Vote

Which candidate would you vote for?

  • George W. Bush

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • John Kerry

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • Ralph Nader

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • Michael Badanarik

    Votes: 0 0.0%

  • Total voters
    0

i

Wannabe Storage Freak
Joined
Feb 10, 2002
Messages
1,080
flagreen said:
In a word - Character.

That's it? That's all? No lofty and eloquent commentary about the state of the union?

*sigh*

Kerry is a bit ... dim. Not dim-witted. Just dim ... or perhaps bland is a better word. But bland in a kind of tainted way. (I must be hungry or something.) I tolerated that though, because I found myself putting the topic of character as secondary to the topic of issues. In other words, in this election I found myself trying to mostly ignore the man himself, and instead focusing on what he stood for, in both Bush's and Kerry's case. Neither guy was anywhere close to perfect, but Kerry - to me - clearly seemed the better choice out of two flawed options.
 

i

Wannabe Storage Freak
Joined
Feb 10, 2002
Messages
1,080
Heh.

I was just thinking about the people I know who would like to nominate George W. Bush as the dumbest president in the history of the country. At some level I kind of agree.

A thought just made me laugh though: what does it say about Kerry if GWB really is the dumbest president in the history of this country, and he couldn't win an election against him!

Hah.

I think you're right flagreen. In one word: character.
 

jtr1962

Storage? I am Storage!
Joined
Jan 25, 2002
Messages
4,365
Location
Flushing, New York
Anyone ever think it's all an act with GWB? I nearly always act a lot less intelligent than I am for the simple reason that it catches people off guard. He may be doing the same. Granted, GWB may really be as stupid as he appears, but on the other hand it may all be a brilliant ploy. After all, he did graduate from Yale. Regardless of who your father is, it takes a reasonable amount of intelligence to get into and graduate from such a school. And he did train as a fighter pilot, which is something that requires both balls and intelligence.
 

Mercutio

Fatwah on Western Digital
Joined
Jan 17, 2002
Messages
22,232
Location
I am omnipresent
I said similar things about Kerry at the start of the primary season. You weren't the only one who felt that way, i.

At any rate, yes, I am considering leaving the country (key word there is considering). There is very little tying me to this place. I really don't want to be associated with the people who voted to elect Bush. At all. Bush voters, you make me ill. All of you.


With regard to Bush's character, there have been many commentaries and there is much evidence to support the conclusion that GWB is a cynical political animal, an unctious person, and an anti-intellectual. Those are not qualities I want in a leader. He blithely ignores scientific and intelligence findings contrary to his personal agenda. In the 2000 election, when he claimed to be in deep, daily study of the Bible, he couldn't even tell reporters which part (book) he was reading. He invokes national tragedy at the least provokation, to enforce his masters' political will. Now he avoids the press except that which is identifiably friendly to him - Clinton would call and trade jabs on Rush Limbaugh's radio program, Bush avoids interviews with softball pitcher like Matt Lauer (suggesting, perhaps, that he's unwilling to subject his viewpoint to ANY scrutiny). Some of Bush's Harvard B. School professors described his behavior in much the same way it can be seen today - he would make sweeping generalizations in class that he could not defend with any intellectual or even emotional rigor, then, when called on it, would claim that his classmates were putting words in his mouth. That's Harvard's MBA program, folks, not exactly a hotbed of left-wing ideology. I see Bush engaging in behavior I would consider uncivil in a professional, let alone a world leader. Flagreen's picture of Bush, above, is a prime example of that. In "The Price of Loyalty", Paul O'Neill describes a man who is very often "protected" from hearing dissenting viewpoints by those outside his inner circle. He has minimal contact with press outside scripted situations. He has very little contact with those outside his party or political affiliation (for example, refusing invitations to addres NAACP or the Congressional Black Caucus). He regularly ignored advice from the moderates of his cabinet (Colin Powell and the aforementioned O'Neill). He seems to me to be very much a puppet of certain among his advisors.

This man is not my leader. He does not speak for me. He CERTAINLY does not have the qualities I would like to see in a leader.
 

Mercutio

Fatwah on Western Digital
Joined
Jan 17, 2002
Messages
22,232
Location
I am omnipresent
jtr1962 said:
After all, he did graduate from Yale. Regardless of who your father is, it takes a reasonable amount of intelligence to get into and graduate from such a school. And he did train as a fighter pilot, which is something that requires both balls and intelligence.

