USA Politics Thread - *No gun debate*

[ralphwiggum 6]

http://money.cnn.com/2004/12/09/news/bush_socsec/index.htm?cnn=yes

Quote[/b] ]WASHINGTON (CNN) - Following a meeting with key advisers, President Bush promised Thursday he would not raise payroll taxes to help pay for overhauling Social Security.

"We will not raise payroll taxes to solve this problem," Bush told reporters during an Oval Office meeting with Social Security experts.

"The problem is America is getting older and that there are fewer people to pay into the system to support a baby boomer generation which is about to retire," the president said.

He again reassured retired Americans and those about to retire that nothing would change with the system, which first began paying retired workers monthly in 1940.

But now, the program is facing "unfunded liabilities of about $11 trillion," the president added, noting he's suggested a new way to help shore up its funds.

"I think it's vital to consider allowing younger workers, on a voluntary basis, to set aside some of their own payroll tax in personal accounts as part of a comprehensive solution to dealing with the Social Security issue," Bush said.

hello federal deficit!

[joltan 0]

This release will exceed the CO2 absorbed by growing trees for at least the first 10 years, they say. Only later will the uptake of carbon by the trees begin to offset the losses from soils

That's what you get when you quote stuff you don't have the background knowledge to understand!

First: Clearcuts are about the worst way of managing your forests and are not practised anywhere where it's not just big logging companies flattening everything for big profits. Also you may note that the text mentiones that this problem only exists for the first years (and what it doesn't mention: also depends on tree species used and the soil) - after that the process turns around. Considering the time needed until a tree is harvested or dies of natural causes this is irrelevant. The same applies to planting new woods on sites where they don't belong (=peats) - of course there's places that aren't suitable for aforrestation, but quoting these human-made mistakes as an argument for forests as a polluting source is plain stupid.

If anything it just proves that nothing is simple enough to fit in one phrase.

For your information: I'm a graduated forester and have been working for several years at the university as a researcher.

[theavonlady 2]

Yay, we go to court now...

Quote[/b] ]

NO. 7 6 3 2 1 - 6

DAVID T. McDONALD and RONALD

Clown court!

[billybob2002 0]

Quote[/b] ]If anything it just proves that nothing is simple enough to fit in one phrase.

I already say it was for a temp. time but I was wrong. Furthermore, you care to notice about one of the Kyoto cons:

Quote[/b] ]4. She did said it was complicated but did not explain the reasons.

[Akira 0]

Quote[/b] ]If anything it just proves that nothing is simple enough to fit in one phrase.

I already say it was for a temp. time but I was wrong. Furthermore, you care to notice about one of the Kyoto cons:

Quote[/b] ]4. She did said it was complicated but did not explain the reasons.

Then why bring it up? You are quoting and arguing for someone who didn't even give you the reasons for their beliefs, and therefore no platform from which to argue from!

Do you always argue for things that you have no information on to make an informed decision? (*cough*votingforbush*cough*)

[billybob2002 0]

Quote[/b] ]If anything it just proves that nothing is simple enough to fit in one phrase.

I already say it was for a temp. time but I was wrong. Furthermore, you care to notice about one of the Kyoto cons:

Quote[/b] ]4. She did said it was complicated but did not explain the reasons.

Then why bring it up? You are quoting and arguing for someone who didn't even give you the reasons for their beliefs, and therefore no platform from which to argue from!

Do you always argue for things that you have no information on to make an informed decision? (*cough*votingforbush*cough*)

I was shocked that a enviornmental ecology professor would be against Kyoto. She did give reasons but she did not explain the tree argument in-depth. I just wanted to explore why she would say that.

You know why I did not vote for Kerry and for Bush? He said during his DNC speech that he would not lie and he lied through the campaign. Furthermore, Bush got my vote because my county is heavily democratic and I see what democrats in power for a long time can do. They do not care about education (overcrowded schools and ranked second to last in testing in the state for years), environment (allow 5 new developments to be build on a single road that already has a couple of large communities), crime, and etc. My vote was against the Democratic Party and other reasons I gave before. I know somebody has problems with republicans in control in their community but bah....  

[Akira 0]

Please explain....once again....and clearly....why it is OK to lie and send the country to war then? You obviously think it is since you voted to re-elect him.

Quote[/b] ]They do not care about education (overcrowded schools and ranked second to last in testing in the state for years), environment (allow 5 new developments to be build on a single road that already has a couple of large communities), crime, and etc. My vote was against the Democratic Party and other reasons I gave before. I know somebody has problems with republicans in control in their community but bah....

