quote:

Originally posted by PHALPAX I feel that a large portion of the population disagrees with Bush

That would be an incorrect feeling, as evidenced by individual voter support for all programs mentioned tonight except for the immigration plan. His approval rating is also between 50% and 60% depending on the polls.

What are your feelings on the Social Security plan? Two new types of savings accounts for everyone to invest in. SS returns 2% on the money that you pay into it. You can double that amount just by investing in money markets. For someone my age, this is perhaps one of the most important reforms.

As for healthy forests, take your pick. A forest cleared of underbrush and dead trees, or 2.5 million acres burned to a crisp in California.

quote:

Originally posted by imokruok That would be an incorrect feeling, as evidenced by individual voter support for all programs mentioned tonight except for the immigration plan. His approval rating is also between 50% and 60% depending on the polls. What are your feelings on the Social Security plan? Two new types of savings accounts for everyone to invest in. SS returns 2% on the money that you pay into it. You can double that amount just by investing in money markets. For someone my age, this is perhaps one of the most important reforms. As for healthy forests, take your pick. A forest cleared of underbrush and dead trees, or 2.5 million acres burned to a crisp in California.

I deliberately used the general term “large portion” and did not say the majority of people. And, uh, polls sure are a great indicator in terms of measuring your popularity ... I’m sure Howard Dean speak up for that.

I do not have an opinion about SS currently; hence I have not looked into it. My priroritues are more concentrated on social issues and civil liberties along with the usual liberal baggage (education, healthcare etc).

I find it laughable that logging companies are honestly just going after “dead trees and brush”. I mean come on, the forest initiative is Republicanism at its best; and we all that Bush favors corporations interests.

is there a transcript of his speech anywhere?

___________________
[/IMG]http://i54.tinypic.com/ngycqo.png[/IMG]

quote:

Originally posted by ahlamalek is there a transcript of his speech anywhere?

http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/rele...20040120-7.html

I found this speech rather average.
First id like to mention that 48% of the people say that the speech was poor, 38% exellent, and I guess im among the 20something %. ( CNN POLL).

Something id like to know, and please bring me info, I may have missed something.. how Was Saddam responsible to the 9/11 attacks? and where is the evidence of the links between him and Al QUaida?!?! please I need, because after what Bush said, there seems to be. All I can say of what he talked about the war and the fight against of terrorism, and his proof for action was total .. w/e. Expected. There were some things I did agree with, some good ideas, but overall it was just average..hispanic voters will turn out against him though.. just turn on the spanish channels. I dont see no good future with him as president for another term though on the US.. and Ive been saying this all along, and with that speech, It backs me up. Whats for him to say that he would take the US to war with no permission slip .. ppsshh.. very smart, very smart for diplomacy. I smell BULLY's.

___________________
Upcoming:

Michael Andrews Feat. Gary Jules - Mad World (Grayed Out Mix)

In all fairness

quote:

Originally posted by PHALPAX school drug testing

Yes ... disagree

quote:

, privatizing Medicare

Yes ... somewhat agree

quote:

, strengthening the PATRIOT ACT

Actually not strengthen it's due to expire soon and he called for congress to renew it ... disagree

quote:

, abstinence only education,

Yes ... disagree

quote:

appointment of radically religious judges

Nope, he just talked about judges redefining marriage ... partially agree/disagree see gay marriage thread.

quote:

and the so-called "Healthy Forest Initiative"

Wasn't in his speech.

quote:

YOU BOYS LIKE MEXICO?! [end gripe session]

Just go to Canada instead. Seems like a better choice if you don't mind the cold

quote:

Originally posted by imokruok As for healthy forests, take your pick. A forest cleared of underbrush and dead trees, or 2.5 million acres burned to a crisp in California.

BULLSHIT

It's a giveaway to timber companies to clear-cut national forests.