As I understand things, GWB scores were well below those needed to enter flight school on his own merit, and his scores never improved above the bare minimum to remain with that duty assignment.
For the most part, Yale is the least academically rigorous of the Ivy League schools. He got in as a "legacy" (his father went there) maintained a C average throughout his time in college (would you, as a professor, give a nonpassing grade the son of a multimillionaire former CIA director and internationally known alumnus?), and has since been described as having exceedingly poor verbal skills by almost everyone who has encountered him. It's blatantly obvious from his political career that just about every proposal, initiative or law that he has backed has been someone else's idea.
 

zx

Learning Storage Performance
Joined
Nov 22, 2002
Messages
287
Location
Beauport, Québec, Canada
GW Bush has this extraordinary ability to be underestimated. Many people think that he's just a moron, a redneck 'cowboy' from Texas. I think a moron can't become the president of the United States. So yes, I think it's an act. He knows how to 'seduce' the American voter. Kerry tried to do the same, but was much less successful.
 

sechs

Storage? I am Storage!
Joined
Feb 1, 2003
Messages
4,709
Location
Left Coast
mo·ron (môrn, mr-)
n.

1. A stupid person; a dolt.
2. Psychology. A person of mild mental retardation having a mental age of from 7 to 12 years and generally having communication and social skills enabling some degree of academic or vocational education. The term belongs to a classification system no longer in use and is now considered offensive.

Which definition?
 

flagreen

Storage Freak Apprentice
Joined
Jan 14, 2002
Messages
1,529
Uh-oh guys....

Unhappy Democrats Need to Wait to Get Into Canada
Wed Nov 3, 2004 01:16 PM ET

By David Ljunggren
OTTAWA (Reuters) - Disgruntled Democrats seeking a safe Canadian haven after President Bush won Tuesday's election should not pack their bags just yet.

Canadian officials made clear on Wednesday that any U.S. citizens so fed up with Bush that they want to make a fresh start up north would have to stand in line like any other would-be immigrants -- a wait that can take up to a year.

"You just can't come into Canada and say 'I'm going to stay here'. In other words, there has to be an application. There has to be a reason why the person is coming to Canada," said immigration ministry spokeswoman Maria Iadinardi.

There are anywhere from 600,000 to a million Americans living in Canada, a country that leans more to the left than the United States and has traditionally favored the Democrats over the Republicans.

But recent statistics show a gradual decline in U.S. citizens coming to work in Canada, which has a creaking publicly funded healthcare system and relatively high levels of personal taxation.

Government officials, real estate brokers and Democrat activists said that while some Americans might talk about a move to Canada rather than living with a new Bush administration, they did not expect a mass influx.

"It's one thing to say 'I'm leaving for Canada' and quite another to actually find a job here and wonder about where you're going to live and where the children are going to go to school," said one government official.

Roger King of the Toronto-based Democrats Abroad group said he had heard nothing to back up talk of a possible exodus of party members.

"I imagine most committed Democrats will want to stay in the United States and continue being politically active there," he told Reuters.

Americans seeking to immigrate can apply to become permanent citizens of Canada, a process that often takes a year. Becoming a full citizen takes a further three years.

The other main way to move north on a long-term basis is to find a job, which in all cases requires a work permit. This takes from four to six months to come through.

Continued...

Source - Complete article here
 

flagreen

Storage Freak Apprentice
Joined
Jan 14, 2002
Messages
1,529
Mercutio said:
Fortunately, some Canadians are willing to do what it takes to help out..

There's even a homosexual willing to take on a legal same-sex domestic partner. Since, you know, state-sponsored homophobia isn't real popular in the land up north.
LOL Damn they got that up quick.


Words of wisdom from a conservative blogger...

Let the Healing Begin

I guess I'm pleased by the outcome of the election, but it comes with some mixed feelings. Frankly, it's hard to celebrate knowing so many other ordinary Americans -- like the posters at Daily Kos, Democratic Underground, BartCop, SmirkingChimp, IndyMedia, and CruSHruBusHitleRethuglicaNazis -- are suffering another bad case of the 'Wednesdays.' Today should not be about gloating and victory laps, it should be about about good sportsmanship and moving the country forward. So if you're on the other size of the political aisle, I'd like extend my congratulations for a hard-fought battle, and offer a few tips to help you get through the next four years.

