posted on August 9, 2001 07:19:27 PM new
1. Because we can. Ain't freedom great?
2. What goes around comes around. Republicans trashed Clinton over his private sex life, and even impeached him for lieing about it. OK, no problem, but the republican party better be squeaky clean after pulling that crap. I don't think they are.
3. Because he's a Minority President
Reguardless of what happened in Florida, Nationwide more people voted for Gore than Bush. He's the President, but he should remember that only a quirk in our system put him in office. It's one thing to ignore the minority, but for him to ignore the majority of voters and what they want is going to cost him in 2004.
posted on August 10, 2001 07:05:38 AM new
The reason I trash him is due to the stolen election. They took the constitution and threw it out the window. The people will have their day soon. I saw on tv this morning the catholics are steamed about the stem cell research. They compared it to his dads "read my lips" mistake. Below is pictures that years from now will grace our kids history books.
posted on August 10, 2001 12:14:34 PM new
I trash him only because I want republican voters to realize the danger that they put this country in by voting for someone of Dubya's intellectual caliber to be president. Forrest Gump was a fine movie -- one of my all time favorites and it makes a wonderful, heartwarming statement about doing right. But the reality is that below average IQ people do not make for good leaders.
I guess it's also one other thing, though. I recall how for years upon years republicans bashed Clinton for using marijuana in his past. But when it's their candidate that is an alcoholic (although dry nowadays) and did cocaine and who knows what other hard drugs in his past, plus has a criminal record -- well, that's OK by them. To me, that is so hypocritical -- particularly when they keep shoving the Morality Card at us all the time. So I like to let them know just how hypocritical their positions are.
I have no doubt that Dubya, if he had been given a really free choice would have chosen nearly anything other than go into politics. I am sure that the onerous opinions that his presidency endorses are not his own and is really just a good Joe with a good heart. I think that he would be far more comfortable pumping gas at a filling station for a living and going out for beer and darts after work with his buddies than put up with all of the political intrigue that he can't comprehend.
posted on August 10, 2001 01:04:26 PM new
Well there you go again.... but and however, you now say, from what I am comprehending here is that it is NOT Bush you bash or trash, its the Republican Voters? So why didn't you say that long ago? (well you did in quite a few places)
If ya feel he's just a sweet dumb guy like Forrest Gump, and didn't want to be in politics, then bash your average,dumb Republican voter. Why not?
We're the evil ones, Bush is just kinda slooooow....
posted on August 10, 2001 01:40:56 PM new
Well, from my point of view, it's not Republican voters I have a problem with. It's Republican Politicians.
It started with Watergate. Now, that was a stupid move, hiring people to break into Democratic Headquaters. No way was Nixon going to lose that election, so WHY? To my mind, it was just "dirty tricks".
Then Reagan put us trillions of dollars in debt. WHY? Who profited from it?
The bit with "Read my lips", I can over look that....
What the Republicans in the Congress and Senate did with Clinton was just more "dirty tricks". They knew there was NO WAY ON GOD'S GREEN EARTH they could remove Clinton from office, but they spent tons of money, and Put on a Circus. Again, WHY? More "dirty tricks".
So... It's time for "Pay Back", and poor ole Boy George just happens to a very easy target. If he steps even one inch out of line, it's time for Senate Hearings and Special Prosecutors.
Republican Leaders are so fond of "dirty tricks", well, that's a two way street.
UBB edit.
[ edited by Microbes on Aug 10, 2001 01:41 PM ]
posted on August 10, 2001 02:00:57 PM newnearthesea: I notice you carefully avoided Borillar's points regarding the hypocrisy of many Republicans. Why is that?
posted on August 10, 2001 02:09:35 PM new
I didn't avoid it, because like I've told him, and he knows, I've never bashed Democrats, or got into the 'Clinton Affair' or whatever it was. Look, when Clinton said 'he never inhaled' I took that as him honestly being humorus. So I don't find myself being hypocritical about this.
posted on August 10, 2001 02:43:24 PM new
Thank you, NearTheSea, for taking my words out of context. Others have been doing that with my statements of late too! That is so typical of republicans; the politicians, the GOP, their voters. Now it's practically an American institution.
But that doesn't bother me. Like the GOP and polticans and their double-talk, it is just another way of telling lies in order to slander someone that they don't like.
It's pretty pathetic when political supporters have to resort to slander, lieing, misquoting, character assasination, and outright nastiness to support their position, when corfonting the issues directly is intelectually acceptable method of resolving issues. I guess that pretty much says it all.
posted on August 10, 2001 03:50:28 PM new
Ah, forgive me, NearTheSea. Having looked over your past statements you have mentioned on more than one occasion that you are kinda new to political debate and therefore, you may not be astute enough to comprehend the fundamentals. Let me show you the way …
I am going to use an analogy here. If you have ever had kids and you had to discipline them using whatever methods you chose, you at one point had to explain to them that you were disapproving of your child's behavior, and not that child personally. Do you recall this? A parent can disapprove of a child's behavior and attempt to correct the behavior, but keeps that behavior separate from the actual child; e.g. the child is not the behavior that they act out. Therefore, there is a difference between what a person says or does and the actual quality of that person. You do follow that?
Now, when it comes to a person's position on matters, it is important to be able to distinguish between the position and the person making the statement. That is what AW means by saying that we are to address the topic and not the poster.
Now, for example, I stated, "So I like to let them know just how hypocritical their positions are." I did not state that the people themselves were hypocrites - just that I felt that their positions were. Can you see the difference now? And when you stated, " it is NOT Bush you bash or trash, its the Republican Voters?" you can clearly see how that had been taken out of context. But now you know better and its all settled … right?
UBB
[ edited by Borillar on Aug 10, 2001 03:53 PM ]
posted on August 10, 2001 04:55:53 PM new
As you point out, that I have pointed out, that I am not asute enough to debate political matters..... whatever! LOL
No, I cannot match you Borillar, and its much too hot right now, so I will again concede to your political intellect.
posted on August 10, 2001 05:55:59 PM new
Lordy, Near the Sea...
I had no idea how astutitudinally deficient you were. Please shape up, at once. You need to be in intellectually top form to debate the great mind of Borillar.
posted on August 12, 2001 11:22:44 AM newQuoted from Borillar: "I guess it's also one other thing, though. I recall how for years upon years republicans bashed Clinton for using marijuana in his past. But when it's their candidate that is an alcoholic (although dry nowadays) and did cocaine and who knows what other hard drugs in his past, plus has a criminal record -- well, that's OK by them. To me, that is so hypocritical -- particularly when they keep shoving the Morality Card at us all the time. So I like to let them know just how hypocritical their positions are." (bolded by me for emphasis...)
YUP!!! That basically capsulizes the attitude that is most prevalent with the Repub mindset!
[ edited by Triggerfish on Aug 12, 2001 11:23 AM ]