Yeah, I guess if you cut all the trees down there won't be anymore fires right?

quote:

Originally posted by LiquidX Something id like to know, and please bring me info, I may have missed something.. how Was Saddam responsible to the 9/11 attacks? and where is the evidence of the links between him and Al QUaida?!?! please I need, because after what Bush said, there seems to be. All I can say of what he talked about the war and the fight against of terrorism, and his proof for action was total .. w/e. Expected. There were some things I did agree with, some good ideas, but overall it was just average..hispanic voters will turn out against him though.. just turn on the spanish channels. I dont see no good future with him as president for another term though on the US.. and Ive been saying this all along, and with that speech, It backs me up. Whats for him to say that he would take the US to war with no permission slip .. ppsshh.. very smart, very smart for diplomacy. I smell BULLY's.

He's lying if he said that, and misleading us if he insinuated that.

Colon Powell has said recently that Saddam has no link to Al Queda.

Bush is using the tactic of fear to gain reelection.

Liquid X, you and I should go register hispanic voters. I agree with you.

quote:

Originally posted by occrider Wasn't in his speech.

I didn't listen to his speech, but I will read the transcript now.

quote:

Just go to Canada instead. Seems like a better choice if you don't mind the cold

Fuck Canada, I'm an American and my family has been here since where I live was Spain. I'm not going anywhere (except leaving Texas).

___________________
http://www.discoboomer.com/forums/

Last edited by DaveSZ on Jan-21-2004 at 10:15

quote:

GOP Abandons Conservatives by Ron Paul The Medicare prescription drug bill passed by Congress last week may prove to be a watershed event for political conservatives in America. This latest expansion of the federal government, potentially the largest in our nation’s history, is firmly in keeping with the failed New Deal and Great Society programs of the utopian left. This leaves true conservatives, who believe strongly in limited government and identify with the Goldwater- era Republican party, wondering whether they still have a political home in the modern GOP. In the eyes of many conservatives, today’s GOP simply has abandoned its limited-government heritage to buy votes and gain political power in Washington. The unfortunate truth is that the Bush administration, aided by a Republican congress, has increased spending more in three years than the previous administration did in eight. Federal spending has grown by more than 25% since President Bush took office. The federal government now spends roughly $21,000 per household every year, up from $16,000 just 4 years ago. Columnist Cal Thomas, in a recent article entitled “The Embarrassing GOP,” raises an excellent question: “How much of that $21,000 could you spend that would produce better results for yourself and your family?” Consider that Mr. Bush has not vetoed a single bill, nor does he even bother to employ conservative rhetoric. Chris Edwards of the CATO Institute says this about the President: “I’ve never seen him give a speech in which he says government is too big and we need to cut costs.” Furthermore, the outlook for spending restraint during a second Bush term is nil: “When you have a president who has a bunch of his own spending initiatives like education and the Medicare drug bill, it makes it difficult for him to go out and say that Congress is being wasteful,” Mr. Edwards states. Columnists have coined the phrase “Big-Government Republicans” to describe the current crop of free spenders now controlling the White House, Senate, and House of Representatives. Many of the president’s closest advisors are Big-Government Republicans, former leftists who have no qualms about spending huge amounts of money both at home and abroad to achieve supposedly conservative ends. The irony is that conservatives suffered through decades of Democratic control of Congress, always believing that liberals were to blame for the relentless growth of the federal government. When Republicans finally took control of Congress in 1994, many saw an opportunity for a real conservative revolution. But first, conservatives were told, the Democratic administration had to be removed. In the meantime, spending continued unabated throughout the 1990s. When Republicans won the White House in 2000, another opportunity seemed at hand. The Senate, however, was still in Democratic hands-- the last possible GOP scapegoat. Finally, in 2002 the GOP took control of the Senate and increased its majority in the U.S. House. Surely this was the moment conservatives had been waiting for! Yet the past year has seen more spending than ever, including the disastrous Medicare bill that will cost trillions over coming decades. The latest line is that the GOP needs a filibuster-proof Senate of 60 Republicans, and then, finally, the party can begin to implement a conservative agenda. At what point will conservatives stop accepting these excuses? When does the conservative base of the GOP, a base that remains firmly committed to the principle of limited government, finally demand new leadership and a return to conservative values? Will conservatives abandon the party when they realize the GOP, at least under its current leadership, is simply not interested in reducing the size and scope of the federal government? With Republicans controlling the administration and the legislature, and nominally controlling the Supreme Court, the party has run out of other people to blame. One thing is certain: Republicans who support bigger entitlement programs and bigger federal budgets have lost all credibility as advocates for limited government.

