Reading Politics

Well..Well..Well… I believe we have some of the same old politics going on in the Presidential race. Isn't it a shame that our President has to stoop to the level of ignorance with these anti Kerry and Athens Olympic ads? To be quite honest, I will probably not vote. I dislike Bush, and I really do not care for Kerry, although I do like Edwards. In the race to the White House, these ads really show who the responsible adult is, and it’s not Bush. I will give Kerry credit, thus far, he has held his composure. He has not stooped to Bush's level.
Another point, Bush never ceases to amaze me on how he is such a dumb American. With everything he does he keeps adding to his ignorance level. Seriously, he has got to be one of the biggest idiots to ever be President! He has severed may ties with other countries, and made Americans look like we are just like his cowardly big headed self.
This also frustrates me about American politics. Look, we have all these individuals; Bush, Dole, and more that want to attack Kerry on his war record. Well, at least Kerry went to Vietnam, cannot say the same for you Bush. Many of our Presidents never went to war. Yet they make all these war decisions. I salute Dole as a war veteran, but the only reason he is making such a fuss is the fact that he is not in the limelight and he yearns to be so badly. He also wants people to know "He was injured more." How childish does that sound? Shut up Dole. Why don't you and your dumb ass friend Bush focus on the real issues in the United States and the rest of the world. Instead the both of you are trying to build truth out of lies with your negative Kerry ads. Grow up. There is more to deal with than some overgrown babies crying about a Purple Heart or two.
This is why I do not vote.
With all politics, this is what we as Americans get. Whether running for Governor, Senate, or President, all we hear is blahhh, blahhh, blahhh, and the same 'ol negative ads. Why doesn't anyone talk about the real problems and the potential solutions? These Politians are all the same: Whiny rich kids. So we as average everyday Americans always have the Bush's of the world as our representatives. My opinion; life was definitely better when Clinton was in office.

As history shows us, it has always been Aces over Kings

This post was edited by havananights on Aug 26, 2004.

Well...your decision to not vote will put you in the legions of same minded Americans who have put our government in the hands of the few.

quis custodiet ipsos custodes?

Wow, I must have offended some pro-Bush's/pro-Dole's here. What, someone cannot handle the truth? This is crazy, to receive a 51%. Actually that is kind of bullshit if you ask me. Why the 51%? What I wrote is true and currently happening as I speak. For the most part I came from a non bias stance. If you consider my post as slamming Bush; turn on the T.V., read the newspaper, or look it up online. He is not playing fair. When someone makes up nonsense to gain more political power that is low and unjust. Yet it always happens. What I stated in my post is all true. I mentioned in the beginning I was not sticking up for either party, hence being a no show at voting time. Remember what happened in Florida, ok.
Did the two individuals that tanked me read the article in its entirety, or maybe they formed a judgment on reading a few lines. Hell, maybe they are not up on the current events, and they have no idea what is going on in the political race. Or get this; I probably offended someone when I stated that life was somewhat easier when Clinton was in office. In my opinion that is true. That is my opinion. Wait, hold on oh yeah, someone’s opinion differed from mine and as a result I received a 51%. I thought the posts were "graded" as writing pieces and not of opinions. Well then this particular post will be an interesting “grade”.
Back to my opinion, Clinton had the task of cleaning up all the mess that Bush Senior created. For eight years business boomed, our debt was nil, jobs were strong, we built stronger multiple country relations, etc, etc. Now Jr. is in office, and if Kerry wins he will have quite a mess to clean up. Do not judge Clinton as a bad president on the grounds of what happened with his affairs. What he did was wrong, no doubt. Still that does not make him a poor president. He just made poor decisions with his personal life. Look at all the other presidents that did the same, and yes that includes even dear 'ol Kennedy. The difference, well the media is stronger now then it was when Kennedy held office.
At Netalive, if there are individuals that do not enjoy my blunt honest approach to writing, then do me a favor and don’t read my posts. Now I wash my hands of this.

As history shows us, it has always been Aces over Kings

This post was edited by havananights on Aug 26, 2004.

Hmm well i don't have strong opinions on this since i dont live in America, but all i would say is that people shouldnt be rating your post on whether or not they agreed with it anyway.

I remember what happened in Florida. Do you?

