Allstocks.com's Bulletin Board Post New Topic  Post A Reply
my profile login | register | search | faq | forum home

  next oldest topic   next newest topic
» Allstocks.com's Bulletin Board » Off-Topic Post, Non Stock Talk » Kudlow & Company's Bush Poll (Page 1)

 - UBBFriend: Email this page to someone!   This topic comprises 2 pages: 1  2   
Author Topic: Kudlow & Company's Bush Poll
canadadry
Member


Member Rated:
5
Icon 1 posted      Profile for canadadry     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
The people who watch Kudlow & Company are not liberal leftist, they are educated business owners and a majority of them think Bush should be impeached; 67% yes, 33% no. I never would have thought that Kudlow’s audience would want to impeach bush, I guess you learn something new everyday.

Poll results: http://moneycentral.msn.com/content/cnbctv/promos/p140051.asp?ShowResults=1

Posts: 19 | Registered: Dec 2005  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Gordon Bennett
Member


Icon 1 posted      Profile for Gordon Bennett     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
It doesn't surprise me at all. Business owners often have above-average intelligence and even those that don't are usually too busy to listen to the AM Talk buffoons.

--------------------
"Those who would give up Essential Liberty to purchase a
little Temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety."

- Benjamin Franklin

Posts: 3898 | Registered: Dec 2005  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
glassman
Member


Icon 1 posted      Profile for glassman     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
business owners like the constitution too...


most of US just want to know we aren't going to have the feds listening in for no other reason than curiosity...
i'm not saying that is happening NOW, but the door has been opened, and terrorism will never end, and?

it very difficult to define what a terrorist is isn't it?

today? they hide in caves...

tomorrow? they might be people who go to the wrong church no not mosque, meeting house, you know like Quakers?????

Pentagon Spying on Quaker Meeting House
Printer-Friendly Page

Draft Counselors at Lake Worth, Florida Quaker Meeting House called "Threat"


"A year ago, at a Quaker Meeting House in Lake Worth, Fla., a small group of activists met to plan a protest of military recruiting at local high schools. What they didn't know was that their meeting had come to the attention of the U.S. military."

~NBC News Report

http://www.fcnl.org/issues/item.php?item_id=1672&issue_id=67

--------------------
Don't envy the happiness of those who live in a fool's paradise.

Posts: 36378 | From: USA | Registered: Sep 2003  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
RiescoDiQui
Member


Icon 1 posted      Profile for RiescoDiQui     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Most "Businessmen" are educated by Commie biased universities.

--------------------
Spend Word For Word With Me And I Shall Make Your Wit Bankrupt.

Posts: 1326 | From: Here | Registered: Oct 2005  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Gordon Bennett
Member


Icon 1 posted      Profile for Gordon Bennett     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
LOL [Roll Eyes]

--------------------
"Those who would give up Essential Liberty to purchase a
little Temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety."

- Benjamin Franklin

Posts: 3898 | Registered: Dec 2005  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Dustoff 1
Member


Rate Member
Icon 1 posted      Profile for Dustoff 1     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
I've seen a few real Commies in my rifle sights....

We called um Charly..
Some even called him Bye Bye Sir Charly, right before they shot them.

Posts: 10729 | From: oregon | Registered: Feb 2005  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
bdgee
Member


Icon 1 posted      Profile for bdgee     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Timothy McViegh earned an honorable discharge from the Marines and a Bronze Star for bravery by a patriotic American, And, so far as any one has been able to find, he had NO communistic leanings and certainly no ties to communist.
Posts: 11304 | From: Fort Worth, Texas | Registered: Mar 2005  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Gordon Bennett
Member


Icon 1 posted      Profile for Gordon Bennett     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
It's interesting that Aragorn is avoiding this thread, isn't it?

--------------------
"Those who would give up Essential Liberty to purchase a
little Temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety."

- Benjamin Franklin

Posts: 3898 | Registered: Dec 2005  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
bdgee
Member


Icon 1 posted      Profile for bdgee     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Oh, if he knew that he could come to it and insult someone's beliefs or religion, he'd be here. He is dedicated.
Posts: 11304 | From: Fort Worth, Texas | Registered: Mar 2005  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
mjm2005
Member


Rate Member
Icon 1 posted      Profile for mjm2005     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Being in NJ, I've seen first hand the work of Democrats... because our state has much poorer areas that tend to lean left, our state thus votes and elects a Democratic governor... votes for Clinton... votes for Clinton again... votes for Gore... votes for Kerry...

