Bush knows more...

[Guest]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (FSPilot @ July 23 2002,02:19)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE"></span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">i dont know why people who have absolutely no political background, training, or education besides what they see on CNN think they're fit to judge the president of the united states.<span id='postcolor'>

That in NO way says anything about freedom of speech.  Just because you don't know what you're talking about, doesn't mean you don't have a right to say it.

I was saying that people who aren't trained in a certain field, but still talk about it like they are, are stupid.<span id='postcolor'>

You say that you don't know why people who have no political training feel that they can judge the president. The basics of free speech is that you have the right to criticize the government without being part of the political system. Politics is something that concerns everybody in a democracy and hence they have the right to speak about it.

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE"></span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">Uneducated people making important decisions is the fundament of democracy?  I certainly hope not.<span id='postcolor'>

I'm not talking about voting.  Citizens didn't vote on this decision did they?  So what I said has absolutely nothing to do with voting, does it?<span id='postcolor'>

Democracy = representative power. Voting is the most importrant decision making process there is in a democracy.

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE"></span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">educated as in people that know what they're doing, yes.<span id='postcolor'>

That has nothing to do with an intellectual elite.  I'm simply

against professional wrestlers being elected into office.  <span id='postcolor'>

Prefering professional politicians before 'regular' citizens as representatives is the same as prefering an ruling elite. The politicians are supposed to be representative for the population.

[Warin 0]

For all its flaws, I agree that democracyt has generally worked better than the alternatives.

FSPilot..

I am very educated, please dont misunderstimate me And I have almost zero respect for the average American Republican (in spite of being desperately in love with one for awhile ).  Why?  Because in spite of the glaringly obvious fact that Mr Bush is NOT highly intelligent, and in fact is of rather mediocre intelligence, knee jerk republicans like yourself feel this inane need to defend him and try to point out his brilliance.  

So..

GW Bush:  A bit of an intellectual turnip, but in spite of that a rather earnest fellow who really is trying.  So while I may not think much of him as a 'Leader of the Free World' I respect the fact that he is doing an almost passable job in spite of his problems.

Republicans:  Deadly afraid of letting people poke fun at their 'man', they make claims that are shattered almost every time Bush opens his mouth.  So while I might think a lot of a republican as a person, I cant respect the head in the sand attitude displayed to their leader.

This is not a flame, nor a personal insult. It's an observation...

[Paratrooper 0]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">I was saying that people who aren't trained in a certain field, but still talk about it like they are, are stupid.

<span id='postcolor'> Are you trained in politics?

The important part of democracy is that everyone is involved in the political process.

[Guest]

I find it highly amusing how people have misconceptions on what democracy is. It is not some fantasy wonder solution.

Democracy is the rule of the mediocre. The good thing about it is that it works well in average and people are content with it also in average.

Democracy requires people that are representative for the population it is supposed to govern. That means average people. Now, one can debate if it is the best system or not, but that is what democracy is. Take it or leave it.

You can't say that you want politically educatead professional politicians to govern the country and say that you are for democracy at the same time.

[Paratrooper 0]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (denoir @ July 23 2002,02:34)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">I find it highly amusing how people have misconceptions on what democracy is. It is not some fantasy wonder solution.

Democracy is the rule of the mediocre. The good thing about it is that people are happy about it in average.<span id='postcolor'>

Thats right, democracy does not assure good leaders, but it allows bad ones to be removed.

[Warin 0]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (Paratrooper @ July 23 2002,02:37)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">Thats right, democracy does not assure good leaders, but it allows bad ones to be removed.<span id='postcolor'>

When their term is over...

Canadas problem right now is that the leader of the current government doesnt want to step aside when it has become obviously apparent that even a good portion of his own party has stopped supporting him.

Bleah!

And so we wait till the next election to try to rid ourselves of him, unless there is a vote of non confidence.  And that is not likely to happen.

[FSPilot 0]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (Warin @ July 23 2002,02:28)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE"><span id='postcolor'>

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">The basics of free speech is that you have the right to criticize the government without being part of the political system<span id='postcolor'>

I didn't say people didn't have the right to do so, I said it would be stupid to.

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">The basics of free speech is that you have the right to criticize the government without being part of the political system<span id='postcolor'>

Again, I'm not talking about voting.