Florida went to the Republicans because a large number of people didn't even register to vote because nobody in great parts of the state, especially the panhandle, barely knew what was going on. People were turned away at the polls for not having their voter registration information (which, in the state of Florida, you do not need, so long as you have other forms of identification like SSN, driver's license, etc.), or as convicts, even if they had been paroled and allowed to vote, sometimes even being held back for crimes that were logged as happening between 2003-2008. Yeah, they knew when people would commit crimes later on, so they held 'em back. People didn't vote because they couldn't get to the polls, especially in the panhandle, and there weren't enough people who cared to try to set up carpools or anything of the like to get to the polls. People didn't vote because apathy, in so many forms, spread throughout the state, and much of the country. There were so many people saying "My vote doesn't count, so why should I try to (x)" that a minority of extreme right-wing (by American standards) politicians took power, against the will of hte majority of Americans. Don't say your vote doesn't count. If you think your vote is worthless, then do something about it. Try to be more involved, and GET OTHER PEOPLE INVOLVED. If you bring people to politics, your vote and theirs can make a difference, because every person you convince to be more interested in an election can spread it to more folks, so on and so forth. I can't vote in this coming election, and I'm sick and motherfucking tired of hearing people say "my vote doesn't count, I probably won't bother" when my sister and I, and countless numbers of people across the country have been going around, registering people to vote trying to plant the seeds of political interest to fight the apathetic "my vote doesn't count" syndrome. You don't like how the system is working out for you? DO SOMETHING.

Thbbbbt

Yes I know exactly what happened in Florida. I have many family members and friends that live in the Sunshine State. Yes there were voters that gave up and didn’t vote, and no, that was not the entire story. Let’s get one thing straight. I never said my vote does not matter. I don't know if you are venting about other individuals or if you are putting me in the classification of those people that say "my vote doesn't matter, why bother." Whatever your reasons, lets make sure we get this point clear. In both of my posts, I never said that particular phrase. I remember saying I really do not feel like voting because I dislike Bush, and I really do not care for Kerry, although I do like Edwards. That is what I remember saying. I am not talking about my vote making an impact. In my posts, I am talking about how multiple individuals are not playing fairly.
You are right about saying; "Do something." I plan on doing something. Right now I feel through all my political posts I might educate certain individuals. I hunger to educate the individuals that do not entirely know what is going on in the political world. Even though I stated; I probably will not vote, that doesn't mean I haven’t a clue about what is going on in our political environment.
In the future I plan on running for some type of office. The only way to make a change is to create one. The only way to create a change is in your words “Doing something.” Kudos to you for stirring up the voting public. One thing you might want to take into consideration when you get sick and motherfucking tired is some people (voters) are also sick and motherfucking tired. They are sick and motherfucking tired that every four years it is the same type of Politicians, and their voices are never heard. They tend to start saying "My vote doesn't matter, why bother." You might want to hold more compassion for those individuals that have lost sight on the bigger picture.

As history shows us, it has always been Aces over Kings

Are the U.S. election campaigns slandering? Totally. Are they focusing on Vietnam too much? Yes, to the point of redundant stupidity. But why?

Because they don't think the American people are willing to vote one way or another for any reason other than a 30 year old war record and the fear of electing someone who will change their life.

Are they wrong? It's hard to tell.

I think the problem is that so many people see themselves as living in their country, not as being a part of that country. And it's true that the relationship between the government and the populace has become horribly screwed up (to the point that saying "you would make a great politician" has become an insult). But when it comes down to a choice between making it worse and keeping it the same, people will invariably choose the status quo. And now that the party lines have drawn closer and become blurred, people who percieve that it will stay the same no matter what they do will, and happily or not, decide that their vote makes no difference in their lives.

But to me it seems a tiny bit hypocritical to expect so much from, and to brutally criticise your system and them to fail to recognise your contribution to it. If everyone wants change, then they should change themselves- then the politicians would give us the options we want, because we are the politicians, just like we are the teachers, the construction worker, and everything and everyone else.

As to your original post, I don't think it was rated down by Bush-lovers... they don't last long around here. Personally I thought the only thing wrong with it was the title, which was gramatically bewildering and had nothing to do with the post itself.

But I can't find no place or nothin', where thrills are cheap, and love is divine

This post was edited by Bunk on Aug 27, 2004.

Everyone has exercised their opinions, and marked their stance on the right to vote. Now I am not taking away anything from those individuals that are still too young to vote. Those of you that are under eighteen, the real world has not hit you yet. You are all wise way beyond your years, and I tip my hat to every single one of you. However, you lack one important ingredient, and that is independency. I am sure that the majority of you joggle part-time jobs, while bettering yourselves in the last years of high school. Still, the real world has not hit you yet. You do not know exactly what it is like to be independent. To have your own life, meaning a career, house, car, bills, and bills. I applaud each of you in your extreme amount of intelligence. Still, your judgment is fresh and one sided. The independence is not there in the sense of relying on ones parents for shelter, food, and or other forms of stability.
Now I agree with what Bunk stated.

But to me it seems a tiny bit hypocritical to expect so much from, and to brutally criticize your system and them to fail to recognize your contribution to it. If everyone wants change, then they should change themselves-

He is right, to an extent. As Americans, we as in the working force and most underrated of them all, contribute much to the United States. The blue collar worker does demand so much from our system. We should, and here are a few reasons why. Number one. Our lives. When conflicts flare up, the blue collar communities are the ones called upon to fight. Number two. As working class Americans we work to live. Tax relief, no the working class really doesn't see too much of that. In actuality we usually pay more, unless we have a family. For those single or non-child families we see about 33% of our weekly incomes going to taxes. Then we get the privilege in witnessing the government waste our precious tax dollars. Number three ties into number one. The working class is the majority of America. The rich are the minority. Yet the rich run our country, with no prospective of a blue collar workers life.

then the politicians would give us the options we want, because we are the politicians, just like we are the teachers, the construction worker, and everything and everyone else.