First, keep in mind that this was a very narrow defeat, and could have gone either way with the right breaks. John Kerry would be planning his inaugural today if his campaign had not made a couple of strategic blunders, such as not getting people to vote for John Kerry.

Next, you've got to stop all this crazy talk about "suicide" and "that's it, I'm moving to Canada." C'mon people, just stop it!. Why? Because you are Americans too, and Americans are known for action, that's why! If you ever expect other Americans to treat you as a serious political force, you've got to get up off your duff, can all that jibber-jabber, and get cracking on the U-Hauls and tragic carbon-monoxide incidents, Mister Big Talk.

Keep in mind that following a crushing election defeat, any political movement is going to face a bloody period of disarray and intraparty power struggles. When the inevitable recriminations, purges, and cannibalism start up, remember -- it's not personal.

Want some good news? With the election finally over, it will be easier than ever to get the word out about the illegitimate Bush Regime. Just this morning I was at Barnes & Noble, and they're running a great $0.39 per pound special on anti-Bush books! They make great stocking stuffers, and there's over 500 titles to choose from.

Lesson for the day: learn from your mistakes. Get together with other progressives, and have a candid discussion about what went wrong -- and why, and how, and where. Record these mistakes, and organize them with a program like Lotus Notes. Next, email them to Terry McAuliffe so he can put them in the next volume of his indexed archives.

Just like in baseball, more games are won with hustle than with power. In the next election, you should pledge to get out there early and explain to twice as many voters how Bush planned 9-11 and is building secret Gay concentration camps in Utah. Volume counts too, so make sure you scream these facts extra-loud next time, especially to old people.

Here's some momentum to build on: if the exit polls are any guide, John Kerry won almost 300 of the 436 racial/ ethnic/ sexual/ religious/ social/ demographic/ labor groups targeted by Democratic party strategists, an improvement of 6% versus the 2000 election.

Also remember that every cloud has a silver lining. For example, did you know that George Soros wants to share his fortune with you for forwarding this message to all of your progressive friends? This is NOT a junk letter, and you will regret if you ignore! As part of a progressive community email 'beta test.' When you forward this message to friends, George Soros and MoveOn will track it for a two week time period. For every person that you forward this e-mail to, George Soros and MoveOn.org will pay you $50, and for every person that fowards from there, they will pay you $49, and so on! In two weeks, remember to contact MoveOn.org and ask for your money.

Finally, celebrate your accomplishments and keep yourself focused on the future. Despite the election setback, you're part of a massive intellectual movement that has attracted the support of important thinkers from Noam Chomsky to Howard Dean to Brad Pitt. This is real revolt -- a people's revolt that will continue to grow, as long as people like you stay committed to the anti-Bush cause. And if you ever find yourself waivering, just look in the mirror and tell yourself, "I am still revolting."
Source - http://iowahawk.typepad.com/
 

Mercutio

Fatwah on Western Digital
Joined
Jan 17, 2002
Messages
22,232
Location
I am omnipresent
I think the greatest solace that I have in all this...

Despite the fact that a republican senate candidates with obvious signs of Alzheimers, and another who described his state public schools as filled with "rampant lesbianism" (for some reason I don't want to do a google search on that during work hours!), at least Alan Keyes went down in flames in Illinois.

For the record, the instant you set foot outside Chicago, Illinois is much a part of the NASCAR and Budweiser constituency as Kentucky and Missouri.
 

Mercutio

Fatwah on Western Digital
Joined
Jan 17, 2002
Messages
22,232
Location
I am omnipresent
Clocker said:
Oh, and thanks for calling me a moron. [/url]

I call 'em like I see 'em, Clocker. I'm sorry if you fit into that category since I know that in many ways you are an intelligent human being despite this very obvious failing.

I know that you're primarily a republican due to economic issues. I just wonder if you realize just what you're getting in a party that is increasingly controlled by fundamentalist christians.

The impact of Bush's now-unobstructed jucidial appointments might very well stand in this country for the next hundred years. GWB might be our very own Oliver Cromwell (who was a great guy if you were a puritan but not so nice if you weren't). There is no doubt that this country will be taking big steps backward in social progression over the next decade.

