Aces High Bulletin Board
General Forums => The O' Club => Topic started by: Ripsnort on October 11, 2000, 02:21:00 PM
-
Interesting article by this gentlman:
By Alan Caruba
The unbelievable tedium of the presidential campaign as it winds down toward November 7th seems to suggest Americans are operating on automatic, ignoring the campaign either because they made up their minds long ago, because they are unable to perceive any significant difference between the candidates or because they are the much ballyhood "undecideds." Nothing could be farther from the truth.
I don't think there are that many "undecideds" at this point. I think those who say they are undecided are either lying or, more likely, they are morons who have paid no attention to the campaign and have no intention of voting.
Anyone who has paid any attention at this point knows that Gov. George W. Bush represents the view that government must be smaller, less intrusive into our lives, while Vice President Gore has proposed a myriad of programs that would expand government to a new bursting point. In truth, under both Democrats and Republicans, the fastest growing segment of the employment sector has been government at all levels. The only thing perceptively downsized is our military that strains to meet its recruitment needs and is working with spare parts.
The cold truth is that voter turnout has been diminishing for years and November's election will likely prove to be the smallest turnout ever. This bodes ill for America. Nothing so endangers a democracy than that its citizens grow indifferent to who leads their nation. It is an open invitation to despotism.
The most significant aspect of the campaign is the long trail of lies that Al Gore leaves behind him as he moves closer to his goal of taking this nation toward "a wrenching transformation of society" to correct
what he believes is man's assault on earth. "We are the enemy," he wrote in his famous book, "Earth in the Balance", but there is no balance to his views. He offers a despotism directed at ending "consumption" of everything by imposing "sacrifice" and "struggle" on Americans, most of whom haven't
a clue what he has in mind for them.
We are not the enemy, nor do we have any cause to be dispirited. To borrow from the preamble of the Constitution, we are the people who have come together to establish justice and insure domestic tranquility by forming "a more perfect Union." Our government operates at "the consent of the governed", but neither Clinton, nor Gore are much interested in either our opinions or consent. They want obedience.
There will be very little tranquility if Al Gore is elected and begins to impose his dark view of the world upon us. Clinton tried to achieve this by issuing more Executive Orders than virtually every preceding President. The lesson has not been lost on Gore.
The tedium, the indifference, the seeming lack of drama of this election masks what will surely be a dramatic turning point if Gore is elected. So far on the campaign trail, he hasn't spoken about his real
vision, spelled out in his book. Instead he uses the politics of fear to entice seniors to believe that their Social Security check will no longer arrive, that Medicare will cease to provide help, and that, for whatever reason, the government must now also pay for their medications. To young married couples, he holds out college tuition benefits for their children.
He offers everyone the villains of Big Oil, Big Tobacco, Big Pharmaceutical companies; all big business with which he has been heavily invested, first on his father's tobacco farm, then as trustee of $500,000 of
Occidental Oil, and as the beneficiary of campaign funds from pharmaceutical companies. To others he offers Hollywood as the enemy. Government, he suggests, will have to step in and decide what is acceptable for Big Media to provide. To anyone else, he offers "the rich." No communist could do it any better.
Big Brother will look after you and, in return, you will do what Big Brother says. The morons who are "undecided" always learn this truth too late.
Alan Caruba is the founder of The National Anxiety Center, a clearinghouse for information about scare campaigns
[This message has been edited by Ripsnort (edited 10-11-2000).]
-
Originally posted by Ripsnort:
Interesting article by this gentlman:
By Alan Caruba
The unbelievable tedium of the presidential campaign as it winds down toward November 7th seems to suggest Americans are operating on automatic, ignoring the campaign either because they made up their minds long ago, because they are unable to perceive any significant difference between the candidates or because they are the much ballyhood "undecideds." Nothing could be farther from the truth.
I don't think there are that many "undecideds" at this point. I think those who say they are undecided are either lying or, more likely, they are morons who have paid no attention to the campaign and have no intention of voting.
....
Big Brother will look after you and, in return, you will do what Big Brother says. The morons who are "undecided" always learn this truth too late.
Another geat post Ripsnort
Anyone heard of this:
http://www.digitalangel.net/index.htm (http://www.digitalangel.net/index.htm)
"Basic Features of Digital Angel™
The idea behind the initial version of Digital Angel™ is to build a microchip that can be worn close to the body. Subject to FDA approval, future versions of the device may be able to be implanted within the body.* This microchip will include biosensors that will measure the biological parameters of the body and store this information. "
* It is my understanding that this step is complete. It is the size of a rice kernel which can be implanted under the skin. How does one feel about walking around with a GPS antenna on your person 24/7?
