'm not suggesting that you've done that - I know you're not the kind of person who does that kind of stuff, but rather that someone else may have cut it and posted it before you came across it.

Now, assuming that the quote is indeed correct, and not out of context - I don't see how you've managed to come to the conclusion that you have. To me, it looks like he's predicting that Bush will win the election - and that he will screw up so badly that people will invariably elect a progressive president the next time around. Maybe we're just reading it differently, but to me, it looks like you're jumping to conclusions.

quote:

Originally posted by Shakka Are you suffering?

Out of curiosity, what's your opinion of ethical egoism, and of altruism? Do you believe that altruism exists, and if so, what do you think of it?

quote:

Originally posted by DaveSZ No, but I care about other people. Is that a radical concept to you?

Sometimes I think the world would be a better place if people stopped caring for one another

Re: Re: Nader: At least he's honest

quote:

Originally posted by arctic Do you have a source for that quote? From my experiences with creationists, I've seen how easy it is to find an out of context quote that really doesn't reflect what the person was saying at all. I'm not suggesting that you've done that - I know you're not the kind of person who does that kind of stuff, but rather that someone else may have cut it and posted it before you came across it. Now, assuming that the quote is indeed correct, and not out of context - I don't see how you've managed to come to the conclusion that you have. To me, it looks like he's predicting that Bush will win the election - and that he will screw up so badly that people will invariably elect a progressive president the next time around. Maybe we're just reading it differently, but to me, it looks like you're jumping to conclusions. Out of curiosity, what's your opinion of ethical egoism, and of altruism? Do you believe that altruism exists, and if so, what do you think of it?

I cut and pasted it from a left-wing blog, and indeed it may be taken out of context. I'll try to find the speech where he said that, so we can evaluate the context. Kerry is pretty much a centrist (though to the left of Clinton, Dean and Gore), but I support him because I recognize the need to get the Fundies out of office to save America. I'm actually registered as an independent.


Anyways, Kerry still seems to be doing reasonably well:

http://www.electionprojection.com/elections2004.html


The guy who runs that site wants Bush to win, but he keeps it updated with polls and stuff.

Re: Re: Re: Nader: At least he's honest

quote:

Originally posted by DaveSZ Anyways, Kerry still seems to be doing reasonably well: http://www.electionprojection.com/elections2004.html The guy who runs that site wants Bush to win, but he keeps it updated with polls and stuff.

did you see his state by state analysis????
has bush winning 449 electoral votes. kind of reminds me of my NCAA bracket with UNC winning it all. i thought it was a sound theory, but the reality of the situation was a bitch.

i really don't understand Nader's aganda this time around. he seems like a respectful man, but do we really need four more years of f**king ourselves to realize we've made a mistake?

i'll try to see where that quote came from as well, out of context or not, can anyone post a theory on why he would be running this time around

Some Republicans are already planning to rig it though:

quote:

http://www.haloscan.com/comments.ph...ts050804#169954 The disadvantage that our president has is that challengers usually get the bulk of the undecideds. Iraq is not going to go away, even after the handover, and most people trust democrats on the economy, even with the changing numbers on unemployment. Another advantage the Democrats have is that they really, really despise Bush -- partly because of his policies, but also because of the way in which he came to power. With that in mind, I am really in despair -- UNLESS, and this is my great hope -- that the elctronic voting machines in key states, which are run ny Republican companies, have already been programmed to tilt the election to Bush in key states, like Florida. Also, there's hope that purging of the voting roles will eliminate many eligible Democrats from voting in tight states, such as Florida and also Ohio. Yes, this goes against "fairness" and all that, but who cares about democracy when freedom is at stake? lucy kreuger | Email | 05.09.04 - 2:14 pm | #

Morality and family values my ass. That just makes me sick to my stomach.

http://www.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/0307/01/cf.00.html

here's a little excerpt from a july interview with nader. it doesn't have the quote in question, but it does almost bring the quote to a potential existance.

