+- CDBZ Archive (http://alex.zulenka.com)
+-- Forum: Out of Character Forums (http://alex.zulenka.com/forumdisplay.php?fid=8)
+--- Forum: The Legendary Asylum (http://alex.zulenka.com/forumdisplay.php?fid=133)
+--- Thread: complete winner! (/showthread.php?tid=27438)
complete winner! - Hellfighter 17 - 09-13-2005
Yea, I must say I wasn't exactly very political during Clinton's time in office, but I've heard many good things about him as a president. I wouldn't really care if he was screwing around, as long as it wasn't when he was supposed to be working.
Oh, and Jackie, you said he spends most of his time on his ranch. I know that was an exaggeration, and so wouldn't you say he deserves a vacation from time to time, like most other people who have jobs? I mean, no life for eight years would suck. =/
Also, I can't say I'm precisely pro-Bush, as I do not keep constant track of him so I cannot form a "perfectly informed" opinion, but that goes with most of you. Oh, and plus he has had to deal with a lot of stuff that other presidents haven't, so that might contribute towards him being assaulted by the media and your country going downhill.
I haven't followed Blair except when they talked about him alongside Bush. =/
complete winner! - Old Dave - 09-13-2005
Look we can settle this right now, write me in for president next time there is an election, I'll run the country better then this retard drunk off my ass.
EDIT: I really wanna know what Vegeta has to say, Bush is his Commander in Chief.
also the above was a joke, I know that if I were in his shoes I would struggle with the extreme task of running a country, we all would, and untill we are in that position we can not really argue about it. Sure some things could have been done different...but he has done the best he could, and that's what we as a nation elected him to do.
complete winner! - Ruhiel - 09-13-2005
Furiza's hit this one right on the head ya'll. Bush may have made some mistakes in his term, but that's only human. It's just that more of his mistakes have been overinflated by the media who always look for the bad news before the good news because it sells better.
Personally, I think Bush is a great person, with very strong and solid morals, but maybe he wasn't meant to be the President. It's kind of like our governor here, Ernie Fletcher. He simply did something the Democrats (who have been dominant here for decades) did all the time: filling some of the government positions with his friends and people who share his views so that decisions can be made. Well, naturally, the Democrats jumped on him, and tried to take him and all the people he gave jobs to to court. Well, he used his executive privelege to pardon all those people except himself. Like I said, his heart is in the right place, but he just wasn't meant to lead during this period in time.
complete winner! - Raditzu - 09-13-2005
I don't know why you guys even bother discussing this hear. Its just going to turn into someone who can't act mature posting and the thread getting locked.
Furiza posted something about the bible at one point and I decided to call discussions like this "talkin' bible". No matter what point of view you hold, you'll find something to support your argument. I think Furiza said soomething about the bible not saying gays were evil. There's absoultely no doubt in my mind that I could go through the bible and find something that said that homosexuals are, indeed, evil. Same thing here. People will find things to support whatever argument they want. People who like Bush will say he has upstanding "morals" or some such, and people who don't will just point to 9/11.
However, I would like to add that I am impressed with the level of maturity that has been maintained thus far.
complete winner! - Raz - 09-13-2005
Especially from what the conversation spawned from. =P
Honestly I'm not one for politics... my views are that the government maintains and thus allows everything to roll as one, meaning those with opinions against it are probably those who can't accept the decent work that holds the bindings together or have been missed by the system. I mean, human error is something that happens with or without natural involvement. LAX went through a power outaged just yesterday in one of the major financal locations due to human error, but that's not really the point. Bush is there and until he deems the USA offically screwed and I find myself sailing over to stalk down Furizy to live with, he's fine by me.
complete winner! - Krillin - 09-14-2005
There are specific verses in the Bible that state that "homosexuality is an abomination". I'm just too lazy to look them up. I believe they're in the Law.
Regardless, why else would God toast Sodom and Gomorra? I mean, I'm sure homosexuality wasn't their only sin, but it's specifically mentioned as one of the reasons for their destruction.
complete winner! - Tobias - 09-14-2005
Quote:Originally posted by Krillin
Regardless, why else would God toast Sodom and Gomorra?.
