Discussion about usa politics

[FallenPaladin 0]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (PitViper @ 06 May 2003,19:40)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">You don't remember Pravda during the Cold war? heh<span id='postcolor'>

You said it: "during the cold war" ...

It`s been some years. Back then the russians were bad and the the USA good for Europeans. Now that`s changed.

[Warin 0]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (PitViper @ 06 May 2003,14:48)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE"></span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (Warin @ 05 May 2003,18)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">The cornerstone of the US Constitution is the right to free speach<span id='postcolor'>

heh. Perhaps there's the right of creative spelling in Canada. <!--emo&<span id='postcolor'>

Throw not stones there, mister. Your spelling is not always perfect, and your grammar can be lacking at times as well.

God save me from my English 110 teacher! If I hear the phrases 'that's a comma splice' or 'passive voice' one more time, I swear I am going to spike his coffee with strychnine! (And that was just the first class! )

Ahhhhhh... the joys of having your internet connection on again and not having to write furitive little posts at work while your boss is not looking.

I am going to side ith my American cousins on the issue of Dubyas IQ. Snopes debunked that urban legend awhile ago. I would like to see his transcripts from college though, because I expect he was at best an average student.

[PitViper 0]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">Throw not stones there, mister.  Your spelling is not always perfect, and your grammar can be lacking at times as well.<span id='postcolor'>

 Nobody's perfect.  I'm not being mean-spirited about it.  It's just my pet peeve.

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">God save me from my English 110 teacher!  If I hear the phrases 'that's a comma splice' or 'passive voice' one more time,<span id='postcolor'>

Yep.  My problem is that I post as I speak which isn't always proper grammar.

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">I am going to side ith my American cousins on the issue of Dubyas IQ.  Snopes debunked that urban legend awhile ago.  I would like to see his transcripts from college though, because I expect he was at best an average student.<span id='postcolor'>

aha! Someone who at least acknowledges that an urban legends went around based on what was previously mentioned.

[Warin 0]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (FSPilot @ 06 May 2003,07:41)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">I don't know why people don't understand this, it should be common sense.  When you insult our president, whether we voted for him or not, you insult the entire country.  When you say the president is a bumbling fool, you insult the entire country.  If you're not careful you're going to get a lot of knee-jerk reactions.

So, unless you like insulting Americans, stop insulting the president.  Now I know nobody here is going to stop making fun of the president, any type of change is too much to expect.  Just remember that  71% of Americans like the president, so when you prance around calling him a bumbling fool you insult 71% of the United States, and dont be surprised when you get a hostile reaction.<span id='postcolor'>

LOL.

Your president IS a bumbling fool. If not for a wave of 'patriotic correctness' people would still be saying it like they did before September 11th. Bush has wrapped himself in an American flag and uses it as a shield from people speaking truths about him. And when people have the courage to speak the truth, they are generally beaten down by the 'America, love it or leave it crowd'. Defend Bush if you honestly believe he is a good president. But to berate or belittle someone who believes differently than you is wrong. And to question a persons loyalty because they dont blindly follow a person with a title is insane.

Repeat after me:

One can love America without blindly following it's leader. One can feel that the people of a nation are generally caring and intelligent people even if they think the leader of that nation is a step below Inspector Clouseau on the intelligence scale. Nowhere is it written that blind obedience is equal to true patriotism.

Not questioning authority when authority is manifestly poor is doubleplusungood.

[theavonlady 2]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (Warin @ 06 May 2003,21:36)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">I would like to see his transcripts from college though, because I expect he was at best an average student.<span id='postcolor'>

Maybe that's because he had your English teacher.

[Jinef 2]

Ahh yes the passive and active voice, guess which one GWB uses in all his speeches.

[Warin 0]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (PitViper @ 06 May 2003,20:46)</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 am going to side ith my American cousins on the issue of Dubyas IQ.  Snopes debunked that urban legend awhile ago.  I would like to see his transcripts from college though, because I expect he was at best an average student.<span id='postcolor'>

aha! Someone who at least aknowledges that an urban legends went around based on what was previously mentioned.<span id='postcolor'>

Well, dont think I somehow believe that Bush is a genius. I think I have used the term 'pedestrian' in describing him, and it fits well

And after all, who needs to make stuff up about Bush when he provides all sorts of evidence himself!