Not to hard to read between the lines here: http://www.digitalangel.net/pr_09_11_00.htm (http://www.digitalangel.net/pr_09_11_00.htm)
Its implications are scary to say the least...........
Prophetic at worst case.
Eagler
[This message has been edited by Eagler (edited 10-11-2000).]
-
Ripsnort must be a member of the Bush propaganda machine (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/biggrin.gif).
Or be the machine himself.
Resistance if futile. You will be assimilated (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/biggrin.gif)
------------------
StSanta
9./JG 54 "Grünherz"
(http://www.angelfire.com/nt/regoch/sig.gif)
-
Originally posted by StSanta:
Ripsnort must be a member of the Bush propaganda machine (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/biggrin.gif).
Or be the machine himself.
Resistance if futile. You will be assimilated (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/biggrin.gif)
And you my friend are a liberal (Gore) mouth piece (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/smile.gif) Gore's campaign song should be "Welcome to the Machine" by Pink Floyd as his big gov plan is nothing more than that. Huxley's "Brave New World" comes to mind..
Anyone else see Bush kick Gore's arse last night? There maybe hope yet...
Eagler
-
Eagler, Santa and I go back along ways on our political differences, and they are all in jest, for the most part! (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/wink.gif)
Believe me when I say that Santa appears to be left liberal today, since he's young, dumb and full of c..but when he hits 30 and gets married, that will change, I can tell by the content of his posts. (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/smile.gif) (I used to think like he did, amazing ain't it?)
One day he will relize that when he gets a good salary from a big company that hires him (Granted, he doesn't show up to the interview with colored hair that basically says "Im having an Identity Crisis"), that hires folks, helps the economy, gives him a good retirement package, and 6 weeks off a year for vacations, then, only then, will he see the light. (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/wink.gif)
[This message has been edited by Ripsnort (edited 10-12-2000).]
-
Ripsnort
I know what you mean. My view point now at 41 is 180 degrees from what it was when I was 19. It's just that for every liberal statement/point of view, there needs to be a counterpoint or else those who know no diff could be brain washed. It's much easier to be lib these days than conservative. As today's youth seems to be softer than previous gen's, the MTV gen, unless there is a conservative (square) point of view, more of our youth will just swallow the liberal POV (cool) as it is an easier lifestyle. Less restraints, more so called freedoms but at what cost...
I know where StSanta is coming from. I have a 21 year old son who knows it all (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/smile.gif) Heck, I knew it all at 21 also, just I know more now (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/smile.gif)
Eagler
-
Hehe, Eagler, I may have to get some pointers from you in a few years, got a 2 and 4 year old boys, and I'm 40.
-
Gore's antics at the first debate infuriated me! I got a big kick out of him squirming an d biting his lip last night. This guy is not a leader. I think George W. will probably be a better prez than his dad, especially stronger in domestic affairs (economy) and he will benefit from the experience of George Sr and his colleages in foreign affairs.
Now ask yourself, who would you rather have a beer with - Gore or Bush?
Sour
-
Do you seriously believe Bush won that debate? Man, take off those blinders!
I think the debate was fairly equal until Bush couldn't respond to Gore's numbers relating to Texas being dead last in health care.
Nothing wrong with being liberal. It means you're open minded and compassionate towards other people who may or may not be associated wit you. IT also means being open to change.
Being Conservative means being stuck in the past, being an elitist and looking down on anyone who does not conform to your elitest, old ideas.
------------------
Squadron Leader, Igloo.
C/O RCAF 411 Squadron - County of York (http://www.trueorigins.net/411rcaf)
"Problems cannot be solved with the same awareness that created them" - Albert Einstein[/i]
-
hehe
-
Igloo:
Your above post says it all about the Liberal mind. You're out of touch.
After watching Gore crash-and-burn during the debates, i've been humming a little tune that goes a little like this:
"I said Baby, Baby, Baby, you're out of time...." The Rolling Stones.
Cabby
-
Originally posted by Igloo:
Do you seriously believe Bush won that debate? Man, take off those blinders!
I think the debate was fairly equal until Bush couldn't respond to Gore's numbers relating to Texas being dead last in health care.
Nothing wrong with being liberal. It means you're open minded and compassionate towards other people who may or may not be associated wit you. IT also means being open to change.
Being Conservative means being stuck in the past, being an elitist and looking down on anyone who does not conform to your elitest, old ideas.
Igloo,
Just where does your defintiion of open minded come from??? This post and your "redneck roadkill" post are pretty indicative of a much differant concept of open minded than what I have ever found. Yours is much more in line with saying, I'm open minded as long as you think / act as I want you to. Exactly where does your version of compassion for others not associated with you come into play here? I certainly missed it in the redneck post.