There really isn't much keeping me in the USA. I'm thoroughly disgusted by my countrymen. I have no bills, contracts or obligations holding me here. There's an obvious issue of where to settle, since it looks to be devilishly hard to settle in the Commonwealth (except Canada), and South Africa isn't what I'd call an appealing place, either. I would be lying if I said that I wasn't seriously considering my options.
 

zx

Learning Storage Performance
Joined
Nov 22, 2002
Messages
287
Location
Beauport, Québec, Canada
sechs said:
mo·ron (môrn, mr-)
n.

1. A stupid person; a dolt.
2. Psychology. A person of mild mental retardation having a mental age of from 7 to 12 years and generally having communication and social skills enabling some degree of academic or vocational education. The term belongs to a classification system no longer in use and is now considered offensive.

Which definition?

The first one...

In a way, Bush isn't a moron because you can't get through college, become a businessman, governor and president just because of preferential treatment. There's a minimum of intelligence you must have to accomplish this.

However, he may be a moron, because he made many stupid decisions (IMO) during his presidency. One of his biggest accomplishments is destroying the reputation of the US.
 

Mercutio

Fatwah on Western Digital
Joined
Jan 17, 2002
Messages
22,232
Location
I am omnipresent
zx said:
The first one...

In a way, Bush isn't a moron because you can't get through college, become a businessman, governor and president just because of preferential treatment.

Are you sure about that? He ran his businesses into the ground. He's running his country into the ground. Face it, this is a man who has defied the Peter principle to rise to the highest level of power without a whit of merit or accomplishment of his own.
 

Clocker

Storage? I am Storage!
Joined
Jan 14, 2002
Messages
3,554
Location
USA
Guys...this just in. The election is over and Bush won. Get over it and move on with your lives.

Merc- Don't think that you know me and why I'm a Republican...because you don't.
 

RWIndiana

Learning Storage Performance
Joined
Oct 19, 2004
Messages
335
Location
Nirvana
Merc you sound very pessimistic (IMO) about the future of the country. Of course, on many social things I think it would be good to move "backward" a little ways, at least. I personally don't see what it could hurt not to force people to legally recognize a same-gender "marriage," which, theoretically, could get the Bible banned entirely. That would be a real step backwards for religious freedom. Even the liberal state of Oregon overwhelmingly voted to ban same-sex marriage, so I think most people do recognize the potential damage to our religious freedom that this could cause.
Just curious, what state do you live in?
 

Mercutio

Fatwah on Western Digital
Joined
Jan 17, 2002
Messages
22,232
Location
I am omnipresent
I live in Indiana. Specifically, I live in Hobart, a bit south and east of Gary.

Gay rights are a very important and deeply personal issue to me.

One of my aunts has lived with a loving partner for 40 years. They have raised biological and adopted children together, yet the two of them have difficulties with things like Hospital visitation rights and estate planning (they are in their mid-70s).

My ex-fiance, whom I love very dearly, has been in a committed relationship with a woman for the last two years. The two of them were unable to get approval for home or car loans as a couple (but qualified as singles), and her partner could not be added to my ex's insurance coverage, which makes no allowances for domestic partners.

In both cases I see well-adjusted couples who clearly love each other, who are being denied the rights that someone in a "straight" relationship would expect and take for granted. I can watch a straight couple go through the stages of romance, marriage and divorce almost as casually as one might order a meal in a restaurant (possibly moreso if that couple is in Las Vegas). Those in non-traditional relationships struggle to even gain recognition of their commitment, regardless of its ardor or duration. Simply put, this is highly discriminatory, and in the context of secular life, there is no basis for it, just as there is no secular basis for prohibition of miscegenation.

In one's religious teachings, one may find a reason to object, but last I checked, no one's religious teaching is the basis for the law of the land in this country. Even more, not everyone reading the same holy book will draw the same conclusion about this issue.

I am deeply afraid of the coming wave of media censorship, the promotion of school prayer and creationism being taught as fact in public schools, third graders being taught the definition of "unilateral", anti-choice judicial appointments, removal of contraceptive options from the marketplace and the coming backlash against many lines of scientific pursuit. I see an isolationist oligo-theocracy pursuing a doctrine of unchecked aggression.

I see a draft and many wars fought against implacable foes. I see a commander-in-chief of the most powerful nation on this planet who admits publicly that his god tells him to do things. I see a nation that will struggle to find itself against the rise of Asian nations as superpowers. I see an American commercial monoculture built on the shoulders of favoring only the biggest and richest enterprises.