quote:

NOVAK: I'm going to try once again why is it that you don't think that Dennis Kucinich, Howard Dean, they're saying exactly what you're saying. Well, why do you have to run again when you've got people on the left and the Democratic Party saying the same thing you are? NADER: Well, you raise an interesting point. If Dennis Kucinich gets the nomination, it'll be less reason to have a third-party challenge. He's a very progressive Democrat and his views actually are closer to Jim Carville's than many of the nominees, potential nominees, not to mention Gore and Lieberman.

i'll keep searching

This is the kind of thing I'm talking about when I say, "to save America." If even Nancy Reagan thinks the Bush Administration policies that subvert science are radical and indefensible, that really says something.


http://www.latimes.com/news/local/l...l=la-home-local

quote:

Stem Cell Funding Is Put in Spotlight Nancy Reagan makes a rare speech urging more research, which is limited by U.S. policy. By Stephanie Chavez, Times Staff Writer In rare remarks aimed at influencing national public policy, former First Lady Nancy Reagan told a star-studded crowd Saturday night that stem cell research must be pursued "to save families from the pain" of debilitating illnesses, such as Alzheimer's disease, which afflicts her husband, former President Reagan. "I am determined to do whatever I can," she said after receiving a standing ovation at a gala fundraiser in her honor at the Beverly Wilshire Hotel. She told the crowd, which included Michael J. Fox, Harrison Ford and James Taylor, that Alzheimer's had taken her husband "to a distant place where I can no longer reach him." She added that stem cell research held hope for a cure. "I don't see how we can turn our backs on this," she said. "We have lost so much time. I just can't bear to lose any more." In the past, she has discreetly made known her views in support of stem cell research. But Saturday's event marked the first time that she had spoken publicly in favor of the research, for which President Bush limited federal funding in 2001, following a politically charged debate. Before Saturday's event, Fox, who has Parkinson's disease, said the former first lady's strong support of stem cell research would be a "tremendous boon." "She's so revered by the entire cross-section of the country, they trust her judgment when she says, 'This is about helping people who we love,' " said Fox, who has a foundation that supports stem cell research "She's looked at it, thought about it and prayed, and realized it is the right thing to do," he said. Actor Ford read letters from former Presidents Clinton, Carter and Ford. President Ford's letter said: "We are so proud of your strength over the last challenging years." In his letter, Clinton said: "She has demonstrated a deep and abiding commitment to supporting a field of research that could save countless lives." After a video tribute to the Reagans, Fox presented the former first lady with a Caregiver's Award, a tribute to her commitment in caring for her ailing husband, 93, who revealed 10 years ago that he had Alzheimer's disease. The former president no longer makes public appearances and is cared for by his wife in their Bel-Air home. Reagan was escorted to the event by longtime family friend and entertainer Merv Griffin. She approached the podium in tears and told Fox, "I have such admiration for you. Your children must be so proud." The event included speeches from people who suffer from diabetes, as well as a leading scientist in the field, Larry Goldstein of UC San Diego. The $500-a-plate dinner was expected to raise about $2 million, the first time the Juvenile Diabetes Research Foundation has held an event specifically aimed at funding stem cell research. Scientists believe embryonic stem cells hold the key to curing a range of diseases that afflict nearly 100 million Americans as researchers learn how to mold the cells into pancreas cells for diabetics, replacement brain cells for people with Parkinson's or Alzheimer's disease or heart cells for cardiac patients. Stem cell research holds promise for those with spinal cord injuries, multiple sclerosis and other afflictions. The Bush policy limits the use of taxpayer money, which funds most U.S. medical research, to experiments on a narrow set of stem cells that had been taken from human embryos before August 2001. A broader policy would be immoral, he said, because it would cause more human embryos to be destroyed for their stem cells. Bush's decision was a relief to many abortion opponents and religious conservatives, politically potent Bush allies. The U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops, however, said it was unacceptable, and that research that began with the destruction of human embryos was tantamount to murder. Prominent scientists and disease advocacy groups criticized the decision, saying that it would prevent them from jump-starting one of the most promising fields of medical research. As a respected Republican figure, the former first lady is expected to give a high-profile boost to a renewed effort to reopen the debate on stem cell research. "When the wife of one of the most popular presidents, a strong conservative, makes a public statement that this research must go forward with all haste � it further demonstrates in a dramatic and vivid way that the yearning for cures trump politics and trump ideologies," said Daniel Perry, president of the Coalition for the Advancement of Medical Research. Just last week, more than 200 members of Congress, including conservative Rep. Dana Rohrabacher (R-Huntington Beach) and other abortion opponents, signed a letter to Bush urging him to change his policy to allow funding of research on embryonic stem cells derived from excess in vitro fertilized embryos developed to help infertile couples have children. An estimated 400,000 such embryos are held in frozen storage, and they are likely to be destroyed if not donated to research with the couples' consent. The letter urges the changes because the researchers have found that only 19 of the original 78 embryonic cell lines authorized for federal research funding are still available � and they are contaminated, making their use for humans uncertain. Also, more and more research is moving overseas, the letter states. Trent Duffy, a Bush spokesman, said Saturday that the president's policy remained the same, "which is we remain committed to the promise of research on existing stem cell lines." He said that though "we respect those with different views, we can't allow for federal funding that would encourage the destruction of human embryos." Federal law, however, does not prohibit private sector or state funding for stem cell research. California has emerged at the forefront of this biomedical field with the passage in the last two years of several laws that encourage stem cell research. The laws authorize the use of human embryos and establish ethical and legal standards for their use. California voters could be propelled into the debate if a statewide initiative qualifies for the November ballot. The California Stem Cell Research and Cures Initiative proposes a $3-billion general-obligation bond measure that would fund stem cell research over a 10-year period, and would represent the largest state public funding source in the nation. A $350-million annual spending cap would be established, and principal and interest payments would be deferred for five years, said Fiona Hutton, a spokeswoman for the measure. Supporters of the measure, which include more than 25 disease advocacy groups, 10 Nobel laureates and other scientists, have submitted more than 1 million signatures to the secretary of state's office, which will decide whether it qualifies for the ballot. Campaign finance disclosure statements show that the measure received $1.8 million in contributions from Jan. 1 to March 31, including a $500,000 donation from the Juvenile Diabetes Research Fund.