I agree and disagree with this statement. In the real world this does not happen. The majority of Politicians have their own agenda. The teachers, construction workers, and the other entire blue collar workers keep this beautiful country running. Yet the white collars run this country. See we have some fuzzy judgments. If you haven't read my Rush Limbaugh post, do so. The first areas that get financial cuts every time are the schools or any form of educational development. Second is our law enforcement. However, politicians get automatic pay raises every year, and continue to get paid after office.

If everyone wants change, then they should change themselves-

True statement, but there is more to a better political America than just that. Go back to any great turning point in America or in the world, and you will see a great person leading many. All the Gandhi's, Martin Luther King's, Roosevelt's, Lincoln's, Shastri's, Nehru's, just to name a few were all great leaders. One reason they were all great; they held the courage to stand up to all the old ways, old laws, corrupted politicians, etc. They believed in a better India, a better America, a better Pakistan, a better world. They displayed courage and an ability to lead/motivate those that others cared less about. They knew more than likely they themselves would not see a change, but if they motivated the people whom followed, a change would come. Every one of those great leaders I mentioned, their lives were cut short. More than likely, most great leaders in history were killed before they witnessed the results of their actions. I see in our current world many individuals are too intimidated to stand up.

As history shows us, it has always been Aces over Kings

This post was edited by havananights on Aug 27, 2004.

This post is excellent. A true view of the facts of being an American. So, in answer to your first post. The campaign going on now has sunk into basically a facade to keep both candidates expressing a stance on real issues, in my humble opinion.

My jaw gapes in admiration at both sides ability to "putting a spin" on anything, lol, absolutely anything!!!!

quis custodiet ipsos custodes?

Well said, Magnifico, my post was NOT about whoever you might want to vote for. Too many years of people NOT voting have made the general population of each state less important to their senators and representatives (despite their immediate denials) than lobbyists, and high dollar concerns. In a nutshell, the government is swinging more and more to short sighted goals rather than toward a mix of long term affects and short term.

In elections, the general vote has always been secondary to the electoral vote...but the electoral used to listen more to the public vote and that is not happening.

Vote...even if you write in a candidate!!! Every vote states there is someone out there, watching Big Brother if we want to get into paranoia. Wahhhhaaaahaaa.

quis custodiet ipsos custodes?

This post was edited by gentledeepwaters on Aug 26, 2004.

Assuming political affiliation based on negative ratings seems childish, at best. Had you presented a similar argument with more sufficient support and less bias, you might have seen better results. You claim to have written truth, yet the content of your post hardly comes across as objective.

You fail to recognize that Bush too has come under attack in ads funded by third parties.
(please refer to the following for evidence: http://www.abc.net.au/news/newsitems/200407/s1146826.htm
http://www.cnn.com/2004/ALLPOLITICS/04/01/ad.complaint/)
Politics bring out mankind's ugly side. Sadly, mudflinging has long been a component of campaigns. All parties are guilty, and to deny this reveals nothing but willful ignorance.

Both Bush and Kerry have recently faced opposition over the credibility of their veteran accomplishments. Personally, I do not consider military service to be an ideal indicator of good leadership potential, thus I fail to recognize its impending relevance during election time. But I digress. Until and unless you can validly refute the military history of either candidate, I would not recommend condemning it.

I am not terribly disappointed in your decision not to vote; I lack confidence in your grasp of politics and your ability to reason beyond party lines. However, relinquishing your vote, in my eyes, removes the privilege of complaint as well. If you do not have enough faith in your beliefs to commit to them, your opinions lose weight drastically.

In any case, it might behoove you to evaluate your personal definition of "truth", and be prepared for controversy if you post fittingly.

Oh is it really a bias stand point? Really? What part? The part where the quality of politicians are not up on par? Or where our tax dollars seem to go to disappear Ville? Or the fact that that white collars run this country while blue collar make less or get laid off? Or we need another leader that isn't afraid of criticism or going against the grain? What point am I really being bias about? Is it bias or honesty?

You fail to recognize that Bush too has come under attack in ads funded by third parties

If you would have read the posts in their entirety, then you'd see I explained; I was tired of both parties slamming one another. We have more important issues to deal with, than what happened in Vietnam. So where do I enter in a bias stand point Shark? You just skimmed over everyone's posts didn't you? In what way do I lack an intelligent grasp in today's politics Shark? Why don't you add some substance to your claims before you start swinging away.

In any case, it might behoove you to evaluate your personal definition of "truth", and be prepared for controversy if you post fittingly.