Now about the idea of labels. Wasn't it you that asked earlier why anyone should be labled??? In your "liberal speak" conservative and elitist are definitely labels. I felt very much looked down upon by your last paragraph. Is this only authorized for "liberals"?
Mav
-
Cabby,
You are a putz.
I always think it's funny when Republican robots try to make themselves seem more human by using lyrics from a rock song to make their point. Bozo boy, The
Rolling Stones and every other rock group in the free world are DEMOCRATS. Every time George W. tries to use theme music he gets a nasty letter from the group telling him to stop playing their music because they don't want to be associated with that stiff or the republican party. I think Wagner might be a better choice of music for that campain.
Bush can play "Ride of the Valkeries" while he drives through poor neighborhoods crushing the bones of his royal subjects.
Ahh Camelot...
Later
F4UDOA
-
Geez, guys, can't we just discuss politics without personal insults to each other? Everyone who posted in this thread is a guy I could easily sit down and have a beer with, regardless of their political affiliation (Well, Santa might be an exception, we would have to sit down in a bar of MY choice, not his (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/wink.gif) (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/wink.gif) )
Back to the subject, I didn't catch the debate, from radio and internet reports I've heard today, *they* say George won this round...any input on the debate?
[This message has been edited by Ripsnort (edited 10-12-2000).]
-
Originally posted by F4UDOA:
Bush can play "Ride of the Valkeries" while he drives through poor neighborhoods crushing the bones of his royal subjects.
Ahh Camelot...
Later
F4UDOA
Oh yeah, that's right - all republicans are rich and the democrats are poor struggling people.. I think what is more accurate is the fact that there are more democrats on welfare than republicans as the average republican is self sufficient while the democrat wants/needs the government for their hand outs. They want bigger government i.e. larger hand outs, while penalizing the successful with higher taxes to pay for these programs. They think the federal government knows how to run their life better than they do themselves. I find it humorous to see these democrats in their limos and furs act as if they represent Joe six-pack.
Eagler
-
The snap polls after the debate were all wrong.
They had Bush winning it 49% to 37%.
This is obviously incorrect as they asked only US citizens.
Had they been smart enough to place one phone call to Igloo, they could have gotten his infallible opinion (unsupported by fact as usual)and gotten it right.
(http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/smile.gif)
Here is the erroneous polling data, as yet uncorrected by Igloo:
CNN/USA TODAY/GALLUP POLL
October 11
Who did the best job In the debate?
Bush 49%
Gore 36
Sampling error: +/-5% pts
CNN/USA TODAY/GALLUP POLL
October 11
How did Bush do?
Excellent 29%
Good 51
Only fair 18
Poor 2
Sampling error: +/-5% pts
CNN/USA TODAY/GALLUP POLL
October 11
How did Gore do?
Excellent 18%
Good 54
Only fair 25
Poor 2
Sampling error: +/-5% pts
CNN/USA TODAY/GALLUP POLL
October 11
Effect of debate on your opinion of Bush
More favorable 40%
Less favorable 12
No effect 48
Sampling error: +/-5% pts
CNN/USA TODAY/GALLUP POLL
October 11
Effect of debate on your opinion of Gore
More favorable 24%
Less favorable 16
No effect 61
Sampling error: +/-5% pts
CNN/USA TODAY/GALLUP POLL
October 11
Who agree with you more on issues you care about?
Bush 52%
Gore 43
Sampling error: +/-5% pts
CNN/USA TODAY/GALLUP POLL
October 11
Who was more likeable?
Bush 56%
Gore 31
Sampling error: +/-5% pts
CNN/USA TODAY/GALLUP POLL
October 11
Who expressed himself more clearly?
Gore 47%
Bush 39
Sampling error: +/-5% pts
CNN/USA TODAY/GALLUP POLL
October 11
Who was more believable?
Bush 51%
Gore 38
Sampling error: +/-5% pts
CNN/USA TODAY/GALLUP POLL
October 11
Is Bush intelligent enough to be a good president?
Yes 70%
No 27
Sampling error: +/-5% pts
CNN/USA TODAY/GALLUP POLL
October 11
Who made more unfair attacks on the other candidate?
Gore 40%
Bush 27
Sampling error: +/-5% pts
[This message has been edited by Toad (edited 10-12-2000).]
-
I am so SICK of this liberal "we're out to save the world" bulltoejam!
I, for one, think that welfare should be gone. Finuten. Nein, nada, zilp, zilch GONE!
I know a woman who uses the number of babies she has for INCOME!!! And the saddest part is, I'm payin for their friggin diapers!
