Poor Mr Bush

[Soapvox]

On e draw back of working from home is that i watch the news channels all day. When Clinton was in office it was interesting to say the least, but with Gov Bush in the office it makes me sad to be an american. To my point, has anyone else been watching him over in Europe? Is it just me or is he being an angry american whenever a reporter asks him a question.


Canada here I come!

 

[AdmiralAK]

Xmmmm....
I havent seen the news, but being greek-american (born here of greece descent, raised aprly in greece and partly here) I have been of dual though, euro and american.

I think that sometimes people are too stuck up on BOTH sides, but when it comes down to it I support the national interest of the USA as far as I think fitting.


btw is bush wearing a cowboy hat & cowboy boots ???


Admiral

 

[RacerX]

I voted for Gore because he once had a powerbook duo like mine! (okay, maybe that wasn't the only reason, but it a good one)

 

[AdmiralAK]

I voted for bush because gore claimed to be the inventor of the internet damn egomanic lol .. he did not invent the internet!

 

[RacerX]

Wow, that was an interview where Gore (who was THE leading force behind the funding from the government to create the fiber-optic back bone of the internet that we use today) had misspoke his response to the interviewers question. This does not change the fact that his is the main reason we have the internet the way is is today, without his support (because no one else was going to step forward for this techie pipe dream) we would be today where we were back in 1996 as far was infrastructure (that is a system that could only support about 10,000,000 servers). No one else saw what the internet could be back in 1991 when Gore first started to push this issue as a senator. As vice president when the democrats controls both houses of congress, his was able to push through the funding that would NEVER have been possible in a climate like today (makes you wonder what great idea might be being still born as we speak).

But that was a perfect example of the republican media machine during the election. The republicans put together a media saturation team designed to give the media what it love more than a liberal view point, dirt (accurate or not) that they could run with (by the end of the election, some news groups where actually coming TO the republicans asking for the next story). The funny thing is, once some idea is thrown out there (like Microsoft innovating all the cool features in Windows that were actual around for in other operating systems from 5 to 10 years earlier, Microsoft uses that same media tactic if disinformation to promote themselves) it is very hard to correct.

What we ended up with is a man without vision, who is currently trying to recreate the Reagan years (even though his father thought that the policies of Reagan were flawed at the least, you may be to young to remember the Bush-Reagan debate where Bush called Reagan's ideas VooDoo economics). This current recreation of star wars does nothing to fight the current real threat, terrorists walking or driving into a city to destroy it (it is fitting to note that NO missile defense system would have saved Oklahoma City in 1995, or the World Trade Center a few years earlier).

With every new misstep of our new president I long for the days of yesteryear. No, not the last Administration, but the one of the REAL President Bush, a man who's shoes baby Bush is no where close to filling.

"I voted for bush because gore claimed to be the inventor of the internet damn egomanic lol .. he did not invent the internet!'

Maybe not, but you owe that fact that we have it to him none the less. And Microsoft was one of Bush's biggist supporters... care to venture a guess why?

 

[AdmiralAK]

The thing I despise politically about this country is the dual party system. I have spend a few (well more like 10) years in greece and everyyear I watched my grandparents go vote.... there myst be at least 6 major parties in greece and at least another 30 minor ones.

It would be nice to have some choce here too... democrat, republican, no vote .... teh reform party is like a non-vote ... urgh... I think that pragmatologically both dems & reps are made from the same cloth, I dont see a diff. Ideologically there is a diff but no politician had the balls to stand up for what he was elected for, he just goes with the current so that he may get re-elected ....

I have to say that politicians thus are whores.


Admiral
--> Admiral for senate 20xx !!!!!!! ...admiral for President 20xx !!!!!!! <--

 

[Soapvox]

I agree with you admiral, the problem is is that once you are elected you have to start raising money for your re-election campaign. There is just to much damn money in politics. The only way to make our politicians become true politicians is to take the money out of politics. I have an idea how this could happen, you give each canidate equal free media time, including television, print, debates, and radio. Get the money out and watch out world, we might actually do something and become prosperous and peaceful, reduce polution and get rid of this damn energy problem in california

 

[AdmiralAK]

The only radio stations & TV channels that would happen on would be PBS (Public Broadcasting) and NPR (National Public Radio) ... all other stations are too capitalistic thats why these political whores need $$$$$$$ .... and you cant really pass a bill to mandate that stations provide free time for ads and lots of debates because it seems uncostitutional ...

 

[Soapvox]

But the networks have to lease the airwaves from the fcc, so you put in those contracts that they have to a lot a certain number of hours to political commercials and debates.