I can say the same about the Republican controled Texas offices. The State is in the middle of an education crisis (I won't even get into the new text books they just oked) with no money for schools, but they thought it wise to spend millions of dollars on special sessions in order to re-district the state. Yes. Republicans have education high on their list as well

[billybob2002 0]

Quote[/b] ]Please explain....once again....and clearly....why it is OK to lie and send the country to war then? You obviously think it is since you voted to re-elect him.

The WMD claim might of not been the truth has TBA painted it but TBA could of said other things that is non-WMD to go in. Honestly, I do not know why he used the WMD claim and the claims that some of people used for going it (i.e. oil and greed) is BS. Kerry just pissed me offf that he would say that he bring "truth" (not the exact word) back to white house and he lied his ass off during the campaign.

I will never forgot what those Badnarik supporters at my campus was...

[Akira 0]

You do actually read what you write right?

Quote[/b] ]The WMD claim might of not been the truth has TBA painted it but TBA could of said other things that is non-WMD to go in.

So he didn't have to lie, but he did anyway and thats ok. Are you even reading? Does this actually make sense in your head because from where I sit it comes off as completely ridiculous bordering on idiotic.

Quote[/b] ]Kerry just pissed me offf that he would say that he bring "truth" (not the exact word) back to white house and he lied his ass off during the campaign.

Please refresh our memory. What did he lie about that was so bad that he shouldn't have been elected. (Keep in mind I will be weighing upon your own admission that lying to go to war and killing hundreds of thousands is A-ok to you).

[Grigory Toadfoot 0]

Kerry did not deserve to be elected for many reasons. He completly disowned his own countrymen by lambasting our troops that were still in Vietnam. He also does not keep his ground on any issues. He does not stand firm.

Now, That being said, Mr Bush was not really any better. He went awol from his duties in the Air National Guard, which he was in in the first place just to get out of going to vietnam. He is fiercely loyal, and although that is usually a good thing, he does not know when to give up on people he should.

Sir Toadfoot

[Akira 0]

Quote[/b] ]He completly disowned his own countrymen by lambasting our troops that were still in Vietnam.

That is an argument perpetrated by the Bush campaign and pushed by the Republican swifties. The fact is his testimony (which is easy to find a transcript) clearly shows he did no such thing, and spent 99% of his testimony time lambasting THE GOVERNMENT for allowing soldiers to die, to support a corrupt and not even democratic regime.

Quote[/b] ]He also does not keep his ground on any issues. He does not stand firm.

I will give you that. He waited far too late to put his platform to the people, and allowed Bush to pre-emptively define what Kerry was and stood for.

Quote[/b] ]Now, That being said, Mr Bush was not really any better. He went awol from his duties in the Air National Guard, which he was in in the first place just to get out of going to vietnam. He is fiercely loyal, and although that is usually a good thing, he does not know when to give up on people he should.

And let us not forget that he is stubborn, short-sighted, one-dimensional, and religious to the point of being a zealot.

[red oct 2]

don't forget he lacks credibility, he contradicts himself, he answers tough questions in his format only. and he's of course he's misleading. thats how he sold the Iraq war after all.

[billybob2002 0]

Quote[/b] ]Please refresh our memory. What did he lie about that was so bad that he shouldn't have been elected. (Keep in mind I will be weighing upon your own admission that lying to go to war and killing hundreds of thousands is A-ok to you).

He talked restoring trust and credibility to the White House and he used lies throughout the campaign. He used powerful words and he did not even follow them through his campaign.

@Red Oct: Stop crying, you big baby...

[billybob2002 0]

Kerik quits before he is even hired.... a trend?

http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tm....ecurity

Quote[/b] ]

Kerik Withdraws His Name for DHS Chief

10 minutes ago White House - AP Cabinet & State

WASHINGTON - Former New York Police Commissioner Bernard Kerik, President Bush (news - web sites)'s choice to be homeland security secretary, has withdrawn his name from consideration, the White House announced late Friday.

Presidential press secretary Scott McClellan, in a conference call to news organizations, revealed that Kerik had withdrawn "for personal reasons."

"The president respects his decision and wishes the commissioner and his wife, Hala, well," McClellan said in a statement.

"Commissioner Kerik is withdrawing his name from director of homeland security," the spokesman said. "He informed the White House this evening that he was withdrawing for personal reasons from consideration to be secretary of homeland security."

McClellan said that Kerik telephoned the president at about 8:30 p.m. EST. Kerik also sent a letter to the White House in which he announced his wishes.

McClellan said the White House "will move as quickly as we can to name someone else to fill this nomination."

[red oct 2]

Quote[/b] ]He talked restoring trust and credibility to the White House and he used lies throughout the campaign. He used powerful words and he did not even follow them through his election.

and? restoring trust and credibility is something that almost half of the population in this country and pretty much everybody in this world would agree is long over due. how exactly would you know that he didn't follow through w/ his words if he hadn't been elected in office? the prize pig you elected promised 2 million jobs, that WMD's would be found, and Osama would be caught. so far he hasn't followed through w/ any of it. and how about instead of your usual moronic comment, you go back and find a article worth reading. im still waiting on how exactly we are supposedly going to flood the markets w/ U.S. products.