Now, what happened here? Well, the governor--> McGreevey raised taxes and completely messed up NJ... it took him multiple times just to get elected... And how did he leave? Did he finish his term? No. He had a revelation mid-term and had a press conference that he couldn't live a lie... He admitted to having a male partner and said that he was actually gay... He had a wife and three kids... Now, that's fine. I don't care... but I'm just disgusted that he raises taxes... Democrats are lean heavily toward the socialist ideal system... Let's take away from those who worked for their money and give it to the "less fortunate"

--------------------
Remember two things:
You love New York City
and leave only your footprints.

Posts: 1526 | From: Chatham, NJ... and NC-- Wake Forest University | Registered: Jul 2005  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
mjm2005
Member


Rate Member
Icon 1 posted      Profile for mjm2005     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Clinton? He made a mockery of the Presidency AND was re-elected. Please, someone... tell me something positive he did for this country... I will say he came across as a fairly intelligent guy... I will say he convinced people to vote for him because of his charisma and great speaking ability...

But legislature?? What did he do that was so great? What did he do that made the economy go up so much? I think people are forgetting here that the economy usually is based upon 4-10 years before... way before Clinton was in office... And, people are overlooking that Clinton was President during the same time as the Internet stock bubble... that's what drove the economy... I guess you could say that Clinton distracted the investors from actually looking at current financials... and they saw things that weren't there...and Bush's coming to office caused them ro re-examine their investments and see they they were ridiculously over-priced...

--------------------
Remember two things:
You love New York City
and leave only your footprints.

Posts: 1526 | From: Chatham, NJ... and NC-- Wake Forest University | Registered: Jul 2005  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
mjm2005
Member


Rate Member
Icon 1 posted      Profile for mjm2005     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Now, this is what bothers me... Liberals/Democrats seem to be in love with their party... they praise it as the best party out there...

What are the beliefs of this party that make it so much better than the conservative/republican beliefs...

Now, I will say I used to be a hard core Republican... and, economically, I still am... However, I disagree with a few non-economic points that the conservatives are for...

The abortion issue is still up in the air for me... I typically say that I lean Pro-Life with very, very strict guidelines for abortion (such as in the case of rape or when a mother's life is at risk)... The death penalty just seems so medieval... We're supposed to be helping criminals reform--> hence "correctional facilities"... those that can't be helped deserve life without parole...

And a huge issue I have is that conservatives are so against stem cells and stem cell research... If stem cells are as important to preventing disease, treating disease, and helping with many other problems then it should be researched... heck, I even invested in STEM (a company that deals with Stem Cell Research)...

But, unless you Democrats/Liberals can present me with a reason why your economic plans are so much better OR even good, I will never be a Democrat...

Usually, I refer to myself as a Moderate...but, I've just become so disgusted with everything lately (not the war...politics, I'm disgusted with politics)

--------------------
Remember two things:
You love New York City
and leave only your footprints.

Posts: 1526 | From: Chatham, NJ... and NC-- Wake Forest University | Registered: Jul 2005  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
mjm2005
Member


Rate Member
Icon 1 posted      Profile for mjm2005     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
I'm not saying that Bush is a wonderful or even perfect president... I will admit that there could've been better presidents... that there have been better presidents... But what could Gore have done differently? What could Kerry do?

He couldn't pull the troops out of Iraq...what would that do? The people that we removed would just be back in power... I still don't understand why we have stopped looking for Osama... Or have we? I'm not sure... Can you really believe anything anymore?

But this---> This pissed me off-->

"Stop throwing the Constitution in my face. . . . It's just a goddamned piece of paper!" -- President George W. Bush

That angered me... and even with my moderate/conservative stance, I am angered by this...

--------------------
Remember two things:
You love New York City
and leave only your footprints.

Posts: 1526 | From: Chatham, NJ... and NC-- Wake Forest University | Registered: Jul 2005  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
timberman
Member


Member Rated:
4
Icon 1 posted      Profile for timberman     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:


But, unless you Democrats/Liberals can present me with a reason why your economic plans are so much better OR even good, I will never be a Democrat...