Okay, I did. I thought I possessed a grasp on the definition of truth. I took your advice and looked it up in the Webster's New World Dictionary. The definition of truth is; 1. Being true, honest, etc. 2. That which is true.
So where am I not being honest, or truthful about our current situation?
Then I glanced up at the last part of your statement and it all made sense.

be prepared for controversy if you post fittingly.

Amen.

As history shows us, it has always been Aces over Kings

This post was edited by havananights on Aug 30, 2004.

Oh is it really a bias stand point? Really? What part?

I think that you do show a slight bias against President Bush when you said the following:

Another point, Bush never ceases to amaze me on how he is such a dumb American. With everything he does he keeps adding to his ignorance level. Seriously, he has got to be one of the biggest idiots to ever be President! He has severed may ties with other countries, and made Americans look like we are just like his cowardly big headed self.

Thbbbbt

I think that you do show a slight bias against President Bush when you said the following:

Yeah, but he's right. :-P

"*sigh* Some men are really hard to manipulate!" - Orchid

Thank you Null.

As history shows us, it has always been Aces over Kings

This post was edited by havananights on Aug 30, 2004.

Hahhh, your right Magnifico. I will admit I did show some bias with that particular statement. Nice catch my dear Watson.

As history shows us, it has always been Aces over Kings

This post was edited by havananights on Aug 30, 2004.

Oh is it really a bias stand point? Really? What part? The part where the quality of politicians are not up on par? Or where our tax dollars seem to go to disappear Ville? Or the fact that that white collars run this country while blue collar make less or get laid off? Or we need another leader that isn't afraid of criticism or going against the grain? What point am I really being bias about? Is it bias or honesty?

Since you seem to enjoy tossing about definitions, let us explore our dictionaries once more.

www.dictionary.com)
bi·as

"A preference or an inclination, especially one that inhibits impartial judgment. "

(www.brainydictionary.com/words/bi/bias136516.html)

(n.) A leaning of the mind; propensity or prepossession toward an object or view, not leaving the mind indifferent; bent; inclination.

If one will observe the following quotes (Magnifico's previous statements notwithstanding):

"How childish does that sound? Shut up Dole. Why don't you and your dumb ass friend Bush focus on the real issues in the United States and the rest of the world."

"Grow up. There is more to deal with than some overgrown babies crying about a Purple Heart or two."

"These Politians are all the same: Whiny rich kids."

"My opinion; life was definitely better when Clinton was in office. " (Pay careful attention to this one; if you cannot see your own bias anywhere else, it is clearly spelled out here. You certainly seem to have a predisposition against Bush.)

In you next post, you stated:

"Wow, I must have offended some pro-Bush's/pro-Dole's here."

An outside observer might easily believe that supporters of those candidates had reason to be "offended", based on this statement alone, ironic in its origins.

If you would have read the posts in their entirety, then you'd see I explained; I was tired of both parties slamming one another. We have more important issues to deal with, than what happened in Vietnam. So where do I enter in a bias stand point Shark? You just skimmed over everyone's posts didn't you? In what way do I lack an intelligent grasp in today's politics Shark? Why don't you add some substance to your claims before you start swinging away.

I have reviewed all three pages of posts in this thread numerous times, and have yet to find a passage in which you specify such intentions; perhaps I simply overlooked it. I would be very grateful if you could illuminate me.
I did, however, notice many references to the anti-Kerry ads, as such:

"In the race to the White House, these ads really show who the responsible adult is, and it’s not Bush. I will give Kerry credit, thus far, he has held his composure. He has not stooped to Bush's level. "

"Instead the both of you are trying to build truth out of lies with your negative Kerry ads. Grow up. There is more to deal with than some overgrown babies crying about a Purple Heart or two."

"Bush... is not playing fair."

It wasn't until later that you began altering your stance to include both parties.

As to my claims to your lack of political understanding, I simply find it difficult to maintain respect for people whose viewpoints come across as hastily thrown together, as your first few posts did. You made exaggerated allegations and failed to include citations or any sort of evidence to support them. The only instance in which you attempted to bring in other sources was when you referred to a vague article in the Wall Street Journal.

Okay, I did. I thought I possessed a grasp on the definition of truth. I took your advice and looked it up in the Webster's New World Dictionary. The definition of truth is; 1. Being true, honest, etc. 2. That which is true.

I shall include definitions I have found as well.

[b](www.brainydictionary.com)

Truth
(n.) The quality or being true; as: -- (a) Conformity to fact or reality; exact accordance with that which is, or has been; or shall be.
(n.) The practice of speaking what is true; freedom from falsehood; veracity.
(n.) That which is true or certain concerning any matter or subject, or generally on all subjects; real state of things; fact; verity; reality.
(n.) A true thing; a verified fact; a true statement or proposition; an established principle, fixed law, or the like; as, the great truths of morals.

(www.dictionary.com)

"A statement proven to be or accepted as true.
Reality; actuality. "[/b]

So where am I not being honest, or truthful about our current situation?