quote:

Originally posted by Yoepus Sometimes I think the world would be a better place if people stopped caring for one another

I really hope that either I've misunderstood you or you're kidding.

In fact, if you're in Israel you should know better than anyone else what egoism and intolerance can do

quote:

Originally posted by Lira I really hope that either I've misunderstood you or you're kidding. In fact, if you're in Israel you should know better than anyone else what egoism and intolerance can do

ahh n000b alert.

Sound the alarm!

Where is my trusty gaurd dog as seen in the caricature of my online presense sterotype as kindly pointed out by tahti when you need him??

shoo n00b ! shoo!

Re: Re: Re: Nader: At least he's honest

quote:

Originally posted by DaveSZ I cut and pasted it from a left-wing blog, and indeed it may be taken out of context. I'll try to find the speech where he said that, so we can evaluate the context. Kerry is pretty much a centrist (though to the left of Clinton, Dean and Gore), but I support him because I recognize the need to get the Fundies out of office to save America. I'm actually registered as an independent.

It's no big deal, I just didn't see what you saw when reading the quote. I would probably say that Kerry is centrist or slightly to the right (at present) - he's certainly not leftist by European standards. Lastly, I don't know where you're getting the idea that he's left of Dean from, what do you base that on?

quote:

Originally posted by Yoepus ahh n000b alert. Sound the alarm! Where is my trusty gaurd dog as seen in the caricature of my online presense sterotype as kindly pointed out by tahti when you need him?? shoo n00b ! shoo!