Usually, I refer to myself as a Moderate...but, I've just become so disgusted with everything lately (not the war...politics, I'm disgusted with politics) [/QB]

Good point. I usually find that the Dems are just as guilty as the people that they accuse. To me that makes them worse. If your going to point the finger at someone else, you should have your own act together.
Posts: 474 | From: Central PA | Registered: Oct 2003  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Aragorn243
Member


Rate Member
Icon 1 posted      Profile for Aragorn243         Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Gordon Bennett,

It's interesting that you think that I should be monitoring this message board just waiting to post on every thread.

I could care less what some unscientific poll says and once again simply refer you to the Rasmussen Poll taken last week which shows 67% of the people support the wire taps including 51% of Democrats. As you ingnored that poll in the last discussion, you'll probably ignore it in this one as well.

bdgee,

"Oh, if he knew that he could come to it and insult someone's beliefs or religion, he'd be here. He is dedicated. "

Excellent way to stick to the subject matter. LOL

Posts: 559 | Registered: Oct 2005  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
glassman
Member


Icon 1 posted      Profile for glassman     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
why don't you post the EXACT question of the rasmeussen poll strider?

it doesn't mention warrantless searches...

you seem able to look right past much of the obvious... if it suits your needs

i see Bush is now in deparation mode...
calling in all of thge help he can find....

note that he is even asking "liberals" at this point...

he's been forced to try to become the uniter he said he was in 2000....



Iraq

Times Online January 05, 2006

Suicide bombings kill 110 in Iraq as Bush hosts war summit
By Sam Knight and agencies



Insurgents killed more than a hundred Iraqi pilgrims and police recruits today in a second day of savage violence aimed at destabilising the country.

The attacks came as President Bush was due to host an unprecedented meeting at the White House of more than a dozen former Democrat and Republican secretaries of state and defence, to consult on the future of the Iraq war.


i'm still waiting for you to show me the other polls you claim exist.... you know the one that shows you share majority views with your ultra-conservative friends.... the ultra conservatives and the ultra-liberals are by definition marginalized...

even Bush isn't as right wing as you want him to be... but he does allow, even encourage his shepherds to "stir up the flocks" to motivate them.... Pat Robertson messed up again i see [Big Grin]



what questions a poll asks are more telling than the votes cast...

nobody rational is against govt spying in general, esp. now...

i'm not even upset about the Quaker anti-recruitment people being "spied on" but i am worried about warrantless searches...

and no, i'm not ready to call for an impeachment, but? if people like you keep saying it's correct to lie to people to do whatever the powerful want? the powerful will do whatever they want....

i have a difficult time believing thet YOU would or would have supported Clinton or Gore if they did most of this stuff....

you said Bush knows his history, i disagree totally..... the Brits have been where we are right now and failed over and over again....

--------------------
Don't envy the happiness of those who live in a fool's paradise.

Posts: 36378 | From: USA | Registered: Sep 2003  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Aragorn243
Member


Rate Member
Icon 1 posted      Profile for Aragorn243         Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
I believe I did post the exact question but in case I didn't here it is:

Should the National Security Agency be allowed to intercept telephone conversations between terrorism suspects in other countries and people living in the United States?

Yes 64%
No 23%

You wish to add the qualifier of "without warrents" to this. That's fine. I doubt it would make much difference but it is possible.

Since it's been all over the news for two weeks now that these conversations have been intercepted without warrents, most people are going to be aware of that.

I don't need to show YOU polls that I'm in the majority. You made the claim that I'm not. YOU show the evidence of that.

I did show you the poll results of the last two Presidential elections, the ones that matter.

You also claim that Bush is liberal yet McCain is not. You need to re-adjust your definitions as most people when hearing the terms conservative/liberal refer to that in social terms, not fiscal terms.

Clinton DID do this stuff. I didn't complain then, it is within his powers, it is within Bush's powers.

I don't recall saying Bush knows his history, I don't know if he does or not. We are not attempting to rule Iraq as the British were so your comparison doesn't fit.

Posts: 559 | Registered: Oct 2005  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Aragorn243
Member


Rate Member
Icon 1 posted      Profile for Aragorn243         Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Glassman,

I missed this one:

"if people like you keep saying it's correct to lie to people to do whatever the powerful want? the powerful will do whatever they want."

I'm never said it's correct to lie to people to do whatever the powerfull want.

What bearing does that have on this discussion. You have proof now that someone powerfull lied to get what he wanted?

You've made lots of claims that Bush lied, etc, yet there is no proof of this and the Senate already investigated these claims and tossed them.

