|
Would Kerry do a better job countering terrorism (pg. 6)
|
View this Thread in Original format
| George Smiley |
| quote: | Originally posted by Shakka
You desire Utopia? Furthermore do you think that you live solely to be identically equal to everyone else? That no single person should have more or less than anyone else? That we should all be clones??? Brave New World???:nervous:
Who would be in charge of things in your Utopian society? A small group of all powerful dictators? Or do you think that a democracy works in a Utopia?
I'll take equality of opportunity, and the freedom to pursue my individual abilities and opportunities any day over that. I would prefer to be in control of my own life and not live for the sake of some all powerful big brother. |
What are you talking about Shakka matey?
Who ever said anything about a utopia or everyone being a clone?
I dont think I have ever said I want either of those (why the hell would I, or anyone else for that matter?) and in fact, I think I have stated on two occasions that I dont think communism would work.
But that didn't stop you building your wicker man did it?
I can see where you get your 'utopian' ideas from, but where the hell did your crazy ideas about clones come from?!
Your an idiot who cannot comprehend simple sentences. You say you would prefer to "take equality of opportunity, and the freedom to pursue my individual abilities and opportunities" over being a clone, yet in my previous posts, I stated that communism ensures equality of oppertunity and political freedom...so make your ing mind up!
No seriously, where on Earth did your cloning views of communism come from?!?! Years of research I'm sure but still, I'd like an answer... |
|
|
| Shakka |
| quote: | Originally posted by George Smiley
What are you talking about Shakka matey?
Who ever said anything about a utopia or everyone being a clone?
I dont think I have ever said I want either of those (why the hell would I, or anyone else for that matter?) and in fact, I think I have stated on two occasions that I dont think communism would work.
But that didn't stop you building your wicker man did it?
I can see where you get your 'utopian' ideas from, but where the hell did your crazy ideas about clones come from?!
Your an idiot who cannot comprehend simple sentences. You say you would prefer to "take equality of opportunity, and the freedom to pursue my individual abilities and opportunities" over being a clone, yet in my previous posts, I stated that communism ensures equality of oppertunity and political freedom...so make your ing mind up!
No seriously, where on Earth did your cloning views of communism come from?!?! Years of research I'm sure but still, I'd like an answer... |
The clones comment is actually a reference to "Brave New World", by Aldous Huxley. Read it, moron. Christ, it's spelled out in my post, I did capitalize those letters for a reason. :whip: :whip: |
|
|
| rainbow_marble |
| quote: | Originally posted by arctic
The reason I support Kerry over bush is due to Bush's stance on gay issues, the PATRIOT act, and primarily the war in Iraq. Quite frankly the 'lesser of the two evils' concept comes into play here IMO. Personally I would have much preferred Kucinich (as Kucinich is actually a liberal, not someone like Kerry who's actually a right-winger parading as the voice of the left) or Dean, but since Kerry is what we have now, it's him or Bush. Presumably Kerry wont go and kill thousands of people for no valid reason, so hey, that's why I support him over Bush. But yeah, if I were American I'd be torn between the need to oust Bush, and the fact that I believe that Ralph Nader is the candidate who would best reflect my views and beliefs. Ugh, the two party system is a cancer upon society.
For me, Bush's warmongering scares me far more than Kerry's so called flip flopping, when I compare the two there really isn't a comparison, Kerry wins hands down. |
Man, I keep reading your posts. You honestly need to find a new thread... Considering the fact that you have the political expertise of a 5 year old girl, you should at least refrain from posting about issues concerning American government. You talk about Kerry's stance on gay issues, the patriot act and the war in Iraq. Hate to say it buddy, but this guy was preaching the exact same sh*t as Bush a few months ago. Now that this election is in crunch time, he's using the old 'straddle the fence' technique like a motherf*ck. This guy doesn't know what he wants, all he wants is POWER. But how will he handle this power? Will he help America's current situation any? Well, maybe due to the fact that there is a Republican majority in the congress, he may not do TOO much harm. And if he does, we can always rehire a republican to fix things. (see: Bill Clinton [however he did let Osama go, increased tax which hurt businesses which eventually led to the recession of the early millenium, etc etc... if you disagree then please take an economics course or else shut the f*ck up]) Anyways back to the point... Chances are Kerry will do nothing productive. The way that he vascillates every opinion shows that he will be a poor leader. His whole platform sucks ass! All he does is point out things he hates about Bush, he hasn't offered any insight of what he would do or how he would handle things. , if anybody hasn't realized this, take a look at the guys webpage (www.johnkerry.com) Its a f*cking joke.