Down with welfare, down with social security! If those old farts had brain one in their heads, they would have been putting money away from the start! Look at me- I'm 24 years old and I already have 30,000 saved! And guess what, it ain't goin nowhere! It's in the bank, where it belongs.
Don't get me wrong, help people, just don't do it with my friggin money! If the democrats want to hand out free money, set up a donation center. I don't pay my taxes, I get JACKED from that squeak on the corner.
At least with Bush I know he won't do much, but Gore's big Gov plan only leads to more and more control over the money I work hard to attain.
There. I'm done.
have a nice day (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/smile.gif)
------------------
-Rebel
JG2 "Richtofen"
"You Rebel Scum"
-
F4UDOA:
Like i said. Liberals show their true colors every time. Why do you think i, or anyone else over 16, gives a toejam what the political affiliation of a bunch of burned-out rock musicians may be? Who cares?
Speaking of "stiffs", your Liberal philosophy/Democrat Party is about to become one. Old. Dead. Defunct. Irrelevant. Not in step with the times. You get the idea.
Oh, BTW. "Ride Of The Valkyries" is a great tune. Much better than anything the Stones ever wrote with the possible exception of "Gimmie Shelter", which will be most apropos background music for the coming toejam-storm caused by 8 years of loopy-Liberal incompetence in Government and Education.
Say hi to "Bozo" for me when you get to the "Home For Retired Hippies, Liberals, And Other Assorted Clowns".
Cabby
[This message has been edited by cabby (edited 10-12-2000).]
-
Rebel, I don't agree 100% with what you said in regards to welfare, but I do think that a person should be limited on how much they draw. Then let local groups of volunteers help them after that is exhausted, say, 2 years of welfare, after that, then one should look for charity within their respective communities, ie. Churches, etc.
Remember, welfare was set up to help those thru the hard times of the depression, with a booming economy as we have, seems pointless to have it, although cutting it off all at once would cause more problems than solve...
Another program being manipulated is S.S.
For instance, my low-life sister, as much as I love her (Blood is thick), married a fellow that was on S.S. for a permanent disability.
She knew what she was doing, had two kids with him, then divorced him. Now her kids draw S.S. until they're 18, and shes the one that gets the money (they minors).
-
I'm not a Republican OR a Democrat but I can tell you I've had enough of the Clinton/Gore roadkill to last me a lifetime.
I don't think Bush is the best person for president but he is the better of the two.
I think the 2 vice-president candidates are better suited for the presidency.
------------------
Mighty1
The New Baby Harp Seals
"Come try to club THIS Seal"
-
Roger that, Rip. I don't really mind spending some money to help those who really need it, but the system is WAY too giving nowdays. I'm tired of having over a 1/4 of my paycheck going to those people who take advantage of a system. There should be a system in place that says- you're in this situation, therefore, you only get this much money, and make it a non-livable amount. This amount could help someone down on their luck, and help them break out, but not enough to sustain a lifestyle of any sort.
------------------
-Rebel
JG2 "Richtofen"
"You Rebel Scum"
-
A few quotes I found interesting from last nites debate:
Transcript at: http://www.cnn.com/ELECTION/2000/debates/transcripts/u221011.html (http://www.cnn.com/ELECTION/2000/debates/transcripts/u221011.html)
GORE: I just think, Jim, that this is an absolutely unique period in world history. The world's coming together, as I said, they're looking to us. And we have a fundamental choice to make: Are we going to step up to the plate as a nation, the way we did after World War II, the way that generation of heroes said, "OK, the United States is going to be the leader"? And the world benefited tremendously from the courage that they showed in those post-war years.
BUSH: Yes, I'm not so sure the role of the United States is to go around the world and say, "This is the way it's got to be. We can help." And maybe it's just our difference in government, the way we view government. I mean, I want to empower people, I don't -- you know, I want to help people help themselves, not have government tell people what to do.
I just don't think it's the role of the United States to walk into a country, say, "We do it this way, so should you." Now, I think we can help, and I know we got to encourage democracy and the marketplaces.
So what do you Euro's think of this exchange?
BUSH: I disagree with the vice president on this issue: I don't -- he's for registration of guns. I think the only people that are going to show to register or get a license -- get licensing, like a driver's license, of a gun -- the only people who are going to show up are law-abiding citizens. The criminal's not going to show up and say, "Hey, give me my ID card." It's the law-abiding citizens who will do that. And I -- I just -- I don't think that's going to be an effective tool to make the -- keep our society safe.
GORE: Well, I'm not for registration. I am for licensing by states of new handgun purchases so that...
Huh? Hey, Igloo, does Gore need to wake up and join the 21st Century too?
