Do we really want to live like this for 4 more years?

cstyle, what diffference does it matter that Bush is reclusive? What, are we going to bounce over to his haircolor/style next, just to find issues?

Discredit those who speak out against him? Man, where have you been? You paid any attention to Kerry lately? Hello, Pot, meet Kettle. As a matter of fact, Kerry could learn a few things from Bush about not stirring up issues. There have been manya times when I thought Bush should have absolutely waxed the floor with the butts of liberal liars, but he didn't give them the time of day.

You guys living in bad areas? Having problems finding jobs (or are you having problems finding entry level senior CEO jobs?)? Maybe relocation is in order. Aerospace and auto industries are on the upswing in Alabama. As a matter of fact, jobs in general are on the upswing. The employment numbers are never even considered around here, except when the non-southern parts of the country cause the numbers to tweek down a bit, thereby messing with our stock portfolios. Jobs are there and I wish you bozos would pick one or two of them up, it'd greatly help both my stock and the economy!

One more thought before I skip over to another thread. While I was purusing this thread, I noticed somebody spewing off at the mouth about the Bush admin making money in oil, blah, blah, the usual...I'd like to point out a couple of things. First off, Clinton and Gore both received more money from oil companies, but I heard nobody screaming that their election attempts were fraudulent, I never heard some idiot call the Clinton admin a "regime" (seriously, if you are so stupid as to think that the lawfully elected administration, whether you like it or not, is a regime, then I wish you'd go and live in a country with a regime-ran de facto government for a few years!).

Let's look at Cheney, for a moment, a fellow that many of you can't think of without cursing. He had interest in Halliburton, right? Well, the libs couldn't take the thought of a republican having any interest and run for the White House (Why, that's only for the Dems, right Kerry?), so they screamed until he sold it off. Then, they screamed bloody murder because he sold it off as they demanded, and he actually made a PROFIT!! Only Dems can sell for a profit (Right, Cattle Futures Baroness, Hillary?) because we all know that if a Republican does it, its called GREED! So now, he has no interest in it, neither he or Bush own any oil companies or anything, but to try and keep the mantra alive, the libs scream that Bush's FRIENDS are making money! Do you guys ever feel stupid? Talk about being mindless, don't call people who are informed mindless, pal. There is quite a difference.

But back to our discussion, cstyle, those reasons for not voting for Bush are nothing more than hollow excuses. You might as well say you are going to vote for Kerry because you are making soup as one excuse is as good as another. I can give you plenty of reasons to not want to vote for Bush, and I mean some really good reasons where you can see his decisions have not been made with the constitution in mind. The problem is, Kerry is much worse, and has explained quite well that the U.N. and the rest of the world takes priority over the U.S. Should it be any wonder why the likes of France and Russia and pulling for Kerry? LOL! That should be your first indication that Kerry is a bad choice.

What we need is someone other than these two bozos (okay, for those who'd actually consider Nadar, these three bozos). Someone who understands the constitution, knows the history and foundation of the nation, has morals and knows right from wrong, and also has international diplomacy experience. Ah! Gee, the answer is obvious - Alana Keyes! Oh, that's right, he can't get the coverage because the media is owned predominately by the liberals, and the small slice owned by Right Wing don't want a good man in office anymore than the liberals do.

Write Keyes' name in.

yes you do want a leader who listens to mob rule as you put it because it is a democracy and the elected officials who are supposed to govern a nation need to listen to the people. It's their job.

If you want a leader who doesn't listen to "mob rule" you essentially have a fascist state.

thanks,
drfunk

Originally posted by netbound
What happened to America? I think we've all gone mad! It's beyond my comprehension that such an arrogant, self-serving administration that has done so much damage to our nation and it's standing in the world can still have so much support from it's citizens. Either we've been subjected to some kind of mass mind control or we've all become stupid.

The dumbing-down of America has been going on for way more than 4 years. It's just been real subtle. You are slowly being told what to wear and what to eat. Look around, the media and government are slowly taking over, and neither party is blameless.

Our country has been on somewhat of a downward spiral. The date I like to use for the beginning of this downward trend is November 22, 1963. But, that is another topic on a lot of other threads.