The next point about how you wish there was an even more liberal candidate running... Do you not realize that American democrats that are MORE liberal than Kerry want to socialize medicine and raise taxes? That hurts businesses and will lead to a decline in the economy. Not to mention, socialized medicine would be a mess for a country of this size. Numbers of people wanting to be doctors would dwindle leading to further mess... blah blah, don't even feel like explaining. After all, the US has been the greatest country in the world for a reason...
What was next? Ralph Nader? Rofl! I'm not even going to get into that. Stating that Ralph Nader is the candidate with your views shows exactly how callow you are when it comes to politics.
To boot, I would be very surprised if Kerry won 'hands down', but who knows, this country does have a multitude of welfare-craving, gay-loving, minority-empowering halfwits.
Feel free to disect. |
|
|
| arctic |
| quote: | Originally posted by rainbow_marble
Man, I keep reading your posts. You honestly need to find a new thread... Considering the fact that you have the political expertise of a 5 year old girl |
Cut out the ad hominem & inflammatory insults. I don't recall doing the same to you, why do you feel the need to resort to attacks such as these, could it possibly be because you either can't (or don't want to) respond to actual arguments?
| quote: | | you should at least refrain from posting about issues concerning American government. |
What a bizarre thing to say. Why on earth should I do that?
| quote: | | You talk about Kerry's stance on gay issues, the patriot act and the war in Iraq. Hate to say it buddy, but this guy was preaching the exact same sh*t as Bush a few months ago. |
I'm not saying that Kerry is perfect, in actuality I think that Kerry has some major flaws in his polices. However, since it's either Bush or Kerry, I view Kerry as the lesser of the two evils. I'm well aware that Kerry is behaving like a hypocrite, but when I contrast him with Bush, I believe Kerry to be a better choice.
| quote: | | Now that this election is in crunch time, he's using the old 'straddle the fence' technique like a motherf*ck. This guy doesn't know what he wants, all he wants is POWER. |
I agree that Kerry hasn't yet come out and made his position known on several key issues. However, he can't sit on the fence for ever, he'll eventually be forced into playing his hand. He’s playing the game, as is Bush. I agree that Kerry desires power, but at least he only seems to want power on a US level. The Bush administration (and to some extent the west) seems to want to control the rest of the world as well, which I simply can't support. Regardless, we're going to turn this into a UN efficiency debate if we aren't careful. :p
| quote: | | But how will he handle this power? Will he help America's current situation any? Well, maybe due to the fact that there is a Republican majority in the congress, he may not do TOO much harm. And if he does, we can always rehire a republican to fix things. |
The way I see it, he simply couldn't do any worse than Bush, somehow I doubt that that's humanly possible. And yes I do believe that he would help America's domestic situation, as well as the situation in other countries where the US is currently in control and so on. And what makes you so sure that a republican could fix things, look at what bush has done? That isn't fixing thing, it's making them ten times worse.
| quote: | | (see: Bill Clinton [however he did let Osama go, increased tax which hurt businesses which eventually led to the recession of the early millenium, etc etc... if you disagree then please take an economics course or else shut the f*ck up]) |
And there we have it, another unnecessary insult. Again, why the insults, is it that hard to address arguments without resorting to comments bordering on ad hominem attacks?