Posts: 559 | Registered: Oct 2005  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Gordon Bennett
Member


Icon 1 posted      Profile for Gordon Bennett     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Not even perfect? [Roll Eyes]

quote:
Originally posted by mjm2005:
I'm not saying that Bush is a wonderful or even perfect president...



--------------------
"Those who would give up Essential Liberty to purchase a
little Temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety."

- Benjamin Franklin

Posts: 3898 | Registered: Dec 2005  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
glassman
Member


Icon 1 posted      Profile for glassman     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
strider, i'm sorry, i thought you had actually read the senate's report and the president's report...

if you had? you would have come accross alot of irrefutable evidence that SOMEBODY did "edit" the intel...
whoever did it was, at the time, in power... ahem that means a powerful person, or one of the powerful...

you misconstrue what i say all the time...

i have stated in the past that i personally believe it is quite possible Bush had no clue he was lied to...
that does not release him from culpability tho.....


many people were steamrolled to get this war...
Reagan once said the truth is stubborn, and it is...
if Bush was just repeating lies? he's still the one holding the "buck"...
the iraqi natiaonal congress is so dirty in all of this , that there's little chance they'll ever get any control over iraq, and well, that means we are gonna need to redifeine success over there....

the iraqi natl congress was lobbying our govt....

--------------------
Don't envy the happiness of those who live in a fool's paradise.

Posts: 36378 | From: USA | Registered: Sep 2003  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
mjm2005
Member


Rate Member
Icon 1 posted      Profile for mjm2005     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Gordon Bennett:
Not even perfect? [Roll Eyes]

quote:
Originally posted by mjm2005:
I'm not saying that Bush is a wonderful or even perfect president...


Listen, Gordon...Read "Amusing Ourselves to Death"... Everyone's worst fears about 1984 and "big brother" aren't going to happen... we (as a people) are destroying this country...

Better yet, here's a link for you, so you don't have to even read the whole book... http://www.gyford.com/phil/notes/2004/09/26/amusing_ourselves_.php

Orwell, 1984: What we hate will kill us. Huxley, Brave New World: What we love will kill us. This book is about the latter.

"We have reached, I believe, a critical mass in that electronic media have decisively and irreversibly changed the character of our symbolic environment. We are now a culture whose information, ideas and epistemology are given form by television, not by the printed word.” Just because TV and print coexist, doesn’t mean there is parity — “print is now merely a residual epistemology.""

"TV News is bad because segments are short and shallow, anchors are required to appear believable, they use music, they have commercials"

"People have opinions about events but, these days, know little background. More rightly “emotions” rather than “opinions”."

9. Reach Out and Elect Someone

127-8 Capitalism requires rationality. Adverts were once propositions that could be true or false. Now they appeal to emotions — can’t be tested, not rational.

132 Politicians have gradually become “celebrities”, appearing on TV not just as political figures (on game shows, commercials, dramas), from 1950s, exploding in 1980s.

136-7 TV provides little context and therefore no history. Continual present.

138-41 Orwell envisaged the government controlling information. But it is more like Huxley. Orwell was more accurate for an age of print where banning books had more impact. Now, despite outcries, it has little effect. Television doesn’t ban books; it displaces them. We have the opposite of censorship — too much TV, but all of the TV is simplistic and noncontextual.


--------------------
Remember two things:
You love New York City
and leave only your footprints.

Posts: 1526 | From: Chatham, NJ... and NC-- Wake Forest University | Registered: Jul 2005  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Gordon Bennett
Member


Icon 1 posted      Profile for Gordon Bennett     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Bush couldn't have been elected without TV; I'll give you that.

--------------------
"Those who would give up Essential Liberty to purchase a
little Temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety."

- Benjamin Franklin

Posts: 3898 | Registered: Dec 2005  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
mjm2005
Member


Rate Member
Icon 1 posted      Profile for mjm2005     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
haha, your argument is always focused on Bush...

I'm attacking POLITICS in general... So what if Bush won... So what if Kerry had won... So what if Gore had won...

It's all a farce... (the political process)

Let me restate this--->

Orwell envisaged the government controlling information. But it is more like Huxley. Orwell was more accurate for an age of print where banning books had more impact. Now, despite outcries, it has little effect. Television doesn’t ban books; it displaces them. We have the opposite of censorship — too much TV, but all of the TV is simplistic and noncontextual.

