Presidential Debate

[Coffee]

Originally posted by Saxifrage
Bush will win, this is the real world and the bad guy always wins in the real world. The Rupert Murdochs, the Dick Cheneys especially the Mellon-Schaffes. That is why christianity is so popular, it tells you that although you suffer under the heel of a tyrant now you will have a kingdom in heaven.

But Ghandi won...

...and Hitler lost.

It can happen.

[Smartypants]

See? THAT's the attitude!

All of you pessimists, you listen to Coffee. He knows what's what.

Kerry by a landslide, November 2.

Not only that, but between the election and the inauguration, Bush f*cks up so badly that even his staunchest supporters become relieved that he lost, and Kerry enters the White House with support from both parties.

<--- OK, so these glasses have a slightly rose-colored tint, but they're so purdy, dontcha think?

[zenbabe]

was just reading in the paper today, here they sent two sets of ballots to about 1000 registered voters.....

[Coffee]

Nelson Mandella won too despite overwhelming odds against him and while in prison even...IT CAN HAPPEN.

My glasses are rosier than your's SP

[amanda]

Originally posted by Coffee
But Ghandi won...

...and Hitler lost.

It can happen.

There is something wrong here.

Gandhi, as much as I am a supporter of works and his thoughts, did not "win" anything politically. Yes, he helped to personify the movement for a decolonized India, but there is much evidence that points to the gradual decolonization of India by the British. Yes, he believed in the unity for all peoples, but did nothing to stop keep M.A. Jinnah within the Congress, which eventually led to the Partition between India and Pakistan. Over a million lives were lost in the founding of a separate Muslim state. And now both countries, not too long ago, had the proverbial fingers poised over their respective doomsday buttons (read: NUCLEAR).

And what did Hitler "lose"? His life? Yeah, well, so did Gandhi.

But there is something much deeper in those comments that really bothers me is the increasing amount of demonizing of those "on the other side" of the political spectrum. On November 3rd, those people who sit opposite of you of the political fence will still be here, whether who "wins" or "loses". They will still want their voices to be heard, whether it's for safe schools, same sex, or Schwarzenegger for 2012. This isn't a little collective Western B-grade flick where the good guy wears the white hat- no one in this political machine is inherently good. Or inherently evil. It is made up of humans, by humans and for humans. Imagine that. It's up to us to hold these folks accountable for the consequences that emanate from the decisions made while they are in positions of power. That goes for Hitler AND for Gandhi.

My glasses are rosier than all youse put together.

[Saxifrage]

Originally posted by amanda
There is something wrong here.

Gandhi, as much as I am a supporter of works and his thoughts, did not "win" anything politically. Yes, he helped to personify the movement for a decolonized India, but there is much evidence that points to the gradual decolonization of India by the British. Yes, he believed in the unity for all peoples, but did nothing to stop keep M.A. Jinnah within the Congress, which eventually led to the Partition between India and Pakistan. Over a million lives were lost in the founding of a separate Muslim state. And now both countries, not too long ago, had the proverbial fingers poised over their respective doomsday buttons (read: NUCLEAR).

And what did Hitler "lose"? His life? Yeah, well, so did Gandhi.

But there is something much deeper in those comments that really bothers me is the increasing amount of demonizing of those "on the other side" of the political spectrum. On November 3rd, those people who sit opposite of you of the political fence will still be here, whether who "wins" or "loses". They will still want their voices to be heard, whether it's for safe schools, same sex, or Schwarzenegger for 2012. This isn't a little collective Western B-grade flick where the good guy wears the white hat- no one in this political machine is inherently good. Or inherently evil. It is made up of humans, by humans and for humans. Imagine that. It's up to us to hold these folks accountable for the consequences that emanate from the decisions made while they are in positions of power. That goes for Hitler AND for Gandhi.

My glasses are rosier than all youse put together.

Yep, that is quite rosy, my cynicism meter has overloaded......please reboot harddrive.

[Ace]

hahah all you liberal Democrats, have no idea what the "real world" is. How can you call President Bush a idiot, when he freed the Iraqi people from the terror of Saddam Hussein and elimated almost of Al Quida. Hussein massacared over 10,000 people with his biological and chemical agents. He also tried to invade Kuwait in which we responded and easily won Operation Desert Storm. If you can not call him a terrorist, please tell me why not. And also about the economy, look around you. Do we have slaves and poverty all over the place with no business because our economy is so bad? Please, wake up and smell the coffee, welcome to the "Real World."