He was bored?
complete winner! - Raditzu - 09-14-2005
That's why I'd make a bad god. It would probably be funny to see people fleeing in terror from a tsunami moving at 8 miles per hour.
complete winner! - Bardock - 09-14-2005
Quote:Originally posted by Krillin
Yeah, if someone honestly doesn't agree with something Bush does, I'm fine with that. I personally think he's a fine man, and a good leader. But when people take a side just to be cool, and actually aren't informed on the subject, that kinda perturbs me.
Here's why I don't like Bush:
- First president in US history to enter office with a criminal record.
- In his first two years in office, over 2 million Americans lost their jobs.
- Shattered record for biggest annual deficit in history.
- Set all-time record for biggest drop in the history of the stock market, second only to the crash.
- Cut the taxes of the wealthiest people in America (those making over $200,000 a year).
- Members of Bush Administration are the richest administration in history.
- First year in office set the all-time record for most days on vacation by any president in US history.
- Cut unemployment benefits for more out-of-work Americans than any president in US history.
- Dissolved more international treaties than any president in US history.
- Set the all-time record for biggest annual budget spending increases.
- First president in US history to attack a sovereign nation against the will of the United Nations and the world community.
- Took the biggest world sympathy for the US after 9/11, and in less than a year, made the US the most resented country in the world.
- First US president in history to have a majority of people in Europe (over 70%) view his presidency as the biggest threat to world peace and stability.
- In the 18 months following the 9/11 attacks, he has successfully prevented any public investigation into the biggest security failure in the history of the United States.
Is that informed enough? I'd like to think I have good reasons to dislike the President. It makes it difficult for me to follow the mantra "I did not vote for him, but he is still my President."
complete winner! - Hellfighter 17 - 09-14-2005
Very enlightening, Bardock. Thanks for the informatiom, I'm gonna print that out and shove it in people's faces. =P
Quote:Originally posted by Android-13I never got no PM.
also Roshi after your pm... im now indifferent with Bush lol ^^ g/j you now have turned my world updside down o.O
complete winner! - Amadeus - 09-14-2005
No you dont have to lie to your people. At least if your a good politician. Which I guess Blair is not. Also, Germany is an ally of the US and they didnt go to war, Saudi Arabia is an ally of the US and they didnt go to war (and even rejected the use of their air space), Turkey is an ally of the US and they didnt go to war. If these countries didnt go to war, then im sure that a former colonial power with nukes can also not go. But yeah, I will admit Blair was good on the fact he stuck to his ally. That I give him a plus.
Well if it helps you Krillin im anti-Bush for many reasons.
People shouldnt judge a politician by his personall life unless the topic in question prevents him from doing his work properly. Roosevelt was a chain smoker, drank a lot and had two mistresses, yet he was the best president in history of the US.
Never a good leader? Then your forgetin Nelson Mandela.
Of course he deserves vacation from time to time. Being a president is a preety stressful job and I wont argue if he takes vacation from time to time. Also he didnt say he spends most of his time on his ranch. I only mean that he spends A LOT of his time on his ranch, A LOT more then is usual.
The president of the US isnt in the same position as say president of Slovenia. In the US, the president is the highest authority. In Slovenia, tha parlament is the highest authority. See what I mean?
All in all, I never said that Bush is exclusivly a bad person. But he has made a lot of bad things during his term and I mean A LOT. SO I agree that he just wasnt meant to rule in this period of time.
complete winner! - Hellfighter 17 - 09-14-2005
Which Roosevelt? I'm not that up-to-date on past president's personal lives from early 1900's.
complete winner! - Krillin - 09-14-2005
I'm going to bow out, at this point. To say I'm a good debater of Politics would be like saying Tapion doesn't Mass Debate. I steer clear of most arguments about Bush after the opening statements, usually.
complete winner! - Amadeus - 09-14-2005
Quote:Originally posted by Hell Fighter 17
Which Roosevelt? I'm not that up-to-date on past president's personal lives from early 1900's.
Franklin Delano. I dont like Theodore beacuse of his strategy of "speaking softly and carrying a big stick".
complete winner! - Amadeus - 09-14-2005
Quote:Originally posted by Furiza
Again, Jackie, you seem to understand little of how things really are.
You forget, Nelson Mandella was a terrorist. A man fighting for his beliefs, sure, but a terrorist.
Is Osama Bin Laden a great leader since Al Quaeda have enjoyed so much success? I guess he is. Would you say that to anyone in a pollitical conversation? No you wouldn't.