(http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/biggrin.gif)
[This message has been edited by Toad (edited 10-12-2000).]
-
Gore had a better tie, a nice blue color.
(I'm sorry for the country to say that it probably got him a few votes.)
I abhor Gore's policies, and budget.
Bush came across better on foreign policy, I thought.
Score so far?
I think Bush is ahead.
(http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/smile.gif)
-
I agree with that 100% Rebel. I was there, but never drew on any public funding, just pulled my boot straps up and started clawing out...unfortunatly the welfare system is into 3rd generations of families now, and they laugh about it as well...
-
Originally posted by Ripsnort:
Back to the subject, I didn't catch the debate, from radio and internet reports I've heard today, *they* say George won this round...any input on the debate?
[This message has been edited by Ripsnort (edited 10-12-2000).]
I saw the last hour Rip. I thought Bush blew Gore's pants off him, but I'm just a mean spirited Republican (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/smile.gif)
What was funny, at the end of the debate, I saw two talking head newscasters trying to spin it with their commentaries saying that Gore had won, that Bush had made this mistake and that mistake.. then their own "instant polls" bore out the fact that Bush had won. Bush looked much more relaxed and came across as more "presidental" and down to earth than Gore did.
Eagler
-
You remember that kid at school? Where everyone else wanted to be a designer or a soldier or a drummer or an astronaut, the one that wanted to be a politician?
That's the single biggest problem I have with politics (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/smile.gif)
-
It's election year?????
-
Aw GUYS. (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/biggrin.gif)
I ain't a US liberal. A US liberal is a guy who thinks the government should be more ivolved and bigger. In the European sense of the word liberal, it means the direct opposite. I'm pro tax cuts, I am for a minimalization of the government and so forth.
I'm not sure I like Gore's values. OTOH, even if he is a charming son of a beatch, I am quite sure I dislike some of Bush's values.
30 is only five years away from me. I can tell yo right now that my life style is light years away from anything that could be called "normal family life style" (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/biggrin.gif). And, quite frankly, I cannot see that changing that radically in just five years (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/smile.gif). <looks at mess around him, brushes uncombed long wet hair from face>
Man, I'm a slob. And, I like it (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/biggrin.gif).
To sum up some of the disagreements I have with Ripsnort's view on politics: I am pro same choice (not equal choice) in terms of opportunity, which means free university education. I'm pro choice as well. Also pro state run medical care, although the system we have here needs a reform badly. These are the leftovers of a socialistic indoctrination I went through from growing up in Scandinavia (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/smile.gif) (believe it or not, when I learned at age 12 that you actually had to pay for medicine, I was quite surprised, thinking that the government dealt with health, and medicine was related to health). Dunno where rip stands on the issue of separation of church and state, but I very much support it (and I *wail* live in a country where such a separation is non existant). That means no government money to any religious organisations of faiths; total independency. Which in turn would be a vote against vouchers allowing parents to use government money to put their children into religious schools.
Other than that, me and rip agree on 90%. And, he is bigger than me and can bully me around, but the distance between us enables me to <poke> him in the ribs and run away laughing (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/biggrin.gif).
What I'm saying is that you cannot label me a US democrat, since I really don't know what a US democrat is. I know what a US liberal (in broad terms) is, and I know I ain't one of those. Nor am I a republican, since those people seem to be just as odd as the democrats (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/biggrin.gif).
We have huge taxes here, yet only one party promises "no more increases". So, I am decidedly non socialistic on that issue (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/smile.gif).
Now, rip, I believe Bush has another message for you to forward (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/biggrin.gif).
<G, D, R>
------------------
StSanta
9./JG 54 "Grünherz"
(http://www.angelfire.com/nt/regoch/sig.gif)
-
Hehe, good post Santa, I wouldn't think of bullying anyone around, but I do enjoy excercising ones thoughts, thus controversial posts in off-topic.
Most folks, when discussing Politics or religion, have made up their minds along time ago on which side of the line they fall on. I like to see how their thought process works, since I'm always discovering something new about myself when it comes to 'global thinking'. To shoebox oneself into one thought path leads to narrow-minded thinking. When my kids go thru their 'radical-identity crisis' once they hit their teens, my philosophy will be the same as my fathers, "you can do anything you wish (up to a relatively 'sane' approach) but you must also pay the consquences of those decisions as well". Well, I've paid, I've learned, and I never forget hard-learned lessons. To go thru life mistake free means you never learn anything.
-
Like I said. Like attracts like. The man you elect in Novemeber is the man whom you feel best represents you. Doesn't say much if Bush is elected.