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

Big Brother's a thing of the past... TV is it's closest replacement. TV will be the downfall of our society...

--------------------
Remember two things:
You love New York City
and leave only your footprints.

Posts: 1526 | From: Chatham, NJ... and NC-- Wake Forest University | Registered: Jul 2005  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Leo
Member


Member Rated:
4
Icon 1 posted      Profile for Leo     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
What's interesting is that Orwell's book came out after Huxley's.
Posts: 1235 | From: Anacortes, WA | Registered: Apr 2005  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Gordon Bennett
Member


Icon 1 posted      Profile for Gordon Bennett     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Agreed, the political process is all a farce.

What's your solution?

--------------------
"Those who would give up Essential Liberty to purchase a
little Temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety."

- Benjamin Franklin

Posts: 3898 | Registered: Dec 2005  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
glassman
Member


Icon 1 posted      Profile for glassman     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
excellent points mjm....

this medium we are using here (the BB) is IMO a major advance tho....

why? because we can "discuss" without shouting each other down, rudely interrupting each other midsentence/thought and no intimidating body language available either...

we can provide detailed references (whose validity/credibility can then be argued over )and go into as much depth as we wish.... and we can ignore as much "in depth" as we wish...

--------------------
Don't envy the happiness of those who live in a fool's paradise.

Posts: 36378 | From: USA | Registered: Sep 2003  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Leo
Member


Member Rated:
4
Icon 1 posted      Profile for Leo     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by mjm2005:

But this---> This pissed me off-->

"Stop throwing the Constitution in my face. . . . It's just a goddamned piece of paper!" -- President George W. Bush

That angered me... and even with my moderate/conservative stance, I am angered by this...

But he's got a mandate!!
Posts: 1235 | From: Anacortes, WA | Registered: Apr 2005  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
glassman
Member


Icon 1 posted      Profile for glassman     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
oh come on Bush didn't REALLY say that [Razz]

other things Bush didn't say:

sadam is involved with 9-11

God speaks thru me

God told me to invade iraq

God told me to give palestine it's own state [Roll Eyes]

Presidents since Roosevelt have commonly spoken as petitioners of God, seeking blessing, favor, and guidance. This president positions himself as a prophet, issuing declarations of divine desires for the nation and world. Among modern presidents, only Reagan has spoken in a similar manner—and he did so far less frequently than has Bush.
http://www.beliefnet.com/story/159/story_15962_1.html

--------------------
Don't envy the happiness of those who live in a fool's paradise.

Posts: 36378 | From: USA | Registered: Sep 2003  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
bdgee
Member


Icon 1 posted      Profile for bdgee     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
How can anybody believe anything Bush says after so many proven lies?

Make that "anybody rational"....I can think of a couple that post here that will believe and regurgitate anything the Party wants them to say.

Posts: 11304 | From: Fort Worth, Texas | Registered: Mar 2005  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
glassman
Member


Icon 1 posted      Profile for glassman     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
this is currently still posted and logged at the WhiteHouse dot gov...

i do not post direct links to the white house because you should look thru there yourself...

they even have video


For Immediate Release
Office of the Press Secretary
April 20, 2004
President Bush: Information Sharing, Patriot Act Vital to Homeland Security
Remarks by the President in a Conversation on the USA Patriot Act
Kleinshans Music Hall
Buffalo, New York


"Secondly, there are such things as roving wiretaps. Now, by the way, any time you hear the United States government talking about wiretap, it requires -- a wiretap requires a court order. Nothing has changed, by the way. When we're talking about chasing down terrorists, we're talking about getting a court order before we do so. It's important for our fellow citizens to understand, when you think Patriot Act, constitutional guarantees are in place when it comes to doing what is necessary to protect our homeland, because we value the Constitution."



i try not to use the word "lie" to describe any of Bush's statements. sometimes i may have failed in that. What matters is that the prez has made many many statements to the US that were deliberately misleading. Whether they were full-blown "lies" or not is irrelevant. and in fact becomes a major waste of time and BB space trying to sort out who called who a liar...the facts aren't that hard to see...

--------------------
Don't envy the happiness of those who live in a fool's paradise.