Despite the almost total destruction of an entire race of people, Hitler was an astonishingly good pollitician. You say that Roosevelt is the greatest president the US has ever had? If I know my Roosevelts, FD followed Hoover, which means he dealt with the depression, which means he set up the Alphabet Agencies. Adolf Hitler dealt with German depression in the same efficient way, if not moreso.
I don't know how they do things in Slovenia, but around here, lying to people is the only way to stop them complaining. People don't know how to run a country and therefore it shouldn't be pretended to them that they do.
At the end of the day, democracy isn't even a valid system, it's just flavour of the month at the moment. You guys should be happy you even have a chance to vote, because if it were up to me, I wouldn't want any of us voting for something so important.
You say that, yet you dont seem to want to explain why you think so.
Guerrila and terrorist are two diffrent words, ones you must be careful to split. Guerrilas fights against terror. Terrorists spread terror. And this is where the diffrence between Nelson Mandela and Osama Bin Laden appears. Nelson Mandela faught against a oppresive system which used terror if opposed. Osama Bin Laden on the other hand spreads terror by sending his minions to do terrorist attacks.
So? Hitler was a genius. A lunatic, but a genius nevertheless. He turned Germany from a weakened country into a great power, which almost dominated Europe. Thats something not every leader can reach. As for Roosevelt, his New Deal saved the US from depression, at least mostly. Yes, he did create Alphabet Agencies and few of them turned out to be a bad idea. But you also have to understand he had to think of New Deal very quickly cause the depression was (when he took over the position) preety deep. Also, these agencies where soon ended after they where started (the bad ones I mean). Sure, his rule wasnt perfect (rasism was still strong, there where worker strikes). But his rule is the closest to what I would call a true democracy. Not there yet, but close. At least he was better then any president before or after him. Dont you think there must be something to him if he is the only president to be elected four times?
Ruling is like RPing. You have to accept critisicm in order to improve. Sure, there will be always people with pointless complaints, but there are many who have valid critiques. Or at least it should be like that. But like you said, we dont live in a democracy. The capitalist regimes that rule us refuse to listen to people. What is worse, the people dont realise how much power they have. Sure, as a single individual you wont do much. But if you unite with other people who think the same way you do, then you (a long the people with you) will become a force to be reconed with.
That is one thing I agree with. Like I said, we dont live in a democracy. Infact, no country in history (not even Greek states) ever lived in a true democracy. We only live under a fake cover of democracy. The truth is, we live in a plutocratic-like system. Of course, I dont belive the idiocity that there is a room somewhere where the rich gather. However, it is without doubt that we live in a system lead by the rich and who is influenced by the rich.
complete winner! - The Not Cool Not Tapion - 09-14-2005
Quote:Originally posted by Bardock
Quote:Originally posted by Krillin
Yeah, if someone honestly doesn't agree with something Bush does, I'm fine with that. I personally think he's a fine man, and a good leader. But when people take a side just to be cool, and actually aren't informed on the subject, that kinda perturbs me.
Here's why I don't like Bush:
- First president in US history to enter office with a criminal record.
- In his first two years in office, over 2 million Americans lost their jobs.
- Shattered record for biggest annual deficit in history.
- Set all-time record for biggest drop in the history of the stock market, second only to the crash.
- Cut the taxes of the wealthiest people in America (those making over $200,000 a year).
- Members of Bush Administration are the richest administration in history.
- First year in office set the all-time record for most days on vacation by any president in US history.
- Cut unemployment benefits for more out-of-work Americans than any president in US history.
- Dissolved more international treaties than any president in US history.
- Set the all-time record for biggest annual budget spending increases.
- First president in US history to attack a sovereign nation against the will of the United Nations and the world community.
- Took the biggest world sympathy for the US after 9/11, and in less than a year, made the US the most resented country in the world.
- First US president in history to have a majority of people in Europe (over 70%) view his presidency as the biggest threat to world peace and stability.
- In the 18 months following the 9/11 attacks, he has successfully prevented any public investigation into the biggest security failure in the history of the United States.
Is that informed enough? I'd like to think I have good reasons to dislike the President. It makes it difficult for me to follow the mantra "I did not vote for him, but he is still my President."
Lol, I found that on my friend's xanga. But some of that information is innacurate. I forgot which parts were, but it's not all right.
But speaking on the gay marriage issue, I think it should be left alone. I have a few friends who are gay and they are looked down upon for their choice in life and it really hurts. I don't think we should bring religion into it because based on our government, there are ten things we do to be good American citizens, and most people should know them. And one of those ten things to be good citizens states
"To treat other's differences equally."