[theavonlady 2]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (Jinef @ 06 May 2003,21:47)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">Ahh yes the passive and active voice, guess which one GWB uses in all his speeches.<span id='postcolor'>

Well, the way you're ranting, it's most probably a combination, known as assive voice.

[Schoeler 0]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (Warin @ 06 May 2003,11:36)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE"></span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (PitViper @ 06 May 2003,14:48)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE"></span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (Warin @ 05 May 2003,18)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">The cornerstone of the US Constitution is the right to free speach<span id='postcolor'>

heh. Perhaps there's the right of creative spelling in Canada. <!--emo&<span id='postcolor'>

Throw not stones there, mister.  Your spelling is not always perfect, and your grammar can be lacking at times as well.

God save me from my English 110 teacher!  If I hear the phrases 'that's a comma splice' or 'passive voice' one more time, I swear I am going to spike his coffee with strychnine! (And that was just the first class!   )

Ahhhhhh... the joys of having your internet connection on again and not having to write furitive little posts at work while your boss is not looking.

I am going to side ith my American cousins on the issue of Dubyas IQ.  Snopes debunked that urban legend awhile ago.  I would like to see his transcripts from college though, because I expect he was at best an average student.<span id='postcolor'>

I usually try to type as fast as I'm thinking, which gets me into trouble because my typing skills are sadly lacking!

Passive voice is okay to use in many instances where it creates a mood or emphasis that cannot be achieved any other way. I hate my spell checker, its always gigging me for passive voice use!

[Warin 0]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (theavonlady @ 06 May 2003,20:47)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE"></span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (Warin @ 06 May 2003,21:36)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">I would like to see his transcripts from college though, because I expect he was at best an average student.<span id='postcolor'>

Maybe that's because he had your English teacher. <span id='postcolor'>

Perhaps...

But I am not the president of the United States

It amazes me that people will forgive the man all sorts of ignorance simply because he is the President. Hell, if you took away his family money and name, and then made him an average Joe he would not be elected to the PTA, let alone to higher office. Being President does not somehow confer a boost in intelligence or reasoning ability.

[theavonlady 2]

Personally I look at the bottom line. He has a long successful political career, was apparently liked by his constituants and I don't think he's doing such a bad job, with his Dubya Speak and lack of sophistication.

Anything but Slick Willy. There was nothing wrong with his English but that's the biggest compliment I'll give him.

[Schoeler 0]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote ([CCCP]Stalker @ 06 May 2003,00:46)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">American is a big helper you know. It helped other countries to get rid of millions of civies with their high-precise bombing runs, to get rid of the oil in Iraq and many more.<span id='postcolor'>

Oh Goody! A fantastic statement, and just after my little sidebar about how I love to get people who put this kind of shit out as fact!

Can you supply photos and/or articles offering proof that we've killed "million" of civvies please? I'd really like to see that.

As far as I know, the Iraqi oil is still safe and sound in Iraq.

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">And I think Bush is the best president for you nation. BTW hos IQ=90 which is the lowest IQ of ALL presidents around the world.<span id='postcolor'>

Again, at least an internet link on Bush's I.Q. Though I don't doubt he's not too bright. One can tell from his command of the English language and his perfect ability to stick his foot in his mouth that he can't be a genious.

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE"> And abount insulting americans and their president. You are so stupid to understand the warning message Bin Laden sent to you. "STOP DOING THE THINGS TO OTHERS THAT YOU DON"T WANT TO BE DONE WITH YOU !!!" And you know almost no other nation exept americans like americans. If you wanna see it come to my homecountry and run holding you flag. But run quick...<span id='postcolor'>

I don't know, I was in the Navy so I've traveled a bit. I seem to recall more than a few cultures/societies that either liked, or loved Americans. It seems to be the radical cultures that can't seperate the people from some of the actions of our government that hate us. If we Americans thought that way, judging you Ukranians by the actions of your government, we probably would have attacked you years ago. As far as Bin Laden goes, well we did learn our lesson, we put our collective foot right up his skinny ass! Also, we got rid of a potential future threat in Iraq, and are in the process of pulling out of Saudi Arabia. Will we pull off all of our goals without fucking up? Who knows, I doubt it. Churchill said, "Americans always do the right thing, but only after trying all of the wrong things first." He was spot on with that remark.