You have to remember that increased tax can have effects on social welfare and so forth, as well as big business. Again, economic policy isn't the main reason I’m against Bush, although the US did behave in a particularly stubborn and unreasonable manner when it came to the free trade agreement with us.
| quote: | | Anyways back to the point... Chances are Kerry will do nothing productive. The way that he vascillates every opinion shows that he will be a poor leader. His whole platform sucks ass! All he does is point out things he hates about Bush, he hasn't offered any insight of what he would do or how he would handle things. , if anybody hasn't realized this, take a look at the guys webpage (www.johnkerry.com) Its a f*cking joke. |
Again, I can't see how he could be any worse than Bush. As long as he doesn't invade any other countries on shoddy intelligence (or on plain out premeditated lies), then in my book he's doing ok. Further to that, it's my view that Kerry won't advance the US along the lines of a theocracy as Bush is doing at the moment, and his support of civil unions goes some way to addressing the open discrimination that gays face in contemporary US society. I suggest that you actually look at the issues page on Kerry's website, it actually outlines some of his policies and positions. Again, I’m no huge Kerry fan; the man has some defects (as well as some strengths). I simply judge him to be the lesser of the two evils.
| quote: | | The next point about how you wish there was an even more liberal candidate running... Do you not realize that American democrats that are MORE liberal than Kerry want to socialize medicine and raise taxes? That hurts businesses and will lead to a decline in the economy. Not to mention, socialized medicine would be a mess for a country of this size. Numbers of people wanting to be doctors would dwindle leading to further mess... blah blah, don't even feel like explaining. After all, the US has been the greatest country in the world for a reason... |
Living in a country with what you would assumedly describe as 'socialized medicine', I can safely say that it isn't too bad. :p Raising taxes can have positive effects. The government needs to get money for social welfare programs from somewhere. I've seen the claim that an Australian-like Medicare program would decimate the US aired by conservatives in the past, and to be honest I’m not well informed when it comes to health, and as such I don't have a strong vie on it. It may be that Kerry is wrong, it may be that he's right when it comes to this one. Your assertion that the US is the greatest country in the world is also interesting. In what respect do you consider it to be the greatest?
| quote: | | What was next? Ralph Nader? Rofl! I'm not even going to get into that. Stating that Ralph Nader is the candidate with your views shows exactly how callow you are when it comes to politics. |
Come on, you're really scraping the barrel now. How does it show that I’m 'callow'? I don’t agree with everything that Nader says but from what I have heard, I find myself agreeing with him more than I do the two major parties.
| quote: | | To boot, I would be very surprised if Kerry won 'hands down', but who knows, this country does have a multitude of welfare-craving, gay-loving, minority-empowering halfwits. |
And to end it, we have a bigoted conservative diatribe. Marvellous. Care to elaborate on the 'gay loving' & 'welfare craving' points? |
|
|
| occrider |
| quote: | Originally posted by rainbow_marble
Bill Clinton increased tax which hurt businesses which eventually led to the recession of the early millenium, ... if you disagree then please take an economics course |
I disagree. I've taken economics courses. What do I do now?
I know ... let's discuss this. Present your argument with the above thesis: "Bill Clinton's increased taxes hurt businesses which was the cause of the recession". Please list sources for the discussion. |
|
|
| igottaknow |
| quote: | Originally posted by occrider
I disagree. I've taken economics courses. What do I do now?