He only cares about Oil companies, gas companies, timber companies, mining companies, chemical companies, corporate farms that put family farmers out of business, utility companies, prescription drug companies, etc who fund his campaign, and that's all he cares about.

___________________
http://www.discoboomer.com/forums/

I noted with interest Mr Bush's talk about better job prospects and an improving economy. It seems others dont agree.

For a realistic view of the US economy, and in particular why the US has a jobless recovery and what that means for the financial markets click on:

http://msdw.talkpoint.com/roach/20040120.asp

Its a 4 minute audio presentation viewable in Realaudio or Windows Media Player by Morgan Stanley Chief economist Stephen Roach. It doesnt cost anything. My favourite quote is "the US economy is running on fumes"

Some Bush supporters seem a bit deluded, and frankly scare me:

quote:

[QUOTE=christianactor]Why all the Bush bashing I really dont have any other choice but to support this president whether I like him or not because of the position God has put him over my life. First of all if I disrespect this guy im basically disrespecting God. No, bush is not my favorite but let me tell you something very important to me personally. This man is against abortion.... and that is saving lives. In other presidents in the past how are they (one's who support abortion) any different then hitler who killed the Jews? 1000's of babies die every year legally through the left wing party. The bible says God knew you in the womb and that he has a destiny allready chosen for you. If in november I vote for a left wing candidate isnt that supporting murder? This man is promoting establishing the marriage union and that is between a man and a wife ONLY according to the bible. Anyways it is great to have an opinion over a president but remember! If there is any name calling hand angry opinions on this president just remember. He was put there by God. god allowed George Bush the position he has taken. I would not want to attack something God has istablished. im not god and slapping god in the face is not my kind of fun. Just remember your motives and what constitutes a rebellious heart.

*Sigh*

How do you argue with someone who thinks Jesus elected their president?

The Supreme Courth that legalized abortion was dominated by Republican appointees, and one of Kennedy's justices dissented.

So much for that argument.

It's just a ploy to trick voters.

___________________
http://www.discoboomer.com/forums/

Last edited by DaveSZ on Jan-21-2004 at 11:33

"A strong America must also value the institution of marriage. I believe we should respect individuals as we take a principled stand for one of the most fundamental, enduring institutions of our civilization. Congress has already taken a stand on this issue by passing the Defense of Marriage Act, signed in 1996 by President Clinton. That statute protects marriage under federal law as a union of a man and a woman, and declares that one state may not redefine marriage for other states.

Activist judges, however, have begun redefining marriage by court order, without regard for the will of the people and their elected representatives. On an issue of such great consequence, the people's voice must be heard. If judges insist on forcing their arbitrary will upon the people, the only alternative left to the people would be the constitutional process. Our nation must defend the sanctity of marriage. (Applause.)

The outcome of this debate is important -- and so is the way we conduct it. The same moral tradition that defines marriage also teaches that each individual has dignity and value in God's sight. (Applause.)"

I highly disagree with this, as well as many other parts of that damn speech yesterday. About marriage, I believe that same-sex marriages should be allowed and have the same rights as opposite-sex marriages. If that can't be allowed, than don't allow anyone to get involved in marriage, as the current system isn't fair to all people. I also believe that polyamourous & plural marriages/relationships should be allowed, as it can reduce cheating of spouses. Now, another thing, I believe that marriage should not be a government-sponsored thing. The government should have no reason to get involved in peoples' private romantic life.

Last edited by ali92 on Jan-21-2004 at 12:24