I see continued persecution of homosexuals, pay-per-view-porn being removed from hotels and a bare-breasted statue of justice draped in cloth. I see a national ID card and, an extra hour needed to board a plane that will still ferry terrorists in and out of our country, cameras on street signs and naive regulation of the internet, which will itself move from a world of content created by its users to a downstream-only outlet controlled and DRM'd by large media companies.
 

Pradeep

Storage? I am Storage!
Joined
Jan 21, 2002
Messages
3,845
Location
Runny glass
So anyway I stopped off at a Thruway diner in MA tonight to grab a bite to eat, it was really strange. Plenty of people inside, but it was so quiet. Spooky. I can only imagine that they just can't take it that Kerry lost. I was expecting a buzz from the Red Sox winning. Anyway, just my experience on the leftest state of all.
 

Handruin

Administrator
Joined
Jan 13, 2002
Messages
13,916
Location
USA
So how's MA treating ya. Are you having a wicked good time with all the massholes? :)

Now that Kerry lost, I'm almost curious what its.fubar has to say after all his/her ranting. OK, no I don't; carry on now...
 

jtr1962

Storage? I am Storage!
Joined
Jan 25, 2002
Messages
4,365
Location
Flushing, New York
Mercutio said:
In both cases I see well-adjusted couples who clearly love each other, who are being denied the rights that someone in a "straight" relationship would expect and take for granted. I can watch a straight couple go through the stages of romance, marriage and divorce almost as casually as one might order a meal in a restaurant (possibly moreso if that couple is in Las Vegas). Those in non-traditional relationships struggle to even gain recognition of their commitment, regardless of its ardor or duration. Simply put, this is highly discriminatory, and in the context of secular life, there is no basis for it, just as there is no secular basis for prohibition of miscegenation.
I can agree with you here to a point, the point being that civil unions which protect inheritence, visitation, and other rights are OK, those which provide benefits, medical or otherwise, at taxpayer expense to domestic partners are not. I don't care what someone does in the privacy of their bedrooms but taxpayer money should not be used to, for example, provide health insurance for a municipal employee's domestic partner, regardless of orientation. Besides the obvious huge potential for fraud, it's yet another benefit cash-strapped governments simply cannot afford. And I don't think spouses or children of straight couples who are municipal employees should get such benefits, either, just to show that I'm fair-minded on the subject. Indeed, such benefits are inherently discriminatory against single employees with no partners because such employees receive less total compensation than those with partners.

I am deeply afraid of the coming wave of media censorship, the promotion of school prayer and creationism being taught as fact in public schools, third graders being taught the definition of "unilateral", anti-choice judicial appointments, removal of contraceptive options from the marketplace and the coming backlash against many lines of scientific pursuit. I see an isolationist oligo-theocracy pursuing a doctrine of unchecked aggression.
I find it virtually unbelieveable that all of these things would happen in the US. This is why we have a system of checks and balances. In any case, let me address some of your concerns, especially the one regarding censorship. Media censorship has always existed. Whatever the media didn't think would draw high ratings was censored. ;) Seriously, since when has the media, especially on TV, ever been objective? For years they were the mouthpiece of the far left, in some cases even farther left than yourself. All those who complained about Reagan, the neoconservative movement, and now W term #2 can thank the media for these things. Your fellow countrymen whom you see as intellectually deficient simply rebelled against years of being fed ideas which were often counter to either their religious beliefs, their pocketbooks (i.e. the middle class mostly ends up funding the loony left's entitlement programs), or plain common sense (i.e. NYC giving fertility drugs to welfare mothers and the now famous "criminals are victims of society". Please :tdown:). What do you expect? People are going to sit back while the government appropriates half their salaries to fund programs which fail to accomplish the goals they were supposed to, and in many cases make things worse? Or while they are told that something is wrong with them if they see homosexuality as a perversion? Isn't the left largely responsible for turning college campuses from places where ideas were discussed into indoctrination centers for their ideology? Now who's doing the censoring? If four more years of Bush means the end of the disease of political correctness then I'll gladly take it despite the obvious faults. It's not censorship. We're just going back to allowing viewpoints which were formerly censored to be expressed. The flood of far right-wing ideology is to be expected. It'll die down once people get tired of hearing it, and then hopefully both sides will get equal time as well they should. Certainly nobody censors your opinions here, and I welcome them as a counterpoint which keeps me honest. And while you may cringe at the possibility of abortion being made illegal again, which I highly doubt will happen despite the Supreme Court's makeup, it's a sad commentary on our society when so many exhibit so little self-control and planning that aborting unwanted pregnancies is even an issue. Certainly no sane person can object to abortions for rape, incest, or medical necessity, but it's sad that people are screwing so casually these days without regard for the consequences, and this despite the so-called enlightened policy of requiring sex ed.