[Saxifrage]

Originally posted by Ace
hahah all you liberal Democrats, have no idea what the "real world" is. How can you call President Bush a idiot, when he freed the Iraqi people from the terror of Saddam Hussein and elimated almost of Al Quida. Hussein massacared over 10,000 people with his biological and chemical agents. He also tried to invade Kuwait in which we responded and easily won Operation Desert Storm. If you can not call him a terrorist, please tell me why not. And also about the economy, look around you. Do we have slaves and poverty all over the place with no business because our economy is so bad? Please, wake up and smell the coffee, welcome to the "Real World."

Aah sonny boy, been drinking deep from the tap at Faux news have you? All the reasons we went into Iraq have turned out to be lies, Sadam was a pain but the sanctions against him had worked and he was a toothless lion. He was not a terrorist , he was a dictator. There are many dictators in the world and we do business with most of them. Bush has lied to you, has tricked you. The economy, I don't know what country you are in but here in the US it is in the toilet. Lowest wages since 1936, highest unemployment since Hoover. Now you run along and be a good boy, make sure you swallow your dose of Faux and get plenty of Rush Limbaugh, he'll save you from us nasty liberals

[Smartypants]

Even with the media's complete roll-over-and-play dumb policy that it has perpetuated to kiss the ass of the Bush White House, the real story of this admin's deceit, greed, and down-an-out incompetence has been unsuppressable of late. Even Fox News, long a mouthpiece for the right wing, hasn't been able to stop the flow of truth about Bush's lack of qualification to remain in power.

How is it at all possible for anyone with a radio, TV, or newspaper, unless he/she is a Vote-Republican-Right-or-Wronger or a delusional Christian fundamentalist, to still support Bush?

Even thinking Republicans understand that Bush stands for nothing -- NOTHING -- of the Republican values of fiscal conservatism and small government.

And even if one thinks it distasteful to demonize one side or another, it's hard to imagine how we are not all going to hell -- from war, terrorism, economic collapse, or influenza -- pretty damn soon if a major change doesn't come about on November 2d.

It's hard to keep rose-colored glasses (or those of any color) on my nose from all the shaking of my head in disbelief .

[Saxifrage]

Historically there are several conservatives I have a great respect for, Henry Adams, his brother Brooks (who was a little off) and a prominent conservative named Henry Cabot Lodge. This Lodge fellow was a supremely conservative man, fiscally responsible he stood against the US backing up the English pound, stood against anything that wasn't in the interest of the rich. there was none of this false playing to the common man in those days. The repubs were vocally the party of the wealthy and proud of it. These conservatives would have an apoplectic fit if they knew that their party was responsible for a 7 trillion dollar debt. These men would not recognise the monstrosity that has become of the republican party. A few of the principles of the party I like, keeping government out of individuals business, no deficit spending but they lose me in their lack of human compassion and utterly selfish profit only nature.

[Smartypants]

Originally posted by Saxifrage
A few of the principles of the party I like, keeping government out of individuals business, no deficit spending but they lose me in their lack of human compassion and utterly selfish profit only nature.

In other words, you are a staunch Democrat.

The only reason people believe that Republicans stand for "keeping government out of individuals business, no deficit spending" is that the Republican spin machine tells them so.

In fact, it was under Clinton that we cut the deficit and realized the huge surplus that the present administration has squandered. It took Clinton's Democratic administration to undo the financial damage brought on by Reagonomic giveaways to the rich at the expense of national financial security.

As for keeping government out of individuals' business, Democrats believe government's role is to protect the interest of those who can't protect their own -- the only involvement in individuals' business is when those individuals endanger the health, safety or rights of others. On the other hand, Republicans want to dictate all sorts of things to individuals that are none of government's business, inflicting narrow moral and religious prejudices to restrict the rights guaranteed by the Constitution -- and now in post-9/11 America, playing on people's fear to make further incursions into other people's business.

If you are looking for fiscal responsibility, staying out of individuals' business, AND human compassion, I think it's the Democratic Party, not the Republican Party you're looking for.

I find it fascinating that the Republicans for years have been describing Democratic ideals as their own and then working to achieve the opposite, and the people who want to see those ideals realized blame the Democrats for obstructing individual rights and financial prudence, when if they had just voted in Democrats in the first place, those ideals would more likely have been realized.

[amanda]

there ya go, smartypants.

nice work.

[zenbabe]

VOTE KERRY!!!!!!!!!!!

[amanda]

yes ma'am.

[zenbabe]

Good girl!