So whether they are different or not, let it be. They are humans, it is their rightful choice, government shouldn't be allowed to say no to it just because it's "icky" or because religion says so. I believe that's wrong.
I just want to know what reason there is to ban homosexual marriage. Not because of morals or religion, and not because it's "gross". What REAL reason is there. I would like to know, William, you have opinions, what do you think?
complete winner! - Raditzu - 09-14-2005
Quote:Originally posted by Furiza
To be a fan of democracy, yet say Bush sucks despite the election of his father, then himself, is an oxymoron. The people voted for him. To say they were wrong is to say democracy is wrong.
Democracy was wrong. Let's not forget that the first time Bush was elected he lost the popular vote. In other words MORE AMERICANS DID NOT WANT HIM ELECTED.
That's pretty much a complete failure in my book. As such, I don't think there's anything wrong with being a fan of democracy and complaining about Bush. Normally, I would agree with Furiza 100%, but the fact of the matter is that the system failed.
EDIT: I'm with Tapion. Leave gay people the fuck alone. How the fuck does letting gay people get married have anything to do with the damned constitution!? There's is absolutely NO reason our government should get in the middle of that.
*fumes*
complete winner! - The Not Cool Not Tapion - 09-14-2005
Quote:Originally posted by Raditzu
Quote:Originally posted by Furiza
To be a fan of democracy, yet say Bush sucks despite the election of his father, then himself, is an oxymoron. The people voted for him. To say they were wrong is to say democracy is wrong.
Democracy was wrong. Let's not forget that the first time Bush was elected he lost the popular vote. In other words MORE AMERICANS DID NOT WANT HIM ELECTED.
That's pretty much a complete failure in my book. As such, I don't think there's anything wrong with being a fan of democracy and complaining about Bush. Normally, I would agree with Furiza 100%, but the fact of the matter is that the system failed.
EDIT: I'm with Tapion. Leave gay people the fuck alone. How the fuck does letting gay people get married have anything to do with the damned constitution!? There's is absolutely NO reason our government should get in the middle of that.
*fumes*
I agree with everything you said. That is why I don't like the ellectoral collage, or whatever it's called, there has been a couple other instances of this. It's really not fair. And people can go back on what they voted, because they could realize that yes, they were wrong. Maybe they weren't wrong, it is their own choice.
complete winner! - Raditzu - 09-14-2005
Actually there was only one other instance of this in the history of the college's existance. Everyone said "ah, it'll never happen again" and went on with their lives.
>.>
I honestly don't understand why they don't just use the popular vote to determine who is elected.
complete winner! - Ruhiel - 09-14-2005
Okay, for those of you who seriously detest the war in Iraq (I don't like it either, but just consider this hypothetical situation).
America goes into their little retaliation against terrorist groups in Afghanistan, searching for Osama Bin Laden. But, we also had intel reports saying that Saddam Hussein had WMDs in his possesion, and could possibly fire a missle strike on the US.
In a different world, Bush does nothing. Saddam may have had weapons in his possesion, and managed to dismantle them and dispose of them before we arrived, or he might not have. But suppose he did? And he DID fire a WMD at a highly populated city somewhere.
Then what would we be saying? It's the president's fault for not doing anything when he had reports that Saddam did have WMDs?
I'm just saying that this is another point of view. I don't believe a war in Iraq was neccesary, as the UN inspectors could have handled the job, but I'm just saying, if you knew something could happen that would cause mass destruction, would you do everything in your power to stop it? Or would you sit idly by and see what happens?
We waited once. Two words. Pearl Harbor. We had intelligence reports then that the Japanese were probably going to attack us. We just didn't know when and exactly where, but we knew it was probably coming.
We also acted once. We dropped atomic bombs on Japan, and it resulted in the end of WW2. While it did cause mass destruction and death, would it have caused more death and destruction than an invasion would have? It could have been another D-Day for all we know.
But as for the other things that Bardock mentioned earlier, I'm with him 100%. There may be some explanation for that, but I don't see one.
All I can say is I hope that things turn out for the best in the future, as we can't change what's in the past.
And no, this is not meant to be arguing with anyone. I'm just trying to show a different perspective on the war in Iraq. What would you have done, if you didn't know what the current situation would be like today?
I'm out now, though. If someone wants to continue this, do it on pms or on AIM.