I see a draft and many wars fought against implacable foes. I see a commander-in-chief of the most powerful nation on this planet who admits publicly that his god tells him to do things. I see a nation that will struggle to find itself against the rise of Asian nations as superpowers. I see an American commercial monoculture built on the shoulders of favoring only the biggest and richest enterprises.
I share many of these concerns but I don't think we'll see another draft unless the US mainland is threatened with invasion. Parents will not want their children forced to die in another pointless border dispute like Vietnam. And the Dems are just as tied to the evils of big business as the GOP. Don't think otherwise for a second. Just because they'll occasionally throw a few crumbs to the poor doesn't alter these facts.

I see continued persecution of homosexuals, pay-per-view-porn being removed from hotels and a bare-breasted statue of justice draped in cloth. I see a national ID card and, an extra hour needed to board a plane that will still ferry terrorists in and out of our country, cameras on street signs and naive regulation of the internet, which will itself move from a world of content created by its users to a downstream-only outlet controlled and DRM'd by large media companies.
DRM is evil but don't blame Bush for that. If enough people refuse to buy products with DRM it'll never fly. It's simply a matter of getting the word out about how it needlessly restricts the user's rights. If the Internet becomes as you say, I'll be canceling my ISP service. Big business will listen once enough people jump ship. A national ID card will never fly. I'll personally refuse to get one. So will many others. I don't think we'll see state-sponsored persecution of homosexuals, either, or gay concentration camps. You'll have occasional bias incidents just as you always have. You can't stop stupid people from being stupid. The incidents against homosexuals and Jews always seem to garner an inordinate amount of media coverage, making things seem worse than they really are. Again we have the media presenting a distorted picture as they always have to push an agenda.

Finally, I'm sorry for you that someone you despise with every fiber of your being got reelected, but as Clocker says, deal with it. I felt similarly when Clinton was reelected. Things aren't going to be as bad as you think they are. In retrospect, consider yourself lucky that Kerry lost. I believe he would have thrown the nation into a full-blown depression trying to nationalize health care and save Social Security. Once that happened, you would probably be a senior citizen before another Democrat had a shot at the White House.
 

iGary

Learning Storage Performance
Joined
Nov 22, 2002
Messages
236
Location
iLand

TRIVIA QUESTION:

Who was this year's US Presidential candidate residing from Houston, Texas. This shouldn't be too hard (or is it?). Hint: His last name has 4 letters. :lol:

 

Gilbo

Storage is cool
Joined
Aug 19, 2004
Messages
742
Location
Ottawa, ON
I typically try and avoid political debate because it's generally useless, but at this point I have to say something. Don't hate me, I'm just a messenger of practical reason.

If you don't want to read a medium-length illustration, just read this:
I don't think reasonable, educated men and women in the United States have any option but to emigrate. They are not going to be able to fix their country.

Why? The situation is irreperable because unreasonable men and women now outnumber reasonable men and women in the nation. The country is now in a positive feedback loop of uneducatedness ;) that will be irreversible, because the uneducated, as Mercutio points out, have control of the very education system!

Has democracy failed Americans? No Americans have failed democracy. It might be better to say that religion, and other non-critical behavioural tendencies like partisanship have doomed it. Afterall, there are still some Americans that are reasonable and fully capable of making moral decisions. Bear with me and I'll explain.

You see many people don't understand that a religious man, is inherently incapable of making moral decisions. A moral decision differs from a religious one in important ways even when they result in identical action. You see for a decision to be moral it has to be self-legislated (self-imposed) and freely so. The only way to do this, as Kant points out quite thoroughly, is through the use of reason --sorry religion doesn't qualify. It's almost curious that religious Americans don't appreciate this, because you don't even need to read Kant's Critique of Practical Reason to have this explained. Luther, the father of the majority of the cults practiced in the U.S., iterated this himself! In fact it is one of the most important principles of most non-Catholic Christian doctrines. Perhaps religious Americans are simply incapable or unwilling to make the necessary extrapolations. Of course Luther thought we were doomed (one way or another, heaven or hell). Kant pointed out that God gave Men the faculty of reason, which distinguishes us from animals, ostensibly with the intent that we use it to make moral decisions, since it isn't actually useful for much else (no Darwin yet). This allows us to overcome the doom of predestination, reasserts free will, and offers the beginnings of the glimmering hope of Modernity and Enlightenment, and is crucially necessary to set the stage for all sorts of social engineering, particularly democracy.