 

[RacerX]

Broadcast stations use to have to air a certain number of hours of community and childerns programming (which became Sunday morning religous programs and Saturday morning cartoons for most stations 20 years ago). It real shouldn't be that hard to get them to give time to elections, but the networks have a great loby group working for them

 

[Soapvox]

If you have the money for lobbying groups, you can buy what you want to happen, when the people had a voice things got done, but now everyone has a special intrest to lobby for so nothing gets done for the little guy, like healthcare and schooling. We are spending so much more on prisons than schools. My sister inlaw just got her degree in teaching and is going to teach at a poor school in Washington state, she says that for her school they have 1 computer lab that has 18 working computers on a good day... these children are going to be electronic lepers as they grow up because they were not allowed access to computers, they are using Social study books from 8 years ago, do you remember 1993, think about how much has changed since then. Also they don't have enough english or math books for every class, so they keep the books on a cart and shuttle them back and forth between each class, which means these children can't take the books home to study. I am so sick of living in a republic and not a true democracy!

 

[jdog]

I voted for Bush because the guy who impersonates him on Saturday Night Live does a better job than the guy who plays Gore. I would rather watch 4 years of the Bush guy.

In my opinion, the President is nothing more than a GUI for the party he is affiliated with. He is basically a ventrilliquists (spelling?) dummy with more than one hand up his ass (his so called "advisors").

This country is no longer "by the people, for the people." We are now subjects of the government. This happend the moment government officals (probably military) decided to with-hold information for the "saftey" of the country. In other words, we the public, are to stupid to think for oursleves, therefore the government will decide whats best for us and not the other way around.

Do you realize that one of the main reasons our forefathers broke away from England was the taxes they were forced to pay. I do not have the figures on it, but relativly speaking, we are paying a LOT more than they were in taxes.

My state (Nevada) tells me that it is a privlege for me to drive, not a right. They force me to pay almost $.50/gallon tax on gas, plus everyother tax we pay that goes towards the buliding/maintenance of our roads and tell me it is my privlege that they let me drive? Uh-hm...I think I have paid enough for that god-damn road to allow me the RIGHT to drive on it.

Sorry for the rants but I am on a role now...

In my state, out driving policy is based on a point system, a speeding ticket is woth 2 points, running a red light is four, etc. If you get 16 points in a one year period, you will have your license suspended. This is a good system. But the police also have to power to ticket you. They can basically take your money when ever they feel like it. I have been pulled over three times during my life, and everytime I got a ticket. The very first time I got a ticket, I was doing 78mph on a 65mph freeway at 2:30 in the morning. This is the FIRST time I had ever been pulled over and the cop writes me a $60 ticket. I know of two women who have been pulled over, one doing 55 in a 45 and another doing 45 in a 25 and who also ran a stop sign, neither one got a ticket. I do not like the fact that police have the power to take MY money based on how they feel at the time. They point system is great and I think it really detures unsafe behavior, but I think I pay enough money to my local government to not worry about them taking anymore. Oh, yeah and do you know what that money from those tickets buys? Cars like Ford Expeditions and Camaros. An expedition starts at $30,000 and lord knows how much after they put all their cop crap on it. Plus its an enormous SUV that gets really crappy gas mileage. Is this nessecary?

Ok, I've blabbed enough
-jdog

 

[Soapvox]

What about the insurance lobby, they make it a requirement for insurance(which I don't feel too badly about) but then they get the right to gouge you at every chance. My wife and I are both over 25, never an accident, never a ticket, not even parking tickets. We moved to San Francisco and being earth concience citizens decided we did not need our car in the city... so we sold our car and cancelled our insurance, 9 months later my wife moves back to Oregon to go to school, so we buy a new safe family car with all of the safety and anti theft features, they jack up our rate 75% because we had a lapse in insurance, uh we did not have a car but they expect us to keep our insurance, it is a scam. And to add insult to injury I can't get medical insurance because I was diagnosed with chrohns disease 12 years ago. When I say I can't get insurance, I can but the cheapest I can get is $225 a month and it wont cover my pre-existing, so a) it is not affordable b) it doesn't cover what I need it for, I have to pay $5,000 a year for a special test out of pocket. Insurance companies are a speacial intrest that needs to be properly regulated!

 

[RacerX]

No fault didn't exactly help either. I look at my Dad who has payed auto insurance all his life, and wonder just how much those companies got without ever having to pay out! There should be a limit! You pay until you reach.. oh lets say $15,000, and then you stop. If you have an accident, it comes out of that and you start replacing the funds until you get back to the limit again. (Actually, as I recall, in California if you have over a certain amount ot fluid funds (something like over $125,000, I read this back in '89), you can be considered self-insured.

But that is NOTHING compared to health! You pay and pay, then if you come down with something really expensive, you can be dropped!

There is something very immoral about insurance being a profit drive industry. It is alway more profittable to insure people when they don't need insurance and to drop them when they do.

 

[RacerX]

"Do you realize that one of the main reasons our forefathers broke away from England was the taxes they were forced to pay. I do not have the figures on it, but relativly speaking, we are paying a LOT more than they were in taxes."

I think your missing a key point there... "taxation without representation" was the the actual reason. The colonist payed taxes when they were in England, but they had a representative in the governement working on there behalf, in the colonies, you were taxed without any say how much, and where it would go, or what items could be taxed.

Taxation hasn't been that bad for me, and it not like I'll see a BIG tax cut, I not part of the "mid-class" (you know family income of $250,000 per year).