What evidence have you that your self-stated "opinion" is the end all, be all truth? The nature of politics is such that few people will EVER know the entire truth of a situation, if such a phenomenon is even possible. Politics is wrought with the influence of opinion, especially in a democracy, and varying viewpoints thrive in such environments. Knowledge of the actions and motivations of politicians frequently fails to come into the public eye for years after the occurence.
Truth and honesty do not always coincide. One can be honestly misinformed, for instance.

This post was edited by Madrigal_Shark on Sep 01, 2004.

O-pin'ion -n. what one thinks true. 2. Belief. 3. Estimation.
That is what I am going by. Obviously there will always be critics.

"How childish does that sound? Shut up Dole. Why don't you and your dumb ass friend Bush focus on the real issues in the United States and the rest of the world."
"Grow up. There is more to deal with than some overgrown babies crying about a Purple Heart or two."

"Instead the both of you are trying to build truth out of lies with your negative Kerry ads.

"These Politicians are all the same: Whiny rich kids."
"My opinion; life was definitely better when Clinton was in office. "

[/cite]

That is my opinion. If you want to label that as a bias opinion, fine then do so. I label as a blunt approach. What parts of those statements are not based on truth? They all are. You are right though, to a Bush or Dole lover, those statements are completely offensive and one sided. Okay whatever. Still there is more to the political race than some whiney rich kids fighting over a Purple Heart or two. There are people losing jobs and losing sight.

As to my claims to your lack of political understanding, I simply find it difficult to maintain respect for people whose viewpoints come across as hastily thrown together, as your first few posts did.

You had to throw the word few in there didn't you? Honestly the only hastily and emotionally driven posts are the original Well..And You Asked For It. The reason why I put And You Asked For It in that category is the fact I crossed the lines with that particular post. Oh well, I made amends. One last thing, maybe you are also coming from a bias stand point. You seem somewhat perturbed about some of my Bush statements.

As history shows us, it has always been Aces over Kings

This post was edited by havananights on Sep 01, 2004.

O-pin'ion -n. what one thinks true. 2. Belief. 3. Estimation.
That is what I am going by. Obviously there will always be critics.

www.dictionary.com provides the following definition (italics are my own):

A belief or conclusion held with confidence but not substantiated by positive knowledge or proof: “The world is not run by thought, nor by imagination, but by opinion” (Elizabeth Drew).

I can only emphasize that one person's truth is not always shared by his peers. Support and explore and hold your opinion; more power to you. That doesn't make it right, or true, or acceptable in anyone else's eyes.

However, I completely agree with your general concept. The point of an election should not be someone's military history; in fact, I for one would like to see much less weight given to military affairs in general, when the common American has enough trouble resolving issues of poor education, overtime pay cuts, foreigners taking domestic jobs, missing tax refunds, overcrowding in prisons, and countless other issues.
It often seems to me that many politicians prefer to trash each other and spew propaganda about less relevant subjects in order to avoid facing his or her constituency with controversial ideas.

You had to throw the word few in there didn't you? Honestly the only hastily and emotionally driven posts are the original Well..And You Asked For It. The reason why I put And You Asked For It in that category is the fact I crossed the lines with that particular post. Oh well, I made amends. One last thing, maybe you are also coming from a bias stand point. You seem somewhat perturbed about some of my Bush statements.

To say all would have been a fallacy.

In any case, perhaps my stand point is biased. But it may be closer to yours than you think. I have no issues with you bashing Bush... just don't call it the truth if you can't back it up. Perspective is a beautiful thing.

I read through most of the posts here and I decited to throw my two cents in.
It's your choice whether you vote or not. It's a right, not a duty, so if you choose to take that right and throw it out the window, and let other people decide for you, that's your right too.
Alot of people in this country are sick of the crap and bulshit going on in politics, me being one of them. But to not vote, and not have my voice heard somehow, and abdicate my choice, well that's something I don't want to do.
I protested the war. Marched in front of the fedral court house here with others who felt that the war was about oil and finishing "daddy's business". As an american citizen I had that right, now since they put into law the pariot act, I found out that if I protest again I could go to jail.
I've come to believe that it's not just every four years that we need to pay attention and complain at all the things that the goverment does, but be informed all the time. Get the numbers and addresses of all the people who have political power in your state and your district, watch c-span if you can, it shows what goes on in thoes sessions in congress and the senate, and if something seems crazy, make a call, voice your thoughts, tell them you think this is bad for you, because you are part of "we the people", and let them know beyond any shadow of a doubt that you are watching them and if they arn't doing what's best for this country, you'll take this vote else where. I think that could be classified as the people excercising their right to free speach and the power to change things.
Because after all, it has to start somewhere.
But unfortunately, in this year of elections, like many other years of elections, the politicans blast the information highways with so much mud-slinging that it makes us all sick and I think they do it partly because maybe they hope that thoes of us who could make a difference by making our voice heard won't, simply because we're so sick of it all. And we do just that everytime we don't vote. We shift things the way they want, and we end up with more mess.
So I'm gonna vote, how I'm not completely sure, not the same way I did last time, but I will vote. I've lost so many rights over the last few years because the goverment has passed laws that I didn't know were being passed and now many of the freedoms that this country once knew are gone, completely contrary to the constution. So I would urge you to vote, if for nothing else than to keep that right.