The CNN coverage is saying that Gore won the debate by just a little. Also that people were very surpised that Bush has such a grasp on international matters. LOL, well ya, he better if he wants to be president. The sad thing is, you want to elect someone that suprises people when he gives off the impression of being intelligent enough to handle a situtation..
Like I said, like attracts like..
------------------
Squadron Leader, Igloo.
C/O RCAF 411 Squadron - County of York (http://www.trueorigins.net/411rcaf)
"Problems cannot be solved with the same awareness that created them" - Albert Einstein[/i]
[This message has been edited by Igloo (edited 10-13-2000).]
-
Igloo, without personal attack intended, you do not want my opinion of CNN news, they do not report news, they simply give their political opinion when reporting the news, whether is be a raising or lower of voice at the proper moment, or raised eye-brows, or stories they choose to run, they are politically slanted to the left as much as Fox news is to the right. A broad base of information from various sources is best, then weeding out the politically bias, etc. If you get all your political information from one source (i.e. CNN) then you (not "you" as in igloo, but You as in taxpayer) are one hurting unit.
-
One other thing, read Gore's book, then ask yourself if this is a man you want in the White house.
This is a bad year for presidential runners, however after reading Gores book, I would have Satan himself in the white house before I put Gore in.
-
LOL, so, when CNN says Gore won it is CNN that is wrong? Hrmm... What if FOX agreed with CNN? And NBC?
Isn't it funny how the republicans made a stink about Clinton smoking pot, yet they don't mention Bush doing Cocaine?
------------------
Squadron Leader, Igloo.
C/O RCAF 411 Squadron - County of York (http://www.trueorigins.net/411rcaf)
"Problems cannot be solved with the same awareness that created them" - Albert Einstein[/i]
[This message has been edited by Igloo (edited 10-13-2000).]
-
why do you care so much igloo? dont ya have to worry whos "saving the queen" this week? my god worry about your country first.
------------------
Dnil---Skyhawk until I get Dnil back :)
Maj. 900th Bloody Jaguars
Part time aircraft restorer. www.kingwoodcable.com/jheuer (http://www.kingwoodcable.com/jheuer)
-
Originally posted by Igloo:
LOL, so, when CNN says Gore won it is CNN that is wrong? Hrmm... What if FOX agreed with CNN? And NBC?
Thats a big "What if", and I would agree if several sources said he won, but, one known reporter was heard to say after the debate in regards to Bush "your looking at the next president of the United States"
Originally posted by Igloo:
Isn't it funny how the republicans made a stink about Clinton smoking pot, yet they don't mention Bush doing Cocaine?
Why should they mention it, the Democrats are doing it. (Think role reversal)
-
I think Igloo has been transfixed by all the Gory campaign hype fluttering about.
The following is Gore talking at the Democratic National Convention in 1996:
"When I was a child, my family was attacked by an invisible force that was then considered harmless. My sister Nancy was older than me. There were only the two of us, and I loved her more than life itself. She started smoking when she was 13 years old. The connection between smoking and lung cancer had not yet been established. But years later, the cigarettes had taken their toll. It hurt very badly to watch her savaged by that terrible disease. Her husband Frank and all of us who loved her so much tried to get her to stop smoking. . . . Tomorrow morning, another 13-year-old girl will start smoking. I love her too. Three thousand young people in America will start smoking tomorrow. One thousand of them will die a death not unlike my sister’s. And that is why until I draw my last breath, I will pour my heart and soul into the cause of protecting our children from the dangers of smoking." (Al Gore, The Democratic National Convention, 8/28/96)
Here is Gore talking to Tobacco Growers:
"Throughout most of my life, I raised tobacco. I want you to know that with my own hands, all of my life, I put it in the plant beds and transferred it. I've hoed it. I've dug in it. I've sprayed it, I've chopped it, I've shredded it, spiked it, put it in the barn and stripped it and sold it.
Gore has more WHOPPERS than BurgerKing.
PS: And why wasn't Gore jumping up and down in outrage when President Clinton of the United States of America encouraged a young woman to use a tobacco product in the oval office of the Whitehouse? (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/smile.gif)
.
.
.
.
.
[This message has been edited by Gunthr (edited 10-13-2000).]
-
Chinese colonels at Harvard -- only in Clinton's America
By Don Feder, September 6, 2000
Let's recap: The People's Republic of China is engaged in a vast program of military expansion, has looted our nuclear secrets, sees America as its principal adversary, threatens war with Taiwan if the island doesn't acquiesce to a hostile takeover and promises to launch a nuclear strike against us if we intervene.
So, what are 24 senior colonels of the People's Liberation Army doing at Harvard's John F. Kennedy School as you read these words?