 

[Soapvox]

I have no problem paying taxes ( I am true middle class $75000yr) if my taxes are going to do the right things, if you think we have representation, go back to the first posting, we are limited to the people who can raise the most money, not the ones that will represent us best. I have no problem even paying 40% in taxes (34% now) if my taxes ensured my child is going to get a good education, if I were injured I would not have an insane medical bill, when my parents retire, they don't have to pay $300 a month just for their medicine, if we were protecting the environment, but instead my money goes to wasteful spending, it goes to murdering inmates, it pays for a over zealous military, and corporate welfare. This country needs to start listening to its people or canada is going to have a boom in imigrants

 

[RacerX]

We shouldn't forget the current battle cry for coorperations buying elected official: "it is a matter of free speech!"

A majority of people voted liberally in the last election, but they cancelled each other out. It just goes to show that the old sayings are the best : "United we stand, divided we fall". Why do you think the republican party use such a large amount of money towards the end of a compain to run pro-Nader adds? I'll give you a hint, it wasn't because they agreed with his liberal views. They knew they didn't have the votes, but every vote for Nader was one less for Gore. They stopped running on issues (because they would lose) and ran to win at all cost. The down fall of the '92 and '96 elections was the far right hurting the Republicans in the primaries, they learned to keep them quite during the election and let the far left do to the Democrats what had been happening to them.

This government is what you get when the voters are ill informed of the issues and players. Any one who is surprised by the current tack on so many issues don't take to time to look at young Bush's record before voting. I knew his record, I knew Gore's, I knew Clinton's, I knew Dole's, I really knew Bush senior's record (and he wouldn't be doing half this stuff by the way). I'll say I am disappointed by what I see Bush doing, but not surprised.

PS

I moved from San Diego to Minneapolis, so I'm almost to Canada if need be (though I'm not sure I can take this whole weather thing much longer, they actually have it here)

 

[apb3]

I voted for Bush and supported him heavily from the early pre-primary days and nearly froze in NH (a short drive from here in Boston) where he lost to McCain.

I am middle class however, I come from money. This has no effect on my political views. I am a staunch supporter of 1st amendment rights, limitation of police powers (I thought we lived in a country in which we were not allowed an army to enforce local laws on US citizens (got that idea from Rome I think). I think most SWAT teams are as well outfitted - almost- as my unit was in the Gulf.), limited legalization (and taxation, quality control, etc) of drugs, a smaller federal gov't with possibly more power to the states, Globalization, free trade (that is FAIR), hell - that's enough, if you care message me.

As you can see, not all of my views fit with Bush's. This doesn't matter. As stated, he's a GUI. Where I disagree is that he is not a GUI for his party anymore once he's won the election (he's already pissed some of his party buddies off), he's a GUI for America.

I just could not see Gore being able to get anything done in negotiations, crises, getting respect from the rest of the world, etc. This is a problem for VPs in general but I think he had some extra liabilities.

In the negotiations/interactions with foreign leaders I've seen involving Bush, I've been impressed. I think China especially was handled rather well (maybe papa Bush's experience helped here).

Also, Gore is a big hands-on guy. Not a quality I feel is good for the leader of ANY large corporation/nation. Delegation/listening to those who know and have first-hand/close-up experience is key. From what I've seen. This is Bush's style. Maybe some of you will say this is because he's just stupid. I disagree. I think this is one of his greatest assets.

Gotta cut this short, conference call w/ client in a few.

 

[Soapvox]

apb I am not flaming you, please understand! I just don't see how you can say Bush is anything other than a bumbling fool when it comes to international policy. The China scenario was handled well, a little too much machismo on both sides but all in all there wasn't a war. But have you watched the news in the past few days, in Europe Bush (and as the GUI for america) is a joke, we come off as murderers, power hungry jerks. And for Bush being a GUI for america, how can he be a gui for america, if over half of voters didn't vote for him (remember, he won the electorial not the popular). Now I am not saying that Gore was a whole hell of a lot better, but at least he has a decent IQ.

 

[apb3]

haha conference call cancelled!

http://www.cnn.com/2001/WORLD/europe/06/13/bush.greenfield/



He's a GUI for america because he won. regardless of by what percent or by what measure.

I'm not taking this as a flame. We're all entitled to our opinions and I've fought and killed for everyone's right to think and express those thoughts no matter what I think of them.

Aside from the link above re: europe's view of new presidents, they've always had a problem with our death penalty. A lot of Americans do too.

From my experience overseas (about 9 years in total), everyone who isn't the big guy on the block (or perceived as such anyway) criticizes the perceived big guy. I really don't see the US as power hungry (maybe power possessing, but that's a quirk of history and probably not a permanent thing - ask England). Power hungry to me means (1) you don't have the power and (2) you try to gain it. This seems to me more like a North Korea for example (and not to single out and generalize about any Koreans reading this).

Bush MAY be not the greatest thinker but like I said in my earlier post, he surrounds himself with some of the greatest experts on various issues. AND he listens to them. This is a trait I feel that exemplifies one's "IQ" better than any actual score.