[Warin 0]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (theavonlady @ 06 May 2003,21:00)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">Personally I look at the bottom line. He has a long successful political career, was apparently liked by his constituants and I don't think he's doing such a bad job, with his Dubya Speak and lack of sophistication.

Anything but Slick Willy. There was nothing wrong with his English but that's the biggest compliment I'll give him.<span id='postcolor'>

The bottom line is that without the Bush name and his family money, he wouldnt have been elected to anything. That is certainly my opinion... but I dont think that I am alone it it.

It goes back to the idea that the US political system is moving away from its roots as a representational democracy.

[PitViper 0]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (Warin @ 06 May 2003,15:05)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">It goes back to the idea that the US political system is moving away from its roots as a representational democracy.<span id='postcolor'>

*coughconstitutionalrepubliccough*

[Guest]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (Schoeler @ 06 May 2003,21:05)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">If we Americans thought that way, judging you Ukranians by the actions of your government, we probably would have attacked you years ago.<span id='postcolor'>

I doubt it. Unless your leadership wanted to turn USA into a smoking hole in the ground.

You know there is a correlation between Iraq not having means to hurt America and it being attacked.

There was no showdown with the Soviet union because of MAD. If you look at post-WW2 US wars you'll see that USA never picked a fight that would pose any danger to your mainland. That's why 11/9 was such a nasty shock.

[PitViper 0]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">One can tell from his command of the English language and his perfect ability to stick his foot in his mouth that he can't be a genious.<span id='postcolor'>

I don't believe speaking ability and intelligence are universally related. I know several highly intelligent people who could not speak publicly to save their life.

[Schoeler 0]

Well, Korea is an exception, but we didn't pick the fight with the Chinese, they picked it with us.

My point to his post was that if americans shared the same attitude he does, judging a people by the actions of their government, then the world would have gotten really nasty in a hurry.

The showdown with the Soviet Union occurred, it just occurred in limited brushfire wars like Vietnam, Afganistan, the Sudan etc... The U.S. and the soviets fought each other, just not in an insane manner through direct confrontation.

[Schoeler 0]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (PitViper @ 06 May 2003,12:52)</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">One can tell from his command of the English language and his perfect ability to stick his foot in his mouth that he can't be a genious.<span id='postcolor'>

I don't believe speaking ability and intelligence are universally related.  I know several highly intelligent people who could not speak publicly to save their life.<span id='postcolor'>

No, certainly not public speaking ability, but grasp of one's own language and being able to put together a coherent sentence are indeed connected to one's I.Q.  Its why these abilities as well as spacial reasoning and logic are included in many intelligence tests.

Oh, also PitViper, a constitutional republic and a representative democracy are basically the same thing. Our government works as a representative democracy because we elect representatives to make the laws instead of just voting them into being ourselves. The difference is that one requires a constitution and the other does not. The Constitution however, established a representative democracy as our form of government, though you can argue that its a representative republic because we don't directly elect our President, the electoral college does, or in the case of the 2000 election, the Supreme Court chooses him (without consideration for the popular vote at all I might add, and flying directly in the face of the constitution by going outside of its jurisdiction as well.) I don't know what you'd call that kind of a system, maybe a judicial republic?

[Longinius 1]

"I don't believe speaking ability and intelligence are universally related. I know several highly intelligent people who could not speak publicly to save their life."

A politician should be able to speak in public. Its part of the job description. A president should for sure be able to. But as they say; only in America

[PitViper 0]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (Schoeler @ 06 May 2003,15:56)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">or in the case of the 2000 election, the Supreme Court chooses him (without consideration for the popular vote at all I might add, and flying directly in the face of the constitution by going outside of its jurisdiction as well.)  I don't know what you'd call that kind of a system, maybe a judicial republic?<span id='postcolor'>

The Supreme court didn't select anyone.  It upheld Florida election laws with regards to recounts and deadlines.  Since you obviously disagree with the Supreme Court's ruling, you must believe that election laws can be changed on a whim in the middle of an election?