You know, I don't have to go back in the mod's forum to check that you were actually in Texas... but I did because actually care about others

Would the world be a better place if we cared less about others? Think about the suspension you could get if I were an immature bastard

quote:

Originally posted by Yoepus ahh n000b alert.

LOL!

Yoepus, I've seen do and say some downright hilarious & idiotic things over the past year, but calling a mod (who registered the year before you) a n00b defiantly takes the cake.

Maaz: you probably don't realize it, but most of comrade Yoepus' posts are either tongue in cheek or blatant sarcasm, although he does make serious posts sometimes - he once made one telling us that he was a republican communist. Or was that a joke...

Bah now I'm confused.

Nader's ego has grown to large as of late. He should stick to his consumer rights lobbying and drop out of the race, otherwise he'll steal votes that should be going to Kerry just like he robbed Gore of precious votes.

DIE NADER!

Can't this dumbass realize that people just don't want to see his ugly ass run this time around?

What a frickin' sorry ass loser. First Oregon, now Texas:

http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/ht...52_nader11.html

quote:

Originally posted by Lira You know, I don't have to go back in the mod's forum to check that you were actually in Texas... but I did because actually care about others Would the world be a better place if we cared less about others? Think about the suspension you could get if I were an immature bastard

Well it does say I'm "Evil" in my profile.

Just trying to live it up

Damn it... need to pay more attention to who's actually a mod. Guess I should step out of the polit forum every now and then

Still the 'n00b' comment was directed as your status in the polit forum. Clearly you aren't a n00b. - we've just had an influx of them recently and they are making polit forum seem worse than the old Chill Out political debates. I have a reputation to live up to here ya know

As for the question:
I believe there are two different types of "caring about others", the direct compasion, and indriect compasion. Indirect compasion is more logicial and harsh, and is often blockaded by direct compasion -emotion and humane views.

For instance going to war in Iraq is indirect compasion but caring for Iraqi pyramaid builders is direct compasion.

These are I think the fundamental difference between most philosophical/political viewpoints. Its not that people dont' care about each other - its how they care. And I personally would prefer to see more indirect compasion than direct compasion then we do today - I think it would in the end make the world a more peaceful place - something we all want.

It's all good, Yoepus I didn't know you were being sarcastic (as you and arctic pointed out) and I only mentioned my modship for comedy's sake (or in case you were serious), because it had been the first time I've ever been called a noob.

I used to be more active here though (when the political forum didn't have more than a couple of pages), but then there was too much reading here to do and I hardly ever read the threads about Middle East, so that's why probably you seldom see me posting here

Just in case, take a look at this so you won't have problems with bitter mods in the future

quote:

Originally posted by Yoepus ahh n000b alert. Sound the alarm! Where is my trusty gaurd dog as seen in the caricature of my online presense sterotype as kindly pointed out by tahti when you need him?? shoo n00b ! shoo!

You're calling Maaz a noob?

And this is coming from a person who has never contributed to anything related to trance or edm, and instead is dedicated to spewing xenophobic and McConservative propaganda in this forum.

You want to talk about noobs? Have a discussion about music with Maaz and you'll see who the noob is.

IMO the people that post exclusively in Political Discussion should be banned. Especially when their views are so full of hate and shallowness.

quote:

Originally posted by YaleTrance You're calling Maaz a noob? And this is coming from a person who has never contributed to anything related to trance or edm, and instead is dedicated to spewing xenophobic and McConservative propaganda in this forum. You want to talk about noobs? Have a discussion about music with Maaz and you'll see who the noob is. IMO the people that post exclusively in Political Discussion should be banned. Especially when their views are so full of hate and shallowness.

Do you not see the slight contradiction in your last sentence?