[Akira 0]

Quote[/b] ]He talked restoring trust and credibility to the White House and he used lies throughout the campaign. He used powerful words and he did not even follow them through his campaign.

Huh? You still haven't pointed out these "lies" though I've asked twice already (three times now). So please tell us EXACTLY what the lies were.

And as Red Oct. nicely pointed out, what exactly has Bush done to restore credibility to the White House? Lie to go to war? Have secret energy conference with Enron and Haliburton and not release the transcripts of the same? You realize that TBA is the most secretive administration in a LONG time right?

[billybob2002 0]

Quote[/b] ]He talked restoring trust and credibility to the White House and he used lies throughout the campaign. He used powerful words and he did not even follow them through his campaign.

Huh? You still haven't pointed out these "lies" though I've asked twice already (three times now). So please tell us EXACTLY what the lies were.

And as Red Oct. nicely pointed out, what exactly has Bush done to restore credibility to the White House? Lie to go to war? Have secret energy conference with Enron and Haliburton and not release the transcripts of the same? You realize that TBA is the most secretive administration in a LONG time right?

1. Cutting Social Security benefits.

2. Putting the blame on Bush for outsourcing but it existed way before Bush was in office. (status quo)

3. Job loss numbers.

4. 40-odd million people who would get health insurance under his plan.

5. his fudged christmas story

.....

This is classic! I want to talk about Kerry and you want to jump to Bush.

Quote[/b] ]

im still waiting on how exactly we are supposedly going to flood the markets w/ U.S. products.

Only thing I can find on a quick notice...

http://www.bloomberg.com/apps....efer=us

Quote[/b] ]

The dollar traded at $1.33 against the euro, little changed from its record $1.3470 yesterday. The U.S. currency yesterday fell to a record against the euro, boosting the competitiveness of U.S. companies selling their goods abroad.

``You want to put your money in American exporters that might benefit from the weaker currency,'' said Robeco's van Duijn.

BTW, if you cared to look at the other posts, you would notice I do not want the dollar to be weak...

[Supah 0]

Quote[/b] ]

The dollar traded at $1.33 against the euro, little changed from its record $1.3470 yesterday. The U.S. currency yesterday fell to a record against the euro, boosting the competitiveness of U.S. companies selling their goods abroad.

haha yes and the best thing about it is, oil is paid in dollars so it lessens the efect of TBA bungling in the middle east for europe

We in western europe don't buy that many american goods. Most of the stuff we do buy from american brands has this sticker on it that says "Made in china" or taiwan or some other third world nation. The only american making money from that is some old bussinessman making him even more idiotically rich, money that due to bushies tax cuts for the super rich will never make it into the US economy as it will go to the stockmarket. A process from which the average american is being more and more seperated. There are no factory workers in the US making a single buck from that.

Look at IBM's personal computing bussiness .... now owned by Lenovo of China .... for companies abroad it will become easier to buy american companies. You pay in dollars, but thats not worth shit anymore anyway. If you live in the eastern US and have a mortgage you pbb own money to a dutch bank through sister companies. If you buy groceries you are pbb buying it from a dutch owned company.

But the US needs a worthless dollar too ofcourse to be able to pay its national debt, which will only grow and grow in the future with bush his ill concieved plans for healthcare and personal budgets. The damage done now to your economy will come to haunt you for years and years.

[Grigory Toadfoot 0]

I have never understood why so many europeans have such staunchly biased opinions about the US and Its politics. You don't see people in the US lambasting every policy of the EU ect....

Sir Toadfoot

[Pathy 0]

Maybe because the policy of the US is ripe for a blasting, whereas the EU policy tends not to piss so many people off.

In other words, when your policy basically screws the rest of the world over, don't start moaning about how the rest of the world hates you..........instead change your policy so they have no reasons to.

[brgnorway 0]

 

Quote[/b] ]I have never understood why so many europeans have such staunchly biased opinions about the US and Its politics.

Of course we care since our own economy and political life has been so intimately connected to US foreign politics and the economy as a whole in the post war period.

Quote[/b] ]You don't see people in the US lambasting every policy of the EU ect....

That's because most americans doesn't care - their foreign office cares for them! Same thing with latin america - you don't care unless the price of bananas go up, then you care!

However, you you certainly did care about freedom fries, old europe etc - so maybe the truth is that you only care when you are directly affected by european politics! - or rather when the price go up regardless if we're talking about bananas or war in Iraq

[Grigory Toadfoot 0]

Maybe because the policy of the US is ripe for a blasting, whereas the EU policy tends not to piss so many people off.