Posts: 36378 | From: USA | Registered: Sep 2003  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
DWE
Member


Rate Member
Icon 1 posted      Profile for DWE         Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
I like Neil Cavuto and Terry Keenan

--------------------
"NEVER UNDERESTIMATE THE POWER OF THE U.S./CHINA CONNECTION"

SSTY & TPDI

www.suretrace.com

Posts: 3662 | From: The City of Angels, Beautiful Los Angeles, California | Registered: Oct 2005  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
bdgee
Member


Icon 1 posted      Profile for bdgee     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
We know.
Posts: 11304 | From: Fort Worth, Texas | Registered: Mar 2005  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
mjm2005
Member


Rate Member
Icon 1 posted      Profile for mjm2005     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by glassman:
excellent points mjm....

this medium we are using here (the BB) is IMO a major advance tho....

why? because we can "discuss" without shouting each other down, rudely interrupting each other midsentence/thought and no intimidating body language available either...

we can provide detailed references (whose validity/credibility can then be argued over )and go into as much depth as we wish.... and we can ignore as much "in depth" as we wish...

EXACTLY...basically, bringing it back to the time of the Lincoln/Douglas debates...that was reputable politics...

--------------------
Remember two things:
You love New York City
and leave only your footprints.

Posts: 1526 | From: Chatham, NJ... and NC-- Wake Forest University | Registered: Jul 2005  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
mjm2005
Member


Rate Member
Icon 1 posted      Profile for mjm2005     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Gordon Bennett:
Agreed, the political process is all a farce.

What's your solution?

Well, that's the problem... Can anyone see a forseeable solution?

How many of us would advocate the removal of television? Some would argue that it poses more good than bad...and vice versa... Yet, it's so ingrained in society, that it would be very difficult to remove such a medium... I, for one, am not against television... I just think that it is becoming outdated... The internet offers a solution... It meshes the two worlds together quite well (the multimedia age/world and the written/text age/world)

A friend of mine is a progressive... He tries not to align himself with political parties, yet he comments upon current politics as well as theorizes about future ones... He and I recently had a discussion... This discussion concerned the war, present politics, and a far fetched solution...

Now, it is obvious that liberal and conservative propaganda gets us nowhere... Attack what we don't like in order to fix it? (Hmmm, sounds familiar)... It just doesn't make sense. What we were thinking was that there would need to be a "world globalization." It's interesting because the United States has undergone a similar globalization, per se. For example, our country wasn't always a nation... it was a group of colonies... these colonies grew larger and larger... finally, they got to become defined areas with borders, yada yada yada... we have a group of UNITED States... Now, I do admit that these states sometimes do not work out well...but there are things in place (Constitution, Dec of Ind, the House, the Senate, etc) that can make changes if the need arises...

Well, that's all just an overview... What we need is a democratically appointed UN with actual power... Now, this is something, if you think about it, that would be good. F the UN representatives... That doesn't do anything. We need appointed leaders to act as part of the UN. Get Bush and Blair to be UN representatives... Have real punishment for violating the UN code...

Yet, we have a HUGE problem still... How have we solved the problem of the corrupt political process? How do we achieve this world globalization???

One unforseeable solution could be this (WARNING WARNING-- HIGHLY IDEALISTIC NOT REALISTIC)-->

1) We do away with party designations (Didn't our fore-fathers warn about the dangers of a bi-partisan system?)-- This will remove blind voting based upon party alignment...

2) Candidates are required to list their stance on issues and CANNOT change at an point during their campaign... change would result in forfeiture of their ability to be voted for

3) Voters (unless they have a VALID excuse) are required to vote... This would ensure a true democracy... It is horrible that so much of our voting age population doesn't vote each election...

4) Voters would be given a sheet with the candidate's stance on major issues... Without the party designation, voters would need to look at these stances and make an informed decision...

5) Candidate wins based upon the popular vote (Idk about this one, maybe)

This elected official then represents our country in the fully functional UN...

*********WORK IN PROGRESS...I'll add to it later...just some 4AM ramblings...

--------------------
Remember two things:
You love New York City
and leave only your footprints.

Posts: 1526 | From: Chatham, NJ... and NC-- Wake Forest University | Registered: Jul 2005  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
mjm2005
Member


Rate Member
Icon 1 posted      Profile for mjm2005     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Here are some of his ramblings, if you care to have an interesting read---->

----------------------------------------------------
Professors...

In my non-stop no sleep finals period, I just finished having a conversation with some friends during a break from the writing. Based on all of the readings I have done for the various research papers this semester, the following just formulated itself in my head. I want your opinions on this, because honestly, I feel as though it is entirely possible.

