« previous next »
Pages: 1 2 3 [4] 5 6 7 ... 9   Go Down

Author Topic: Courteous Political Discussion  (Read 2113 times)

Offline Nash

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 11705
      • http://sbm.boomzoom.org/
Courteous Political Discussion
« Reply #45 on: May 15, 2004, 01:11:43 AM »
Quote
Originally posted by Holden McGroin
You seem to have this dictator complex.

Not a Napoleon, but a Lincoln or Churchill or Jefferson.  I am looking for a president who can persuade, who can show the better path and when you see the path, you realize it's value and go on your own accord.

Blindly following the wishes of the governed is called mob rule.


How about we bring this back on home, for a second k Holden?

You said "The subject of this thread is whether it is better to have someone in the oval office who has firm convictions or someone with a more flexible approach to policy."

Now I HOPE we can appreciate that this depends on WHO is in office.

If you're saying that it'd be cool if "Jefferson" were back in biz and callin the shots then..... well, that's something.

But I suspect you were trying to make a parallel with the Bush admin.

That's where it goes down in flames.
Logged

Offline rpm

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 15661
Re: Courteous Political Discussion
« Reply #46 on: May 15, 2004, 01:13:07 AM »
Quote
Originally posted by Holden McGroin
Let me begin by stating that I'm not interested in causing a flaming thread of any kind. Besides, calling many of you idiots would be an insult to all the stupid people. I'm merely here to open myself to differing opinions, not to start some fruitless argument. So, a thought crossed your mind? Must have been a long and lonely journey. With that in mind, if you wish to say something, please do so in a mature, positive, and moreover constructive manner.

I know most of you have an interest in the political ramifications of the decisions of 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue, and many have had insightful comments to make on the subject.  Some of you though are the kind of person one would use as a blueprint to build an idiot.  So keep your thoughts concise and get directly to the point.  Don't let your mind wander - it's far too small to be let out on its own.  

The subject of this thread is whether it is better to have someone in the oval office who has firm convictions or someone with a more flexible approach to policy.  So post your ideas; if you keep it up long enough someday you'll say something intelligent.  Above all folks, let’s keep it courteous and hold the insults to a minimum.  

I believe that we should be electing a leader who steers public opinion rather than following the currents of popular thought. Too many politicians are reacting to polls and if that were the way in 1862, Lincoln would not have been able to press on his policy, which has been proven through history as the appropriate one. I realize it's hard to get the big picture when you have such a small screen, but try to keep up.  We are supposed to elect leaders, not followers.

;)

Wow, you made it 1 sentence before Flame On.
Logged
My mind is a raging torrent, flooded with rivulets of thought cascading into a waterfall of creative alternatives.
Stay thirsty my friends.

Offline AKIron

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 12770
Courteous Political Discussion
« Reply #47 on: May 15, 2004, 01:14:18 AM »
It will be interesting to watch Bush in the months to come. You can learn a lot more about a person's character when they are under pressure.
Logged
Here we put salt on Margaritas, not sidewalks.

Offline Holden McGroin

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 8591
Courteous Political Discussion
« Reply #48 on: May 15, 2004, 01:16:09 AM »
Quote
Originally posted by Nash
But I suspect you were trying to make a parallel with the Bush admin.


Honestly, I wasn't.  I was being more (here's that word again) general.
Logged
Holden McGroin LLC makes every effort to provide accurate and complete information. Since humor, irony, and keen insight may be foreign to some readers, no warranty, expressed or implied is offered. Re-writing this disclaimer cost me big bucks at the lawyer’s office!

Offline Nash

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 11705
      • http://sbm.boomzoom.org/
Courteous Political Discussion
« Reply #49 on: May 15, 2004, 01:16:41 AM »
Call it fate, but I don't believe you.
Logged

Offline Holden McGroin

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 8591
Courteous Political Discussion
« Reply #50 on: May 15, 2004, 01:24:38 AM »
Quote
Originally posted by rpm371
Wow, you made it 1 sentence before Flame On.


You didn't get the joke?
Logged
Holden McGroin LLC makes every effort to provide accurate and complete information. Since humor, irony, and keen insight may be foreign to some readers, no warranty, expressed or implied is offered. Re-writing this disclaimer cost me big bucks at the lawyer’s office!