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">Prefering professional politicians before 'regular' citizens as representatives is the same as prefering an ruling elite. The politicians are supposed to be representative for the population.<span id='postcolor'>

In my opinion, a "professional politician" is a representative for the population.

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">Because in spite of the glaringly obvious fact that Mr Bush is NOT highly intelligent, and in fact is of rather mediocre intelligence, knee jerk republicans like yourself feel this inane need to defend him and try to point out his brilliance.<span id='postcolor'>

Well, what about all the "knee jerk" people who criticize and doubt every single action the president takes?

I don't mean to be a "knee jerk republican" and I'm sorry that you think I am. But I'm tired of seeing the president being mocked for nothing more than being a bad public speaker. How can you not see that?

IMO, political mistakes are generally a matter of opinion. For example: pro-choice people are not going to like this decision, and are going to call it a mistake. But some political mistakes are real mistakes that even Bush-friendly republicans can point out. Those kind of mistakes I won't defend with any vigor. But stuff like this really ticks me off.

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">Are you trained in politics?<span id='postcolor'>

No, but does that take away my right to talk about it?

[Paratrooper 0]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">No, but does that take away my right to talk about it? <span id='postcolor'> According to you, no, but in your words; It makes you stupid. You said it. Not me.

[USSoldier11B 0]

Please friends, before you decide to criticize how the U.S. spends it's money...pay my taxes.

[Guest]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (FSPilot @ July 23 2002,02:42)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE"></span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">Are you trained in politics?<span id='postcolor'>

No, but does that take away my right to talk about it?<span id='postcolor'>

I know that this is evil, but I must quote you once more

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">i dont know why people who have absolutely no political background, training, or education besides what they see on CNN think they're fit to judge the president of the united states.  now THAT's stupid. <span id='postcolor'>

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE"></span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">The basics of free speech is that you have the right to criticize the government without being part of the political system<span id='postcolor'>

I didn't say people didn't have the right to do so, I said it would be stupid to.

<span id='postcolor'>

(emphasis added)

Edit: You were faster Paratrooper

[FSPilot 0]

Bah!

Basically, it goes the same for you all too. Unless of course you're formally trained in politics.

[Paratrooper 0]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (FSPilot @ July 23 2002,02:47)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">Bah!

Basically, it goes the same for you all too.  Unless of course you're formally trained in politics.<span id='postcolor'>

Well I'm about to begin a degree in philosophy and the philosophy of politics, but I never said that people were not entitled to an opinion. You did.

Democracy isn't perfect, in any country, but it is vital to the freedoms we enjoy in the West today.

[ralphwiggum 6]

let's see...i'm going to start ph.D. in Economics in Sept. so that pretty much qualifies me as an experienced person in politics. afterall, politics is act of distribution of resource, isn't it?

everybody is a political animal, so everybody has experiences. the only thing different btw politician at capitol hills and us is that they are incorporated into system by trying to be elected, while we don't try.

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">Democracy isn't perfect, in any country, but it is vital to the freedoms we enjoy in the West today.<span id='postcolor'>

can't agree more.

[FSPilot 0]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (Paratrooper @ July 23 2002,03:20)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE"><span id='postcolor'>

Again, I didn't say that.

I just said it was stupid to talk about something you didn't know about.

Which, in retrospect, I didn't really do. I just vocalized my opinion on it.

[Warin 0]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (FSPilot @ July 23 2002,04:32)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE"></span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (Paratrooper @ July 23 2002,03:20)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE"><span id='postcolor'>

Again, I didn't say that.

I just said it was stupid to talk about something you didn't know about.

Which, in retrospect, I didn't really do.  I just vocalized my opinion on it. <span id='postcolor'>

And who are you to presume that we know nothing about politics? It seems awfully arrogant.

One thing to remember is that in most nations, a lot of people take interest in the political process. In some cases we can be as knowledagble as any lobbyist or actual politician.

And what makes someone qualified to discuss politics? A degree in a particular topic? Owning a baseball team? Are you qualified if you have ever held any sort of office, or is there certain threshold where it's 'serious' enough.

You seem to think that 'politician' is some sort of profession in and of itself. And like Denoir, I think that when you make political office a profession rather than a service, you cease to be part of a 'representative democracy' and make yourself part of a nation ruled by an elite.