Andrea will know about my recent ramblings on the possibility of reconstruction in both Iraq and Afghanistan. Essentially, I feel that there is no possibility of success in either state with the current policies of this government. Instead of treating our operations in the middle east as a war, as a war implies state v. state, we must alter this perception. We are not at war with a particular state like GWBco wants us to think. We are at odds with an ideology, the ideology of fundamentalist Islam. Therefore, I will call it: US at odds with Violence Incited by Fundamentalist Islam. Yes, the military actions in both Afghanistan and Iraq began as attacks against Taliban/Hussein.
However, as you know, as soon as the govts fell, the battle changed completely. My greatest area of concern is Iraq. This is not to downplay Afghanistan, it is just that I feel the situation there is slightly more stable for the time being. In my opinion, Iraq poses the greatest threat the US has seen in decades; moreso than anything since WWII. Right now there are many factions of politicians in our government divided thanks to this conflict. Pull out, leave it be, put more in...all are ultra simplified summations of the ramblings in the US. To me, a few things become clear. Firstly it is not only impractical but idiotic to call for the immediate withdrawal of US troops. Second, it is equally ignorant to maintain the status quo. Therefore the only option I see is the deployment of more troops, with a catch.

The immediate withdrawal of troops will not work for several reasons.
Before the removal of Saddam, the Iraqi people lived in relative safety and security albeit not freedom. Since the "coalition" forces took the country, conditions have declined at a catastrophic rate. I believe it is safe to say that conditions for Iraqis are worse now than before.
Living in constant fear for your life along with the stress of poverty and hunger many face is not an environ that is conducive to anything productive, let alone the creation of an effective and lasting govt.
Even though the links to Al Qaeda/bin Laden have been proven false, Zawahiri now maintains a near constant barrage of attacks on "coalition"
forces and the revived Iraqi security forces. In effect, we will have provided bin Laden something he desperately needs; a state that sponsors and protects terrorism and t-groups (Taliban anyone?). If we withdraw troops, it is easy to see that the Sunni majority would take power, oppress the Kurds and shi'a, and welcome the creation of Al Qaeda's brand now base of operations where they can start planning anew.

Maintaining the status quo is equally ineffectual. We are loosing troops every week. The "order" we maintain is laughable. The govt we are creating will be seen as a puppet of the US/west. Not to mention it is easy to assume that US presence will be necessary for the better part of a quarter century.

From that I am willing to say the only option is the deployment of more troops. Simple as it may sound, this action must be planned to a t so to ensure success. Mistake1 of GWBco: unilateral. Here comes my radical side. The world can no longer be viewed as a group of isolated independent countries. In my opinion, globalism is ringing the death knell of national sovereignty. Good or bad is not important, only how to move forward. Every state in the world is Dependant on another in some way, treaties, trading, military...the list is endless and every growing. America may be the strongest single nation in the world, but as our "coalition" has shown that means little. The policy of unilateral action must die. Thanks to that policy we are the laughing stock of the world. Our supporters include nations of such great power and influence like Luxembourg. Thanks for the moral support guys. Rhetoric like "You're with us or against us" reminds me of a John Wayne western, and infuriates the international community. Isolationism is dead. Only political ancients are holding onto that pathetic ideal. Mistake2: Much more fun that 1. Since the initial invasion of 2003, it has become obvious that the information and intelligence used to support the invasion of Iraq was shaky at best. Even so, GWBco treads forward stepping on every shred of truth and sliver of faith they may have had.
They refuse to admit that things are going badly in Iraq. They refuse to admit the folly (gasp, farce, let alone purjory) of the intel leading the the war. The world must love us now. We told every person, state and group that they were essentially un/anti-American if they doubted that which they were told. There was no room for distention. The path for the US had been decided, praise the lord and Joe McCarthy.

Solutions, possible (terrifying) outcomes.