Ohh.. and there is definitely a philosophical gap between a "constitutional republic" and a "representative democracy". You can't simply gloss over the differences as you just did.

[Schoeler 0]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (PitViper @ 06 May 2003,13:19)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE"></span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (Schoeler @ 06 May 2003,15:56)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">or in the case of the 2000 election, the Supreme Court chooses him (without consideration for the popular vote at all I might add, and flying directly in the face of the constitution by going outside of its jurisdiction as well.)  I don't know what you'd call that kind of a system, maybe a judicial republic?<span id='postcolor'>

The Supreme court didn't select anyone.  It upheld Florida election laws with regards to recounts and deadlines.  Since you obviously disagree with the Supreme Court's ruling, you must believe that election laws can be changed on a whim in the middle of an election?<span id='postcolor'>

My point is that the Supreme Court did not have the jurisdiction to hear the case, the Florida Supreme Court did.  Read Article III of the Constitution.  It states that the Supreme Court enjoys only appellate jurisdiction of State cases.  The Florida Supreme Court never got the chance to rule on the case.  The Supreme Court only enjoys original jurisdiction in Cases and Controversies arising under federal law, the Constitution and treaties.  Despite the fact that it was a federal election, it was state election law that was being challenged.  In the interests of expediency, the Supreme Court bypassed the Constitution and their own precedent entirely and took the case.  Thats not a good thing.  In fact its really dangerous.  The last few time the Court bypassed the Constitution, we ended up with rulings in cases like Korematsu v. United States and Plessy v. Ferguson.  Two of the most tragic examples of the misuse of power in our history and a lasting shame and embarassment to the american people.

[Schoeler 0]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (PitViper @ 06 May 2003,13:19)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">Ohh.. and there is definitely a philosophical gap between a "constitutional republic" and a "representative democracy".  You can't simply gloss over the differences as you just did.<span id='postcolor'>

If you are referring to the concept of federalism, then yes there is a fundamental difference. But, even under a federal system, the basic structure of our government is a representative democracy/republic. Federalism too is not essential to a constitutional republic. You can have one without the other.

[PitViper 0]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (Schoeler @ 06 May 2003,16:27)</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">My point is that the Supreme Court did not have the jurisdiction to hear the case, the Florida Supreme Court did.  Read Article III of the Constitution.  It states that the Supreme Court enjoys only appellate jurisdiction of State cases.  The Florida Supreme Court never got the chance to rule on the case.  The Supreme Court only enjoys original jurisdiction in Cases and Controversies arising under federal law, the Constitution and treaties.  Despite the fact that it was a federal election, it was state election law that was being challenged.<span id='postcolor'>

Wrong!  The Florida Supreme Court DID rule on the case and basically told them to ignore the laws regarding the deadlines and recounts and to continue recounting beyond the deadlines set in law.  Upon its ruling, the Supreme Court exercised its ability to review that ruling under the constitution. The supreme court then ruled that the state election laws cannot be ignored as the state supreme court had ruled. The state law was upheld by the Supreme Court.

EDIT:  ok.. to clarify: the case was taken locally at the Miami-Dade level where Gore lost.  Gore appealed to the Florida Supreme Court which took up the case and made a ruling. The Supreme Court reviewed the Florida Supreme Court's ruling which reversed it - all according to the constitution.

[Schoeler 0]

I don't think that was a ruling, but rather a preliminary finding. I think the actual case was still pending when the Supreme Court snatched it up. I'll look it up, I could be wrong.

[FallenPaladin 0]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (Warin @ 06 May 2003,20:53)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE"></span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (theavonlady @ 06 May 2003,20:47)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE"></span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (Warin @ 06 May 2003,21:36)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">I would like to see his transcripts from college though, because I expect he was at best an average student.<span id='postcolor'>

Maybe that's because he had your English teacher. <span id='postcolor'>

Perhaps...

But I am not the president of the United States

It amazes me that people will forgive the man all sorts of ignorance simply because he is the President.  Hell, if you took away his family money and name, and then made him an average Joe he would not be elected to the PTA, let alone to higher office.  Being President does not somehow confer a boost in intelligence or reasoning ability. <span id='postcolor'>

Being president makes him sexy!!