I know ... let's discuss this. Present your argument with the above thesis: "Bill Clinton's increased taxes hurt business which was the cause of the recession". Please list sources for the discussion. |
He only needs to spew out unsubstantiated claims it's your job to run around and try to disprove his ignorant, hate filled ideas. :rolleyes: Sometimes it depresses me to hear ppl who are so mean spirited and ignorant. Who's this guy's daddy Rush Limbaugh? |
|
|
| occrider |
| quote: | Originally posted by igottaknow
He only needs to spew out unsubstantiated claims it's your job to run around and try to disprove his ignorant, hate filled ideas. :rolleyes: Sometimes it depresses me to hear ppl who are so mean spirited and ignorant. Who's this guy's daddy Rush Limbaugh? |
Well in all fairness he might have a cogent economic analysis of the raw data that would prove his thesis but in looking at the raw data myself, and by looking at analyses done by businessweek, economist, greenspan, etc., I'm somewhat hard pressed to arrive at a similar conclusion. It must be good data ... |
|
|
| arctic |
| quote: | Originally posted by igottaknow
He only needs to spew out unsubstantiated claims it's your job to run around and try to disprove his ignorant, hate filled ideas. :rolleyes: Sometimes it depresses me to hear ppl who are so mean spirited and ignorant. Who's this guy's daddy Rush Limbaugh? |
I'm starting to think that some of these hit and run neo-cons are actually the same person under different alias'. We've had Mike/Schlomo (sp) coming back under the illian name, and to be honest I think that this might also be a disgruntled ex poster.
There are some right-wingers/conservatives who I actually enjoy conversing with, Shakka, Yoepus (although I'm still confused how someone can be a right winger and also call themselves a communist) and imokruok. But then we have the hit and run types who litter their posts with ad hominems and tend to patronize people with opposing viewpoints. I do hope I'm wrong, but perhaps an IP check would be in order. |
|
|
| George Smiley |
| quote: | Originally posted by Shakka
The clones comment is actually a reference to "Brave New World", by Aldous Huxley. Read it, moron. Christ, it's spelled out in my post, I did capitalize those letters for a reason. :whip: :whip: |
Already read it mate. Didn't think it was that good to be perfectly honest. Nowhere near 1984 which is another book focusing on the dangers of totalitarianism and authoritarianism that is a lot closer the mark.
Neither, however, describe a communist society... |
|
|
| Shakka |
| quote: | Originally posted by George Smiley
Already read it mate. Didn't think it was that good to be perfectly honest. Nowhere near 1984 which is another book focusing on the dangers of totalitarianism and authoritarianism that is a lot closer the mark.
Neither, however, describe a communist society... |
Sorry matey, but there are plenty of people who disagree with you, and frankly it doesn't matter what your opinion of the book is, you clearly missed the reference and are backpeddeling.
Nowhere in my original post, however, did I ever mention the word 'communism'. :rolleyes: |
|
|
| George Smiley |
| quote: | Originally posted by Shakka
Sorry matey, but there are plenty of people who disagree with you, and frankly it doesn't matter what your opinion of the book is, you clearly missed the reference and are backpeddeling.
Nowhere in my original post, however, did I ever mention the word 'communism'. :rolleyes: |
Me and Occrider were discussing communism, then you began to comment on what I had said. You had no need to mention the word 'communism' as that is what I was already talking about, therefore, whether you said the word or not, that is what you were commenting on... |
|
|
| igottaknow |
| quote: | Originally posted by arctic
I'm starting to think that some of these hit and run neo-cons are actually the same person under different alias'. We've had Mike/Schlomo (sp) coming back under the illian name, and to be honest I think that this might also be a disgruntled ex poster.
There are some right-wingers/conservatives who I actually enjoy conversing with, Shakka, Yoepus (although I'm still confused how someone can be a right winger and also call themselves a communist) and imokruok. But then we have the hit and run types who litter their posts with ad hominems and tend to patronize people with opposing viewpoints. I do hope I'm wrong, but perhaps an IP check would be in order. |
I've found it odd there are disproportionate amount of neocons and ultra conservatives on these boards. I don't have problem with someone's political beliefs as long as it doesn't prevent them from engaging in a facts based debate. It's like as soon as someone is labled as liberal, then everything that person says is invalid. I'm tired of ppl who have some idologic bent set in concrete that frames every topic that they discuss.
In other debate forums they inforce a strict anti-flame policy that you can discuss and debate ideas but your not allowed to make personal comments about another poster. While i enjoy sparring with others and like a more informal format it seems like rules like i discribed are the only way to keep a civil debate.
btw i thought conservative communist is very funny |
|
|
|
|