If we want to win in Iraq things must change starting yesterday. One, in recognition of the growing inter relationships of all states today, the UN must be fully reorganized (how I'm not totally sure, but hopefully you get the idea) and given the power it so richly deserves. Much like our Congress deliberates the declaration of war and other national issues, the gen assem should have that ability for the world. Give it the power to declare war. Not just Secur Coun resolutions, but decisive statements allowing the newly created UN security force, bolstered by troops from ALL member states, to take action against the offending state. International action solves unilateral blunder. This will require something I don't really see happened, an apology and admittance of wrong doing by GWBco. This will hopefully bring much needed support from our previous allies and take some burden off our military. Then this new UN can then start focusing on Iraq. Once enough troops are in place to seriously deter and impede the actions of the insurgents/terrorists, reconstruction of the infrastructure can begin. There is a reason why ancient Athenians were so involved in their democratic experiment: peace of mind knowing that they were safe, their govt was theirs, and they didn't have to be more concerned with eating than deciding policy. If the people of Iraq feel safe, those citizens who want change, who want security will come forward knowing that they will not be killed for doing so. This will allow the people to create a govt for themselves, a govt that stands a much higher chance of being accepted by the majority of the people and therefore successful.

Its not very detailed, but its the general idea I have. My reason for concern is this: America continues to follow the path of GWBco, inciting rage in the hearts of Muslims with references to the crusades and his increasing cocky and statements with religious undertones. They are mad and worried, rightly so. We are at a cross roads. Pull out or stay in.
As you can tell, I know what I think will work. But I am a lowly college student in a small town in NJ. Think about this. We pull out or just maintain our forces. Attacks increase, more public outcry to remove troops from harms way. Either way, I foresee military withdrawal. Chaos.
Struggle for power. Usually leads to an oppressive regime a la Taliban, Saddam...etc. This regime would likely have no scruples allowing a newly empowered Al Qaeda/bin Laden (providing he's alive, if not the new face of the organization...maybe Zawahiri?) to get what they need to start planning and carrying out attacks on the scale of 9/11. Attack comes more public outcry. We attack again. At best the cycle continues, more likely in my opinion is escalation. We would be attacking a govt in the heart of Islam. Other govts would become involved, and I see the start of a never ending WWIII. Yes, we are terrific at destroying the infrastructure that the govt, and the people, need to survive. The govt may be gone, but the people are there. They are suffering. They are hungry. Needless to say, they are mad. Now, instead of those state v.
state wars we are so damn good at, we have a major problem. Countless Muslims joining terrorist groups. They have nothing left, their countries in shambles thanks to western military might. When situations are most dire, the influence of the most radical increases exponentially (remember Hitler and 30's Germany). We are back to the war that with our current strategies is un-winnable. One important detail, though. WWIII, which involved the US, GB, hopefully France and Germany and a few others; and the Muslim nations of the middle east, assumingly ends with a "victory" by the west. Except now we must deal with a crippled area of the world. All the countries are without the infrastructure necessary to operate. The people have turned in droves to fundamentalist groups promising salvation and revenge. In my opinion, we are now finally, as many Muslims believe, at war with Islam. There is no force imaginable large enough to effectively occupy the entire middle east. We cannot rebuild the nations when we have just finished destroying them. There is no chance that we could ever hope to garner the support of the people.
What option do we have? We have turned the entire middle east into a terrorist state, and it seems to me, there are no means to fix it.
Thanks to our military might, we have knocked the region back thousands of years, the tribes of yore replaced now with terrorist groups.

I admit this is slightly radical, and definitely not certain. However, I see it as very possible based on current trends and actions. The potential for disaster in the middle east is everywhere; and with history as our guide, if the potential is there, it usually happens. I am not intending this to be "scholarly." I didn't do research for this per say, just used the collection of info cycling through my head to brainstorm. Its not complete, its going be missing a thing or two and I'm sure I'm not developing the details as much as I should. Its really just ramblings that should be told in conversation, but being that its 4AM and I wanted to get it down before I lost it, it ended up in this form. Once I am finished with the equally radial amount of work I have to do for finals, I'll sit down and revise and add to this. I kind of like the idea. Hope you enjoy my radical and assumptive ramblings.

--------------------
Remember two things:
You love New York City
and leave only your footprints.

Posts: 1526 | From: Chatham, NJ... and NC-- Wake Forest University | Registered: Jul 2005  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
  This topic comprises 2 pages: 1  2   

Quick Reply
Message:

HTML is enabled.
UBB Code™ is enabled.

Instant Graemlins
   


Post New Topic  Post A Reply Close Topic   Feature Topic   Move Topic   Delete Topic next oldest topic   next newest topic
 - Printer-friendly view of this topic
Hop To:


Contact Us | Allstocks.com Message Board Home

© 1997 - 2021 Allstocks.com. All rights reserved.

Powered by Infopop Corporation
UBB.classic™ 6.7.2

Share