Now its obvious that when the majority of people in a democracy, are incapable of making moral decisions you have a serious, serious problem. Democracy was engineered as a social system with the aim of reconciling the interests of all individuals in a society in such a manner that the sum of their interests is coincident with the interests of the constituent individuals, as were its brothers communism, capitalism, totalitarianism, and anarchy (the last, at least, in its more commonly advocated iterations). However, individuals who cannot make their own moral decisions obviously cannot reconcile with others. This is why we're having so much trouble with some Muslims right now. And its also why a large group of Americans are every bit as bad as the Muslims. Consequently, I am glad I live in Canada where we are content to let idiots fight idiots, but I digress.

The fact is that democracy won't work when people vote in the absence of reason. What I have tried to point out is that implicit in the construction of democracy is the belief that human beings are rational, and consequently moral individuals, and that religious people are neither. And neither are the wierd political partisans of the United States (without a doubt the wierdest human animal in my opinion --I actually have deep sympathy for religious people, but none for partisans). So, the specific problems you have in America are partisanship and religion and they have achieved critical mass as of today.

The closest analogue is the Arabic world where democracy isn't working very well either. And it won't work, because unreasonable people (i.e. religious people) are inherently free to use unreasonable means like aggressive applications of force. As soon as one does that, reconciliation is abondoned and democracy is impossible. I don't think Americans really understand what the division in their nation truly indicates. Reason has been abondoned by one side, and with it the hope of the reconciliation of individual interests and consequently democracy itself. The American invasion of Iraq is that most obvious indication of the failure of democracy in the United States or, more accurately, the American population's tacit endorsement of it. Bans on same-sex marriages are another good indicator, or the interest in banning abortion. It's not whether or not a majority of people opposed these things or not that make them such important barometers, but the fundamental shifts in the very way in which American citizens are now thinking that these recent events and movements enshrine. That people even think of interfering with others in such ways, in the absence of rational justification, is terrifying to any liberal (which I use in its original philosophical sense, not as its contemporary political epithet).

Democracies don't work that way; they can't work that way. Such things should simply not be possible in a proper, enlightened democracy. It's as if the Renaissance, the Reformation, the Enlightenment, and Modernity never even existed. And, for the minds of the majority of Americans, it is unlikely they will ever exist again in the foreseeable future, because the unreasonable people are the majority and the majority controls the education system and the thought of the next generations. It's a positive feedback loop of idiots, and the intrinsic problem with an idiot is that you can't fix him, but you can't kill him, because deep down, somewhere, he's human even if he acts like an animal. In the end you just got to let them take care of each other. And leave them behind to do it of course.
 

Corvair

Learning Storage Performance
Joined
Jan 25, 2002
Messages
231
Location
Desolation Boulevard
iGary said:
TRIVIA QUESTION:

Who was this year's US Presidential candidate residing from Houston, Texas. This shouldn't be too hard (or is it?).

Hint: His last name has 4 letters. :lol:

Jeez... Still no winners?

OK, another hint, then. There's also a "B" in his last name.
 

Fushigi

Storage Is My Life
Joined
Jan 23, 2002
Messages
2,890
Location
Illinois, USA
jtr1962 said:
I can agree with you here to a point, the point being that civil unions which protect inheritence, visitation, and other rights are OK, those which provide benefits, medical or otherwise, at taxpayer expense to domestic partners are not. I don't care what someone does in the privacy of their bedrooms but taxpayer money should not be used to, for example, provide health insurance for a municipal employee's domestic partner, regardless of orientation. Besides the obvious huge potential for fraud, it's yet another benefit cash-strapped governments simply cannot afford. And I don't think spouses or children of straight couples who are municipal employees should get such benefits, either, just to show that I'm fair-minded on the subject. Indeed, such benefits are inherently discriminatory against single employees with no partners because such employees receive less total compensation than those with partners.
I'm curious. How would you propose spouses, offspring, and domestic partners of government employees get their health care? With what you're saying, they would become a huge burden to the free/cheap clinics and hospitals that are out there (since civil employees are by and large not well paid, buying private health insurance is not feasible). And those facilities would have to appeal to the government for funding, so you're right back where you started, except the funding would be more expensive than the insurance.