Offline Nash

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 11705
      • http://sbm.boomzoom.org/
Courteous Political Discussion
« Reply #51 on: May 15, 2004, 01:26:33 AM »
I did.... but I was bored so I ignored that part :)
Logged

Offline Tarmac

  • Gold Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3988
Courteous Political Discussion
« Reply #52 on: May 15, 2004, 01:36:05 AM »
Quote
Originally posted by AKIron
It will be interesting to watch Bush in the months to come. You can learn a lot more about a person's character when they are under pressure.


Glad to know that whole Iraq thing isn't putting too much pressure on him.  Wouldn't want him to be stressed about something as trivial as the questionably justified invasion of another country.
Logged

Offline Holden McGroin

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 8591
Courteous Political Discussion
« Reply #53 on: May 15, 2004, 01:37:07 AM »
Quote
Originally posted by Nash
Call it fate, but I don't believe you.


Don't know what to tell you, except to say that while I did vote for Bush and probably will again, he is like all politicians, a compromise.  

I would have campaigned for Powell if he had run.
Logged
Holden McGroin LLC makes every effort to provide accurate and complete information. Since humor, irony, and keen insight may be foreign to some readers, no warranty, expressed or implied is offered. Re-writing this disclaimer cost me big bucks at the lawyer’s office!

Offline AKIron

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 12770
Courteous Political Discussion
« Reply #54 on: May 15, 2004, 01:44:19 AM »
Quote
Originally posted by Tarmac
Glad to know that whole Iraq thing isn't putting too much pressure on him.  Wouldn't want him to be stressed about something as trivial as the questionably justified invasion of another country.


I don't think he undertook said invasion lightly, even after the apparent ease of pushing the Iraqi's out of Kuwait in '91. I think he leans heavily on advisors (always wise imo) and I'm confident they considered the opposition US troops are facing in Iraq today. However, the situation in both Afghanistan and Iraq are most surely a heavy burden for him. If they are not then he most definitely is not one I want to lead our country.
Logged
Here we put salt on Margaritas, not sidewalks.

Offline Nash

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 11705
      • http://sbm.boomzoom.org/
Courteous Political Discussion
« Reply #55 on: May 15, 2004, 01:45:18 AM »
Powell would likely be the antithesis of your original post here.

He'd likely not be blindly driven by ideology nor duped into something by a few folks who are smarter than him.

And he wouldn't try and sell ya on something dumb that ya didn't even know that ya didn't want in the first place.
Logged

Offline AKS\/\/ulfe

  • Platinum Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 4287
Courteous Political Discussion
« Reply #56 on: May 15, 2004, 01:48:20 AM »
Jane has three quarters, three nickels, one dime, and an oak leaf. Jon has one quarter, one nickel, seven dimes and a maple leaf.

Who has more money?

Answer will come when you figure out the worth of both leaves, and then you'll still be wrong.

I undeestood pawliteeks.
-SW
Logged

Offline Nash

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 11705
      • http://sbm.boomzoom.org/
Courteous Political Discussion
« Reply #57 on: May 15, 2004, 01:51:39 AM »
TEH ONE WITH TEH MAPLE LEAF EH WOOT!
Logged

Offline AKIron

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 12770
Courteous Political Discussion
« Reply #58 on: May 15, 2004, 01:53:26 AM »
Quote
Originally posted by AKS\/\/ulfe
Jane has three quarters, three nickels, one dime, and an oak leaf. Jon has one quarter, one nickel, seven dimes and a maple leaf.

Who has more money?

Answer will come when you figure out the worth of both leaves, and then you'll still be wrong.

I undeestood pawliteeks.
-SW


Since Jon has the maple leaf his dime is obviously Candian and worth less. Jane has the most money. ;)
Logged
Here we put salt on Margaritas, not sidewalks.

Offline Nash

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 11705
      • http://sbm.boomzoom.org/
Courteous Political Discussion
« Reply #59 on: May 15, 2004, 01:55:28 AM »
You can't put a dollar sign on heart!
Logged
Pages: 1 2 3 [4] 5 6 7 ... 9   Go Up
« previous next »