Why they're being lectured by current and former national security officials on how the United States would respond militarily to a crisis over Taiwan -- presumably on the theory that the more the enemy knows about your strategic planning the better for you.
Harvard's current guests are the third group of Chinese colonels run through a program established in 1997 by Joseph Nye, a former Clinton defense official and China soft-liner, now dean of the Kennedy School. It's funded by a $1 million-grant from a Hong Kong businesswoman with extensive mainland ties.
Marshall Goldman, Harvard's Russia expert, observes, "Almost all the Chinese are intelligence people" -- unlike the people running the program.
The Kennedy School lectures are an attempt to circumvent an amendment to last year's defense appropriations bill that limits military exchanges with the PLA. Congress had grown increasingly wary of these misadventures -- like letting Chinese officers witness the training of Navy fighter pilots at Top Gun -- which were starting to resemble a Wal-Mart for intelligence gatherers.
But the administration is so eager to show its friendship for Beijing that it must devise other ways to share sensitive data.
The president just can't do enough for his strategic partners. This spring, he pledged to do "whatever it takes" to get Permanent Normal Trade Relations for China, to assure a continuation of the trade that finances its military build-up. He's repeatedly threatened to veto the Taiwan Security Enhancement Act (designed to bolster the island's defenses), which passed the House in February.
When Taiwan's new president, Chen Shui-bian, was in California in August, in transit to Central America, a bipartisan congressional delegation wanted to meet with the man who led the first democratic change of government in 5,000 years of Chinese history.
Fearing it would antagonize the PRC, the State Department pressured Chen into declining the meeting. But, it rolled out the red carpet for Lt. Gen. Xiong Guangkai, the PLA's deputy chief of staff, when he visited Washington in January.
During the 1996 Taiwan crisis, when China was test-firing missiles in the island's direction, Xiong warned that Beijing had ICBMs which could take out Los Angeles. That's how to get the royal treatment from this administration -- threaten to turn America's second largest city into radioactive rubble.
Four Gore years of this policy and the People's Liberation Army could be marching down the main street of Carthage, Tenn.
For the vice president, China is an "extremely important partner." He's against "isolating and demonizing" China (dealing with it realistically) and wants to "build a bridge" -- to Tiananmen Square?
In a 1997 trip to the mainland, he repeated the Clinton mantra on humanizing totalitarian thugs, "We seek real progress on human rights, not confrontation." This high-sounding rhetoric really means that no matter what bloody atrocities Beijing commits, America will never criticize it directly but hope that our kindness will somehow infuse the regime with a spirit of benevolence.
China is evolving in a somewhat different direction. On March 6, Beijing announced that the nation's military budget will increase by 12.7 percent this year, the eighth straight year of double-digit growth.
The same day, the Liberation Army Daily warned that American intervention in a conflict with Taiwan would result in "serious damage to U.S. interests" and casually noted its "capacity of launching a long-distance strike."
Along with the Kennedy School sessions on our strategic planning, perhaps the administration would like to help Beijing with procurement and recruitment. We've already sold it supercomputers to help improve the accuracy of its ballistic missiles.
Just when you thought Clinton's China policy couldn't get more surreal, you find we've fallen down another rabbit hole, arriving at a whole new level of Wonderland.
©2000 Creators Syndicate, Inc.
-
Thanks, Funked.....I think. (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/wink.gif)
Maybe the UN will defend Taiwan? (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/biggrin.gif)
-
We need to get these people out of office... PRONTO!
-
This administration should be charged with treason. What they have done within last eight years is way to sinister to be just incompetence and/or stupidity.
Unfortunately that will never happen.
-
This is something I don't quite understand. Perhaps someone can shed some light on the matter.
The United Nations, along with Britan and the US, has had a reputation of helping peaceful countries fight against their aggressors. They have fought against counties who feel that they have the right to occupy another soverign nation's land and claim it as their own. The fought against North Vietnam, who was attempting to claim it's southern counterpart as it's own. They fought against North Korea who was trying the same. Yet, they sit by and literally watch China invade and occupy the most peaceful of all nations on this planet, Tibet. Why?
Now China feels that they have the right to designate who the next Dalai Lama will be.
"One particular concern voiced by the Dalai Lama was the role of the boy picked by the Chinese leadership as the Panchen Lama -- the second most important figure in Tibetan Buddhism who is charged with selecting the next reincarnation of the Dalai Lama.
The Dalai Lama recognised another boy as the reincarnation of the Panchen Lama in 1995, but his choice was spirited away by the Chinese authorities and has been kept in a secret location ever since.
"I made it clear that if I passed away, the (Dalai Lama's) reincarnation would logically come from outside Tibet, in a free country," the Dalai Lama said.