Yoepus made a little oopsie. Sorry, but big fucking deal? Lira knew it was a little oopsie, Yoepus apologized for the little oopsie, and that was the end of it. Do you honestly feel that you have made a contribution of any sort pointing this out any further, especially with the attitude that you brought with it?

I disagree with Yoepus in nearly everything, yet I still have a high regard for his opinion. There are a handful of us here that frequent other forums but give little input to those forums. Does that make us musically or socially inferior in your eyes? And if so, should I be panicking right now because of my inferiority?

There was a thread about this some time ago, and I failed to give my input in it, but my feelings about posting in other forums are probably similar to Yoepus' or most others here - there's a sincere amount of immaturity in the other main forums. There's only so many fucking times I can read, "OMFG I DIE when I hear that tune!", or "should I eat out my gf more" followed by a "Pics or STFU!". Furthermore, there's only a finite amount of times I sent myself scrambling across the internet or in my own .mp3 collection trying to identify the Paul van Dyk's 5th song in some fucking rave, let alone commenting on how great that damn fucking repetitive beat is over and over and over and over and over.....

The one area that has maintained my interest, however, is the Political forum. A variety of views all across the world are poured into this forum nonstop, some mesh well while others clash hard. It is extremely interesting to me to hear all sorts of viewpoints, as well as debate those points that I disagree with at any level. In short, it is quite intellectually stimulating to be here, something from which I tend to find the other threads lacking.

That's not to say I haven't done those things, nor is it to say that I think it's "stupid" or "unnecessary" to comment in other forums. It's just no longer my cup of tea. Call it a phase, call it a life's moment of trying to be someone in a pretty eclectic forum and community, the point is I'm over it. I still love the music, I love the dance culture, and I sincerely wish the best for it. But I tend to find those old conversations are not only repetitive, but they are simply not very stimulating anymore. Again, not my cup of tea.

I hope that's okay with you, though I certainly won't lose any sleep if it's not.

quote:

Originally posted by MisterOpus1 Do you not see the slight contradiction in your last sentence? Yoepus made a little oopsie. Sorry, but big fucking deal? Lira knew it was a little oopsie, Yoepus apologized for the little oopsie, and that was the end of it. Do you honestly feel that you have made a contribution of any sort pointing this out any further, especially with the attitude that you brought with it?

I reckon that he apologized and that this thread was practically dead, but I was standing up for my friend because it angered me to see someone like Yoepus attack his character like that. In my experience and from what I've read, Yoepus spews hate and shallow anti-European propaganda. I have respect for conservatives, but not for one that demeans my culture (like he did on the Madrid bombings thread).

quote:

I disagree with Yoepus in nearly everything, yet I still have a high regard for his opinion. There are a handful of us here that frequent other forums but give little input to those forums. Does that make us musically or socially inferior in your eyes? And if so, should I be panicking right now because of my inferiority?

No, but I find it awfully suspicious when someone registers on TA and posts exclusively on this forum. I admit that this will strike me more when I read a post that I find offensive.

quote:

There was a thread about this some time ago, and I failed to give my input in it, but my feelings about posting in other forums are probably similar to Yoepus' or most others here - there's a sincere amount of immaturity in the other main forums. There's only so many fucking times I can read, "OMFG I DIE when I hear that tune!", or "should I eat out my gf more" followed by a "Pics or STFU!". Furthermore, there's only a finite amount of times I sent myself scrambling across the internet or in my own .mp3 collection trying to identify the Paul van Dyk's 5th song in some fucking rave, let alone commenting on how great that damn fucking repetitive beat is over and over and over and over and over.....

There is a sincere amount of immaturity in this forum as well. Actually, this is the reason why I don't post in here as much as I could. Politics is my second passion after music.