It only looks that way because your standing on your head.

This is why I do not vote.

Then quit your bitching. If you do not vote, you had no say nor did you even participate in what had and has been going on, made no attempts to stop what you hate, and have no right to even begin to complain.

If you don't like Bush, vote for Kerry or Nader. It doesn't matter, just vote. Cast your opinion into the pool. As we saw with the 2000 elections, just a handful of votes can make a big difference, and you not casting yours immediately should strip away your right to complain. You made no attempt to keep Bush out of office, or should you have not been eligible around 2000, you apperantly aren't going to make any attempt to keep Bush out of office.

Casting your opinion is often synonomous with voting. Right now, what have you done? Cast your opinion, obviously supporting Kerry (who out of the three is the biggest "whiney rich kid", but I'm not talking about who you are voting for). If you cast your opinion every where else but not in the voting booth, isn't that hypocritical?

It's sad. You are given a freedom most others in the world aren't. Lets think about all those chinese people and how much they would love to cast their vote on which "whiney rich kid" gets to rule them rather than be trounced upon by the red army T-72 tanks.

It's because of people like you saying "well, I'm going to complain about an office I made no attempt to stop and not vote" that America has the lowest voter turn out compared to any other country. Our percentages are horrible and embarassing, and these coming from the damn country that invented modern fucking day democracy. Do us a favor, if you are going to bash and complain about politics and politicians, go do something about it and vote. If you aren't, dig yourself a hole and fall in it.

The only thing that truly depresses me about this election is I won't turn 18 in time to cast my vote, but you'll be damn sure when congressional elections come 'round, you can find me at the nearest voting booth.

Pistol Grip Pump In My Lap At All Times

Look young one. Don't ever tell me to quit bitching about anything. Go suck on your thumb, and learn to respect your elders before you speak non-sense.
Eljefe, we are going to learn a new word today, and the word is OPINION. Oh what a great word in America! However, this is what I witnessed in one or two of the reponses from my original post.
When someone does not respect or appreciate ones differences in OPINIONS, instead of debating, they tend to try and tear down that individuals right for feeling how he/she feels on certain issues.
What I wrote about in my original post; Well..Well..Well was my OPINION. Now I am catching all kinds of B.S. for expressing my own OPINION. (Note the 57%) So go ahead and down rate my post because in one or two lines I stated I probably will not vote. Is November already here?! Hum, no so save it Eljefe. I am weighing my options right now. I am watching my potential candidate. Until then you dig your hole, and please trip over your tongue when falling into it.

obviously supporting Kerry (who out of the three is the biggest "whiney rich kid",

Enough said. You obviously don't know much about what is currently going on.

This is why I do not vote.

That is the reason I am receiving such a ridiculous score. Not for the substance of issues I brought to light, no I am getting flak for being honest enough to express my own OPINION. For telling the NAO community "This is why I do not vote." Oh I voted before, in previous elections. Maybe I should have put will not, instead of do not vote. Then juveniles like you would fully understand before speaking gibberish.
So, Eljefe, I read some of your past sniffling posts. You tend to talk about things you really do not know much about. Still I am mature enough not to blast your ratings because I do not agree with what you said. You are a habitual line stepper. I am going to refrain from telling you to quit bitching. Oh wait, damn too late. I guess I stepped over the lines. Oh well.
Do not dictate to me what I NEED TO DO. Son, you still live at home. Your responsibilities are nil. Learn to show some respect when grown folks are talking, and do not assume anything until you know everything.
Last, you know nothing about my political past and whom I voted for in the 2000 elections. You were what 11 or 12 then. Please. Spend some time as an independent adult before you come knocking on my door telling me what I can or cannot bitch about.
Oh, and yeah you may be right, yes it is probably hypocritical expressing my views and then not casting my vote in November. However, it is also hypocritical, being 17 and never voting before, yet talking like you know something about life.

As history shows us, it has always been Aces over Kings

This post was edited by havananights on Aug 30, 2004.

Enough said. You obviously don't know much about what is currently going on.

Let's take a look at the facts here. Kerry is a businessman, Kerry is married into the Heinz family. Kerry's accecible income greatly exceeds that of Bush, therefore making him the whiney rich kid. Now, let's take another at what I said, being "biggest". Now lets let google inform us about some new words today:

Biggest: greatest in size of those under consideration

Only: and nothing more

So, how exactly does that statement prove I know nothing of the situation?

Look young one. Don't ever tell me to quit bitching about anything. Go suck on your thumb, and learn to respect your elders before you speak non-sense.