"But China will choose a boy as the next Dalai Lama, though in reality he is not."
Why won't the US step up to the plate and totally defend what they believe in? Because China would beat them.
------------------
Squadron Leader, Igloo.
C/O RCAF 411 Squadron - County of York (http://www.trueorigins.net/411rcaf)
"Problems cannot be solved with the same awareness that created them" - Albert Einstein[/i]
-
Why won't the US step up to the plate and totally defend what they believe in? Because China would beat them.
*Dumb stuff deleted.*
We're going to go to war and get our people killed because some goofy pagans don't have the right llama? Sorry, not on my dime.
How on earth are we supposed to get troops into Tibet? There is no way to fight that battle without starting a total war with China.
We might win such a war, but not without turning China into a highly radioactive glass parking lot. Tibet would be free, but would there be any Tibetans left?
[This message has been edited by funked (edited 10-14-2000).]
[This message has been edited by funked (edited 10-15-2000).]
-
Buddhists are not pagans. Far from it.
I seriously do not know if the US could beat China, that's why I said what I did. If they won't help Tibet, why do they help other countries in similar situations? I'm not saying to go in guns blazing, but at least confront the Chinese on this serious issue. What would the US do if China invaded Italy and said they have the right to apoint the next Pope?
------------------
-
Look up the definition of pagan again sonny. (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/smile.gif)
I see what you are saying now. I don't think it's feasible to confront China militarily in this area, because of the location of Tibet. There is no way to get forces into that area without first invading China, which would probably require the committment of all NATO forces plus Russia's forces and divine intervention wouldn't hurt either.
I do agree that the US should play hardball with China on this issue as well as human rights issues. But I am not willing to put the lives of American soldiers in jeopardy for this.
-
PS Igloo we need RCAF fighter pilots for our scenario!!! http://www.mikeangel.com/afrikacorps/ (http://www.mikeangel.com/afrikacorps/)
-
A Pagan is someone who believes in several gods. Tibetean Buddhists believe that everything that exists is a part of the same Divine Energy - a.k.a God.
------------------
Squadron Leader, Igloo.
C/O RCAF 411 Squadron - County of York (http://www.trueorigins.net/411rcaf)
"Problems cannot be solved with the same awareness that created them" - Albert Einstein[/i]
-
pa·gan
n.
1. One who is not a Christian, Muslim, or Jew; a heathen.
2. One who has no religion.
3. A non-Christian.
4. A hedonist.
adj.
1. Not Christian, Muslim, or Jewish.
2. Professing no religion; heathen.
At least we agree about China! (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/smile.gif)
[This message has been edited by funked (edited 10-15-2000).]
-
Funk,
Save your electronic ink. I believe even Einstein would agree that you need a least a tiny bit of awarness to work with for a start.
(http://smilecwm.tripod.com/net4/jump.gif)
-
This administration loves China because it emulates the desired government they would like to establish here in the US. Give this mind set, two to four generations and it will happen (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/frown.gif)
We give them our decomissioned naval stations here in the states, they currently produce the footwear our military is issued, not to mention 9 out of 10 things you pick up and turn over - reads " Made in China"!
Eagler
-
I really don't think the fact that just because Tibeteans are Buddhists (The only religion never to have went to war over their religion) we shouldn't step in. There is not a more peaceful man on this earth than the Dalai Lama. Nor is there a more peaceful nation than Tibet.
Eagler, that's a little paranoid.
------------------
Squadron Leader, Igloo.
C/O RCAF 411 Squadron - County of York (http://www.trueorigins.net/411rcaf)
"Problems cannot be solved with the same awareness that created them" - Albert Einstein[/i]
-
Originally posted by Igloo:
I really don't think the fact that just because Tibeteans are Buddhists (The only religion never to have went to war over their religion) we shouldn't step in. There is not a more peaceful man on this earth than the Dalai Lama. Nor is there a more peaceful nation than Tibet.
The average American doesn't understand Eastern religions well enough to support a military action you describe above but put the Pope in place of the Dalai Lama ...
Eagler, that's a little paranoid.
[/b]
I hope so, time will tell... I haven't seen an administration so in bed with the Red Chinese as this one. I am truly amazed they get away with it.
Eagler
[This message has been edited by Eagler (edited 10-16-2000).]
-
Since one party running for the office of the Presidency has accepted money from the Chinese shouldn't that raise some questions? What do the Chinese hope to gain? Why are the Chinese interested that Gore wins? What would e the obligation in return for the campaign funds?
Would the Chinese accept money from the US to fund an oposition leader in China? I don't think so.
Mav