Reading Politics

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.

I'll believe in anything if you'll just believe in anything

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

Yeah, but he's right. :-P

When life hands you a lemon, that's 40% of your RDA of vitamin C taken care of.

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.