But then since I am not a politician, what do I know?

[FSPilot 0]

That's funny, I thought I already asked. I just worded it wrong.

Going through the giant process of determining who is qualified to go to what political positions isn't of interest of me. I just want to make sure it's done so I don't have people who don't know what they're doing in office.

[Longinius 1]

"That's funny, I thought I already asked. I just worded it wrong.

Going through the giant process of determining who is qualified to go to what political positions isn't of interest of me. I just want to make sure it's done so I don't have people who don't know what they're doing in office."

And you probably don't. That is the scary part, most of the time they know what they are doing and why.

[Warin 0]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (FSPilot @ July 23 2002,06:55)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">That's funny, I thought I already asked.  I just worded it wrong.

Going through the giant process of determining who is qualified to go to what political positions isn't of interest of me.  I just want to make sure it's done so I don't have people who don't know what they're doing in office.<span id='postcolor'>

The point of representational democracy is that ANYONE is qualified. All they have to do is convince enough people of it.

G W Bush proved that if you have enough money and connections, you can convince a whole court full of judges that you should be president (Kidding!! ) But it is a valid point.

It's a popularity contest, and in this day and age that means he with the most money wins. It's why there is/was such a large outcry about soft money contributions. Special Interest Groups wield far, far too much money and influence in your countrys elections.

And if you dont worry about how your nations leaders are decided, then you are abdicating a lot of responsibility to those that may decide they know what is best for you.

[Albert Schweitzer 10]

I am not really contradicting any of you with the following comment so please let me eat my lunch in peace now! Oh, and by the way I hate you all for the posting whenever I am not there. I often wait for new comment but nothing happens for hours. Then I go away for a few minutes and 14853905945945439 new posts are up! Why dont you just ban me, it would have the same effect! But here comes my comment

One of the interesting facts of democracy is the big effect a former ruling party can have on the future. People tend to judge by the past and therefore we now see in europe extreme tendencies towards the right after there had tendencies to the left. Unfortunately do those waves from left to right grow bigger and bigger and can end up in an extreme. On the other hand it takes quite a lot of time to flatten the wave and get a liberal party back to power. My predictions for europe will be 80% right wing during the next 3-4 years. Just see the amount of power Monsieur Chirac has now in France. He has the absolute power! Think about Holland and Italy.

When we look into the past we see that during the last years the socialists had most european countries in their hands. Of course you cannot compare the socialists in the UK with the socialists in Germany but still, similar tendencies.

And what did we have before this left-wing-europe? A right wing europe! Kohl, Thatcher, Mitterand...

I wonder what the next wave will go to.?

[Tex -USMC- 0]

Uh oh, the German is getting frustrated... I think Ran better batten down the hatches, or at least make travel arrangements

[Guest]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (Albert Schweizer @ July 23 2002,13:27)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">But here comes my comment<span id='postcolor'>

You are too late Albert. The battle has already been fought and won. Not that it was much of a fight, more like shooting sitting ducks

[Albert Schweitzer 10]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (denoir @ July 23 2002,13:43)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">more like shooting sitting ducks <span id='postcolor'>

No No No, that is forbidden and no hunter with honour would ever do this!

But I wasnt contributing to the battle I was just trying to open your eyes that we are exposed to regular life-cicles of political trends in europe and that those trends were european-wide already before the EU started.

[Guest]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (Albert Schweizer @ July 23 2002,14:16)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">But I wasnt contributing to the battle I was just trying to open your eyes that we are exposed to regular life-cicles of political trends in europe and that those trends were european-wide already before the EU started.<span id='postcolor'>

Yes, I know, and that is why we don't like you

[Albert Schweitzer 10]

Okay, got the point! Then I will hide in the MiddleEast thread again! Heard about the incredible "kill eight children for one terorist and call it SUCESS" incident? well anyway, this belongs into the other thread above!

[Espectro (DayZ) 0]

Damnit, too late again.

Anyway, to make the topic on topic again. If America doesnt wish to help the poor and miserable people in the other countries like the rest of the western world does. It shouldnt expect us to help them whenever they decide to create a new war or getting hit by a major catastrophy.

There, said it.