I respect those who earn my respect. Sure 'elders' are given more leeway that peers, but you must earn it first.

Now, on to your opinions. You make a big mistake in your argument. Esentially, in a debate, points are not opinions, but how one ties points together however, are. Can you predict the future? No. Can I predict the future? Probably worse than you. But essentially, in a debate, it is the war between opinions, since (given that one has equally represented the points) points really cannot be disputed to any worthwhile degree. What is disputed is how the points relate to each other. All I did was take apart your points and give you my opinion.

Still I am mature enough not to blast your ratings because I do not agree with what you said.

I don't rate down posts I don't agree with. If you get access to my rating histories, you'll find that I have rated up posts posted by mcclaincausey, whom if you read my 'sniveling' posts is my exact opposite on nearly every issue maybe except for the fact that we both hate corrupt politicians, merely because I thought his posts were very well put together and well presented (and fun to spar with). I personally rated down your post not for you opinions, but because your post is hypocritical because you did not equally represent Kerry in your argument, it is hard to follow, and not a good read. Hell, I missed the not vote part the first time I read it.

Oh, and yeah you may be right, yes it is probably hypocritical expressing my views and then not casting my vote in November. However, it is also hypocritical, being 17 and never voting before, yet talking like you know something about life.

Just because you are older doesn't mean you are privy to information I can't get my hands on. I can form my own opinions on life based on the same facts fed to you, and right now my opinions are based on views widely accepted by your peers, not mine. Sure you may have live through more years that me, but that doesn't automatically make what I say null and void to what you say. With age may come wisdom, but not intelligence.

Pistol Grip Pump In My Lap At All Times

Let's take a look at the facts here. Kerry is a businessman; Kerry is married into the Heinz family. Kerry's accessible income greatly exceeds that of Bush, therefore making him the whiney rich kid. Now, let's take another at what I said, being "biggest". Now let’s let google inform us about some new words today:

I read an article in the Wall Street Journal where it explained the difference of wealth between Kerry and Bush. The Heitz fortune is estimated at 3.2 billion dollars. Bush's wealth is estimated at 13 million dollars. Kerry's wealth is far greater. Kerry married into wealth. Bush inherited the majority of his wealth. As mentioned by one affiliate:
'The Kerry’s would be the richest couple ever to live in the White House and with wealth comes responsibility. Their assets should be disclosed to the voters so that they can assess whether there are any potential conflicts of interest. Since the Kerry campaign is proposing to raise tax rates on the upper middle class, most people would probably like to know whether the Kerry household uses tax-avoidance techniques to avoid paying its "fair share."'
I feel you miss my point. I never said Bush was a whiney rich kid and Kerry wasn't. I labeled the majority of politicians as overgrown whiney rich kids, which they are. They throw away our tax dollars and cut other resources out. Why, because it isn't their money. Think about this. If you worked hard for your wealth, I mean you built your wealth from scratch. Won't you be somewhat more cost conscience with your investments than someone who is handed wealth? Of course. You earned your money. Tax dollars is like free money to most politicians. So they blow budgets and then they resort to cutting education and law enforcement funds.

Just because you are older doesn't mean you are privy to information I can't get my hands on. I can form my own opinions on life based on the same facts fed to you, and right now my opinions are based on views widely accepted by your peers, not mine. Sure you may have live through more years that me, but that doesn't automatically make what I say null and void to what you say. With age may come wisdom, but not intelligence.

Good point, and with experience comes knowledge.

Editors Note: I would like to apologize because my original post Well..Well..Well was hastily put together. Yet I enjoy the amount of responses to this particular post. Educate the people.

As history shows us, it has always been Aces over Kings

This post was edited by havananights on Aug 30, 2004.

Tax dollars is like free money to most politicians. So they blow budgets and then they resort to cutting education and law enforcement funds.

I agree with you on that. One of the biggest problem I have with conservatives (even though I would considder myself as such) is their misuse of federal surpluses (well, politicians in general mishandling). I think the idea of the tax rebates to be rather stupid, because from many accounts the people who really need a tax relief don't fit in the bracket for the rebate. That money could have been better spent, say, on education (primarily it should be spent raising teachers salaries).

I feel you miss my point. I never said Bush was a whiney rich kid and Kerry wasn't. I labeled the majority of politicians as overgrown whiney rich kids, which they are.

I feel I did miss your point there.

Pistol Grip Pump In My Lap At All Times

Eljefe,
I apologize for being so critical of you. While you held your composure, I lost my cool in the middle of an honest debate. Totally immature on my part. I used words as my weapons. I definitely crossed the literature lines. Thank you my dear friend for showing me more than you know.
Havananights.

As history shows us, it has always been Aces over Kings

This post was edited by havananights on Aug 31, 2004.

No problems here. We all lose our cool from time to time. I do have to admit that I came on a little strong with my origionationg post, so I apologize for that.