In other words, when your policy basically screws the rest of the world over, don't start moaning about how the rest of the world hates you..........instead change your policy so they have no reasons to.

Quote[/b] ]In other words, when your policy basically screws the rest of the world over, don't start moaning about how the rest of the world hates you..........instead change your policy so they have no reasons to.

I was never moaning, I couldn't care less what the world thinks of us, honestly. The only way the world would stop hating us would be if we ceased to exist. I don't know why that is, but it is becoming more and more the truth. Mabey if we threw out all of our government officials and replaced them with librals......Ones that don't represent the majority of our country, then that might make a difference. But I doubt it.

[denoir 0]

I have never understood why so many europeans have such staunchly biased opinions about the US and Its politics.  You don't see people in the US lambasting every policy of the EU ect....

Well, first of all we don't go pissing the rest of the world off so blatantly (by starting wars, ignoring international treaties etc). So basically there is less to complain about.

The second reason is that Americans simply don't care too much about what's going on in the world. Or better to say, they consider World = America. This is partially the fault of a bad education system, but also because America has been largely self-sufficient for a long while.

With globalization and better communications, I suspect both things are already changing as we speak.

Quote[/b] ]I was never moaning, I couldn't care less what the world thinks of us, honestly.  

So why did you bring it up in the first place? From my experience Americans tend to very much care what the rest of the world thinks of them. Or better to say, they're shocked and surprised at the notion that anybody might dislike them. Usually that's solved by villifying those that disagree with your actions (case example, the French in the prelude to the Iraq war).

I suppose it has its origins in the idealism that America is founded on and the dogma it has turned into.

(I know it's a very broad generalization, but you asked for a differentiation between Europeans and Americans - something that cannot be done without certain amount of stereotyping)

Quote[/b] ]I was never moaning, I couldn't care less what the world thinks of us, honestly.  The only way the world would stop hating us would be if we ceased to exist.

It's easy to despise what you cannot have.  

[Supah 0]

I have never understood why so many europeans have such staunchly biased opinions about the US and Its politics.  You don't see people in the US lambasting every policy of the EU ect....

Sir Toadfoot  

Thank you for endorsing the stereotype of the uninformed american. Some examples of what you say doesn't happen:

- Christians Right recent anti dutch campaigns because of euthanasia.

- UN Bashing and the rather childish Boo'ing at the Republican National Convention.

- "Old Europe" bashing by Republican officials at the Republican National Convention.

- Europe being called "Cowards" when they didn't swallow the WMD evidence head line and sinker.

- Constant US criticisme of the dutch drug policy even when statistics prove it works better at prevention then the US "War on drugs" system.

- US Invasion laws of the Netherlands should a US serviceman ever be brought before the Internation War Crimes Court.

[Grigory Toadfoot 0]

I have never understood why so many europeans have such staunchly biased opinions about the US and Its politics. You don't see people in the US lambasting every policy of the EU ect....

Sir Toadfoot

Quote[/b] ]Thank you for endorsing the stereotype of the uninformed american. Some examples of what you say doesn't happen:

- Christians Right recent anti dutch campaigns because of euthanasia.

- UN Bashing and the rather childish Boo'ing at the Republican National Convention.

- "Old Europe" bashing by Republican officials at the Republican National Convention.

- Europe being called "Cowards" when they didn't swallow the WMD evidence head line and sinker.

- Constant US criticisme of the dutch drug policy even when statistics prove it works better at prevention then the US "War on drugs" system.

- US Invasion laws of the Netherlands should a US serviceman ever be brought before the Internation War Crimes Court.

I have never understood why so many europeans have such staunchly biased opinions about the US and Its politics. You don't see people in the US lambasting every policy of the EU ect....

Sir Toadfoot

Thank you for endorsing the stereotype of the uninformed american. Some examples of what you say doesn't happen:

- Christians Right recent anti dutch campaigns because of euthanasia.

- UN Bashing and the rather childish Boo'ing at the Republican National Convention.

- "Old Europe" bashing by Republican officials at the Republican National Convention.

- Europe being called "Cowards" when they didn't swallow the WMD evidence head line and sinker.

- Constant US criticisme of the dutch drug policy even when statistics prove it works better at prevention then the US "War on drugs" system.

- US Invasion laws of the Netherlands should a US serviceman ever be brought before the Internation War Crimes Court.

(Having trouble with teh quotes, lol.)

These seven things that you have listed are refering to politicians. I was talking about he common people of our country. You don't see people having rallies in the US waiving around posters saying things like

"Insert foriegn leader heer Is a Nazi and the number one terrorist"

Sir Toadfoot