�The dumbing-down of America has been going on for way more than 4 years. It's just been real subtle. You are slowly being told what to wear and what to eat. Look around, the media and government are slowly taking over, and neither party is blameless.�

DontTreadOnMe, I totally agree with you. I didn�t mean to imply that the dumification of America happened overnight. And I know both parties, and the public in general, each have a share of the blame. Personally, I�m an independent, politically, and have problems with both sides of the fence. Currently, though, I have REAL PROBLEMS with the present administration. They scare the hell out of me.

I�ve sometimes wondered if it�s not something to do with the Baby Boomer generation, and either the values it has passed along to the current generation, or the current generation�s reaction to the Baby Boomer�s sense of values. It seems that every generation rebels/reacts in some way to the one before it. In the 60�s and 70�s the Peace & Love/Make Love, Not War/Flower Child/ Sex, Drugs and Rock & Roll/Down With the Establishment generation was a reaction to the World War II/Creator�s of Thermonuclear Warfare/Cold War mentality of their parents. In the 80�s and 90�s the winds seemed to change toward the Yuppie/Self-Indulgent/What�s In It For Me/Opportunistic/Violence Works/It�s Mine � I Stole It Fair & Square kind of mentality, which was in turn a reaction to the Woodstock mentality of their parents. And here we are now, with a generation who supports the policy of pre-emptive strikes, who doesn�t seem to care if they�re lied to because lying is just part of the game, a generation with a �f**k you! Who needs you? We can kick you�re a**!!� attitude toward the rest of the world, and a generation that condones the use of violence to get it�s way. It�s kind of spooky in light of the technological capabilities we now have to totally destroy an enemy, combined with our lack of wisdom to control it.

Sorry for the above babble. I know it makes no sense. But, I do admit, I have to wonder sometimes how we got here, because it sure has me stumped. I keep wanting to wake up and realize it�s all been just a bad dream �


[edit on 8/29/2004 by netbound]

Check out this link, it gives a great, unbiased evaluation of our govt. and how it doesn't matter if Bush or Kerry wins, our govt. in general is already destroying itself.

wethepeoplesstateoftheunion.blogspot.com...

Originally posted by drfunk
yes you do want a leader who listens to mob rule as you put it because it is a democracy and the elected officials who are supposed to govern a nation need to listen to the people. It's their job.

If you want a leader who doesn't listen to "mob rule" you essentially have a fascist state.

thanks,
drfunk

No, you do not want a leader that follows the whims of a fickle crowd, what you should want is a leader that runs on a particular platform, and then once elected, stands by it. There should be no surprises. That does not meet the definition of a "fascist state", and, by the way, this nation, although it has fallen into the state of a democracy, was not intended to be one.

Dee, an interesting read, although not entirely unbiased (which is not necessarily a bad thing).

After reading the article, I scrolled through the quotes, and while I usually find a mass of quotes without more background information, I did find an important point of interest, one that I feel the need to pull out and place here, in case others didn't read it all.

"No state shall ...coin money; emit bills of credit; or make anything but gold and silver coin a tender in payment of debts."
-From Article I.10.1 of the U.S. Constitution

This is a very important clue to how far astray the nation is. IAW the laws of nations, one knows that silver is what one uses intranationally, and gold is international payment, right? We also know that both gold and silver are of substance and self-worth. But what about "federal reserve notes", what are they?

Another thing you may call your paper money is "war scrip". During times of war, it only makes sense that a nation would not want their national worth to be taken by the enemy, so war scrip is used. Other than times of war, gold and silver is to be used, and the constitution, as stated above, makes that pretty clear. So why do we use federal reserve notes? For the sake of convenience? Well, that might be how you view the issue, but I assure you, that is not why they are circulated.

Greenspan's comment clarifies why after the "Civil War" (actually, a civil police action) Abraham Lincoln was murdered to prevent him from recinding martial law, thereby allowing the bankers, lawyers, large corporations and corrupt politicians huge control over the nation:

"The abandonment of the gold standard made it possible for the welfare statists (government bureaucrats) to use the banking system as an unlimited expansion of credit. In the absence of the gold standard, there is no way to protect savings from confiscation through inflation... Deficit spending is simply a scheme for the "hidden" confiscation of wealth. Gold stands in the way of this insidious process."