Pistol Grip Pump In My Lap At All Times

Lets think about all those chinese people and how much they would love to cast their vote on which "whiney rich kid" gets to rule them rather than be trounced upon by the red army T-72 tanks.

At least the tank is honest.

I admit, this time, there is a choice in the upcoming U.S. election. I know nothing about Kerry, but my knowledge of Bush is enough for me to urge all Americans to vote for the Johns, and if Kerry somehow manages to do a worse job than Bush, he will have my humorless congradulations.

But "the lesser of two evils" is a pretty crappy motivation, isn't it?

votes can make a big difference, and you not casting yours immediately should strip away your right to complain

I'm a supporter of voting as long as you are a supporter of society, but lets go over the logic of your statement.

All politicians are supposed to do exactly what they say they are going to do, and/or act according to a certain set of moral guidelines. A vote for them is basically saying that you:

a) agree with what they are going to do

and/or

b) have the same set of personal moral guidelines

Given these rules, if you vote for someone who wins, and once elected does not do what he/she said they were going to do, or does not act within their supposed moral guidelines, then you have a right to complain loud and clear.

If you vote for someone, but the other guy wins, you have every right to talk about how you disagree with them, but if they are doing what they said they would do, you can't say they are doing a bad job, because they are (theoretically) just doing what they were told to do by the majority. If they are not doing what they promised, it's really the role of the people who voted for them to give them shit.

BUT... what if you agree with neither candidate to the extent that, even if they did exactly what they said they were going to do, and acted totally true to their stated moral guidelines, you STILL thought they sucked?

Or what if you liked the ideals of one of them, but you knew that neither was really going to do anything close to what they said they would do?

If either of these were the case, your complaint would not be "so and so candidate sucks", but rather "the system sucks, it doesn't work, and all the candidates are carbon copy crapheads". Wouldn't it then be a bit hypocritical to complain about the system, then to turn around and continue to support and perpetrate that system by voting?

Now, granted, 99% percent of the people who didn't vote last election probably didn't put this kind of thought into it. The only thing hypocritical is the fact that they continue to support the system all the other ways: working, shopping, going to school, joining the army, paying taxes, etc.

It's too bad all the dissatisfied people don't have a worthy candidate to vote for.

--- (storytime)

The Simpsons, one of the Treehouse of Horrors:

Before the election, Bob Dole and Bill Clinton are abducted and replaced by an alien couple (Kang & Kodos) in disguise intent on taking over america. Before the vote however, they are revealed in their true form. One speaks confidently:

"well, what are you going to do about it? It's a two party system."

A crowd member replies: "maybe I'll vote for a third party candidate."

To which the alien says "Go ahead, throw your vote away! Bwahahahah!"

Kang is elected, and enslaves everyone. At the end, Homer says "Don't blame me, I voted for Kodos"

But I can't find no place or nothin', where thrills are cheap, and love is divine

Or what if you liked the ideals of one of them, but you knew that neither was really going to do anything close to what they said they would do?

That reminds me, have you ever noticed that seemingly no country in the world has a law which requires politicians to tell the truth or keep their campaign promises? We fine companies for misleading product ads, we require food companies to print a detailed list of ingredients and used food additives on every can of baked beans, and fraud or perjury are major crimes. But no such thing for false campaign promises or factually incorrect attack ads.
I know that a few years ago some French politicians attempted to create such a law, but were stopped by (then- and current) president Chirac and his lackeys. The US supreme court even ruled that the media must accept and broadcast/print any campaign ads, even if it's obvious that they're nothing but lies. (The reasoning was that people should be able to see it - free speech - and then decide for themselves how much of it they want to believe.)

Kinda makes you think, doesn't it?

"*sigh* Some men are really hard to manipulate!" - Orchid

Your right. I read something about that a while back. Very interesting point.

As history shows us, it has always been Aces over Kings

We fine companies for misleading product ads, we require food companies to print a detailed list of ingredients and used food additives on every can of baked beans, and fraud or perjury are major crimes. But no such thing for false campaign promises or factually incorrect attack ads.

You're exactly right... it's a double standard. The funny thing about democracies is, they allow, in fact encourage people to be self-centered to the extent that they care more about their can of beans than the leader of their country.

The reasoning was that people should be able to see it - free speech - and then decide for themselves how much of it they want to believe

Of course: because everyone always takes the time to research and gather facts before generating a opinion, and they are smart enough to know fact from fiction.

Yeah right. :p

Maybe we deserve these shoddy leaders. After all, when no wants to be a politician, the people no one wants end up being politicians.

But I can't find no place or nothin', where thrills are cheap, and love is divine

Maybe we deserve these shoddy leaders.

As a wise man (me ;-P ) likes to say, "in a democracy, the majority of people get the government they deserve."
Unfortunately the rest are stuck with a leader they don't want.

After all, when no wants to be a politician, the people no one wants end up being politicians.

This is an interesting thought. I'll have to think about it.

"*sigh* Some men are really hard to manipulate!" - Orchid