And also, music discussion has been host to many deep and meaningful discussions regarding music history and the musicology of edm. These discussions make TA the important medium that it is, as a useful way to discern global trends in music and edm culture, having a huge impact on the current evolution of the scene and general taste. Most of the posts might seem useless, but many have a useful purpose.

quote:

The one area that has maintained my interest, however, is the Political forum. A variety of views all across the world are poured into this forum nonstop, some mesh well while others clash hard. It is extremely interesting to me to hear all sorts of viewpoints, as well as debate those points that I disagree with at any level. In short, it is quite intellectually stimulating to be here, something from which I tend to find the other threads lacking.

I think it's great that this forum exists. And I would post more if it weren't for time constraints.

You're one of the few people that I agree with most of the time, so I feel kind of bad that you have attacked me.

quote:

That's not to say I haven't done those things, nor is it to say that I think it's "stupid" or "unnecessary" to comment in other forums. It's just no longer my cup of tea. Call it a phase, call it a life's moment of trying to be someone in a pretty eclectic forum and community, the point is I'm over it. I still love the music, I love the dance culture, and I sincerely wish the best for it. But I tend to find those old conversations are not only repetitive, but they are simply not very stimulating anymore. Again, not my cup of tea. I hope that's okay with you, though I certainly won't lose any sleep if it's not.

To each his own, and please understand the context of my criticism of Yoepus. Frankly, I think it's fine if people post mostly on Political Discussion. But I can't help being suspicious of the intentions of someone like Yoepus. Every TA should have a connection to edm culture, even if it's remote or minimal. It wouldn't be very constructive to see random football or basketball fans registering to TA just to post on the sports discussion if they don't have any interest in trance or edm culture. That's my only point.

quote:

Originally posted by YaleTrance I reckon that he apologized and that this thread was practically dead, but I was standing up for my friend because it angered me to see someone like Yoepus attack his character like that. In my experience and from what I've read, Yoepus spews hate and shallow anti-European propaganda. I have respect for conservatives, but not for one that demeans my culture (like he did on the Madrid bombings thread). No, but I find it awfully suspicious when someone registers on TA and posts exclusively on this forum. I admit that this will strike me more when I read a post that I find offensive. There is a sincere amount of immaturity in this forum as well. Actually, this is the reason why I don't post in here as much as I could. Politics is my second passion after music. And also, music discussion has been host to many deep and meaningful discussions regarding music history and the musicology of edm. These discussions make TA the important medium that it is, as a useful way to discern global trends in music and edm culture, having a huge impact on the current evolution of the scene and general taste. Most of the posts might seem useless, but many have a useful purpose. I think it's great that this forum exists. And I would post more if it weren't for time constraints. You're one of the few people that I agree with most of the time, so I feel kind of bad that you have attacked me. To each his own, and please understand the context of my criticism of Yoepus. Frankly, I think it's fine if people post mostly on Political Discussion. But I can't help being suspicious of the intentions of someone like Yoepus. Every TA should have a connection to edm culture, even if it's remote or minimal. It wouldn't be very constructive to see random football or basketball fans registering to TA just to post on the sports discussion if they don't have any interest in trance or edm culture. That's my only point.

Fair enough, sir. I have to admit I do agree with you about the certain degree of immaturity in this forum, which renders my point somewhat moot. I also must agree with you in regards to the Music Discussion forum. No doubt there has been a great wealth of historical info. posted, as well as interesting discussions about the music itself as well as its culture.

But as I said, much of the conversations in other forums are just not my cup of tea anymore, yet the topics in this forum still peak my interest. I also have a tendency to puff out my chest and defend this forum and it's regulars at any cost, so my apologies for my tone.

But I do think you should give Yoepus or anyone in here the benefit of the doubt. I certainly can't speak for him, but I suspect he has similar interests to most others on Tranceaddict, and I highly doubt he only came here as a means for debating politics and promoting his conservative viewpoints. Truly there are a high number of internet forums for such means. But even if he did come here for the sole reason of politics, I personally still embrace his viewpoints, despite my constant differences.

Peace, and may the Schwartz be with you YaleTrance.

Powered by: vBulletin
Copyright © 2000-2021, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.