Allowing civil unions that full rights of marriage would make the odds of fraud the same as for married couples, eliminating that portion of the argument.


Face it folks, banning gay marriage is nothing but gender discrimination. It is the first step toward repealing civil rights and the supposed equality that Americans would like to take for granted.
I find it virtually unbelievable that all of these things would happen in the US. This is why we have a system of checks and balances.
With a Republican executive branch, legislative branch, and (very likely) a judicial branch, I find it quite likely. Don't get me wrong; if the three branches were all Democrat-controlled things would also be too dangerous.
Certainly no sane person can object to abortions for rape, incest, or medical necessity
What is our Commander in Chief's view on this subject? I know he is against abortion in general, but does he support in the above cases?
, but it's sad that people are screwing so casually these days without regard for the consequences, and this despite the so-called enlightened policy of requiring sex ed.
Agreed. If I had to mention a single cause for the failings of our society in the baby-boom generation and beyond, it is the lack of accepting responsibility for one's actions and their consequences. This is severely lacking both in the corporate world (Enron, etc.) and in people's personal lives (besides casual unprotected sex, rude/unenlightened behavior would probably top my list).
DRM is evil but don't blame Bush for that.
Agreed WRT the creation of DRM, but his policies do nothing to protect the consumer.
If enough people refuse to buy products with DRM it'll never fly.
This would work if the average consumer were enlightened, but the average consumer is not and would not understand the implications.
A national ID card will never fly.
It already exists, just not in a standardized, overt form. You have a SS number, most folks have a state-issued driver's license or state ID card. Getting that card required surrendering your SS #. Even if you don't have those forms of ID, you are identified to the government in other ways. Tie the databases together (in the name of national security, of course) and a national ID system (without a physical card) can already be achieved.
 

Fushigi

Storage Is My Life
Joined
Jan 23, 2002
Messages
2,890
Location
Illinois, USA
Merc, you've got a Kerry state just a little to the west. Or "left", as it were. You could keep your current job, although the commute would grow.
 

Corvair

Learning Storage Performance
Joined
Jan 25, 2002
Messages
231
Location
Desolation Boulevard
Corvair said:
iGary said:
TRIVIA QUESTION:

Who was this year's US Presidential candidate residing from Houston, Texas. This shouldn't be too hard (or is it?).

Hint: His last name has 4 letters. :lol:
Jeez... Still no winners?

OK, another hint, then. There's also a "B" in his last name.

Is this too hard of a trivia question??? Apparently.

OK, one last hint: The second letter in his last name is a vowel (A, E, I, O, U, and sometimes Y).


Recapping:

1.) US presidential candidate whose official residence is Houston, Texas.

2.) His last name has 4 letters _ _ _ _.

3.) And to make it even easier, the second letter of last name (starting at the left... _ X _ _) is one of these 3 vowels: I, O, U.
 

sechs

Storage? I am Storage!
Joined
Feb 1, 2003
Messages
4,709
Location
Left Coast
The problem with state-sanctioned same-sex marriage is not same-sex marriage, but state-sanctioned marriage.

Marriage is a religious institution that the government really has no business in licensing.
 

Mercutio

Fatwah on Western Digital
Joined
Jan 17, 2002
Messages
22,232
Location
I am omnipresent
I tend to concur, sechs. My ideal would be that all state-recognized unions be offered the same rights and privileges. We can let the term "marriage" lapse back to religious groups to refer to some collection of their ceremonies.
 

Corvair

Learning Storage Performance
Joined
Jan 25, 2002
Messages
231
Location
Desolation Boulevard
CityK said:

Ding! Ding! Ding! We have a winner!

http://www.votecobb.org/


PS: George Dubya B U s h is from Midland / Odessa, though it might really be Dallas. However, George Bush, Sr. resides in Houston, next door to (ironically) now-retired Democratic Senator Lloyd Bentsen, who was the VP running mate of Dukakis in 1988 running against daddy Bush (Bentsen made the immortal retort, "...and you are no Jack Kennedy," as a response to a remark Dan Quayle during a debate.
 
Top